1 FEED AND FEED SYSTEM...........................................................................................

6
1.1 Feed Temperature........................................................................................................6
1.2 Feed size......................................................................................................................6
1.2.1 Coarse and Fine Clinker....................................................................................6
1.3 Feed Moisture.............................................................................................................7
1.4 Feed Chemistry...........................................................................................................8
1.4.1 SO3 Effects.........................................................................................................8
1.4.2 Weathered or Stored Clinker vs. Fresh Clinker..................................................8
1.4.3 Alite / Belite / Grinding Aid................................................................................8
1.5 Feed Bins..................................................................................................................10
1.5.1 Expanded Flow.................................................................................................10
1.6 Weighfeeders.............................................................................................................11
1.7 Feed Arrangement.....................................................................................................12
2 DRYING..........................................................................................................................13
2.1 Drying Targets...........................................................................................................13
2.2 Drying Capacities......................................................................................................13
2.3 Drying without external heat source.........................................................................14
2.3.1 Actions to control drying when no external heat source available..................14
2.4 Drying compartment (ball mills)..............................................................................14
2.5 Kiln and cooler Air....................................................................................................15
2.6 Flash or Shaft Dryer..................................................................................................15
2.7 Rotary Dryer / Flash Dryer Comparision..................................................................16
2.8 Hot Gas Generators...................................................................................................19
2.8.1 Fuel Sources.....................................................................................................19
2.9 Heat Balance.............................................................................................................20
2.9.1 Heat Balance Program.....................................................................................20
3 GRINDING......................................................................................................................21
3.1 Mill Speed.................................................................................................................22
3.2 Mill L/D and Chamber Lengths................................................................................22
3.2.1 L/D....................................................................................................................22
3.2.2 Chamber Lengths..............................................................................................23
3.2.3 FLS Combidan Design Philosophy..................................................................23
3.3 Quality criteria in mill and at mill exit......................................................................24
3.3.1 CEMENT Ball Mill...........................................................................................24
3.3.2 RAW ball mill....................................................................................................25
3.4 Ball charge filling level.............................................................................................25
3.4.1 LAFARGE Recommended Ball Charge Filling Levels.....................................25
3.4.2 Relationship Mill kWh/t and Ball Charge filling level.....................................25
3.4.3 Relationship Throughput and ball charge filling Level...................................26
3.5 Material filling level.................................................................................................27
3.5.1 Relationship Crushing Efficiency and Material Filling Level..........................27
3.5.2 Ball Charge Classification...............................................................................28
3.5.3 Swelling of charge / Reverse Classification.....................................................28
3.6 Residence TIme.........................................................................................................29
3.7 Ball Coating..............................................................................................................29
3.8 Grinding Aids............................................................................................................29
3.8.1 Willi Suter Presentation....................................................................................30
3.8.2 Price.................................................................................................................30

1
 3.8.3 Effect of grinding aid on kWh/t........................................................................30
3.8.4 Effect of grinding aid on product quality.........................................................31
3.9 Spitzers (Unground Clinker).....................................................................................31
4 GRINDING TOOLS.......................................................................................................32
4.1 Ball Charge...............................................................................................................32
4.1.1 Ball weights sizes and densities........................................................................32
4.1.2 Ball Charge Specific Surface............................................................................32
4.2 Ball Charge Condition..............................................................................................33
4.3 Monochamber and Raw Mill Ball Charge Design....................................................34
4.4 1st Chamber Ball Charge Design...............................................................................35
4.4.1 Biggest ball size – bond formula......................................................................35
4.4.2 100mm balls......................................................................................................35
4.4.3 Raw mill............................................................................................................35
4.4.4 Cement Mill......................................................................................................36
4.5 2nd Chamber Ball Charge Design..............................................................................37
4.5.1 Discussion.........................................................................................................37
4.5.2 Raw Mill...........................................................................................................38
4.5.3 Cement Mill With Classifying Liners................................................................39
4.5.4 Cement Mill With Non-Classifying Liners........................................................40
4.5.5 Open circuit cement mill...................................................................................41
4.5.6 Calculation Procedure For A Composite Cement............................................42
4.6 Liners........................................................................................................................45
4.6.1 Impact on Process.............................................................................................45
4.6.2 Process Design.................................................................................................45
4.6.3 Liner Bolting.....................................................................................................46
4.7 Diaphragms...............................................................................................................46
4.7.1 Diaphragm Design...........................................................................................46
4.7.2 Selecting Diaphragms......................................................................................46
4.7.3 Drying Compartment and 1st Chamber............................................................47
4.7.4 Intermediate......................................................................................................48
4.7.5 End diaphragm.................................................................................................49
4.8 Mill Head..................................................................................................................49
4.9 Mill Shell..................................................................................................................49
4.10 Mill Ball Charge and Internals Lifetimes.................................................................50
4.10.1 Ball Charge.......................................................................................................50
4.10.2 Liners................................................................................................................50
5 MILL VENTILATION, DEDUSTING AND FILTERS..............................................53
5.1 Pressure Drops..........................................................................................................53
5.2 Mill ventilation..........................................................................................................53
5.2.1 Mill ventilation velocities.................................................................................53
5.2.2 Static Separators on the Mill Ventilation..........................................................55
5.2.3 Ventilation Limits..............................................................................................56
5.2.4 Mill Fan (Ball Mill)..........................................................................................56
5.3 Auxilliary Dedusting.................................................................................................56
5.3.1 Ducting.................................................................................................................56
5.3.2 Dedusting Hood Design...................................................................................58
5.4 Bag Filters.................................................................................................................58
5.4.1 Filter Design.....................................................................................................58
5.4.2 Filter Types.......................................................................................................60
5.5 Electrostatic Precipitators.........................................................................................63
2
6 TRANSPORT AND AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT.......................................................64
6.1 Belt Conveyors..........................................................................................................64
6.1.1 Belt Cleaners....................................................................................................64
6.1.2 Spillage Conveyors...........................................................................................64
6.2 Elevators...................................................................................................................64
6.3 material transport pneumatic versus mechanical......................................................66
6.4 Transfer points..........................................................................................................67
6.5 Airslides....................................................................................................................67
6.6 Metal Separation.......................................................................................................68
6.6.1 Overband Separator.........................................................................................68
6.6.2 Metal Trap........................................................................................................68
6.7 Fuller Pump...............................................................................................................70
6.8 Pfister Feeder............................................................................................................71
7 SEPARATION.................................................................................................................72
7.1 Separator Price..........................................................................................................72
7.2 Separator analysis.....................................................................................................72
7.2.1 Concept of Bypass............................................................................................72
7.2.2 Efficiency..........................................................................................................73
7.2.3 Cut point...........................................................................................................73
7.2.4 Sharpness..........................................................................................................74
7.2.5 Circulating Load Calculation...........................................................................74
7.2.6 Rosin-Rammler.................................................................................................74
7.3 Cyclones....................................................................................................................75
7.4 Static separators........................................................................................................75
7.5 1st Generation (Sturtevant) Separators......................................................................76
7.5.1 1st Generation Modifications............................................................................77
nd
7.6 2 Generation Separators..........................................................................................77
7.6.1 2nd Generation Separator Modifications..........................................................77
rd
7.7 3 Generation / High efficiency separators...............................................................78
7.7.1 Impact on Production.......................................................................................78
7.7.2 Impact on KWh/t...............................................................................................79
7.7.3 HES Comparison..............................................................................................79
7.7.4 HES Dimensioning...........................................................................................80
7.7.5 HES Guide Vanes..............................................................................................81
7.7.6 HES Operation.................................................................................................82
7.7.7 HES Wear Protection........................................................................................82
7.7.8 HES Fan and Filter Dimensioning...................................................................83
7.8 Separator Conversions To HES.................................................................................83
7.8.1 Open Circuit Conversion..................................................................................84
7.8.2 Static Separator Conversion.............................................................................84
7.8.3 1st Generation Conversion................................................................................84
7.8.4 2nd Generaton Conversion................................................................................85
7.8.5 Alesd Raw Ball Mill Separator.........................................................................85
8 OPERATION AND CONTROL....................................................................................87
8.1 Ball Mills..................................................................................................................87
8.1.1 Optimal Mill Load............................................................................................87
8.1.2 Mill Ear Control - Costs...................................................................................87
8.1.3 Circulating Load...............................................................................................87
8.1.4 Mill flushing and Pumping of separator feed...................................................88

3
 8.1.5 Detection of Filling Level.................................................................................88
8.1.6 Fineness Control...............................................................................................89
8.1.7 Online Analysers...............................................................................................89
8.1.8 Start-up of a New Mill......................................................................................89
9 PRODUCT QUALITY...................................................................................................90
9.1 Mesh size conversion................................................................................................90
9.2 Raw meal..................................................................................................................91
9.2.1 Fineness............................................................................................................91
9.2.2 Moisture............................................................................................................92
9.2.3 Quartz...............................................................................................................92
9.3 Influence of raw grinding on kiln burnability...........................................................92
9.3.1 Kiln Dust...........................................................................................................92
9.4 cement.......................................................................................................................92
9.4.1 EN 197-1...........................................................................................................92
9.4.2 Fineness............................................................................................................92
9.4.3 Moisture............................................................................................................93
9.4.4 Particle size Distribution..................................................................................93
9.4.5 Mineralogy.......................................................................................................93
9.4.6 Density..............................................................................................................93
9.4.7 Grinding Aids...................................................................................................94
9.4.8 Clinker Storage.................................................................................................94
9.5 Fly Ash Cement.........................................................................................................94
9.6 pozzolana cement......................................................................................................94
9.6.1 fineness.............................................................................................................94
9.7 masonry cement........................................................................................................94
9.8 Slag cement...............................................................................................................94
9.8.1 Fineness............................................................................................................94
9.9 limestone cement......................................................................................................95
9.10 coal............................................................................................................................95
9.10.1 Fineness............................................................................................................95
9.11 petcoke......................................................................................................................95
10 COOLING AND GYPSUM (CASO4 DIHYDRATE)..............................................96
10.1 Vertical Mills.............................................................................................................96
10.2 Cost...........................................................................................................................96
10.3 Objectives of cooling................................................................................................96
10.4 Water Injection..........................................................................................................96
10.4.1 Choice of 1st or 2nd Chamber Injection, Co-Current / Counter-Current...........97
10.4.2 Direction of Spray.............................................................................................97
10.4.3 Water Injection Troubleshooting......................................................................98
10.4.4 Control of water spray......................................................................................98
10.4.5 Effect of water injection on cement properties.................................................98
10.5 Cement Coolers.........................................................................................................99
10.5.1 Cooler Dimensioning........................................................................................99
10.5.2 Cooler Design.................................................................................................100
10.6 Gypsum...................................................................................................................101
10.6.1 importance of gypsum.....................................................................................101
10.6.2 Gypsum hydrolyis...........................................................................................101
10.6.3 False set / flash set.........................................................................................101
10.6.4 Gypsum solubility...........................................................................................103
10.6.5 The use of anhydrite.......................................................................................103
4
10.6.6 Gypsum replacements.....................................................................................104
10.6.7 Phosphogypsum..............................................................................................104

5
1 FEED AND FEED SYSTEM

1.1 Feed Temperature

Plants with satellite coolers have high clinker temperatures: e.g. Cumarebo, Oujda…..

Exit satellite cooler 200-250°C.

Exit grate cooler 100-150°C.
HGRS standard for a grate cooler is that clinker temperature should be 80°C above ambient
temperature. Reality is that it is a little bit igher (90°C-100°C).

Karl-Heinz has never measured more than 150°C clinker temperature at mill inlet. Depends
on storage time and whether stored inside / outside. Solution to satellite cooling is to pour
water onto satellites (Karl-Heinz saw this in Korea).

Example Chekka, clinker temperature > 150°C with coal, but then lower with petcoke (clinker
made from petcoke is finer  better heat exchange in cooler)

1.2 Feed size

Clinker density 1.4 (Dotternhausen).

Ball Mill
 Cement Lafarge max R5% >25mm, Holcim <50mm. Standard offer from mill
manufacturer is R5% >30mm
 Raw Meal max R1% > 30 mm (Lafarge). Holcim “<25 – 50mm”.
o For quartz, feed must be precrushed to <10mm. Note that 90mm are required
to crush quartz fed at <3mm. Quartz demands a high crushing energy AND a
high grinding energy.

1.2.1 Coarse and Fine Clinker

It is “accepted” that coarse clinker is in many cases easier to grind than fine clinker. Yet,
when clinker from the same kiln system is screened into coarse and fine fractions, lab testing
is unable to determine significant differences in terms of energy requirements at high fineness
(see also clinker grindability). On the other hand, some plants can tell when their clinker
breaker has worn out. The oversized clinker causes the mill to choke and lose production.

In general, a mill system is set up to accept clinker of a certain size (or PSD) and if it
receives anything different, then production rates are usually affected.

1.2.1.1 Clinker Size Segregation

Clinker segregation is another well known situation which is a result of poor stockpiling
practices (end piles especially) and poor bin design and bin filling practices. If segregation is
occurring, the mill feed can swing from coarse to fine and back again. When the mill is
receiving clinker that's too coarse, retention in the first compartment rises (and sometimes

6
backspills) and the second empties and starts to over grind. If the clinker becomes too fine
then it flushes through immediately to the second compartment and overwhelms it. Mill
outlet fineness suddenly drops and the circulating load jumps up rapidly. Some spectacular
mill cycles have resulted from clinker segregation problems.

1.3 Feed Moisture

Ball Mill

Maximum moisture of fresh feed

Mill Type Limestone Clinker Slag Coal
Raw Meal (+slag,
flyash,
limestone)
1 open circuit [1 - 2] 2 2-3
2 clos ed circuit 2 3 3-4
3 clos ed circuit + hot gas 2-3 4 - 6 (7) 6 (7)
clos ed circuit + drying chamber
4 (preheater waste gas ) 6 7 10% (100% slag)
5 tandem sys tem (hammercrusher + mill) 14
6 vertic al mill (+ preheater was te gas) 25% 15% (100% slag) 15

slag: environmental temperature (0 - 20 °C)

clinker: (70 - 120 °C)

7
 Temperature clinker &
[t/h] proportion

100

90

2 3 4 [%] H2O

1.4 Feed Chemistry

Limestone specific weight = 2.7 g/cm3

1.4.1 SO3 Effects

The clinker SO3 content has been recognized as having an impact on grindability. Higher
SO3 in clinker results in a reduction in grindability and increases specific power consumption
per ton. Also, increasing SO3 (above optimum) content in clinker results in a decline of the
28 day cube strengths at a constant Blaine. It is important to watch for this as a lot of plants
switch to higher sulfur (and cheaper) fuels.

1.4.2 Weathered or Stored Clinker vs. Fresh Clinker

It has not been proven conclusively that the grindability of weathered or stored clinker is
significantly different than that of fresh clinker. The greater impact seems to be from the
condition of the weathered or stored clinker (i.e. wet or dry, fine or lumpy, warm or cold, etc.)
and its effect on the mill system.

For instance, if the clinker is wet, the production rate will drop if the mill system cannot
accept additional or replacement moisture. If the clinker is stored outdoors, it may be very
fine as a result of it being passed over many times with a bulldozer; or it may be chunky from
hydration effects, or a combination of the two. In this case, the first compartment ball charge
may not be capable of accepting a feed size which varies greatly from that of fresh clinker
without a corresponding loss of production. On the other hand, a comparatively large amount
of fines have been known to result in a production rate increase. As a rule with weathered
clinker, it is necessary to increase blaine to maintain strengths and this will cause a plant to
lose production. This also depends on the addition rate.

In summary, the mill system limitations have more impact on production rates relating to
weathered or stored clinker versus fresh clinker than does the grindability of the clinker itself.
A ball mill is optimised for certain conditions – if these are changes, production will
drop.

1.4.3 Alite / Belite / Grinding Aid

8
 To date, research indicates that grinding energy for up to 3,000 blaine rises with:

1) increasing alite crystal size

2) increasing C2S content
3) fewer number of pores

Item [2] relates to raw mix chemistry. Items [1] & [3] relates to overburning. Large alites
means over-burnt clinker thus it's harder to grind. Clinker with a lot of pores are easier to
crush. Some (not all) plants can monitor their grindability by watching the clinker
literweights. As it rises, the clinker becomes over-burnt; sometimes balls up into bigger
pieces; and sometimes it gets very dense (no pores). Good literweights are usually between
1250 and 1350. Watch out if gets above 1400. Note that some plants make a very fine yet
seemingly hard to grind clinker. The researchers have observed that a high proportion of big
alite crystals can be found in the fine sizes, in these cases.

On the other hand for fine grinding (> 3,000 blaine), the main factors become:
1) alite size, as before
2) C2S content , as before
3) grinding aid. Cost 0.6-1.2 €/t, usage 150-400 g/t.

As the cement particle gets smaller the pores disappear and no longer become a factor.
Increasing the amount of grinding aid will make the cement easier to grind.

Hard burning = hard grinding. Hard burning may be necessary when the fuel burning is not
optimal.

