PRODUCTION AND PHYSICO-MECHANICAL CHARACTERIZATION

OF BRIQUETTE MADE FROM GROUNDNUT SHELL AND SUGAR

CANE BAGASSE

BY

AKANGBE, ADEWALE IDOWU

(14/30GD026)

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING,

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY,

UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN, NIGERIA.

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

AWARD OF BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING (B.Eng.) IN MECHANICAL

ENGINEERING

AUGUST 2019
 APPROVAL PAGE
This project has been read and approved as meeting the requirement of the Department of

Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, University of Ilorin; for the

award of Bachelor of Engineering (B.ENG) Degree in Mechanical Engineering.

…………………………….. ……………………
H.A. AJIMOTOKAN DATE
(SUPERVISOR)

…………………………...... …………………….
DR. OHIJEAGBON DATE
(HEAD OF DEPARTMENT)

…………………………...... ……………………
(EXTERNAL EXAMINER) DATE

ii
 DEDICATION
I dedicate this project to Almighty God who has guided, guarded and protected my life to this

present moment.

I also dedicate it to my parents who contributed a lot towards the success and completion of this
project. To m

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

All praise and adorations belong Jesus Christ for making this project a success. I am also grateful

to my parents (Mr. and Mrs. Akangbe and my siblings (the twins and Ayodeji) who have shown

me great care, love and concern until this moment.

I really appreciate my ever supportive project supervisor, Dr H.A Ajimotokan who guided me all

through my project and encouraged me with his applicative and innovative level of thinking till

the very end of the work. I also want to also appreciate Engineer Ibitoye for the helpful tips and

advice all through the production of my briquettes.

My appreciation goes to my wonderful project partner, Marcus David who made the project fun

and adventurous at the same time. Special thanks to my good friends; Aina praise, Adebayo

Emmanuel, Odedina Emmanuel, Timilayo Adetomiwa and many more.

Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to my closest friend; the Holy Spirit who has always been

by my side to guide me.

iv
 ABSTRACT
In this project work, the physico-mechanical characterisation of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)

shell and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) bagasse was examined. The briquettes were

produced in ratio of 90:10, 80:20, 70:30, 60:40, 50:50 with respect to groundnut shell and

sugarcane bagasse and vice versa using cassava starch as the briquette binder. Three different

particle sizes 0.5mm, 1.0mm and 1.4mm representing fine, medium and coarse respectively were

selected for this project. The briquettes samples were produced with a low-pressure briquetting

machine at compacting pressures of 25kPa and 35kPa respectively. The briquettes were subjected

to physico-mechanical tests like moisture content, mechanical durability, compressive density,

relaxed density, shatter resistance, relaxed density, water resistance, hardness and resiliency. The

results obtained from the tests on the various compositions of the briquette gave an overview of

which compositions yields comparative physico- mechanical properties.

v
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL PAGE ....................................................................................................................................................... ii
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................................................. iii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................. v
TABLE OF FIGURES................................................................................................................................................ viii
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY .............................................................................................................................1
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................................3
1.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES ..........................................................................................................................................3
1.4 JUSTIFICATION .....................................................................................................................................................3
1.5 SCOPE OF STUDY ..................................................................................................................................................4
LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................................................................................5
2.1 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................................5
2.1.1 History of Briquetting .......................................................................................................................................5
2.1.2 BRIQUETTING TECHNOLOGY IN NIGERIA ..........................................................................................................5
2.1.3 TYPES OF BRIQUETTING ....................................................................................................................................7
2.2 AGRICULTURAL WASTE UTILIZATION THROUGH BRIQUETTING..........................................................................8
2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATION OF AGRICULTURAL-BIOMASS BRIQUETTE IN NIGERIA ....................................8
2.3 PAST LITERATURES ON THE PRESENT STUDY ....................................................................................................10
2.3.2 Characterization of fuel briquettes made from a blend of rice husk and palm oil sludge .............................11
2.4 PHYSICO-MECHANICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BRIQUETTES ..........................................................................13
2.4.1 MOISTURE CONTENT ..........................................................................................................................13
2.4.2 EFFECTS OF MOISTURE .....................................................................................................................14
2.4.3 DENSITY: .................................................................................................................................................15
2.4.4 PARTICLE DENSITY .................................................................................................................................15
2.4.5 EFFECTS OF PARTICLE SIZE ............................................................................................................15
2.4.6 POROSITY ...............................................................................................................................................16
2.4.7 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF THE BRIQUETTE SAMPLES ....................................................16
2.4.8 DURABILITY / ABRASIVE RESISTANCE .........................................................................................17
2.4.9 WATER RESISTANCE ...........................................................................................................................18
2.5 SHATTER RESISTANCE ..........................................................................................................................20
2.6 EFFECTS OF INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT ON THE PHYSICAL AND MECHANICAL
PROPERTIES OF NORWAY SPRUCE BRIQUETTES ......................................................................................21

