Acknowledgement

We express our sincere gratitude to all those who have contributed to the successful
completion of this project. We would like to extend our deepest appreciation to our
instructors Mr. milkiyas D. and Mr. Bulcha J. for their guidance, expertise, and support
throughout the duration of this project endeavor. And also we would like to thank the
members of our project team for their dedication and collaborative spirit, as well as for
their diligent efforts in driving this project forward.

i
Table of Contents
Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................... i

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... iv

List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... v

Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... vi

Abstract ............................................................................................................................. vii

CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................. 1

1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Problem of Statement ................................................................................................ 2

1.3 Objectives ................................................................................................................. 3

1.3.1 General objective ............................................................................................... 3

1.3.2 Specific objectives ............................................................................................. 3

1.4 Significant of the study ............................................................................................. 4

1.5 Scope of study ........................................................................................................... 4

CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................ 6

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................... 6

2.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 6

2.2 Existing Briquetting Technologies ........................................................................... 7

2.3 Previous Work on Proximate and Physical Properties of Briquettes ........................ 8

CHAPTER THREE .......................................................................................................... 11

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS .................................................................................. 11

3.1 Material ................................................................................................................... 11

3.2 Design considerations for briquetting machine ...................................................... 12

3.3 Briquetting Machine Design ................................................................................... 13

ii
CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................. 24

4. BRIQUETTING PROCESS FOR SOLID BIOFUEL PRODUCTION ....................... 24

4.1. Main process for briquetting .................................................................................. 24

4.2 Briquetting Process Quality Parameters ................................................................. 30

4.2.1 Compression Condition ................................................................................... 31

4.2.2. Khat biomass Properties affect briquetting ..................................................... 32

4.4. Material and Energy Balance ................................................................................. 35

4.5. Economic Data Analysis and Calculations ............................................................ 37

4.5.1. Assumptions of the Study ............................................................................... 37

4.5.2. Economic Feasibility Analysis ....................................................................... 38

4.5.3. Profitability Analysis of Briquette and Charcoal Production ......................... 41

4.6. Site consideration ................................................................................................... 44

4.7. HAZOP Analysis ................................................................................................... 44

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 46

Reference .......................................................................................................................... 47

iii
List of Tables

Table 1 Design considerations and assumptions .............................................................. 12

Table 2 Component part of the WH briquette machine and functions ............................. 13
Table 3 Machine Part Dimension Values based on Derived Equations ........................... 21
Table 4. The mass balance analysis with its efficiency .................................................... 37
Table 5 Economic indicators for the feasibility analysis .................................................. 38
Table 6 Total Cost of Charcoal Production for press screw at utilization capacity of
90Kg/day ........................................................................................................................... 40
Table 7 Cost of Producing a Unit of Briquette and Charcoal and Annual Revenue ........ 41
Table 8 NPV of Briquette Production using screw press ................................................. 42
Table 9 NPV of Charcoal Production using screw press of Capacity, 90kg/day ............. 43
Table 10 Analyzing Economic Indicators of Feasibility of Briquetting and Charcoaling
Projects. ............................................................................................................................. 43

iv
List of Figures

Figure 1Briquetting production process............................................................................ 24

Figure 2 process flow sheet of briquetting production ..................................................... 30

v
Abbreviations

CO2 Carbon dioxide

CO Carbon mono oxide
CFC Chloro floro carbon
Kg/h kilogram per hour
GHG Greenhouse gas
WH Water hyacinth
MC Moisture content
VMC Volatile matter content
AC Ash content
FCC Fixed carbon content
PMC Percentage moisture content
CV Colorific value
NPV Net present value
IRR Internal Rate of Return
PBP Payback period

vi
Abstract

Globally, fossil fuels are the major source for production of energy. It takes millions of
years for the formation of fossil fuels. So, it is said that the production is low in regard to
the demand. Such fuels generate higher amount of air pollution which leads to
environmental issues like global warming. Therefore, it is now necessary to switch over to
the alternate energy sources. After coal and oil, biomass is the third largest primary energy
resource in the world. The agricultural residues are increasing day by day due to the higher
agricultural production. But, those residues are usually burnt directly which results into air
pollution. So, for efficient use of biomass wastes, biomass briquettes can be formed.
Biomass Briquetting is the densification of loose biomass available such as agricultural
residues, municipal waste and paper waste, etc. Biomass wastes such as sawdust, coir pitch,
coffee husk, rice husk, forest leaves, coconut shells, etc. can be used for production of
biomass briquettes. This project focuses on design and fabrication of automated biomass
briquetting machine. The main aim to manufacture such a machine is to help waste
management and also to use such waste in an efficient way. This machine is designed in a
way that it remains highly efficient and low cost.

vii
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Energy is a vital input for development and an essential ingredient for the survival of
humankind. Among the major energy issues today are that of energy security,
environmental implication of fossil fuel consumption and deforestation. Among the clean
energy source, the use of biomass resource can be one alternative energy resource, since
energy from biomass waste is a proven renewable energy technology that recovers energy
from waste. However, the use of biomass energy sources in most developing countries is
mostly traditional that lead to indoor air pollution as a result causes health and
environmental problems.(Alape Ariza et al., 2023)
In addition dependence on biomass energy involves a trade-off in agricultural productivity,
the crop residues and animal wastes being diverted from farms, where they supplement soil
nutrition, to provide energy needs. Furthermore, the growing demand for traditional use of
biomass energy and lack of access to modern energy services is expected to impose
pressure on the limited biomass and forest stock of the country. Hence there is a need for
the adoption and promotion of alternative modern biomass conversion technologies that
can result in more efficient and eco-friendly energy supply. Worldwide, both technologies
are being used for briquetting of sawdust and locally available agro-residues. Although the
importance of biomass briquettes as substitute fuel for wood, coal and lignite is well
recognized, the numerous failures of briquetting machines in almost all developing
countries have inhibited their extensive exploitation.
Briquetting technology is yet to get a strong foothold in many developing countries because
of the technical constraints involved and the lack of knowledge to adapt the technology to
suit local conditions. Overcoming the many operational problems associated with this
technology and ensuring the quality of the raw material used are crucial factors in
determining its commercial success. In addition to this commercial aspect, the importance

1
of this technology lies in conserving wood, a commodity extensively used in developing
countries and leading to the widespread destruction of forests. Utilization of municipal
waste such as “chat wastes” as a substitute renewable alternative energy-carrier to reduce
deforestation, environmental pollution and flooding due to clogging of ditches and
drainage by the wastes is very advantageous from economic as well as from ecological
point of view. The basic ecological reason for stopping disposal of chat wastes on ditches
and drainage, and deposition of the combustible waste in dumps is the fact that led to
flooding during raining season and biological decomposition process forms methane gas,
which is harmful for the environment.
Fossil fuels served as the main energy source for the global industrial sector for a long
time. Alternative fuels have drawn a lot of interest for the production of industrial power
due to factors such as growing energy costs, the depletion of fossil fuels, and environmental
concerns. Low production costs, high product quality, minimal environmental impact on
society, and significant waste management challenges can all be achieved with the use of
renewable and alternative fuels. Among the renewable and alternative fuels, agricultural
residues are receiving a lot of attention these days due to their abundance and capacity to
produce cheap, clean energy that lessens the damage fossil fuels have on the environment.
However, agricultural leftover biomass materials' low bulk density, high moisture content,
and low energy density are typical limitations for energy applications that need high carbon
source energy. This results in low combustion efficiency during the production of energy
as well as unsuitability for handling and transportation.

1.2 Problem of Statement

Khat is a widely cultivated crop in certain regions, and its cultivation generates substantial
waste biomass. i) The improper disposal of khat waste results in environmental challenges
and missed opportunities for resource utilization. The extraction of solid biofuel from khat
waste via briquetting presents a promising solution; however, existing technologies and
practices harbor limitations that hinder its efficient and sustainable conversion. The current
methods of khat waste management lead to underutilization of the biomass's potential for
solid biofuel production, thereby contributing to environmental pollution and resource

2
wastage. ii) Existing briquetting machines and processes tailored to khat waste fail to
maximize the quality, output, and efficiency of solid biofuel production, thus impeding its
wider adoption and economic viability. iii) Improper disposal of khat waste results in
environmental pollution, contributing to ecological and public health concerns, creating an
urgent need for sustainable waste management solutions. iv) There exists an opportunity
to design and develop an advanced briquetting machine tailored specifically for processing
khat waste, aimed at maximizing solid biofuel extraction efficiency and yield. v) Creating
an effective briquetting system for khat waste presents an opportunity to improve resource
utilization, mitigate environmental pollution, and contribute to sustainable energy
production. By resolving technological shortcomings and environmental concerns, the
project envisions enhancing the economic viability of solid biofuel production from khat
waste, potentially contributing to local and regional economic development.

1.3 Objectives

1.3.1 General objective

 Developing and Designing Improved Khat Waste Briquetting Machine for Solid
Biofuel Production.

