See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/263139096

The Effects of Moisture Content and Coal Mixtures on the

Grinding Behavior of Two Different Coals

Article  in  Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization and Environmental Effects · February 2014
DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2010.538811

CITATIONS READS

9 1,097

1 author:

Vedat Deniz
Hitit University
72 PUBLICATIONS   601 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Calcite and huntite minerals grinding, ore benefication (Barite waste) View project

9005 University-Sector Cooperation supported by the Hitit University Scientific Research Fund (BAP) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Vedat Deniz on 12 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [V. Deniz]
On: 24 December 2013, At: 02:53
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery,

Utilization, and Environmental Effects
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueso20

The Effects of Moisture Content and Coal

Mixtures on the Grinding Behavior of
Two Different Coals
a
V. Deniz
a
Department of Polymer Engineering , Hetit University , Çorum ,
Turkey
Published online: 20 Dec 2014.

To cite this article: V. Deniz (2014) The Effects of Moisture Content and Coal Mixtures on the Grinding
Behavior of Two Different Coals, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects, 36:3, 292-300, DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2010.538811

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2010.538811

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Energy Sources, Part A, 36:292–300, 2014
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1556-7036 print/1556-7230 online
DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2010.538811

The Effects of Moisture Content and Coal Mixtures on

the Grinding Behavior of Two Different Coals

V. Deniz1
1
Department of Polymer Engineering, Hetit University, Çorum, Turkey
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

In this article, effects of moisture content and coal mixtures on grinding properties of the samples
of two different fine coals, which were used in the Göltaş Cement Factory in Isparta (Turkey) were
investigated. Grinding tests were done in a new grinder called “Mortar Grinder.” A good calibration
has been established between the Mortar Grinder with the Bond and the Hardgrove grindabilities at
the beginning of the tests. At the first stage, A and B type two coal samples, and in the second
stage, the samples of three different mixtures (25% of A C 75% of B, 50% of A C 50% of B, and
75% of A C 25% of B) have been worked in grindability tests for different moisture contents. As a
result, although the A and B coal samples were showing different grinding intervals versus moisture
contents, these samples had similar grinding characteristic curves. Additionally, the high quality coals
have easier grinding in respect to the low quality coals with the same moisture content.

Keywords: Bond work index, coal, coal mixture, Hargrove grindability, moisture

1. INTRODUCTION

Turkey has 84 million tons of lignite reserves; hence, Turkey has an important place in coal
production potential for future use in terms of electric energy production, the cement industry,
and some chemical industries that use coal. In these industries, at least 50% of lignite needs to
be ground under 75 microns. The produced fine coals are ignited by a burner.
Two of the most important factors that influence the efficiency of coal grinding plants are the
physical and chemical properties of coal used. These properties should coincide with the design
parameters of the grinding plant since coal with off-design characteristics causes a considerable
increase in production costs besides a decrease in efficiency. In the selection of a grinding
system, capital cost and operating expenditures have been known to play an important role in
the grindability of coal (Deniz and Umucu, 2013).
Grindability is a complex material characteristic involving the mechanical properties of the
material, the principal breaking forces generated in a given grinding apparatus, and the interactions
of the formers. Therefore, the expressions for the grindability should be a relevant complex
parameter. The expressions for the grindability, as measured by relative generation of a certain
size fraction or the specific energy required for grinding 1 ton of a given material below 100 m,

Address correspondence to Prof. Vedat Deniz, Department of Polymer Engineering, Hetit University, Müh. Fak. Polimer
Müh. Böl., Çevre Yolu, Çorum 19030, Turkey. E-mail: vedatdeniz@hitit.edu.tr

292
 GRINDING BEHAVIOR OF COALS 293

have been developed. They are known as the Hardgrove grindability index and the Bond work
index, respectively. The Hardgrove grindability index associated mainly with vertical spindle mills
while the Bond grindability index associated with tumbling mills. The Hargrove grindability was
proposed by R. M. Hargrove in 1952 and the Bond grindability was proposed by C. Bond in
1952. The Hardgrove procedure is relatively simple and uses the ball-and-race type standard
small laboratory mill, where the dominant grinding effect is attrition. The Bond test is based on
the simulation of a ball-drum mill-sizer closed circuit until reaching the equilibrium condition, and
it involves a very time consuming experiment. The major comminution effects arising in the Bond
mill are blow and impact, and the minor effect is rubbing. These methods have two important
difficulties: first, Bond and Hargrove methods need a special mill and, second, the procedure takes
too long (Bond and Maxson, 1943; ASTM, 1951; McIntyre and Plitt, 1980; Prasher, 1987; Deniz
et al., 1996; Csöke et al., 2003).
In general, coal grindability characteristics reflect the coal hardness, tenacity, and fracture,
which are influenced by coal rank, petrography, and the distribution and types of minerals.
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