An 1 point C3S Excess Free d75 Alite


increase on ...
produces a
SO3/tot. alk. CaO alite C3S
variation of ...  [%] [%] [%] [µm] x100
on ....
 SSB 3500 -0,6 5 0,2 -0,2
Grinding energy
[kWh/t] SSB 4000 -0,7 5 0,2 -0,3
[cm²/g]
Petcoke burning leads to harder to grind clinker.

9
1.5 Feed Bins

Typical problem: slag or other composite cements milled in systems designed only for OPC.
Therefore 2 bins instead of 3  often dosing problems since slag or other component is dosed
with a front-end loader.

Or, there are 3 bins, but they are designed for clinker or gypsum and not the mineral
component.

Feed bins have sides at different angles in order for the material to flow at different speeds.
This imparts shearing forces on the material and thereby prevents accumulation of material in
the bin corners.

1.5.1 Expanded Flow

Expanded exit flow means that the exit box diverges in the direction of the flow. This allows
material from the part of the bin nearest the flow direction to fall.

This can also be achieved by having a straighter side in the direction of the flow.

10
1.6 Weighfeeders

11
1.7 Feed Arrangement

Step-chute is favoured arrangement.

Slegten Modification to FLS mills:

Above: Magotteaux modification to FLS feed chute in trunnion mill

Below: FLS feed chute (new generation into slide shoe mill)

12
13
2 DRYING

2.1 Drying Targets

Intermediate diaphragm 90-95°C. But Colonel = 65°C, without problems.

 Wireless mill inlet (did I mean intermediate diaphragm??) temperature probe:
o FLS $29,000
o KIMA $15,000 with electric ear

2.2 Drying Capacities

 End Discharge Mill max 4% drying with hot gases, 1.5% without
 Absolute drying capacity depends on the material size and if the moisture is surface or
in the pores. Take example of sticky clay which rolls down preblending pile making
large clumps  This is difficult to dry.
 5-7% may be possible to dry without a drying chamber but accepting a lower
production (depends if moisture is surface water or in pores).
 1% additional water = 10% less capacity, when no excess of drying capacity.
 Greater than 7-8% definitely requires a drying chamber
 Max hot gas temperature 450°C for roller and 350°C for ball mill trunnion bearing
(but note that Réunion is 550°C above trunnion), 250-300°C for roller press separator
bearing.
 Center Discharge Mill: 1st compartment hot gases only, max 10-15% with kiln air +
extra hot air.

14
  Air Swept Mill: no intermediate diaphragm (pressure drop too great). Therefore single
compartment, therefore small feed granulo / low hardness particles required.
 Raw Mill Exit Moisture approximately 0.4%.
 4 stage preheater systems are generally able to dry raw meal up to 8% moisture. 5
stage 6.5%, 6 stage 5.5%.

2.3 Drying without external heat source.

Percentage of total feed that can be dried is often largely a function of the clinker temperature
and the proportion of clinker in the feed.

 Need to modify internals for increased gas flow.

 Drying must be complete by the end of the first chamber.
 Max Gas Air Speed (tube) <2m/s WITH hot gas only (otherwise 1.5 m/s). Can go
>2m/s though if there is no excessive wear on the intermediate diaphragm and its
centre screen.
 Max gas air speed (diaphragms etc) <25 m/s.
 Filter must be able to handle moist gas. Operate 30°C above gas dew point.

2.3.1 Actions to control drying when no external heat source available

 Increase drying by increasing energy input:

 Increase mill feed temperature
 Increase the separator returns, and/or increase its temperature by moving fresh air
damper (but beware of maintaining the underpressure). For single-pass, recycle the
gas from the fan outlet.
 Decrease mill ventilation (increases air residence time)  air gets warmer 
increases amount of water that it can take.
 Increase Mill power in the first chamber (but beware of increasing kWh/t….).
 Possibly, use chemical admixtures, which allow drying of the water even at
temperatureas around 80°C. Documented example from Barosso, Brazil  add up to
7% moisture with hot clinker 140-150° 25% slag but with no hot gas generator. Used
by Votaratim and Lafarge in Brazil.

2.4 Drying compartment (ball mills)

Drying in a ball mill is called COMPOUND MILLING.

 Hot gases from hot gas generator <1300°C. Standard temperature with a hot gas is
400°C, ideal is 450°C. Need adequate cooling on the trunnion bearings. Max Bearing
temperature typically 60-70°C (??).
 Introduce gases at <350°C if no drying compartment or drying compartment is
integrated into the mill, <700°C if an overhanging drying compartment. Drying
efficiency:
300°C = 220 kg H2O/m³.h
700°C = 350 kg H2O/m³.h

15
  Create tubulence in drying chamber by installing impact plate but watch for influence
on the system pressure drop.
 Make sure that material is lifted to provide a full curtain of material. Watch for
influence on the system pressure drop.
 Maximise retention time of the material by installing a weir at the outlet. Verify
impact on the mill motor.

Drum Dryer L/D < 8.

Specific Load: <150 kg H20 / m³.h depending on internal fittings.

Dispersion Dryer – like a dryer in a tube mill.

Rapid Dryer - Drying rate 2500 – 25000 kg H2O/h
Dryer-Crusher – Air swept crusher with separator. For soft materials.

Flash dryer. Desagglomeraator breaks up feed which is fed to horizontal(vertical?) pipe

where it meets hot gas coming from the bottom. The particles are carried upwards and dried
at the same time. High gas speed required to compensate for terminal velocity of the
particles. Material limit is function of pressure drop. Specific Load: <500 kg H20 / m³.h.
feed size <20mm.

2.5 Kiln and cooler Air

Two sources for raw and cement grinding: KILN GAS and COOLER GAS.

 KILN GAS is often used for the raw mill instead of the cement mill because the
temperatures are higher than cooler air (typically 300 –350°C) and the raw meal is
generally more moist than cement. Kiln gas has high CO2 / CO content, and is
therefore an explosion and safety hazard in the raw mill.

 COOLER GAS is used for cement mills because it is generally stable (more
independent of kiln performance than kiln gas). Note however that cooler gas goes
preferentially to the kiln air (high in O2), and only the excess supplies the cement mill.

60% thermal energy goes to preheater, 40% to kiln.

????
Overhung cooler is located on the other side of the trunnion. Often the metal is thinner etc
because there is no ball charge.
Dust Load at raw meal outlet

2.6 Flash or Shaft Dryer

Conversation with Ole Rasmussen, FLS, October 20th 2005

 Shaft dryers operate with gas speeds up to 18-20 m/s.

 The drying ability depends strongly on the type of water (surface or inherent)
 Also depends strongly on the type of material and its granulometry and if it is porous or
not. Slag for example is generally easy to dry.
16
 Tips for increasing residence time are to recirculate some of the cyclones material back to
the dryer (use a splitter gate)
 FLS always design an reduction in the diameter (they call it a throttle) just before the
feed point in order to increase the gas flow and therefore lift more of the larger particles
up the dryer  higher residence time.
 Particles 15-30 mm are too big to be lifted up to the cyclones
 Indicated that 2% drying capacity is reasonable for Alesd.

 Kurt B. thinks that flash dryer internals are not used in the cement industry, despite what
is shown in the books.

2.7 Rotary Dryer / Flash Dryer Comparision

Hazemag – e.g. Pedro Leopoldo

Figura 1: Secador PL - modelo Hazemag ASS 03

17
Rotary Dryer

Bagfilter

Wet GBFS

Dried GBFS
to storage

Grinding system Ball mills

Criteria for dryer sizing :
Heating : direct-heat with a burner
Material & gas flow : cocurrent flow
L/D ratio: 2.5 - 3.5
Drum inclination: < 4°
Material filling ratio: 10-15%
Drum rotation: 20-30% of critical speed
Hot gas temperature: 500-800°C

Performance :
Thermal efficiency : 50 - 65% (not insulated)
Feed moisture : max.12 - 15%
Residual moisture : <0.5%

Flash Dryer

Bagfilter

Wet GBFS

Dried GBFS
to BM, RP or HM

Air Heater
Flash Dryer

18
Grinding system : BM, RP, HM
Criteria for dryer sizing :
Heating : air heater
Material & gas flow : cocurrent flow
Hot gas temperature: 300-600°C
Gas velocity : > 25 m/s
Retention time : < 1 - 1.5 s

Performance :
Thermal efficiency : 45 - 60 % (insulated)
Feed moisture : max. 12 - 15%
Residual moisture : 1 - 4%

Relative investment costs

EXAMPLE Rotary Dryer Flash Dryer

REQUIREMENT :
- Design capacity t/h 50 50
- Feed moisture % 12 12
- Residual moisture % max. 0.5 max. 3.0
EQUIPMENT SIZE :
- Dryer diameter x length(or height) m 2.0 x 5.5 1.1 x 25.0
- Heating capacity MW 8.0 8.0
- Dedusting air flow m3/s 16.0 28.0
RELATIVE CAPEX COST (1) : % 100 70 - 100(2)
(1). The scope includes complete dryer, heating & dedusting systems and excludes raw & dried slag handling.

(2). The lower end represents a process that the dedusting system is integrated to that of the ball mill system.

Operating Costs

19
2.8 Hot Gas Generators

2.8.1 Fuel Sources

Kiln needs 3,300 MJ/tonne KK

Coal: 26,000 MJ/t

Fuel Oil : 45,000 MJ/t

Coal volatile matter 45%  accounts for difference in calorific values.

1 tonne coal  8 tonnes KK

1 tonne fuel oil  15 tonnes KK

Kiln 3000 t/d = 125 t/h.

Therefore 16 t/h coal required or 8 t/h fuel oil.

30% of HGG air is fresh air

HGG exit temp (combustion gases) 1869°C, O2 2%, CO2 10.5%, H20: 134 g/Nm3

8-9 litres of oil per tonne are required to dry a 10% blastfurnace slag in PL.
9 litres of fuel oil per tonne of coal are used in Chekka.
Pedro Leopoldo decreased from 11 litres to 7 litres per tonne of slag using oil.

As far as the HGG is concerned, I would measure the following:

1. Amount of fuel used per hour (then check against my calculation)
2. Amount of O2 and CO in the gas directly after HGG (no influence of mixing air)
(incomplete combustion?)
3. Temperature of hot gas (is it optimised – not too high = waste of fuel, not too low = dew
point problems, again in my calculation you can play with that)
4. Outside temperature of ducts (insulation OK)
5. Operating procedure (timely start up to heat up system, switchover of fuels, not running
unnecessarily, running too hot, etc)

If there is CO then there is a lack of Oxygen. There should be about 10% oversupply of O2 at
least. check O2 in return gas ahead of HGG if it is a inert system. The primary air fan should
give a good pressure to the burner, the head can be optimised to give a flame without any
colour. No colour = good burning. If using solids, then check momentum thru burner and
density phases in the solids flow.

Pressure of gas at HGG outlet should be constant -3 to -5 mbar. any variations (caused by feed
maybe) will impact the burner and cause inefficient burning.

Additionally, if you can measure at 90 degree angles multiple places you can check
temperatures and verify good mixing downstream of hot and cold gases. (Remember my idea
of using a drill and just boring holes in any place, that's the idea here!)

20
It is critical if temp before mill is reading X and actually most of the gas has temp Y because
of separated flow.

2.9 Heat Balance

Heat Balance

IN OUT
Mill Feed + Water Mill Product at mill outlet
Separator Returns Air at mill outlet.
Air Evaporated Water
Mill Power

Clinker / Cement MJ / tonne

Temperature °C
20 0
30 6
40 14
50 22
60 30
70 38
80 46
90 54
100 62

3.6 MJ/t.KW (* 0.95 efficiency) mill power. = 3.42.

2.9.1 Heat Balance Program

This program has two aims:

 Calculate the fresh air required to cool the product to the specified temperature at the
mill exit
 Calculate the quantity of hot gases required to achieve the product with the specified
moisture

For the drying, the program first uses the kiln and cooler gases specified in the input section.
If this is too much, it will bypass the mill and go straight to the filter. If it is not enough it will
use gases from a supposed hot gas generator.

 The program calculates an estimation of the available KILN GAS based on kiln
throughput.
 For the available COOLER GAS, need to ask TPT on a case-by-case basis.
 There is no direct to filter gas loop for cement and coal mills. The available amount of
kiln and cooler gases must be modified manually to reach 0 m3/h excess gas.

21
3 GRINDING

22
3.1 Mill Speed

Critical Speed = 42.3/sqrt(diameter)

"Mill Speed
Calculations.xls"

% Critical speed < 70  “slow”

70-75%  “normal
>75%  fast

3.2 Mill L/D and Chamber Lengths

3.2.1 L/D
Kurt Breitschmid from ??? report: The mill with a L/D ratio of 2,9 [-] is rather short for
grinding cement with a fineness >3'500 [cm2/g] according to Blaine.

Lafarge:
Raw Mills: L/D = 1.5 - 3.2
Cement Mills L/D = 2.8 - 3.2

HGRS:
Typical L/D is 3.2.

23
3.2.2 Chamber Lengths

Lafarge:
For blaine 3000, chamber 1 : 32-34%
For blaine 4000, chamber 1 : 26-28%.
For Raw Mill, chamber 1 : 35-45%

3.2.3 FLS Combidan Design Philosophy

L/D 3
L1/L2 % 40 / 60
Filling Level % 32.5 / 31

Slot Width OC mm 2-2.5 4.0

CC mm 4.0 6.0

Shell Liners Wave Dragpeb

Diaphragm Combidan Combidan

Feed Material Size mm 12-14 <4

<2
Ball Charge 90 23% 25 40%
80 32% 20 41%
70 21% 15 19%
60 24%
Average Ball Weight g 1536 35
Avergae ball surface m2/t 10.4 36.7

FLS philosophy is of long 1st chamber and short 2nd chamber. In the second chamber there is
a narrow range of ball charge and so there is no possiblity for classifying the charge.
Therefore non-classifying (dragpeb) style liners are used. These liners should NOT be
installed in a long second chamber or where there is a wide range of ball sizes.

The maximum ball size that can be used with these liners is 50mm.

FLS also supply traditional classifying liners on request.

According to FLS, the corrugated 2nd chamber liner provides the necessary lifting and also
prevents slippage between liners and balls. Also maximises power uptake due to the thin
profile (+2.7% kW compared to traditional classifying liner for a 4.6m diameter mill)

FLS mills have large centre openings. They allow the ball charge to be higher than the centre
screen level when the mill is at stop because when the mill is running, the ball make a banana
shape around the centre screen, therefore the screen is not damaged.

177 UMS mills have been sold.

24
Dear Mr Ortega,
For closed circuit mills grinding OPC as well as CEM II type products, the 
FLSmidth default CII media charge is 40% 25 mm, 40% 20 mm and 20% 15mm (~38
m^2/t). This charge is combined with a relatively low design circulation 
factor, reflecting that the rather fine media charge works with good 
grinding efficiency up to ~2000­2200 Blaine at the mill exit. This also 
means that we would use the same design charge for say 12% R45 µm and 5% 
R45 µm, as the design circulation factor would be adjusted for maintainng 
an approximately unchanged fineness at the mill outlet.
A coarser CII charge wil have lower grinding efficiency and require a 
higher design circulation factor. This will give a coarser product at the 
mill outlet and thus reduce dry coating. The balance between lower grinding
efficiency and reduced coating will depend both on the material and the 
Length/Diameter ratio of the mill.

Hoping that you will find my remarks useful, Ole S. Rasmussen

FLSmidth A/S
Process Design
Vigerslev alle 77
DK­2500 Valby
Phone +45 3618 2356
Fax +45 3617 1091
osr@flsmidth.com
www.flsmidth.com

3.3 Quality criteria in mill and at mill exit

3.3.1 CEMENT Ball Mill

At Intermediate Diaphragm
 0% water at the intermediate diaphragm.
 15 – 25% R0.5 mm (Old Holderbank Manual)
 HGRS / LAFARGE <5% R2mm at the end of chamber 1 is the general fineness
target.
 OR (LAFARGE) 86-92% passing 1 mm, 80-90% passing 0.6 mm, 75-
85% passing 0.5mm
 Another is <50% R90m sieve (this is also what we use for the grindability test).
Inlet 2nd Chamber
 <5% R1.2mm at inlet to the second chamber is necessary for a ball charge of 30mm.
At Discharge Diaphragm
 <0.35% water in the mill exit product since values greater than this may lead to
hydration  reduction in strength. Keep dew point under 60°C and there will be
no hydration ??
 Holderbank: 15-25% R90, max 5% R200
 Lafarge: <5% R0.5mm, <30% R0.2mm before the discharge diaphragm.
 Blaine at the end of C2 is usually half that of the final blaine, or 40-60% for typical
circulating loads.

25
3.3.2 RAW ball mill

 <5% R 4mm at intermediate diaphragm (Lafarge), <5% R 2mm (Hanspeter).

 50-60% R90 at the mill discharge (Hanspeter), 30% (Karl-Heinz).
 Typical raw meal blaine fineness 4200 cm²/g (Karl-Heinz). Isn’t it much lower??

