CALCINER COMBUSTION

Addressing the challenges of multi-fuel

calciner combustion

Dr. Stefan Kern, 25.11.2016 Johannesburg, South Africa

OUR MISSION

We are your
reliable partner
for pyroprocess
solutions.
OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. REQUIREMENTS AND INFLUENCE BY FUEL COMBUSTION

3. FUELS IN CEMENT PLANTS

4. COMBUSTION PROCESS AND EMISSIONS

5. INFLUENCE ON CALCINER DESIGN

6. INFLUENCE ON PLANT CAPACITY

7. OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES
INTRODUCTION

Today’s Challenges
Production Costs
Regulations
OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. REQUIREMENTS AND INFLUENCE BY FUEL COMBUSTION

3. FUELS IN CEMENT PLANTS

4. COMBUSTION PROCESS AND EMISSIONS

5. INFLUENCE ON CALCINER DESIGN

6. INFLUENCE ON PLANT CAPACITY

7. OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES
INFLUENCE BY COMBUSTION

Ignition and Flue gas

combustion Gas amount
Calciner res. time Gas temperature
Peak temperature Composition
Plant design
FUEL
CHARACTERISTICS
Production
Build ups

Emissions Clinker characteristics

NOx, CO, CO2, H2O Production capacity

OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. REQUIREMENTS AND INFLUENCE BY FUEL COMBUSTION

3. FUELS IN CEMENT PLANTS

4. COMBUSTION PROCESS AND EMISSIONS

5. INFLUENCE ON CALCINER DESIGN

6. INFLUENCE ON PLANT CAPACITY

7. OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES
TYPICAL FUELS

Solid fuels

Coal: Depending on coal rank

Peat, Lignite, Bituminous Coal, Anthracite
Petcoke
Biomass: Wood, Straw, etc.
RDF: Solid Alternative Fuels (SAF), Fluff, Tires, etc.

Liquid fuels

Fuel oil (HFO, LFO), LAF, Solvents (C3H6O, C2H6O, etc.), etc.

Gaseous fuels

Natural Gas (Methane), LNG, etc.

SOLID FUELS

Coal rank vs C/H ratio

SOLID FUELS

Typical analysis of solid fuels

Plastics
Biomass Coal Char
(SAF)

Unit Wood pellets Lignite Hard coal PE Coal char

Water content wt.% 6.1 18.6 9.9 0 1.1

Ash content wt.%db 0.3 4.2 7.4 0.0 4.0
C wt.%db 50.2 65.5 76.5 85.9 87.1
H wt.%db 6.0 3.8 3.9 14.1 1.7
O wt.%db 43.4 25.2 10.3 0.00 5.5
N wt.%db 0.05 0.84 1.34 0.02 1.40
S wt.%db 0.005 0.38 0.46 n.d. 0.25
Cl wt.%db 0.003 0.05 0.15 n.d. 0.09

Volatile components wt.%db 86.5 51.8 34.6 >99 7.5

Fixed carbon wt.%db 13.5 48.2 65.4 <1 92.5

SOLID ALTERNATIVE FUELS

Alternative fuels
Fuel Specification High quality RDF Low quality RDF

Particle Size < 30 mm (2D) 30 – 150 mm (2D)

Moisture < 20 % > 20 %

Ash content (Inorganics) Minimal (< 5 %) Considerable (> 5 %)

Heating value (LHV) > 20.000 kJ/kg << 20.000 kg/kg

OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. REQUIREMENTS AND INFLUENCE BY FUEL COMBUSTION

3. FUELS IN CEMENT PLANTS

4. COMBUSTION PROCESS AND EMISSIONS

5. INFLUENCE ON CALCINER DESIGN

6. INFLUENCE ON PLANT CAPACITY

7. OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES
COMBUSTION OF SOLID FUELS

Solid Fuel Combustion Volatile compounds

CO
CO2
H2
CH4 + O2  CO2 + H2O
C2H2
C2H4
H2O CO + O  CO2
CXHY

drying pyrolysis char gasification

heat heat O2

Raw fuel particle Dry fuel Fixed carbon Ash

(char)
COMBUSTION OF SOLID FUELS

Fuel Combustion
Influence of the volatile matter content of the fuel

Char Bituminous coal Wood PE

~ 0 % (theor.) ~ 30 % ~ 85 % ~ 100 %

Dominated by pyrolysis step: High release of CxHy radicals

COMBUSTION OF SOLID FUELS

Fuel Combustion
Influence of the volatile matter content of the fuel

Char Bituminous coal Wood PE

~ 0 % (theor.) ~ 30 % ~ 85 % ~ 100 %

Dominated by char gasification: mainly CO formation

EMISSIONS

Emissions
Emission Sources (typical) Impact

CO2 All fuels & raw material low

CO SAF medium
NOX (NO, NO2) Process related very high
SO2 Raw material, high S fuels high
Mercury Fuels (e.g. sewage sludge), rm high