Moisture of coal is an important parameter, which influences the grindability of a coal. This
has a significant effect on the coal with average moisture levels being approximately 2.5%
higher in the winter than summer. As this difference is relatively consistent despite the actual
rainfall, it is reasonable to assume that the moisture content during the determination of Hargrove
grindability index (HGI) is significantly higher in winter than in summer. As the coal dries well
in summer, it is likely that the ’as analyzed’ moisture shows a greater difference between summer
and winter than would be apparent from the coal stockpile moisture levels (Vuthaluru et al., 2000,
2003).
Blending is another parameter that influences the grindability of a given coal. There have been
some investigations in the past on the HGI of coal blends in relation to the additivity of the HGI,
and although some coals show additivity, this is not usually the case. There is no general method
for predicting the HGI of a coal blend, which must be determined experimentally on a case to
case basis (Vuthaluru et al., 2003).
Because of difficulties on the determination of the Bond and the Hargrove grindability tests,
in this work they were accomplished by a new mill called the Mortar Grinder. In addition, the
Mortar Grinder was also used for tests due to similarity to a vertical spindle mill, which is
generally used for grinding coal. In the first test, the coals that have 11 different properties were
tested with 3 grindability methods. A correlation between the Mortar grindability test with the
Bond and Hargrove grindability tests were established, and the relation equations between them
were determined.
The subject of this study was about the effect of moisture on coal and coal mixtures. For this
purpose, the coals called A and B used in the Goltas Cement Factory in Isparta (Turkey), were
tested. In these tests, the Mortar Grinder has been used to determine the grindability index for the
first time.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Materials
Two different fine coal samples, namely A (slime) and B (0–18 mm) coals, used in Goltas Cement
Factory, were used in tests. The A coal sample with a density of 1.68 t/m3 contains 24.96% fixed
carbon, 33.34% moisture, and 18.55% ash, with a net calorific average value of 3,617 kcal/kg.
The B coal sample with a density of 1.45 t/m3 contains 38.22% fixed carbon, 21.96% moisture,
and 16.38% ash, with a net calorific value of 5,857 kcal/kg.
 294 V. DENIZ

2.2. Hargrove Grindability Index (HGI) Test Method

The HGI of coal is an important technological parameter in understanding the behavior of the
grinding of coal. The design of the vertical spindle mill is mainly dependent on the HGI. Although
the device for testing of HGI is not costly, the measuring procedure to get a HGI value is toilsome
and time consuming. In addition, it is not a routine testing item in coal-fired power and cement
plants that used vertical spindle mills (Peisheng et al., 2005).
In the United States, the HGI method is described in ASTM D409 “Standard Test Method for
Grindability of Coal by the Hardgrove-Machine Method” (ASTM 1951). This method consists of
grinding a sieved sample in a grinder with defined dimensions and grinding energy, measuring
the sieve size of the remaining product, and comparing the result with standard coal samples to
produce the relative grindability index. A high HGI value of a coal indicates that the coal is easy to
grind. The most often reported limitations of the HGI test include that the parameter is non-linear
(e.g., HGI values changing from 40 to 50 can cause much more difference in grindability or mill
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

capacity than from 90 to 100), not-additive as in cases of blend coals, and affected significantly
by moisture content and thus pretreatment of coal samples. Some modifications of the standard
test result in more confusion, e.g., the same coal may have different HGI test results.
The ASTM (1951) Hardgrove procedure was carried out, i.e., the test feed is a 50-g sample of
coal, which has been prepared in a specific manner and which has a limited particle size range,
1:18  0:6 mm, and is placed in a stationary grinding bowl in which eight steel balls can run in
a circular path. A loaded ring is placed on top of the set of balls with a gravity load of 29 kg.
The machine is run (for 3 min) for 60 revolutions of the mill at a speed of 20 rev/min. The top is
removed and the ground coal removed. This coal is sized and the quantity less than 75 microns
recorded. This is converted to a HGI value using a calibration graph.

