BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 10

Measurement of Overflow Density in Spiral

Classifiers Using a Vibrating Fork Densitometer
with Accuracy Evaluation
Sidney A. A. Viana
____________________________________________________________________________

 microwave transmission [6], and tomography [7]. Each

Abstract — This work concerns the application of a vibrating measurement principle has specific advantages and drawbacks
fork densitometer to the measurement of overflow density in involving: sensing capabilities, physical installation aspects,
spiral classifiers. A spiral classifier is a mineral processing operating conditions, and maintenance and calibration aspects,
equipment which receives an ore slurry input and performs a
that must be taken into account for the intended application.
gravity separation process between the solids particles of ore and
the water. The classifier has two outputs: the “underflow”, Depending on their measurement principle, some types of
formed by sedimented coarse solids; and the “overflow”, in the densitometers cannot be fully calibrated in factory, and their
form of an ore slurry with fine suspended solids particles. For true accuracy can only be determined by field calibration and
proper performance of a spiral classifier, the density of its proving. Examples are nuclear and ultrasonic densitometers,
overflow needs to be controlled by a feeding of dilution water at whose output is related to the actual fluid being measured and
the input of the classifier. Even in present days, this control is
the installation environment. If a densitometer has been
still performed manually from manual samples of the overflow
density, due to the lack of a standard instrumentation solution calibrated only on a single fluid, its accuracy is likely to be
for this application. In this context, this work describes the based on a single density value, and such accuracy may not be
application of a vibrating fork densitometer for overflow density the same for liquids with densities that differs from the
measurement in spiral classifiers. The instrument performance calibration fluid. The same holds for a fluid with significant
was evaluated in two steps: a bench testing and a field testing. In density variations, like ore slurries in mineral processing, if
both cases, its measurement accuracy was statistically
the densitometer is calibrated only on a single density value.
investigated. The results obtained indicated the feasibility of the
instrument for the intended application. Field proving of a densitometer is usually hard-working and
Index Terms — densitometer, density meter, slurry density, time-consuming, or even unpractical in some cases. If the
spiral classifier, vibrating fork, tuning fork. application depends on the ability to field-prove a
densitometer, many issues such as reference liquids and
I. INTRODUCTION sampling procedures must be addressed. The application must
be carefully evaluated for potential installation problems and
D ENSITY is an important property of liquids and a major
process variable in many industries. The density of a
liquid is mainly affected by its temperature and composition,
calibration limitations at the point in which the measurement
needs to be made [1].
and in less degree by its pressure. The degree in which the As alternative to the most commonly used, radioactive-
density is affected by these variables depends of the liquid [1]. based, densitometers for mineral slurries, the present work
Instruments intended to measure density are referred as investigated a non-radioactive density meter based on the
density meters, density gauges or simply densitometers. Those vibrating fork technology. This article is structured as follows:
instruments use specific measuring principles, such as: Section II summarizes the use of radioactive densitometers in
attenuation of ionizing radiation [2], resonance of mechanical the mineral processing industry. Section III presents a class of
vibrations [3;4], hydrostatic differential pressure [5], non-radioactive densitometers which can be used as an
______________________________________________________________ alternative to radioactive instruments. In Section IV, the
S. A. A. Viana is a Senior Member of the IEEE – The Institute of Electrical challenges regarding density measurement of mineral slurries
and Electronics Enginers. He is currently with the Ferrous Automation are discussed. Section V explains the application of interest
Engineering Department of VALE, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil (e-mail:
sidney.viana@vale.com). for use of the vibrating fork densitometer. Sections VI and VII

DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531

BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 11

present, respectively, the bench and the field testings of the underperformed in a narrow density range, normally
densitometer, with the corresponding accuracy evaluations. around the nominal process density (nominal operating
Finally, Section VIII summarizes the conclusions about the point), leading to a non representative calibration along the
work. full operating density range. As a consequence, the
measures provided by the instrument may be inaccurate
II. THE USE OF DENSITOMETERS IN THE MINERAL when the process gets out the narrow density range used in
PROCESSING INDUSTRY the field calibration.
Mineral processing plants deal with ores in two major
forms: bulk ore and ore slurry [8]. An ore slurry is a mixture Although nuclear densitometers are a suitable measurement
of ore solids particles and water. Most slurry processings such technology for several applications, some industries like
as hydrocycloning, filtering, thickening, and froth flotation, chemical, petrochemical, and pharmaceutical have succeeded
need information about the slurry density. in the use of alternative non-nuclear density meters [9]. Those
Nuclear or radioactive densitometers, shown in Fig. 1, have instruments are not yet common in the mineral processing
been the most used type of density meter in mineral industry, due to a lack of assured knowledge on how to
processing, where they are applied to measure the density of properly apply them to the measurement of ore slurries.
ore slurries flowing in pipelines.
Some advantages of nuclear densitometers are: non- III. VIBRATING ELEMENT DENSITOMETERS
intrusive/non-contact measurement; easy external mounting on
pipelines, with no need to stop the process operation; and A class of alternative non-nuclear density meters are the
robustness for harsh industrial environments. However, they vibrating element densitometers, which measure the frequency
have also drawbacks: of vibration of a mechanical element in contact with the
process liquid. There are two types of vibrating element
densitometers: the coriolis density meter and the vibrating fork

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. Vibrating element density meters: (a) Coriolis [4]. (b) Vibrating fork
Fig. 1. Typical installation of a radioactive densitometer [2], as usually used [3].
in mineral processing.
density meter, shown in Fig. 2.
1) Need for permanent safety care Coriolis densitometers [4] measure the frequency of
Nuclear densitometers for mineral processing applications resonant vibration of a tube through which the process liquid
use radioactive sources, normally with Cesium-137 or
flows. This resonant frequency depends on the mass of liquid
other gamma ray radioisotopes, which are potentially
inside the tube, which is directly related to the density of the
hazardous elements. Despite the radioactive sources are
liquid, since the volume of the tube is fixed. The instrument
sealed and shielded, the handling of nuclear densitometers
needs permanent safety care to prevent occupational usually include an integrated temperature sensor to allow
injuries. Due to OHS (Occupational Health and Safety) temperature compensation of the measured density.
concerns, some mining companies are working to Vibrating fork or tuning fork densitometers [3] measure the
reduce/eliminate the use of nuclear densitometers, by vibrating frequency of a resonant fork inserted in the process
trying alternative non-radioactive density instruments. liquid. The resonant frequency is directly related to the density
2) Need for field calibration of the liquid in which the fork is inserted. Those instruments
Unlike other kinds of instruments, calibrating a nuclear can also be characterized for viscosity measurement.
densitometer in a workbench is unpractical, because of the Vibrating element densitometers are the most accurate
difficulties to reproduce process and installation conditions instruments for density measurement of liquids, provided that
in a workbench. This brings the need of field calibration the liquid characteristics and the process conditions are
and proving, through which the instrument is calibrated compatible with the measuring principle of the densitometer.
directly in the process line where it is installed. In mineral They are widely used in the hydrocarbon, chemical, and
processing plants, a major restriction for field calibration is petrochemical industries.
the difficult to vary the process density along its full The need for contact with the liquid being measured may
operating range to allow a representative calibration. impose restrictions to the use of vibrating element
Because of this restriction, the field calibration is often
DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 12

densitometers, mostly if the liquid is corrosive, abrasive, or

flows at high velocities. Abrasive effects are the most limiting
aspect for the use of those densitometers in mineral
processing.

