Proceedings of the First International Conference on Materials Engineering and Management - Engineering Section (ICMEMe 2018)

Coal As An Alternative Fuel

Authors
Peter Sahupala, Nurjannah Yusman
Corresponding Author
Peter Sahupala
Available Online March 2019.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2991/icmeme-18.2019.14How to use a DOI?
Keywords
Briquette, Coal, Cylinders, Boven Digoel
Abstract

This study was aimed to analyze coal a fuel in the form of briquettes. The coal was taken from the district ofDigoel and was made cylindrical and processed without carbonization. Furthermore, the coal waspassed ultimate and proximate tests along with the analysis of nature and the combustion test of the coal briquettes.This study used an experimental method. Thechemical testing process of coal briquettes which consisted of proximate was conducted in Inorganic Chemistry Laboratory of Chemistry Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences University of Hasanuddin, Makassar. The analysis and testing of coal dust were more accentuated on the rates of solid carbon, volatile matter, ash, sulfur and calorific value. In addition, proximate analysis was done using titration method which included the rates of humid moisture, ash, volatile matter and solid carbon. Besides,the test of calorific value was performed using a bomb calorimeter. This method was based upon ASTM. The results of analysisrevealed that the grain size of the mesh of 60 was the height x diameter (58.75 mm x 73.85 mm) x and the weight of briquettes, 1.55 gr. The average of mass was 510.11 grams, tapioca 10% of 32.52 grams, 650 ml of hot water. Besides, for the mesh of 80, the size, height x diameter, was 58.75 mm x 73.85 mm, x the weight: 1.95 grams. Furthermore, the average of mass was 543.20 grams, tapioca 10% of 38.61 grams, 700 ml of hot water. In addition, the results of test showed that the coal briquettes of60 mesh had the rates of water: 8.66%, ash: 6.18%, volatile metter: 37.04%, solid carbon: 18.64%, the compressive strength: 46.17 kg/cm2, sulfate: 3.67%, nitrogen: 0.39%, and fuel calorific value: 3307 kcal/kg. For mesh 80, the results obtained 7.16% with 7.21% of ash rate, 43.86% ofvolatile metter,20.78% of solid carbon, 74.74 kg/cm2of compressive strength, and 3783 kcal/kg. Besides, the test of calorific value was done by burning the coal briquettes in 1 liter or 1000 grams in boiling water. The water was boiled at a temperature of 100oC with 29oC ambient temperature. In addition, the different temperatures was performedto get the efficiency of thermal combustion. The boiling temperature of the mesh of 60 was 70oC while the mesh of 80 was 71oC. The result showed that the thermal combustion of mesh 60 was 22.529% while mesh 80 was 17.314%.

Copyright
© 2019, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.
Open Access
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

Download article (PDF)

Volume Title
Proceedings of the First International Conference on Materials Engineering and Management - Engineering Section (ICMEMe 2018)
Series
Advances in Engineering Research
Publication Date
March 2019
ISBN
978-94-6252-679-2
ISSN
2352-5401
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2991/icmeme-18.2019.14How to use a DOI?
Copyright
© 2019, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.
Open Access
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

Cite this article

TY  - CONF
AU  - Peter Sahupala
AU  - Nurjannah Yusman
PY  - 2019/03
DA  - 2019/03
TI  - Coal As An Alternative Fuel
BT  - Proceedings of the First International Conference on Materials Engineering and Management - Engineering Section (ICMEMe 2018)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 60
EP  - 68
SN  - 2352-5401
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/icmeme-18.2019.14
DO  - https://doi.org/10.2991/icmeme-18.2019.14
ID  - Sahupala2019/03
ER  -