Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel
h i g h l i g h t s
A multi-component model to describe energysize reduction for various coal particle sizes and densities.
Model parameters calibrated with JKFBC characterisation testing data.
Using tn-family of curves to determine product size distribution from the model predicted t10 parameter.
Model was validated with over 100 sets experimental data using an Australian and a Chinese coal sample.
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 14 May 2013
Received in revised form 7 July 2013
Accepted 9 July 2013
Available online 1 August 2013
Keywords:
Coal
Breakage characterisation
HGI test
Multi-component breakage model
a b s t r a c t
A multi-component breakage model has been developed at the Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research
Centre (JKMRC) to describe the energysize reduction in relation to particle size and density for coal
M
breakage characterisation. The model takes the following form: t 10 RD=RD
f1 expfmat x Eg.
c
min
The model incorporates four parameters and ts 60 JKFBC (JK Fine-particle Breakage Characteriser) test
data for each of the Australian coal and Chinese coal samples, with R2 = 0.982 and 0.978 respectively. The
multi-component model can be switched into a single component model by setting c = 0.
A set of tn-family of curves for coals ground in the JKFBC are presented. It was found that the data from
various particle sizes and densities of the two coal samples, collected from the Australian and Chinese
power stations, all fall on similar tn-curve trend lines. These tn-family of curves can be used in the
multi-component model to estimate the product size distribution from the predicted t10 values. A procedure has been developed to calibrate the multi-component model with seven tests based on a combination of various particle sizes, coal densities and grinding energy levels, using the JKFBC device. Over 100
sets of data have been used to validate the calibration procedure.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Particle breakage characterisation aims to establish the relationship between a specic energy input and the resultant product,
through some type of laboratory test on a given sample [1]. With
this energysize reduction relationship characterised for a particular coal sample, users can investigate how particles break when
subjected to a given input energy; or determine what energy is required in order to achieve a desired breakage degree. Obviously,
the traditional HGI test on a single size coal particle with a single
level of grinding energy cannot provide this level of detail.
An improved coal breakage characterisation method has been
developed at the Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Centre
(JKMRC), which is presented in Part 1 of this paper [2]. An experiment was conducted on various narrowly-sized and density
Tel.: +61 7 3365 5913; fax: +61 7 3365 5999.
E-mail address: f.shi@uq.edu.au
0016-2361/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.07.026
franctionated groups of coal samples, using a JKFBC (JK Fine-particle Breakage Characteriser) consisting of a standard HGI grinding
device and a precision torque meter. Each sizedensity group sample was ground in the JKFBC with various input energies. The data
show a strong size effect and density effect on coal breakage, with
the larger and lower density particles being broken more easily under the same specic energy.
Part 2 of the paper presents a mathematical model which describes the multi-component breakage behaviour observed in the
JKFBC tests. Part 3 will demonstrate the applications of the model
for HGI predictions and coal breakage simulations.
2. Particle breakage modelling
2.1. The JKMRC prior-art model
The JKMRC has been using a breakage model (Eq. (1)) to
describe the energysize reduction relationship for a long time:
t 10 A1 eb:Ecs
where t10 is a size distribution neness index (%), Ecs is the specic
comminution energy (kWh/t), and A and b are the ore impact breakage parameters. The product form of the model parameters Ab is
used as an indicator of ore resistance to breakage, with a large
Ab indicating less resistance to breakage [1]. The Ab indicator for
ore breakage is currently used by researchers and mining engineers
worldwide.
Previous work has found that the crack density of larger particles is much greater than that of smaller particles [3,4]. In view
of this, larger particles tend to be weaker and therefore easier to
break than smaller particles. In the standard data reduction procedures, however, Eq. (1) is used to t the Drop Weight Tester (DWT)
data with one set of A and b parameters for all particle sizes. This
average set of A and b parameters assume that particles of different sizes would be broken in the same way when subjected to the
same impact energy. However, this assumption is questionable.
A new breakage model incorporating particle size effect has
been reported [5] to describe the degree of breakage. It was modied from Vogel and Peukerts work [6] describing the probability
of breakage. The breakage degree model takes the following form:
1157
Fig. 1. Comparison of model tting results to the same DWT data of a quarry material (after Shi and Kojovic [5]).
1158
t10
Fig. 2. Coal density effect on the energysize reduction relationship for the 2.8
4.0 mm Chinese coal ground in the JKFBC.