IV. THE CHALLENGE OF MEASURING ORE SLURRIES

An ore slurry is a mixture of water and suspended solids

particles of ore. Because the solids particles tend to sediment
by gravity, the slurry is inherently a non-homogeneous
mixture whose solids concentration may vary between
Fig. 3. Operating principle of a spiral classifier.
different points within it. As discussed in Section 2, nuclear
densitometers have been the most used type of density meter The classifier receives ore slurry as a feeding input, and
in mineral processing, but there are motivations to move dilution water as a control input. The coarse solids in the
towards the use of non-nuclear densitometers. slurry sediment to the bottom of the classifier and are dragged
Two main factors affect the measurement of ore slurries by up by a rotating spiral to produce an output referred as
contact: abrasion and solids segregation. Abrasion is a wear underflow, which is sent to a further processing stage. The part
effect caused by the relative movement of the slurry regarding of the slurry containing fine particles of solids that did not
a fixed object in contact with it, including its container. Solids sediment, flows freely through the borders of the classifier and
segregation, by its turn, is a preferential separation of solids is referred as overflow [8]. The overflow density is mostly
particles between themselves or between the water in the defined by the concentration of fine solids in the input slurry
slurry, and causes the slurry to be non-homogeneous so that its and should be controlled by the dilution water. The proper
properties (e.g.: solids concentration, density) vary from one operation of a spiral classifier requires a regulation of its
point to another within it. overflow density around a specific operating point.
Abrasion is perhaps the main restriction for When the input slurry becomes more concentrated, the
contact/intrusive measurement of slurry properties, as it amount of sedimented solids at the bottom of the classifier
gradually destroys the sensing element in contact with the will increase – and may lock the rotating spiral, stopping the
slurry. Avoiding abrasion effects is the major reason for the classifier. The overflow density will also increase from its
use of nuclear densitometers since they have absolutely no current operating point, so that its measurement by an
parts in contact with the slurry. Microwave- and tomography- instrument can be used in a control loop to increase the
based densitometers usually have tubular body coated with dilution water flowrate in order to compensate the increased
some lining material (e.g.: polyurethane, natural rubber, concentration of the input slurry. In the opposite way, when
ceramics) that will not last forever when subjected the input slurry becomes less concentrated, the overflow
continuously to abrasive slurry flows. Moreover, vibrating density will decrease from its current operating point, for the
element densitometers may have their sensing elements current dilution water flowrate. In this case, the control loop
quickly damaged by abrasion, as they need to stay in direct
contact with the slurry being measured.
Therefore, the main challenge in measuring ore slurry
properties is to rightly match the measurement technology to
the process characteristics. Measurement technology concerns
the measurement principle and installation requirements,
whereas process characteristics relates to slurry properties and
operating conditions. Each slurry measurement application
must be carefully addressed in this sense.
Slurries formed with very fine solids particles and low to
medium solids concentration, have normally reduced abrasion
effects that may allow measurements by contact. A particular
case of interest in mineral processing is the slurry produced by
spiral classifiers, discussed in the next section.

V. DENSITY OF OVERFLOW IN SPIRAL CLASSIFIERS

A spiral classifier, shown in Fig. 3, is a mineral processing Fig. 4. Overflow of a real spiral classifier.
equipment intended to perform a gravity solids-liquid should reduce the dilution flowrate to avoid wasting of water.
separation of ore slurries, based on the density differences In both cases, the manipulation of the dilution water flowrate a
between the solids (ore particles) and the liquid (water). the control loop will act to adjust the overflow density at a

DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531

BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 13

specified operating point (density set-point) that meets the

needs of the next processing stage to where the overflow Computer for
Densitometer
slurry goes. This will reduce the input variability of the next data analysis
PLC for data
processing stage and improve process quality. acquisition Agitator
The Carajás Iron Ore Plant has seven spiral classifiers in its
Secondary Screening facility, one of which is shown in Fig. 4.
The overflow density of those classifiers is measured from
samples collected by a field operator at a one-hour interval. Recipient
Manipulations of the dilution water flowrate are made
manually from the control room upon request from the field
operator. This doesn’t allow a proper regulation of the density
at the desired operating point.
Fig. 5. Workbench for testing the vibrating fork densitometer.