1.3.2 Specific objectives

 Optimizing the machine's performance, capacity, and energy efficiency specifically
for processing khat waste biomass.
 Develop an advanced material handling system to efficiently prepare and feed khat
waste into the briquetting machine.
 Assess the environmental impact of the briquetting process and aim to optimize it
for reduced waste, emissions, and overall ecological footprint.
 Evaluate the economic feasibility of the developed briquetting machine and its
integration into the market for solid biofuel production

3
1.4 Significant of the study

In the near future the world and our country will face energy crisis due to the depletion of

fossil fuel such as coal, petroleum and natural gas and emphasis should be given to solve

this problem. And it is better to substitute these non-renewable energy source with

renewable sources such as biomass resources. In addition to this combustion of these fossil

fuels emits CO2, CO, CFC and other pollutants which are harmful to the environment.

Using wood charcoal has consequences on health and pollution because of smoking. In

addition, cutting wood trees for the purpose of charcoal production and use it as fuel cause

deforestation and using wood biomass as energy source may cause many problems such as

increase in CO2 emission and global warming. So using non woody biomass in the form of

charcoal briquette as energy fuel will solve these environmental related problems and it is

a good alternative energy resource. Therefore, the importance of this study are decreasing

the alarming rate of deforestation for the purpose of firewood and production of charcoal

in addition to that improve the absence of affordable convenient modern alternative energy

sources by improving the efficiency and also improve the problem of land degradation,

indoor air pollution, employments and serious damage to the environment .

1.5 Scope of study

The scope of our project is ;- i) Focusing on the design and development of an efficient,

specialized briquetting machine tailored to the unique properties and handling

requirements of khat waste, ii) Evaluating the environmental impact of khat waste

briquetting and the potential for sustainable energy production, including carbon neutrality

assessments and waste reduction strategies, iii) conducting comprehensive performance

4
tests to validate the efficiency, output quality, and energy yield of the briquetting machine

and the solid biofuel it produces, iv) Detailed analysis of khat waste biomass, including

physical and chemical properties, moisture content, particle size distribution, and energy

content, v) Assessing the economic viability and market potential of the developed

technology, covering production costs, market demand, and the potential economic impact

of solid biofuel production from khat waste.

5
 CHAPTER TWO

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

Different kinds of briquetting machines have been developed in time past for compacting
bio chars into briquette form. The shapes, sizes, and operation mode of the developed
systems vary from one form to another. Ejiroghene developed a low cost biomass billet
machine for compressing waste into briquette form. The developed briquette was intended
to work on the mechanical compression principle. The machine is operated manually by a
hydraulic system to generate pressure required for the compression. Agidi et al. developed
a hydraulically powered briquette machine and tested its efficacy with agricultural waste.
The designed machine was found to be capable of converting feedstocks or biomass
resources such as khat, saw dust, rice husk, and sugar cane waste into useable briquettes
for local and commercial use. Teerapot et al designed and constructed a lightweight
briquetting machine (compact screw-press). The designed machine can conduct multiple
operations, such as crushing waste, mixing a formulation of compressed waste, water, and
binder, and binding the combination into briquettes. The developed machine's unique
feature is its capacity to minimize space for in-process operation, remove material
handling, and require less monitoring by employees, while also improving machine
efficiency. With the technology in place, cost and production time are optimized with
improved productivity. Joushua investigated a biomass briquetting machine (hydraulic
piston press) suitable for residential and small-scale business operations. According to their
findings, improving the existing local briquette machine, which was integrated using an
automated system, enables continuous manufacturing of briquettes from feedstock’s. All
of the machine's constituent parts were subjected to stress simulations as well as additional
machine design simulations such as variable loading, factor of safety, and strain
simulations. The next stage was to put the machine's various parts together.(Okwu et al.,
2022)

6
2.2 Existing Briquetting Technologies

Mechanical Piston Press

The mechanical piston press consists of a ram (piston) and a die and it is driven by an
electric motor. Biomass feedstock is punched into a die by a reciprocating ram with a very
high compaction pressure to obtain a briquette. According to Tumuluru et al., this machine
develops a compression force of approximately 196.1 MPa and is typically used for large-
scale production, ranging 200–2500 kg/h. The achieved briquette densities are generally in
the range between 1000 and 1200 kg/m3. The capacity of a mechanical piston press is
defined by the volume of material that can be fed in front of the piston before each stroke
and the number of strokes per unit of time. Capacity by weight is then dependent on the
density of the material before compression. The moisture limit of feedstock in most cases
is 15%; nonetheless, the ideal operating region is 8%–12%. A lower limit of 5% is
acceptable as anything less will cause friction and thus increase energy demand. It requires
a higher level of maintenance and the briquettes produced are of lower quality. (Brunerová
et al., 2018)
Hydraulic Piston Press
The hydraulic piston press operates like the mechanical piston press. However, the energy
to the piston is exerted by a cylinder operated by a hydraulic system. Eriksson and Prior
noted that the briquetting pressures with hydraulic presses are considerably low and this is
because of limitations in pressure in the hydraulic system, which is normally limited to 30
MPa. The piston head can exert a higher pressure when it is of a smaller diameter than the
hydraulic cylinder, but the gearing up of pressure in commercial applications is modest.
The typical production capacities of these machines are in the range of 50–400 kg/h and
can tolerate higher moisture contents than the usually accepted 15% for mechanical piston
presses. It usually produces briquettes with a bulk density lower than 1000 kg/m3 because
pressure is limited.
Roller Press
Roller presses are considered the global standard technology to produce pillow-shaped
briquettes using diverse types of biomass. It consists of dual cylindrical rollers of the same
diameter, rotating horizontally in opposite directions on parallel axes. The two rollers are

7
arranged in such a way that a small gap exists between them and the distance from each
other depends on factors such as the biomass type, the particle size, the moisture content,
and the addition of binders. During operation, the raw material is fed into the press and
forced through the gap between the rollers on one side. It is then pressed into a die forming
the densified product, which comes out on the opposite side. The smooth production of
briquettes using this technology requires high-quality rollers with smooth surfaces on
which the briquettes are shaped. The type of roller or die used determines the shape of the
densified biomass and typical bulk densities range from 450 to 550 kg/m3.
Manual Press
Different types of manual presses exist for the densification of biomass materials. Some
come in the form of piston or screw presses but are operated with bare hands and hardly
uses electricity.
According to Maninder et al., manual presses are designed for the purpose of briquette
making or adapted from existing implements used for other purposes. Manual clay brick
making press is a good example with which briquettes can be made from both carbonized
and non-carbonized biomass feedstock. The press is made from both metal and wood with
the latter being the most common. These machines operate with very minimal pressure and
binder addition to feedstock is required. Manual presses are characterized by low capital
costs, low operating costs, and low levels of skill required to operate the technology.
However, they have a low production capacity of about 5 kg/h or 50 kg in a 10-hour
day.(Kshirsagar et al., 2018)

2.3 Previous Work on Proximate and Physical Properties of

Briquettes

According to Romallosa and Hornada, (2014) the growth of using biomass resource and
urban wastes for briquette production is due to the increase in fuel prices. They also
indicated that changing them into briquette create a chance to organize wastes and clean
the environment from unwanted wastes, prevent the forest from deforestation, and decrease
greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and it gives alternative energy for poor urban and rural
community. This study also shows that waste materials previous which have low density

8
to be changed in to briquette is compacted to produce higher bulk density, lower moisture
content and the same shape and size making these materials simple package and store, low
cost to transport, comfortable to use, and the combustion characteristics are better than the
original waste material. The major steps for briquette production need four procedures,
namely: preparation of materials used, mixing of the prepared materials by hand
compaction of the materials using the selected molder, and finally drying the briquette to
produce the end product. They also concluded that the most viable mixture to produce
briquette is that paper with sawdust, the combination of paper, carbonized rice husk and
sawdust and individually paper. The reason for their selections is such as production
requirement and high production rate, better-produced fuel quality, rapid operating
performance in terms of boiling water and cooking rice and the potential for income
generation. Other related study shows that the production of briquette from sesame stalk
can have the potential to solve health problem and energy poverty at the same time it can
solve 22 deforestation. Their laboratory analyses showed that the calorific value produced
from sesame stack with 15% optimal possible clay binding have 4647.75 Cal/gm. and
minimum ash content, this value decrease with increasing the ratio of binding (clay)
material and this value is satisfactory energy content for cooking. In addition to that the
paper also shows that the main factors for the quality of briquette are ignition time, % of
volatile matter, % of sulfur availability, % of fixed carbon, and % of moisture content of
sesame stalk briquettes, they also compared with that time on-use biomass briquettes and
they showed that for cooking and heating purpose sesame stalk briquettes is the best from
the others (Gebresas et al., 2015). According to Windi et al. (2015), they used the method
that sample household wastes are collected, the organic wastes are settled for different days
in order to analyze composting then after that they pressed to reject the fluid wastes and
analyze the water content and heating value and their result shows that within one day the
heating value in the range of 1956.832 to 3257.24 Cal/gm. and the water content at the
starting ranging 53-65% an average 1.631% moisture content. In the end product
(briquettes) the calorific value increased. They also indicated that because of municipal
solid waste have different material, the composition of heterogeneous mixture and size,
there are a lot of briquettes process such as household waste collection, drying, binder
preparation and mixing, Briquette production, Drying and packing and finally analyzing.