vi
2.7 EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF BIOMASS BRIQUETTES
FROM DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL RESIDUES COMBINATION ............................................................23
2.8 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSICO-MECHANICAL PROPERTIES, COMPACTING
PRESSURE AND MIXING PROPORTION OF BRIQUETTES PRODUCED FROM MAIZE COBS
AND SAWDUST ................................................................................................................................................24
CHAPTER 3 ...............................................................................................................................................................25
3.0 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................25
3.1 MATERIALS COLLECTIONS ..................................................................................................................................25
3.2 PRETREATMENT AND PREPARATION .................................................................................................................25
PRODUCTION PROCESS .........................................................................................................................................26
.............................................................................................................................................................................27
Production of briquettes using a 220kN manual compression machine .......................................................28
3.3 CHARACTERISATION OF THE BRIQUETTE SAMPLES.................................................................28
3.3.7 SHATTER RESISTANCE .......................................................................................................................31
3.6 PROCESSING FACTORS .................................................................................................................................33
CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................................................34
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................................34
CHAPTER 5 ................................................................................................................................................................52
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ...............................................................................................................52
4.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................................54
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................................................57

vii
 TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Briquette Machine ............................................................................................................ 6

Figure 3 Groundnut shell .............................................................................................................. 10

Figure 4 Sugarcane bagasse .......................................................................................................... 13

Figure 5 Rupture force Experiment ...............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 6 Schematic diagram for tumbling test. ............................................................................. 18

Figure 7 Schematic illustration of immersion test. ....................................................................... 19

Figure 8. Schematic diagram for drop test. ................................................................................... 20

viii
 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Since the existence of mankind, energy conversion has been an inevitable part of human survival.

It has been a major factor for the wellness of humanity and economic development of nations

(Oladeji, 2015); About half of the world’s population use wood or charcoal for cooking and

heating. Cutting of trees for fuel and for subsistence farming is resulting in loss of 2-3% of the

world’s forest each year. (Oladeji, 2015). In Nigeria, 80% of the people who live in the rural or

semi-urban areas depend solely on fuelwood to meet their energy needs. (Onuegbu, 2012) reported

that fuelwood accounts for about 37% of the total energy demand of the country and out of the

total wood demand from the forest, 90% goes to fuelwood. (harley, 2014)This shows that most

families have traditionally relied on wood and wood-derived charcoal as their primary cooking

fuel. Recent statistics from Nigeria Conservation Foundation (NCF) have shown that over 96% of

the country is currently deforested. (Toussaint, 2007).