2.3. Bond Work Index (Wi ) Test Method

The Bond ball grindability determination is carried out in a standard test mill and under standard
conditions. The Bond ball mill has no lifters and all the inside comers are rounded. It is operated
at 70 rpm and is equipped with a revolution counter. The ball charge consists of 285 iron balls (43
of 38.1 mm, 67 of 31.75 mm, 10 of 25.4 mm, 71 of 19.05 mm, and 94 of 15.87 mm) weighing
20.125 grams. The Bond grindability test is usually determined at 27, 50, 76, 106, or 150 microns.
Actually, these values finer than 76 m are doubtful because dry screening in these finer sieves is
not reliable. However, in the industrial practice, such a bulk material, which has a higher ratio of
fine fraction, is not rare. Therefore, the work indices were determined at a standard test sieve size
of 106 m. An additional problem might be that feeds contain an excessive amount of finished
product, which prolongs attainment of the steady-state condition. For practical purposes, a sample
that contains 15% of finished fraction or less is ideal (Yap et al., 1982).
The standard Bond grindability test is a closed-cycle dry grinding and screening process, which
is carried out until steady state conditions are obtained. This test was proposed by Bond and
Maxson (1943) and used by different researcher (Yap et al., 1982; Deister, 1987; Magdalinovic,
1989; Deniz et al., 1996; Deniz and Özdağ, 2003; Deniz, 2004, 2013; Deniz and Umucu, 2013).
The material to be tested is reduced to 3.35 mm by careful stage crushing. The amount of
material used as the charge to the mill is the mass of 3.35 mm material that occupies 700 cc
after being shaken by a vibrating table. For the first grinding cycle, the mill is started with an
arbitrarily chosen number of mill revolutions, for example, the Bond mill is rotated 100 times and
then stopped. At the end of the first grinding cycle, the entire product is discharged from the mill
and is screened on a test sieve (106 m). The oversize fraction (recycled product) is returned to the
mill for the second run, together with a fresh feed to make up the original weight corresponding
to 700 cc. The weight of the product per unit of mill revolution, called the grindability of the
 GRINDING BEHAVIOR OF COALS 295

TABLE 1
The Properties of the Hardgrove Mill and the Mortar Grinder

Properties of Test Mortar Hargrove

Apparatus Grinder Mill

Load (kg) 40 29
Number of ball 1 8
Rotation speed (rpm) 70 20
Grinding time (min) 1 3
Particle size (mm) 1.7–0.85 1.18–0.60
Diameter of ball (mm) 128 25.4
Size of test sieve (micron) 106 75
Weight of material (g) 50 50
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

cycle, is then calculated to estimate the number of revolutions required for the second run to
be equivalent to a circulating load of 250%, i.e., containing 28.6% of fresh feed. The process is
continued until a constant value of the grindability is achieved to reach the equilibrium condition.
Continue the grinding period cycles until the net grams of sieve undersize produced per revolution
reaches an equilibrium and reverses its direction of increase or decrease. This equilibrium condition
may be reached in 6 to 12 grinding cycles. After reaching the equilibrium, the grindabilities for
the last three cycles are averaged. The average value is taken as the standard Bond grindability
(Gbg ):

P
Gbg D ; (1)
n

where Gbg is Grindability index of sample (g/rev); P is the net amount of ground products, (g);
and n is revolution number of Bond ball mill.
The Bond work index values (Wi ) are calculated from Eq. (2):

44:5
Wi D 1:1  p p ; (2)
Pi0:23  Gbg
0:82
 Œ.10= P80 / .10= F80 /

where Wi is standard Bond work index (kwh/t); Pi is test sieve size (106 m); Gbg is Bond
standard ball mill grindability (g/rev); P80 and F80 are the 80% of cumulative undersize curve of
feed and product (m), respectively.

