Strength. Performance. Passion.

Grinding with Ball Mill Systems

21. Grinding

© 2013 Holcim Ltd

Grinding

Grinding
Power

Efficiency

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Grinding steps

Coarse Medium Fine

grinding grinding grinding

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Coarse grinding

Coarse Medium Fine

grinding grinding grinding

Ø 90 – 60 [mm] balls

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

How to evaluate coarse grinding efficiency?
• Material fineness evolution in the 1st chamber
[% ] Residue on 2 [mm]
20

15

10 Very Bad
Bad
good
5
too good

0
Sampling point
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

 How to evaluate coarse grinding efficiency?

• Material level

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Parameters we can play with
• Absorbed power • Efficiency
 Ball filling degree  Ball charge composition

 Chamber length  Ball filling degree

 Liner design

 Intermediate diaphragm settings

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Ball charge composition

If ball charge too fine:

Feed decides
1. Material too coarse
ball charge
2. Level too high
composition

If ball charge too coarse

1. Material too fine
2. Level too low

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

HGRS standard ball charge for the 1st chamber

1.Compartment
Ø Ball [mm] Weight [ t ] Percent [%]

90 25.0 25.0
80 35.0 35.0
70 25.0 25.0
60 15.0 15.0

Total 100.0 100

Average ball weight [g] 1667

Spec. media surface [m2 / t ] 10.2

 Add only 90 and/or 80 mm balls  Add only 60 and/or 70 mm

to coarsen the ball charge balls to get a finer ball charge

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Ball filling degree
D filling degree = D absorbed power
98
93
Power [%]

85

Typical range
75

20 25 30 35 40 - 45 f [%]

Limiting factors: Limiting factors:

 Minimum production rate  Motor installed power
 Breakage of liners and balls  Mill internal dimensions

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Ball filling degree
D filling degree = D the coarse grinding efficiency

38 %

30 %

20 %

Due to an increase in the number and intensity of balls impacts

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Liner design
D liner lifting effect

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Liner replacement criteria
• Valid for step liners (flat and
waved)
h0
• The criteria might change
depending on the liner design
(napoleon hat)
• Liner replacement has to be
justified through coarse grinding
efficiency evaluation
• A worn liner can partially be
compensated with a coarser ball h
charge composition

h > 0.5 h0

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Intermediate diaphragm settings

• Material transport capacity

• Slots opening 6 – 8 mm
• Central screen opening
• Control elements (material guide
plates)

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Possible 1st chamber situation (1/2)

[% ] Residue on 2 [mm]
20

15

10
Very Bad
Bad
5
 Coarsen the ball charge

0  D ball filling degree

1.1 1.2 1.3  D liner
1.4lifting effect

 D the chamber length

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Possible 1st chamber situation (2/2)

[% ] Residue on 2 [mm]
20

15

10
too good
5

0  Get a finer ball charge

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
 Lower ball filling degree
 Shorten the chamber

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Fine grinding

Coarse Medium Fine

grinding grinding grinding
Ø 50 - 40 mm balls Ø 30 - 17 mm balls

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

How to evaluate fine grinding efficiency?

• Material fineness evolution (2 mm down to 45 mm)

100

% R 200 µm
Logarithmic scale

10

1
Sampling
point 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

How to evaluate fine grinding efficiency?

• Material level

>> 50 mm: bad

~ 50 mm good
< 50 mm bad

<< 0 mm very bad

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Parameters we can play with

100

 Ball charge composition

 Ball filling degree
 Liner design
10  Material transport from 1st to 2nd chamber

1
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Adjustment of ball charge composition (1/6)
• Example

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
50 40 30 25 20

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Adjustment of ball charge composition (2/6)

• Example

100

10

Ball size 50 40 30 25 20
% 12 6 22 20 40
1
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Adjustment of ball charge composition (3/6)

• Example

100 Ø 20 mm: bad

efficiency

10 Ø 50 mm: bad
efficiency

Ball size 50 20
% 12 40
1
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Adjustment of ball charge composition (4/6)

• Example

100

10

Ball size 40 20 17
% 18 17 23
1
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Adjustment of ball charge composition (5/6)
• Example

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
50 40 30 25 20 17

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Adjustment of ball charge composition (6/6)

• Ball charge composition fine tuning:

 Start with 80 % in weight
 Decide replenishment based on longitudinal sieving

• Some points to consider

 Ø 17 mm balls might not work well in case of cements with high
limestone content (> 5 – 10 % of limestone)
 Very fine cements (> 4’000 cm2/g) or with high amounts of slag or
Pozzolana might benefit from finer charges than the standard.

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

HGRS standard ball charge composition

• OPC > 3’200 cm2/g in closed circuit

2.Compartment
Ø Ball [mm] Weight [ t ] Percent [%]

50 20.0 10.0
40 20.0 10.0
30 32.0 16.0
25 32.0 16.0
20 42.0 21.0
17 54.0 27.0
15

Total 200.0 100

Average ball weight [g] 41
Spec. media surface [m 2 / t] 32.8

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Ball charge composition

• FLS Standard for OPC > 3’200 cm2/g in closed circuit with non
classifying liners
2.Compartment
Ø Ball [mm] Weight [ t ] Percent [%]

50
40
30 36.0 18.0
25 80.0 40.0
20 62.0 31.0
17
15 22.0 11.0

Total 200.0 100

Average ball weight [g] 39
Spec. media surface [m 2 / t] 34.5

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Ball filling degree
Same limiting factors as for coarse grinding

Increase ball filling degree

> > 50 mm: bad

~ 50 mm good
< 50 mm bad

>> 0 mm very bad

Lower ball filling degree

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Liner design
• Classifying liner
 A good ball charge classification allows 5 – 10 % lower mill motor
specific energy consumption

Material flow
Mill rotation

 A worn non classifying liner should be replaced by a classifying liner

(watch out possible reduction in absorbed power)

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd

Material transport from 1st to 2nd chamber
• Air speed reduction through the centre of the intermediate diaphragm :
 Install grates on second chamber side (starting with external ring)
 Modify material path to avoid exposure to air stream

desired

Cement Manufacturing Course, 2013-02-25 © 2013 Holcim Ltd