hongminh
44 posts
TimePosted 16/02/2011 03:02:11
hongminh says

LSF in clinker

Dear Experts,

Please explaine to me why we have got a phenomenon reducing of LSF in clinker during we have not change in LSF of raw mix,

parameters design of raw mix :

                LSF : 100-101,     SM : 2.6   AM : 1.45

Parameters design of clinker:

               LSF :95 - 96.      and now is 92 - 93 and sometimes 95 - 96.

Some days ago we have to change LSF in raw mix up to 102 - 103 but LSF in clinker still lower than the parameter design.

Thank inadvance,

Best regards,

HongMinh.

Reply


Know the answer to this question? Join the community and register for a free guest account to post a reply.

Ted Krapkat
536 posts
TimePosted 16/02/2011 04:33:18

Re: LSF in clinker

Hello HongMinh,

It sounds like the ash content and/or ash chemistry of your coal is varying. If you haven't changed fuel types then your current coal may be becoming contaminated at the stockpile.

Have you recently changed to a new coal supplier or changed coal type?  Or, is the level of coal in your stockpile becoming low at times resulting in soil contamination?

 Regards,

 Ted.

Reply

hongminh
44 posts
TimePosted 17/02/2011 01:46:40
hongminh says

Re: LSF in clinker

Dear Mr Ted,

My coal store had layout a coal pad depth on the floor and the distance from chain feeder to the surface of the floor is enough to ensure that it never take together the soil or concrete in operating.The level of coal in stockpile always maintain in a high level. The coal type same before.

I think may be change something in the chemistry composition of shale. Sometimes it has changes the position on the querry and the SiO2 content may be increase. Do i think correct?

Best regards,

HongMinh.

Reply

Bhaskar Agate
81 posts
TimePosted 17/02/2011 07:32:58

Re: LSF in clinker

Dear HongMinh,

If the quality of coal is consistent then the change in the chemistry composition of shale will certainly have an impact on LSF. What you are thinking appears to be correct.

Best regards,

HongMinh.                                                                                                                  

Reply