The core impacts of ball mill jar materials on grinding performance lie in grinding efficiency, sample contamination level, and material compatibility. Differences in hardness, density, and chemical stability of various materials directly determine the final particle size, purity of samples, and the feasibility of experiments.

1. Material Hardness: Determines Grinding Efficiency and Abrasion Contamination

Hardness is a key indicator affecting grinding efficiency, and it also determines whether the jar body will generate abrasive particles to contaminate samples during grinding.

① High-hardness Materials (e.g., Agate, Silicon Carbide)

Advantages: High hardness (Mohs hardness 6–9), resistant to abrasion, and almost free from sample contamination; high grinding efficiency for high-hardness fibers (e.g., glass fiber, carbon fiber), capable of rapidly breaking fiber structures.

Disadvantages: High brittleness, prone to cracking under severe impact (e.g., high-speed collision of grinding balls); relatively high price and maintenance cost.

Applicable Scenarios: Experiments requiring high sample purity (e.g., fiber composition analysis, nanofiber preparation) or grinding of high-hardness fiber samples.

② Medium-hardness Materials (e.g., Alumina Ceramics, Stainless Steel)

Advantages: Moderate hardness (Mohs hardness 4–6), combining wear resistance and impact resistance, not easy to crack; lower price than high-hardness materials, suitable for routine experiments.

Disadvantages: May generate a small amount of abrasive particles after long-term use (e.g., stainless steel jars may introduce metal ions), requiring regular cleaning.

Applicable Scenarios: Routine fiber grinding (e.g., plant fiber, wood fiber) or pre-treatment experiments with low sample purity requirements.

③ Low-hardness Materials (e.g., Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), Nylon)

Advantages: Excellent chemical stability, resistant to acid and alkali corrosion; soft texture, no damage to grinding balls; light weight for easy operation.

Disadvantages: Low hardness (Mohs hardness 2–3), low grinding efficiency, only suitable for grinding soft fibers (e.g., cotton fiber, wool fiber); prone to scratches and dirt accumulation after long-term use.

Applicable Scenarios: Grinding of soft fibers or processing of fiber samples containing acid-alkali solutions (e.g., grinding of chemically modified fibers).

2. Material Density: Affects Energy Transfer Efficiency

Material density determines the inertia of ball mill jars during rotation, which in turn affects the energy transfer between grinding balls and samples, and ultimately impacts grinding efficiency.

① High-density Materials (e.g., Stainless Steel, Tungsten Carbide)

Advantages: High density (7–15g/cm³), large inertia during rotation, providing greater impact force for grinding balls, accelerating fiber crushing and shortening grinding time.

Disadvantages: Heavy weight, increasing difficulty in operation and installation; relatively high price for some materials (e.g., tungsten carbide).

Applicable Scenarios: Rapid grinding of fiber samples or batch processing experiments (e.g., fiber pre-treatment in industrial pilot tests).

② Low-density Materials (e.g., PTFE, Nylon)

Advantages: Low density (1–2g/cm³), light weight for easy operation; low load requirement for grinding equipment, suitable for small ball mills.

Disadvantages: Small inertia, low energy transfer efficiency, long grinding time, and difficulty in crushing hard fibers.

Applicable Scenarios: Micro-grinding of soft fibers in small laboratories or matching with small ball mills.

3. Chemical Stability: Determines Material Compatibility

Different fiber samples may contain various components (e.g., oil, sugar, acid-alkali substances). The chemical stability of ball mill jar materials must match the sample components to avoid chemical reactions.

① Chemical Corrosion-resistant Materials (e.g., PTFE, Agate)

Advantages: Resistant to corrosion by strong acids, strong alkalis, and organic solvents; no chemical reaction with samples, maintaining stable sample components.

Applicable Scenarios: Grinding of fibers containing acid-alkali solutions (e.g., acid-treated cellulose) or fibers containing oil and organic solvents (e.g., degreased textile fibers).

② Non-chemical Corrosion-resistant Materials (e.g., Stainless Steel, Alumina Ceramics)

Disadvantages: Stainless steel is susceptible to corrosion by strong acids (e.g., hydrochloric acid, nitric acid), leading to metal ion contamination; alumina ceramics tend to react with strong alkalis, causing jar damage.

Applicable Scenarios: Grinding of neutral, non-corrosive fiber samples (e.g., dry plant fibers, glass fibers).

The selection of ball mill jar materials requires clarifying fiber type (e.g., soft/hard), experimental requirements (e.g., purity/efficiency requirements), and sample characteristics (e.g., corrosive components or not). Only by matching the most suitable material can optimal grinding performance be achieved and avoid negative impacts on experimental results due to improper material selection.