Sampling Methods

Bautista, Stella Maris R.

Chiong, Angeline D.
Clavito, Elisa Jane F.
Ferrer, Rachel Angela P.
Lomod, Mary Margarette
Department of Mining, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering
University of the Philippines - Diliman
Quezon City, Philippines

S ampling is a key component in mineral processing. It is the
art of securing a small weight or fraction that is representative of
a relatively large mass to ascertain the true value of a desired
property of the material through its sample. Normally, it is prone
to a lot of errors which can be brought about by the sampling
technique used. Thus, it is important to know which method is
the most applicable and reliable to use. In this experiment, two
sampling techniques were used – Coning and Quartering and
Jones Riffle S plitting to sample a mixture of white and black
pebbles and the composition of the mixture was determined.
Through coning and quartering, the mixture was estimated to be
58.84265% white pebbles in terms of quantity and 48.79815% by
weight while through Jones Riffle sampling, the mixture was
estimated to be 57.08796% white pebbles by quantity and
48.80276% by weight.
I. INT RODUCT ION
The process of sampling is crucial in the mineral
processing industry. Samples are taken in order to produce a
small percentage of material from the large bulk that will be a
representative of the whole, this small percentage being
homogeneous. The population in mineral processing is referred
to as the sampling unit and can be defined by the mass of the
mill feed, the dewatered concentrate, bullion, a volume of
cyclone, or the tailings slurry.
Sampling aims to reduce the size of the population
without altering the defining characteristics present to ascertain
the true value of the desired constituent. Sampling is governed
by uniformity, size, occurrence, and ratios between the sample
and the population. All these are monitored to reduce the
introduction of bias in the sample preparation. In sampling the
uniformity of the ore must be considered: the grade, the
homogeneity, and the size and specific gravity. The size of the
individual grains composing the bulk will help determine the
type of sampling method to be used. The mode of occurrence,
on the other hand, will help determine the ease of sampling. It
will be harder to sample the bulk if the metal is carried by a
comparatively few pieces in a large mass of barren material. It
will be easier if a large bulk with a uniform composition is to
be sampled. The proportion of the sample with regards to the
largest particle will also determine the sampling size. Weight
ratio should also be considered in order to get a sound
representative of the bulk. Lastly, the method of selecting the
sample should be able considered to obtain the different
characteristics, sizes, and qualities of the parent bulk in the
sample.
It is of utmost importance to take sampling seriously
and follow its principles and guidelines in order to save time
and resources.
Sampling methods are usually divided into two: the
method of manual sampling and of machine sampling. The
manual method of sampling is usually done by manual labor of
workers using different tools such as augers, shovels, and
scoops. On the other hand, machine methods utilize
mechanical processes in gathering the sample.
Coning and Quartering is a type of manual sampling.
It is done by mounting the material into conical heaps and
makes use of the radial symmetry in order to divide the sample
into four equal parts. In order to divide the heap easily and
effectively, the point of the cone is flattened and the division
into quarters is done by a metal cutter. The two opposite
corners are taken for further sampling if necessary and the
other two are removed from the sampling unit. The process is
repeated until the target size is reached. The advantages of
using this type of method includes inexpensive in terms of cost
and could be applied to any types of ore. Its disadvantages on
the other hand are that it is slow and tedious, labor extensive,
and crude in handling.
Manual methods, such as coning and quartering, may
be the primary choice of sampling type when dealing with a
small size of bulk such as those used in the laboratory, or when
no machine is available. However, in large-scale sampling,
manual methods may be slow, tedious, and costly due to
operating labor, and significant errors are present due to human
bias. Mechanical sampling minimizes these problems: it’s
more reliable because little to no human intervention is needed,
thus minimizing accidental and intentional errors due to human
bias, sampling time is shortened, and sampling results are more
repeatable or precise because the system runs the same for
every trial. There are two types of mechanical sampling. It
could be moving where samples are taken by taking the entire
flowing stream at a part of the time or it could be stationary
where only a part of the stream is taken all of the time.
Stationary machine samplers are ideal for uniform streams
while the moving ones are for streams that are non-uniform in
cross-section.