In addition, the usage of wood and dung indoors leads to smoke levels that have been detrimental

to the health of many Nigerians, causing afflictions like Acute Lower Respiratory Infection

(ALRI), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and many other life-threatening diseases

(Toussaint, 2007)

Therefore, in a bid to resolve these seemingly undying challenges, there’s been a need to establish

a sustainable source of energy which can at least have a long-lasting impact on both domestic and

industrial energy needs, a source of energy that can be easily assessed, readily available, climate-

friendly, human friendly, highly effective and financially affordable.(Akangbe & Marcus, 2019)

Out of the diverse sources of renewable energy, biomass is expected to play a major role in the

1
foreseeable future, particularly for developing countries whose economies are largely based on

agriculture. With biomass, the potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to a nearly zero net

gain (CO₂) can be achieved when sustainable production and utilization are implemented. Some

of this biomass are already used as fuel but as the majority of them are bulky, uneven, fluffy, dusty

and also have low energy density and high moisture content as compared to the generally used

fossil type fuel, theses unwanted characteristics’ make biomass difficult to handle, store, transport

and utilize (Arry Y Nurhayatia, 2015). These inherent properties make biomass not readily

available as an excellent source of solid fuel, thus their densification (Rabiu, 2018).

Briquetting, one of the densification processing of loose agricultural residues is a reliable and

convenient way of achieving high energy by producing high-density solid fuel through the

compacting of combustible raw materials such as charcoal, agricultural residue, forest waste,

industrial and municipal waste to increase the net calorific value per unit volume, to improve

combustion efficiency, to reduce pollution and to ease handling, transportation as well as storage.

(Shrestha, 2014).

Furthermore, With the abundance of land for agricultural practices in Nigeria and approximately

74,500,000 ha of the total land area of 91,077,000 ha of the country, about 41.2% of the agricultural

land being arable land (Fasina, 2013), with close to 70% of the Nigerian population involved in

agricultural production and more than 70% of the farming population being smallholder farmers

(< 5 ha per person),hence land use is not a barrier for mass production of agricultural practices and

the resulting wastes called agricultural-residues can be converted to energy.

Despite the fact that briquetting technology can be easily practiced in Nigeria and other African

counties, it has not been given the required attention particularly in Nigeria which is because of

2
the overdependence on crude oil, which in the last fifty years, has become our major export to the

rest of the world and its end products which are our major sources of energy in industries.

Therefore, there is a need to diversify if Nigeria is ever going to solve this energy problems that

will shape or change the future of a nation. (Nhavare, 2014)

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

For years now, production of renewable energy has been a major source of concern as well as

hindrance to nations economy development, and the direct burning of loose biomass has been

detrimental to the health and well-being of humans. With the cost of purchasing kerosene and gas

increasing daily, many families find it difficult to access and have resulted to old conventional way

of cutting down trees and using it as a source of fuel wood. This source of energy is not only

inefficient but it has also cause deforestation in the country as well produce harmful gases at the

expense of human health. Thus, this project seeks to produce and carry out physico-mechanical

characterisation of briquettes made from groundnut shell, sugar cane bagasse and their blends.

1.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this research project is to produce and carry out the physico-mechanical

characterisation of briquettes made from groundnut shell, sugar cane bagasse and their blends. The

specific objectives to achieve this aim are to;

1. Characterize the raw groundnut shell and sugar cane bagasse.

2. Produce briquettes made from groundnut shell and sugar cane bagasse; and

3. Carry out the physical and mechanical characterization of the produced briquettes

1.4 JUSTIFICATION
Direct burning of biomass is hazardous to the environment as its increase pollution as well as the

green house effects. And because of structure of this biomass, they are difficult to handle, transport

3
and store. Compacting and densification of this loosed biomass will make them easy to handle,

transport as well store for longer period. Therefore, Briquetting technology which is the

densification of loosed biomass will not only make them easy to transport, handle and store but

will also increase their efficiency. This technology is effective and it can be easily practiced. It

will greatly reduce deforestation, saves cost of transportation, reduce waste pollution and serves

as a source of employment for farmers. (Arry Y Nurhayatia, 2015)

1.5 SCOPE OF STUDY

This project is limited to only production and physical and mechanical characterisation of how

biomass briquettes from groundnut shell and sugar cane bagasse residues can be a reliable source

solid fuel.

