• No results found

CONCLUSION

In document Coal Mill (Page 57-63)

CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSION

6.2 CONCLUSION

The original equipment manufacturer (Babcock and Wilcox) determined a scheduled maintenance service interval of 5 000 hours. The main components in the mill that influenced and determined this interval were the stationary throat slots and mill wear plates. These components were now proven to be improved with the introduction of new technologies:

• Rotating throat assemblies: Original stationary throat slots (5 000 hrs service life) improved by RTA installations (60 000 hrs service life).

• Triton wear plates: OEM wear plates (5 000 hrs service life) improved by Triton material (15 000 hrs service life).

In view of the successes gained with the introduction of the new technologies, there is an opportunity for less maintenance required. If a very conservative approach is taken, the mill services of 5 000 can easily be extended to 8 000 hours without risk to the mill. The mill auxiliary plant’s capability to run for an additional 3 000 hrs between services however has to be tested before this approach can be taken. The carbon seals on the PA fan for instance are prone to failure and a design out maintenance strategy will need to be adopted to eliminate this bottle neck out. In hind side, the introduction of new technologies in this dissertation is nothing else than design out maintenance; evaluating and then eliminating bottle necks in the maintenance process to achieve better performance results. The

advantage of this approach is that there is a cost saving added with maintenance and plant performance enhancement.

The airbags and classifier cone modification were introduced to improve the mill’s reliability and availability. The added benefit is life cycle cost saving with the new technologies. The high chrome mill grinding media was introduced for the purpose of extending mill grinding media life. This material change proved to be successful and with longer material life, the service intervals for ball changes and/or ads are extended. This has the benefit of being able to coordinate service intervals and ball change/add intervals. Refer back to section 4.2.1 where a 5 000 hour mill service will be done after 3 910 hrs due to the wear ion the mill balls. This modification poses a big opportunity for future maintenance cost savings due to a smaller required mill maintenance crew as the amount of required services will be less.

The author would like to suggest future work in this field where a condition based maintenance strategy needs to be investigated. The plant reliability, plant availability and then the cost of maintenance must be compared between a used base and predictive maintenance strategies. The most interesting thing will be to determine the optimum crew size to support a condition based mill approach as the inspection pillar in this approach will need to be extremely reliable for predictions, planning and scheduling of maintenance activities.

The technologies implemented was purposefully first tested for hardware performance and then only evaluated from a financial point of view. This approach assists the financial evaluation of a technology as tangible results can be used as inputs. An investment committee can then easily take a decision for the implementation of a project or not. This approach can only be taken if good references of the proposed technology are sourced from industry. Because of plant differences and various different coal qualities being pulverised in industry, imperial testing is still necessary to determine the actual impact of the technology in the applicable plant.

Due to the technologies introduced, the plant’s maintenance budget will benefit, as savings on maintenance cost will be realised. The NPV for each modification is a saving over time for the power utility. The saving on maintenance cost due to a possible smaller crew for plant maintenance was not part of the scope of this thesis. If a condition based maintenance strategy, as is being suggested, is evaluated, it will be the focus of this research undertaken.

be trended to be able to compare the maintenance results achievable by comparing a time based to a condition based maintenance strategy.

REFERENCES

[1] Varley, J. (April 1999). Looking for India’s lost generation. International

Journal – Modern Power Systems.

[2] Thuesen G.J. & Fabrycky W.J. (2001, ninth edition). Engineering Economy.

[3] Simon, E., Bischoff, W. & Schuster, H. (August 2000). Recent Findings about

the Use of an Extended Coal Range in a Hard Coal-Fired Steam Generator.

International Journal – VGB Power Tech.

[4] Jacobs, B. (1990). E-Type Mill Ball Reduction in Wall thickness. Report done

by Engineering Investigations Division of Eskom, Project Number E89C4405/I.