9
And lastly they concluded that to get well quality briquette, it is better to put the wet
briquette in windy place in order to minimize energy that is necessary for drying, the
calorific value of the household waste composition must be checked whether the material
has higher caloric 23 value (such as paper, sawdust etc.) or not and the household waste
should be sliced before mixing with binding to get well briquette.(Khat, n.d.)

10
 CHAPTER THREE

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Material

The design of a screw press extruder machine necessitates working calculations and
precision in order to produce high-quality briquettes with high density and clean
combustion. This design is required for continuous briquette production from available
waste fed into the hopper system in order to produce efficient burning fuel. Continuous
feeding force is necessary to apply pressure to the material, resulting in improved
compaction for high-quality briquettes. The significant component part of the briquetting
machine includes the frame, hopper, barrel housing, grinding chamber, screw shaft, die,
belt and pulley. Briquette densities from these machines usually range between 1000 to
1400 kg/m3.
Material selection is critical for the construction and automation of WH (water hyacinth)
briquetting machines. It is critical to consider the cost of materials, the availability of
component parts in the local market, the type of force acting on the machine members, and
the environmental conditions under which the machine will operate, the electric motor's
power which is used for driving the motor shaft to improve dry WH grinding, and the
power required to compress WH. The major material used for the briquetting machine
construction is mild steel plate with thickness of 2mm, minimum yield stress of 250 Mpa,
and ultimate tensile strength of 440 Mpa. The galvanized steel alloy was used to fabricate
the machine screw extruder and hopper. Other commercially available components
included an electric gear motor, a belt transmission setup, bearing units, a grinder shaft and
blade, a pillow bearing, and a switch box. To help regulate the system temperature and
increase the output of the billets, a heating system consisting of a band heater,
thermocouple, and temperature controller was installed. The gear motor was also installed
on the frame, and the chain drive member connected it to the briquetting screw shaft.

11
3.2 Design considerations for briquetting machine

The design considerations are based on forces required to drive the shaft, materials and
material selection, shaft diameter, throughput capacity, dynamic load on bearing, power of
the electric motor required to turn the shaft for effective grinding using the disc plate,
diameter of the screw shaft, the dynamic load on the bearing transmitted by the screw shaft,
power of the electric motor required to compact pulverized feedstock as well as extrude
the resultant briquette from the die. Other considerations include the size of the machine,
design acceptability based on socio-cultural practices, adaptability of design and fitness for
purpose.

The design of the briquetting press involved the calculation of the size of the hopper, helix
geometry, size of the belt and the power requirement for motor selection. Based on
literature findings and preliminary investigations, the information in Table 1 was assumed
in the design.
Table 1 Design considerations and assumptions

S/N Consideration and assumptions Value Unit

1 Capacity of the briquetting machine 200 Kg/hr
2 Length of the hopper 347 mm
3 Height of the hopper 226 mm
4 Width of the hopper 113 mm
5 Length of the briquette 100 mm

6 Slip should not occur at the walls

7 Raw biomass should be
incompressible
8 Gravity forces should be negligible

12
 9 Inertial forces should also be
negligible

3.3 Briquetting Machine Design

Table 2 shows the major components and functions of the WH briquetting machine. As
previously said, the key components are six and each performs a particular job in fulfilling
the goal and functioning of the unique hopper briquette machine.
Table 2 Component part of the WH briquette machine and functions

S/N Component Function

1 Base frame
2 Feed Hopper
3 Barrel
4 Thrust Bearing
5 Die
Designed to support briquetting barrel and screw
assembly of the system
This is a channel for easy passage of feedstock into
the screw of the system
The barrel was developed in sections and clamped
The bearing absorbs a momentous back thrust which
compensate for the imparted force directed to the
briquette material as it is pulled forward along the
length of the screw. The system is designed such that
the screw is supported by bearing at the driven end
The extruder has series of shaped holes which allow
the briquetting materials to emerge from the machine
for easy formation of briquettes. The die holes
enable easy formation of shapes of briquettes.

13
 6 Speed reduction gear With the reduction gear, input speed can be reduced
to meet the requirement of slower output speed,
while maintaining or increasing the output torque.
The pulley drive helps to drive the gear motor of the
machine. The pulley is mounted on the motor and the
connecting rod shaft so that the power transmission
can obtain the desired speed

To develop the dual briquette fuel and billet improved version of briquetting machine
(DBFBIVBM) standard principles were adopted elsewhere. Detailed information on
component parts and calculations are presented here.
Briquetting Machine Frame
The DBFBIVBM frame was built to house the grinder shaft, bearings, grinder blade, barrel,
and other machine components. Mild steel was used in the frame's construction (MS). This
is due to the strength of MS, but the tolerance and increased straightness of MS are also
advantages. The frame is rectangular in shape, and the design is specified by the width (W)
and length (L) of the frame. Computation of the area (A) of the frame, require a typical
equation as presented in Eq. (1)
𝐴 = 𝐿𝑊 (1)
Hopper design
The briquette machine's hopper was made of 3 mm thick mild steel. The truncated shape
of a frustum was used to create the design. For ease of computation, the volume of the
truncated frustum can be expressed as V, where V1 is the volume of the large frustum and
V2 is the volume of the smaller frustum. The volumes of the truncated frustum, large
frustum, and smaller frustum were calculated using Eq. 2 (a), (b), and (c).
𝑉 = 𝑉1 − 𝑉2 (2𝑎)
1
𝑉1 = 𝑎2 𝐻 (2𝑏)
2
1
𝑉2 = 𝑏 2 𝑥 (2𝑐)
2

14
From the above equations, the notations x, a, b, H are 0.1 m, 0.3 m, 0.75 m and 0.4 m
correspondingly.

Grinding chamber
The grinding section, which is an attachment for crushing the carbonized feedstock into
smaller forms, is also an important feature of the briquette machine. The grinding chamber
for the briquette produced is made of mild steel. The mathematical expression for
computing the chamber is as expressed in Eq. (3)
𝑑12
𝑉𝑐 = 𝜋 𝐿 (3)
4 2
From the presented equation 3, d1, Vc, and l2 represent internal diameter of the grinding
chamber, which is 0.1 m, VC the volume of chamber in m3, and the length of the grinding
chamber, which is 0.125 m, respectively.

Housing of Barrel
The barrel housing is made up of the screw shaft (SS), die, and screw shaft housing. The
screw shaft housing (SSH) functions as the screw's box as well as an enclosure for the
crushed stainless steel feedstock. The SS volume was computed using the system of Eq.
(4). The screw shaft (SS), die and the housing for the screw shaft, make up the complete
barrel housing. The case for the screw is the screw shaft housing (SSH), while the SSH
serves as the box for the screw and an enclosure to SS feedstock being crushed. The SS
volume was calculated as expressed in system of Eq. (4)
𝑑32
𝑉𝑆𝑆 = 𝜋 𝐿 (4)
4 5
The presented equation shows d3 and l5 which represent the length of screw shaft housing

of 0.8 m, the diameter of screw shaft housing is 0.1 m, respectively.

Volume of die

The cylinder's architecture was regarded to precisely achieve the defined volume, and the
die volume computation for the DBFBIVBM, was performed using Eq. (5). The die volume

15
computation for the DBFBIVBM, Vd was performed using the presented Eq. (5). The
architecture of the cylinder was considered to achieve the defined volume perfectly.
1 2
𝑉𝑑 = 𝜋𝑑 𝑙 (5)
4

From the presented equation, the length of cylinder, L is 0.30m, and the diameter of
cylinder, “d” is 0.050 m.
Volume of Screw Shaft (SS)
The SS is calculated using Eq. (6), taking the volume of the cylinder into consideration.
1
𝑉𝐶 = 𝜋𝑑𝑠2 𝑙8 (6)
4
As shown in Eq.6, denotes the screw shaft's length, which is 0.552 m, and represents the
screw shaft's diameter, which is 0.06 m.
Diameter of the grinder shaft pulley (GSP) and screw shaft (SS)
The GSP and SS are essential system components and represent the SS and GSP diameters,
which are calculated using Eqs. (7) and (8). The GSP and SS are essential components of
the system. The diameter of the SS is represented D2, and the diameter of the GSP is
represented as D3. These are computed and presented as systems of Equations (7) and (8),
respectively.
𝑁1 𝐷1
𝐷2 = (7)
𝑁2
𝑁2 𝐷2
𝐷3 = (8)
𝑁3
Considering the equation presented, N1 is 2830 rpm, the value of D1 in Eq. 7 is 0.066 m,
and N2 is the anticipated speed of SS, equivalent to 566 rpm. N2 is 566 rpm, the value of
D2 is 0.033 m, and the grinding shaft predicted speed, N3 0.074 m.
Length of Belt for Electric Screw Shaft (LBESS)
The LBESS is computed using Eq. (9).
𝜋(𝐷 + 𝑑) (𝐷 − 𝑑)2
𝐿 = 2𝐶 + + (9)
2 4𝐶
The notation L signifies the length of belt, and C represents the centre distance of pulleys
which is equivalent to 0.435 m and D represents the large pulley diameter which is