NOX
• Mainly process driven (thermal NOX)
• New regulations (e.g. 200 mg/Nm³ in
Germany)
• Primary reduction (staged combustion)
• Secondary reduction (with Urea or NH3)
OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. REQUIREMENTS AND INFLUENCE BY FUEL COMBUSTION

3. FUELS IN CEMENT PLANTS

4. COMBUSTION PROCESS AND EMISSIONS

5. INFLUENCE ON CALCINER DESIGN

6. INFLUENCE ON PLANT CAPACITY

7. OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES
CALCINER DESIGN

Conditions to ensure optimum combustion

Time Temperature Turbulence

Residence time for Sufficient high Necessary to provide

complete fuel temperature oxygen to unburned
combustion e.g. ignition point fuel
Methane (CH4): 595 °C

3-T criteria has to be fulfilled for complete combustion

Threats if 3-T criteria is not fulfilled

• Incomplete combustion • Emissions (CO)
• Combustion proceeds in preheater • Higher spec. energy consumption
• Operational issues (blockings) • Degree of calcination, etc.
CALCINER DESIGN

Gas residence time

Calcination Complete
Calciner Size
CaCO3 -> CaO + CO2 Combustion
constant depending
< 2 sec on fuel

Typical required residence times

>3 sec gas, oil
> 3,5 sec bituminous coal
> 4,5 sec petcoke, anthracite
>5 sec for high quality AF

>7 sec AF, low NOX technol.

CALCINER DESIGN

Focus

Proper Ignition Hard to ignite Fuels Separate Combustion

Chamber

high H2O content low volatile fuel

SAF Petcoke / Char

High Turbulence Mixing Mixing Chamber

(Post Combustion Chamber)

High gas viscosity

CO / NO / O2 streams
CALCINER STAGED COMBUSTION

Staged combustion for In-line precalciner plants

low NOX
for emission control of NOx levels

• Creation of a reducing atmosphere to

Calciner
reduce NOX in calciner by: l>1
 CO
 CXHY (hydrocarbon radicals) Calciner
l<1 high NOX
CXHY + z NO = x CO2 + y/2 H2O +z/2 N2
levels
 Active fuel nitrogen (NH3, HCN)

• Complete oxidation in last “stage” Kiln

l>1
CALCINER FIRING
A TEC staged combustion CALCINER with PCC and separate combustion chamber

Complete combustion

Incresed residence time and

controlled velocity
Excellent ignition
SEPARATE COMBUSTION
CHAMBER

Separate calciner
combustion chamber

• Optimum conditions for

ignition in hot air
• Needs to be designed
carefully for homogenous
flow, refractory protection
and good burn-out
SEPARATE COMBUSTION
CHAMBER
Conventional design
• Hot meal added at TAD inlet
Advantages
– Refractory protection

– Combustion control

Disadvantages

– Too low temperature for ignition of

low quality fuels

– Creation of cold spot

– Working principle insufficient Conventional Combustion Chamber

at Engineering phase
SEPARATE COMBUSTION
CHAMBER
New design
• No hot meal added at TAD inlet
• Refractory protection and control by
jacket tube and air
Advantages
– Higher temperature for low quality
fuels
– Perfect ignition of all fuel qualities
– Efficient utilization of calciner
volume
– Perfect for retrofitting (no meal
pipes needed)
– Drying & Ignition defined by tube
A TEC Combustion Chamber
without using hot meal
POST COMBUSTION CHAMBER

The A TEC Post Combustion Chamber

Installed at calciner top

A TEC PCC
Increase of cross section upstream

Velocity reduction upstream

downstream
Larger unburned fuel particles can stay in the

upsteam
upsteam section

CALCINER
Expansion of residence time

Eccentrically entrance downstream

High turbulence
POST COMBUSTION CHAMBER

A TEC Post Combustion Chamber CFD-modelling

POST COMBUSTION CHAMBER
OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. REQUIREMENTS AND INFLUENCE BY FUEL COMBUSTION

3. FUELS IN CEMENT PLANTS

4. COMBUSTION PROCESS AND EMISSIONS

5. INFLUENCE ON CALCINER DESIGN

6. INFLUENCE ON PLANT CAPACITY

7. OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES
PLANT CAPACITY

Fuel change

Flue gas amount

Flue gas temperature

Exit pressure preheater

ID fan capacity

Clinker production capacity

PLANT CAPACITY
C vs H combustion

C + O2 = CO2 2H + ½ O2 = H2O
1 kmol 1 kmol 1 kmol 2 kmol ½ kmol 1 kmol
12 kg 22,41 m³ 22,41 m³ 2 kg 11,205 m³ 22,41 m³
1 kg 1,87 m³ 1,87 m³ 1 kg 5,6 m³ 11,2 m³