Page 1 of 8
 The common types of stationary machine samplers are the with our data for the Jones Riffle in to produce 10 sampling
whistle-pipe sampler and, the one used in the experiment, the trials.
Jones Riffle sampler. In the whistle-pipe sampler, the material For both the sampling method, once the 1/8 of the bulk is
to be sampled, ideally dry, finely-crushed and thoroughly- acquired, the white pebbles are separated from the black
mixed, runs down a vertical pipe which has notched openings pebbles. Each kind was tallied and weighed. This was done
cutting halfway through the pipe, and spaced 90 degrees after every trial.
horizontally from each other. These cutters or dividers are The percentage weight of the black and white pebble was
originally centered, but because dry, finely crushed and computed for every trial. For every method, the data from the
thoroughly-mixed ores are very rare, these cutters wear over 10 trials were used to compute for the mean, the variance, and
time and the dividing line formed by the cutters misalign from the standard deviation. Statistical analysis was also used to
the center. Ore samples also tend to clog the pipe. This compute for the range within which the average percentage of
machine, though, offers free installation, and a shorter the white pebbles in the mixture will fall at different
operating time than manual sampling. confidence intervals.
One type of a stationary machine sampling is the Jones
Riffle. The Jones Riffle sampler is a V-shaped box containing III. SAMPLE OBSERVAT IONS AND CALCULAT IONS
two equally-sized chutes that are at right angles from the long During the first part of the experiment, sampling was do ne
axis. These chutes discharge at opposite rectangular trays. through coning and quartering. To quantify the concentration
When the ore sample is poured in the Jones riffle sampler, it of the white pebbles from the mixture of white and black
splits into two parts, half falling through the chute to the right pebbles of unknown composition, the quantity and the weights
tray and the other half to the left. This process is repeated until of each of the types of pebbles were determined and were
the desirable amount is achieved. The sample here should be tabulated in Table 1.
granular or powdered; the largest particle size should be at least
three times smaller than the chute width to avoid clogging. The
other tray is kept as the new sample while the other one is TABLE I. QUANTITIES AND W EIGHTS OF P EBBLES – CONING AND
discarded. The same process is repeated until the target size is QUARTERING METHOD
obtained. Its limitation is that the size of the ore particle should No. of Weight of We ight of
No. of Black
be smaller than the chute width by at least a factor of 3. Trial White White Black
Pebbles
The objectives of this experiment are to understand the Pebbles Pebbles (g) Pe bble s (g)
1 453 303 65 70
basic statistical techniques used in sampling and to determine
2 437 277 60 60
the composition of an unknown bulk sample by applying 3 394 284 65 60
proper mixing, sampling and analysis. 4 334 267 55 70
5 425 281 55 65
II. M ET HODOLOGY 6 414 269 65 60
7 376 281 60 65
For the experiment, two sampling methods – Coning and 8 363 283 60 65
Quartering, and Jones Riffle – were applied for the given bulk 9 427 303 70 70
of black and white pebbles. The sample was mixed thoroughly 10 453 291 60 60
before every division of the bulk through rolling.
The first sampling method performed was Coning and The percentages of the quantity and of the weight of the white
Quartering. The sample was first mixed using the sampling mat pebbles were calculated using Equations 1 and 2, respectively.
by rolling its four corners to facilitate the mixing – starting
from the lower right to upper left then lower left to upper right.  %𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 =
𝑁𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠
The rolling was repeated for 50 times. The sample bulk was × 100%  
then gathered into a single pile to form a conical shape. The 𝑁𝑜.𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 +𝑁𝑜.𝑜𝑓 𝐵𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠

bulk was flattened and then divided into quarters using a wood
divider. Two opposite divisions were taken for further
sampling and the other two divisions were discarded into the  %𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 =
𝑊𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 (𝑔)
reject sampling bag. These procedures were done thrice to 100% 
× 
𝑊𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 ( 𝑔)+𝑊𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐵𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 (𝑔 )
gather one eight of the original bulk. The coning and quartering
method was done for nine more times for a total of 10 trials. Using the data obtained in the first trial, the sample was
The second method performed was done using Jones Riffle found to be 59.92063492% white pebbles in terms of quantity
sampler. The sample bulk was also mixed using the sampling and 48.14814815% in terms of weight.
mat by rolling 50 times. It was then placed in a container and
then poured and passed through the Jones Riffle. Half of the 453
 %𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 = × 100%  
bulk was placed into the reject sampling bag; the other half was 453+303
taken for further sampling. These procedures were done thrice
to gather one eight of the original bulk. The Jones Riffle
method was done four more times for a total of 5 trials. Since %𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 = 59.92063492%
we were asked to acquire 10 sampling trials, due to time
constraints: the data gathered by another group were combined

Page 2 of 8
 65 𝑔 In the second part of the experiment, the Jones Riffle
%𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 = 
65 𝑔 + 70 𝑔 splitting machine was used instead of the Coning and
Quartering method, obtaining the following data in Table 4.

%𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊ℎ𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑃𝑒𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑠 = 48.14814815% 

TABLE IV. QUANTITIES AND W EIGHTS OF P EBBLES – JONES RIFFLE
SAMP LER
The same calculations were done for each trial, yielding the
following data tabulated in Table 2. No. of
No. of Black
Weight of We ight of
Trial White White Black
Pebbles
Pebbles Pebbles (g) Pe bble s (g)
1 428 303 60 70
TABLE II. P ERCENTAGES OF WHITE PEBBLES BASED ON QUANTITY AND 2 467 318 70 65
W EIGHT – CONING AND QUARTERING METHOD 3 459 329 65 75
%Q uantity of White %Weight of White 4 447 311 65 70
Trial 5 407 298 55 65
Pebbles Pebbles
1 59.92063492 48.14814815 6 328 222 65 55
2 61.20448179 50.00000000 7 319 270 60 60
3 58.11209440 52.00000000 8 306 248 55 60
4 55.57404326 44.00000000 9 287 244 55 55
5 60.19830028 45.83333333 10 302 249 50 55
6 60.61493411 52.00000000
7 57.22983257 48.00000000 Same calculations as in the first part of the experiment were
8 56.19195046 48.00000000
9 58.49315068 50.00000000
done to the data yielding the data presented in Table 5,
10 60.88709677 50.00000000

The mean, variance and standard distribution of the sample TABLE V. P ERCENTAGES OF WHITE PEBBLES BASED ON QUANTITY AND
W EIGHT – JONES RIFFLE SAMP LER
were then calculated order to describe the central tendency of
the data gathered. In order to calculate for these statistics, the %Q uantity of White %Weight of White
Trial
Pebbles Pe bble s
following formula were used: 1 58.54993160 46.15384615
2 59.49044586 51.85185185
∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑋𝑖
 𝑆𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 ( 𝑋̅) =   3 58.24873096 46.42857143
𝑛 4 58.97097625 48.14814815
5 57.73049645 45.83333333
6 59.63636364 54.16666667
∑𝑛 ̅) 2
𝑖=1(𝑋𝑖 −𝑋 7 54.15959253 50.00000000
 𝑆𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑉𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 (𝑠 2 ) =   8 55.23465704 47.82608696
𝑛−1
9 54.04896422 50.00000000
10 54.80943739 47.61904762
∑𝑛 ̅ )2
𝑖 =1 (𝑋𝑖−𝑋
 𝑆𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝐷𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑠) = √   The following measures of central tendency were
𝑛−1
calculated:
where:
n is the sample size or the number of trials,
𝑋𝑖 is the data for trial i, TABLE VI. MEASURES OF CENTRAL T ENDENCY ON THE P ERCENT
QUANTITY AND P ERCENT W EIGHT OF W HITE P EBBLES – JONES RIFFLE
𝑋̅ is the sample mean, SAMP LER
𝑠 is the sample standard deviation, and
%Q uantity of White %Weight of White
𝑠 2 is the sample variance. Pebbles Pe bble s
Sample Mean 57.08796 48.80276
The calculated measures of central tendency were presented Sample Variance 5.127431 7.243313
in Table 3. Sample Standard
2.264383 2.69134
Deviation