4
 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 BACKGROUND
2.1.1 History of Briquetting
The compaction of loose combustible material for fuel-making purposes was a technique used by

most civilizations in the past. Biomass densification, otherwise known as briquetting of agro

residues has been practiced for many years in several countries. Briquettes were discovered to be

an important source of energy during the First and Second World Wars for heat and electricity

production, using simple technologies. During this period, briquetting of sawdust and other waste

materials became widespread in many countries in Europe and America under the impact of fuel

shortages. Screw extrusion briquetting technology was invented and developed in Japan in 1945.

As of April 1969, there were 638 plants in Japan (Grover and Mishra, 1996)). The methods used

were no more than simple baling or drying. Industrial methods of briquetting dated back to the

second part of the 19th century. (Oladeji, 2015)

This chapter includes summary of the past literature and researches which are relevant to the

present study. The literature associated with various aspects of the present study is divided under

the following subheads

1. Briquetting technology

2. Limitations of briquetting technology

3. Past literatures relevant to the present study.

2.1.2 BRIQUETTING TECHNOLOGY IN NIGERIA

Briquetting is the process of conversion of agricultural residues into solid fuel with or without

binders in enhancing the handling properties of the materials for transport, storing, usage etc.

(Mishra, 1996)This technology will help in expanding the use of biomass in energy production

5
through densification process which improves the volumetric calorific value of a fuel, reduces the

size of the biomass, thereby making it more portable for transportation and as a result, improving

the fuel availability situation in rural areas. Briquetting is one of several agglomeration techniques

which are broadly characterized as densification technologies.it is a viable and attractive solution

in utilizing biomass for fuel application. Agglomeration of residues is done with the purpose of

making them denser for their use in energy production. The expansion of densification of biomass

depends basically on three factors: (Felfli, 2011)residues availability, adequate technologies, and

the market for the briquettes. Biomass is readily available and the market for alternative source

exists in Nigeria due to the high cost of existing energy nevertheless the major challenge is

developing effective technologies that would produce cost-effective briquettes that will be

competitive in the energy market. More research should be done on improving this sector as it is

highly important to the success of briquetting (Felfli, 2011)

Figure 1 Briquette Machine

(Anon., 2015)

6
2.1.3 TYPES OF BRIQUETTING
On the basis of compaction, the briquetting technologies can be divided into: High pressure

compaction, medium pressure compaction with a heating device and low-pressure compaction

with a binder. At present, there are two high-pressure technologies: Piston press and screw

extrusion machines used for briquetting. The briquetting produced by a piston press are completely

solid, while screw press briquettes have a concentric hole, which gives better combustion

characteristics due to a larger specific area. The screw press briquettes are also homogenous and

do not disintegrate easily. Having a high combustion rate, these can substitute for coal in most

applications and in boilers. Briquettes can be produced with a density of 1200Kg/m3 from loose

biomass of bulk density 100 to 200Kg/m3. A higher density gives the briquette a higher heat value

(KJ/Kg), and makes the briquettes burn more slowly as compared to the raw materials from which

the briquettes are made. (Oladeji, 2015)

2.1.4 LIMITATIONS OF BRIQUETTING TECHNOLOGY IN NIGERIA

As good as briquetting process appears to be, it has the following drawbacks: -Briquettes can only

be used as solid fuels. They have no application as liquid fuel such as the one being used in internal

combustion engines. The second major problem identified with the briquetting process is the life

of the screw, where dies screw is used. Usually the screw wears out within 3-4 hours and becomes

unusable. Repairing of the screw causes interruption in the work and also one screw cannot be

repaired more than 10 times. Therefore, the cost of screw and its repair are one of the major barriers

to further dissemination of briquetting technology. Briquettes cannot withstand direct contact with

water, so a covered storage facility is required. The maximum attainable temperature is 1000OC

due to their low carbon content. However, this temperature is more than adequate for cooking

7
purpose, but may not be sufficient for industrial applications. The burning capacity per unit volume

is low compared to coal, so a larger storage area is required (Oladeji, 2015)

2.2 AGRICULTURAL WASTE UTILIZATION THROUGH BRIQUETTING

One technology for the utilization of agricultural wastes is biomass briquetting, which involves

the densification of the biomass through the use of pressure. The advantages include providing a

cheap source of fuel for domestic purposes, which will be affordable by all Nigerians. Providing a

good means of converting coal fines, low-rank coal, waste agricultural residue into a resourceful

substance of economic value.

