IECEC '95 PAPER No 384

DIAGNOSIS OF MILLING SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE BASED ON

OPERATING WINDOW AND MILL CONSUMPTION CORRELATIONS

Inmaculada Arauzo and Cristbal Corts

Centro de Investigacin del Rendimiento de Centrales Elctricas (CIRCE)
University of Zaragoza
Mara de Luna, 3
50015 Zaragoza
SPAIN
Telephone: (+34) 76 51 62 00
Fax: (+34) 76 73 20 78
E-Mail : IARAUZO@MCPS.UNIZAR.ES

ABSTRACT
The milling system is an important part of the auxiliary
equipment of a coal-fired power plant. This paper describes two
useful tools to diagnose the milling system performance. They are
the "operating window" and a semi-empirical relation between
milling consumption and mill and coal characteristics: grinding
pieces age, coal flow and coal grindability and composition. The
operating window (Gill, 1984) describes a set of values of coal
flow and air flow per mill, for which usual problems (mill skids,
duct erosion, explosion and fires in pulverized coal-air ducts or
inside the mill) are likely to be avoided. The precise meaning of
every limit and its calculation are shown in detail. A correlation
between mill energy consumption and mill performance
characteristics may help in the prediction of mill malfunctions,
such as pulverized coal too coarse or too fine, grinding pieces
wearing higher than expected and bad adjustment of spring loading
system. The paper describes the application of these tools to the
mills of a 350 MWe unit. General bases to reproduce the results
for roller and table type mills are also explained.

NOMENCLATURE
Ac
Pulverized coal - air ducts cross-section (m2 ).
C%
Percentage by weight of bituminous coal in blend.
Cc
Coal specific heat value (J/kg K).
Cpair
Air specific heat value (J/kg K).
G
Fraction of pulverized coal through 75 m sieve.
H
Age of grinding pieces (hours)
hl(T)
Enthalpy of water as saturated liquid (J/kg).
hv (T)
Enthalpy of saturated steam (J/kg).
I
Mill drive current (A).
M
Coal moisture (% by weight).

n
Po
Qa
Qc
Qca
Qcamax
Qg
Qha
Qhamax
Qsa
Ra
Rm
T
T ha
Ti
To
T sa
UA
v
w

Number of mills in service.

Pressure in coal-air ducts at mill outlet (N/m2 ).
Total air flow through a mill (kg/s).
Coal flow through a mill (kg/s).
Tempering air to the mill (kg/s).
Maximum tempering air to the mill (kg/s).
Gas flow through air-gas preheater (ks/s).
Hot air to the mill (kg/s).
Maximum hot air to the mill (kg/s).
Sealing air to the mill (kg/s).
Ideal gas constant for air, 287.041 J/kgK.
Ideal gas constant for steam, 461.37 J/kgK.
Temperature (K).
Temperature of hot air (K).
Temperature of coal at mill inlet (K).
Temperature of coal-air at mill outlet (K).
Temperature of sealing air (K).
Overall heat transfer coefficient (W/K).
Pulverized coal-air velocity (m/s).
Absolute humidity of ambient air
kg. water vapor
(
).
kg. dry air

INTRODUCTION
The milling system is an important part of the auxiliary
equipment of a coal-fired power plant. Its performance is strongly
dependent on operating parameters, such as raw coal
characteristics and temperature and flow rate of primary air.
Operating conditions of the mills themselves, such as grinding

5)
Tempering limit.
6)
Drying limit.
They can be set in the following categories: limits related to
coal flow (1&2), limits related to air flow (3&4) and limits related
to pulverized coal- air temperature (5&6). Plotting this limits a
suitable "working area" is defined, which is the zone enclosed
under upper limits (2, 4 and 6) and above lower limits (1, 3 and 5).
Pulverizer working point must be into this working area, to avoid
performance problems.

