Application guide / generalized scenario
A field-oriented guide for Indonesian nickel laterite projects. Compare dry, balanced, and high-stability routes for 120-300 TPH feed preparation.
Published February 23, 2026 · Updated July 11, 2026 · 10 min read
01 / Reference conditions
For this generalized scenario, assume rainfall can turn ROM feed into a sticky clay-lump mix. Validate moisture, clay fraction, and choke risk instead of relying on nameplate capacity.
This guide compares three practical layouts for 120-300 TPH operations that need a stable feed envelope for kiln or HPAL preparation without overbuilding capital.
02 / Selection logic
01
Condition
Feed moisture frequently exceeds 18% and clay bands are visible
Recommendation
Start with a jaw-led route and keep an open bypass to washing
Operating reason
Tight reduction on sticky feed can increase buildup risk and destabilize throughput; confirm with wet-feed trials.
02
Condition
Contract asks for consistent -30 mm feed with low oversize recirculation
Recommendation
Add cone stage with conservative CSS and two-deck control screen
Operating reason
A conservative cone setting and control screen provide a defined route for testing top-size control against hourly duty.
03
Condition
Penalties are tied to downtime instead of only tonnage
Recommendation
Choose the high-stability route with trim stage and washing contingency
Operating reason
If downtime penalties dominate, include resilience in the economic model instead of optimizing equipment CAPEX alone.
03 / Required data
04 / Process alternatives
Route 01
Why this route works
Equipment references
Route 02
Why this route works
Equipment references
Route 03
Why this route works
Equipment references
05 / Comparison matrix
Swipe or scroll horizontally to compare all three routes.
| Metric | Dry-start | Balanced wet | Contract-stable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Planning feed condition | Dry to moderate moisture | Mixed seasonal moisture | High variability and sticky spikes |
| Water demand | Low | Medium | Medium-high |
| Operational complexity | Low | Medium | High |
| Typical failure mode | Wet-season choke | Wash loop under-sized | Over-tuning by inexperienced crew |
| Illustrative upgrade trigger | Wet-feed limits are confirmed | Offtake quality tolerance tightens | No additional stage assumed |
06 / Operating context
If weather changes feed moisture and clay behavior while dry-season settings remain in use, feed consistency and screen loading may move outside the design window.
Logging moisture, choke events, and screen efficiency creates the evidence needed to test operating-window changes before proposing hardware changes.
Strong proposals state exactly how the line behaves at high moisture and what throughput derating is expected. Weak proposals only show dry test numbers.
Before PO, ask suppliers to document feed assumptions, expected recirculation range, and the acceptable operating window so acceptance decisions have a traceable basis.
07 / Supplier brief
08 / Project handoff
Replace assumptions with data
Share the feed and product conditions that define the process. The guide provides a comparison frame; final equipment sizing still requires a project-specific check.
Procurement reference
Use these notes for model, budget, and procurement questions outside this application scenario.
Selection guide for buyers targeting around 200 t/h. Match feed size, discharge target, and rock hardness to the right PE model before requesting quotes.
A practical checklist for comparing jaw crusher quotations when model, delivery scope, and site conditions make a public list price unreliable.
A practical route guide for 250 t/h basalt lines, balancing wear cost, product shape, and throughput stability.