Split-Desktop: Validation & Accuracy

In 1995, Noranda Technology Centre, Canada conducted a series of validation tests. Three systems, Fragscan, WipFrag, and Split, were used to measure the size distribution of a backfill muck pile from Holloway Joint Venture, and these results were compared with actual sieving. A pile of rocks was divided into four parts. One part was sieved and the other three (Tests 1, 2, 3) were spread out, imaged, and analyzed with the three programs. The original comparison between the Split technology and a sieve (and WipFrag and Fragscan) and other details are given in Liu and Tran (1996).

Split-Desktop® Technical Tour
1.	Image Acquisition
2.	Fragmentation & Delineation
3.	Size Analysis
4.	Results & Output
5.	Validation & Accuracy

Return to How Split-Desktop Works

Figure 6

Recently the images from this test were rerun using the latest version of Split-Desktop (mainly changes in fines calculations as previously described). The results are presented in Figure 6. The top plot is a linear-linear plot and the bottom plot is a log-linear plot. A Schumann distribution was assumed for the fines. Together, the two plots in Figure 6 show that Split-Desktop gives a very accurate prediction both for fine and coarse sizes when compared with the actual sieving results.