CTS-Mechanical Process Technology Management and Consulting Ltd.

Phone +41 (0)62 887 61 61

MEMORANDUM Fax +41 (0)62 887 67 26

Copies to: external Internal

KBr, Bf, Fh Number: MPT 01/13/E

KHB, Bru, Mbi, Author: Stéphane Ortega
PWi, WZ
Date: 9.05.2001/swa
MTC
Project no.: 54001.007

Ordered by: CTS / MPT

B 8. 1. 1 Reg. 12
Company: CTS / MPT
Title: Surface Reconditioning for Roller Jackets and Table Plates in Vertical Roller
Mills

KEY WORDS: SURFACE RECONDITIONING, WELDING, VERTICAL ROLLER MILL,

WEAR PROTECTION

SUMMARY:

Situation
In a Vertical Roller Mill, the grinding tools are of major importance to ensure an efficient, reliable and
long enough mill operation that suits the plant requirements.
The wear protection for Vertical Roller Mill grinding tools can be divided in two major groups:
¾ Replacement
Once the grinding tools are worn, new ones replace them.
¾ Reconditioning
The worn grinding tools are reconditioned in shape through welding deposit of special wear
resistance alloys.
The present paper analyses the wear leading parameters in a Vertical Roller Mill, describe the
complex process of surface reconditioning and compare it with the solution of replacing the grinding
tools.

C:\Documents and Settings\sortega\Local Settings\Temp\wzadcd\OR-13.DOC

The copyrights for this document and all appendices are reserved by "Holderbank" Management and Consulting Ltd..
 -2-

Conclusions
Surface reconditioning has advantages and, of course, inconveniences, when compared with
replacing due to different incidence in the mill availability, specific energy consumption, hourly
production and labour resources, therefore in the mill total operating cost.
Surface reconditioning is in application for Vertical Roller Mills since 1978 and, despite a complex
process, the know-how developed in the last fifteen years make this technology reliable when
properly applied.
The most cost effective solution for wear protection of grinding tools can only be achieved with a
case by case study, due to the many influencing factors, but it can be generally concluded that
surface reconditioning is interesting when:
¾ Grinding of high abrasive products, especially when mill production decreases quickly as wear
progresses. A typical example is slag grinding.
¾ Very abrasive raw meal grinding where the mill cannot operate during the complete kiln
campaign due to excessive wear of the grinding tools
¾ The actual set of grinding tools are made in Nihard 4 with achieved lifetimes not longer than
one to two years of operation.
 -3-

1. SURFACE RECONDITIONIG AND GRINDING TOOLS LIFETIME 4

1.1 Wear leading parameters 4
1.2 Wear protection for Vertical Roller Mills (VRM) 5
1.2.1 Wear resistance 5
1.2.2 Type of wear protection materials for VRM 5
1.3 Why can surface reconditioning last longer? 6
2. WHAT IS ABOUT SURFACE RECONDITIONING? 7
2.1 The process 8
2.2 The wire and its composition 10
2.3 Welding: melting and solidification 10
2.4 The base material weldability 11
2.5 Piece form requirement 12
2.6 Execution procedure 12
2.6.1 Surface preparation 12
2.6.2 Base material testing 13
2.6.3 Controlling the part temperature 13
2.6.4 Surface reconditioning 14
2.6.5 Cooling down 14
2.6.6 Heat treatment 14
3. WHERE CAN THE JOB BE DONE 14
4. HOW MANY TIMES CAN A GRINDING TOOL BE RECONDITIONED? 15
5. WHEN HAS RECONDITIONING TO BE DONE? 16
6. HOW MUCH DOES SURFACE RECONDITIONING COST? 16
6.1 Cost sources 16
6.2 Cost when subcontracted 17
7. SURFACE RECONDITIONING AND MILL AVAILABILITY 18
8. COST COMPARISON: SURFACE RECONDITIONING / REPLACING 18
8.1 Raw meal mill LM 38.4 by Carboneras plant 19
8.2 Raw meal mill MPS 4150 at Intermoselle 19
8.3 Cost simulation 1 19
9. DANGERS OF A JOB NOT PROPERLY DONE 20
10. CONCLUSIONS 20
 -4-