[5] Williams, K.N. (1984) Babcock ‘E’ Mills: Achievements & Future

Developments. Marketing report for Babcock Engineering Contractors (Pty)

Ltd.

[6] Angleys, M. & Gehrke, B. (September 1998). Development of the Modern

EVT Bowl Mill. International Journal – VGB Power Tech.

[7] Chercea, G., Radulescu, M., Mangu-Totolo, C., Ispas, C. & Belausov, G.

(October 1999). Experiments for Choosing the Optimal Mill Type for Grinding

the Middling Product of Romania. International Journal – VGB Power Tech.

[8] Tigges, K.D., Bischoff, W. & Steinhage, T. (November 1998). Ring-and-Roller

Mills as Components of Modern Firing Technology. International Journal –

VGB Power Tech.

[9] National Fire Protection Association, INC. (1982). Standard for the Installation

and Operation of Pulverized Fuel Systems. U.K. Standard for the Installation

of Pulverised Fuel Systems.

[10] Coetzee, J.L. (2000, second edition). Maintenance.

[11] Tidd, J., Bessant, J. & Pavitt, K. (2000, second edition). Managing Innovation.

[12] Kriel Power Station Income Statement for 2002.

[13] Sherwin, D. (2000). A review of overall models for maintenance budget.

Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering.

[14] DIN 24100.

[15] Babcock Engineering Manuals. (Revision 0). Kriel Power Station 10.8E Coal

Mill Maintenance Manual.

[17] Williams,K. (Various discussions). Ex. Babcock Africa Commissioning

Engineer.

[18] Dugdale, K. (Various discussions) Ex. Mitsui Babcock Design Engineer.

[19] International Energy Agency. (1995). Coal Pulverisers – Performance and

Safety. Report number IEACR / 79.

[20] EPRI Technical Report. (Volume 1). Pulveriser Maintenance Guide. Raymond

Mills.

[21] Nakajima, S. (1998). Introduction to Total Productive Maintenance.

[22] Harrison & White. (n.d.). Capital Replacement.

[23] Investec Client securities article for investors. (December 2007). The global

market for coal.

[24] Scott, D.H. (1995). Coal pulverisers – performance and safety. International

Energy Association coal research report.

[25] Peterson, B.S. Creating a successful maintenance council,

www.samicorp.com

[26] Idhammar, C. Current best practices. Available from www.idcon.com.

[27] Hughes, R. Designing for the life cycle. Available from www.reliability.com.

[28] Liptrot, D. Achieving maximum equipment reliability. Available from www.mt-

onlie.com.

[29] Idhammar, C. What constitutes world-class reliability and maintenance?

Available from www.idcon.com.

[30] Worsham, W.C. Criteria for CMMS to satisfy facility reliability needs. Available

from www.reliability.com.

[31] Mather, D. Fundamentals of maintenance planning. Available from

www.maintenanceworld.comidcon.com.

[32] Ferguson, D. A best process model for asset management. Available from

www.amgplanning.com.

[33] Thompson, P. Reliability – The Journey at Blackwater mine. ICOMS Asset

APPENDIX A – KRIEL PERFORMANCE

TESTS

A1

Coal analysis:

For comparison purposes the following conclusions were made:

• Total moisture on Test 4 (T4) for mill 1C cannot be correct; as the mill outlet temp. during the test was ± 90°C, showing that a grab coal sample is not very accurate. • Hardgrove Index for all the tests is more or less the same and can be assumed to be

constant at 59 for all tests.

• The Calorific Value was only taken as a matter of interest.

• The ash content of tests 2, 4 & 5 differ by less than a percentage point. The differences on the other tests are as follow: T1 = 28%, T3 = 10.6% & T6 = 11.1%. The ash content will influence wear rates more than mill performance and can be assumed to constant for all tests.

In conclusion the coal can be assumed as a constant for comparison purposes. No major deviations were noted.

A.2 Mill differential pressure:

In document Coal Mill (Page 57-63)

Related documents