16
equivalent to 0.33 m, while d represents the small pulley diameter which is also equivalent
to 0.066 m.
The Length of belt for SS
The length of belt for the SS is computed with Eq. (10).
𝜋(𝐷 + 𝑑) (𝐷 − 𝑑)2
𝐿 = 2𝐶 + + (10)
2 4𝐶
The notation C equals 0.435 m; D is 0.33 m, while d is 0.074 m.
Speed of Belt Computation
The speed of the belt is estimated using Eq. (11).
𝑑1 𝑁1
𝑉=𝜋 (11)
60

Tight tension of belt Computation

The tight belt tension is computed with the aid of Eq. (12).
𝑇𝑚 = 𝜎 × 𝑏 × 𝑡 (12)
As shown in Eq. (12) 𝜎, b, and t are the assumed maximum stress (4 MPa), belt (0.009 m),
and belt thickness (0.008 m), respectively.
Tension of Slack for SS-electric motor belt
The tension of the SS-electric motor belt was computed as per Eq. (13).
𝑇1
2.3 log ( ) = 𝜇𝜃 (13 )
𝑇2
As presented in Eq. (13), μ, θ and T1 are 0.27, 2.53 rads and 288 N, respectively.
Tension of Slack for SS-grinder Shaft Belt
The tension of slack of the SS-electric shaft belt was computed with Eq. (14).
𝑇1
2.3 log ( ) = 𝜇𝜃 (14 )
𝑇2
As presented in Eq. (14), μ, θ and T1 are 0.27, 2.38 rads and 288 N, respectively
Computation of Motor and Pulley Transmitted Torque
The torque transmitted by the motor and pulley was computed with Eq. (15)
𝑇𝑚 = (𝑇1 − 𝑇2 )𝑟1 (15)
As presented in Eq. (15), T1, T2 and r1 are the tension of tight side of the system (288 N),
tension at the slack side of the system (145.34 N), and radius of the system (0.033 m).

17
Computation of Torque as a result of Screw Shaft Pulley (SSP) transmission
Torque transmission by the SSP was used to determine motor pulley torque, as given in
Eq. (16). As presented in Eq. (16), the transmission of torque by the SSP can be
implemented to evaluate the motor pulley torque.
𝑇𝑚 = (𝑇1 − 𝑇2 )𝑟2 (16)
As presented in Eq. (16), T1, T2 and r1 are the tension of tight side (288 N), slack side
tension (148.35 N), and radius (0.161 m), respectively.
Computation of Torque by Considering the grinder and Pulley (G&P)
Eq. (17) was applied to calculate the torque transmitted by G&P. To calculate the torque
transmitted by G&P, such computation can be adopted using system of Eq. (17)
𝑇𝑚 = (𝑇1 − 𝑇2 )𝑟2 (17)
As presented in Eq. (17), T1, T2 and r2 are Tension of tight side (288 N), slack side tension
(151.35 N), and radius (0.161m).
Computation of Power Generated by Screw shaft (PGSS)
Eqs. (18a), (18b), and (18c) were used to determine the powers expended by the combined
grinder and shaft (PGSS)
𝑵𝒔 𝑻𝒔
𝑃𝑆 = 2𝝅 (𝟏𝟖𝒂)
𝟔𝟎
𝑵𝒈 𝑻𝒈
𝑃𝑆 = 2𝝅 (𝟏𝟖𝒃)
𝟔𝟎
𝑵𝒎 𝑻𝒎
𝑃𝑆 = 2𝝅 (𝟏𝟖𝒄)
𝟔𝟎

From the presented equation, the notation, Ns and Ts are approximately equal to 566 rpm
and 23.04 Nm; also, the notation Ng and Tg are 566 rpm and 23.04 Nm, then the notation
Nm and Tm are 2479 rpm and 5.06 Nm, correspondingly.
Twisting Moment (TM) of Shaft as a Result of Belt Tension
It is crucial to correctly specify the shaft's twisting moment. This is defined as the force
that causes the shaft to revolve about its axis. It is essential to remember that the twisting
moment of the shaft is the same as the torque transferred by the shaft pulley for practical

18
computation. As a result, the twisting moment caused by the screw, grinder, and motor
shafts may be calculated using the system of Eqs. (19a-19c). It is crucial to properly define
the twisting moment of the shaft. This is defined as the force which tends to rotate the shaft
about its axis. For practical computation of the twisting moment of the shaft, it is essential
to note that it’s the same with the transmitted torque by the shaft pulley.
TM of screw S shaft, 𝑀𝑡 = 23.04𝑁𝑚 (19𝑎)
TM of grinder S shaft, 𝑀𝑡 = 5.06𝑁𝑚 (19𝑏)
TM of M motor S shaft, 𝑀𝑡 = 4.71𝑁𝑚 (19𝑐)
From the presented equation, the notation, Ns and Ts are approximately equal to 566 rpm
and 23.04 Nm; also, the notation Ng and Tg are 566 rpm and 23.04 Nm, then the notation
Nm and Tm are 2479 rpm and 5.06 Nm, correspondingly.
Bending moment (BM) of grinder shaft (GS)
The forces that tend to bend the shaft during machine operation are represented by the BM
of the GS. When calculating the BM of the shaft, it is critical to define the parameters using
the notation T1, which is the tension on the fixed area of the belt and is equivalent to 288
N, T2, which is the tension on the loose part of the belt and is equivalent to 151.35Nm, and
L, which is the distance between the center line of the bearings and the pulley and is
equivalent to 0.12m. In addition, the bending moment of the grinder shaft was calculated
using Eq. (20). The BM of the GS are the forces that tend to bend the shaft during operation
of the machine. In calculating the BM of the shaft, it is crucial to define the parameters
using the notation T1, which is the Tension on the fixed area of the belt and equivalent to
288 N, then T2, represent the Tension on the loose part of the belt, equivalent to 151.35Nm,
L represent the distance which is between the center line of bearings and pulley, which
represent 0.12m.
𝑀𝑏 = (𝑇1 + 𝑇2 )𝐿 (20)
Bending moment of screw shaft (BMSS)
The BMSS is computed using Eq. (21). To calculate the BMSS, the system of equation
proposed in Eq. (21) is implemented. From the given equation, the notation T1 is equal to
288 N, T2 is equal to 148.35 Nm and L is equal to 0.15 m.
𝑀𝑏 = (𝑇1 + 𝑇2 )𝐿 (21)
Bending moment of motor and shaft (BMMS)

19
To calculate the BMMS, the system of equation proposed in Eq. (22) is implemented.
From the given equation, the notation T1 is equal to 288 N, while T2 is 145.34 Nm and
finally L is 0.1 m.
𝑀𝑏 = (𝑇1 + 𝑇2 )𝐿 (22)
Grinder shaft Diameter (GSD)
To calculate the GSD, it is essential to note that the shaft is usually subjected to combined
bending and twisting moments during operation. Eq. (23) was adopted to compute the
diameter of the shaft by applying the corresponding bending and twisting moment to the
shaft. The diameter of the shaft can be obtained by using the equivalent bending and
twisting moment to calculate the diameter of shaft. As presented in system of Eq. (23).

16√[(𝐾𝑏 𝑀𝑏 )2 (𝐾𝑡 𝑀𝑡 )2 ]
3
𝑑=√ (23)
𝜏𝜋
From Eq. (23), Kb, Kt , Mb , Mt , and τ are the joint shock and fatigue factor which are
applied to bending moment ( 1.5), collective shock and fatigue factor which are applied to
torsional moment (1.0), bending moment (5060 Nmm), twisting moment (52720 Nmm),
and shear stress (103.95 N/mm2 ). From the presented equation, Kb is the joint shock and
fatigue factor which are applied to bending moment and is equal to 1.5. Equally, Kt,
represent the collective shock and fatigue factor which are applied to torsional moment and
is equivalent to 1.0, also, Mb, represent the bending moment which equals 5060Nmm, Mt,
represent the twisting moment, with value of 52720Nmm, τ, is the Shear stress of 103.95
N/mm2.
Screw Shaft Diameter (SSD) and Motor Shaft Diameter (MSD)
The SSD and MSD are determined using the system of Eq. 23. For SSD, Kb, Kt, Mb, Mt
and τ are 1.5, 10, 6540 Nmm, 2340 Nmm, and 103.95 N/mm2 correspondingly. For MSD,
Kb, Kt, Mb, Mt and τ are 1.5, 10, 43330 Nmm, 4710 Nmm, and 103.95 N/mm2
correspondingly.
The efficiency of Machine
The efficiency of the developed machine is computed using the system of Eq. (24)
𝑃𝑇𝑆
∈= × 1𝑂𝑂 (24)
𝑃𝑇𝑀

20
As presented in Eq. (24),∈, PTS, PTM are the efficiency, power transmitted by the shaft and
power transmitted by the motor, respectively.