The analysis also pointed out that particle density affects the
positions of the trend lines. Fig. 2 depicts the density effect on
the energysize reduction relationship for the 2.84.0 mm Chinese
coal ground in the JKFBC. Obviously, as density increases (indicating more mineral matter associated with the coal particles), the
breakage degree (t10) decreases.
The physical meaning of parameter M in Eq. (2) is the maximum
t10 that a sample can reach as the other variables (specic energy E
or particle size x) change. Mathematically, changing M in Eq. (2)
will change the position of the exponential line. Based on this analysis, therefore, the density effect was modelled in the M-term, and
M
f1 expfmat x Eg
RD=RDmin c
where t10, M and x have been dened in Eq. (2), RD is the relative
density of the particle, RDmin is the minimum relative density of
the sample (RDmin = 1.25 for coal), c is a parameter determining
the trend line position, fmat is a model parameter that is described
by a size-dependent equation with parameters p and q, E (J kg1)
is the mass-specic energy in the JKFBC that is determined by Eq.
(4):
2pNT
m
where N is the mill revolution number, T (Nm) is the mean net torque, and m (kg) is the coal mass being ground.
The model incorporates four parameters, M, c, p and q, which
can be calibrated by tting the model to the measured data. Figs. 3
and 4 show the tting results for the Australian coal and the Chinese coal respectively. There are nominal 64 data points (4
Fig. 3. The multi-component breakage model tted to the JKFBC data for a nominal 4 sizes 4 densities 4 energies (61 data points sharing 4 parameters) for the Australian
coal.
Fig. 4. The multi-component breakage model tted to JKFBC data for a nominal 4 sizes 4 densities 4 energies (59 data points sharing 4 parameters) for the Chinese coal.
1159
100
t2
80
t n (% Passing)
t4
60
t10
40
t25
20
t50
t75
0
0
10
20
30
Breakage Index, t
10
40
50
(%)
Fig. 6. Determination of size distribution parameter tn from the breakage index t10
(Redraw after Narayanan [10]).
the feed size. This t10 parameter indicates the neness of a product
when subjected to breakage with a certain input energy. Sometimes it is not sufcient knowing the neness of a product. It
may be necessary to predict the product size distribution. For
example, for optimum combustion efciency, the pulverised fuel
(PF) has a certain size distribution requirement, such as 75% passing 75 lm and 99.5% passing 300 lm.
Narayanan and Whiten [7] found that the t10 parameter is uniquely related to other points on a family of size distribution
curves, with tn, dened as the cumulative percentage passing a given fraction of the initial size, x/n. The t10 can then be used to generate a size distribution from relationships between t10 and tnfamily of curves established from the drop weight test database.
The tn-family of curves have been independently conrmed by
Pauw and Mar [8] and by King and Bourgeois [9] using different
materials over a wide range of fracture energies. Fig. 6 depicts
the tn-family of curves for a range of ore types [9]. Spline regression
analysis can be carried out to describe each of the relationships
t10t2, t10t4, t10t25, t10t50 and t10t75.
Using the tn-family of curves to produce a size distribution is
straightforward. For a given t10 (e.g. t10 = 20), Fig. 6 indicates that
t2 = 75, t4 = 42, t25 = 10, t50 = 8, t75 = 6. For a feed geometric mean
size of 50 mm, t2 = 75 means 75% passing 25 mm (=50/2 mm),
t4 = 42 means 42% passing 12.5 mm (=50/4 mm), and so on. The
size distributions at the required size fractions can be determined
from the tn knots using spline regression. Thus the whole size
Fig. 5. Modelling the coal density effect for various feed sizes, with one set of four parameters shared by 61 Australian coal tests.
1160
Fig. 7. The plots of tn-family of curves using the JKFBC data from grinding the
Australian and the Chinese coal samples.
Fig. 9. The tn-family of curves used for coal grinding in the JKFBC.
Table 1
R2 values for various regression lines between the measured and the predicted values
using the generalised tn-family of curves presented in Fig. 9.
Fig. 8. The plot of t25 versus t10 for various densities of the Australian and Chinese
coals, consisting of 120 measurement points.
t2
t4
t25
t50
t75
0.94
0.97
0.95
0.90
0.88
the tn-family of curves (Fig. 9), regardless of particle size and density; thus the whole product size distribution can be determined
from a single breakage index t10.
