Comparison between currently applied cement grinding technologies

Hajo Reiners

Agenda

1. Cement Grinding with Loesche Vertical Roller Mills 2. Other Systems for Cement Grinding 3. Former Concerns regarding VRM Cement Qualities 4. The Proven Reality 5. Short Conclusion

2012

Page 2 / 28

Cement Grinding with Loesche VRM Mills

Loesche cement mills worldwide

LOESCHE Ref. C/S Mills 11-2011

LM 63.3+3 LM 56.3+3 LM 56.2+2 LM 53.3+3 LM 46.2+2 LM 41.2+2 LM 35.2+2

Worldwide nearly 240 mills with the 2+2 / 3+3 system About 170 of them are in operation
2012 Page 3 / 28

Cement Grinding with Loesche VRM Mills

Power consumption of ball mill system v/s LOESCHE VRM system (mill, classifier, fan) - OPC grinding

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 3000 3500 4000 cm/g 4500

Ball mill system

kWh/t

LOESCHE VRM system

5000

2012

Page 4 / 28

Cement Grinding with Loesche VRM Mills

Power consumption of ball mill system v/s LOESCHE VRM system (mill, classifier, fan) - slag (GBFS) grinding

160 140 120

Ball mill system

kWh/t

100 80 60 40 20 3000 4000 cm/g 5000

LOESCHE VRM system

6000

2012

Page 5 / 28

Cement Grinding with Loesche VRM Mills

Loesche cement mills worldwide

~ 60% of Mills for more than 1 product ~ 40% of Mills for more than 3 products
2012 Page 6 / 28

Agenda

1. Cement Grinding with Loesche Vertical Roller Mills 2. Other Systems for Cement Grinding 3. Former Concerns regarding VRM Cement Qualities 4. The Proven Reality 5. Short Conclusion

2012

Page 7 / 28

Other Systems for Cement Grinding

Different Systems

2012

Page 8 / 28

Other systems for Cement Grinding

Main Differences of grinding process parameters:

Characteristics
Comminution by: Retention time (min): Comminutions before separation: Circulation factor: Wear rate (g/t):

Ball mill
(closed circuit)

Roller press pressure <0,1 1 >10 5 - 10

Vertical roller mill pressure and shear forces <1 1-3 6-10 3-6

impact 20 - 30 not countable 2-3 ~ 50

2012

Page 9 / 28

Agenda

1. Cement Grinding with Loesche Vertical Roller Mills 2. Other Systems for Cement Grinding 3. Former Concerns regarding VRM Cement Qualities 4. The Proven Reality 5. Short Conclusion

2012

Page 10 / 28

Former Concerns re. VRM Cement Qualities

Compared to traditional Ball Mill systems

It was said that Cements produced in a VRM System have a

Higher Water Demand (Standard Consistency) Retarded Setting Time Lower Compressive Strength

due to
Steeper Particle Size Distribution (Slope n) Different Particle Shape Lower Gypsum Dehydration

2012

Page 11 / 28

Former Concerns re. VRM Cement Qualities

Compared to traditional Ball Mill systems

Steeper Particle Size distribution?

Different Particle Shape?

Lower Gypsum Dehydration?

2012

Page 12 / 28

Agenda

1. Cement Grinding with Loesche Vertical Roller Mills 2. Other Systems for Cement Grinding 3. Former Concerns regarding VRM Cement Qualities 4. The Proven Reality 5. Short Conclusion

2012

Page 13 / 28

The Proven Reality

Different Particle Size Distribution
VRM System (Slope n: 0,9 - 1,1)

sum of residue Q (x) (w.-%)

slope n = tan

position parameter d particle size (m)

Ball Mill System (Slope n: 0,8 - 1,05)

More fine material (Over Ground) in the cement produced by Ball Mill system due to high number of impacts and mill inefficiency
2012 Page 14 / 28

The Proven Reality

Operational parameters

Grinding Pressure Dam Ring Height Mill Airflow Classifier Rotor Speed Table Speed for very high Blaine cements

Dam Ring

2012

Page 15 / 28

The Proven Reality

Options to adjust the inclination n in the PSD Curve.