Through this technology, our natural resources can be conserved since it is a good substitute for

firewood. Therefore, it will help to reduce the quantity of firewood, oil and gas that is used in the

production of energy for domestic uses and generating plants.it is a great avenue to create

employment opportunities for people since people will be needed to operate the briquette machine.

(Oyelaran, 2015)

must be converted into briquette, a clean-burning fuel.

2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATION OF AGRICULTURAL-BIOMASS

BRIQUETTE IN NIGERIA
The continuous increase in the dependence on the use of wood, crop residues and untreated coal

for cooking in developing countries has a lot of harmful effects on both the people and the

environment. Fuel-wood, roots, agricultural residues, and animal dung all produce high emission

of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and particulate matter. The reliance on biomass fuels results

in reduced agricultural productivity by depriving the soil of recycled nutrients that would have

8
been available for tree, crop and animal residues and could be a cause of deforestation and

desertification in some areas.

The densification of this biomass into clean, renewable, nontoxic no harmful and even more

efficient energy source will solve these environmental problems .it will likewise reduce the burden

of carrying these high biomass like wood which weighs about 38kg load and can result to serious

long term physical damage from the strenuous work without sufficient recuperation (Bolaji, 2012)

especially for women in the rural communities who spend more than six hours each day collecting

and preparing wood despite the fact that there are often vast quantities of biomass residues and

waste available with the potential to be used as fuel. Densification of these biomasses will not

only meet energy demands in an environmentally friendly manner but also address pressing human

health issues resulting from the emission due to incomplete combustion of loose biomass. (Aneke,

2014)

In conclusion, some agricultural wastes were examined using starch as binder. The investigation

involved the determination of some physical properties, such as moisture content, bulk density and

size distribution. The construction and testing of briquettes apparatus for making sample briquettes

and tumbling formed was carried out so as to evaluate their characteristics and mechanical

performance. It was observed that the mix ratio has a significant influence on the briquette form

and a highest durability of 89.97% was observed for saw dust at 25 MPa using a mix ratio of 40:

60 (Material: Binder) and least was 37.30% for sorghum residues, mix ratio 60:40 at 10 MPa. The

relaxed and final compaction lengths of the briquettes also depend on the mix ratio, applied

pressure and nature of the material (Aneke, 2014)

9
2.3 PAST LITERATURES ON THE PRESENT STUDY
2.3.1 GROUNDNUT SHELL AS AN APPROPRIATE RESIDUE FOR THE

PRODUCTION OF BIOMASS BRIQUETTE.

Groundnuts, Arachius hypogea, are legumes whose fruits are formed underground, each fruit or

nut usually contains two or three seeds, enclosed by the shell. It is one of the most important annual

cash crops grown in West Africa. In Nigeria, the crop is grown mainly in Kano State, but also in

the Sokoto, Bornu and Kaduna States. Groundnuts require rich, light, sandy loam soils since such

light soils allow the ovary to push easily into the soil, making harvesting easier. It requires an

annual rainfall of 80-120cm, abundant sunshine and fairly high temperatures. These conditions are

obtained in the savanna areas. Groundnuts are propagated by seed. Planting is done with the early

rains in March-April in the South, and May-June in the North. Groundnuts reach maturity in 4-5

months. In wetter areas, groundnuts are harvested in August, while in the drier savannah,

Figure 2 Groundnut shell

(Anon., 2015)

harvesting is done in October-November. Harvested pods are spread on concrete floors or

platforms to dry. They are later beaten with sticks or pounded or using a threshing machine to