Table 3 Machine Part Dimension Values based on Derived Equations

S/N Machine Part Dimension for Values Units
Integrated Hopper Briquetting
Machine

1 Area of the machine frame 0.36 m2

2 Volume of Designed Hopper

(i)volume of truncated frustum 0.012 m2
(ii)volume of large frustum 0.00001075 m2
(iii) volume of small frustum 0.0118 m2

3 Grinding Chamber Volume 0.000982 m3

4 0.00507 m3
Barrel Housing Volume

5 Die volume 0.000549 m3

6 Screw shaft volume 0.00156 m3

7 Screw shaft diameter 0.033 m
8 Grinder shaft pulley diameter 0.074 m
9 Length of belt for electric screw 1.33 m
shaft
10 Length of belt for screw shaft 1.38 m
grinder shaft pulley

21
11 Belt speed 9.78 m/s
12 Belt tight tension 288 N
13 Screw shaft-electric motor belt 145.34 N
slack tension
14 Screw shaft-grinder Shaft belt 151.35 N
slack tension
15 Torque transmitted by the motor 4.7 Nm
and pulley
16 Torque transmitted by the grinder 23.04 Nm
and pulley
17 Torque transmitted by the grinder 5.06 Nm
and pulley
18 Calculation for Power Generated 1.3 KW
by Screw shaft 1.3 KW
1.4 KW
19 Twisting moment of shaft due to
tension of the belt
Twisting moment of screw S shaft 23.04 Nm
Twisting moment of grinder S 5.06 Nm
shaft Twisting moment of M 4.71 Nm
motor S shaft
20 Bending moment of grinder shaft 52.72 N

21 Bending moment of screw shaft 65.45 Nm

22 Bending moment of motor and 43.33 Nm
shaft
23 Diameter of grinder shaft 15.72 mm
24 Diameter of screw shaft 17.03 mm
25 25 Diameter of motor and shaft 14.72 mm
26 Overall length of machine 119 mm

22
27 Overall width of machine 400 mm
28 Overall height of machine 460 mm
29 Capacity of machine 220 Kg/hr
30 Heating Element 240, 800 V, Watts
31 Gear Motor 2, 1000 hp, Rpm

32 Efficiency 85 %

23
 CHAPTER FOUR

4. BRIQUETTING PROCESS FOR SOLID BIOFUEL

PRODUCTION

4.1. Main process for briquetting

Processing Size reduction

 Sorting Drying  Choppin

 cleaning g
 Grinding
Preparation
Densification
 Binder
Briquetting  Pressing
addition
 compaction
 Mixing

Figure 1Briquetting production process

Cleaning
The densification of biomass materials into briquettes usually starts with sorting and

cleaning of the khat. This procedure is also called sieving, which is done to remove all

unwanted materials ensuring that all the khat is of the required size. As reported screening

equipment such as sieves and magnetic conveyors are used to remove impurities such as

soil, dirt, metal, and plastic strings, etc., to achieve the maximum cleanliness of the

feedstock. These unwanted materials are generated during the collection and storage of

24
residues. Washing the materials with water or mild solvents is another means of cleaning

out impurities generated through alkali oxide, chemicals, and fertilizer application in

agricultural farms. Said et al. observed that washing can improve the combustion properties

of biomass.

Drying

Khat drying is essential particularly if the feed is wet. Drying of feedstock increases its

efficiency but should not be excessively dried. Allowing a small amount of moisture helps

in binding the biomass particles. According to Solano et al., drying can be done naturally

by exposing the feedstock to favorable environmental conditions to reduce its moisture

contents without supplying any heat externally. Another way is forced drying by industrial

process that reduces the moisture content of biomass fuel down to a specified range (5% to

15%) suitable to start densification. For biomass that has to be forced dried, Grover and

Mishra noted the use of direct driers in which hot air or flue gases are intimately mixed

with material and indirect ones where heat is transferred to materials through a metallic

surface. In the indirect driers, material is not mixed with the hot air. Purohit and Chaturvedi

noted that the drying process is the most energy-intensive process and accounts for about

70% of the total energy used in the biomass densification process.

Size Reduction

Size reduction is a very important process prior to biomass briquetting. Studies have noted

that it partially breaks down the lignin content of biomass and increases the total surface

area leading to greater inter-particle bonding. Size reduction in biomass also increases the

bulk density, which improves the flow of biomass during densification. There are several

size reduction methods, which include chopping, chipping, hammer milling, crushing,

25
shredding, and grinding. Size-reduced biomass was classified as chopped (50–250 mm),

chipped (8–50 mm), or grinded (<8mm). The status of the biomass feedstock determines

which method or combined methods that needs to be adopted. Tumuluru and Heikkila

reported a two-stage grinding process of khat biomass materials. The first stage entails the

grinder breaking the biomass bundles into a larger size material enhancing its movement

in the conveyors, while the second stage involves a further grinding to a smaller size to

make the biomass suitable for biochemical and thermochemical conversion processes.

Common equipment used to reduce the size of biomass for briquette densification include

hammer mill, knife mill, linear knife grids, and disk attrition. However, hammer mills are

considered the most suitable, whereas the cutting mill is the next most preferred.

Carbonization

Carbonization is defined as the process by which high carbon content solid residues are

formed from organic material usually by pyrolysis in an inert atmosphere. During this

thermal decomposition process, moisture and volatiles are driven off, leaving a solid

residue (char), liquids (condensable vapor) and permanent gases. Pyrolysis is one possible

path by which we can transform biomass to higher value product. It is a thermal conversion

process where the material is treated in an inert atmosphere in the absence of air or oxygen

with final temperatures of about 500ºC. The process yields solid char (charcoal, biochar),

volatile condensable compounds (distillates) and non-condensable gases.When the

biomass is dry and heated to around 280°C, it begins to spontaneously break down to

produce charcoal plus water vapor, methanol, acetic acid and more complex chemicals,

chiefly in the form of tars and non-condensable gas consisting mainly of hydrogen, carbon

monoxide and carbon dioxide. The spontaneous breakdown or carbonization of the

26
biomass above a temperature of 280°C liberates energy and hence this reaction is said to

be exothermic. This process of spontaneous breakdown or carbonization continues until

only the carbonized residue called charcoal remains. Unless further external heat is

provided, the process stops and the temperature reach a maximum of about 400°C. This

charcoal, however, will still contain appreciable amounts of tarry residue, together with the

ash of the original biomass. The ash content of the charcoal is about 3-5%; the tarry residue

may amount to about 30% by weight and the balance is fixed carbon about 65-70%. Further

heating increases the fixed carbon content by driving off and decomposing more of the

tars. A temperature of 500°C gives a typical fixed carbon content of about 85% and a

volatile content of about 10%.

Mixing and Binder Addition

Binders can be added during mixing of the feedstock or after carbonization of the khat

before densification. Binder addition to biomass feedstock is a co-processing practice,

which aids in densification or increase the mechanical or thermal properties of the product.

Binder addition helps to reduce wear on production equipment. It forms a bridge to enhance

strong inter-particle bonding with biomass components. The amount of binder to be added

depends on the binding properties of the raw material and the binding agent. There are

three types of binders used for briquette production, namely inorganic binders, organic

binders, and compound binders. Common examples of inorganic binders include clay,

lime, cement, plaster, and sodium silicate. On the other hand, the organic binders are sub-

grouped into biomass binder (e.g., cassava paste, wastepaper pulp, molasses, cow dung,

and starch), tar, pitch and petroleum bitumen binder, lingo sulphonate binder, and polymer

binder. A combination of the two or more binders from both the organic and inorganic

27
binders forms the compound binder. There are some advantages that one type of binder

may have over the other because of its material components. Briquettes made with

inorganic binders have higher compressive strength, compaction ratio, and hydrophobic

nature compared to those made with an organic binder. However, such briquettes display

an increase in ash content, burn out temperature, and reduced calorific value.

Khat biomass densification and particle bonding mechanism

Biomass densification represents a set of technologies for the conversion of biomass into

a fuel. It essentially involves the compaction under pressure of loose material to reduce its

volume and to agglomerate the material so that the product remains in the compressed state.