1. SURFACE RECONDITIONIG AND GRINDING TOOLS LIFETIME

1.1 Wear leading parameters

Studies done for the mining industry allowed establishing the following classification of the
wear leading parameters:
Table 1

Wear influencing factor Range of net wear rate variation

Type of ground product 1 – 400

Final product fineness 1 –150

Type of wear protection 1 – 20

Type of grinding process 1–3

For an existing plant the only remaining freedom to control wear is the “Type of wear
protection”.
But the optimal choice of the “Type of wear protection” has to be done considering the
type of material to be ground and also the type of wear under the grinding tools are
operated: abrasion, erosion or adhesion (in special cases corrosion is also possible).
The relationship between wear ratio can be plotted as a function of the hardness of the
grinding tools and the material to be ground:
Wear ratio
Soft grinding tool
Hard grinding tool

Area with high potential lifetime increase

100 1’200 Ground material hardness HV

Limestone Sand
See annex 1 for more information on grinding tools and ground material hardness.
For the grinding tools in a Vertical Roller Mill erosion is the most frequent type of
wear. Other wear types like adhesion and fatigue are a consequence of bad mill
operation, due to contact between roller and table and/or foreign bodies entering the mill
and should not be solved through the choice of softer grinding tools.
 -5-

1.2 Wear protection for Vertical Roller Mills (VRM)

1.2.1 Wear resistance

The wear resistance of a given material depends mainly on the three following
parameters:
¾ Hardness
¾ Quantity and type of armouring particles (carbides)
¾ The fineness and homogeneity of its base structure or matrix
As a general statement it can be said that: “The higher the hardness, the quantity of
carbides (and their hardness) and the finer the matrix, the higher will be the wear
resistance”.

1.2.2 Type of wear protection materials for VRM

Based on the above wear resistance parameters the following classification of the
solutions used for wear protection of the grinding tools in VRM can be done (ordered in
increasing wear resistance):
Table 2

Type of wear protection [%] Carbon [%] Cr [%] other Hardness Carbides
component [HBr] [% in volume]

Nodular carbon cast >3 < 1.2 < 4.5 [%] Ni < 500 --
(FGS) (1)

Steel (1) < 1.5 > 10 Mo > 420 10

Nihard IV (1) 2.5 – 3.5 8 - 10 < 6.5 [%] Ni < 720 < 30

High Cr alloys (1) < 3.6 < 28 Mo, Ni < 750 > 30

Metallic inserts (1) Base material: nodular carbon cast, Inserts: High Cr alloys (see annex 2)

Surface reconditioning > 4.8 22 – 29 7 - 8 [%] Nb < 720 60

(1) All these products are manufactured through foundry process, which means the casting and shaping of melted metal
through solidification in appropriate moulds.

There is an additional solution with ceramic inserts, but as the operating experience is
short it is not here included. This new solution will be followed up closely because the first
results indicate a lifetime 1.5 – 2.5 times longer than the high Cr alloy solution for rollers.
 -6-

Based on laboratory research and industrial experiences a relative relationship between

the type of wear protection and the expected lifetime, expressed as “lifetime factor” can be
established:

Graphic 1

Lifetime
[%] factor

3 Hardfacing
Surface
reconditioning Metallic
DUOCAST
inserts

2 High Cr.
High Cr alloy

1 Ni-Hard IV
FGS

[HRc]
40 50 60 70
The graphic means that, under the same operating conditions, wear protection with surface
reconditioning might have an operating lifetime > 2 times longer than a wear protection with Nihard IV.

1.3 Why can surface reconditioning last longer?

As seen in graphic above, surface reconditioning can generally give longer lifetimes than
cast products due to metallurgical differences resulting from the manufacturing process:
¾ Quantity and type of armouring particles: carbides
The quantity of carbides in the material matrix depends on percentages of carbon and
alloy elements (Chromium, Niobium). The more carbon and alloy elements the more
carbides.
The most common alloys for surface reconditioning for example Vautid 100 or WA CN
– O, have a sensible higher content of Carbon and Chromium than high chromium cast
as FMU 18 or Chromodur.
Cast products are process limited to 30 - 40 [% in volume] carbide content while surface
reconditioning process allows up to 60 [% in volume] carbide content.
Also the metallurgy of surface reconditioning allows the use of elements like
Niobium and Titanium that produce much harder carbides than the Chromium
ones.
 -7-