Using the sample standard deviations and sample means

that are determined in the experiment, the range within which
TABLE III. MEASURES OF CENTRAL T ENDENCY ON THE P ERCENT
QUANTITY AND P ERCENT W EIGHT OF W HITE P EBBLES – CONING AND the average percentage of white pebbles at (1-p)100%
QUARTERING METHOD confidence interval can be determined and is given by:
%Q uantity of White %Weight of White
𝑠 𝑠
Pebbles Pebbles  ( 𝑋̅ − 𝑡𝑝 (𝑣) , 𝑋̅ + 𝑡𝑝 (𝑣) )  
Sample Mean 58.84265 48.79815 √𝑛 √𝑛
Sample Variance 4.096209 6.482888
Sample Standard
2.023909 2.546152
Deviation

Page 3 of 8
where: comprise 57.08796% of the mixture by quantity and
𝑋̅ is the sample mean, 48.80276% by mass. Comparing these statistics, it can be seen
𝑝 is the probability of the occurrence of the deviation that the percentages of white pebbles in the mixture calculated
outside ±𝑡, using the data gathered through the two sampling methods are
𝑛 is the sample size, very close. However, this does not automatically mean a
𝑣 is the degrees of freedom, which is given by 𝑛, successful sampling. Theoretically, the data gathered during
𝑡𝑝 (𝑣) is a value given by the Student’s ‘t’ Table, and coning and quartering would be less precise than those
gathered during Jones Riffle sampling as there is an element of
𝑠 is the sample standard deviation.
human bias present. These biases arose from dividing the
flattened cone into four divisions, shoveling, and separating the
The ranges of the possible values of the mean of the
black pebbles from the white ones as there are middlings which
percentages of the quantity and of the weight of the white
are assigned to either type of pebble depending on a member’s
pebbles were given by Tables 7 and 8.
discretion. However, the data shows that the variance in the
former method is smaller, thus telling that it is more precise,
TABLE VII. RANGE OF VALUES FOR THE MEAN OF P ERCENTAGE OF than that of the latter. This may be attributed to a grave mistake
W HITE P EBBLES – CONING AND QUARTERING METHOD done during the Jones Riffle method: only five trials were
performed by the group and the data for the five other trials
Range of Values for Range of Values for
Confidence Interval Mean of %Quantity of Mean of %Weight of were taken from another group, which has their own mixture
White Pebbles White Pebbles that was surely not of the same composition as that of the
95%
(57.39621501, (46.97847795, original mixture.
60.28908884) 50.61781835)
(57.67142204, (47.32469839, V. A NSWERS T O QUEST IONS
90%
60.01388182) 50.27159791)
(58.39464049, (48.23453349, 1. Discuss the relative merits and demerits of the
50%
59.29066336) 49.36176281) sampling methods used. Make a comprehensive
discussion in terms of the advantages, disadvantages,
applicability, and limitations of each method in the
TABLE VIII. RANGE OF VALUES FOR THE MEAN OF P ERCENTAGE OF experiment, as well as in the actual mineral dressing
W HITE P EBBLES – JONES RIFFLE SAMP LER practices.
Range of Values for Range of Values for
Confidence Interval Mean of %Quantity of Mean of %Weight of Refer to Introduction.
White Pebbles White Pebbles
(55.46966209, (46.87932222,
95% 2. What are the different purposes for which samples are
58.70625709) 50.72618821)
(55.77756826, (47.24528514, taken? What basic requirements must be met in any
90%
58.39835093) 50.36022529) sound sampling procedure?
(56.58671701, (48.20700163,
50%
57.58920218) 49.39850880)
Refer to Introduction.
The range of a parameter is dependent on the confidence
interval. The confidence interval (CI) gives an estimate of the 3. What are the different techniques by which sampling
techniques is done in mineral industries? Indicate
range in which an unknown parameter is likely to fall into,
their advantages and limitations.
based on the calculations made from a sample data. In this
case, the unknown parameters are the mean of the percent
quantity of white pebbles and the mean of the percent weight a. Grab Sampling
of the white pebbles in the given mixture. The length of a - Advantages: Cheap and quick
confidence interval can be obtained by subtracting the lower - Disadvantages: Difficult to get a full
limit to the upper limit of the interval. Here, 95%, 90% and representation of all sizes of particles
50% confidence intervals were used, and it can be observed b. Coning and Quartering
that the 50% CI gives a shorter range than the 90% CI and even - Advantages: Does not require expensive
much shorter compared to the 95% CI. At a narrower equipment and is applicable to practically all
confidence interval, one can be more certain at the true value of classes of ore.
the parameter since the possible values that it can have is more - Disadvantages: High cost of labor and
constrained. Thus, a narrower confidence interval means a requires frequent handling of ore by crude
more precise estimate. Greater precision can also be achieved means so sampling is slow and tedious.
by increasing the sample size. c. Shovel
- Advantages: Applicable for much larger
IV. RESULT S AND DISCUSSION lots compared to coning and quartering.
Sampling is cheaper, quicker and takes up
When sampling was done through coning and quartering,
less space.
the mixture the concentration of the white pebbles was
estimated to be 58.84265% by quantity and 48.79815% by
mass, while through Jones Riffle sampling the white pebbles