15

Coal Flow (kg/s)

pieces wearing, classifier adjustment and spring loading system

settings, are also relevant. Deviations in all these values may cause
both decreasing milling capacity and increasing milling system
consumption.
In order to control and evaluate the influence of these
parameters, a monitoring system has been developed for the
particular case of a 350 MWe unit, burning a coal blend with
about 30% (by weight) of South African-type bituminous coal
and 70% of subbituminous coal mined in the area. The unit has six
planetary roller and table-type mills, each feeding a level of four
burners.
The paper presents the proposed tools for the diagnosis of the
milling system. These are in brief: the mill operating window, as
suggested by Gills (1984), and an empirical formula obtained using
multiple regression analysis techniques. The formula correlates
mill energy consumption with several relevant parameters, such as
spring loading system settings, age of grinding pieces, pulverized
coal fraction obtained through a 75 m sieve and coal blending
composition (for coals quoted above). An example of the results is
also presented.
Using the modified operating window technique, some typical
pulverized-coal system problems, such as insufficient coal drying,
excessive duct wear, explosion or fire risk in the mill and
insufficient fan power can be predicted. As an additional result,
energy losses through noninsulated air-pulverized coal ducts are
also calculated.
A correlation between mill energy consumption and mill
performance characteristics may help in the prediction of mill
malfunctions, such as pulverized coal too coarse or too fine,
grinding pieces wearing higher than expected and bad adjustment
of spring loading system. Although further work is required to
detect these problems, the difference between mill energy
consumption calculated and measured is a very good indication of
mill malfunctions. The results of modifications aimed to improve
the milling system performance can also be evaluated by means of
this parameter. Moreover, it can be used in a general boiler
efficiency improvement program to estimate the increase of
consumption of the pulverizer system if a higher coal fineness is
required and to compare it with unburnt coal losses reduction.

Pulverized coal
transport limit (3)

Erosion
limit (4)

Milling
capacity
limit (2)

10

Tempering
limit (5)

Working
area

Flame
stability
limit (1)

5
Drying
limit (6)

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Air flow trhough the mill (kg/s)

FIGURE 1. MILL OPERATING WINDOW.

The meaning of every limit and its calculation are explained in

the following sections.
2

CONTROLLING MILL PERFORMANCE LIMITS: THE

OPERATING WINDOW.
In coal flowair flow coordinates, the operating window
represents the mill performance limits, which can vary with
heating value and composition of raw coal, temperature and
relative humidity of ambient air, leakage in air-gas preheaters and
number of operating mills. The diagnosis system checks the
current coal flow-air flow point of each mill, therefore allowing an
effective evaluation of present conditions, present drifts and
future problems. Performance limits making up the operating
window are the following:
1)
Flame stability limit.
2)
Milling capacity limit.
3)
Pulverized coal transport limit.
4)
Erosion limit.

2.1 Limits related to coal flow

Upper limit for coal flow is milling capacity. If coal flow is
over this limit, mill skids may happen. Usually this is a value
given by the mill manufacturer. However, corrections may be
applied based on operating experience. For planetary roller and
table-type mills, corrections based on grinding pieces age have
proven to be useful. A simple linear interpolation can be done
between milling capacity stated in manufacture's documentation
(coal flow for grinding pieces age equal to 0 hours) and a lower
value for a large number of hours, as observed in normal operation.
An approximate figure can be 75% of maximum value for a
grinding pieces age of 15000 hours. This value will depend on
material of grinding parts, coal blend and mill design.

Lower coal flow limit per mill is stated in order to maintain

flame stability. A typical value is half of the maximum nominal
milling capacity (Gill, 1984). Actually, the limit depends on unit
load and number of active burners, being lower at high loads and
with the full array of burners in service. Another fact affecting
flame stability limit is the simultaneous firing of backup fuel, such
as natural gas. This is a common practice in some coal power
plants, mainly to face environmental normative in SO 2 emissions.
If backup fuel is used, the value of the limit can be lower. In our
case, 60 % of nominal coal flow has proven to be safe under all the
operating conditions experienced. In general, it is highly advisable
that this limit should be confirmed by burner manufacturer or by
operating experience.