3.4 Ball charge filling level

3.4.1 LAFARGE Recommended Ball Charge Filling Levels

Recommended Volume Loading

st
1 Compartment 2nd Compartment 3rd Compartment
Minimum kWh/t 26-28% 28-30% 28-30%
Maximum Production 32-34% 34-36% 34-36%

3.4.2 Relationship Mill kWh/t and Ball Charge filling level

a) Austin, Klimpel and Luckie – „Process Engineering of Size Reduction: Ball Milling“.
a. U = volume of material / empty volume between balls
b. X-axis Ballcharge filling level
c. Y-axis specific electrical energy consumption of mill kWh/t mill.

b) Energy Input for Cement Grinding, von H.-G. Ellerbrock and B. Schiller, Dusseldorf,
ZKG - Nr. 2/1988)

26
 a. Review of 11 mills showed the following results. They used kWh/t of mill
throughput as a bench mark given that they were grinding to a mill exit of 1800
cm2/g. All mills were running at 55% to 75% of critical speed.

Volume Load vs Specific Power (on circ. mass)

Specific Grinding Energy (kWh/t mill throughput)

25

20

15

10

5
15 20 25 30 35
Volume Load (%)

Practical results: Azergues. 100%  72% of the charge (= 30% filling  21.6%).
Throughput 100%  80%. KWh/t mill 100%  91%.

3.4.3 Relationship Throughput and ball charge filling Level

a) Austin, Klimpel and Luckie – „Process Engineering of Size Reduction: Ball Milling“.

Volume Load vs Breakage Rate

0.030
40%
Realative Absolute Breakage Rate, Sfc/K

0.025
35%
50%
45% 30%

0.020

0.015 20%

0.010
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Fractional Formal Powder Filling, fc

Operating point of mills ?

Conclusions:
 40% filling gives maximum production.
 40% gives 3.8% more production than 30% if the material level is optimised.

27
Lafarge best practice: in a non-sold out market, it is typical to maintain the 1 st level charge at
26-28% filling in order to optimise kWh/t without penalising production too heavily. The
second chamber is usually 2% higher than the 1st chamber level i.e. 28-30%.

Loading can be reduced to 22% filling for OPTIMUM kWh/t if production really isn’t
needed. This is a STRICT MINIMUM due to increased likelihood of damage on shell
liners in C2.

For high market demand, increase the filling level in the C1 to 32-34%, C2 34-26% according
to:
 Mill installed power
 Stress on gearing
 Stress on mill shell
 Drying capacity
 Separator efficiency
 Other constraints

Ball level in the inlet trunnion max 50-75 mm above the level.
When filling levels in C2 are >34%, the effect of classifying liners in often lost.

3.5 Material filling level

3.5.1 Relationship Crushing Efficiency and Material Filling Level

Optimimum filling level occurs between 0.6 and 1.1. This is independent of the amount of
balls used. BUT: SEE Austin, Klimpel and Luckie which suggest the opposite.

Breakage vs Material Filling Ratio

0.030

35%/45%/50% in between
40%
Relative Absolute Breakage Rate, Sfc/K

30%
0.025

20%
0.020

Optimum Range

0.6 to 1.1

0.015
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
Material Filling Ratio, U

28
3.5.2 Ball Charge Classification

Ball charge classification works best in small mills. (stéphane)

3.5.3 Swelling of charge / Reverse Classification

3.5.3.1 Robert’s Experiences:

1. Joliette: 2 different liners used in a monochamber mill. At this point, the ball charge size
distribution is mixed
2. La Réunion. The plant used 2 very similar classifying liners of the same dimensions and
wear profile. Nonetheless, where the 2 liner types met, there was a strict line defining the
loss of the classifying action
3. ?? Can’t remember plant: The mounting of the classifying liners was slightly wrong –
there was a 2 cm gap between liners in the middle of the chamber, which was filled with a
ring of 20 mm balls. At this point, as strict disruption of the classifying effect was
observed
4. Many mills: where unground clinker particles get through to the 2 nd chamber, they cause
localised swelling of the charge. Often, the smaller balls then migrate to the middle of the
chamber leading to swollen mounds in the middle of the chamber.

3.5.3.2 Others’ Experiences

Hanspeter example: Germany? During performance test material filling level was high
and ball charge reverse classified. Reduced feed and filling level and after 1 day the ball
charge was reclassified.

------------------------

3.5.3.3 LAFARGE:
Reverse classification occurs when particles greater than 1/3 the diameter of the void space
between balls are NOT crushed immediately. The reasons are:
 Feed granulometry or hardness too much for ball charge
 In the first chamber, inefficient crushing due to ball charge too small or liners
too worn
 Ball charge too large in the 1st chamber combined with diaphragm slots too large
 large particles get into the 2nd chamber.

This problem can be detected by:

 An overall filling level more than 3% greater than the calculated filling level
o In C1 often the balls are visible but the overall level is more than 3% above
the calculated value.
 Alternatively the first part of the C1 might be swollen (especially with high
returns load) and the zones behind are empty because the retention is greater in
the swollen area. In such cases there may be an inverse classification of the
charge (see next point)
 Reverse classification in 1st or 2nd chambers. In this case the material is carried
by gravity down the “slope” along the length of the compartment. In addition it

29
 is noticed that the balls in this area migrate down the slope too and they may
stop in the middle or the end of the compartment. Often it is the BIGGER
BALLS THAT MIGRATE  reverse classification in the C1 and C2.
 High variations in power draw at the mill motor

3.6 Residence TIme

Open Circuit: >=12 minutes

Closed Circuit: >=5 minutes

Test using fluorosceine, mixed in a bag with some clinker, then added to the feed belt.
Sample at mill exit every 30 seconds for a period of ~25 minutes after adding the
clinke+fluorosceine. Need specialised measuring equipment in lab.

3.7 Ball Coating

Ball and liner coating can occur in raw as well as finish grinding. Ball coating can be a result
of the following conditions:

1. Inadequate Grinding Aid

2. Poor Mill Ventilation
3. Mill Overheating
4. Too Much Moisture Input
5. Mill Overloading

Adequate ventilation will help alleviate persistent problems. Mill ventilation can serve two
purposes to reduce ball coating in mill temperature problem situations. It can take heat away
from the mill as it is created by the grinding, and it can take water vapor away from
introduction with the material or from water sprays which provide additional cooling.

The present theory concerning ball coating is that as the particles of feed shatter under the
impact of the ball charge, the surface equilibrium becomes unbalanced. This unbalanced
condition causes an attraction between the individual particles of feed and between the feed
particles and balls resulting in ball and liner coating, material agglomeration in the mill and
"pack set". Ball and liner coating cushions the impact of balls, and in severe cases can affect
lift. Material agglomeration affects grinding as well as separation.

Pack set is that condition where bulk cement, after being compacted by vibration, requires
considerable mechanical effort to start initial flow. Actually, pack set bears much the same
relationship with cement flowability, as starting friction bears to moving friction. Pack set,
like starting friction, requires more force to start material flow than that required to keep the
material flowing. Pack set has become a serious problem in recent years because of the
cement industry's use of large diameter mills which causes a higher material surface
unbalance and the increased transportation of cement in bulk quantities.

3.8 Grinding Aids

30
The addition of a grinding aid spreads the feed particles farther apart, thus exposing more
surface area to the grinding media, resulting in increased production. The grinding aid
adheres to the individual particles, thereby restoring the particles to a balanced state, thus
reducing agglomeration, ball coating and pack set.

The quantity of grinding aid used in a particular mill is dependent on the size of the mill, feed
size, product size, type of clinker being ground, etc. For instance, in large diameter ball
mills, the impact force of the grinding media is so great, that a high material surface
unbalance prevails in the mill when grinding all types of clinker, thus requiring a
grinding aid at all times.

The higher the fineness, the more grinding aid that must be used to restore the feed particles
to a balanced state. Normally, grinding aids are added in a 15% concentrated solution (1:7
grinding aid to water - helps the dispersal of grinding aid in mill), at approximately 2-2.5
Lb./Ton for medium fineness and 3-4 Lb./Ton for high fineness cement. (Check with your
supplier).

3.8.1 Willi Suter Presentation

"Grinding Aid
Presentation - Willi Suter.pdf"

3.8.2 Price

1300 – 2000 $/t

Dosage rate 200-400 g/t
0.26 – 0.8 $/t clinker.

3.8.3 Effect of grinding aid on kWh/t

 Reduces coating onliners

 Reduces blaine for the same residue 45m
 Enhances flowability, reduces agglomeration  better separation, less bypass

"Grinding Aid
Study.xls"

o Gives quality impact on aggregates in concrete as well as cement.

o Rochefort €150,000/ year on grinding aid.
o Also useful for slag.
o Also work in Vertical Roller Mills.
o Good ventilation helps dispersion.
o Typical dosing range 100-300 g/t (pure), optimal 180-260 g/t.

31
o Threshold value 150-200 g/t
o Typically 300-400 for a cement 3000 to 4000 blaine, 350-400 for higher blaines.
o Effect of ground limestone important??
o XEU242P Never go below 350 g/t.

3.8.4 Effect of grinding aid on product quality

 Depends according to the grinding aid and cements concerned

 Flowability is improved  improvements or problems for transport and packing
 May help reduce the water requirement by acting as plasticisers. The reduction in
water demand consequently leads to a higher compressive strength.
 Mortar and concrete may have an increased tendency to bleeding.

3.9 Spitzers (Unground Clinker)

Spitzers can cause the production of superfines which in turn affects blaine. See Lafarge high
blaine, high rejects problem. Note that hydrated clinker e.g. after long period of storage
outside, can cause a large number of hydrated superfines which add nothing to strength
development.

MilProblemEx3.doc

32
4 GRINDING TOOLS

4.1 Ball Charge

The reasons for the optimum are as follows. If the balls are too small then they don't have the
inertia to properly nip the material and break it. For example; grits (or spitzers) in the second
compartment, the cascading small balls don't hit with enough force to fracture the grains so
they are worn smooth at a slow rate and retained in the mill, causing material transport
problems.

If the balls are bigger than the optimum for the feed size then the lower number of contact
(nip) points reduces the specific breakage rate. Note that if a particle size is smaller than
either the optimum for both the smaller or larger ball the specific breakage rate of the smaller
ball is superior, this is why finer balls in the second compartment work well.

"6-BP_ball
charge.doc"

Relation ball size to particle size. For clinker:

40 mm particle  90 mm ball
1 mm particle  30 mm ball
0.1 mm particle  15 mm ball

4.1.1 Ball weights sizes and densities

Ball weight = [diameter (mm)]3 / 250

LAFARGE
Ball Size Density
3.5 - 2.5 inch 4550 kg/m3
2.5 - 3/4 inch 4650 kg/m3

HOLCIM
Ball Size Density
90-60 mm 4.4 t/m³
50-30 mm 4.6 t/m³
30-20mm 4.7

1st chamber: 4.4, 2nd chamber 4.65 used by Holcim

WARNING: Depending on the source foundry bulk density values have been known to
vary considerably.

4.1.2 Ball Charge Specific Surface

= 785 / d (mm) m2/t

33
4.2 Ball Charge Condition
Stefan Evers and Stephane: There is no contractual specification for the condition of ball
charge
There is a general contractual specification that <3% of charge breaks after being in the mill.

Example of delivered ball charge in La Réunion from a South African foundry (license(?)
Maggotteaux.):

 Mixed 17/20mm balls

 Recycled drums
 60mm with lumps and seam
 Small balls still with mould defects

34
4.3 Monochamber and Raw Mill Ball Charge Design

LAFARGE: Polysius model suits these mills well:

D = 9.6e^(-0.13x)

where x is the effective mill length.

BALL WEIGHTS AND SIZES (New Grinding Media)

High Chrome Cast Iron Grinding Balls

Nominal Weight per Ball # of Balls per Surface Area per Surface Area
Diameter Ball
inches mm lbs/ball g/ball 100 lbs 100 kg in2 cm2 ft2/ton m2/tonne
0.38 10 0.008 4 13 200 29 101 0.442 2.85 810 82.98
0.63 16 0.035 16 2 860 6 305 1.227 7.92 487 49.91
0.75 19 0.061 28 1 640 3 616 1.767 11.40 402 41.22
0.88 22 0.096 44 1 040 2 293 2.405 15.52 347 35.58
1.00 25 0.143 65 699 1 541 3.142 20.27 305 31.24
1.25 32 0.28 127 357 787 4.909 31.67 243 24.93
1.50 38 0.484 220 207 456 7.069 45.61 203 20.81
2.00 51 1.15 522 87 192 12.57 81,10 152 15.55
2.50 64 2.24 1016 45 99 19.63 126.64 123 12.56
3.00 76 3.87 1755 26 57 28.27 182.39 102 10.45
3.50 89 6.15 2790 16 35 38.48 248.26 86 8.76

Data supplied by ME International (1990)

Data based on steel density of 7559 kg/m3 or 471 lbs/ft3

WARNING: values may vary from supplier to supplier. The above table should be
considered as approximate values.
Sampling is recommended for bulk density and porosity index calculations.

surface
3/4 radius
1/2 radius
1/4 radius
center
46 Rc
48 Rc
53 Rc
61 Rc
64 Rc

Typical for a large Ø ball

35
4.4 1st Chamber Ball Charge Design

4.4.1 Biggest ball size – bond formula

"Bond Maximum Ball

Size Calculation.xls"

4.4.2 100mm balls

 The use of 100mm balls is possible, but should be avoided as wear and liner damages
will increase. In this case, the usage of 60mm balls should be reduced to a minimum.
 Big balls climb to the highest position  increased wear and breakage of liners and other
balls.
 Bigger balls means less balls which means less contacts which means less crushing

90 mm 3 kg/ball
100mm 4 kg/ball
110mm 5.5 kg/ball

"Argument against
100mm balls Spreadsheet.xls"

4.4.3 Raw mill

For the RM it is considered to have 40% – 45% of the total mill power consumption in the
first compartment.
For raw mills it is most common to use a ball charge with the coarse grading (up to 50% of 90
mm balls) – see table below for “coarse” grading.

36
4.4.4 Cement Mill

The ball charge tendency in the 1st compartment is to use the coarser of the gradings available.
When producing high Blaine Cement it is the objective to use less tonnage. Achieve
nearer 8-9 kWh/t at the target mill output instead to go for a more fine ball charge (??)

 Standard design is adapted for 3200 cm²/g.

 Slegten Ball charge is same as Polysius for the 1st chamber, and finer for the second
chamber.
 Smallest size = 2x diaphragm slot width
 Standard optimisation is to reduce the power drawn in the first chamber by liner and
ball selection (coarser / finer)

Lafarge Design vs. Holcim

Ball sizes [mm] LAFARGE HOLCIM

COARSE FINE
weight [%] weight [%]
90 40 21 25
80 29 38 35
70 19 25 25
60 12 16 15

Average ball 1,83 1,63 1.69

weight [kg/ball]
Ball Size % Weight Weight/Size, mt # of Balls/Size
(total weight = 60) (in compt.)
90 mm Ø 20.0 % 12.00 4008
80 mm Ø 38.4 % 23.04 11092
70 mm Ø 25.6 % 15.36 10890
60 mm Ø 16.0 % 9.60 10800
Using a pre grinding circuit the maximum ball size could be as low as 60 mm. These cases are
very specific and can not be published as a common solution.

Some plants use on 90, 80, 70 mm balls in 1st chamber. E.e. San Sebastien.

37
4.5 2nd Chamber Ball Charge Design

4.5.1 Discussion

IF THE SEPARATOR IS OVERLOADED, USE A FINER BALL CHARGE SO THAT

THERE WILL BE LESS CIRCULATING LOAD AND THEREFORE LESS
SEPARATOR BYPASS.

4.5.1.1 Transition zone charge

ONLY FUNCTIONS WITH A CLASSIFIED CHARGE

The purpose of the transition zone is to grind the oversize that manages to get by the partition
which is too large for the main second compartment charge to grind. Usually it is composed
of 2, (sometimes 3 sizes). In metric, we usually pick 50 and 40 mm Ø's. In U.S. units we
pick 2" and 1.5" Ø's. The transition zone constitutes the first part of the second compartment.

In any case, for each size in the transition zone we extend the value (N) and the use the exact
same number of balls for each size. Back-calculating we can then determine the weight and
the percentage that represents.

Note that transition zone design can only be used effectively if there is a good classifying
action from the liners. Most people also get a little nervous with such a small tonnage in the
transition. Thus in practice they tend to be larger than what is recommended by the Slegten
model.

4.5.1.2 2nd Chamber Ball Charge – Bombled Versus Polysius and Slegten

Comparing the two curves we can observe that the 1989 design has a slightly coarser ball
charge in the first compartment than what the Polysius model would suggest using, (average
ball weights were calculated to be 1.65 kg/ball vs. 1.5 kg/ball respectively). However it's the
reverse in the second. In fact Polysius model does not recommend any 0.75"Ø balls at all.