The graphic below shows the influence of the amount and type of carbides in the
lifetime
Graphic 2

Lifetime as a function of carbides volumetric proportion and type

2.5

V or Nb Carbide
1.5
Cr or W Carbide

0.5

0
0 10 20 30 40
Carbides volumetric proportion [%]

¾ The fineness and homogeneity of its base structure or matrix

Due to the “mise en oeuvre” and the violent cooling process that occurs during surface
reconditioning the resulting material has:

♦ a finer base material structure or matrix

♦ smaller and, might be, better distributed carbides

than any cast product

2. WHAT IS ABOUT SURFACE RECONDITIONING?

Surface reconditioning is mainly known as the shape regeneration of grinding tools by

deposit of material through arc welding, aiming to:
¾ restore to the roller and/or the table its original shape or give a new shape even
more adapted to the grinding process
¾ give better wear resistance by using higher performance alloys than the original one
from the roller or the table.
But, also, surface reconditioning can be considered for the fabrication of new grinding
tools
In this case a base material, normally Nihard 4 specially treated, is lined with one of the
typical alloys used for surface reconditioning allowing the advantages of surface
reconditioning alloys from the very beginning.
 -8-

Nodular cast iron is also a possible base material, but according to Welding Alloys a
specially treated Nihard 4 is preferred due to better wear resistance and no price
disadvantage.

2.1 The process

Surface reconditioning is done through “arc welding”. The leading parameters that control
this process are:
¾ Welding current
The welding current controls the:

♦ Amount and form of carbides (no carbides means a 50 [%] shorter lifetime)

♦ Deposition rate
The higher the welding current is the higher is the deposition rate because
the faster the wire melts and the higher is the generation of melted drops, which
generates the deposit
wire

drop
deposit

Base material
The welding current is limited by the amount of heat input that the base material
can stand and it varies with the welding wire diameter.
The process of “arc welding” is limited to a deposition rate of 15 kg/h.
In the case of surface reconditioning for grinding tools in Vertical Roller Mills
6 – 11 kg/h is a normal deposition range for one welding gun.

¾ Welding speed
The welding speed is a consequence of the operating welding current and therefore
has the same limitations.
For surface reconditioning in VRM the welding speed ranges within 0.8 – 1.0
[m/min].

¾ Gun position
Must be as vertical as possible to the surface to be reconditioned to avoid
generating a porous deposit. The porosity increases the risk of later reconditioned
surface peal off.
 -9-

¾ Electrode Stick out

Influences also the deposit rate. For most of the applications 5 [mm] appears to be the
optimum. The stick out has to be kept as constant as possible. For a given deposition
rate, the welding current increases as the stick out increases.

¾ Mixing
Is a way to define how much the deposited material penetrates the base material. The
lower the mixing (M) is the higher is the quality of the welding and the
deposition rate

S1
S2
M = S2/(S1+S2)
20 < M < 35 [%] for arc welding
deposition rate kg/h

20 % Mixing
35 % Mixing

Welding current A
 - 10 -

2.2 The wire and its composition

Is composed of a shell filled with a powder.

Shell ¾ The shell
Will generate the matrix of the deposited material.

Powder
¾ The powder
It is there to stabilise the arc and bring in the alloy
elements. The particle size range is from 100 – 500
[μm].
The powder filling degree inside the shell wire
determines the chemical composition.
The most common alloys used for surface reconditioning are (approximate composition):
Table 3

Denomination [%] Carbon [%] Cr [%] others Hardness Carbides

[HBr] [% in volume]

Vautid 100 4.8 29 -- 670 60

WA CN – O 5.0 22 7.2 Nb < 720 60

WA CV – O (1) 5.5 22 6.5 Nb, 3.2 Mo < 720 60

(1) According to FLS, CV – O gives 30 [%] less net wear rate than CN – O

2.3 Welding: melting and solidification

Due to the arc effect the wire melts. Part of it, 5 - 10 [%],
will generate slag and smoke, the rest will solidify and
bond with the material below the welding gun (base
material or a layer of former deposited material) through
mixing.
The deepness of the bounding between layers depends
on the mixing, but can be as 2 [mm] thick.
The development of cracks during the solidification
depends on the base material alloy. The difference of
dilatation coefficient between the alloys used for
reconditioning and the base material generate thermal
stresses, which can only be released through cracks in
the deposited material.
Therefore, the deposited material has a structure similar to the one from a brick wall.
 - 11 -

The amount and form of carbides present in the deposited layer depends not only in the
welding current, as mentioned in 2.1, but also in the mixing and the number of layers, as
qualitatively indicated in the graphic below:

20 % Mixing
% of carbides This is due to a diffusion of the Chromium
35 % Mixing and other alloy elements from the
deposited material to the base material.