Steep ==>

Simple adjustment options to achieve the desired product

2012 Page 16 / 28

<== Shallow

lower Grinding Pressure higher

lower Height of Dam Ring higher

higher Mill Air Flow lower

higher Classifier Speed lower

Slope n

The Proven Reality

Operational Results regarding Particle Size Distribution:
Technical Properties Mill Separator Density Blaine Slope, n Position parameter, d' Water Demand (Standard consistency) g/cm cm/g m % VRM LSKS 3,164 4258 0,93 11,7 28 BM O-SEPA 3,152 4095 0,92 12,6 28,5

Same Slope n Same Water Demand A PSD as needed can be easily produced within a VRM System
2012 Page 17 / 28

The Proven Reality

Compared to traditional Ball Mill systems

Steeper Particle Size distribution?

Not True!

Different Particle Shape?

Lower Gypsum Dehydration?

2012

Page 18 / 28

The Proven Reality

Different Particle Shape

More spherical shaped particles in cements produced with ball mill systems
compared to

More shallow shaped particles in cements produced with VRM systems

results in

Higher water demand for VRM systems

The particle circularity is determined with an L/ - ratio

2012

Page 19 / 28

The Proven Reality

Different Particle Shape

Fineness: about 4100 Blaine

The maximum particle size in cements is usually between 45 and 55 m depending upon the fineness of the final product and the slope n. 95% of all cement particles are usually below 20 and 45 m depending upon the fineness of the final product and the slope n.
52 m

Particle size in cements all below 55 m and 95% below 45 m

2012 Page 20 / 28

The Proven Reality

Different Particle Shape

Clinker B 3000 cm/g

Circularity of cement particles are similar for cements produced in a ball mill or VRM system. The only notable differences appear at higher particle sizes >50 m who have no influence on the strength development!

Circularity

VRM Roller press Ball mill

58 Particle size (m)

(VDZ 2007)

Similar particle shapes produced on VRM systems

2012 Page 21 / 28

The Proven Reality

Compared to traditional Ball Mill systems

Steeper Particle Size distribution?

Not True!

Different Particle Shape?

Not True!

Lower Gypsum Dehydration?

2012

Page 22 / 28

The Proven Reality

Lower gypsum dehydration
Characteristics
Retention time (min) Temperature (C)

Ball mill (closed circuit)

20 - 30 90 -140

Vertical roller mill

<1 80 -110

Gypsum Dehydration in Ball Mill Systems is different compared to VRM systems. This is due to Higher mill outlet temperature Longer residence time in mill system Different gas humidity (negative factor)
resulting in

(Plaster)

(Gypsum)

(Anhydrite)

Better drying of the gypsum, hence conversion into a higher content of reactive plaster, necessary as a setting regulator

2012

Page 23 / 28

The Proven Reality

Simple Counter Measures in a VRM system

Increase mill exit temperature Increase gypsum content (0,5 1%) Add a small amount of plaster Add a small amount of natural Anhydrite Decrease humidity of mill gas flow
resulting in

Same setting behaviour, i.e. same Setting Time and Compressive Strength Normal optimisation process by works quality department
2012 Page 24 / 28

The Proven Reality

Different Particle Shape

Technical Properties
Mill Separator Fineness acc. to Blaine Standard consistency Setting time, begin Setting time, end Compressive strength (W/C 0,5) [2d] [7d] [28d] MPa MPa MPa 29,8 38,9 57,1 29,9 38,6 54,1 ./. ./. cm/g % min min VRM LSKS 4258 28 130 175 BM O-SEPA 4095 28,5 125 175

Same Cement with the same characteristics

2012 Page 25 / 28

The Proven Reality

Compared to traditional Ball Mill systems

Steeper Particle Size distribution?

Not True!

Different Particle Shape?

Not True!

Lower Gypsum Dehydration?

Partially correct, but simply adjustable! (Normal Optimisation!)

Page 26 / 28

2012

Agenda

1. Cement Grinding with Loesche Vertical Roller Mills 2. Other Systems for Cement Grinding 3. Former Concerns regarding VRM Cement Qualities 4. The Proven Reality 5. Short Conclusion

2012

Page 27 / 28

Short Conclusion
With Loesche Vertical Roller Mills Cement can be produced with the same Particle Size Distribution, Particle Shapes and Setting Behaviour as Cements produced in ball mill systems! Therefore, cements produced with the Loesche Vertical Roller Mill will totally meet the required local market demands, regarding Water Demand, Setting Times and Compressive Strength. BUT much more Energy Efficient, Cost Effective and Flexible

2012

Page 28 / 28