Comments:
In general the Polysius model is simplistic - one curve fits all mills. As a rule of thumb, it
suits raw mills and especially monochambers very well. Solutions will tend to have coarse
second compartment ball charges.

The Slegten model divides the mill ball charge into 3 parts: first compartment, transition zone
and the second compartment. The approach in designing the ball charge is different in each.
However, a recommendation from Slegten will vary from their own model since they take
into consideration field inspections, their own experience, and their own rules of thumb for
mill idiosyncrasies. (They are not all that different from the rules discussed in "Practical
Fundamentals .... Volume 1".) This is after all how they make money on consulting. In
general the Slegten model is compatible only with mills with classifying linings in the
second compartment.

38
Notes
 non-classifying liners only permit 3 ball sizes in C2.
 Lafarge recommended top-size 30-40 mm (2002).
 Standard optimisation is to maximise fine grinding using balls 25mm – 15mm.

Bombled distribution is standard for closed circuit coarse (OPC) cement:

Is based on assumptions:

1) Optimum ball sizes are related to particle sizes according to the following equation:
d1/d2 = (D1/D2)1.7
d = particle diameter
D = ball diameter

2) Particle size distribution along the mill axis can be expressed as a function of %
residue at particle size di:

"Bombled Ball Charge

Distribution.xls"

4.5.2 Raw Mill

It will be beneficial using a finer ball charge. The limit is given by the slot size of the partition
wall.

Ball sizes / liner coarse fine

[mm] weight [%] weight [%]
60 20
50 30 30
40 30 30
30 40 20
average ball weight [g/ball] 186 260
specific surface [m²/t] 21 18

39
4.5.3 Cement Mill With Classifying Liners

SLEGTEN

The second chamber Slegten standard ball charge composition for an OPC cement varies with the
cement fineness as indicated in the table:

[%] in weight Cement fineness [cm2/g]

2’700 – 3’000 3’200 – 3’500 > 4’200
Ball diameter [mm] charge repositions charge repositions charge repositions
60 9.0 25 8.5 25 8.5 26
50 4.5 4.0 4.0
40 3.0 2.5 2.5
30 15.5 50 12.4 44 10.8 41

25 28.8 24.7 23.2

20 19.2 25 16.5 31 15.5 33
17 20.0 31.5 35.5

average ball weight [g/u] 45.0 38.0 37.0

charge specific surface [m2/t] 31.7 33.5 34.1

The repositions to keep the ball charge parameters constant are calculated according to Slegten
criteria.

As an indication the HMC standard ball charge for 3'000 [cm2/g] has 62 [g/u] and 29.4 [m2/t] as
average ball weight and charge specific surface respectively.

HOLCIM

Closed circuit for clinker cements ( > 90 % clinker):

Ball sizes / Blaine Coarse Fine

grading grading
[mm] weight [%] weight [%]
(Transition zone) 40 10
30 25 15
25 25 15
20 20 30
17/18 20 40
average ball weight [g/ball] 47 34
specific surface [m²/t] 32 37

40
4.5.4 Cement Mill With Non-Classifying Liners

Here, the grinding efficiency and the manufacturing technology for the balls do not allow one
to use a large variety of ball sizes. Usually, the range in Ø, (from largest to smallest) should
not exceed 0.75 inches (~20 mm). One must make a compromise then, between using very
large Ø's or very small Ø's in the second compartment. Your choice must take into account
the effect of porosity will have on throughput and the separator. If you work with too many
sizes in such a compartment, then you'll experience reverse or double reverse classification
and a drop in production. It is better to work with a fairly flat gradation of ball sizes.

Ball charge design for non-classifying liners

Diameter mm by weight
40 Ø = 8%
30 Ø = 32%
25 Ø = 35%
20 Ø = 25%

41
4.5.5 Open circuit cement mill

SLEGTEN

The charge composition is also adapted to the cement fineness:

[%] in weight Cement fineness [cm2/g]

2’700 – 3’000 3’200 – 3’500 > 4’200
Ball diameter [mm] charge repositions charge repositions charge repositions
60 8.5 30 8.0 29 5.0 26
50 5.0 5.0 4.0
40 3.0 2.0 2.0
30 5.7 32 4.0 28 2.3 41
25 19.4 16.7 11.7
20 13.9 38 11.9 43 8.3 33
17 18.3 15.7 11.0
15 26.1 36.7 55.7

average ball weight [g/u] 37.0 30.0 22.0

charge specific surface [m2/t] 28.6 31.7 37.6

HOLCIM

Ball sizes / Blaine [mm] weight [%]

30 10
25 10
20 20
17/18 60
average ball weight 30
[g/ball]
specific surface [m²/t] 39

42
4.5.6 Calculation Procedure For A Composite Cement

Composite cement equivalent OPC fineness calculation:

When composite cements are ground the fineness according to Blaine is not anymore as reliable as
with OPC. A fineness correction must be introduced.

According to Slegten laboratory to calculate the equivalent OPC fineness of composite cement the
following values:

Ø Gypsum: 125 * (actual gypsum content [%] - 5 ),

Ø Limestone: 50 * actual limestone content in [%],

Ø Puzolanna: 40 * actual Puzolana content in [%],

Ø Fly ash: Fly ash fineness [cm2/g] * actual fly ahs content in [%].

must be deducted from the composite cement actual Blaine value.

2.2 Ball charge calculation:

Ø The OPC equivalent fineness must be calculated for every cement type ground in
the mill being studied.

Ø The ball charge will be chosen from table 1 or 2 (closed or open circuit mill)
according to the smallest OPC equivalent fineness calculated.

Ø If the OPC equivalent fineness is, for example, 3'700 [cm2/g] interpolation of the
ball composition given on the tables must be done.

Ø The [%] of balls ranging from 60 [mm] to 40 [mm] has to be adapted to the
operation condition of the first chamber (specific energy given to the material, state
of the liner, of the ball charge and of the diaphragm):
© If the first chamber supplies no coarse material to the second chamber, a
smaller amount of these balls than reported on the tables will be required,
even the suppression of the biggest diameters.
© On the contrary, when coarse material can be supplied to the second
chamber the amount of these balls reported on the tables might be
increased.

Ø The calculated ball charge must always be compared to the actual ball charge
because:
© a coarser ball charge might led to a loss in grinding efficiency,
© if the actual ball charge is finer than the calculated one the interpretation of
the process parameters of the grinding circuit will help to decide if a finer
ball charge composition will allow an even better mill operation.

43
4.5.6.1 Ball Charge Wear Rates – See file on ball form

ballcharge.pdf

Net wear rate = process wear rate (loss of tonnage inside the mill during grinding)
Gross wear rate = purchasing wear rate (takes into account the balls thrown away during
sorting, either too small for compartment or scrap), is therefore more than the net wear.

A rough estimation can be calculated considering a global net wear rate of 1.1 [g/kWh]
(Stephane). Gross wear rate 1.5 g/kWh (my estimate). Wear rate is the same for raw
material and cement. Different for slurry grinding (6 times more).
This value can change a lot depending on the cement composition and the abrasivity of these
components. For example, for pure slag grinding the value can be doubled.

4.5.6.2 Specific ball wear costs

Grinding media cost: Relation between specific ballwear costs -

specific ballwear - costs of balls

2000
Specific ball wear costs [DM/tcement]
1800

1600
0.3 [DM/t cement ]
] /t

1400
C o s t s o f b a lls [ D M

1200

1000 0.2

800
0.15
600
0.1
400
0.05
200
0.01
0
0 50 100 150 200

Specific ballw e ar [g ball /t cement ]

4.5.6.3 Ball charge metallurgy

Compartment 1
Low Abrasive Material: 2.5% Carbon,17.5% Chromium
Medium Abrasive Material: 3.0%, 20%
High Abrasive Material: 3.0+%, 20%+

Compartment 2
Low / Medium Abrasive Material: 3,0% Carbon,12% Chromium
High Abrasive Material: 3.0%, 20+%

Application:

44
The working conditions of a liner are “soft” when:

- the filling degree of balls in the chamber is above 28 %,

- the level of material in the chamber is good,
- the mill critical speed is below 76 %.

In any other case the working conditions are “hard”. If more than one of the above-mentioned
points are given during a mill operation the working conditions are very hard.

If the operating conditions are much more favourable than the one above (speed far below 76
% and/or filling degree >>28, the material level in the chamber is good) the working
conditions are very soft.

Restrictions and comments:

 To avoid changes in the steel structure and therefore damage of the liner, the indicated
operating temperatures (T operation) must not be exceded. Also heating up or cooling
must be done according to the indicated gradient temperature.
 For high alloyed steels a perfect support of the plates must be granted to avoid plates
breakage.
 For medium and high alloyed steels the hardness can be modified through specific
heat treatment to reach a better compromise between wear and impact resistance.

Note: for identical liner design, alloy composition and heat treatment the lifetime
reached will be the same and independent from the liner manufacturer.

Estanda: In first chamber design for maximum 3% expansion of the ball charge. (Also
Lafarge)
Estanda: In second chamber design for a maximum of 2% expansion in ball charge.

45
Steel type Commercial desigantion Composition Hardness Restrictions and comments Application
BHO Estanda Magotteaux %C % Cr Other HRc
Mn steel -- FED – 40 FMU 80 1.15 -- 13 % 230 (HBr) T < 250  C, Inlet wall liner, very hard
Mn working conditions
e < 100 mm
Medium 312 FED – 4 FMU 29 0.35 7 Mo, 53 350 < T operation < 500  C First chamber liner hard
alloyed Mn working conditions and slag,
Slow cooling/heating (< 250 slot grates for intermediate
 C/h) diaphragms.
313 FED – 6 FMU 4 0.45 3 Mo, 40 < HRC < with heat
Mn treatment

High 314 FED – 13 FMU 11 1.25 12.5 Mo, 50 Perfect support required. Inlet wall liner, soft working
alloyed Mn conditions.
T operation < 450  C
Back plates for intermediate
Not for big parts. diaphragms.
e > 80 mm First chamber liner.
321 FED – 14 FMU 12 1.85 12.5 Mo, 56 50 < HRc< 63 with heat Second chamber liner
Mn treatment.

632 FED – 18 FMU 18 2.9 18 Mo, < 63 Vertical mill roller and grinding
Mn track segments.
652 FED – 25 FMU 40 2.7 26 Mn < 60 Very soft working conditions.
FED – 27 FMU 46 3.3 26 Mo, 53
Mn

4.6 Liners

4.6.1 Impact on Process

LAFARGE: 8 - 10% production loss when lifting liners worn

4.6.2 Process Design

Correct design is a function of the expansion of the charge which allows material to penetrate
the charge, and the lifting angle defined as the angle between the vertical and the line between
the top ball and the centre of the mill.

1st compartment – low hardness, high impact strength. Opposite for 2 nd compartment
(abrasion resistant).
Manganese liners – small mills, more deformation
Low Chromium – big and small liners, less deformation
High Chromium alloyed cast steel – Most Used, impact strength 4-10 J/cm²

Classifying: every row for small mills, every two rows for medium mills, every 3 for large
mills. Classifying angle increasing with mill size.

 Classifiying liners only work if ball filling level is <35% and chamber L/D is >1.5.
 The flat parts are corrugated, and the sloping parts are not. Therefore………
 Above volume load of 34-36%, the traditional classifying liner breaks down.

46
 NOTE: The X-Class classifying effect breaks down at critical speeds >80%.
 Typical production rate increase from non-classified to classified  6%. This is because
the classifiying liner allows the efficient use of the existing fine ball charge, and further,
allows a further increase in the amount of fine ball charge.

Grooving of liners is due to bolting (?? Info Magotteaux).

Lifetimes:
OPC 25000+ hours 1st chamber, 50000+ 2nd chamber.
Raw Meal: 35000 hours 1st chamber, 70000 hours 2nd chamber.

Rubber Liners – Wet grinding (steel corrosion, good abrasion resistance for balls<65mm)

Conversion from non-classifying to classifying liners in short mills can reduce filling capacity
by up to 5% (check!)

4.6.3 Liner Bolting

LINERDRI.DOC

4.7 Diaphragms

4.7.1 Diaphragm Design

10-20 cm2/tph

4.7.2 Selecting Diaphragms

The type of diaphragm that suits a defined application can be found based on the following
criteria: Mill type: cement mill, dry process raw mill, wet process raw mill.

47
 Diaphragm location:
o Raw mill: transfer diaphragm at the drying chamber outlet, intermediate, peripheral
discharge for a double rotator mill and outlet diaphragm.
o For a cement mill: intermediate or outlet diaphragm. For the case of
cement mills with a drying chamber see raw mills.

 Mill working conditions:

o ventilation air speed through the mill. Bigger or smaller than 1.2 [m/s].
o Material abrasivity. The [%] of slag or pouzzolana content on the fresh mill feed for
cement grinding. The [%] of free silica at mill feed for raw material grinding.

 Moisture content of the mill fresh feed. Above or below 2 [%H2O] content.

 The diaphragm type: the name indicated refer to Magotteaux - Slegten denomination. For
details about each type of diaphragm, please, see B14.2 reg. 8 and B14.1 reg. 2.

 Diaphragm characteristics
o The diaphragm frame can be manufactured or cast. The second one is only use in
special applications where wear is very high.

4.7.3 Drying Compartment and 1st Chamber

Needs to be shock resistant up to 400°C
Needs to resist forces of ball charge in C1
Tend to be very open to allow passage of the gas.

Machined plates have a greater lifetime than cast plates of the same slot width.

48
4.7.4 Intermediate
Chekka  trunpet at the exit of diaphragm lets material flow out of diaphragm outside the air
stream BUT also accelerates the material in the gas stream  uses less of C2 charge.

Most important design criteria are the slot width and total slot area.

From Lafarge best practice papre, experience shows a 5% increase in mill throughput when
installing a flow control diaphragm after a non-flow controlling diaphragm.

Tangential slots – better material flow

Radial slots- reduce probability of clogging
Slot plates made of up to 27% Chromium

Pfeiffer design makes the material flow out of 3 and 9 O’clock positions thereby not
entraining the material in the air-flow  increase in effective grinding length + reduced wear
of balls near diaphragm.

Weight of airfeel diaphragm in mill 5.2 metres diameter  30 tonnes.

Front plates
 Cement slot width: Slot width normally 6mm, but may be 8mm in the case of moisture
content > 2% in order to avoid clogging.
 Raw Meal slot width: 8mm intermediate
 Concentric slots lead to less blocking

 Thickness is 40-60mm when new, 15-30mm when worn out, Pfeiffer 8-10mm.
 Inside rings wear faster than outer rings.

Back Plates
 Thickness is 40-80mm when new, 15-30mm when worn out, Pfeiffer 8-10mm.
 Plates with slots provide less resistance to air flow, but impact negatively the material
flow control.

Central Opening
 Should be as large as possible for minimum air resistance, may be adaptable to the
filling level.
 Grate is only a security measure against balls passing between chambers in the event
of a blockage.

49
4.7.5 End diaphragm

Centre discharge mill – single diaphragms, slots 2mm larger on fine compartment side.
Low wear rate.

Slot width:
OPC 7-10 mm
Raw Meal 12-18 mm

4.8 Mill Head

Tendency to use slide-shoe bearings on large mills. There are too many stresses on large mills
which have trunnions.

For trunnion mills, the end plate is either welded directly onto the shell or is bolted. The end
plate is usually bolted to the trunnion unless it is cast as one piece if small. For proper direct
welding a steel with low sulphur content is required.

Conical with trunnions.

Flat with shoe bearings.

Mill head plates which get damaged  plates circulate in the mill and damage the liners.

4.9 Mill Shell

 Mill Shell – thicker in the middle.
 Trunnions afford greater bending stress (12 – 18 N/mm²) compared to 9-10 for shoe
bearings. 6-8 for centre discharge mills.

50
4.10 Mill Ball Charge and Internals Lifetimes

4.10.1Ball Charge

Magotteaux Rules:
OPC 2800-3200 cm2/g lifetime 100%
OPC 4000-5000 cm2/g -15%
Slag Cement 2800-3200 cm2/g -20%
Slag Cement 4000-5000 cm2/g -30%

FLS wear rates for ball charge:

[g/kWh in the chamber]

4.10.2Liners

Composition Lifetime Hours

Mill Head
1st chamber 25,000 – 30,000 OPC
15,000 – 17,000 Composite
30,000 – 40,000 Raw Meal
Intermediate diaphragm: C = 0.35, Cr = 7 8,000 – 10,000 OPC
10,000 – 15,000 Raw Meal

51
Blind Plates C = 1,25, Cr = 12 20,000 – 30,000
2nd chamber Double the values for 1st chamber
Outlet Diaphragm (1) C = 0,35, Cr = 7 20,000 – 30,000
Outlet Diaphragm (2) C = 3, Cr = 25 30,000 – 45,000

Hanspeter Library Card:

Lifetime range [h] Alloy OPC Slag Puzzolan

Mill head High Cr 12’000 – 18’000 6’000 10’000
First chamber High Cr 30’000 21’000 – 25’000 17’000
Intermediate slot grates Steel 10’000 – 18’000 9’000 10’000
Back plates High Cr 35’000 20’000 20’000
Second chamber High Cr 54’000 – 60’000 40’000 30’000
Outlet slot grates High Cr 24’000 – 36’000 12’000 14’000

The graphic below gives the distribution of the gross and net wear rate in the Group for cement
grinding based on ATR 1’998.

