Deriving Energy Efficiency From Coal Mill

Gear Box Lubricant

`SERVO POWER MEET 2016

Dr. A. K. Jaiswal,
Chief Research Manager (Industrial Lubricants)

23rd September 2016

Indian Oil Corporation Limited,

R&D Centre, Sector 13,
Faridabad 121007, Haryana
 Content

Background
Lab scale assessment candidate oil vs. conventional
Phase 1 : Physico-chemical properties
Thermal / oxidation stability test (ASTM D 2893)
Phase 2 : Tribological properties
WL, WSD, FZG test (DIN 51354), FAG FE 8, FVA 54/IV
Endurance test
Phase 3 : Evaluation of candidate vs. reference oil
Power savings & analysis of aged oils
Conclusions
 Coal Pulverization

Raw coal coming from

65 75 micron
feeder (conveyor) gets Pulverized coal
grounded between grinding
rolls and bull ring segment
on the revolving bowl Crushing by
Grinding rolls &
bull ring segment
Bowl is made to rotate at
medium speed for proper
pulverization of coal 25 mm (coal)

Hot air through the mill

besides removing moisture
picks up pulverized coal,
takes through classifier and
enters to furnace via fuel
Spiral Bevel Gear
Transmit Power between
intersecting axes

piping system
 Energy Losses Caused in Industrial Gear Systems
& Measures to Improve Overall Efficiencies

- Reduction in viscosity drag

- Reduction on COF in boundary & mixed lubrication regimes
Phase 1: Laboratory Evaluation
 Reference & Candidate Oils

RO
(Reference Oil)
DIN 51517 (CLP) Part 3
AIST 224 (formerly USS 224)
AGMA 9005 E 02 (EP type)
IS 8406 (Reaffirmed 2006)
CO
(Candidate Oil)
National & International specification
dont stipulate for energy efficiency
 Approach for Energy Efficiency

Factors to be
Aim Approach
Controlled

Solid
Reduction in
Frictional Loss
Oil Soluble
Energy Saving

Reduce Optimum
Viscous Drag Viscosity

- Choosing optimum viscosity at the operating temperatures

- Use of fiction modifier to reduce COF

 Performance Properties of Industrial Gear Oils
Property RO CO

Adequate Viscosity KV @ 40 0C, 100 0C, VI Y Y

at operating Pour point, 0C Y Y
temperature
Foam test, ml/ml Y Y
Excellent thermal / Rust test, B Y Y
oxidation stability
(GOOT) Demulsibility test Y Y
Flash point, 0C Y Y
Improved ARV & de- GOOT, % change in KV Y Y
foaming (D 892)
WL, Kgs. Y Y
WSD, mm Y Y
Superior anti-corrosive
anti corrosive &
Timken OK load, lbs. Y Y
Anti-rust (D 665)
FZG (conventional) Y Y
FAG FE 8, mg Y Y
Better AW/EP performance Flender foam -- Y
FZG (Modified) -- Y
Improved frictional
AMP as per FVA54/IV -- Y
property

Both oils meets national &

AMP international specification of
industrial gear oils
 Laboratory study
Gear Oil Oxidation Test (GOOT) ASTM D 2893

% reduction in kinematic viscosity

15
10.9 %
12
Candidate Reference 9
6 CO
3
Test Temperature : 121 + 1.0 0C 0
Duration : 312 hours (13 days)
Test Oil : 300 ml. CO
Air flow : 10 + 0.5 liter / hr.

Assessment:
% change in kinematic viscosity @ 100 0C Superior thermal / oxidation stability
Phase 2: Tribological Evaluation
 Tribological Performance
(summary)
Weld load IP 239 : 250 Kg
Wear Scar Dia ASTM D 4172 :0.4 mm

FAG FE 8 (DIN 52829 Part 3)

Roller & Cage wear test - Pass

FZG gear test (DIN 51354) - Pass

FZG high speed test (DIN 51354) Pass

FVA 54 / IV (micro-pitting resistance)

Progressive loading stage
Endurance test

Flender Foam - Pass

Excellent performance of CO
 Coefficient of Friction
SRV III machine
SRV III Machine
Used to evaluate friction under boundary condition
Test Specimens made from steel are used
Machine is instrumented to run short duration tests
under controlled conditions to precisely measure
friction coefficient of lubricants

% Reduction in Coeff. of friction in SRV

Reference oil
20

15 CO
17.5% less
Candidate oil 10 COF
5

Less coefficient of friction:

More Energy Saving
 In-house FZG test
Power Consumption

% Energy Savings in FZG Gear Rig

10
8.66%
8
6
4
2
0
CO showed energy savings of 8.66%

Reduction in Energy consumed (kW) in FZG Gear Rig Test : ~ 8 - 9 %

Candidate oils 4th stage 6th stage 8th stage Cumulative

kW % kW % kW % kW %

Reference oil(RO) 1.54 -- 1.96 -- 2.52 -- 2.01 --

Candidate oil(CO) 1.40 (-) 9.09 1.80 (-)8.16 2.30 (-)8.73 1.83 (-) 8.66
Phase 3: Endurance Test
 Sequence of Evaluation

Oils under Test Tested in Coal Mill (210 MW)

Reference Oil (RO) RO : 1250 hours
Candidate Oil (CO) CO : 2500 hours
Run back to back in coal mill RO : 1250 hours

Various Mill Parameters

Coal analysis & Oil Analysis

Energy Efficiency
Aged oil analysis Electronic Energy Meter
health at every ~500 hours Coal Integrator Reading
Data on various mill parameter
PT temperature sensor

Oils tested in the coal mill in the above sequence : RO CO RO

 Methodology for Calculation of Power Savings -
Specific Power Consumption

Direct Method:
Specific power consumption (Cumulative)
based on actual data noted during the trial

Specific power consumption (6 hours basis) -

based on actual data noted during 6 hours
Coal flow (+ 2.0 Tons / hour)
PA flow to mill (+ 4.0 Tons / hour)
PA inlet temperature (+ 60 0C)
PA out let temperature (+ 4.0 0C)
Mill dp (+ 60 mm of Hg)

To minimize the deviations in the mill

 Higher Drain Interval Confirmations
RO CO Fe Si Cr, Cu, Ni, Al
6
%Change in Kinematic Viscosity @40C

4.95 70
w
5 e
a 60
r
4 50
m
e
t 40
3 2.56 a
l
s 30
2 1.44 ,
1.31 1.96
1.0 20
1.8 p
1 0.48 0.6 p
m 10
0.12
0
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 32 743 1068 1950 2512 32 743 1068 1950 2512
(RO) (RO) (RO) (RO) (RO) (CO) (CO) (CO) (CO) CO)
Running hours Running hours

Significantly lower increase in viscosity Significantly lower Fe & Si pickup

(~ 60% lower in CO Vs. RO) (~ 50% lower in CO Vs. RO)

Confirms the Enhancement of Drain Interval and Correlates well with

Laboratory Oxidation & Tribological Test Results
 Durability Study : Fresh vs. Used Oil samples

Load : 200N, Temp.: 100 0C, 50 Hz, 1 mm, Duration : 1 hour

in SRV test

Fresh Used

Durability of New Industrial Gear Oil in

retaining the frictional efficiency
characteristics
 Power Savings, Used oil Analysis &
Average Power Savings, %
Reduction lube oil temperature
(summary)
Reduction in sump oil

8 6.0

Temperature, 0C
5.0
4.0
7
% 2.0
p
o 6 6.80% 0.0

w
e 5 5.82%
r Enhanced equipment
as well as oils life
s
4 P
a
v
3 Viscosity control - > 60 % less
i
n 2
g
s
Minimal change in total acid no. - ~ nil
1

0 Wear metals less than 50 %

Power Savings Power Savings
(cum.) (6 hrs.)

Reduction in lube oil temperature ~ 5 0C

Power Savings of 5 to 7 % All the operational parameters found within the

operational range in satisfactory condition
 Cost Benefit Calculation
Description Details
Average Power Consumption per gear box, KWh 7.6
Total quantity of coal in year, tons 2,30,000
Power consumption in one year, KWh 17,48,000
Power savings, % (average) 6.0
Total power savings in a year, KWh 1,04,880
Additional cost with new oil for year, INR 1,82,400
Equivalent power (@ INR 6.50), KWh 28,061
Nett power savings from a gear box in a year, KWh 76,819
Unit (210 MW) with 4 nos. of gear boxes, KWh (*) 15,36,380
Total Monetary benefit (@ INR 6.50, 210 MW unit), INR * 99.86 lakhs (~1 crore)
Payback period ~ 15 months (1.3 years)
* assuming oil life of 5 years

monetary Savings of ~ 1 Crore from 210 MW

 Conclusions
Candidate oil meets national & international specifications of
industrial gear oils with anti-micropitting features

Power savings of energy efficient industrial gear (Servomesh

SS) of 5 7 %

Analysis of aged samples for Candidate Oil (CO)

- no abnormal rise in kinematic viscosity (>60% less)
- wear metals build-up (50 % less)
- reduction in lube oil temperature (~ 5 0C)

Benefits of enhancement in oil & gear box life,

- increased productivity,
- reduced down time &
- reduction in carbon foot print