The densification process is critical for producing a feed-stock material suitable as a

commodity product. Densification enables several advantages, including (i) improved

handling and conveyance efficiencies throughout the supply system and bio refinery in

feed, (ii) controlled particle size distribution for improved feedstock uniformity and

density, (iii) fractionated structural components for improved compositional quality, and

(iv) conformance to pre-determined conversion technology and supply system

specifications. There are several densification technologies used in producing a uniform

feedstock commodity for bioenergy applications, however pelleting and briquetting are the

two most widely used. Briquetting is an agglomeration method for upgrading solid biomass

and producing end products with standardized properties and characteristics. It is a process

of changing low-bulk-density biomass into high-density and energy-concentrated fuel and

carried out to improve the density, burn time, and calorific value (per unit volume) of raw

biomass thereby improving the handling and transportability of biomass. It uses relatively

small amounts of energy to increase the mass and energy density, thus reducing the cost of

28
transportation to the point of use. Densification of biomass under high pressure brings

about mechanical interlocking and increased adhesion between the particles, forming

intermolecular bonds in the contact area. This is achieved by forcing the particles together

by applying mechanical force to create inter-particle bonding, which makes well-defined

shapes and sizes such as briquettes. The quality of densified biomass depends on strength

and durability of the particle bonds, which are influenced by a number of process variables,

like die diameter, die temperature, pressure, binders, and pre-heating of the biomass mix.

The mechanism of particle bonding as reported in Manickam et al. can be subdivided into

five major categories including (i) forces of attraction between solid particles, (ii)

interfacial forces and capillary pressure in movable liquid surfaces, (iii) adhesion and

cohesion forces at not freely movable binder bridges, (iv) solid bridges, and (v) mechanical

interlocking.

Briquetting Production

The production process of briquettes essentially involves the acquisition of the biomass

feedstock, processing it, and eventual densification. Densification is done by applying

pressure, heat, and binding agent on the residues to produce the briquettes. The output of

the densification process is briquette, which is referred to as a compressed block of organic

waste material used for domestic and industrial purposes in both rural and urban areas.

Briquettes are made of different qualities and dimensions depending on the raw materials,

mold, and technologies applied during production. Briquettes vary a lot in size and form,

but usually they are of a cylindrical shape with a diameter of between 25 and 100 mm and

lengths ranging from 10 to 400 mm. Square, rectangular, and polygonal briquettes also

exist. Densified biomass such as briquettes have several advantages, which includes, but

29
are not limited to, increased energy density, ease of handling, transport and storage,

improved combustibility, lower particle emission, low volatility, and uniform size, density,

and quality.

Collection of
Khat Waste

Dryer Crusher
Storing

Mixer

Furnace

Dryer
Conveyer

Grinder
Packaging

Briquette
machine

M
Beehive briquette Screerener
machine

Figure 2 process flow sheet of briquetting production

4.2 Briquetting Process Quality Parameters

Compression conditions (pressure, temperature, time) and khat properties (particle size
and shape, moisture content, feedstock composition) are some of the major determinants
of briquette’s quality. Understand these parameters enhances smooth operation during
briquetting.

30
4.2.1 Compression Condition
Compaction pressure
Biomass can be densified under a high compaction pressure or a low compaction pressure.
Generally, the feedstock type, moisture content, and particle size and shape determine the
amount of pressure to be applied. Densification under low compaction pressure requires a
binding agent to enable inter particle bonding. High-pressure densification utilizes the
natural binding components such as starch, protein, lignin, and pectin, which are squeezed
out of the particles of the biomass materials, to facilitate inter-particle bonding. According
to Dinesha et al., the outcome of pressure application is plastic and elastic deformations
and filling of voids, forming higher density briquettes. Compaction pressure influences
density, compressive strength, and durability of briquettes. The study reported that pressure
at 15.3 MPa produced the highest densities for each ratio of briquettes, while the pressure
at 5.1 MPa produced the lowest densities. Kaliyan and Morey noted that high pressure
helps the densification of biomass and suggests a range of 100–150 MPa, or higher.
However, studies have shown that low compaction pressure can produce low-cost
briquettes that are durable.
Temperature
Temperature affects both khat biomass and the die of the briquetting machine before and
during the briquetting process. It aids in the release of components such as lignin, cellulose,
and hemicellulose where the lignin act as binders. Yank et al., noted that high temperature
and pressure are widely agreed to enhance binding mechanisms but require important
energy input. Grover and Mishra advised that the preheating temperature should not exceed
300ºC to prevent biomass materials decomposition while that of the die in a screw press
extruder should be kept at about 280–290ºC. Okot et al., investigated maize cobs briquettes
densified at varying temperatures of 20–80ºC. The study concluded that densification at
temperature of 80ºC could produce briquettes with high density and durability/mechanical
strength required to meet quality certification standards. Optimum temperature value
within the range of 65–100ºC for feedstock preheating was proposed by Kaliyan and Morey
but added that temperatures higher than 100ºC and up to 300ºC can be used if desired.
According to Grover and Mishra, die temperature exceeding what is required will decrease
the friction between feedstock and die wall enabling densification at lower pressure to

31
produce low-quality briquettes. Conversely, low temperature will result in higher pressure
and power consumption. It also leads to lower production rate, but higher-quality
briquettes.

4.2.2. Khat biomass Properties affect briquetting

Moisture Content
Moisture content of khat biomass is an important parameter that determines the overall
quality of biomass briquette. During briquetting, moisture content of biomass facilitates
starch, gelatinization, protein denaturation, and fiber solubilization processes. It acts as a
lubricant, reducing friction between the khat residue particles. Additionally, it serves as
binder and forms a solid bridge between particles via van der Waal’s forces. Under room
temperature, moisture contents from 12% to 20% (w.b.) may help the densification process
but may not be possible beyond 20% (w.b.). The study concluded that at higher or lower
moisture, the briquettes rupture force and density were sharply failing. Similarly, the initial
moisture content of khat biomass measured immediately before densification reported in
Matúš et al., were 7.4%; 9.1%; 10.3%; 11.7%; 12.6%; 14.5%; 16.5%; 19.6%; and 22.0%
w.b. The study discovered that 12.6% was the best value of initial moisture content, which
produced the best briquette based on the physical and mechanical properties. It is important
to obtain a balance for moisture content prior to densification in order to ensure briquette
quality. For instance, low moisture content will hinder proper agglomeration of the
particles of the feedstock. High moisture content, on the other hand, would incur more cost
of energy for drying, which could influence the cost of the final product. Optimum moisture
content varies with the type of feedstock; so far, a value in the range of 8%–12% is
considered as generalized optimum densification value. The right amount of moisture
develops self-bonding properties in lignocellulose substances at elevated temperatures and
pressures prevalent in briquetting machines.
𝒘𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒃𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒅𝒓𝒚𝒊𝒏𝒈 − 𝒘𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒂𝒇𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒅𝒓𝒚𝒊𝒏𝒈
%𝑴𝑪 = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝒘𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒃𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒅𝒓𝒚𝒊𝒏𝒈

Volatile Matter Content

The volatile matter content of powdered khat waste briquette charcoal would be
determined by heating oven-dried sample for moisture content at 950℃ for six minute in
covered crucible of specimen by lid or metal box prepared for this purpose. Then the
32
percentage of volatile content of the sample is computed as the difference between initial
(Oven dry weight of charcoal specimen for moisture determination or weight after moisture
removal) and final weight of the sample after removal of volatile matter and dividing the
result by the total sample weight taken and multiplying the whole with hundred.
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑉𝑀𝐶 − 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑉𝑀𝐶
%𝑉𝑀𝐶 = × 100
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑉𝑀𝐶
Ash content
The ash content of a sample of powdered khat waste charcoal and briquette charcoal were
determined after burning of specimen obtained to a constant weight at 750°C for six hours
in uncovered crucible of specimen. Ash content was, computed as a proportion of the
residue to the oven-dry weight of charcoal. Then the percentage of ash content of the
sample is computed as the difference between initial (Oven dry weight of charcoal
specimen for moisture determination or weight after moisture removal) and final weight of
the sample after removal of ash and dividing the result by the total sample weight taken
and multiplying the whole with hundred.
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 − 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔
%𝐴𝐶 = × 100
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔
The higher quality briquette has low ash amount. Ash is expected to have values for
commercial fuels from 0.6% to 9.8%, energy crops from 1% to 9.6%, cereals from 1.8%
to 4.8% and industrial waste from 0.4% to 22.6%. General values may appear in a range
of levels below 5–20% (Maia et al., 2014).
Fixed (pure) carbon content
The fixed carbon content in sample of powdered khat waste charcoal and briquette charcoal
were calculated as the difference between 100% and the sum of the percentage of moisture
content, volatile matter content and ash content or subtracting these value from the total 28
sample weight taken for analysis and converting the result in to percentage according to
(Anon, 1987).
%𝐹𝐶𝐶 = 100% − (𝑀𝐶 + 𝑉𝐶 + 𝐴𝐶)%
Where
%Mc = Percentage Moisture content
%VM = Percentage Volatile matter content
%AC = Percentage Ash content

33
%FCC= Percentage of Fixed carbon content
The greater the FC, the greater the amount of element existing for combustion, therefore,
the greater the amount of heat released (Cuaresma et al., 2015).
Particle Size, Shape, and Distribution
Particle size and shape are of great importance for the densification of biomass materials.
It influences the quality of briquettes, the production cost, and the briquetting process.
Biomass feedstock of 6–8 mm size with 10%–20% powdery component (<4 mesh) is
generally agreed to gives the best results. However, opinion is still divided as to what
constitutes an optimum particle size. Some studies opined that finer grind of feedstock
material (<2mm) gives the larger surface area for bonding, which results in the production
of briquette with higher density, strength, and durability. The study also noted that the
choice of optimal particle size partly depends on feedstock material but unarguably not
defined yet in general. The distribution of particle sizes is often most important with a
mixture of fine and coarse particles. Grover and Mishra and Yumak et al., noted that mixing
various particle sizes improves the packing dynamics and also contributes to strength and
stability of briquette.