Layers

2.4 The base material weldability

As a general rule, it can be said that the higher the ratio Chromium / Carbon content
(Cr/C) of the base material is the more difficult is to recondition (see DIN 8’555 for more
details). With Cr/C ratio bigger than 10 the base material has to be considered as “NON
WELDABLE”.
Based on this the table below gives a classification of the most used wear protection
solutions sorted from good to difficult /impossible to recondition:
Table 3

DIN EN 12’513 Commercial Cr/C [-] Reconditionability

denomination

-- Nodular carbon cast <1 Good

EN – GJN – HV 600 Nihard 4 +/- 3 Good

-- FMU 27 +/- 50 (1) Good

EN – GJN – HV 600 FMU 18 , Chromodur 5–6 Acceptable

(XCr 14)

EN – GJN – HV 600 FMU 52 7–8 Difficult

(XCr 18)

EN – GJN – HV 600 FMU 40 10 Not weldable

(XCr 23)

(1) Exception to the general rule above

This means that the less “reconditionable” the base material is the more care has to be
taken in the execution of the reconditioning.
 - 12 -

2.5 Piece form requirement

The maximum thickness, “m”, of the deposited

m material, measured as indicated on the drawing,
should not exceed 40 – 60 [mm].
The required remaining thickness, “r”, depends
r on the type of grinding tool:
¾ For a table the remaining thickness shall be >
25 – 30 [mm]
Outer side
¾ For the rollers there is normally no problem of
minimum thickness once the above criteria of
maximum thickness “m” has been respected
There are some cases where deposit thickness is
m bigger than the one given above. But for the time
being there are exceptions and there is not any
r feed back available yet.

One example is at La Cemento Nacional in Ecuador, where a reconditioning of the roller

with a deposited thickness of up to 110 [mm] has been made.
Case of symmetrical rollers
In the case of reconditioning symmetrical rollers, like the one from Gebrüder Pfeiffer,
Polysius, etc. it is very important to remount the roller in the mill respecting the same
outer side it had before the reconditioning.
Mounting the roller reversed will expose the part with the thinner reconditioned layer to the
higher wear and the expected lifetime increase will not be reached.

2.6 Execution procedure

The below-described procedure is a summary of the different procedures being used by

specialised surface reconditioning companies.

2.6.1 Surface preparation

The surface to be reconditioned has to be cleaned with compressed air or water.

 - 13 -

2.6.2 Base material testing

Due to operation the roller jackets and

grinding track liner suffer wear and fatigue
phenomena.
Therefore, before deciding if surface
reconditioning can be done it is necessary
to check that the base material is free
from cracks.
This can be done through ultrasounds
and/or penetrating liquid tests.

These test can only be carried before the first reconditioning, after, as the deposited
material is cracked (see 2.3) the results from the test are very difficult to evaluate (see
photo above).

2.6.3 Controlling the part temperature

The process of welding inputs heat in the base material, which generates thermal
stresses. These stresses must be kept within reasonable ranges to protect the grinding
tools, specially not segmented rollers, from cracking.
¾ Heating
The heating is only necessary in wintertime to avoid a temperature gradient within
the part to be reconditioned bigger than 60 °C.
Welding gun

Ambient Temperature

ΔT < 60 °C

¾ Cooling
The temperature of the part to be reconditioned has to be monitored and kept
constantly below 100 °C, to avoid crossing the temperature of martensitic
transformation. If necessary cooling with fans has to be used.
If during the reconditioning the part is heated above the temperature of martensitic
transformation, during the cooling down breakage might occur due to changes in the
base material structure. Effectively, these structure changes will lead to volume
increase of the part and, therefore, to the generation of so high internal stresses, which
will end in breakage.
 - 14 -

2.6.4 Surface reconditioning

See also 2.1 and 2.3.