2.2 Limits related to air flow

If air flow through the mill is too low, pulverized coal can
stagnate in ducts or irregular sections inside the mill, therefore
giving rise to fire or explosion risk. A minimum velocity of 20 m/s
is commonly considered in pneumatic transport literature. On the
other hand, if air flow is too high, excessive wearing on ducts,
specially in valves and bends, can be experienced. A rough
estimate of maximum allowable air flow is 1,5 times the minimum
value (Gill, 1984).
To calculate pulverized coal-air ratio concerning these limits,
the specific volume of water vapor added to the air flow during
drying process must be taken into account. Performing the
adequate psicrometry calculations (Moran and Shapiro, 1988) the
following equation is obtained for limiting air-coal ratios:

introduced in the determination of Qha and Qca in each case. They

are shown in table 1.

T ha
Qha
Qc =

T sa

Cpair(T)dT+(Qca+Qsa)
Cpair(T)dT
To

To

Analytical expressions for Cpair and values for hv and hl can

be found in Moran and Shapiro (1988), and formulas to calculate
Cc depending on coal proximate analysis are reported by Newman
(1983). As shown in equation (2), an intrinsic humidity of 5% is
considered (Gills, 1984)

TABLE 1. CRITERIA TO DETERMINE Qha AND Qca FOR

EACH Qa REPRESENTED IN AN OPERATING WINDOW
(Qa = Qca + Qha+ Qsa).

Drying limit
Qa- Qsa=
Qa - Qsa<

Qc =

Ac*v*P
M
*T*Rm
100

Qa

Ra

w*Rm

(
+
)
M
w+1 w+1
*Rm
100

(1)

Tempering limit
Qa =
Qa =

The velocity to introduce will be v = 20 m/s for minimum coalair ratio and 30 m/s for maximum coal-air ratio.

2.3 Limits related to pulverized coal- air temperature

The maximum coal flow than can be dried with a given air flow,
assuming that the latter is at its maximum available temperature, is
determined by the drying limit. If coal flow could not be dried
completely, mill skids or overloading can appear, and boiler
efficiency will also be affected. On the other hand, tempering limit
ensures that low coal flows will leave the mill at a reasonable
temperature, low enough to avoid spontaneous combustion risk.
Both limits depend on plant characteristics, such as maximum and
minimum hot and tempering air flow available and air preheaters
performance.
A mathematical expression for these limits (equation (2)) can
be obtained by means of an energy balance between input flows
(hot air and wet coal) and the output flow (pulverized dried coal +
air + coal moisture as steam). Differences in calculation are

(2)

100-M+5
(M-5)
*Cc(T o -T i) +
*(hv (T o )-hl(T i))
100
100

Qhamax
n
Qhamax

Qcamax

Qca

Qha

Qsa

Qa- Qsa

QaQha

Qhamax

Qa

Qsa

Qa- Qsa

n
Qcamax
n

Maximum hot and tempering air flow are as considered in plant

design data or as observed during operation, if changes in plant
affecting to primary air system design have been done. They
depend on primary air fans capacity and on air heating system
design.
For calculating heating air temperature, air-gas preheaters'
equations must be considered. A simple model of the equipment
based on the efficiency-NTU method (Incropera and DeWitt,
1990) can give reasonable results. The most difficult problem is
the estimation of the overall heat transfer coefficient. Air-gas
preheaters are usually of the regenerative type. If air flow is
pressurized and gas flow is at atmospheric pressure (or slightly
lower), air inleakage to gas side may occur. This adds important
difficulties to a rigorous analysis of heat transfer in regenerative
heat exchangers. Mueller (1985) presents a complete analysis of
this problem. However, a simpler analysis could be preferable for
practical implementation of the algorithm, specially if O2
measurements at air-gas preheaters inlet and outlet are not

available or their accuracy is difficult to assess. As an alternative

to a more rigorous analysis, an experimental relation of the form
shown in equation (3) could be tried, determining the KUA
constant and k exponent with plant data.