What sort of density instrument could be successfully To investigate the technical viability of a vibrating fork
applied to the overflow in a spiral classifier? Unlike in densitometer for the application, a testing deal was established
pipelines, the installation of a nuclear densitometer in a spiral with a manufacturer of the instrument. The testing deal
classifier is not suitable from an occupational safety comprised two steps: a bench testing, by which the instrument
perspective, due to risks of people exposure to ionizing would be tested under controlled conditions in a laboratory;
radiation. and a field testing, by which the instrument would be installed
In the search for a non-nuclear density meter, some in a spiral classifier for field performance evaluation.
characteristics of the overflow slurry were considered: The validation requirements for the instrument in the
application were its measurement accuracy and its robustness
1) Small particle sizes to abrasion effects. The desired accuracies for the bench
Overflow slurries are formed by fine ore particles, testing and the field testing were, respectively, ±0.5% and
typically with sizes smaller than 1.0 mm. Slurries with
such small particle sizes are easier homogenized and have TABLE I - DENSITY VALUES AND CORRESPONDING DEVIATIONS OBTAINED
low abrasion effects. FROM THE BENCH TEST

2) High degree of homogenization Sample Measured Measurement Measurement

The rotating movement of the spiral generates a strong Sample Density Density Error Error
(g/cm3) (g/cm3) (g/cm3) (%)
homogenization of the slurry inside the classifier, leading
to a good uniformity of the overflow density. It was 1 0,997747 0,998541 0,000794 0,080 %
expected that such homogenization would be good enough 2 1,015693 1,014464 -0,001229 -0,121 %
to make point measurements of the overflow density be 3 1,028062 1,026106 -0,001956 -0,190 %
representative for the entire overflow. 4 1,044758 1,036825 -0,007933 -0,759 %
5 1,050832 1,048222 -0,002610 -0,248 %
3) Low density range 6 1,061328 1,054829 -0,006499 -0,612 %
According to manual measurement records from the 7 1,090931 1,081058 -0,009873 -0,905 %
Carajás Plant, the overflow density ranges typically from
8 1,116707 1,107633 -0,009074 -0,813 %
1.01 to 1.45 g/cm3. It was expected that this density range
9 1,102343 1,122080 0,019737 1,790 %
would not lead to significant abrasion effects.
10 1,152681 1,143724 -0,008957 -0,777 %
4) Low flow velocity 11 1,178705 1,170285 -0,008420 -0,714 %
For a given spiral classifier, the velocity of the overflow 12 1,185590 1,192173 0,006583 0,555 %
slurry at the borders of the classifier depends on its 13 1,224917 1,198467 -0,026450 -2,159 %
operating throughput. This velocity is typically lower than 14 1,231150 1,240572 0,009422 0,765 %
1.0 m/s at the borders of the classifier. It was expected that 15 1,276576 1,262909 -0,013667 -1,071 %
low velocities would not lead to significant abrasion 16 1,303631 1,318132 0,014501 1,112 %
effects. 17 1,298987 1,295120 -0,003867 -0,298 %
18 1,334929 1,331696 -0,003233 -0,242 %
The above characteristics suggested that the overflow slurry
19 1,363432 1,365545 0,002114 0,155 %
would produce very low abrasion effects on a sensor that
20 1,402273 1,420635 0,018362 1,309 %
would be immersed into it to perform a measurement by
contact. Hence, a vibrating fork densitometer was chosen for 21 1,452780 1,455035 0,002255 0,155 %
the application. An additional advantage of using a vibrating 22 1,470905 1,480419 0,009514 0,647 %
fork is that it could be easily mounted over the surface level of 23 1,504593 1,508305 0,003712 0,247 %
the overflow slurry, with a properly designed mechanical 24 1,540685 1,545078 0,004393 0,285 %
support.
DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 14

