110 ICR OCTOBER 2010

WEAR PROTECTION
X
cc

is a Metal Matrix Composite

wear solution consisting of high-
hardness inserts integrated in the
castings working surface.
The main parameters driving
performance are:
flexibility given by the possibility of
locating the hard inserts in the high-wear
zone (customised solution for the user),
excellent wear resistance (high-hardness
inserts) combined with high-mechanical
properties of the base metal
solution fitting both mono and
bi-directional crushers.
For the user, Xccs main advantages are:
1. Reduced wear costs thanks to increased
lifetime
2. Optimised production as original profile
is kept longer
3. Eased maintenance: further apart and
not affected by exceptional events such as
red river, tramp metal etc
4. Improved safety due to reduced
handling.
Cimpor Alhandra Clinker
crusher trial
The clinker crusher at Alhandra Line 7 is a
Claudius Peters model, with the following
operating data:

Parameter Unit Value
Design throughput tph 3100
Actual absorbed power kW 55
Finished product size mm <30
Three types of clinker crusher hammers
were tested to evaluate their performance,
efficiency and benefits:
G-X 165 Cr Mo V cast hammers
bimetallic hammers
Xcc Magotteaux hammers.

G-X 165 Cr Mo V hammers and bimetallic
hammers lasted seven months and lost
their initial profile quickly.
The Xcc hammers were installed in
September 2007. A first check in June
2008 (after 10 months) showed very little
wear. They were checked a second time in
October 2008, after one year. The wear
started to show but they were still in very
good condition.
The Xcc hammers were finally
removed in April 2009 after 18 months
in operation, although they could still
have run for at least two more months.
The decision to remove them was taken
because they would not have made the
next kiln outage five months later.
To summarise, the results of the
Alhandra clinker crusher test are shown in
Table 1. Xcc hammers are cost-effective,
Cimpor is a key player in the cement world. The group operates plants
in Portugal, Spain, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Brazil, South Africa,
India and China. In Portugal, it has three production centres Alhandra,
Loul and Souselas with a total installed capacity of 6.9Mta. With a view
to improving the availability of their crushers, Alhandra and Loul decided
to test Magotteauxs new Xcc

wear solution for hammers.
The trials were first conducted in the clinker crushers. Xcc brought
significant improvements, so Loul decided to conduct a trial in its primary
limestone crusher. The three trials are discussed in this article.
by Eng Cristina Ramos,
Cimpor Alhandra, Portugal
Eng Hugo Estevns,
Cimpor Loul, Portugal &
Eng Jose Antonio Leyun,
Magotteaux, Spain
ICimpors trio of Xcc trials
Xcc

is Magotteauxs
wear solution for
hammers
Although manganese steel
hammers cost less, when the
cost of hard-facing (hard-facing/
rotation requires a one to three
day mill stop) is factored in, the
total cost ends up around 10
per cent higher than that of Xcc
hammers.


Hammer type life time (months) Relative cost
Cast 7 1.0
Bimetallic 7 1.1
Xcc

20 1.8
Table 1: Alhandra crusher trial results

OCTOBER 2010 ICR 111

lasting almost three times longer than the
other hammers, at a cost only 1.8 times
higher.

Cimpor Loul Clinker
crusher trial
The clinker crusher at Loul is a Fuller
Model, with the following operating data:

Parameter Unit Value
Design throughput tph 90
Actual absorbed power kW 45
Finished product size mm <25
Two types of clinker crusher hammers
were tried to evaluate their performance,
efficiency and benefits:
Hardfaced 12-14 per cent manganese
steel hammers
Xcc Magotteaux hammers
Manganese steel hammers were
installed in May 2006, hard-faced and
rotated in November 2006 and removed
in May 2007. They reached a lifetime of
7798h. Initial hammer weight was 30.5kg,
final weight was 15.5kg. The lost weight
was 50 per cent of the initial weight.
Xcc hammers were installed in April
2008 and removed in August 2009.
They reached a lifetime of 7062h. Initial
hammer weight was 31.5kg, final weight
was 25kg. The lost weight was 20 per
cent of the initial weight.
Although manganese steel hammers
cost less, when the cost of hard-facing
(hard-facing/rotation requires a one to
three day mill stop) is factored in, the
total cost ends up around 10 per cent
higher than that of Xcc hammers.
The results of the Loul test are
summarised in Table 2.
Users benefits of Xcc hammers are:
increased lifetime meaning increased
tonnage crushed per set
less degradation of product size through
time since the initial wear profile is kept
longer
tube mills are fed with a finer clinker
throughout the life of the hammers and
with a more consistent granulometry
leading to improved cement quality
reduced maintenance costs less
interventions and preparation work
better predictability allowing to plan
interventions at favourable times
gain of productive time
reduced spare parts inventories.

Cimpor - Loul primary
limestone crusher trial
The primary limestone crusher at Loul is
a MIAG Titan 48D 75 with the following
operating data:
Parameter Unit Value
Design throughput tph 400
Actual absorbed power kW 2 X 250
Maximum feed size mm 1000
Finished product size mm <30
At Loul, the primary limestone crusher
hammers are one of the largest wear part
costs in the maintenance budget. This is
the reason why research began for new
and better solutions to reduce cost:
design improvements
different hammer concepts and alloys.
Several types of primary limestone
crusher hammers were tested to evaluate
their performance, efficiency and benefits:
manganese steel hammers (12-14 per
cent Mn) normal design
Magotteaux Xcc hammers straight
inserts design
Magotteaux Xcc hammers L shaped
WEAR PROTECTION
Xcc

hammers after 10 months operation

Hammer type Hours Weight loss Relative
(%) cost
Harfaced manganese 7798 50 1.1
Xcc

7062 20 1.0
Xcc

hammers after one year operation

Table 2: Loul crusher trial results
inserts design. The hammers were
installed in January 2009 and removed in
January 2010.
The main concern when starting the
tests was the mechanical sturdiness of
the XCC hammers, since the impact
conditions in primary crushers are much
harsher than in clinker crushers.
As can be seen on the following
pictures, the Xcc hammers behaved very
well and withstood the impact conditions
without any problems.
To summarise, the test results of
the primary limestone crusher at Loul
are detailed in Table 3. Based on the
experience gathered, a set of improved
Xcc hammers was manufactured and is
currently running in the primary limestone
crusher.
Straight inserts, L shaped inserts and
U shaped inserts are being tested. The
U shaped ones are similar to the L
shaped, but the insert covers the whole
outside face of the hammer. The trial will
be finalised in a few months and results to
date are promising.
Conclusion
The use of Xcc hammers in clinker and
limestone crushers brings the following
advantages to the user:
maintenance cost reduction thanks to
increased lifetime, less intervention and
less preparation work
better predictability allowing to plan
interventions at best-suited times,
reducing disruptions
increased production thanks to increased
lifetime and better crusher performance
due to keeping the original hammer
profile longer
power savings on the tube mills and
improvement of the cement quality
since they are fed with a finer and more
consistent clinker
improved safety thanks to less handling
inventory costs savings.
__________________________________ I
WEAR PROTECTION
112 ICR OCTOBER 2010
Mn Steel Straight Xcc L Xcc
Xcc

hammers withstand the impact conditions without any problems

Straight inserts L shaped hammers


30.5kg
31.5kg
15.5kg
Mn steel
Xcc

25kg


Weight reduction 50 per cent
Weight reduction 20 per cent
Hammer type Wear performance
Manganese 1.00
Xcc

straight 1.40
Xcc

L shaped 1.80
Table 3: Loul limestone crusher test results
Comparison of weight loss in manganese steel and Xcc

wear-protected hammers