Fuel water content

22,41𝑚³/𝑚𝑜𝑙
𝑉𝐻2 𝑂𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 = ∙ 𝑥𝐻2 𝑂𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 = 1,24 ∙ 𝑥𝐻2 𝑂𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
18 𝑔/𝑚𝑜𝑙

Excess combustion air l / false air Pressure drop estimation

𝜌 ∙ 𝑢2
m air 20,9 % − 𝑂2,1 ∆𝑝 = ∙ 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡.
l l 1 𝑉2 = ∙𝑉 2
m air,stoich.. 20,9 % − 𝑂2,2 1

+ 𝟏 % 𝑶𝟐 𝒂𝒕 𝑷𝑯 𝒆𝒙𝒊𝒕 → 𝒂𝒑𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒙. 𝟓% 𝑮𝒂𝒔 𝒗𝒐𝒍. 𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒔𝒆 𝑷𝑯 𝒆𝒙𝒊𝒕

PLANT CAPACITY

Addressing typical bottlenecks

ID fan - New ID fan
• High investnment
• Higher electricity consumption
• Higher increase of PH outlet temperature
(spec. heat consumption)

Preheater modification
• Reduction of outlet pressure
• Sucess with small modifications possible
• Reduction of electricity consumption
OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. REQUIREMENTS AND INFLUENCE BY FUEL COMBUSTION

3. FUELS IN CEMENT PLANTS

4. COMBUSTION PROCESS AND EMISSIONS

5. INFLUENCE ON CALCINER DESIGN

6. INFLUENCE ON PLANT CAPACITY

7. OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES
 OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES

High SAF utilization with small calciner

• Calciner modification not feasible (technically

or economically)
• Production stop for modification not possible

A TECRocket Mill instead of cal. modification

TSR increase depending on existing

calciner design
LQ-Fluff
• Can be feasible if TAD already
existing but retention time in calciner
is limited
• Can be feasible if HQ-Fluff is also
produced for main burner
OUTLOOK / ALTERNATIVES

High SAF utilization with SEPARATE line

claciner

• SAF utilization limited due to possible

operational problems, like material falling into
tertiary air duct

Possible solution

• Optimized entry of tertiary air to calciner to avoid

stall of the air flow in the calciner cone cone
• Creation of steady state flow conditions
• Utilization of 2D SAF only
• Size limitation of SAF (< 30 mm)
• Rocket Mill offers additional benefits
THANKyou
Thank YOUfor
FOR
your
YOUR
attention
ATTENTION
s.kern@atec-ltd.com
s.kern@atec-ltd.com
 PRIMARY NOX REDUCTION

Fuel Combustion
Influence of the Nitrogen (N) content of the fuel

„Fixed carbon“ Nitrogen N „Volatile“ Nitrogen

e.g. stable aromatic comounds e.g. H-C-N, high vol. N comp.

+ ox HCN, NH3
Combustion

NHi radicals
+ ox + NO
Primary oxidation to NO
Oxidation to Reduction of NO
NO NO + NH3  N2 + H2O

38
 PRIMARY NOX REDUCTION

Staged combustion for precalciner plants

•Split of tertiary air
•Creating reducing and oxidizing zone

•Sufficient residence time

•Maintaining high temperature in
reducing zone
•Increased reaction speed for NO reduction
•Fuel N: Equilibrium  NO reduction
•Meal split

•Use of high volatile fuels

•CXHY radicals more reactive for NO reduction
•Fuel N: positive effect possible

39
 SECONDARY NOX REDUCTION

Selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR)

Injection of NOX-reducing agent NH3 loss comb.
NH3 slip to NOX
 Ammonia (NH3)
 Ammonia water

NOX abatement, relative

 Urea (CH4N2O)

Limited temperature range

Temperature too low
•Emission of NH3
Temperature too high 900 1000 1100
•Formation of additional NO Temperature, °C
Figure: Influence of the temperature on
the SNCR process

40
 SECONDARY NOX REDUCTION

Selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR)

NO Reducing gross reactions NH3 loss comb.
NH3 slip to NOX
4 NH3 + 6 NO  5 N2 + 6 H2O
For NH3 injection: 800 – 1050 °C

NOX abatement, relative

CH4N2O + 2 NO + 0,5 O2  2 N2 + CO2 + 2 H2O
For urea injection: 50 – 100 °C higher

Basic reaction scheme with NH3

900 1000 1100

+NO N2 Temperature, °C
NH3 +OH
NH2 Figure: Influence of the temperature on
+O the SNCR process
+ox
NO

41