10
remove the shells. This is called shelling or decortication. The seeds are separated from the shells

by winnowing or using a shelling machine. The seeds are further dried and packed in jute bags,

while the shells are dried and kept. Groundnuts are normally baked before eating. Groundnut oil

is used in cooking and also in the manufacture of margarine and soap. It is also used in canning

sardines. The solid portion which remains after the oil is extracted is used in the manufacture of

biscuits and for animal feed in the form of groundnut cake. This cake is richer in protein than other

cakes such as palm kernel and coconut cakes. Groundnuts may be crushed and used in the

preparation of groundnut soup. The whole plant may also be used as a fodder crop or plowed into

the soil as organic manure. It is a most useful rotational crop since it enriches the soil with

nitrogenous material. Groundnut shell is obtained after the groundnut seeds have been removed

from the pod. Hence, it is an agricultural residue (OLIVIA, 2010).

2.3.2 Characterization of fuel briquettes made from a blend of rice husk and palm
oil sludge
Experimental procedures

Okey Francis obi, Kinsley chukwudi okongwu studied the physical and combustion properties of

briquettes produced from a blend of palm oil mill sludge(poms) and rice husk.in this study, the

poms was blended with rice husk in the ratio of 1:10, 1:5,3:10,2:5,1:2,3:5,7:10,4:5,9:10 and 1:1.

he used a compaction apparatus consisting of a 20-ton hydraulic jack, iron frame, a pressure gauge,

plastic cylinder mold and a circle – shaped wood to act as the piston head. The dimension of the

mold used was 6cm diameter and 23cm height while the piston head was 5.5cm diameter and 2cm

thick. In his study he used a compaction pressure (14.72+-0.05kg/cm) and 2234.67cm2 constant

volume of water per kilogram of the biomass blend. The production of the briquettes. A very

important consideration in his study were the physical and mechanical characterization that he

11
considered such as the relaxed density and relaxation ratio, durability, moisture content,

compressed density, water resistance

Results and discussion

From his study, the result of the physical properties of the physical properties of the briquettes

produced from blend of poms and rice husk at different blending ratio of 1:10,

1:5,3:10,2:5,3:5,7:10, 4:5,9:10 and 1:1 leads to an increase in the compressed density from 799.89

to 1044.93kg/m3 as the blending ratio decreased ratio from 1:10 to 1:1 likewise the other physical

properties.

2.3.3 CHARACTERIZATION OF SUGAR CANE BAGASSE

Sugar cane, a large bamboo-like stalk that grows 8 to 15 feet tall, contains sucrose that is processed

into sugar by crushing the stalk to extract their juice. (Anon., 1995) The cane is typically harvested

through hand cutting, machine cutting, or mechanical raking, all of which yield stalks with a

variety of trash and dirt content. Cane harvested using the hand method will contain much more

trash, dirt, and mud than those harvested using machines. When the canes are delivered to a mill,

they are usually washed, chopped into smaller pieces, and then crushed, leaving behind a large

amount of matted cellulose fiber residue. This biomass, a term used for biodegradable wastes that

can be used for fuel, is known as bagasse. Bagasse varies in its composition, consistency and

heating value depending on the particular climate, soil composition,

12
 Figure 3Sugarcane bagasse

(Anon., 2015)
Harvesting method, and efficiency of the milling process. Typically, bagasse has a heating value

of between 3000 to 4000 Btu/lb. (1600 to 2200 kcal/kg) on a wet, as-fired basis. This is the amount

of heat generated per pound of bagasse less the heat required to evaporate its moisture. Dryer

bagasse has a higher calorific value. In addition, bagasse typically contains between 45 to 55

percent moisture by weight. The sulfur and nitrogen contents of bagasse are also very low, usually

near or below 0.1 weight percent. (Anon., 1995)Often, bagasse is disposed of by burning in open

fields or by using it to partially fuel the sugar extraction process in large sugar refineries. However,

the thick smoke produced during burning makes it a poor fuel source for indoor cooking. Thus, it

