R E V I E W N O.

1 4 5

Keystone´s cross-over

Reprint of article published

in International Cement Review, January 2003.

By Robert E. Shenk, Senior Process Engineer

Manager of Pyroprocessing Technology, F.L.Smidth Inc., USA

A detailed review of Keystone Cement’s SF
Cross-BarTM Cooler
K
eystone Cement Company is a sub-
sidiary of Giant Cement Holding,
Inc and along with its sister plant
(Giant Cement) is owned by the
Spanish group Cementos Portland, SA.
Keystone Cement has been an integral part
of the Lehigh Valley’s cement manufactur-
ing scene since 1928.
The original plant consisted of four
state of the art wet process kilns supported
by four raw mills and four finish mills.
Today, the cement manufacturing facility
consists of two wet kiln systems: Kiln#1
(2.9m diameter x 106.7m long) and Kiln#2
(4.57m diameter x 167.6m long). Each kiln
was originally supplied with a traditional
grate cooler. Two (2) raw mills from 1928,
as well as a new raw mill installed in 1999,
are used to support the two kiln lines. A
modern cement mill with high efficiency
classifier is utilised to produce the final
cement product.
Keystone began utilising waste derived
fuels in 1976 to offset the high fuel costs
inherent within the wet process. By having
state-of-the-art testing, unloading, and
storage facilities for waste fuels, Keystone
is able to supplement upwards of 50 per
cent of the fossil fuels utilised with waste
derived fuels in kiln #2.
Decision making process
During the summer of 1997, Keystone
Cement was establishing its budget for fis-
cal year 1998. During this time, it was
foreseen that at least US$500,000 worth of
repairs would be required for the 32-year-
old traditional grate cooler for Kiln #2 dur-
ing the annual outage in 1998. Keystone
had contacted its local equipment supplier
to insure the necessary parts would be
available in time for the outage.
In early 1997, the same equipment
supplier had installed the proto-type ver-
sion of its revolutionary new clinker cooler
concept at a cement plant in Western
COOLER TECHNOLOGY
Keystone’s
cross-over
Pennsylvania.
by Robert This new cooler concept had Engineer Manager of Pyroprocessing
E Shenk Senior Process
Technology, FLSmidth Inc
A wet process plant operating in today’s competitive cement market must
continually look at its operations for any possible ways to maximise avail-
ability at the highest possible efficiency to compete with the more effi-
cient dry process kilns. In doing so, wet process kiln owners must keep
abreast of the latest technology. One such plant was looking at spending
over half a million US dollars in 1997 to overhaul their traditional grate
cooler originally supplied in 1965. At the same time a cement equipment
supplier was introducing a revolutionary new clinker cooler concept to the
marketplace. This paper will focus on this cement plant’s decision to
install the very latest in clinker cooling technology as well as the results
and experiences after four years of operation.
been successfully operating for almost
six months by the time Keystone was
thinking about their 1998 budget.
After receiving the rather large
inquiry for spare parts for the existing
cooler, the equipment supplier reasoned
that it may be more feasible for
Keystone to consider the installation of a
new cooler rather than overhaul an out
dated piece of machinery. The equipment
supplier introduced the new clinker
cooler concept to Keystone Cement and
took them on a plant visit to the proto-
type cooler. The new cooler
concept was a revolutionary Figure 1: comparison of conveying mechanism for traditional
design when compared to both grate cooler (top) versus Cross-Bar Cooler, bottom
Keystone’s traditional grate
cooler and the generally
accepted cooler design at the
time (air-beam style). The new
clinker cooler design is here-
with referred to as a cross-bar
cooler due to one of its four
innovative design features.