The average net wear is 14.9 [g/t] while 28.7 [g/t] for the gross wear rate. This means that about 50
[%] of the liner weight is not being used. Known cases show that within 15 – 20 [%] of the liner
initial weight can be worn before the liner looses its function.

Cement tube mill liner wear [g/t]

160

140

120

100
Wear rate [g/t]

Gross [g/t]
80
Net [g/t]
60

40

20

52
 Raw meal tube mill liner wear rate [g/t]

100

90

80

70
Wear rate [g/t]

60 Gross [g/t]
50 Net [g/t]

40

30

20

10

53
5 MILL VENTILATION, DEDUSTING AND FILTERS

5.1 Pressure Drops

Turbulent Flow:
P2 = P1.(V2/V1)^2

Laminar Flow:
P2 = P1.(V2/V1)^1

In a vertical mill:
P2 = P1.(V2/V1)^1.5 (hence some laminar flow through nozzle ring)

In a bag filter:
P2 = P1.(V2(v1)^1.4 (due to laminar flow through bags. Only turbulent at inlet and outlet)

5.2 Mill ventilation

Objectives:
1. Primary objective is the removal of fines
2. Secondary is the removal of heat (a heat carrier)
3. Third is fluidisation or movement of material through the mill

Need >30°C above dew point in mill filter.

Target 100°C at the intermediate diaphragm, and less than 90 at the mill outlet? Drying must
be completed by the intermediate diaphragm.

Air temperature is generally 5°C lower than clinker temperature. If even lower  false air.

Notes from Alesd:

o FALSE AIR RAW MILL
o Best practice Jerez: 35%
o Addition of flaps at raw mill exit reduces false air 5-10% (Walter)
o Most important is reduction of underpressure at the mill entrance / exit (Alesd)

o Cost of rotary valve feeder:

o 52000 euros ex works for 200 t/h (Polysius)
o Estimated 70000 euros for 300 t/h

5.2.1 Mill ventilation velocities

To fine dust at the mill filter can lead to to quick bag penetration with fine dust resulting
in shortened bag lifetime and increased pressure drop

Bag wear is not only a function of dust load but also depending on ducting and filter inlet
design as well as air speed at the ilnlet of the filter.

54
Lafarge allow up to 3 m/s above the ball charge in raw mills.

5.2.1.1 Above the Ball Charge

Typically we target 1 m/s above the ball charge or greater. However this is very difficult to
achieve. When determining this value watch out for inleakage around the hood and back
drafting through the discharge airslide. They tend to inflate mill sweep velocity estimates. As
a general rule old mills (pre 1980) tend to have small trunnions and are impossible to vent

Recommended air flows for mill ventilation

Circuit Open Closed
Air changes/min 3
5
Kg air/cement Kg 0.25 0.4
False Air inleak
1. Estimate the air inleak by comparing temperatures at the
mill outlet and the filter outlet. Also measure airflows at
the mill inlet to compare with the filter outlet flow.
2. A typical inleak level over a filter system on a new mill is
about = 30% of the flow passing through the mill.
above 1 m/s.

Figure 1: Typical Mill Vent Velocities

10 m/s

5 m/s
1 m/s
25 m/s

55
5.2.1.2 Discharge Trunnion
As a rule of thumb, the maximum vent velocity through the discharge trunnion is 23 to 25
m/s. To achieve higher usually requires such a large pressure drop that most dust collectors
and fans are not designed to make this practical. To estimate the maximum venting volume
flow, take the smallest available cross sectional area; deduct 40% to allow for material in the
trunnion; multiply by 25 m/s.

5.2.1.3 Discharge Hood

Normal maximum dust density to a filter is 200-300 g/m³. This equates to a gas speed at the
exit of the drop-out box of 4-5 m/s. Older mill systems of course may not respect this,
however this is the design value for new mills or for modifications. For higher velocities
there is a tendency to entrain too much dust. This usually leads to a variety of operational and
maintenance problems in the ducting and the dust collector.

A gas speed of 4-5 m/s exit drop-out box and a mill speed of 1.5 m/s generally gives a blaine
of the aspirated dust of ~3000 cm²/g (Beat Stocker).
A gas speed of 2-2.5 m/s exit drop-out box (mill speed 0.5 m/s) gives a blaine of ~4000
(Beat).

5.2.1.4 Discharge Duct

Typically we find that the discharge vent duct is sized for about 10 to 15 m/s. We surmise that
this is only to prevent settling. If the plant wishes to install a drop out chamber, to create a
poor man's static separator then design for 1.5 to 2 m/s for normal cement.

5.2.2 Static Separators on the Mill Ventilation

These units work just like the two separators in series in one respect and like two separators in
parallel in another. All of the feed that goes to the static separator (generated by mill sweep)
is essentially double-classified. First by the static and then again in the dynamic separator
(static rejects go to the elevator). The second nice thing is that the feed to the dynamic is
reduced by the amount of product pulled off by the static. Thirdly, the fineness of the feed to
the dynamic is reduced, this appears to improve its performance too. Fourthly, if your
dynamic is a Sturtevant you will likely find the quality of the product from the grit is better
than your separator fines, Rosin-Rammler speaking.

The trick here is to get as much material as possible to the static. This means maximum mill
sweep. Demopolis gets half of their mill exit material to the grit first, but it takes 1.6 m/s
above the balls ( and a 400 HP fan) to do it.

If you have an H.E.S., the value of adding a static is questionable since the separator is
so efficient already - it won't know the difference. Quality may suffer too. The static's
generally produce cement superior to a Sturtevant, similar to a Raymond, and worse
than an H.E.S. based on Rosin-Rammler. In short follows these rules of thumb:

Pursue a static if you have the following combination;

56
 • Sturtevant or Raymond
• potentially good mill sweep

Don't bother if you have;

• an H.E.S.
• an F.L.S. mill with little trunnions
• other mill sweep limits (D.C.?)

As an alternative consider also a large dropout box (poor man's static) if you have the room,
but not the money. (Exshaw FM2)

5.2.3 Ventilation Limits

 Abrasion of mill internals

 High drag force leads to empty areas at entry of C1 and C2.

5.2.4 Mill Fan (Ball Mill)

 (BCI) Benchmark fan kW is 15-25% mill kW for sufficient RAW MILL drying.
WHAT!! Alesd = 320/5200 = 6%.

5.3 Auxilliary Dedusting

Airslide transport capacity

800

750

700

650

600

550

500
Capacity [m3/h]

< 420 [t/h] 450

min
400
max
350

300

250

< 170 [t/h] 200

150

100

50

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Airslide width [mm]

After mill To silos

5.3.1 Ducting
Bhatpara, ducting at the exit of the 51 Dorol is about 15mm thick. Delivered with spiders
inside in orderto maintain the shape of the parts.

57
Dedusting ductwork design. 16 m/s for slag and clinker, 18 m/s for the rest.

 2000 m3/h for average point, no more than 2750 m3/h

 18 m/s for ductwork airspeed – air quantity comes from air slide injection quantity etc.
 1.5 m/s for hood airspeed
 Dedust blaine 5000 for cement transfer point
 Dedust blaine 3000 for clinker transfer point
 Flowrates of different points need to be balanced, or at least a system to balance.

Rochefort example (Beat Stocker):

For 5 dedusting points = 5 * 2000 m3/h
New filter and dedusting = €80,000
Redo ducting and hoods = €3000 per point
New hoods only, around = €1000 per point

Example Stéphane cement course. Elevator dedusting located in wrong position + incorrect
hooding  extraction of large quantity of fines from elevator. Then discharged from
auxillary filter onto VRM feed belt  mill vibrations and mill stop.

58
5.3.2 Dedusting Hood Design

5.4 Bag Filters

5.4.1 Filter Design

Filtration ratio: Process filters:

Filtration ratio m/h, usually 60 m/h or 1 m/min. Can velocity 1 m/s
Auxillary filters: Filtration ratio 90 m3/m2h, can velocity up to 1.3 m/s

 Filtration Ratio: Air / cloth ratio 60 m³/h/m² = 1 m³/min/m²) Up to 80 m³/h/m² may be

OK if no grinding aid is used. Up to 90 m3/hm2 for auxillary filters OK.
 Can velocity 1 m/s for process filter, 1.3 m/s for auxillary filter
 Compressed Air >0.13 –0.19 m³/h per m². Need good compressed air dryers.
 Delta P: 5-14 mbar
 Bag diameter 14 – 16 cm
 Bag Length <4.5 m

Air-dryer fro filter compressed air: $20,000

Can velocity. Vertical upwards speed of the gas between the bags. Should be as low as
possible in order to give max time for filtration, and to reduce the hold up of the falling filter
cake coming off the outside of the bags. If too high, fine particles get dislodged from the cake
and get sucked onto neighbouring bags. There is therefore repeated filtering of the same
particle.

Design Challenges
 Reduction in energy consumption through low filter pressure drop, correct ductwork and
low compressed air consumption.

59
 Optimisation of filter media  serive life, fine dust collection, temperature resistance,
cost
 Larger filter volumes for increased kiln and grinding capacities
 Reduction of the number of filters e.g. combine kiln and cooler filter
 More decentralised filters (e.g. top-mounted hopperfilters) in order to reduce ducting
lengths.
D u s t c o lle c to r – B a g c le a n in g
 E x a m p le b a g c le a n in g c y c le s
T y p ic a l c le a n in g s e q u e n c e R e c o m m e n d e d c le a n in g s e q u e n c e

7 7

 E x a m p le o f r e c o m m e n d e d c le a n in g s e q u e n c e f o r a d u s t c o lle c to r w ith 1 7 b a g - r o w s
a n d 1 0 t im e r p o s it io n s :
T im e r
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0
P o s it io n
V a lv e 1 4 7 1 0 2 5 8 3 6 9
N u m b . 1 1 1 4 1 7 1 2 1 5 1 3 1 6

1 2
H G R S 0 8 /0 4 -O R

Maximum temperature handling 260°C.

Performance unaffected by start-up / shutdow conditions, CO concentration or change from
compound to direct operation (raw mills / kiln)

Raw Mill
In order to satisfy 260°C limit and achieve adequate conductivity of the gas, gas conditioning
by water injection in a gas tower must be done. Up to 80 g/m3stp or up to 900 g/m3stp if
there is no cyclone after the raw mill and an exhaust gas temperature of 280-400°C are
required.

Coal Mill
From ZKG International Dec 2004: Filters require:
 High pressure shock resistance air-tightness
 Fulfillment of ATEX Zone 22+20 Directive.
Pulse jet filters are therefore normally used.

Silos
Design for 150% of the maximum pumping airflow.

Clinker Cooler
Normal operation, dust loading 5-30 g/m3stp, up to 100 g/m3 during upset operation.
Temperature usually 230-280°C, up to 400°C in upset conditions.

Traditionally and ESP was used, but now bag filters are used at 130°C, therefore upstream
conditioning with an air/air heat exchanger is required (process gas in pipes is cooled
externally by axial fans). A temperature of 130°C allows cheaper polyester bags to be used.

60
5.4.2 Filter Types

5.4.2.1 Reverse Air Filters

Airflow passes through the bags from inside to outside. The particles collect on the inside of
the bag and are cleaned by flushing the bag for a long period at low pressure.

Reverse air filters are mainly used in the USA for large volume flows. The permissable area
loading is substantially lower than for pulse jet filters, hence the capital costs are higher.
Operational costa are also higher.

5.4.2.2 Pulse Jet Filters

Diaphragm valve is opened by electrovalve for a pulse time of less than 0,2 seconds. Either
high pressure (3-6 bar) or low pressure (1-3 bar) pulse is used.

These filters are used exclusively for new cement mill draft and separator installations where
dust loading can be as high as 1000 g/m3. ESPs are confined to existing plants. Vertical mills
with filter requirements of up to 900,000 m3/h.

5.4.2.3 Hybrid Filters

Have an electrostatic section (preliminary collector) followed by a bag-house. The idea is to

reduce pressure drop or alternatively have a smaller bag filtering area for the same pressure
drop.

Filter Pictures

61
62
63
5.5 Electrostatic Precipitators

Maximum temperature handling 400°C.

With appropriate design, it is possible to obtain dust loadings of <20 mg/m3, and efficiencies
99.99%.

Collecting efficiency varies with:

 Residence time of gas in the collector
 Temperature
 Strength of Electric Field
 Dust loading
 CO concentration and conductivity
 Shape and area of electrodes

64
6 TRANSPORT AND AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT

6.1 Belt Conveyors

Distance between skirts 2/3 of the troughed belt width. ½ for free flowing materials.

6.1.1 Belt Cleaners

Belt cleaner lifetime 3 months.
Primary cleaner should remove 90% of material. Located at 3 O’Clock. Cost: $2,500 for
800mm belt, installed $3,500.
Secondary cleaner locates just before 6 O’Clock. Cost: slightly less than primary cleaner.

To replace the plastic scrapers on primary cleaner  $250

V-Plow located on the underside of the belt is used to prevent material wedging between belt
and pulley.

6.1.2 Spillage Conveyors

Spillage conveyor runs every 15 minutes for 5 minutes, or every hour 5 minutes..

65
6.2 Elevators

Design criteria (chains versus bands):

 Temperature (bands max 100°C)
 Height (chains max 60 metres, bands 120 metres)
 Particle coarseness (more coarse = chains)

Chains have higher wear rate. Investment costs between bands and chains are similar.

Buckets in bucket elevators should be maximum ¾ full.

Boot digging is a condition where the bottom is always full to a

certain level, forcing the bottom traction to continuously dig through
it. Some of the causes are as follows:
a) Elevator is undersized (this is common since designers often use
the wrong bulk density in their calculations).
b) Heavy internal recirculation from slippage or incorrect speed.

66
c) For powdered material on mill circuits, bulk density changed due
to internal water sprays, irregular grinding aid addition, or too
much air on the airslide feeding the elevator.
c) For powdered materials, no de-aeration holes on the buckets

If you suspect a recirculation problem get an inspection hatch installed a short distance below
the discharge on the return side. There should be little or no material raining down.

To approximate the degree of boot overfilling, drill, tap and install a series of small plugs at
regular intervals starting from the bottom on the return side of the elevator. It's messy but
sure.

Table with Data of all Bucket Elevators at new 4900 t/d Clinker Production Line at Gladstone

HAC-Code 362-BE1 452-BE1 392-BE1 462-BE1

Function Raw Mill Baghouse/Kiln Dust Raw Meal Transport Kiln Feed
Recirculation Transport
Supplier Aumund Beumer Beumer Aumund
Type Chain Belt Belt Belt
Design Capacity 400 t/h 40 t/h 450 t/h 400 t/h
Center Distance 33.550 m 26.500 m 62.150 m 99.750 m
Drive Power 132 kW 11 kW 132 kW 150 kW
Bucket Width 560 mm 315 mm 1000 mm 1000 mm
Bucket Volume 21.1 l 9.5 l 77.5 l 55.9 l
Bucket Filling Degree no info 73% 69% no info
Bucket Spacing 356 mm 360 mm 580 mm 470 mm
Conveying Speed 1.54 m/s 1.2 m/s 1.86 m/s 1.72 m/s
3 3 3 3
Material Density 1.6 t/m 0.5 t/m 0.7 - 1 t/m 0.7 - 1 t/m
Dedusting Points - top only top only top only
3 3 3
Dedusting Air Vol. - 1800 m /h 2880 m /h 3240 m /h
(incl. air slide with
3
1200 m /h aeration)

6.3 material transport pneumatic versus mechanical

Horizontal transport:
Belt conveyor are more favourable then the pneumatic conveying system, but
==> additional expenses to avoid emissions have to be applied
==> more maintenance work has to be considered
==> higher investment cost have to be foreseen

Vertical transport:
With pneumatic pipe conveying the lifting work is reduced by the significantly lower wall
friction loss in the vertical conveying section.

67
Decisions about the system to be installed may be based on following considerations :
 Maintenance costs
 Operating costs
 Capital expenses
 System availability (Suppliers)

The energy consumption for pneumatic conveying is much more heavily influenced than that
for mechanical conveying by the given operation conditions, constraints and the relevant bulk
material properties.

Results show far better energy consumption for mechanical conveyors in an abstracted
system. Pneumatic transport 1.2 – 1.8 kWh/t depending on distances.

Due to the fact that conveying systems often are more complicated in the cement plant
(changes in directions, different levels, transfer points, dedusting facilities, and so on), each
new conveying system has to be adapted to the particular situation.

6.4 Transfer points

Encourage material to move in the new transfer direction.

Point about AFR  dusty clinker.
Belt speed normal 1.5 m/s
Lifetime of idlers 60,000 hours.
Max inclination of roller belts: 30°.