Page 4 of 8
 - Disadvantages: Not applicable for samples
with big lumps (> 2”), susceptible to ore
segregation and subject to manipulation.
d. Pipe Sampling
- Advantages: Provides quick results at a
low cost.
- Disadvantages: Data gathered could be
erroneous due to clogging and insufficient
mixing.
e.Whistle-pipe Sampler
- Advantages: Cheap installation costs and
quick reduction in bulk.
- Disadvantages: Possible ore clogging and
segregation brought about by metal wear.
f. Jones Riffle Sampler
- Advantages: Continuous diversion of ore
reduces bias in sampling.
- Disadvantages: Has a limitation that the
largest ore particle size should be smaller
than the chute width by at least a factor of 3.
g. Vezin Sampler
- Advantages: Acquired samples are
accurate, construction is simple, and
maintenance is easy.
- Disadvantages: Space consuming, clogging
is possible, and ruggedness is lacking.
h. Snyder Sampler
- Advantages: Construction is simple,
maintenance is easy, and small space is
required.
- Disadvantages: Not applicable to sticky
ore streams.
i. Brunton Oscillating Sampler
- Advantages: Only takes up small space and
maintenance is easy.
- Disadvantages: There is a bias towards the
side of the stream in taking samples.
j. Rotary Splitter
- Advantages: Provides reliable samples
- Disadvantages: High cost
4. What are the general steps taken during a sampling
procedure and what are the possible errors
associated with each step?
5. Mention the different types of mechanical samplers
and explain their working operations.
Refer to Introduction.
6. How is sampling done for wet pulps (without drying)?
Wet pulps can be sampled using hand sampling or
mechanical sampling. Hand sampling makes use of
the hand or scoops to take several portions of the bulk
from different areas to be the representative sample.
This method may be used in handling small volumes.
Mechanical sampling of wet pulps is done using a
Brunton Oscillating sampler which is placed under a
falling stream of ore. It is an oscillating divider that
swings back and forth to segregate the stream into two
reject deflecting surfaces and one sample deflecting
surface which are separated by cutting edges .
7. What is the effect of particle size in sampling?
Large particle sizes limit the equipment that can be
used since some of the samplers has a size
requirement. It also causes clogging in the equipment
furthermore; the ore that was not crushed or grinded
properly may not be a good representative of the
deposit since its components will not be homogenized
within the sample. In addition, according to the Gy’s
Theory (Equation 8), the cube of the diameter of the
largest particle is proportional to the variance of the
Fundamental Sampling Error. It means that the greater
the particle size the higher the variance of error.
8. How is standard deviation related to probable error
in a normal distribution?
The standard deviation is directly proportional to the
probable error PE. On a normal distribution, the
probable error is given by PE = 0.6745*sample
standard deviation. The probable error gives the half-
range of the distribution about the central point. This
aids in estimating the parameter of the population and
accounts for the error given by the level of the
confidence interval.

