Sample assessment
The feed was rhodium powder without a starting size distribution or purity specification. Hard-alloy jar and media entries were recorded.
Analyst consideration: For rhodium powder, contact-derived contamination and deformation can be relevant alongside mesh reduction. The hard-alloy tooling should therefore be selected against the eventual purity and morphology requirements.
Recorded objective
Meet the stated 325-mesh requirement.
Equipment and selection
The machine entry is XQM. TENCAN Vertical Planetary Ball Mill is associated at the recorded series level. No exact housing variant is inferred from jar capacity or an abbreviated machine label.
Test setup
| Jar entry | Hard alloy 250 |
|---|---|
| Media entry | Hard alloy 220 |
| Media-charge notation | 5mm |
| Sample-load entry | 60 (unit not stated) |
| Controller speed setting | 500 |
| Cycle notation | 5/1 |
Unlabelled jar, media and load numbers remain source notation, not assigned units. Controller settings are not certified rpm. The cycle notation has no independently stated timing unit or reversing definition.
Recorded procedure and results
The media entry gives 5 mm, and the controller setting is recorded as 500. The procedure states that three hours was sufficient to reach 325 mesh, with an accepted result entry. No intermediate size readings, passing percentage or sample-temperature data were supplied.
Interpretation
The source supports reported acceptance at three hours for the tested powder. It does not prove complete passage through a specified aperture or establish rhodium purity after milling. Hard-alloy tooling is a recorded choice rather than a contamination-free claim.
Practical precautions
Confirm sieve standard and actual media composition before repeating. Set a recovery and contamination acceptance appropriate to the intended use alongside the fineness check.
TENCAN alternatives to evaluate
TENCAN Benchtop Planetary Ball Mill. A compatible benchtop configuration may be considered for this rhodium charge. Preserve the 5 mm media reference and three-hour mesh check, with contamination acceptance defined separately. A benchtop comparison concerns jar capacity and handling for a verified laboratory charge; it provides no inherent purity advantage and should retain the same media and sieve assessment. This is an untested comparison proposal, not a result of this trial.
Association follows the explicit XQM source entry; only recorded tested series/configurations are related. No jar-volume inference.
About this trial
TENCAN laboratory trial, 2017–2020. Observations above come from this experimental record; selection considerations and proposed comparisons are engineering interpretation. Results apply to this sample and recorded conditions.