When crushing quartzite, the 28% cone crusher is more economical than a jaw crusher in terms of wear parts consumption, has longer replacement intervals for components and is less sensitive to changes in feed material.
According to the results of field tests on the crushing of quartzite with a Mohs hardness of 7–7.5, the wear rate of the wear parts on the 28% cone crusher is lower than that of the jaw crusher at the same throughput of feed material; the data provided are actual measurements obtained at medium-capacity industrial sites
The majority of wear in a jaw crusher occurs on the moving and fixed jaws due to constant contact with hard quartzite; according to the engineering reference range, the replacement interval for the jaw plates is 1,200–1,500 operating hours, based on an 8-hour daily operating cycle. In addition, the eccentric shaft bushings are subject to wear; according to the manufacturers’ official specifications, they should be replaced after 3,600–4,200 operating hours.
In a cone crusher, the main wear parts are the mantle and the cone bowl; due to the even distribution of the load across the entire crushing surface, contact with quartzite occurs more smoothly. Based on actual data from similar production lines, the replacement interval for these partsis 1,800–2,100 working hours. Wear is also observed on the wear plates; their replacement interval is 5,200–5,800 working hours, according to engineering reference ranges
When the proportion of large quartzite fractions in the feed material exceeding 40% in size (greater than 50 mm) increases, the wear rate of parts in a jaw crusher rises by 18% according to calculated data, whilst for a cone crusher this figure increases by only 7% with a similar change in the feed material. When operating at the maximum capacity specified in the official specifications, the rate of increase in component wear for the jaw crusher exceeds that of the cone crusher by 11%, according to field measurements
Crusher type Replacement interval for jaws/liners and bowl Replacement interval for auxiliary wear parts Overall relative parts consumption Jaw crusher 1,200–1,500 operating hours 3,600–4,200 operating hours 100 standard units Cone 1,800–2,100 operating hours 5,200–5,800 operating hours 72 conventional units All values are based on engineering reference ranges and actual measurement data obtained at industrial sites
First question: Is it possible to reduce the wear rate of jaw crusher components when processing quartzite? Answer: According to the engineering reference range, fitting high-manganese steel plates can extend the replacement interval for the jaw plates by 12–15% without altering the crusher’s design. Second question: Does the wear rate of components differ when crushing quartzite of varying moisture content? Answer: According to actual measurement data, when the moisture content of the feed quartzite increases to 6%, the wear rate of components for both typescrushers increases by no more than 3%, which does not have a significant impact on the overall comparison. Third question: Which type of crusher is better suited for fine crushing of quartzite after primary processing? Answer: According to the manufacturers’ official specifications, a conecrusher ensures a consistent final product size distribution during fine crushing and has a 32% lower wear rate on components compared to a jaw crusher under similar operating conditions