9. Derive an expression for the number of particles in a

TABLE IX. GENERAL STEP S IN A SAMP LING P ROCEDURE AND T HEIR
P OSSIBLE ERRORS sample in terms of the volumetric content of the
substance for which an assay is to be made and the
General Steps Procedures Possible Errors probable volumetric error of sampling. Assume that
I. Collection of Large Manual Sampling  T he sample taken
Quantity of Material Methods may not be all particles are free and of the same grade.
from a huge lot. representative due to
the huge bulk. Pierre Gy proposed a sampling theory that predicts the
 Personal Biases value of the variance of the fundamental sampling
II. Reduction of Large Crushing,  T he sample may not
Quantity to a Grinding, be mixed thoroughly
error (FSE). The variance of the FSE can be
conveniently Manual Sampling or is not calculated using the following formula:
handled quantity Method homogenous.
 Personal Biases
III. Final Reduction to a Machine Sampling  Machine Error 𝑓𝑔𝑐𝑙𝑑3 𝐶𝑑3
required quantity Method  𝑠 2 𝐹𝑆𝐸 = =  
𝑀𝑠 𝑀𝑠

Page 5 of 8
 From Equation 8, an expression describing 𝑑 3 can be
where: derived. Substituting the expression to Equation 10,
𝑠 2 𝐹𝑆𝐸 is the variance of the fundamental the number of particles in a substance can then be
sampling error, described in terms volumetric amount of the whole
𝑓 is the shape factor, substance and the volumetric variance of the
𝑔 is the particle size distribution factor, fundamental sampling error.
𝑐 is the mineralogical composition factor,
VI. CONCLUSION
𝑙 is the liberation factor,
𝑑 is the largest particle size diameter, Both Coning and Quartering and Jones Riffle Splitter have
𝐶 is the sampling constant, given by fgcl, their own advantages, disadvantages, applicability, and
and limitations. In this experiment, the effectivity and reliability of
𝑀𝑠 is the mass of the sample. these two sampling methods were tested and compared.
Statistics showed that for the Coning and Quartering, the
Assuming that the particles are free and are of the variance and standard deviation computed are relatively lower
same grade, the mineralogical composition factor c, compared to that of Jones Riffle Splitter. This difference might
and liberation factor l all have a value of 1. Most be because the data were gathered from two different samples,
calculations also assume a shape factor f of 0.5, which thus causing an inconsistency with the results. To avoid such
is a factor used for spherical particles. The sampling error, it is recommended that the two group’s mixtures be
constant would then equal 0.5g, giving us a more combined first before performing sampling using the Jones
simplified equation for the fundamental sampling Riffle Splitter.
error variance: REFERENCES