2.4 PHYSICO-MECHANICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BRIQUETTES

2.4.1 MOISTURE CONTENT

The moisture content is a measure of the amount of water in the fuel. It can exist in two forms,

i.e. in solid fuels as free water within the pores and interstices of the fuel and as bound water,

which is a part of the chemical structure of the material. The moisture content can be measured

by taking a small pre-weighed sample and oven drying it at 105oc until the required consistency

13
 in the sample’s mass is obtained. The change in weight can then be used to determine the

sample's percentage of moisture content. The burning characteristics of the biomass can be

greatly affected by the moisture content. During combustion, the moisture in the biomass will

absorb heat from the burning fuel to form vapor due to the heat of vaporization, thereby

appreciably reducing the heating value of used fuel. This can result in incomplete combustion

of the volatile matter and the deposition of unburnt carbon (smoke) around the stoves, vessels,

and pans, making it difficult to clean them. High moisture content can cause difficulty in the

ignition. Practically, burning fuel with such high moisture content will result in significant

products of incomplete combustion.

2.4.2 EFFECTS OF MOISTURE

The percentage of moisture of biomass is a very critical factor. In general, it has been found

that when the feed moisture content is between 10-12%, the briquettes will have 8-10%

moisture (Oladeji, 2015). At this moisture content, the briquettes are strong and free of cracks

and the briquetting process is smooth. However, when the moisture content is more than 15%,

the briquettes are poor and weak and the briquetting operation is erratic (Oladeji, 2015). Excess

steam is produced at higher moisture content leading to the blockage of incoming feed from

the hopper, and sometimes it shoots out the briquettes from the die. Therefore, it is necessary

to maintain optimum moisture content. The right amount of moisture develops self-bonding

properties in lignocellulosic substances at elevated temperatures and pressures prevalent in

briquetting machines. It is important to establish the initial moisture content of the biomass

feed so that the briquettes produced have moisture content greater than the equilibrium value,

otherwise the briquettes may swell (Oladeji, 2015) during storage and transportation and

disintegrate, when exposed to humid atmospheric conditions

14
2.4.3 DENSITY:
Density is defined as the mass per unit volume of a material at a stated temperature and relative

humidity. The density of the briquettes was determined at room temperature. The density

determines how long it will burn, i.e. the burning time. The density of the briquette samples was

determined by measuring the volume and mass of the various briquette samples. The mass of the

samples was determined by weighing the samples using a triple beam balance. The volume was

determined by immersing the samples in water and measuring the volume of water displaced.

The density of the briquette can be expressed mathematically (OLIVIA, 2010)

𝑴𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝑩𝒓𝒊𝒒𝒖𝒆𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒔 (𝒌𝒈)

Density =
𝑽𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑩𝒓𝒊𝒒𝒖𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒔 (𝒎𝟑 )

2.4.4 PARTICLE DENSITY

Particle density is the mass of an individual particle over its volume. For a group of particles, the

particle density is the mass of all particles divided by the volume of the particles occupying

excluding the pore space volume. For a particle that can be defined accurately geometrically, the

mass of a single particle is measured using a digital caliper. For example, a wood pellet can be

geometrically defined as a cylinder. The ends of the wood pellets are flattened with sandpaper to

make them exact cylinders. The length (L) and diameter (D) of the pellets are measured with a

caliper. The apparent volume is calculated (Sokhansanj, 2014)

2.4.5 EFFECTS OF PARTICLE SIZE

According to (Oladeji, 2015) Particle size and shape are of great importance for densification. It

is generally agreed that biomass material of 6-8 mm size with 10-20% powdery component gives

the best results. Although, the screw extruder, which employs high pressure, is capable of

briquetting material of oversized particles, the briquetting will not be smooth and clogging might