When compared to existing
clinker cooling technology, the
cross-bar cooler introduced
four new and innovative design
features:
INTERNATIONAL CEMENT REVIEW / JANUARY 2003
 COOLER TECHNOLOGY
Clinker conveying
mechanism
In grate coolers (traditional and air-
beam technology), the clinker con-
veying mechanism and cooling mech-
anism are one in the same; the grate
plates themselves. The reciprocating
action of the grate plates conveys the
clinker throughout the cooler.
However, in the cross-bar cooler, the
grate plates are fixed for the entire
grate line. To convey the clinker, the
cross-bar cooler has a system of alter-
nating moveable and stationary cross-
bars located approximately 50mm
above the grate line. The moveable
crossbars are attached to drive plates,
which in turn are attached to a move-
able frame. The moveable crossbars
have a similar reciprocating action as
the grate plates of a traditional or air-
beam cooler. Figure 1 reflects a visual
comparison of the overgrate for a tradi-
tional grate cooler and a cross-bar
cooler.
Both the moveable and stationary
crossbars are held in place by retainer
brackets with a simple wedge and lock-
ing pin mechanism. The retainer brackets
for the moveable crossbars attach to ears
extending from the drive plates. Both
the moveable crossbar and its retainer
brackets rest on a patented sealing pro-
file that protects the drive plate by cre-
ating a dust trap, preventing clinker
from interacting (wear) with the drive
plates and from entering the undergrate
compartment.
The wear parts are limited to the
crossbars, retainer brackets, and the
sealing profiles. All individual wear com-
ponents are easily replaceable. Figure 2 Figure 3: stationary grid for air distribution
depicts the way in which all wear com-
ponents fit together and reflect the simple
assembly and easy replacement.
Fixed grate line for air distribution
As in a traditional grate cooler, the grate
line of a cross-bar cooler sits atop the
under-grate chamber. However, in the
cross-bar cooler, each and every grate
plate is fixed (Figure 3), unlike a grate
cooler where alternating rows are recipro-
cating.
Due to the stationary grid for air distri-
bution, substantial maintenance and
process benefits are realised:
• grate plate wear is minimised and
replacement is rare (decreased mainte-
nance)
INTERNATIONAL CEMENT REVIEW / JANUARY 2003
• from campaign to campaign there is
Figure 2: replacement of wear components
and retainer bracket locking mechanism
no deterioration of the cooler effi-
ciency since no gaps between grate
plates are created and thereby ineffi-
cient cooling air is avoided. (con-
stant, high cooler efficiency)
• no spillage of clinker into the
undergrate and thereby, undergrate
spillage conveying devices are
avoided. (decreased maintenance and
lower headroom requirements)
• no need for air distribution piping.
(decreased maintenance)
• no need for inefficient sealing air as
in air-beam style coolers (increased
efficiency)
• the need for side castings and
replaceable lips are avoided
(decreased maintenance)
• no interface between the grate
plates and refractory side castings
(decreased maintenance).
Mechanical Flow Regulators
All grate plates within a cross-bar cooler
are equipped with a Mechanical Flow
Regulator (MFR) which regulates the air-
flow to each and every grate plate via a
self-adjusting orifice. The MFR working
principal is based upon simple physics
and requires no electrical controls (refer
to Figure 4). The primary function of the
MFR is to insure a constant airflow
through the grate plate irrespective of
the clinker bed height, particle size dis-
tribution, temperature, etc.
The MFR acts like a barometric damper
in a chimney. Depending upon the pres-
sure inside the tower, the MFR opens or
closes. Since the pressure inside the
tower is a measure of the resistance of
the material level above it, the regulator
Figure 4: MFR
 COOLER TECHNOLOGY

