Ore crushing is not aggregate crushing with a different feed. The ore is harder and more abrasive, the site is further from everything, and a stopped primary stops the whole mine. The configuration and the wear strategy have to be designed together.
We are a crusher manufacturer, not a mineral-processing contractor, and this page is written on that basis. We design and build the crushing stages — primary reduction through to the size your grinding circuit or your leach pad wants. We do not quote recovery rates, plant metallurgical performance or mine management, because those are not ours to promise.
What we do know very well is what makes an ore-crushing circuit survive: matching the primary to the mine's actual feed, choosing a wear strategy against a specific ore rather than a generic one, and making sure the maintenance can be done by the people who are actually on site. On a remote mine, a machine that is theoretically better but needs a specialist is worse than the machine that does not.
| Circuit | Primary | Secondary | Typical capacity | Suited to |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jaw → cone → screen | SJ.E.90.12 / 13.16 | SK.D.1500 / 1800 | 250–800 t/h | Smaller mines, contractor operations, staged investment |
| Gyratory → cone → screen | SK.90.22 / 120.24 | SK.D.1800 × 2 | 1,000–2,500 t/h | Large hard-rock mines with long planned production life |
| Jaw → cone → cone | SJ.E.13.16 | SK.D.1500 + SK.D.1200 | 400–900 t/h | Ore requiring a finer crush before grinding |
| Gyratory → cone → VSI | SK.120.24 | SK.D.1800 | 1,500–2,500 t/h | Where the downstream stage needs a shaped, well-graded feed |
Indicative arrangements only. Final configuration follows from your ore test data, tonnage profile and site layout — it is produced as a written configuration sheet with a flow diagram.
The failure we see most often is not a machine failure. It is a plant stopped for want of a part that nobody ordered, on a site where the nearest supplier is a flight away. Our answer is a scheduled wear plan and a stocked consumables kit shipped with the machine.
We guarantee the machine's capacity for the duty and ore characteristics we both sign off. That is why we ask for a work-index figure or an ore sample: with it, the capacity commitment is solid. Without it, any number either of us quotes is a guess, and it should be treated as one.
Tell us and we will select liner material and profiles accordingly, and give you a realistic per-ton wear estimate. Where an ore is at the extreme end of abrasiveness, we will also tell you what that does to the operating cost before you commit capital — an honest cost forecast is more useful than an optimistic one.
No. We supply the crushing and screening stages and the conveying and structure within them. Flotation, gravity separation, leaching and refining circuits are outside what we build, and we will not pretend otherwise in order to win a package.
Usually not — the foundation and capital cost is hard to justify below roughly 700–800 t/h in hard-rock duty, and a jaw crusher will do the job for less. We will run the comparison for your numbers rather than pushing the larger machine.
Work index, feed gradation, target product and site conditions. You get a circuit recommendation, equipment list and a realistic wear-cost estimate.