2.4. The Mortar Grinder Index (MGI) Test Method

The grindability tests were performed on 12 different coal samples by using the Hargrove mill,
the Bond mill, and the Mortar Grinder (Figure 1a). From these three types, the Mortar Grinder
has been used as the base grinder and calibration charts of others have been achieved by using
the Mortar Grinder. The Hargrove mill with the Mortar Grinder have a resemblance with respect
to procedure, although, they have different properties. The properties of the Hargrove mill with a
Mortar Grinder were given in Table 1.
The coal samples, which were going to be used in the Mortar Grinder, are constituted in material
of 3.35 mm; they are also used for the Ball mill. This material is separated of 1.7–0.85 mm by
 296 V. DENIZ
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

(a)

(b)

FIGURE 1 (a) View of the Mortar Grinder, and (b) calibration chart (MGI vs. Wi and MGI vs. HGI) for the
Mortar Grinder.

sieving and 50 grams of test materials made out by sampling are sent to the Mortar Grinder. A
grinding time of 1 min has been approved for the test condition of MGI (Mortar Grinder Index)
owing to overcharge, and for the ease of sieving; a screen size of 106 micron has been used. The
percentage value of the ratio of the over size material to the total material has been accepted as
MGI. The lower the MGI value, the easier the coal grindability.
The Mortar grindability indexes (MGI), the Hargrove grindability indexes (HGI), and the Bond
work indexes (Wi ) have been obtained from tests for 11 different coal samples. A calibration chart
has been drawn for transferring the Bond work index or the Hargrove grindability values from
 GRINDING BEHAVIOR OF COALS 297
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

FIGURE 2 The grindability behavior of (a) a coal sample, (b) B coal sample, (c) mixture of 25% of A C 75%
of B, (d) mixture of 50% of A C 50% of B, and (e) mixture of 75% of A C 25% of B sample versus different
moisture contents.

MGI value with the aid of Figure 2b. Equations (3) and (4) of these relationships were as follows:

Wi D 2:54  10.0:01MGI / r D 0:91; (3)

HGI D 288:92  10. 0:02MGI /

r D 0:91: (4)
 298 V. DENIZ

3. EXPERIMENTS

3.1. The Grindability Tests of A and B Coal Samples with Different

Moisture Contests
As mentioned before, A and B coals were performed by Mortar Grinder for different moisture
contents. The drying of coals was carried out at room temperature and dried in an oven that is
adjusted to 70ıC.
The moisture contents of coals were performed in a short time (1–3 min) by an apparatus called
a SARTARIOS moisture determiner. The sieving processes of materials were made by hand with
using under 106 microns after the materials were dried at room temperature.
The Mortar grindability indexes (MGI) of A and B coal samples with different moisture contents
were given graphically in Figures 2a and 2b, respectively. Two different graphics were displayed
with the same grinding characteristics, although the change of grindability interval of the samples
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

was different.
The A sample has easy grinding when the moisture content has a value of 12%. The difficulties
of the grindability increase under the value of 12% and up to 25–30%. The grinding of A coal
sample tended to be easy when moisture content was over 30%.
The B coal sample has easy grinding when the moisture content has a value of 7%. The
grinding of B coal sample tended to be easy when moisture content was over 22%.

3.2. The Grindability Tests of Coal Mixture in Different Moisture Contents

In these tests, three different mixtures were discussed as follows:

1. 25% of AC 75% of B,
2. 50% of AC 50% of B,
3. 75% of AC 25% of B.

The sample, a mixture of 25% of A coal C 75% of B coal, was tested by using the Mortar
Grinder for different moisture contents; the grinding was the easiest when the sample had a
moisture value of 8%, the grinding was increased up to the moisture value of 26%, and after this
moisture value, the grinding tended to decrease (Figure 2c).
The sample, a mixture 50% of A coal C 50% of B coal, was tested by using the Mortar Grinder
for different moisture contents; the grinding was the easiest when the sample had a moisture value
of 10%, the grinding was increased up to the moisture value of 28%, and after this moisture value
the grinding tended to decrease (Figure 2d).
The sample, a mixture 75% of A C 25% of B coal, was tested by using the Mortar Grinder for
different moisture contents; the grinding was the easiest when the sample had a moisture value of
12%, the grinding was increased up to the moisture value of 30%, and after this moisture value
the grinding tended to decrease (Figure 2e).