quality, swift and easy installation. For a

Figure 5: MFR reaction to varying bed resistance given kiln production, modules are simply
set side-by-side and end-to-end to con-
struct the entire cooler. Figures 7 and 8
depict the standard fixed inlet and cross-
bar modules.
Due to the modular design and the pre-
assembly at the manufacturing shop, the
replacement of an existing cooler can take
as little as 25 days (from fire out to fire in
the kiln).

Process comparison

With the revolutionary design of the cross-

bar cooler, increased efficiency is seen
Figure 6: MFR affect on recoup air velocity profile throughout the entire cooler. This high
level of efficiency does not deteriorate
over time since the conveying mechanism
has been separated from the cooling mech-
anism. As a result of this high level of effi-
ciency, the lowest possible cooler losses
are attainable which minimises the specific
fuel consumption of the kiln system. With
the superior heat exchange between cool-
ing air and clinker, lower specific cooling
air rates are possible to achieve acceptable
final clinker temperatures.

Keystone’s decision
After considering the new cross-bar cooler
opens to compensate for an increase in the profile can be created through the clinker design, visiting the proto-type installation,
resistance (fine clinker or thick clinker bed, which maximises the heat transfer and the favourable ‘Lease to Own
bed) or closes to compensate for a and the heat recuperation to the kiln Option”’provided by the equipment sup-
decrease in the resistance (coarse clinker system. plier, Keystone Cement decided to install
or thin clinker bed). The MFR, thus, con- the revolutionary new cooler design rather
trols the amount of cooling air to each Modular design than overhaul its existing cooler system.
individual grate plate. It is like having an The entire cross-bar cooler is constructed The new cross-bar cooler was installed in
individual cooling air fan for every grate as a modular system with a fixed inlet March 1998, and was easily installed dur-
plate in the cooler, except that the airflow module (1.3m wide x 2.0m long or 4 x 5 ing the annual outage, due to the modular
distribution is automatically taken care of grates) followed by standard cross-bar design of the new cooler.
with the MFR rather than constant manual modules (1.3m wide x 4.2m long or 4 x 14 The cooler supplied and installed at
adjustments. Figure 5 depicts the action of grates). The standard modules are pre- Keystone was two (2) modules wide by
the MFR when faced with varying bed resis- assembled in the workshop to ensure high three (3) modules long with a two (2)
tance.
Figure 7: fixed inlet module Figure 8: Cross-Bar module
The distribution of cooling air through
the clinker bed is most important within
the recuperation zone of the clinker cooler.
On traditional grate and air-beam style
coolers, where there is not finite distribu-
tion of cooling airflow, the cooling airflow
takes the path of least resistance as it
passes through the clinker bed. With little
control of where the cooling airflow is
going through the clinker bed, an uneven
velocity profile is created through the
clinker bed, which adversely effects heat
transfer and heat recuperation back into
the kiln (refer to Figure 6). However, when
finite control of airflow is realised, by the
use of MFRs, an even velocity

INTERNATIONAL CEMENT REVIEW / JANUARY 2003

 COOLER TECHNOLOGY
Figure 9: modular delivery and installation of fixed inlet module
Figure 10: delivery & installation of Cross-Bar modules
module wide fixed inlet. Figure 9 shows the
delivery and installation of the fixed inlet
module, while Figure 10 shows the delivery
and installation of the third cross-bar mod-
ule. The total grate area of the new cooler
is 37m2 and at a nominal kiln production of
1500tpd, the cooler loading is 41tpd/m2.
Cross-bar cooler results
Process results
Shortly after the installation and start-up
of the new cross-bar cooler, the equipment
supplier conducted a performance test and
proved that the new cooler easily met the
process guarantees. Figure 11 depicts the
process differences before and after the
cross-bar cooler installation.
The specific fuel consumption
decreased by approximately 15 per cent.
This savings is directly attributed to the
decrease in the cooler loss and the signifi-
cant increase in the secondary air tempera-
ture. Decreased specific power consump-
tion was also realised due to the low
amount of installed cooling air that was
necessary to achieve similar clinker tem-
perature results.
Keystone has realised an additional
benefit with the higher secondary air tem-
perature for their waste fuel firing pro-
gram. Due to the higher secondary air tem-
perature, the kiln is now able to
INTERNATIONAL CEMENT REVIEW / JANUARY 2003
separation of the cooling and conveying
mechanisms inside the cooler.
Over the long-term, Keystone has been
able to appreciate an average secondary air
temperature increase of some 200°C. This
higher temperature has led to better flame
shaping capabilities, stable burning zone,
stable kiln exit NOx, and increased refrac-
tory lifetimes.
Maintenance results
In addition to the substantial process
results achieved by the installation of the
cross-bar cooler, Keystone has realised sig-
consistently utilise waste nificant maintenance benefits as well.
fuel and has a more stable When directly compared to the traditional
burning zone than previous grate cooler on an annual maintenance
to the cross-bar cooler cost basis, Keystone is realising annual
installation. The high sec- savings of US$100,000 (minimum) on parts
ondary air temperature alone. Additional savings are also realised
helps to negate the highly due to the decreased labour cost required
variable moisture content of on the cross-bar cooler during the annual
the waste fuel. outage.
The equipment supplier The characteristics of the wear compo-
recently conducted an audit nents at Keystone Cement have been well
to evaluate the cooler per- documented over the last four years. The
formance over time. Figure equipment supplier and Keystone have had
12 reflects the comparison a close working relationship to continually
of the performance test (1998) and the improve the design of the wear compo-
recent audit some four years later. This nents to a point such that it is expected
comparison truly reflects the capability of that all wear components will last for two
the cross-bar cooler to maintain a high campaigns before requiring replacement.
level of efficiency over time due to the Such long wearlife is achieved due to the
Figure 11: performance test results
Wet kiln system USA Before After
Heat consumption (kcal/kg) 1522 1284
Cooling air to grate (NM3/kg) 2.63 1.47
Excess air (NM3/kg) (Vent air + coal mill) 1.45 0.36
Secondary air (ºC) 601 750
Clinker temperature (ºC) above ambient 86 80
Undergrate fans (kWh/Mt) 4.8 4.4
Cooler loss (kcal/kg) 115 59
Standard cooler loss (kcal/kg) 155 80
Figure 12: Cross-Bar cooler performance over time
Wet kiln system USA 1998 P-Test 2002 Audit
Heat consumption (kcal/kg) 1284 1176
Cooling air to grate (NM3/kg) 1.47 1.75
Excess air (NM3/kg) (VENT AIR + COAL MILL) 0.36 0.52
Secondary air (ºC) 750 905
Clinker temperature (ºC) ABOVE AMBIENT 80 44
Undergrate fans (kWh/Mt) 4.4 4.8
Cooler loss (kcal/kg) 59 55
Standard cooler loss (kcal/kg) 80 85