34
4.4. Material and Energy Balance

Determination of Moisture Content

The percentage moisture content (PMC) determined by weighing 1.5g of the briquette

sample put in a crucible of known mass and placed in an oven set at 105°C ± 5°C for 1

hour. The crucible and its content were removed from the oven allowed to cool to room

temperature and reweighed. This process was repeated until the weight after cooling

became constant and this was recorded as the final weight. The sample's moisture content

was determined using equation (1).

𝑊1 − 𝑊2
𝑃𝑀𝐶 = ∗ 100%
𝑊2

Where, W1 is the initial weight of briquette sample and W2 is the final weight of briquette
sample.
1.5−1.3761
W1 =1.5g PMC = = ∗ 100% = 9%
1.3761

W2 = 1.3761g

Determination of Volatile Matter

The percentage volatile matter (PVM) was determined by placing 1.5g of the briquettes

sample in a crucible and kept in a furnace for 8 minutes, at temperature of 550o C ± 5°C

and weighted after cooling. The percentage volatile matter of the sample was determined

using equation

𝑊2 − 𝑊3
𝑃𝑉𝑀 = ∗ 100%
𝑊3
Where, W2 is the weight of the oven-dried sample (g); W3 is the weight of the sample
after 8 min in the furnace at 550 °C (g).
1.3761𝑔−1.3157g
W2 = 1.3761g 𝑃𝑉𝑀 = ∗ 100% = 14%
1.3157𝑔

W3 = 1.3157g
35
Determination of Ash Content

1.5g of the briquettes samples are kept in a closed furnace and burnt completely. The

weight of the residue was taken with an electronic balance. The percentage weight of

residue gives the ash contained in the sample and its determined using equation;

𝑊4
𝑃𝐴𝐶 = ∗ 100%
𝑊2
W4 = weight of the residue
0.07347𝑔
𝑃𝐴𝐶 = ∗ 100% = 5.34%
1.3761𝑔

Determination of Fixed Carbon

Given the percentage fixed carbon (PFC) as equation;
PFC = 100% − (𝑃MC + 𝑃VC + 𝑃AC)
=100% − (14% + 9% + 5.34%)
=71.66%

Determination of Calorific Value

The calorific value determines the amount of heat energy present in a material.

The calorific value of the briquettes were determined using a bomb calorimeter 1.5g of the
briquettes sample was burnt completely in oxides of oxygen. The liberated heat was
absorbed by the water and calorimeter. The heat lost by burning briquette was the heat
gained by water and calorimeter. The calorific value (CV) of the fuel was calculated from
the measured data using equation;
𝐵𝐹𝑥 − 2.3 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑒
𝐶𝑉 =
𝑊
Where: BF = Burn Factor; ∆t = Change of temperature (t2 – t1) o C; t2 = final temperature;
t1 = initial temperature; W = mass of the sample used and BF = constant = 13,257.32

36
 13,257.32(3) − 2.3
𝐶𝑉 = = 26513𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/𝑘𝑔
1.5
Mass Balance Analysis

The mass balance analysis was conducted to determine the yield of each stage of the

manufacturing process, starting from milling, screening, carbonizing, mixing, briquetting,

and drying. The simple rule was a calculation of the ratio. Between the mass came (input)

and out (output) in each stage of processes.

Table 4. The mass balance analysis with its efficiency

Process Biomass In(Kg) Biomass Out(kg) Efficiency (%)

Chopping 10 9.5 95.3
Carbonizing 9.5 2.85 30
Milling 2.85 2.76 96.4
Screening 2.76 2.74 99
Mixing 2.74 2.71 99
Briquetting 2.71 2.68 98.7
Drying 2.68 2.58 96

4.5. Economic Data Analysis and Calculations

4.5.1. Assumptions of the Study

The capacity of the briquetting machine is 90kg/h for screw press. This is derived based on

the ratio of briquettes produced in kilograms to the average time taken in the production

process by the briquetting machine. Production time included the time the raw material

was loaded into the machine, compaction/carbonization of the material for briquettes and

charcoal respectively, briquette/charcoal residence and ejection from the machine. Being a

new project the economic life of the technologies was assumed to be 5years. The operation

37
time of the technologies was assumed to be 8hours per day. The total number of operating

days will be 240 days per year signifying 66% utilization capacity. A discount rate of 10%

was assumed based on Pradhan et al. (2019). A depreciation of 10% is assumed on the

initial investment which was calculated using the straight line. The repair and maintenance

cost of the machinery is generally assumed to range from 10-15% of the total cost of the

machine operation and this normally increases as the useful life of the machine. The study

thus assumed a repair and maintenance cost of 10%. A price of birr 0.58/kg was assumed

for the raw biomass material based on the projected cost of agricultural residues of USD

5/ton. This cost was based on the annual growth rate of 0.1. A selling price of birr 50 per

kilogram is proposed.

4.5.2. Economic Feasibility Analysis

Feasibility indicators used in this study included; net present value (NPV), internal rate of

return (IRR) and payback period (PBP) as shown in table.

Table 5 Economic indicators for the feasibility analysis

Economic indicator Definition Equation

𝑛
Net Present Value It denotes the present value 𝑅𝑡
𝑁𝑃𝑉 = ∑ − 𝐼0
of all future benefits minus (1 + 𝑖)𝑡
𝑡=1
the present value of cost
required to invest.
𝑛
Internal Rate of Return The discounted rate that 𝑅𝑡
𝐼𝑅𝑅 = ∑ − 𝐼0
makes the net present value (1 + 𝑖)𝑡
𝑡=1
of the future net benefits =0
equals the initial
investment. It denotes the

38
 highest interest rate that
would be paid by a project
for all the resources that
were used in the project if it
wanted to recover its
investment cost as well as
the cost of operations and
still make a profit
Payback Period Period The period it will
take from inception of a
project to recovery of the
total investment cost.

Where Rt is the Net cash flow at time t, i is the discount rate, t is time of the cash flow
and I0 is the initial investment.

Cost biofuel and Briquettes Production

The total production cost of briquettes and biofuel comprises fixed costs, operations costs

and the cost of repair and maintenance. Fixed costs are the costs of the briquetting and

charcoaling technologies, installation costs and the cost of the storage facility. Operation

and maintenance costs include the cost of raw materials and processing including their

transportation cost. Included in the operation and maintenance costs are the cost of labour,

repair and maintenance. Machine cost accounts for the largest share of fixed costs for the

briquetting and charcoaling technologies

Cost biofuel Production

In Table 6 the total cost of charcoal production using press screw is detailed. The total cost
of production was also estimated from the capital expenditure and operations/maintenance

39
expenditure. Machine cost (birr 110,000) accounts for the largest share of fixed cost while
raw material cost (birr. 183,744) accounts for the largest share of operations and
maintenance costs. A total of (birr. 600,331.20) was the investment cost to produce 90kg
bag of biofuel per day for 240 days.

Table 6 Total Cost of Charcoal Production for press screw at utilization capacity of
90Kg/day

Item Rate (birr) Amount (birr)

Fixed Cost (Initial Investment)
Machine cost 110,000 110,000
Installation cost 1,500 1,500
Storage facility cost 75/day×240days 18,000
Sub-total 129,500
Operation Cost
Raw material cost 765.6/day×240days 1183,744
Raw material processing 500/day×240days 120,000
cost
Labour cost 500/day×240days 120,000
Depreciation cost 10% of Initial Investment 12,950
Miscellaneous cost 5% Sum of(Raw material cost, 21,187.2
Raw material processing cost,
Labour cost)
Sub-total 457,881.2
Repair and Maintenance cost
Repair and Maintenance 10% of Initial Investment 12,950
cost
Sub-total 12,950
Total Investment Cost 600,331.2
Source: Primary data collected

40
Cost of Producing a Unit of charcoal /Briquette

The cost of producing a unit of briquette and charcoal and the annual revenue that could
be generated from the sale of charcoal/briquette for the different technologies was also
estimated as presented in Table 7. Given the machine capacities of 90kg/day (press screw),
and selling prices of birr 50/kg for briquette and birr 40/kg for charcoal, the total annual
revenue can also be calculated. From the results, the proposed selling prices for a unit of
briquette (birr 50 per kg) and charcoal (birr 40 per kg) are both higher than the unit costs
using different briquetting and charcoaling machines. This result however contrasts with
the result of Kaoma and Gheewala (2021), whose unit cost of producing briquettes was
higher than the proposed selling price. With the machines being operated for 240 days, 240
bags (21600kg) of charcoal will be produced from press screw per year. Based on this, the
annual revenue generated for the first year and subsequent years was estimated to be birr
864,000.