When reconditioning wear parts, especially rollers, with curved forms (Gebr. Pfeiffer,
Polysius, etc) some precautions have to be taken in deciding where and how the job has
to be started.
Start at the lowest point with reduced deposition rate to serve as a base for the next ones

2.6.5 Cooling down

The cooling down has to be done carefully at ambient temperature but avoiding thermal
shocks (see 2.6.3).

2.6.6 Heat treatment

No heat treatment is required.

A stress – releasing treatment might reduce the risk related with part internal stresses but
also will change the structure of the deposited material and reduce its wear resistance.

3. WHERE CAN THE JOB BE DONE

The reconditioning of the wear parts can be done:

¾ In the mill
¾ In the plant workshop
¾ In a specialised company workshop
From the three above alternatives the last two are preferred due to the point that a still
better work quality can be achieved.
Making the final decision is also a matter of cost and mill availability.
Making the job in a workshop implies dismounting, mounting and handling costs, as well
as spare wear parts if the time available for reconditioning is short.
 - 15 -

4. HOW MANY TIMES CAN A GRINDING TOOL BE RECONDITIONED?

The number of times that a grinding tool can be reconditioned depends mainly on:
¾ Type of grinding tool
Generally a table can be reconditioned more times than a roller. A segmented part can
be reconditioned more times than one in a single piece.
¾ The amount of deposited material in each reconditioning
When the surface reconditioning is done in thin layers, < 10 – 20 mm, the number of
possible reconditioning is bigger than when the reconditioning is done in thick layers.
Reconditioning in thick layers is a typical situation for raw meal or coal grinding
and; reconditioning in thin layers can generally be found for slag, cement and puzzolan
grinding.
The difference between reconditioning in thick or thin layers is given by the influence of
wear in mill performances. In the case of raw meal grinding up to 30 – 40 % of the
rollers initial weight can be used before a sensible deterioration of the mill
performances appear. In this case the reconditioning is in thick layers. If only 10 – 15
% of the initial grinding tool weight can be used the reconditioning will be in thin layers.

Experience shows that the possible number of times a grinding tool can be
reconditioned:
Table 4

Thin layer Thick layer

Roller < 15 (1) 4 - 5 (2)

Table < 10 - 20 5 – 10
(1) Loesche slag mill at Foz sur Mer.

(2) Vautid

The reconditioning heating up and cooling down cycles results in changes in the base
material structure. This phenomenon limits the possible number of reconditionings (see
2.6.3.).
 - 16 -

5. WHEN HAS RECONDITIONING TO BE DONE?

According to Vautid the reconditioning is of even better quality when achieved on an

already existing reconditioned layer (for the second and successive reconditioning):

First reconditioning
Second reconditioning
Third reconditioning

For Welding Alloys this is unimportant and is not a decision criteria for when
reconditioning has to be undertaken.

6. HOW MUCH DOES SURFACE RECONDITIONING COST?

6.1 Cost sources

The cost of surface reconditioning is mainly influenced by:

¾ Wire
10 [CHF/kg] for a Vautid 100 up to 21 [CHF/kg] for a WA CN – O
The price range can be very wide according from whom the offers are from. A
difference of up to 50 % has been observed for the same alloy. It appears that buying
from a mill manufacturer is generally more expensive than buying directly from the
welding wire manufacturer.

¾ Manhours
Manhours cost = Labor cost [CHF/h] / deposit rate [kg/h]

25 - 100 [CHF/h] / 6 -10 [kg/h] ≈ 2.5 - 16.0 [CHF/kg]

 - 17 -

¾ Other costs:

♦ Welding machine amortisation

The machine amortisation cost per kilo material deposited depends much on the
wear rate and the amount of times that reconditioning must be done. A machine
with a welding gun and a rotating device can cost some 150’000 [CHF].
1. 920’000 [t/a] raw meal, 3.5 [g/t] net wear rate, 1 reconditioning per year,
welding machine amortised in 10 years: 4.5 [CHF/kg] amortisation cost
2. 600’000 [t/a] slag, 8.0 [g/t] net wear rate, 6 reconditioning in one year, welding
machine amortised in 10 years: 3.0 [CHF/kg] amortisation cost.
3. A specialised company will drastically reduce the amortisation cost due to the
high utilisation of their machines

♦ Electricity

♦ Dismounting, handling and mounting

The time and, therefore, the costs of this point depend much on the mill type and
the country.
So it can only be calculated in case by case basis.
Replacing the roller from an MPS mill can take 3 – 4 days while it take 24 – 36 [h]
to replace the rollers from a Loesche mill.