0.5𝑔 𝑑 3 [1] Wills, Barry A., and Napier-M unn,Tim J.. Wills’ Mineral
 𝑠 2 𝐹𝑆𝐸 =   Processing Technology. 7th ed.
𝑀𝑠
[2] M erks, Jan W. "Sampling in M ineral Processing." Accessed
An expression for the number of particles in a February 22, 2018. https://www.911metallurgist.com/blog/wp -
substance to be assayed can then be derived in terms content/uploads/2016/12/Sampling_M ineral-Processing.pdf.
of the volumetric content. Since density is constant, [3] "Value of SGS' M echanical Sampling Systems and Online
an expression for the mass of a single particle 𝑀𝑝 can Analysis in the Coal Industry." Accessed February 22, 2018.
http://www.sgs.com/-
be derived. 𝑉𝑠 and 𝑉𝑝 refers to the volume of the /media/global/documents/presentations/sgs-min-wa230-value-
sample and of a single particle, respectively. The of-sgs-mechanical-sampling-systems-en-11.pdf.
number of particles in a substance can then be [4] "Sampling Practices." Lecture, M etE 13 Class, Department of
calculated by dividing the mass of the whole sample M ining, M etallurgical and M aterials Engineering, University of
by the mass of a single particle. the Philippines - Diliman, Quezon City, February 06, 2018.
[5] Kennedy, Bruce A. Surface Mining. 2nd ed. Baltimore, M D:
𝑀𝑠 𝑀𝑝 𝑀𝑝 6𝑀𝑝
 = =4 𝑑 =   Port City Press, Inc., 1990. Accessed February 22, 2018.
𝑉𝑠 𝑉𝑝 𝜋( )3 𝜋 𝑑3 https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=qJJrYnpT2pYC&printse
3 2
c=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false.

𝜋 𝑑3𝑀𝑠 [6] M ichaud, L. D. "M etallurgical Plant Sampling Techniques."

 𝑀𝑝 =  
6𝑉𝑠 M ay 09, 2016. Accessed February 21, 2018.
https://www.911metallurgist.com/blog/metallurgical-sampling.
[7] "Confidence Intervals." Accessed February 21, 2018.
𝑀𝑠 𝜋𝑑3 𝑀𝑠 6𝑉𝑠
 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑠 = = 𝑀𝑠 ÷ =   http://www.stat.yale.edu/Courses/1997-98/101/confint.htm.
𝑀𝑝 6𝑉𝑠 𝜋𝑑 3
[8] Subba Rao, D. V. Minerals and Coal Process Calculations. EH
Leiden, Netherlands: CRC Press/Balkema, 2016. Accessed
From Equation 8, an expression describing 𝑑 3 can be February 21, 2018.
derived. Substituting the expression to Equation 10, https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=2HeuDQAAQBAJ&prin
the number of particles in a substance can then be tsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false.
described in terms volumetric amount of the whole [9] Harris, J. Arthur, and Ness, M arie M .. "The Probable Error of
substance and the volumetric variance of the the Standard Deviation." Taylor & Francis Online. M ay 08,
fundamental sampling error. 2012. Accessed February 22, 2018.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01621459.1928.10
𝑠2 𝐹𝑆𝐸 𝑀𝑠 2𝑠 2 𝐹𝑆𝐸 𝑀𝑠 503011?journalCode=uasa20.
 𝑑3 = =  
0.5𝑔 𝑔

3𝑉𝑠 𝑔
 𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑠 =  
𝜋 𝑠2 𝐹𝑆𝐸 𝑀𝑠

Page 6 of 8
 APPENDIX

Figure 1: Mixing by Rolling of the Sample. Figure 3: Dividing the Sample into 2 Halves. (Crosswise
and Lengthwise)

Figure 2: Piling up of the Sample into a Cone-shape. Figure 4: Separation and Counting of White and Black
(Coning) Pebbles.

Page 7 of 8
Figure 5: Placement of the Pebbles in the Tray. Figure 7: Weighing of the Segregated Sample.

Figure 6: Dividing using the Jones’ Riffle .

Page 8 of 8