6.5 Airslides

Aeration flow: 2.5 m3/min

Slopes:

68
 minimum inclinations: deg %
 raw meal 5 9
 cement
 < 3500 cm2/g 5 9
 > 3500 cm2/g 6 10.5
 ex mill product
 raw meal 12 21.5
 cement 12 21.5
 separator coarses
 raw meal 15 27
 cement 12 21.5

 required air pressure mbar Notes: + low values for fine

products
 raw meal 50 - 140 + high values for coarse
products
 cement 60 - 100

69
 conveying air rates m3/m2/min
 (1.5) - 2 - (5)

 venting air rates %

 150 of conveying air rate

6.6 Metal Separation

6.6.1 Overband Separator

Orizabe: 200 times per day metal separator is activated.
1 year, 1 million $ for replacement of 2 rollers in large mill.??

6.6.2 Metal Trap

Metal Trap Costs €30,000. Install an extra fan exclusively for the airslides providing 7
m3/min/m2 air. Use Cement Course Diagram.

70
 Tramp Metal Separator (System Polysius) Ball Mill (Detail)

Air slide

Air slides

Air
Air

Distance to gate ~1000 mm

Slide Gates

Foreign body trap:

The foreign body trap installed in the circuit (after the bucket elevator discharge)
works very well. This can be taken as example of a good practice:

o Double slide gate (do not use rotary valves)

o Foreign bodies discharged every 2 h

o Screen (5mm openings) to separate foreign bodies from cement

o Rotary feeder below screen

o Cement returned to bucket elevator

71
 Foreign body trap with gates Screen below foreign body trap

6.7 Fuller Pump

2 to 2.5 bar pumping pressure used.

G-B5: FK Pump Venting and Material Compaction

Recognize that all FK Pumps are volumetric devices. In other words it delivers a set volume
flow rate and no more. However mill circuits are normally balanced with respect to weight or
mass flows and this balance can be upset if the FK Pump cannot cope. Delivery rates (mass
flow) can be affected significantly on FK Pumps due to a change in density. Thus for this
reason feeding an FK pump with an airslide is not always wise since the aeration air can
dramatically alter bulk densities. Good venting is important to relieving this air out of the
hopper as the material enters the screw.

In cases where FK Pump capacity is marginal with respect to the circuit, venting become
crucial to ensuring that the bulk density is as high as possible to maximize tonnage. To
help out, an extra venting box or baffle plate can be added to the hopper as shown in the
diagram below. Recognize that the variable pitch screw compacts the material which in effect
squeezes any air out. This air escapes out into the hopper which will aerate the incoming
material further. The baffle plate provides a easy escape route for this air without re-
entraining it, thus maximizing the feed bulk density.

Occasionally in some installations, for reasons not fully understood, material can become
over-compacted which causes the pump to draw high motor amps and trip suddenly. Fuller, in
many installations, (but not all, consult Fuller if you wish to modify a particular pump) has
provided a small threaded port located midway in the pump barrel. This is a compressed air
injection port. Typically it is hooked up to a solenoid which in turn is activated by a high
motor amp switch. As the motor suddenly rises in current, the switch causes the solenoid to
open which fires compressed air into the barrel momentarily. This fluidizes the compacted
material, relieving the binding on the screw and hence motor amps.

72
G-B6: Troubleshooting - Pumps
Condition: Dusting from feed hopper, pump running
1. Check flapper arm for movement. If movement is minimal or none, hold the arm
down by hand to try and feel if there is material coming out of the pump. If there is no
material flow or the load seems light, check flow to the pump hopper for possible
obstructions. If none, check the airslide air valve setting and the dedusting line.
2. If the load seems normal continue to hold arm down to attempt to make a material
seal. If the seal is achieved observe operation of the pump and monitor the operation
periodically.
3. Of the seal is still not achieved, check to see if there is enough manifold pressure, it
should be 25 to 30 PSI. If air pressure is low, start another compressor and attempt to make a
seal by holding down on the flapper arm. If a seal is achieved observe and monitor the
operation of the pump.
4. If all of the above attempts to make a seal fail, contact the control room and advise
him of the problem. Contact the Coordinator or Mechanical Maintenance.

Pump Feed To Dust Collector

Baffle plate or box
Air pressed out by screw
Hopper Flapper
Valve Mixing Chamber
Barrel

Outlet
Variable Pitch Screw
Air Seal Air Header
Nozzles
Roller Bearing

6.8 Pfister Feeder

2309ROT-3-Pfister slice 29.exe

73
7 SEPARATION

7.1 Separator Price

O-Sepa N-2000 (120,000 m3/h). St. Lawrence Cement.

$390,000 Separator, motor and drive
$316,000 Auxiliary equipment and Plant Engineering

“Engineering” means:
 Equipment Flowsheet
 General Arrangement Drawings
 Equipment Drawings
 Dedusting ducting routing
 Platework design drawings
 Equipment Manuals

7.2 Separator analysis

Quick Method to determine product and bypass

Take the % of particles <45m in the separator feed and multiply by the t/h. Take 80% of this
value for the product. The remainder is rejects.

7.2.1 Concept of Bypass

Lafarge: bypass decrease of 2-5% max when kg sep feed / m3/h sep air <2  no significant
effect on the mill production rate.

Lafarge: bypass is the lowest % of feed that will go back to the mill.

Note that Ito considers bypass a function of the particle dispersion and separator geometry.
The particles rejected by the separator back to the mill consist of this amount + the truly
separated particles.

A quick check for separator overload is to compare the PSD of the feed and the rejects. If
they are similar, this indicates a high bypass.

Bypass is a function of the separator feedrate. Therefore the classifier cannot be described by
a single Tromp curve.

74
 1st generation 2nd generation 3rd generation

Bypass (%) 30-60 10-35 5-10

Acuity limit (µm) > 20 15-20 < 15
Imperfection > 0,45 0,30-0,40 < 0,30

Bypass versus Feedrate (Test 18'Ø Sturt's)

100

90

80

70
67%
60 57%
Bypass (%)

50

40 42%

30
100 t/h

200t/h
160 t/h

20

10

0
50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300
Feedrate to Separator (t/h)

Static Separator Guide Vane position?

First generation = Mechanical separator

Second generation are ether blade or rotor type, with external fan.
Air is always recycled, either from cyclone fan or filter fan.

7.2.2 Efficiency

% recovery of THE RANGE 0 – x m feed size into the fines stream. Is therefore
CUMULATIVE Depends on the circulating load.

= f / (u * a)

where:
f = % passing in fines at sieve size x m
a = % passing in feed at sieve size x m

7.2.3 Cut point

75
“d50” - Is the particle size at which 50% of a sample is greater.

7.2.4 Sharpness

d75 / d25 – particle size 75% in rejects / particle size 25% in rejects. Equals “1” for perfect
separation.

7.2.5 Circulating Load Calculation

CL = 2-2.5 for raw mills

= 1.5 – 2 for low fineness
= >2 for high fineness

Calculate with (f - r) / (a - r) using different sieve sizes.

Or: CL = (f-r) / (a-r). Do for every particle size and take average.
Result is variable according to the size class chosen.

CL = A/F
Aa = Rr + Ff (a,r,f = percentages 0 to x m) or % residue on any sieve size.
A=R+F

Tromp Curve Tr = Rr / Aa * 100% or Tr = r/a * (1-1/CC) * 100%

where r = percentage of stream between an upper and lower diameter size).

7.2.6 Rosin-Rammler

The term "Rosin-Rammler number" relates to the use of the Rosin-Rammler-Bennett curve.
This Rosin-Rammler curve is simply a mathematical formula which can be made to
approximate most powder size distributions. The slope value [n], sometimes called the
Rosin-Rammler Number, simultaneously reflects the PSD's scatter or irregularity and
the tendency to group in one narrow size range. A PSD of random numbers will fit a
Rosin- Rammler distribution 9 out of 10 times. However it's slope or [n] will be low. As the
irregularities disappear and/or the PSD begins to group around a size range then the
RR# increases.

It offers the following advantages:

1. Reasonable fit with many different cements and raw mixes.
2. Use of a single, relatively simple formula.
3. Representation of size distribution data as a straight line.

[d/do]n
R = 100 · e

where
R = % residue at size [d]
d = particle size, µm
do = fineness number = size at 36.8 % retained or 63.2 % passing
n = Uniformity = slope of the Rosin-Rammler distribution or Rosin Rammler Number
76
0.6 - 0.7 raw meal grinding
0.75 - 0.85 open circuit grinding or very bad separator performance
0.85 - 1.00 bad to mediocre performance for first generation separators (Raymond, Sturt)
1.00 - 1.20 good performance for first or second generation separators (Humbolt-Wedag)
1.10 - 1.40 high efficiency separators

The figures given above are for cement, raw mix R.R. Nos. are usually lower.

7.3 Cyclones

HMC guide value is 2.6 [m3/m2.h]. Where m2 is the area based on the nominal diameter.

A more sophisticated approach is the cyclone, shown in figure 4.1. The outward spin forces
the coarse particles out of the gas stream. Cyclones are intended to separate dust from gases -
they are very poor size classifiers. WARNING: do not confuse cyclone efficiency with
selection (recovery) efficiency. Cyclone efficiency refers to the effectiveness of dust removal
from gas stream - not how good of a classifier it is.

75-80% efficient = the mass percentage separated into the cyclone rejects.
Lafarge – 96%(?).

7.4 Static separators

Dimensions from Polysius Drawing:

Dip Tube diameter 13 mm
Vanes diameter 35 mm
Outside Casing Diameter 41 mm

Speed through dip tube 19-21 m/s

Larger and higher tube  coarser particles

Example from HGRS library: 10% increase in throughput after installation of a static
separator (cement fineness 3500).

Pressure Drop 10-15 mbar

Dedusting Efficiency 75-80%

77
See Heming photo for example of adjustable dip tube height, and diameter of dip tube.

Older Design Newer Design

Centrifugal Force

Coarse
particles loses
velocity and
drops out, only KHD and FCB are
to be re- two suppliers who
entrained at the made this
inlet where the modification to
velocity is much capture the coarse
higher. The particles as rejects.
resulting cloud Thus efficiency
blocks flow. improves on the
unit.

7.5 1st Generation (Sturtevant) Separators

The same laws of fluid dynamics are at work in a Sturtevant, but are used slightly differently
and less efficiently. The high efficiency separator uses drag and centrifugal forces in direct
opposition to determine the cut size or balance diameter. Residence time in the classification
zone is largely dependent on particle mass, gravity and fluid resistance. However in
Sturtevants (and other similar first generation machines) drag forces are pitted mainly against
relatively weak gravity forces to determine cut size or selection. For this reason, improving
the main fan or opening the diaphragm tends to "drag" or "lift" a lot more coarse particles out
of the classification zone leading to lower 325 and 200 meshes (but with a lower separator
bypass). Consequently secondary selector blades are crucial to overcoming this gross
inefficiency. The strong centrifugal forces determines rejection and thus residence time
instead. Time for separation is much shorter than what is found in HES units. By adding
more selector blades (increasing total blade area), the spinning internal vortex and thereby the
centrifugal forces are strengthened and shortens the residence time in the classification zone.
Drag forces must overcome gravity; they must overcome centrifugal forces acting at right
angles; and they must drag or lift particles past the selector blades. Separator bypass
increases and the cut size favors the smaller diameter, whenever centrifugal forces are
increased by changing the selector blades. In scaling up unit sizes Sturtevant also made the
colossal mistake of not scaling up the height of the classification zone correctly. Hence
larger Sturtevants tend to be more inefficient than smaller units by virtue of having a
proportionately smaller classification zone. Changing the main fan or the diaphragm
merely changes the drag or lift forces in Sturtevants, thus affects the force balance with
similar performance end results.

78
Once the particle is selected in the inner cone it moves to the outer cone where it is must again
by selected to report to product, the other portion not selected returns to the inner cone
through the return air vanes, increasing separator bypass.

Understanding how these forces are employed will help the process engineer make rational
decisions regarding how best to enhance separator performance.

At this point it worthwhile to point out a couple of useful rules of thumb for Sturtevant
separators:
a) maximize main fan power to minimize separator bypass but be wary - this will
reduce overall fineness if no other changes are made.
b) increasing total blade area will improve blaine fineness and increase bypass
somewhat. The % passing a specific mesh size (200 or 325) will likely
improve as well.
c) increasing the number of blades will improve the % passing a specific mesh
size (200 or 325).

More information and useful ideas are covered in "Practical Fundamentals ... Volume 1" as
well as a useful report on Sturtevant geometry is contained in this Volume.

7.5.1 1st Generation Modifications

"Sturtevant "Sturtevant
Modifications.DOC" Geometry and Fineness LAFARGE.DOC"

7.6 2nd Generation Separators

7.6.1 2nd Generation Separator Modifications

79
See PPE ppt file.
See Stephane Report Siggenthal.
See Modification DIBUJOS, Carboneras (installation of cage rotor with cone to ZUB 45/6),
also done on two ZUB 42 separators at Sparrows Point.

1. Check Vertical Speed past separating Blades (function of plate supporting blades)
2. Check fan flowrate and fan for improper modifications (cf. Heming)
3. Check gap between blades and outside of casing (design value Polysius Cyclopol =
50mm). This reduces the residue value (rather than Blaine)
4. Check for sufficient rotor power if air speed is increased (or number of blades?).

Design flow cooling air = 10% total separator air. Maximum cooling effect = 3-5°C.

7.7 3rd Generation / High efficiency separators

 RULE OF THUMB: 3 [%] of the maximum separator speed

leads to a change of ~100 [cm2/g]

See ITO Articles

7.7.1 Impact on Production

1. Reduce the bypass  less fines returning to C1 which cushion the grinding forces of
the balls  more efficient grinding  greater production.
2. Increase the concentration of particles in the range 3-30m which are important for
strength development  can reduce the fineness target for the same strength 
greater production.

How much production increase depends on:

 How steep the current distribution curve is with the existing separator
 How much is the decrease in bypass (for example if the existing separator works with
a low circulating load, its bypass will already be low and hence the gain will be small
for a high efficiency separator).
 Mill or transport bottlenecks to passing the increased flow of material (e.g. mill
internals)
 Whether the blaine can be reduced from the viewpoint of standard cement properties.
E.g Workability is related to the percentage of small particles, percentage and type of
gypsum, percentage hydration of the gypsum in the mill, reactivity of clinker, product
temperature etc.

For typical cases (existing separator at the limit, mill OK to pass more particles), production
increase is in the range 12-43%.

80
7.7.2 Impact on KWh/t

The kWh/t decreases for the following reasons:

1. Reduce the bypass  less fines returning to C1  less energy spent on overgrinding
2. Because high efficiency separators use less air per particle than for conventional
separators (for the same bypass), the the fan duty is reduced.

For typical cases (existing separator at the limit, mill OK to pass more particles), kWh/t
decrease is in the range 6-21%.

If fineness of the product is measured by %R rather than blaine, then benefits of

conversion to a 3rd generation separator will be extremely high. This is the case for raw
meal grinding and coal grinding.

The existence of a pregrinder in a cement circuit is good for the conversion to a high
efficiency separator because following the increase in production, the pregrinder will
rarely plug unlike a 1st chamber in a ball mill.

Experience shows that separators should operate with a maximum amount of air and
cage speed in order to reduce bypass and hence reduce kWh/t. Working with maximum
air-flow also gives a sharper PSD.

7.7.3 HES Comparison

Polysius Sepol: (cf: mill 8 West Thurrock) has the fines extracted from underneath. This
allows a central material feed from the top and therefore a more even material distribution.
First hit market in 1985. Sold 40 a year worldwide every year since. Use guide vanes to
direct the air evenly through the cage.

Maximum feed size to a Sepol = 4mm (Polysius roller press document).

Pfeiffer QDK: Same design as Sepol

KHD SKS: (cf: Dotternhausen, Réunion) 4 feed points (Hp and SO think this is the best
separator!).

NOTE: At Dotternhausen the shale was previously ground to 7000 blaine. After installation
of new SKS circuit, only 5900 blaine is required for the same quality. AND the laser
granulometry shows very little difference between the 2 grinding methods.

KHD VSK: (cf: Dotternhausen). Supposedly “almost“ as good performance (bypass /

imperfection) as standard HE separators. Allows high air loading (4 kg feed / m3 air), which
results in a lower energy of the fan (note at Dotternhausen the fan was grossly oversized,
therefore a VSD was required). Energy consumption of the wheel is comparable to other HES
at high speed and lower at low speeds. Supposedly low pressure drop of the separator (65%
of typical HES) also allows a reduction in fan energy, approximately 45% claimed.

THE VSK IS GOOD FOR SEPARATION UP TO MAXIMUM 1900 cm²/g.

81
The VSK is arranged before the roller press in order to cool or heat the clinker with fresh air /
hot gas as required.

Sturtevant SD100: (cf: Rochefort) 2 feed points, poorly placed (but made no difference).
Walter says that the SD100 is dimensioned differently from others  poor experiences with
this size.

