UTILIZATION OF STAINLESS HAMMER

TO REDUCE ANODE DROP VOLTAGE

IN POT OPERATION
GRATHA ADHITYA PUTRA
39014149
REDUCTION OPERATION SECTION
SMELTER REDUCTION AND CASTING DEPARTMENT
PT. INALUM (PERSERO)
2016

1. Introduction

OUTLINE:

1.1. Background
1.2. Objectives

2. Method

2.1. Technical Specification of Stainless Hammer

2.2. Utilization of Stainless Hammer in Pot Operation

3. Achievement of Improvement
4. Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)
3.1. Countable
3.2. Uncountable

5. Conclusions

s1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

High anode drop

Anode BusBar
raising (ABB)

Anode clamp
damaged

Overheat
Spark
Expanded
Failed to
unlock

COST

s1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

To reduce anode drop voltage in anode reset, ACC will

cleaning anode clamp by air jet, lock anode, and then
moves axially if anode drop voltage remains high.

s1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

From Nov, 2014 till Feb, 2016 we have repaired 136 pcs anode
clamp. It was caused by spark (54%), overheat (29%), expanded
(8%), failed to unlock (7%), slipped down anode (2%).
Table of Trouble Telescopic Small Trolley ACC

No Equipment

Trouble
Date

Reparation
Date

Remark

Reparation

ACC B7

4 Mar'14

4-5 Mar '14

Small trolley ass'y

Spare from ex-trolley ACC B8

ACC A7

18 Mar '14

19-22 Mar '14

Telescopic assy's

New spare

ACC B4

29 Apr '14

29-30 Apr '14

Small trolley ass'y

Spare from recycle trolley

ACC A8

1 May '14

1-7 May '14

Small trolley ass'y

Spare from reparation of ex-ACC B4

ACC B5

29 Dec '14

30-31 Dec '14

Small trolley ass'y

Spare from recycle trolley

ACC B1

10 Jun '15

11-12 Jun '15

Small trolley ass'y

Spare from recycle trolley

ACC A6

17 Jun '15

17-18 Jun '15

Welding

s1. INTRODUCTION
1.2. Objectives

1. To reduce anode drop voltage efficient

2. To minimize ACC usage in Anode Busbar
Raising (ABB) and Anode Reset (AR)

s2. METHOD

2.1. Technical Specification of Stainless Hammer

Detail
Material

Stainless steel

Round Head Diameter

50 mm

Approximate Length

300 mm

Approximate Width

90 mm

Approximate Weight

1800 g

s2. METHOD

2.2. Utilization of Stainless Hammer in Pot operation

Before 116.7 mV

Accuracy 99.60 %
After 38.8 mV

3.
of Improvement
INTRODUCTION
s1.Achievement

Table of reduced anode drop voltage by using stainless hammer

Pot
319
324
326
328
331
332
334
336
419
420
423
424
427
428
434
435
436
622
624
626
627
632
633
635
636
637
638

Anode Number
13
14
6
13
14
5
2
3
6
2
11
15
5
18
4
12
16
4
4
17
7
16
15
15
5
4
13

DV before
80
90
100
200
140
90
110
80
90
110
110
98
85
98
85
90
105
100
120
200
200
95
200
100
90
100
200

DV after
20
21
34
20
25
31
21
21
21
32
25
18
19
19
15
22
19
22
34
41
55
26
21
34
29
50
20

DV after 2 days
14
26
29
25
16
39
21
27
23
12
80
12
20
21
49
14
11
23
41
40
44
45
22
44
14
110
21

Remark

noisy pot

noisy pot

noisy pot

3.
s Achievement of Improvement

Table of reduced anode drop voltage by using stainless hammer

Test location

PL 1
PL 2
BOOSTER
Average

Test location
Station 3
Booster

Average DV before
103.59
140.50

Average reduced DV (mV)

Stainless hammer
ACC
97.05
70.40
70.41
103.89
83.43
93.50
83.63
89.26

Average DV after Average DV after 2 days DV changed after 2 days

22.53
25.82
3.29
33.20
40.40
7.20

There is no significant DV changed after 2 days ABB.

This improvement can reducing anode DV about 83.63 mV.

3.
s Achievement of Improvement
after stainless
hammer usage

Average monthly clamps reparation decreased until 1.77

3.
s Achievement of Improvement

after stainless
hammer usage

No significant changes

3.
s Achievement of Improvement

Experimental test to know any changes after ABB (16 hours after ABB)

306

406

NO ANODE
SLIPPED
DOWN

405

403

3.
s Achievement of Improvement

Experimental test to know any changes after ABB (after Anode Effect)

331

635

NO ANODE
SLIPPED
DOWN

427

637

3.
s Achievement of Improvement

Comparison between Existing and Improvement State

Case

Existing state

advantages reduce anode drop effectively

disadvantages

longer time of ABB process

high probability of damaged ACC's telescopic

Improvement

reduced anode drop voltage almost same as ACC does

minimalizing damaged ACC's telescopic
alternative emergency action when no ACC arround
reduce ABB duration (25% faster)
adaptation process to use this hammer
possibility for people to fall when climbing the pot's hood

To overcome hazardous potentials

of this improvement, people must
be ensure their steady position
safe before hit the anode rod.

4.sCOST BENEFIT ANALYSIS

3.1. Countable
No.

Item Cost / Benefit

Unit

Existing

Improving

Merit (USD)

Provide the hammer

pcs

18

(415)

Provide ladder

unit

(231)

Depresiasi (10%)

unit/year

10%

-41.54

20%

-46.15

4
5

Maintenance cost for ladder unit/year

Reduce welding busbar

Reduce damaged of anode
clamp

tms/year

343

pcs/year

105

75

9,434

Reduce operating time of ACC

4123.08

6365.34

Total Profit

USD/year

15,408

ROI

6161%

10

PBP

year

0.11

hr/year 4278.25

4.sCOST BENEFIT ANALYSIS

3.2. Uncountable

Existing state

Improvement

high probability accident due to

operational ACC

low probability accident due to

operational ACC

5.sCONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION

1.Utilization of stainless hammer can

reducing anode drop voltage efficient.

2. Utilization of stainless hammer can

minimizing ACC usage in ABB raising.
3. Before using this hammer, people must
be ensure their steady position safe.

sAttachment

2.2. Utilization of Stainless Hammer in ABB

sAttachment

2.2. Utilization of Stainless Hammer in ABB

sAttachment

2.2. Utilization of Stainless Hammer in ABB

sAttachment

sAttachment

2.3. Achievement of Improvement

sAttachment

2.1. Utilization of Stainless Hammer in ABB

sAttachment

Background