Table 7 Cost of Producing a Unit of Briquette and Charcoal and Annual Revenue

Items Amount (birr)

Screw press
Total Investment cost (birr/year) 600,331.2
Unit Cost (birr/kg) 27.79
Annual revenue (birr/year) 864,000
Source: Primary data collected

4.5.3. Profitability Analysis of Briquette and Charcoal Production

Upon cessation of any business, the revenue obtained from the sale of all the business

assets at that particular time is expected to be higher that the investment that was made

(Vochazka et al., 2019). Thus, an economic analysis is important in determining the

feasibility of any enterprise (Ifa et al., 2020). This section presents the cash inflow for each

41
technology showing income and expenditure for a period of 5 years. The cash inflow data

enabled calculation of the economic indicators for an entrepreneur engaging in briquette or

charcoal production using these technologies. In Table 5, the NPV of briquetting project

using screw at capacity utilization of 66% and a discount of 10% was birr 1,967,908.748.

The positive NPV confirms financial profitability and investment viability in the

briquetting project using screw press technology.

Table 8 NPV of Briquette Production using screw press

Time (Year) Cash inflows (birr) (1+i)t (10%) PV =C/(1+I)t

1 864,000 1.1 785454.545
2 864,000 1.21 714,049.58
3 864,000 1.331 649,135.98
4 864,000 1.4641 590,123.6254
5 864,000 1.61051 536476.023
Total present value (TPV) 2,568,239.74
Initial investment (Io) 600,331.2
NPV 1,967,908.748

The capacity of the briquetting machines may have played a major role in determining the
NPV of the technologies. Studies have indicated that plants with low capacity have had a
negative NPV while those with large capacity had positive NPV. Where negative NPV was
reported for plants with lower capacities and a positive NPV for plants with higher
capacities. The positive NPVs noted could then be interpreted as presenting the projects as
feasible and economically viable.
In Table 9, the results of the analysis of net present value for charcoal production using
screw is shown. As indicates that the projected earnings from investing in screw press
charcoaling technology discounted at 10% will exceed its projected costs at today’s
shillings, thus assuming a profitable investment.

42
Table 9 NPV of Charcoal Production using screw press of Capacity, 90kg/day

Time (Year) Cash inflows (birr) (1+i)t (10%) PV =C/(1+I)t

1 360,000 1.1 327,272.7273
2 360,000 1.21 297,520.6612
3 360,000 1.331 331 270,473.3283
4 360,000 1.4641 245,884.8439
5 360,000 1.60151 224,787.8565
Total present value (TPV) 1,365,939.417
Initial investment (Io) 600,331.20
NPV 765,608.22
Source: Primary data collected

The Internal Rate of Return (IRR) for screw press is 34% as shown in Table 10. From the
cash flows of the briquetting and charcoaling projects, the NPVs would be equal to zero at
the aforementioned discount rates. A negative NPV will be obtained if the interest rate goes
above the IRRs. This implies that profits to be attained would be much less than the
investment cost. An investment will be deemed profitable and economically viable if the
value of IRR is greater than the allowed discount rate. When analyzing cost-benefit of
charcoal briquette production, Onchieku (2018) noted IRR values of different setups; 68%,
76%, and 100% over a two-year production using a discount rate of 15%. These values
were all greater than the discount rate value signifying profitable investments. The Payback
Period (PBP) for screw press is 1.67 years. This implies that for all the projects, it will not
take a lot of time to get returns on investment.
Table 10 Analyzing Economic Indicators of Feasibility of Briquetting and Charcoaling
Projects.
Screw press
S/No Indicator Value
1 Net Present Value (birr) 765,608.22
2 Payback Period (Years) 1.67
3 Internal Rate of Return (%) 34

43
4.6. Site consideration

We planned to design our machine around Awaday town. This site is chosen for different
reasons such us location, environmental impact, and access to raw materials and utilities to
get profit from our work. Additionally these site considerations plays a significant role in
the design of the khat waste briquetting machine.
Accessibility: accessible for transportation of materials and equipment, as well as for the
delivery of the finished briquettes to potential customers.
Availability of raw materias: located close to sources of khat waste to minimize
transportation costs and ensure a steady supply of raw materials for the briquetting process.
Infrastructure: this site have access to necessary infrastructure such as electricity, water,
and road facilities to support the operation of the briquetting machine.
Market proximity: located close to potential markets such as Harar and Dire Dawa for
the biofuel briquettes to minimize transportation costs and facilitate distribution.
Cost considerations: Awaday town is selected based on cost-effectiveness, taking into
account factors such as land prices, utilities, and labor costs.
Future expansion potential: Awaday town have the potential for future expansion to
different areas since the town is center of trade for khat for this reason the biofuel
production facility to accommodate increased demand for the briquettes.

4.7. HAZOP Analysis

The HAZOP analysis typically focuses on specific nodes or key points within the system
to systematically uncover potential deviations and hazards. For the briquetting machine
project, the following nodes are prime focus areas: Material Handling and Feeding System,
Briquetting Chamber and Compaction Process, Thermal Treatment and Solid Biofuel
Output, Automation and Control System, Operational Procedures and Maintenance
The analysis involves evaluating each node with respect to deviation parameters, including:
1. Temperature: Deviations in temperature control during compaction and heating
processes, posing risks of thermal hazards and material degradation.

44
2. Pressure: Examination of pressure deviations within the briquetting chamber,
highlighting potential risks related to over-pressurization or leaks.
3. Flow: Analysis of material flow variations, which could lead to blockages, overloading,
or inconsistent compaction.
4. Mechanical Stress: Identifying deviations in mechanical stresses, such as excessive
vibrations, imbalanced loading, or structural integrity issues.
5. Human Factors: Considering deviations related to operator error and human-machine
interface challenges that may compromise safety and operational efficiency.
The intent is to systematically scrutinize each node and deviation parameter to identify
potential hazards, such as:
1. Mechanical Hazards: Equipment malfunctions, potential for pinching, shearing, or
entrapment of personnel, and risks related to moving parts.
2. Thermal and Fire Hazards: Risks associated with excessive heat, flammable materials,
and potential sources of ignition within the system.
3. Pressure-Related Hazards: Potential ruptures, leaks, or over-pressurization leading to
equipment damage or hazardous material exposure.
4. Environmental and Health Hazards: Considerations regarding emissions, waste
handling, and the potential impact of solid biofuel production on environmental and
occupational health.
Once potential hazards are identified, risk mitigation strategies must be developed to
address the hazards. This may include:
1. Safety Interlocks and Controls: Implementing safety features, emergency stops, and
interlocks to mitigate mechanical, thermal, and pressure-related hazards.
2. Material Handling Protocols: Establishing safe material handling, feeding, and pre-
processing guidelines to address flow-related hazards and human factors.
3. Operational Procedures and Training: Developing standardized operational protocols
and providing comprehensive training for safe machine operation, maintenance, and
troubleshooting.
4. Fire and Environment Protection: Incorporating fire suppression systems, waste
management protocols, and environmental monitoring to mitigate environmental and fire
hazards.

45
Conclusion

In genaral, the design of a briquetting machine for the production of solid biofuel from
waste khat has the potential to address environmental and waste management issues while
also providing a sustainable source of energy. The project has successfully demonstrated
the feasibility of converting waste khat into a valuable biofuel resource, which can
contribute to reducing reliance on traditional fossil fuels. The development of this
technology could have significant implications for waste management and renewable
energy production, offering a promising solution to both environmental and energy
challenges. Further research and development in this area could lead to the widespread
adoption of this technology, ultimately contributing to a more sustainable and eco-friendly
future.

46
Reference

Alape Ariza, D. K. G. N., Pinzon Reyes, A., Medina Rocha, A. H., Cabrera Perez, R., &
Isabel Bermudez Santana, C. (2023). Economics of Briquettes and Charcoal
Production Technologies in Kenya: Implication for Wide-scale Commercialization.
International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research, 11(6), 52–64.
https://doi.org/10.20431/2349-0349.1106006
Brunerová, A., Brozek, M., Šleger, V., & Nováková, A. (2018). Energy Balance of
Briquette Production from Various Waste Biomass. Scientia Agriculturae Bohemica,
49(3), 236–243. https://doi.org/10.2478/sab-2018-0030
khat. (n.d.).
Kshirsagar, K., Bhaware, S., Wadnerkar, G., Yadav, R., & Nikalje, V. (2018). Design and
Manufacturing of Briquette Making Machine. International Journal of Advance
Engineering and Research Development, 5(06), 286–291.
Okwu, M. O., Samuel, O. D., Otanocha, O. B., Akporhonor, E., & Tartibu, L. K. (2022).
Development of a novel integrated hopper briquette machine for sustainable
production of pellet fuels. Procedia Computer Science, 217(2022), 1719–1733.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.12.372

47