We investigate the flow of a granular material over a vibrated horizontal screen. We perform a direct quantitative comparison, across a range of operating conditions, between laboratory scale experiments and simulations using the discrete element method (DEM). We test the extent to which the commonly employed DEM approximation of particles being spherical affects the ability of the model to realistically reproduce the behaviour of industrial screening systems where the particles are generally non-spherical in shape. The simulation geometry and input particle size distribution are set up to exactly match the experimental system, which consists of a horizontal screen with a wire mesh cloth onto which quarry rock is fed at a series of input flow rates. The screen is vibrated, causing the granular bed to flow over the deck and vertically stratify with finer material passing through the screen, where it is collected in a series of bins located along the length of the screen. The size distribution of the material flowing through each section of the screen is found by analyzing the contents of each collection bin. The best agreement is found for very low flow rates, where the vast majority of the below aperture size material is rapidly captured just after it enters the screen in both the simulation and experiment. At higher flow rates, significant quantitative errors are found with the over-prediction of the flow rate through the screen for near grate sized particles. This is attributed to the higher rate of percolation through the bed and the easier capture by the screen surface of the spherical shaped material. The near aperture sized spherical particles also show a very strong tendency to peg the screen, becoming trapped in the screen openings and limiting further flow through those parts the screen. The use of spherical particles in the DEM simulation of vibrating screens is therefore found to be inadequate for modelling realistic flow and separation of particles that are not actually spherical. Crown Copyright (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.