k
k
UA = KUA*(1/ Qha +1/ Qg )-1
(3)
2.4 Additional questions related to the operating
window
An unsolved question concerning the operating window
technique is the coupling of the windows corresponding to
different mills. This is due to the fact that a change in coal flow
entering a single mill causes a different scheme of primary air
distribution and a corresponding change of coal flow in other mills.
Solutions to this problem are highly dependent on milling control
system.
For the case study, primary air is considered to be shared
equally for all mills in service. This is a reasonable approximation,
because different mills usually process a similar coal flow.
Differences are in fact very narrow, because major changes in unit
load are usually achieved increasing or diminishing the number of
mills in service. A better approximation could have been to assign
primary air proportionally to coal flow in each mill, but
calculations of drying and tempering air would become very
elaborated.
With respect to coal flow variations, there are two
possibilities: to keep the total coal flow constant or to suppose
that it varies in the same way in every mill. The proposed
solution is the first one, which is equivalent to consider variations
in one mill but not in plant load. This is a more realistic approach,
because the other option would lead to an excessive total coal
flow, i. e., to a unit load significantly higher than the nominal
value. Moreover, changes in gas flow should also be introduced
with this assumption, making air preheaters performance analysis
more involved.

correlate quite well with a linear combination of several products

including the following variables:
Coal fraction through 75 m sieve.
Grinding pieces wearing (measured through their age).
Mill coal flow.

A - B*(C%)/100 , where A and B are constants related to

grindability of each component of coal blend. Some
additional information in this respect can be obtained from
Skorupska (1993) and Waters (1986).
The correlation is the form shown below:

I = K1 +K2 *G*ln(H)+

(K3 *G-K4 )*Qc*H

(4)

(A-B*(C%)/100)

The meaning of the different terms being the following:

K1 : empty mill consumption associated to mill weight.
K2 *G*ln(H): mill consumption associated to spring loading
system settings and to classifier position.
(K3 *G-K4 )*H

: indicates an increase in consumption

(A-B*(C%)/100)
associated to high output coal fineness, grinding pieces
wearing and low values of coal grindability. This term
modifies consumption dependence on coal flow.
Correlated data of Qc and I are average values during an
acquisition interval of five minutes. Selected data were taken
during stable load conditions (change of load less than 15 MWe in
20 minutes) and coal flow per mill (changes in coal feeder speed
less than 25 rpm). They were 5324 data points. The range of the
variable values is shown in table 2.

TABLE 2. RANGE OF CORRELATED DATA.

MILL CONSUMPTION CORRELATION
Correlated mill energy consumption allows the detection of
problems such as excessive wearing of grinding pieces and
excessive or insufficient coal fineness. These issues must be
confirmed with isokinetical tests and mill inspections. However,
the correlation yields a good indication based solely on plant
measurements and standard recordings. On the contrary, an
isokinetical sample is a complicated manual measurement, and mill
inspections can only be performed during plant shutdown.
The energy cost of higher fineness can also be estimated. This
result can be the starting point of studies on optimization of
pulverized coal size, considering unburned coal losses and the
energetic cost of producing finer coal.
Essay plant has 6 vertical spindle mills, each feeding a level of
four burners. For this kind of mills, mill power input seems to

Minimum

Maximum

G (%)

68,8

94,2

H (hours)

800

14500

Qc (kg/s)

7,8

12,5

C% (%)

18

40

Correlation has been obtained by standard linear techniques

(Draper and Smith, 1966) using IMSL routines for multiple
regression calculation (IMSL, 1984). Percentage of the variance
explained by regression has been R2 = 89,54 %.
In figure 2, correlation results (continuous line) is represented
together with measured values of mill drive current.

44
42
40
Mill
drive 38
current
36
(A)
34
32
30
0

1000

2000

3000
Data number

4000

5000

6000

FIGURE 2. CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MEASURED AND CORRELATED DATA VALUES.