Using this approach to determine the product size distribution
is helpful when there is no sizing data available, as in the case of
numerical simulations. However, it is noticed from Fig. 7 that the
data on each trend line are rather scattered, similar to the tn-curves
plotted from the rock impact tests [10]. This implies that errors are
associated with the generalised tn-family of curves. Table 1 gives R2
values for each tn curve, when plotting the measured t-values
against those calculated from the tn-family matrices. R2 is the statistical term of coefcient of determination, which provides a measure of how well observed outcomes are replicated by the
regression model. R2 varies from zero to 1. R2 = 1 indicates that
the two sets of data are exactly matched, with a perfect diagonal
line on the plot of the predicted versus the measured t-values, on
the same x-axis and y-axis scales.
For an understanding of the R2 values, readers are referred to
Fig. 8 (the t25 plot). In this plot R2 = 0.95. The t2 (R2 = 0.94) has similar results to the t25, the t4 (R2 = 0.97) is slightly better than the t25,
but both the t50 and the t75 are not as good as the t25. This implies
that for a feed size of 10 mm, predictions of the cumulative percentage passing 5 mm (t2), 2.5 mm (t4) and 0.4 mm (t25) would
be accurate if the predicted t10 is accurate, however larger errors
may be associated with the cumulative percentage passing
0.2 mm (t50) and 0.133 mm (t75). To minimise the errors associated
with product size distributions, using the sizing data to establish a
set of coal-specic tn-family of curves for the tested coal sample is
recommended, rather than using the generalised tn-family of
curves, particularly if experimental data is available, as was the
case in the JKFBC tests.
1161
Fig. 10. The multi-component model predictions for the Australian coal, using seven tests to calibrate the model parameters.
Fig. 11. The multi-component model predictions for the Chinese coal, using the seven Australian coal testing conditions to calibrate the model parameters.
using the calibrated four model parameters. Fig. 10b presents the
predicted t10 versus the measured t10. Comparing Fig. 10b with
Fig. 3, where all 61 sets of data were used to t the four model
parameters, the new characterisation procedure using seven tests
to calibrate the model parameters predicts almost the identical results as those using the 61 sets of data, with R2 of 0.976 for the 7
tests and 0.982 for the 61 tests.
The same seven test conditions were applied to the Chinese coal
sample, with minor variations in the feed particle sizes tested. The
similar results are presented in Fig. 11. Note that the prediction results for the Chinese coal, using the same seven testing conditions
as for the Australian coal, appear more scattered (Figs. 11b compared with 10b). This indicates that more work can be done to
optimise the set of 3D test conditions (sizedensityenergy) used
for the model calibration.
A statistical t-test was performed on paired comparisons between the measured and the predicted t10, using the model parameters calibrated by the seven tests. Table 2 summarises the
statistical test results. The null hypothesis is that each pair of results is equal, or that each difference is zero. The null hypothesis
is assumed true unless proved otherwise. The result given in
Table 2 indicates that the differences in t10 values determined by
the two methods for both the Australian and Chinese coal
samples do not reach the 95% signicant level threshold. The null
1162
Table 2
Summary of t-test results on a paired comparison between the measured and the
predicted t10 from the model parameters calibrated by the seven tests.
Coal source
Australia
China
Mean difference
Standard deviation
Degree of freedom
t
Distribution
Signicance level (%)
0.35
2.14
60
1.26
2-Tailed
79
0.05
3.69
58
0.096
2-Tailed
8
hypothesis is therefore accepted. This conrms that the multicomponent coal breakage model calibrated with seven reduced
tests can represent the coal breakage behaviour on a size-bydensity-byenergy basis.
Future work remains to develop standardised testing conditions
for calibration when more data are available. Nevertheless this pioneering work demonstrates that using reduced coal breakage tests
with the JKFBC to calibrate the model parameters is a viable approach, and the multi-component model will predict the full
breakage characteristic response of the coal.
4. Conclusions
Based on the multi-component JKFBC test results and the analysis of the effects of particle size and density on the energysize
reduction relationship, a multi-component breakage model for coal
has been developed. The model ts the approximately 60 sets of
JKFBC tests on each of the Australian coal and Chinese coal samples
well, with only four parameters needing to be calibrated. The model demonstrates its robustness to replicate the complex patterns of
coal density and size effects on breakage. The multi-component
model can be switched into a single component model.
A set of tn-family of curves have been established for coals
ground in the JKFBC. It was found that the data of various particle
sizes and densities, from the two coal samples collected at the Australian and Chinese power stations, all fall on similar tn-curve trend
lines. These tn-family of curves can be employed to estimate the
product size distribution from the predicted t10 values by the multi-component model.