Figure 13: comparison of 1998 (left) wear components (heat resistant material) versus 2002
(right) wear components (wear resistant material) after one year operation
fact that the wear components are now
completely tailored and designed for wear
resistance rather than heat resistance.
Figure 13 shows a comparison of the typi-
cal wear components after one year of
operation for the older design heat resis-
tant components and the newer design
wear resistant components. The pre-
Figure 14: kiln operation percentage with traditional grate cooler
Figure 15: kiln operational percentage with Cross-Bar cooler since installation
dictability and longevity of the wear resis-
tant materials continue to further drive
down the maintenance costs for the cooler
and offers additional cooler availability,
which in turn offers the potential for
increased kiln availability.
If any maintenance is required on the
cooler throughout a campaign, Keystone
INTERNATIONAL CEMENT REVIEW / JANUARY 2003
COOLER TECHNOLOGY
Cement personnel have found that the
majority of maintenance items can be
accomplished while the kiln is still running
due to the simplicity and accessibility for
maintenance. This fact alone insures maxi-
mum utilisation of the kiln process and
increases overall availability.
Due to the innovative design of the
cross-bar cooler and the predictability of
maintenance, the availability of the kiln
system has increased to record levels for
Keystone Cement. The average monthly kiln
operational percentage was 86.1 per cent
(inclusive of annual outages) for the two
years prior to the cross-bar cooler installa-
tion. Since the cross-bar cooler installation
four years ago, the average monthly kiln
operational percentage has increased to
90.8 per cent (inclusive of annual out-
ages). Most significantly, Keystone Cement
has not had to shut down the kiln system
due to any problem with the cross-bar
cooler over the last two years. Figure 14
reflects the monthly average kiln opera-
tional percentage with the traditional grate
cooler for the two years prior to the cross-
bar cooler installation. Figure 15 shows the
increased average monthly kiln operational
percentage for the kiln system after the
installation of the cross-bar cooler. Specific
notation should be made to the substantial
increase in 100 per cent kiln operation
after the installation.
Conclusion
Over the four years since the installation of
the cross-bar cooler, Keystone Cement has
realised all of the equipment supplier’s
claims for the revolutionary clinker cooler:
decreased maintenance costs, increased
thermal efficiency, decreased specific
power consumption, and increased kiln
system availability. In many areas, actual
results have exceeded expectations. This is
especially apparent when looking at the
average monthly kiln operational percent-
age of 95.9 per cent (exclusive of annual
outages). The cross-bar cooler has signifi-
cantly raised the secondary air temperature
to such an extent that Keystone can max-
imise the utilisation of waste derived fuels,
while still maintaining a stable burning
zone ensuring long refractory lifetime.
Keystone Cement’s decision to ‘Lease to
Own’ a revolutionary new cooler rather
than overhaul an outdated piece of equip-
ment has ensured themselves higher
operating margins and has positioned
themselves more competitively within the
marketplace. ______________________❒
Data in this brochure is intended for preliminary project planing only. Manufacturer reserves the right to modify equipment details and/or specifications without notice.

DENMARK
F.L.Smidth
Vigerslev Allé 77
DK-2500 Valby
Copenhagen
Tel: +45 - 36 18 10 00
Fax: +45 - 36 30 18 20

Environmentally certified according to DS/EN ISO 14001 Richard Larsen Grafisk A/S
E-mail: info@flsmidth.com

INDIA
Fuller India Limited
Capital Towers
180, Kodambakkam High Road
Nungambakkam
Chennai 600 034
Tel: +91 - 44-252-191234
Fax: +91 - 44-2827-9393
E-mail: fil@fullerindia.co.in

USA
F.L.Smidth Inc.
2040 Avenue C
Bethlehem, PA 18017-2188
Tel: +1 - 610-264-6011
Tel: +1 - 800-523-9482 KN
ING 02
2
MILJØMÆR

KSAG

Fax: +1 - 610-264-6170
TRY
SK

41

DI 5
NOR

E-mail: info@flsmidth.com

www.flsmidth.com