Fuller O-Sepa: (cf: Cilacap) 4 feed points, air extracted upwards. Primary and secondary air
inlets. 425 separators installed worldwide as of April 2006.

FLS SEPAX: uses a desagglomerator for roller press feeds. Generally bottom-fed. Like a
vertical mill separator?

7.7.4 HES Dimensioning

7.7.4.1 Radial Speed

Most manufacturers design for the same cage dimensions but with a higher gas flow for raw
meal simply because the cut size of the raw meal is higher. Speeds are usually 20% higher.
Therefore if 4 m/s cement, 4.8 m/s raw material.

For cement:
3.9 m/s cage speed Sturtevant
3.6 Polysius
3.4 Pfeiffer
4.5 KHD

Polysius philosophy is lower speeds in order to reduce wear. KHD is higher speeds in order
to improve separation efficiency.

7.7.4.2 Cage Speed

Cage speed desirable max is 35 m/s. Need a special (expensive) rotor construction for speeds
> 35 m/s.

Typical maximum values:

KHD 40 m/s (criterion that a higher radial speed(4.5 m/s) and a higher cage speed give more
efficient separation)
Polysius 32 m/s
O-Sepa 30 m/s

note that for the Alesd Raw Mill separator, KHD did not want to drop below a cage speed of
12 m/s (for reasons of separation efficiency).

7.7.4.3 Specific Air Loading ETC

Specific separator load: <10-12 t/h m² (tonnes of fines)

82
Specific air load (feed): < 2.5 kg/m³ (FLS O-Sepa: 2.5) or > 0.4 m3/kg, although
is 4 kg/m3 for Horomills and VSK.
Specific air load (product) < 0.75 kg/m³ (FLS O-Sepa: 0.85) or > 1.33 m3/kg
(hence circ load of 3.3)
Cage speed 5-35 m/s

Installed power cage 0.5 kWh/t product

Installed power fan 2-2.5 kWh/t product
Pressure Drop across Sep 20-30 mbar
Pressure Drop across cyclones 10-15 mbar
Pressure Drop across filter 10-15 mbar
Pressure Drop Ducting 5 mbar

Bypass typically 15% at 2.5 kg/m³.

Research by ONODA suggests that the different sizes of separators may not have been scaled
up correctly. Cage height, gap width (between the cage and guide vanes) and especially cage
bars or blade spacing are important factors. Apparently there is a critical optimum spacing
width between cage blades or bars. Too wide or too narrow results in poor 325 mesh values.
The spacing varies with unit size. Larger units appear to have spacing that's too wide.

1st generation: 1,0 kg/m³ (difficult to measure the airflow) or 6 t/m² [depending on
separator-surface (separator diameter); see also particular advise in the
manual, as specific value depends also from product fineness]

2nd generation: 1,6 kg/m³ ; +/- 0,2 kg/m³

3rd generation: 1,8 kg/m³ ; +/- 0,2 kg/m³, higher if the fine material load remains< 1,0
kg/m³

Separator efficiency is usually poor if separator rejects are > 850 cm²/g for cement in the
range 3200-4000.

7.7.5 HES Guide Vanes

KH- Typical guide vane angle 17° to the tangent.

Walther et al:
Reasons for guide vanes:

1. Pre-separation of the incoming particles. Larger particles have a hard time to change
their direction, so get caught by the vanes (effect static separator / cyclone)
2. The guide vanes pass the material in a direction in front of the rotor blades (not into
the blades) where the particles are then "presented" to the gas flow. Somehow this is a
more "pure" separation than if the material is directed into the rotor blades, probably
less wear too.
3. The guide vanes direct into a single direction/angle to the rotor. If there were no
vanes, then the same sized particle which approaches the rotor at different angles
would have a different chance of being separated.

83
 4. The blades act as a trap for particles which have rebounded off the vanes. The
particles lose velocity and fall into the rejects cone
5. The vanes can be angled at different points around the rotor (useful if the
aerodynamics of the spiral around the rotor is not well designed) so that the airflow is
evenly distributed to the cage (I guess only beneficial if the material is also evenly
distributed).

K-HB: guide vanes provide a surface for the rebounding particles to be trapped, lose velocity
and fall down the cone.

Chat with Hanspeter, separation

 Narrow bars = narrower gaps between separator bars.

 LVT Nillson doesn’t like a static separation of coarse particles which hit the separator
guide vanes, lose velocity, then fall.
 He prefers a pure dynamic separation where the particles approach tangentially to the
cage but just outside i.e there is less contact of the particles with the blades.
 Therefore the angle of guide vanes is made so as to approach this tangential angle.
 Other manufacturers go for a static element to the separation. There is no talk of
disagglomeration of the particles through impact.

7.7.6 HES Operation

Third generation separator. Put the air at max, and change the rotor speed only (1-2 revs/min)
to get the fineness. Highest separation efficiency at highest air flows. Low air = higher by-
pass. Low air flow needs low cage speed.

7.7.7 HES Wear Protection

See Polysius Wear Protection document on Sepol.

84
Wear is a function of:
 Angle of impact
 Particle velocity
 Particle shape
 Particle hardness
 Material bulk density
 Wear material

More detail:

Wear rate increases at (particle velocity)1.8

The highest rate of wear for normal steel occurs at an angle of impact of 25°. The
lowest is at 90°.

The highest rate of wear of compound steel is 65°.

With an angle of impact of 90°, wear of normal and compound steel are identical

With increasing material load wear rate is reduced (autogenous protection by
rebounding particles)

The wear rate is strongly dependent on the type of material conveyed.

Particularly high wear occurs from: Pozzolana, raw meal with high quartz content,
disagglomerated cakes from a roller press (due to particle shape?).

7.7.8 HES Fan and Filter Dimensioning

Lafarge: Fan sized for 66 mbar

Lafarge, typical pressure drops:

 Cage 25 mbar
 Filter 15 mbar
 Ducting 11 mbar
 Total 51 mbar

Included in the design is the possibility to recirculate 0-80% of the total airflow.

Alesd HES with 4 cyclones and 265,000 m3/h @90°C, fan is designed for 38 mbar.
Alesd HES with 2 cyclones and 530,000 m3/h @90°C, fan is designed for 45 mbar

Only 5-8% above the nominal airflow is recommended for the filter.

Alesd RM, 4-4.5% of separating airflow is dedusted, but filter is sized for 2.5 times this value.
Fan is sized for 30 mbar.

7.8 Separator Conversions To HES

For new installations a HES is best-suited in most cases. Special applications (e.g. low water
demand, flatter granulometry may require alternative solutions)

All comments for a blaine of 3500 and OPC.

85
7.8.1 Open Circuit Conversion

Holcim Grinding Manual

 Cement with blaine 3,000 and separator with low bypass  5-10% capacity increase
 Cement with blaine 3,000 and separator with high bypass  10-15% capacity
increase
 Cement with blaine >4,000 and separator with high bypass 15-25%

Improvements > 25% are unrealistic.

 Conversion to HES will only make a difference if the mill has L/D of <3.5.
o In this case, production increase of >20%
o Cost of conversion $2.5M including mill ventilation system + separator
 Conversion to a static separator will give:
o Increase in capacity of between 5 and 10%
o Mill MUST be sufficiently ventilated and mill filter must recuperate more than
15% of the finished product.
o Cost $60k

7.8.2 Static Separator Conversion

Example from HGRS library: 10% increase in throughput after installation of a static
separator (cement fineness 3500).

Generally static separators are associated with a dynamic separator which produces 80% of
the fines. Therefore little interest in optimising the static separator. However, for birotor
mills, the static may produce 60% of the fines. In this case:

 Installation of a cage into static separator, cost $100k

 Installation of HES that also replaces the dynamic separators and therefore entails
changing the general ventilation system, cost $1.6M

7.8.3 1st Generation Conversion

For Raw Mix:

 Installation of 45° squirrel cage accompanied by 20% increase in speed will give:
o Increase in output at same fineness
o 2 point decrease at R200m
o Cost of conversion $60k
 Installation of a HES can increase throughput as much as 20%
o Throughput increases may be limited by raw material moisture

For Cement:
 Separating ventilation and separator blade drives will give:
o Increase up to 5% production
o Allow greater flexibility in multi product mills

86
 o Required a Variable Speed Drive on each shaft with the possibility of
increasing speed by 20% and installing a cage at 57° or vertical for selection.
Cost $250k.
 Installation of a 2nd Generation (extra cyclone and external fan + VSD for selection
process) will increase capacity by 7%.
o Cost: $700k.
o Allows cooling / drying possibilities.
 Installation of HES wil give:
o Throughput increase of up to 12% at 3500 cm²/g, up to 30% at 5400 cm²/g.
o Typical value (Holcim) 30%. Palavi 30 t/h  45 t/h.
o Cost $1.6M

7.8.4 2nd Generaton Conversion

Proven efficiency of 2nd generation separators makes it very difficult to justify upgrade to
HES. However can:
 Install cage in place of separation blades + high efficiency cyclones + increasing
ventilation gives:
o Production increase of 3-4%
o Cost: $600k for all the above changes.

7.8.5 Alesd Raw Ball Mill Separator

Polysius 1 separator: 410/2

Price: €500,000 for sep, €1.1M for sep+filter+fan+motors

Separator
Diameter 4.1 m
Height 2.735 m
Cage area 35.2 m2
D/H 1.5
Installed rotor motor power 495 kW

Fan
Airflow 530,000 m3/h at 90°C, 21,200 m3/h dedusted
Pressure drop 45 mbar
Amount of dedusting air = 4% of separating air volume.
Installed Fan Power 1100 kW

Cyclones
Number of cyclones 2
Diameter of cyclones 5.5 m, length 13.1 m

Dedusting Filter
Max dust load to dedusting filter 70 g/m3
Filter area 775 m2

87
Gas Flow 20,000 m3/h
Air to cloth ratio 1.07 if using fan design flow. (guideline 1.5 m3/m2.min)
Fan deisgn air flow 50,000 m3/h at 90°C
Fan
Pressure drop 30 mbar

Ducting
Diameter 2.9 m ( 6.6 m2)
Gas speed (530,000/3600) / 6.6 = 22.3 m/s

Comments
Guarantee on 200m??
Dedusting filter sizing- actual flow 20,000 m3/h, sized for 50,000 m3/h
Sepol motor power – page 2, 495 kW, page 16, 380 kW
Air quantity unclear: fan design 530,000, separating air 530,000, operating air 493,000 m3/h
(datasheet). Radial airspeed is 4.2 with 530,000 but only 3.9 with 493,000 m3/h. Same
applies with smaller separators.
For the single separator, not an ideal bend at the air inlet. Much better (straight) inlet into the
two smaller separators.

88
8 OPERATION AND CONTROL

8.1 Ball Mills

8.1.1 Optimal Mill Load

Function of retention time:

 Circulating Load
 Moisture
 Grinding aid / water injection
 Feed Temperature
 Particle size
 Internals (balls /diaphragms).

Targets: Material level middle of charge in C1, 50mm above charge in C2.

8.1.2 Mill Ear Control - Costs

For the new vibration mill “ear”:

1. Barries, Dudfield: MillScan DSP2000 – on contact vibration system. “Twice the
resolution of a standard ear”. Installation cost $US 35,000.
2. Ashley Kimes, Artesia also installed this, same price. +2/3 t/h = 5% increase t/h.
3. Karl-Heinz, Siggenthal - $12,000 including wireless intermediate diaphragm probe

8.1.3 Circulating Load

Fuller strategy – high circulating loads and coarse ball charge, highly filled. (U.S mills)
Hanspeter: adapt ball charge for a higher retention time  increase the fineness at the
mill exit and reduce the load on the separator.

Circulating load factor, OPC

Blaine 3000 2.0
4000 3.0
5000 4.0

Definition circulating load:

89
Lafarge: The amount of fines returned to the mill do not lead to overgrinding or reduce
the capacity of the mill. BUT NOTE EXAMPLE OF FOS – CLINKER ALONE 30 t/h
during purge not plugged, 24 t/h with recirc  plugged. Therefore Lafarge statement
not true.

8.1.4 Mill flushing and Pumping of separator feed

Due to:
 Irregular dosing of grinding aid or water
 Mill airlock too tight (yeah, right!)
 Pumping pneumatic trough conveyors

One drawback in mill operation, with the addition of grinding aids, is the occurrence of
flushing in the mill. Due to the dry dispersing action of the grinding aid, the fluidity of the
dry material being ground may be greatly increased, causing the material to flush rapidly
through the mill. Normally this sort of problem is related how the grinding aid is injected
and/or that there is a metering problem (i.e.. flushes of grinding aid). Usually too much
grinding aid can't hurt, except for cost and leaky liner bolts.

8.1.5 Detection of Filling Level

Mill Power
Mill power increases with increasing filling of the voids between the balls. At some point the
balls interlock in a different manner and are released lower on the shell  reduction in
abosrbed kW.

Most mills operate in the zone where an increase in feed leads to a reduction in the absorbed
kW, some in the opposite zone and few in the unstable zone.

Mill Sound
1st chambers are often porous and coarse at the start of the chamber, then fine in the centre and
coarse again towards the end. Material tends to accumulate only where it meets the point of
lowest porosity, but this point can be affected by feed size and crushability as well as changes
to the ball charge porosity. Sinve microphones are fixed, thery are trying to measure a peak
level that is shifting with changes in circulating load.

Mill Elevator
Suffers the following problems:
 Long lag times, especially with multi chambers or long mills
 Cannot detect extreme problems in 1st chamber
 Sensitive to erratic water spray or grinding aid flow
 Sensitive to amount of aeration air used or material flidity
 Boot is overfilled  digging influences kW not just the load
 Motor is oversized, therefore kWs is insensitive

Rejects Flow

90
8.1.6 Fineness Control

At Jerez, fineness according to Blaine is NOT considered a good control parameter of quality
EXCEPT for OPC where a good correlation exists between blaine and compressive strenght
development. R63m is used instead.

8.1.7 Online Analysers

E.g. Insitec.

 Installation not protected from dust (cf. photo Jerez and Dotternhausen)

Supposed benefits
 Better control of product quality, narrower range of operation
 Hence increased productivity and reduced kWh/t due to reduced overgrinding
 Allows optimisation in the by giving immediate feedback to engineers actions (but
note that the system must restabilise after an action, hence the real result of the action
occurs 2 hours later!)
 Reduction of laboratory workload
 Faster cement type changes (5 minutes from sample to result)

8.1.8 Start-up of a New Mill

1. 5% Charge 15 mins max 70mm WITHOUT FEED

2. 50% 25 hours max 70mm with material feed
3. 75% 75 hours max 80mm with material feed
4. 90% 100 hours max 90mm with material feed
5. 100% Normal operation

The bolts of the liner fixation should be reightened several times, for the first time after 8-12
hours.

91
9 PRODUCT QUALITY

Sampling

Sample size = 0.1 x (max particle size mm)^1.5 WITH MINIMUM SAMPLE SIZE 1kg
PAGE 67 CMC for representative sample size.

9.1 Mesh size conversion

SIEVE OPENINGS
ASTM / CSA
1 micron = 0.001 mm
Mesh Size No. Ø µm Mesh Size No. Ø µm
4 4,750 50 300 raw meal
5 4,000 60 250
6 3,350 70 212 raw meal
7 2,800 80 180

92
 8 2,360 (2.36 mm) interm. diaphr. 100 150
10 2,000 120 125
12 1,700 140 106
14 1,400 170 90 coal, raw meal
16 1,180 200 75 cement
18 1,000 230 63
20 850 270 53
25 710 325 45 cement
30 600 400 38
35 500 450 32
40 425 500 25
45 355 635 20

9.2 Raw meal

9.2.1 Fineness

Holcim targets:

"29 Product
quality.ppt"

Generally milling particles to R90 and limiting the number of particles >200m. Therefore
we only generally consider these 2 sizes.

R90microns 10 – 20%
R200microns <0.5-1%

Ratio R200 / R90 is between 0.02 and 0.05 for good separation. Separation is
improvable for values > 0.05.

(Lafarge: 10% R90, 1% R200.)

Conversion to “blaine”:

1% R90m 4000 blaine

2.5% 3600
3.5% 3400
5% 3200
7% 3000
9.5% 2800
15% 2600

93
9.2.2 Moisture
Residual Moisture 0.5-1% raw materials.

9.2.3 Quartz

If silica modulus < 1.8, probably no free quartz (Hans Braun)

9.3 Influence of raw grinding on kiln burnability

IMPACTOF.DOC

Note that particles > 300m may be composed of silica (quartz) compounds. These are
extremely difficult to burn in the kiln  reduction in kiln throughput. The kiln can be very
sensitive to very small changes in this coarse fraction (example passing from 0.45% rejects on
300m to 0.50% can lead to serious kiln problems).

Holcim Burnability index considers calcite > 90m and quartz > 200m. Problems if
calcite > 90m and quartz > 32m.

Lafarge: limestone particles greater than 125m and Quartz particles > 45 m can
cause burnability problems.

