Experiment No.

– 1

Sampling Method: Coning and Quartering

Objective:

(a) To study the propagation of error in the sampling process

(b) To study the differences in grab sampling and systematic coning and quartering sampling

Equipment and materials required:

1. Sample – River sand

2. Coning and quartering apparatus
3. Weighing balance
4. 2 mm sieve

Theory:

Sampling: It is a procedure by which a representative sample is determined for entire population.

Any processing plant relies on the assays of a few small samples. Decisions affecting crores of
rupees are made on the basis of a small fraction of the bulk of the ore body. It is therefore very
important that this small fraction is as representative as possible of the bulk material. The basic
rule for correct sampling is that all parts of the ore, concentrate, slurry or other material being
sampled must have an equal probability of being collected and becoming part of the final sample
for analysis.

There are two steps in sampling process

1. Collection of samples: Samples can be taken from range of locations including blast areas,
relevant feed and product streams, trucks, trains, stockpiles or from ships during loading and
unloading. The sample collection should be bias free.
2. Splitting the samples: After the collection of samples, it is split to reduce the mass ensuring
the unbiasedness.

There are many processes to split the sample. Coning and quartering is the simplest way to do
sampling. It can be done with least sophisticated equipment; only quartering apparatus and
flattening disk are required. Coning and quartering can be done anywhere, any size and any mass
but dependent upon the skill of the operator.

Coning and Quartering: This method is well suited for large lots of material. It is a systematic
splitting process on both dry and moist materials of virtually any size. It can be conveniently done
using shovels, or even front-end loaders for very large samples. After thorough mixing, all the
material is piled in the form of a radially symmetric cone. The pile is then spread from the center
to form a flattened disk of material.

The flattened disk of material is then divided into quarters using perpendicular boards. One pair of
opposite quarter is removed (rejected) and other pair is combined and used as sample for further
division.

Each quadrant can be identified as A, B, C, and D. The next stage, two opposite slices are paired,
A-C, and B-D. Once the pairs are segregated, pairs must be mixed again for further reduction, if
required.

Each quartering operation reduces the sample mass by one half. The quartering process is
continued until one is left with an amount of material that is the desired sample mass. This method
of reduction of sample may have human errors. Also, with the reduction in the mass to much lower
extent can result in ‘Fundamental Sampling Error’ (FSE). Error increases with the reduction in the
mass.
Application: To take out a representative sample without creating any systematic bias for
subsequent analysis.

Procedure:

Procedure for grab sampling

1. Collect the mixture of coarse (+3mm – 4.75 mm) and fine (-1mm) river sand sample of 5
kg mixed in 1:9 ratio and mix it thoroughly.
2. Separate 8 samples manually grabbing the samples in 8 equal parts.
3. Sieve all the samples using 2mm screen to determine the coarse and fine ratio as a quality
parameter.

Procedure of coning and quartering

1. Collect the mixture of coarse (+3mm – 4.75 mm) and fine (-1mm) river sand sample of 5
kg mixed in 1:9 ratio and mix it thoroughly.
2. Put the sample on the clean sampling surface and mix it thoroughly and pile the material
in the form of cone (As symmetrical as possible).
3. Flatten the cone evenly with the help of disk.
4. Use the quartering tool to slice the flatten material into 4 equal fractions.
 5. Separate the diagonally opposite samples and mix it. Tag the collected two samples as 1
and 2.
6. Using same procedure steps from 2 to 5 for sample 1 and 2 to get 4 samples which will be
tagged as 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 and 2.2.
7. Further all 4 samples will be divided to get 8 samples, tagged as 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.2.1, 1.2.2,
2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.2.2.
8. Sieve all the samples using 2mm screen to determine the coarse and fine ratio as a quality
parameter.

Observations and Calculations:

Table1: Grab Sampling for 8 fractions

Coarse Fines (-2mm) Coarse to fine
Sl. No.
(+2mm) (g) (g) ratio
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
N=8 Mean = µ =

∑(𝐱− µ)𝟐
𝑆𝐷 = √ =
𝑁

𝑺𝑫
% 𝑫𝒆𝒗𝒊𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 = ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎% =
µ

Similarly, SD and % Deviation can be calculated for 2-fractions and 4-fractions sampling:

(a) 2-fractions: Select even and odd samples and calculate

(b) 4-fractions: Select 2 samples at a time in pairs as 1-3, 2-4, 5-7, and 6-8
 Table2: Grab Sampling for 2 fractions
Sl. No. Coarse Coarse to
Fines (-2mm) (g)
(+2mm) (g) fine ratio
1 (Even)
2 (Odd)

∑(𝐱− µ)𝟐
𝑆𝐷 = √ =
𝑁

𝑺𝑫
% 𝑫𝒆𝒗𝒊𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 = ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎% =
µ

Table3: Grab Sampling for 4 fractions

Sl. No. Coarse Fines (-2mm) Coarse to
(+2mm) (g) (g) fine ratio
1 (1,3)
2 (2,4)
3 (5,7)
4 (6,8)

∑(𝐱− µ)𝟐
𝑆𝐷 = √ =
𝑁

𝑺𝑫
% 𝑫𝒆𝒗𝒊𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 = ∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎% =
µ

Coning and Quartering

Find coarse to fine ratio of 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 and represent them
in the flow chart provided below.
 oar e
F Fine

eig t eig t

F F

. . . .

eig t eig t eig t eig t

F F F F

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

eig t eig t eig t eig t eig t eig t eig t eig t

F F F F F F F F

Calculate standard deviation and percentage deviation as calculated above for 8, 2, and 4
fractions in table 1, 2, and 3 respectively.

Results and Discussions: Plot the graph as shown below.

Propagation of error

Table4: % deviation of 2,4,8 fraction for grab and coning and quartering sampling
2-fraction 4-fraction 8-fraction
Grab Sampling
Coning & Quartering

Conclusion:

Questions
1. Considering the results obtained in the experimental work, which sampling technique
is best suited for sampling? Why?
2. What could be the possible sources of error in grab sampling and coning and
qu rt ring t chniqu ? Wh t cou d b th ‘fiv ’ ik y sugg stions to r duc rrors in
both the sampling techniques?
3. Wh t’s your o inion on th rror ro gation in relation to particle size distribution
of the sample and the choice of sampling techniques? Is it better to increase the
number of steps in coning and quartering to reduce the error propagation?