Sample assessment
Two sulfate formulations were assessed as 45 g dry charges in polyurethane with zirconia media. Neither formulation chemistry nor a numerical output limit is given. Equipment selection can use the favorable short-trial observations as a starting point, but needs a defined material identity and acceptance property before transfer to another sulfate.
Recorded objective
A one-hour milling trial, with a qualitative assessment of the processed material.
Equipment and selection
The source identifies QXQM family. The related TENCAN product association is Omnidirectional Planetary Ball Mill. This identifies the recorded equipment family, rather than an independently verified serial-number configuration. Jar contact materials and charge details below are test observations; an unspecified steel grade or ball-percentage basis is not supplied by the association.
Test setup
| Recorded setup | QXQM planetary family, described as horizontal planetary operation in the procedure; 500 mL polyurethane jar and zirconia balls, standard charge; 45 g per formulation; dry milling at setting 300; run/pause cycle recorded as 5:1; interval units unspecified. |
|---|---|
| Speed notation | Values are retained as recorded speed settings. The source does not identify the revolution/rotation reference; no separate jar speed is inferred. |
Recorded procedure and results
Formulation A was dry milled in the stated jar and ball arrangement for one hour. Its outcome was described as satisfactory. Formulation B used the same recorded jar material, ball material, 45 g charge and speed setting; its outcome was also described as satisfactory. The source gives a two-hour overall duration, consistent with the two trials, but does not separately repeat a one-hour duration in the second procedure sentence. No particle-size, sieve or mixing-uniformity measurements were supplied.
Interpretation
Publication rests on the favorable qualitative observations for both formulations, alongside the stated test objective. The report does not assign a particle-size endpoint or imply a quantified chemical or mixing result. The machine remains associated with the recorded QXQM family despite the horizontal wording; that wording does not establish a WXQM model. These observations provide a starting configuration for evaluation, with the final acceptance properties still needing to be defined for a repeat.
Practical precautions
Identify the two sulfate formulations and their moisture sensitivity before reproduction. Define the practical meaning of the satisfactory assessment, retain representative samples and record recovered powder and surface deposits. Measure the intended application property if that becomes the acceptance criterion.
TENCAN alternatives to evaluate
TENCAN Compact Horizontal Planetary Ball Mill: Evaluate a WXQM compact horizontal model after identifying the actual QXQM configuration and sulfate chemistry. Define the qualitative acceptance check first, then compare recovered powder and deposits under equivalent dry-loading conditions. This is a recommendation for a new comparison, not an observed result of this trial.
Endpoint context: Both formulations recorded as satisfactory; no quantitative particle-size endpoint supplied.
Tested equipment association only: QXQM family; exact machine variant not inferred. Alternative products are evaluation candidates in the body only.
About this trial
TENCAN laboratory trial, 2022. Observations above come from this experimental record; selection considerations and proposed comparisons are engineering interpretation. Results apply to this sample and recorded conditions.