♦ Spare parts
The need of spare parts depends much on the mill type and product demand, or
mill availability.
But in certain conditions, see 2.4 and 2.5, the initial set of grinding tools can be
used as spare parts once they have been replaced resulting in no additional cost.
In the case that spare parts are to be bought their cost would be the same as the
one set of grinding tools available, ranging from 4 – 5 USD/kg for Nihard 4 or High
Cr Alloys. But only their financial cost will have an incidence in the total operating
cost.
The total reconditioning cost can vary from 15 to more than 30 [CHF/kg] of
deposited material.

6.2 Cost when subcontracted

Based on point 4.1 it might be more interesting to subcontract the job to a specialised
company.
Carboneras plant reconditions the grinding track of the LM 38.4 raw mill, in the mill, with a
cost of some 2’500 [CHF] + 32.50 [CHF/kg].
Altkirch sends the grinding track and the roller jackets of their MPS 225 to an external
specialised company. The job cost 25 [CHF/kg] plus the transport cost.
Vautid announces, for a job done in Germany, 28 – 35 [CHF/kg].
 - 18 -

7. SURFACE RECONDITIONING AND MILL AVAILABILITY

The following table shows a simulated comparison among the three alternatives for wear
protection in a Vertical Roller Mill: replacing the grinding tools and reconditioning in the mill
or in a workshop.
Table 5
Surface reconditioning Replacing
Days required Cast/Inserts
Mill Workshop
Cooling the mill down hours hours hours
Opening + Dismounting 0.5 - 1.0 0.5 - 1.5 0.5 - 1.5
Testing (only first time) + surface preparation 0.5 - 2 0.5 - 2
Transport
Temperature control hours hours
Welding (one welding gun) 2 - 14 2 - 14
Cooling down hours hours
Mounting + closing 0.5 - 1.0 0.5 - 1.5 0.5 - 1.5
Warming up hours hours hours

Mill down time (no lifetime factor correction included)

With spare rollers 5 - 15 1.5 - 4 1.5 - 4
No spare rollers 5 - 15 5 - 18

Even if the given figures can change from case to case due to mill design, wear rate, etc; it
can be seen that:
¾ Surface reconditioning in the mill is the alternative that penalises the most the mill
availability. During the welding process no other maintenance activities can be done
in the mill.

¾ Surface reconditioning in a workshop does not penalises mill availability more than
replacing the grinding tools would do, but spare grinding tools are required.

The best cost - effective solution depends mainly on mill design, wear rate and its
influence on mill throughput, specific energy consumption and product quality, the time
available for reconditioning/replacing the grinding tools and the man –labour cost.

8. COST COMPARISON: SURFACE RECONDITIONING / REPLACING

Deciding between surface reconditioning and replacing can be done only in economical
criteria, due to the facts that:
¾ Both are already proven technology
¾ global presence of the most reputed specialised companies
As already mentioned, and due to all the influencing parameters (see point 6), the most
effective solution can only be calculated in a case by case basis. Some examples are
given here below:
 - 19 -

8.1 Raw meal mill LM 38.4 by Carboneras plant

The initial table segments in a high Cr alloy reached an initial lifetime around 4’000 – 5’000
[h].
Once per year the table is reconditioned to fit with the rollers wear profile at a cost of
22’000 [CHF].
To replace the table would cost some 25’000 [CHF].
In addition of the maintenance cost savings an improvement of the mill specific energy
consumption is also achieved.

8.2 Raw meal mill MPS 4150 at Intermoselle

The initial set of grinding tools in Nihard 4 cost 230’000 [USD] lasted 3’248 [h] and ground
721’000 [t] of raw meal. This resulted in a net wear rate of 6.2 [g/t] for rollers and table
segments.
This result in a specific cost of 32.3 [US cent/t].