A. Instrument Accuracy in the Bench Testing

The instrument accuracy for the bench testing was
investigated in a statistical sense through a hypothesis test
using the measurement data obtained.
The very small average measurement error of –0.075 %
suggests that, in a statistical sense, the true measurement error
could be ideally 0.0 %. We can suppose that if new bench
testings would have been run indefinitely under the same
conditions of the testing already performed, the true average
measurement error will be equal to 0.0 %, for all the set of
bench testings. This supposition was regarded as the Null
Hypothesis. The Alternative Hypothesis was that the true
average measurement error differs from 0.0 %. Therefore:

• Null Hypothesis: H0: E = 0

• Alternative Hypothesis: HA: E  0
Fig. 6. Sample and measured density values, from the bench testing.
Since any sample data (the measurement errors in this case)
±1.5%. The resistance to abrasion would be assessed visually. has some degree of likelihood to occur, a hypothesis test
considers a confidence level, which means the degree of
VI. BENCH TESTING OF THE VIBRATING FORK confidence by which the Null Hypothesis is accepted as true.
DENSITOMETER The confidence level was chosen as β = 95% = 0.95. The
corresponding significance level is: α = 1–β = 5% = 0.05.
The bench testing was performed at the Metallurgical
The statistics to be used for hypothesis testing of average
Laboratory of VALE’s Fábrica Iron Ore Plant, in the city of
values is [10;11]:
Ouro Preto, Minas Gerais state, Brazil.
A set of n = 24 sample densities were synthetized by mixing
E  E
a fixed volume of pure water with a calculated mass of dried  (1)
solids from overflow slurry. The slurry samples were sE n
synthetized in a recipient with a fixed volume of water by
adding successive increments of solids mass. A mechanical where E is the sample mean of the measurement errors; E
agitator was inserted into the recipient to agitate the slurry and is the hypothetical value considered for the true mean of the
avoid the sedimentation of the solids. The vibrating fork measurement errors (E = 0); sE is the sample standard
densitometer was attached inside the recipient to measure the deviation of the measurement errors; and n is the sample size
density of the slurry. Fig. 5 shows the workbench during the (the number of measurement errors).
testing. The value of the test statistics 𝜆 for the measurement
For each synthetized slurry sample with known density, the data is:
corresponding measured density provided by the instrument
was recorded, and the error was calculated. Those results are
E  E  0.07536667  0
shown in Table I. Fig. 6 shows the relationship between the    0.42765 (2)
sample densities and measured densities. sE n 0.8633606 24
The measures obtained in the bench testing had the
following statistics: Since n = 24 < 30 (small sample size), the statistics λ was
• Correlation coefficient: 0.998 assumed to follow a t-Student probability distribution with v =
• Mean of the relative errors: –0.075% n–1 degrees of freedom [10;11]. The two-sided score of the t-
Student distribution with 23 degrees of freedom, at 0.05
• Standard deviation of the relative errors: 0.863%
significance level, is:
The high correlation between the density measures provided
t 2;v   t0.025; 23  2.0687 (3)
by the instrument and the sample density values indicates the
great ability of the instrument to follow variations in the slurry
density. The small values of the mean and standard deviation Since the value of the test statistics λ is within  t  2;v 
(the
of the measurement errors suggest that the instrument was acceptance region for H0), we cannot reject the Null
accurate. Its accuracy was investigated statistically, as Hypothesis that the true average measurement error is equal
described in the following. to 0.0%, with 95% confidence. The measurement data does not
provide evidence that the average measurement error differs
significantly from 0.0% in order to reject the Null Hypothesis.
DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 15

There is no evidence to reject the Null Hypothesis. The sample

average error of –0.075% observed in the data was more likely
due to random chance.
The confidence interval for the average measurement error
is given by:

I E  E  t  2;v   sE n (4)

I E  0.07536667  2.068658  0.8633606 24

I E  0.07536667  0.3645653 (5)

Fig. 8. Sample and measured density values, from the field test.