9.3.1 Kiln Dust

 8-15% of total clinker for preheater systems.

9.4 cement

9.4.1 EN 197-1

"EN 197-1 en
Cement Standards.pdf"

9.4.2 Fineness
 Accelerates strength development.
 Effect is small for cement, smaller for concrete.
 Greater fineness  greater water requirement and greater shrinkage, and reduced
bleeding.

94
At Jerez, fineness according to Blaine is NOT considered a good control parameter of quality
EXCEPT for OPC where a good correlation exists between blaine and compressive strenght
development. R63m is used instead.

9.4.3 Moisture
Typically 0% for cement

9.4.4 Particle size Distribution

Narrow particle distribution  higher water demand and higher long term strength (effect
small in concrete?).
Effect on packing volume (bags)?

A typically desired cement is:

1. Rich in 3-30m particles (especially 16-24m) – relates to 7 and 28 day strength

development.
2. Absence of oversize (>90m)
3. Presence of moderate amount (10%) of particles <3m (relates to workability).
4. Possibly also something like “no particles greater than 2 mm” in order that abrasion on
placing equipment is not excessive (?)

Points 1 and 2 are improved with 3rd generation separators. Point 3 can be optimised by
the grinding part of the circuit, including gypsum type / quantity, milling temperature,
ball charge….

Early strength is dependent on particles 3-30um.

Possibly the effect of particles < 7um is not significant for strength development.
Helmuth states that particle sizes in the range 2-5m are essential to the control of flow,
bleeding, setting time, drying shrinkage and strength development.
Particles greater than 45um have very little effect on strength development.

49% of the total specific surface is contributed by particles <2m which is only 7-9% of
the mass, and only 2% of the total specific surface is contributed by particles > 45m.

Lafarge: a 30m cement = blaine 3500cm²/g

9.4.5 Mineralogy
Has little influence in practical situations

9.4.6 Density

Cement
Cement density typically: 1.1 g/cm³.
Belt conveyor – see PPE handbook.

Raw Meal
Raw meal density in homo silo = 0.9 (fresh) to 1 (if in silo for a while, used for calculation)
g/cm3.
95
Fluidised raw meal 0.75 g/cm3.

9.4.7 Grinding Aids

Changes flowabilty, cf transport on belts
Reduce water demand, i.e. behave like plasticisers
Increases likelihood of bleeding.

9.4.8 Clinker Storage

Outside stored clinker  superficial hydrations  formation of fines  inhibits grinding
efficiency.
Loss of hydraulic potential  lower strength.
Detect by loss on ignition and higher freelime, CaOH2

9.5 Fly Ash Cement

(From Greenport, zeller) - Residual carbon of the fly ash (30 % corresponding to 1.5 % in the
raw mix) acts as a grinding aid

9.6 pozzolana cement

9.6.1 fineness
 Has to be ground finer than ordinary OPC in order to compensate for the lower
strength development of the pozzolana proportion.
 Generally high water content.

9.7 masonry cement

9.8 Slag cement

In general, GBFS is abrasive and requires more grinding energy than clinker. Slag is
therefore generally ground alone in ball mills to a fineness of 3000 – 4000 cm²/g. Grinding
alone also allows a better control of the quality which may be variable from the GBFS
producer. Vertical roller mills are also used as pregrinders (the slag always passes through a
ball mill as a finishing / mixing process with the clinker). A wide PSD is generally favoured
in order to have favorable cement / concrete properties.

The final product also often passes through a batch mixer. Limestone or other constituents
may be added at this point.

Slag cements do not produce good early strengths, although strength development at 7 and 28
days is good.

9.8.1 Fineness

96
The PSD generated by the grinding of GBFS changes according to the age of the slag. In
particular the necessary fineness is a function of the age. There xist no correlations as yet
between fineness and age.

Wet slag cement leads to coating / blockages etc of transport equipment  additional costs.
Slag may be dried in a drier or within the grinding circuit  additional costs. Other costs
arise from storage and transport of the slag.

9.9 limestone cement

 Each additional 1% of limestone = additional 50-80 points of blaine.

 Depending on the limestone, limestone cements can give wider particle-size
distributions when ground with clinker (both more fines and more R45m).
 Flowability is generally harder for wider particle distributions, therefore this may lead
to higher filling level in the ball mill which may be detrimental if the filling ratio is not
optimal
 The high fineness and inherent moisture may lead to agglmeration and coating of mill
internals  lower efficiency
 These effects are less apparent for high efficiency systems (3rd gen sep etc)
 Cement strength diminishes according to limestone concentration and fineness.
Strength diminishes faster for % > 10-20% than for % < 10%.
 Additives can play a greater role than fineness in strength development, and may
therefore be a more economical alternative to finer grinding (see below). May also
therefore allow greater production (lower fineness but same quality).

Can use grinding aids (e.g. CB-100, Grace) to improve flowability and late strength. These
can work by removing non-reactive ferrite from the silicate surfaces of the clinker portion of
the cement  greater reactivity. This additive works best at lower fineness (hence good for
limestone cements where the clinker portion is ground less fine than in OPC).

9.10 coal

9.10.1Fineness

R90 = 0.5 – 15% according to the proportion of volatile matter.

9.11 petcoke

97
10 COOLING AND GYPSUM (CASO4 DIHYDRATE)

10.1 Vertical Mills

Cement temperature at the exit of a vertical roller mill is ~85°C, or 10°C less than the mill gas
outlet temperature, hence no need for cooling equipment.

10.2 Cost

FLS 2005: $US 35,000 for a complete 2nd chamber water injection system.

10.3 Objectives of cooling

 Diapgragm: 100°C is optimal, definitely >70°C (empirical observation)

 Mill Outlet: 100°C is optimal, definitely < 110-115°C. Above 120°C leads to coating
of the ball charge  inefficient grinding.
 Cement silo: maximum 70°C, excpetionally 80°C.

Cooling performs three functions

 Promotes the optimal temperature for efficient grinding (heating or cooling).

o Coating of charge and liners if temperature too high + particle agglomeration
 Maintains the correct cement quality (cooling only).
o False set due to hydration of gypsum in the silo making it inactive against C3A
o Lump formation in the silos (condensation of water)

Cooling Options
 Water spray on the feed belt  simple buts risks prehydration of clinker
 Water injection in mill. Only if temperatures > 100°C, otherwise the water will not
evaporate in the mill but will do so in the silos  lump formation in the silos  effect
on bagging operations and reduction of water release from gypsum dehydration
(>70°C)..
 Separator cooling. Note this also cools the rejects, hence reduces the drying capacity
and possibly reducing the efficiency of the grinding.
o Maximum 30-40°C cooling in single-pass air separator
o Maximum 10-15°C in a cyclone separator
 Mill ventilation cooling. Note the ventilation has other functions:
o Fluidises the material
o Transports fines through the mill
 Water Cooler

10.4 Water Injection

FLS: “In order to avoid dry clogging and dehydration of the crystal water in the gypsum, the
temperature in the cement must always be kept below 125°C.”

98
10.4.1Choice of 1st or 2nd Chamber Injection, Co-Current / Counter-Current

General rules:
1. Only use for clinker above 100°C. If used lower, there is a risk of lack of evaporation 
clogging.
2. Inject first into the 2nd chamber. If this is insufficient for the cooling duty, then inject into
the 1st chamber. Other experiences show however that balancing the injection in the 1st
and 2nd chambers is also effective.

 Although the feed end spray is the simplest mechanically, the first compt. is the
coldest and tends to plug easily. To control properly, you must install a thermocouple
in between the partition plates.
 Partition water spray is the best from a process point of view, as it goes with the flow
and can reach any internal hot spots. Mechanically it is more apt to break due to
bending of the pipes. Co-current is preferred because the temperature of the clinker is
kept lower on average throughout the compartment. However, the installation is more
complex. Counter-current are easier to install, exept for central drives.
 Discharge end water spray is a good compromise mechanically, but as it must spray
against the air flow, penetration is not deep and there’s a stronger tendency to plug the
discharge grates.

10.4.2Direction of Spray
 1st Chamber:

99
  2nd Chamber: For intermediate diaphragm spray, need to spray into the expanded
charge for maximum effect, i.e. the side opposite the electrical ear. See mistake in
Dotternhausen.
o Care must be taken because water also fluidises the clinker.
o Also it can prehydrate the cement  loss of strength.

10.4.3Water Injection Troubleshooting

 To troubleshoot atomization while running, measure exit gas temperature and compare
to mill discharge material temperature.
 If exit gas temperature is high vs. material temperature, then spray is likely going into
the load. This is OK if the cement LOI is also OK. If this is high then the spray is not
vaporizing but hydrating the cement.
 If the exit gas temperature is low vs. the material temperature, the water may be over-
atomized. As long as the discharge material temperature is under control this is OK.
However check also the discharge grates the next you’re in the mill. Over atomization
tends plug the grates
 Check efficiency of water spray using an infra-red gun on the mill shell:

Fig.1: Illustration of Water Spray Effects

90

80
Mill Shell Temp, % Range

70

60

50
DE Water Spray
Partiton Water Spray
40
Compartment 1 Compartment 2
30
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
% Distance from Mill Feed End

10.4.4Control of water spray

 Clinker temperature at the mill outlet (for 2nd chamber)

 Or Air temperature at the mill outlet (for 2nd chamber)
 Clinker feed temperature (for 1st chamber)
 Clinker temperature at the diaphragm (for 1st chamber)

Need a water flowmeter, controller + valve for each line and for the water tank level.

10.4.5Effect of water injection on cement properties

The effect of water vapour on cement properties depends on the cement reactivity and the
fineness. For low aluminates (7-8%) and alkalis (Na2O equivalent 0.6%) and a blaine
<4000cm²/g, there is little effect.

100
For cements with a high aluminate content (>10%) and high alkali (K2O > 1%) and a high
fineness, the cement can absorb up to 1.5% water leading to a reduction in strength at 2,7,28
days, and a shorter setting time, especially when alkali/SO3 ratio is > 1.

Chat with Walter:

Lafarge document – effect on hydration:

The obvious method to control the mill temperature and thus gypsum dehydration is through
the use of water spray. This is not without risk:

"... changes in stiffening and setting behaviors occur if ... the water introduced into the
mill [from wet additives, the water spray or from the gypsum itself] ... reacts with the
C3A of the clinker and thus reduces its reactivity. Preliminary hydration of C 3S may
moreover adversely affect strength development." [Ellerbrock]

Ellerbrock goes on the say that:

"The main conclusion to emerge ... is that the water vapour in the mill can appreciably affect
the reactivity of C3A. ... For reasons of cement quality the water vapour dew-point
temperature in the mill air must not exceed about 70 °C."

10.5 Cement Coolers

10.5.1Cooler Dimensioning

101
10.5.2Cooler Design

 Circular tube, water cascades down outside of a cylinder, cement is carried upwards by an
archimedes screw conveyor which occupies the entire area of the cylinder.
 Up to 200 t/h cement
 Cooling from 120°C to 60°C.
 Consumes 1 kWh/t cement

102
 Counter current, cement moving upwards
 1.25 kJ/m°Ch

10.6 Gypsum

10.6.1importance of gypsum

Gypsum has an impact on:

 setting time
 flowability in silo
 strength (increases short, medium, long-term strengths up to an optimum)
 volume stability (shrinkage reduction up to an optimum, too much  expansion)
 grinding energy kWh/t (gypsum is easier to grind than clinker  concentration in fine
fraction <20m). 1% gypsum = 70 points of blaine (approx. 1.4 kWh/t). Note natural
anhydrite is harder to grind than gypsum, hence care when using it to replace gypsum.

10.6.2Gypsum hydrolyis

“Plaster of Paris” = Hemihydrate.

The gypsum or hemihydrate reacts with C3A to form ettringite which surrounds the C3A.
This protection delays the hydrolysis of the C3A and hence the quick setting of the cement.

The ettringite eventually breaks down under crystallisation pressure exposing C3A surface
and allowing the C3A to react with the remaining sulphate. When all the SO3 is used up, only
then does complete hydration of C3A occur with consumption of the ettringite. Ca-Al-SO4
hydrates form which set slower than Ca Aluminates.

Dehydration of Gypsum
Gypsum  Hemihydrate  Anhydrate III, occurs in the mill.
Dehydration function of temperature, time of exposure and humidity (reduce humidity
reduces dehydration temperature).

Cement leaves mill partially dehydrated as hemihydrate. Further dehydration occurs in

silo if temperature stays above 90 degrees for a prolonged period. This is not desirable since
the water can condense, causing blocks / lumps in the silos.

Gypsum is easier to grind than KK, therefore concentrates in fine fraction. Natural
ANHYDRITE II is harder to grind.

10.6.3False set / flash set

Without gypsum, C3A will set in about 10 minutes.

103
False set is due to the presence of gypsum either in the dry cement or after water is added. In
the dry cement, too much gypsum can occur with:
 too little temperature in the mill (poor initial conversion to hemihydrate), or
 too much cooling in the cement coolers (hemihydrate converted back to gypsum)

Gypsum can also form during hydration if too much hemihydrate is present (too hot
temperature in the mill) which then reacts with the mortar water and reforms gypsum.

Yves Zimmermann: Generally it is the latter because the hemihydrate has dissolved in
the water and then recrystallises. When there is too much gypsum in dry cement, the
gypsum has trouble dissolving and therefore there is less chance of the needles forming.

Flash set means insufficient soluble hemihydrate available to react with the C3A. This
happens with:
o If too high mill sweep and too cool  insuffcient time to grind gypsum and insufficient
time/temperature to dehydrate gypsum to hemihydrate  flash set  excessive water
demand.
o too low temperature in the cement cooler  recrystallisation of gypsum
 If the cement temperature is too hot  further dehydration of hemihyrate to anhydrite
which is not soluble and doesn’t cover the C3A particles during hydration  flash set.

Idea is to have the right temperature in the mill so that gypsum dehydrates to the correct % of
hemihydrate, then to “freeze” this amount of hemihydrate by having the correct temperature
in the silo.

Silo temp too high  more complete dehydration of gypsum in the silo  water vapour
condenses on silo walls  hydration of cement (lump formation)  further heat of hydration
 further dehydration of gypsum further liberation of water vapour etc.

MAXIMUM MILL EXIT TEMPERATURE 110°C (limits gypsum dehydration)

MAXIMUM SILO TEMPERATURE 80°C (further deydration possible)

ILLUSTRATION OF SILO BUILD-UPS CAUSED

BY GYPSUM DEHYDRATION DURING STORAGE

RESIDUAL GYPSUM W ILL CONTINUE TO

LOSE WATER IN THE CEMENT SILO AT
TEMPERATURES ABOVE ~70 DEG C.
THE MOISTURE CONDENSES IN THE COOLER
PARTS OF THE SILO CAUSING BUILD-UPS ON THE
WALLS AND ROOF AND CEMENT FLOW
PROBLEMS

104
10.6.4Gypsum solubility

 Gypsum (2.4 g/l, 20% @ 20°C)

 Hemihydrate formed during grinding (6 g/l, 95% @ 20°C)
 Soluble Anhydrite III formed during grinding (6 g/l, 95% @ 20°C) - formed at T°C >
120°C
 Natural Anhydrite II (2.4 g/l, 20% @ 20°C)
 Anhydrite I – found in clinker but not in cement.

The greater the % the hemihydrate in the cement, the greater the 1-day strength (?? Possibly –
other research shows the opposite). Anhydrite increases strength.
Total SO3 is important because it boosts strengths up to an optimum.

The amount of gypsum to be added depends on the clinker reactivity. Ususally want 40-60%
hemihydrate, but in some plants this may be 0% and in others 90%.

For an optimum level of gypsum for best volume stability and strength, for a blaine of 3000
cm²/g is dependent on the reactivity of the clinker (concentration C3A and alkalis):

Required SO3 = 1.5% + 0.22 * C3A

10.6.5The use of anhydrite

 Partial or total anhydrite substitution for gypsum is OK for low reactivity cements
 Very difficult to control gypsum / anhydrite blends.
 Very difficult to understand and solve problems related to setting times for these
blends.
 The % dehydration of gypsum is estimated by a differential scanning calorimeter DSC

The balance of different gypsum forms is affected during start-up. Temperature is at mill
exit?

105
 113°C 2
108°C 1,8
105°C
Hemihydrate 1,6
97°C
93°C 1,4
89°C
87°C 1,2

SO3 (%)
78°C 1
0,8
0,6
Gypsum
0,4
1 2 3 0,2
0
00:00 00:30 01:00 01:30 02:00 02:30 03:00 03:30 04:00 04:30 05:00

Time in hours

10.6.6Gypsum replacements

 Anhydrite for low reactivity cements and slag cements is OK

 Limestone (partial substitution use – reaction with C3A is very similar to the gypsum).
 Synthetic gypsum also used however problems may occur with contaminants found in the
synthetic gypsum (phosphate, fluorine, titanium? coming from the processes that produce
synthetic gypsum).

10.6.7Phosphogypsum

106