A first reconditioning of the grinding tools was done in 1998 with 1’800 [kg] for the rollers
and 2’700 [kg] for the table segments using the alloy CN -O (see table 3). The cost of this
reconditioning was of 155’000 [USD], which included site preparation, construction of an
ergonomic platform for the welding gun operators, auxiliary equipment to rotate the rollers
and table and the reconditioning of the grinding tools.
With this reconditioning 1’390’000 [t], after 5’283 [h], where ground resulting in a total net
wear rate of around 2.8 [g/t].
This result in a specific cost of 11.1 [US cent/t].

In 1999 the grinding tools were again reconditioned but with 3’900 [kg] of CV – O alloy and
a cost of 130’000 [USD].

8.3 Cost simulation 1

A three roller VRM grinds 300’000 [t/a] of pozzolana with some 50 [t/h] as average
production rate.
The table segments are made in a high Cr alloy and the rollers in Nihard 4. The rollers
reached some 4’400 [h], resulting in a net wear rate of 10.6 [g/t] for 225’000 [t] ground.
The cost of the roller set is +/- 60’000 [USD], resulting in 26.7 [US cent/t].
The three rollers reconditioned with Vautid 100 can expect a net wear rate of 5.3 [g/t] and
with 4 reconditioning 1’800’000 [t] could be ground.
 - 20 -

The total cost of the 4 reconditioning of these three rollers is 214’000 [USD],
1. 55’000 [USD] for the purchasing of 3 new rollers as base material
2. 119’000 [USD] for the 4 reconditioning (15 [USD/kg] of deposited material)
3. 40’000 [USD] for the handling and expedition of the rollers to an external workshop.
This results in a specific cost of 11.9 [US cent/t].
The annual saving will reach around 44’000 [USD/a].

9. DANGERS OF A JOB NOT PROPERLY DONE

If the job is not properly done there are two possible risks, which both affect the mill
availability:
¾ Peal off
Peal off occurs when the quality of the deposit has localised defects due, for example,
to too high porosity (see 2.1).
Peal off can be repaired but the risk of recurrent problems does not disappear. When
the base material is much softer than the deposited material, premature wear of the
base material will occur.

¾ Breakage
Breakage is mainly due to inadequate base material quality before the first
reconditioning or too high internal stresses resulting from inadequate reconditioning
process.
The reported cases by competitors of surface reconditioning are very few and not recent.
The risk exists but is very small.

10. CONCLUSIONS

Surface reconditioning is in application for Vertical Roller Mills since 1978. The know-
how developed during this time makes today this technology reliable when properly
applied.
There are two major companies who have developed and care about this know-how:
Vautid GmbH and Welding Alloys. Their global presence shall ensure easy finding of the
required know-how and job quality.
The real interest of surface reconditioning can be, then, decided mainly based in
economical criteria.
 - 21 -

It appears that, generally, surface reconditioning is an interesting solution when

grinding very high abrasive materials like slag and some clinker and puzolan, as well
as some raw meal mixes with high addition of silica correctives, specially when the mill
performance deteriorates as the wear progresses.
Also in most cases where grinding tools are in Nihard 4 with lifetimes of about one kiln
campaign or shorter, surface reconditioning can offer important savings.
But the real interest of surface reconditioning when compared to other solutions for wear
protection of the grinding tools in a VRM, due to the numerous parameters and restrictions
involved, can only be known through case by case evaluation.

CTS-Mechanical Process Technology

Stéphane Ortega
 - 22 -

Annex 1

L ife tim e in c r e a s e a s a fu n c tio n o f g r in d in g to o l a n d g r o u n d m a te r ia l

h a rd n e s s
1 2 .0 0
Nihard IV
1 0 .0 0

8 .0 0

6 .0 0
Q u a rz t
4 .0 0 L im e s to n e

2 .0 0 St 37

0 .0 0
150 250 350 450 550 650
G r in d in g to o l h a r d n e s s [H V ]

Raw grinding: grinding tools lifetime as a function of the raw material Quartz content.

30000

25000
Lifetime expected [h]

20000
NiHard IV, Grinding track
High Cr, Grinding track
15000
NiHard IV, Roller tyre
High Cr, Roller tyre
10000

5000

0
0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5 10.5
Raw material Quartz content [%R90um]
 - 23 -

Annex 2

Metallic insert

Base Material