electromagnetic interferences.
The validation of the instrument was done by comparing the
densities of overflow samples taken manually from the
classifier with the corresponding density measures provided
by the instrument. A set of 228 overflow samples were
collected from 17th March to 8th April, 2015. Several of those
samples were outliers. After removing the outliers, a set of
117 valid density samples was obtained. The desired accuracy
Fig. 7. Installation of the vibrating fork densitometer in a spiral classifier for was ±1.5%. For a process range of 1.00 to 1.45 g/cm3, this
field testing. accuracy means a maximum error of ±0.0218 g/cm3.
Fig. 8 shows the relationship between the sample densities
and their corresponding measured densities provided by the
I E   0.44 ; 0.29 % (6) instrument. The measures appear in two clusters because the
process line was running in only two operating points: at full
The confidence interval includes the hypothetical value E throughput (higher overflow densities, around 1,30 g/cm3) or
= 0, also meaning that the Null Hypothesis cannot be rejected, at no feeding (low overflow densities, around 1,05 g/cm3).
at the given significance level. Additionally, the confidence The measures obtained in the bench testing had the
interval is entirely within the desired accuracy interval of following statistics:
±0.5%, meaning that the instrument was fully compliant with • Correlation coefficient: 0.994
the desired accuracy. • Mean of the relative errors: –1.620%
From the above statistical inferences, the instrument was
• Standard deviation of the relative errors: 1.042%
approved in the bench testing and qualified for the field
testing.
The correlation between the density measures provided by
the instrument and the sample density values also resulted
VII. FIELD TESTING OF THE VIBRATING FORK
high as for the bench testing. The mean relative error was –
DENSITOMETER
1.620%, meaning a very small off-set deviation in the
The field testing of the vibrating fork densitometer was instrument measures. This deviation was probably caused by
performed in the Carajás Iron Ore Plant. The instrument was the flow of the overflow slurry, as well as by the sampling
installed on the spiral classifier CS-131-07, in the Secondary process, which could have introduced sampling errors in the
Screening facility, as shown in Fig. 7. observed deviation.
A specific mechanical support with adjustments for
horizontal and vertical positions was designed to hold the
instrument slightly over the slurry level of the classifier. The A. Instrument Accuracy in the Field Testing
instrument was wired to the I/O module of the Plant Control A hypothesis test was also performed with the field testing
System, so that its analog 4-20 mA density signal could be measures. The value of the test statistics λ considering the
acquired. The wiring was implemented with a shielded cable, measurement data is:
in order to protect the density signal against field
DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 16

E  E  1.620053528  0 of 1,45 g/cm3. Notice that such tolerance of ±2.0% is greater

   16.81336 (7)
than the desired accuracy of ±1.5% originally chosen.
sE n 1.042240216 24
Additionally, regarding to Fig. 8 and Fig. 6, the high
correlations between the instrument measures and the sample
The number of measurements was n = 117 > 30 (large measure indicates that the instrument is able to follow density
sample size) so that the statistics λ can be assumed to folow a variations within the full operating density range of the spiral
normal probability distribution [10;11]. Nevertheless, for the classifier. This also justifies the feasibility of the instrument
sake of coherence with the hypothesis test done for the bench for the application. Finally, a small off-set error between the
testing, the statistics λ was still assumed to folow a t-Student measures from the instrument and the samples can be easily
probability distribution with v = n–1 degrees of freedom. This compensated in the Plant Control System by programming a
assumption is valid because the t-Student distribution tends to correction factor.
a normal distribution for large sample sizes [10;11]. The two- From the above discussions, the instrument was approved
sided score of the t-Student distribution with 116 degrees of in the field test.
freedom, at 0.05 significance level, is:

t  2; v   t 0.025;116   1.9806 (8) VIII. CONCLUSION

Density meters have important applications in process
Since the value of the test statistics λ is out of  t  2;v 
(the monitoring and control, in the mineral processing industry.
acceptance region for H0), we reject the Null Hypothesis that Density measurement technologies can be divided in two
the true average measurement error is equal to 0.0%, with major groups: nuclear and non-nuclear. The decision about the
95% confidence. The measurement data provides evidence best technology for an specific application is the major issue
that the average measurement error differs significantly from for its success. This is truly verified in the mineral processing
0.0% so that the Null Hypothesis should be rejected. The industry, where the main challenge on measuring ore slurry
sample average error of –1.620% observed in the data was not properties is to rightly match the measurement technology to
likely due to random chance. the process characteristics. The key to a successful density
According to equation (4), the confidence interval for the meter application is a thorough understanding of the process
average measurement error is: variables and fluid properties which affect the density of the
fluid, and the purpose of the density measurement.
I E  1.620053528  1.980626  1.042240216 117 As instrumentation technology capabilities are improved,
new measurement principles are developed, and acquisition
costs are reduced, more applications become feasible,
I E  1.620053528  0.1908435 (9)
allowing better process monitoring and control, and leading to
improved business profitability.
I E   1.81;  1.43 % (10) The problem of how to directly measure the overflow
density in a spiral classifier remained unsolved for several
The confidence interval does not include the hypothetical years, mainly due to a lack of technologies for this application.
value E = 0, also meaning that the Null Hypothesis should be The application of a vibrating fork densitometer to this
rejected, at the given significance level. problem was an entirely new application. The success of the
In the early stages of the project, it was supposed that application, as concluded from the results of this project,
accuracies of ±0.5% and ±1.5% could be reached, defines a new paradigm for process monitoring and control of
respectively, in the bench testing and the field testing. There spiral classifiers. Further developments are in progress to
was no prior knowledge to make a hard decision about those design and implement a control strategy for overflow density
desired accuracies, and therefore, they can be regarded as in spiral classifiers.
reasonable references. Those accuracies could have been
chosen as ±2.0% or ±2.5% as well, provided that they are not ACKNOWLEDGMENT
excessive, like 5% or greater. The author thankfully acknowledges Ms. Samantha Santos,
Although the field testing did not meet exactly the desired Mr. Fernando Castro, and Mr. Helvécio Damaso for their
accuracy of ±1.5%, the achieved accuracy (confidence valuable support for the bench testing of the densitometer at
interval) resulted very close to the desired accuracy. The small the Industrial Laboratory of the Fábrica Iron Ore Processing
difference between the confidence interval and the desired Plant. Thanks to Mr. Clefson Silva and Mr. Rooney Coelho,
accuracy does not mean that the instrument is inaccurate, from the Carajás Iron Ore Processing Plant, for the electrical
specially because it achieved a very good accuracy in the installation of the densitometer and its communication with
bench testing. Moreover, the Process Division of the Carajás the plant control systems, necessary for the field testing.
Iron Ore Plant stated that the maximum tolerable error for Finally, Mr. Arilson Silva and Mr. Márcio Soares are
overflow density measurement is ±2.0%. This means gratefully acknoledged for the mechanical installation of the
maximum error of 0,03 g/cm3 at the higher operating density densitometer and for the collection of the overflow samples

DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531

BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL 17

used to generate the process measurements for validation of 1999; and a MBA degree in Project Management, from
the densitometer in the field testing. Fundação Getúlio Vargas (FGV), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, in
2013.
In 2000 he joined former Companhia Vale do Rio Doce
REFERENCES (now VALE), a global mining company, where he started
[1] I. Gordon, “Liquid Densitometers in Process Applications”, Control &
working in the Carajás Iron Ore Processing Plant as
Instrumentation Magazine. Feb. 2011. Instrumentation & Automation Engineer, and later as
[2] OHMART-VEGA, “Radiation-Based Density Measurement with DSG”, Automation Projects Engineer. In 2007 he moved to VALE’s
OHMART-VEGA, Cincinnati, OH, USA. Onça Puma Nickel Project as Lead Automation Engineer and
[3] Endress+Hauser, “Liquiphant M FTL50(H), FTL51(H) Technical
Information (TI328F/00/en/14.12)”, Endress+Hauser, Reinach,
member of the Operating Readiness Team, being responsible
Switzerland, 2012. for the assessment of the plantwide automation system design,
[4] Endress+Hauser, “Promass 80F, 80M, 83F, 83M Coriolis Mass Flow and keeping up with the manufacturing of the automation
Meter – Technical Information (TI053D/06/en/06.08)”, Endress+Hauser, systems at vendors’ factories. In 2009 he joined VALE’s
Reinach, Switzerland, 2008.
[5] SMAR, “Transmissor de Densidade DT400: Manual de Instruções,
Paragominas Bauxite Processing Plant as Process Automation
Operação e Manutenção”, SMAR, Sertãozinho, SP, Brazil, 2014. Specialist, being responsible for plant performance assessment
[6] Kajaani Process Measurements, “KC7 Microwave Density Transmitter and improvement projects, and plantwide data reconciliation.
Product Sheet”, Kajaani Process Measurements, Kajaani, Finland. Finally, in 2013 he moved to his current position at VALE’s
[7] ITS Industrial Tomography Systems. [Online]. Available:
http://www.itoms.com
Ferrous Automation Engineering Department, in Belo
[8] B. A. Wills, and T. J. Napier-Munn, Wills’Mineral Processing Horizonte, MG, Brazil, where he works as Specialist
Technology. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2006. Automation Engineer and Project Coordinator.
[9] EMERSON PROCESS, “Micro Motion Density Meters Replace Nuclear Mr. Viana was associated to the Institute of Electrical and
Devices to Control Well-Cementing Properties”. [Online]. Available:
http://www2.emersonprocess.com/siteadmincenter/PM%20Micro%20M
Electronics Engineers, USA, from 1998 to 2006, when he
otion%20Documents/Well-Cementing-AN-001178.pdf received the grade of IEEE Senior Member, in recognition for
[10] E. Kreyszig, Advanced Engineering Mathematics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, outstanding achievements in the fields of Industrial
2011. Instrumentation, Control & Automation. He is author of
[11] M. R. Spiegel, J. J. Schiller, and R.A. Srinivasan, Probability and
Statistics: Schaum’s Outline Series. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill,
several papers and technical works on Applied Control
2013. Systems, Industrial Automation, and Data Analytics. Two of
[12] VALE – Projeto Ferro Carajás, “Classificador Espiral: Conjunto Geral his works were awarded with the first place of the Brazilian
DF-523BP-42-0001-02-7001 Revisão 7”, VALE, Parauapebas, PA, Industry Prize of the National Industry Confederation (CNI),
Brazil, 1985.
[13] VALE – Projeto Ferro Carajás, “Usina de Tratamento de Minério de
in 2001 and 2004. His main professional interests are
Carajás: Fluxograma de Processo 1000KN-M-87668 Revisão A”, Industrial Engineering, industrial applications of Classical,
VALE, VALE, Parauapebas, PA, Brazil, 2009. Adaptive and Optimal Control Systems, Applied Computing,
[14] R Core Team, “R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Numerical Optimization Methods, Plant Performance
Computing”. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria.
[Online]. Available: http://www.r-project.org
Management, Project Management; and Industrial Data
Analytics, and Machine Learning.

Sidney A.A. Viana (M’99–SM’06) was

born in Belém, PA, Brazil, in 1974. He
received a Graduate degree in Electronics
Engineering, in the field of Control Systems, © 2016 by the author. Submitted for
from Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA),
possible open access publication under
Belém, PA, Brazil, in 1997; a Master of
Science degree, in the fields of Control the terms and conditions of the Creative
Systems and Artificial Intelligence, from Instituto Tecnológico Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license
de Aeronáutica (ITA), São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil, in (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

DOI: 10.3895/bjic.v3n1.4451 ISSN: 2318-4531