4. RESULTS OF TESTS

The tests made on the moisture contents of A and B coal samples showed that they have a different
grinding interval versus moisture content, whereas they have similar grinding characteristics.
The sample, called B coal, can reach a value under MGI D 55 when it has the moisture content
of 7%, although the B coal sample has a minimum value of MGI D 59 when it has a moisture
 GRINDING BEHAVIOR OF COALS 299

content of 12%. Additionally, the A coal sample tends to have easy grinding again when it has a
moisture content of 35%. On the other hand, the B coal sample tends to have easy grinding again
when it has a moisture content of 22%.
Coal particles having over moisture content tend to cling to each other so that their movements
were restricted by themselves. Hence, coal particles cannot escape from the grinding body resulting
in better grinding. Eventually, MGI values will increase. On the other hand, if the moisture contents
decrease, the coal particles move freely and less grinding will occur. Therefore, MGI values will
decline.
If the moisture content falls under an average moisture level, resistance of the coal particles to
grinding will diminish, and because of the breakage nature of the coal surface, MGI values will
increase.
For the mixtures of A and B coal samples, the grinding characteristic of the mixture of 25% of
A C 75% of B was similar to that B coal sample. On the other hand, the grinding characteristic
of the mixture of 75% of A C 25% of B was similar to that A coal sample.
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

5. CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the effect of moisture content, an important factor in the grinding of coals, was
investigated. In the first stage, the calibration between the Mortar Grinder and the Bond and the
Hargrove mills, used coal and mineral processing were studied, and the relationships between
them were presented with a good correlation.
The grindability has been found to be affected by not only moisture content but also quality
of coals. Consequently, the better quality coals have the easier grindability.
As a conclusion of this study, the determination of grindability of each coal and each coal
mixture versus moisture must be done, because they have different grindability characteristics and
grindability intervals in terms of its moisture.

REFERENCES

ASTM. 1951. ASTM D 409-71. Standard test method for grindability of coal by Hardgrove-machine method. West
Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Bond, F. C., and Maxson, W. L. 1943. Standard grindability tests and calculations. Trans. SME-AIME 153:362–372.
Csöke, B., Bokányi, L., Bõhm, J., and Pethö, Sz. 2003. Selective grindability of lignites and their application for producing
an advanced fuel. Appl. Energy 74:359–368.
Deister, R. J. 1987. How to determine the bond work index using laboratory ball mill tests. Eng. & Mining J. 188:
42–45.
Deniz, V. 2004. Relationships between Bond’s grindability (Gbg ) and breakage parameters of grinding kinetic on limestone.
Powder Technol. 109:208–213.
Deniz, V. 2013. Comparisons of dry grinding kinetics of lignite, bituminous coal and petroleum coke. Energ. Source. Part
A 35:913–920.
Deniz, V., and Özdag, H. 2003. A new approach to Bond grindability and work index: Dynamic elastic parameters. Miner.
Eng. 16:211–217.
Deniz, V., and Umucu, U. 2013. Interrelationships between the Bond grindability with physicomechanical and chemical
properties of coals. Energ. Source. Part A 35:144–151.
Deniz, V., Balta, G., and Yamik, A. 1996. The interrelationships between Bond grindability of coals and impact strength
index (ISI), point load index (Is) and Friability index (FD ). In: Changing Scopes in Mineral Processing, Roterdam,
Netherlands: A.A. Balkema, pp. 15–19.
Magdalinovic, N. 1989. A procedure for rapid determination of the Bond work index. Int. J. Miner. Process. 27:125–132.
McIntyre, A., and Plitt, L. R. 1980. The interrelationship between Bond and Hardgrove grindabilities. CIM Bull. June:149–
155.
 300 V. DENIZ

Peisheng, L., Youhui, X., Dunxi, Y., and Xuexin, S. 2005. Prediction of grindability with multivariable regression and
neural network in Chinese coal. Fuel 84:2384–2388.
Prasher, C. L. 1987. Crushing and Grinding Process Handbook. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Vuthaluru, H. B., Brooke, R. J., Zhang, D. K., and Yan, H. M. 2003. Effects of moisture and coal blending on Hardgrove
Grindability Index of Western Australian coal. Fuel Process. Technol. 81:67–76.
Vuthaluru, H. B., Yan, H. M., Zhang, D. K., and Brooke, J. 2000. Investigations into the effects of moisture loss and coal
blending on Hardgrove Grindability Index (HGI). Australian Institute of Energy 9th Australian Coal Science Conference,
Solutions for Industry, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, November 26–29, pp. 26–29.
Yap, R. F., Sepulude, J. L., and Jauregui, R. 1982. Determination of the Bond work index using an ordinary laboratory
batch ball mill. In: Designing and Installation of Comminution Circuits. New York: Soc. Min. Eng., AIME, pp. 176–203.
Downloaded by [V. Deniz] at 02:53 24 December 2013

View publication stats