HEAT LOSSES THROUGH PULVERIZER COAL-AIR

DUCTS
If pulverized coal ducts are not well-insulated, heat losses can
be important and this effect must be taken into account. The
calculation of heat losses comprises the following elements:
natural convection outside the mill and ducts, radiative losses from
external surfaces and internal convection of preheated air and
pulverized coal mixture. Empirical convection correlations and
thermal radiation theory to perform this calculation can be found
in standard books on heat transfer (Incropera and DeWitt, 1990).
Results for the case study are represented in figure 3, for several
pulverized coal-air temperatures.

CONCLUSIONS
Two calculation procedures for analyzing milling performance
have been exposed in this paper: the modified operating window,
and a semi-empirical correlation for predicting mill consumption.
Once the operating window is calculated, proximity of mill
working point to the stated performance limits can be noticed.
Correction actions can thus be taken before problems associated
to the nearest limit appear. The main problems that can be
avoided are:

Insufficient coal drying.

Excessive duct wear.

Explosion or fire risk in the mill.

Required data for calculating the operating window are:
Coal data: specific heat, moisture, and coal flow through
each mill.
Air data: air flow through each mill, sealing air flow required
per mill, tempering air temperature.
Mill data: age of grinding pieces (in hours), number of mills
in service.

Air preheater data: overall heat transfer coefficient, as a

function of primary air flow.
Pulverized coal-air data: temperature and pressure.

Pulverized coal-air temperature

0.8
Heat losses through mills and pulverized coal ducts (MW)

65 C
0.7

70 C
75 C

0.6

80 C
85 C

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1
10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Ambient Temperature (C)

FIGURE 3. HEAT LOSSES THROUGH MILL AND

PULVERIZED COAL DUCTS.

 General data: ambient temperature and humidity, maximum

available air flows (primary and tempering) and gas flow.
Required data for determining mill energy consumption
correlation are:
Grinding pieces age.
Coal fraction through 75 m sieve.
Coal blend composition (by weight).
Coal flow per mill.
As an additional result, the importance of energy losses
through noninsulated air-pulverized coal ducts has been
presented.
Both operating window and mill energy consumption
correlation have been calculated in detail and implemented in a
computer program, running on PCs under Windows. This
program has been designed in a userfriendly interface. Required
data can be introduced through interactive menus or through a text
file, so real time processing will be easily implemented if all
required data are available.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Authors wish to thank Mr. Mariano Lacarta from Teruel
Power Plant (ENDESA), for facilitating plant data and for
multiple private conversations in which he had shared his practical
plant knowledge, and for his encouragement.
This work has been part of the Programa de Investigacin y
Desarrollo Electrotcnico (PIE) financed by the Oficina para la
Coordinacin de la Investigacion y el Desarrollo Electrotcnico
(OCIDE) and also part of the works financed by the Oficina para
la Coordinacin de la Investigacion y el Desarrollo del Carbn
(OCICARBON).

REFERENCES
Gills, A. B. (1984). Power Plant Performance. Buttherworths,
1984.
Moran, J. M., and Shapiro H. N., (1988). Fundamentals of
Engineering Thermodynamics. John Wiley and Sons, 1988.
Newman, S. A. (1983) "Coal char Cp correlations evaluated".
Hydrocarbon Processing. March 1983, pp 77-82.
Incropera, F., DeWitt, D. (1990). "Fundamentals of Heat and
Mass Transfer". Third edition, John Wiley & Sons, (1990).
IMSL (1984). "IMSL Library Reference Manual. Edition 9.2".
IMSL Inc., 1984.
Drapper N. R., Smith, E. (1966). "Applied Regression
Analysis". John Wiley and Sons, 1966.
Mueller, A., C. (1985). "Process Heat Exchangers" in
"Handbook of Heat Transfer Applications". Second edition.
Rohsenow, W. M., Hartnett, J. P., Ganic E. J., Editors. McGrawHill Book Company, 1985.
Skorupska, N. (1993) "Coal Specifications-impact on power
station performance". IEACR/52. London, UK, IEA Coal
Research (1993)
Waters, A (1986) "The additive relationship of the Hardgrove
grindability index". Journal of Coal Quality; 5 (1); 33-34 (Jan
1986).