15
take place at the entrance of the die resulting in jamming of the machine. The larger particles,

which are not conveyed through the screw start accumulating at the entry point and the steam

produced due to high temperature (due to rotation of screw, heat conducted from the die and also

if the material is preheated) inside the barrel of the machine starts condensing on fresh cold feed

resulting in the formation of lumps and leads to jamming. Therefore, it is desirable to crush larger

particles to get a random distribution of particle size, so that an adequate amount of sufficiently

small particles is present for embedding into the larger particles. The presence of different size

particles improves the packing dynamics and also contributes to high static strength. Only fine and

powdered particles of size less than 1 mm are not suitable for a screw extruder because they are

less dense, more cohesive, non-free flowing entities

2.4.6 POROSITY

The porosity test determines the cell opening of the briquettes. The porosity test was carried out

by accurately weighing an equal dimension of the various briquette samples. The briquette samples

were immersed in 100ml of water for 3mins. The excess water was allowed to drain out. The

volume of water drained out, the volume of water retained in the briquette samples and the weight

of the briquette after immersing in water was noted and recorded. (OLIVIA, 2010)

𝑴𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒂𝒃𝒔𝒐𝒓𝒃𝒆𝒅

Porosity Index =
𝑴𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆

2.4.7 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF THE BRIQUETTE SAMPLES:

The compressive strength is the force required to crush or break a material. It determines how the

briquettes can be handled. A briquette sample with a good compressive strength can easily be

transported, packed, and handled. The compressive strength of the briquette samples was

16
determined using a compressive strength testing machine Model 2914. This machine is 1000kN

capacity capable of compressing non-metallic objects/materials. It is powered by electricity, but

hydraulically operated. The length and width of the specimen was measured and recorded. The

machine was switched from the mains and allowed to warm up for about 3 mins. The samples

were then put on the movable bed, and the control lever applied upward to bring contact between

the upper fixed bed and the movable lower bed on which the samples was sitting. The reading was

taken immediately crack was noticed in the specimen, an indication that the specimen has been

compressed. The value of the reading recorded from the machine is the compressive force or test

force. The compressive strength of the samples was calculated using the formula below. The unit

is given by N/mm2 (OLIVIA, 2010)

𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆/ 𝒕𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆 (𝑭𝒕)

Compressive Strength =
𝑪𝒓𝒐𝒔𝒔 𝒔𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝑨𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 (𝑨𝒄)

2.4.8 DURABILITY / ABRASIVE RESISTANCE

The abrasive resistance test, also known as tumbling test was the measure of the mechanical

durability of densified products in consequence of transport and handling processes. The briquette

was subjected to controlled shocks by collision of fuel particles against each other’s and against

the walls of a rotating chamber. The tumbling process was conducted with the speed rate of 25

rpm for 5 minutes in clockwise direction by referring to the standard of EN 15210-2 Sieving was

required before and after tumbling for 30 s to remove the fines attached to the sample. The

illustration of the tumbling test was displayed (Law H.C1, 2018)

17
 Figure 4Schematic diagram for tumbling test.
(Law H.C1, 2018)

The equations used to determine the abrasive resistance of the densified products were portrayed

as follows:

𝑾𝒂−𝑾𝒃
Weight loss (%) = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎%
𝑾𝒂

Abrasive resistance (%) = 100% - weight loss (%)

where Wa is weight of briquette before tumbling (g), whereas Wb is weight of briquette after

tumbling (g).

2.4.9 WATER RESISTANCE

Other than implying destructive forces to the briquettes for strength determination, water

permeability is also one of the crucial aspects to be considered especially when dealing with

18
storage, transportation and handling. The structure could not sustain in shape and crumble easily

due to the weak inter-bonding, and thus creating problem to the combustion. Water resistance of

the solid fuels was measured through the immersion test. A 200-ml beaker was filled with 100

ml of water at room temperature as portrayed in Figure 5. The initial weight of each briquette

was recorded before the immersion. At the same time, a stopwatch was used to record the

immersion duration at 30 s. This immersion procedure was performed according to the research

done by (Law H.C1, 2018)

Figure 5 Schematic illustration of immersion test.

(Law H.C1, 2018)

After the immersion, the briquette was extracted from the beaker and the final weight was

obtained. The percentage of water gained by each briquette was calculated by using the

equations as follows

𝑾𝒊𝒊−𝑾𝒊
Weight gained (%) = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎%
𝑾𝒊

Water resistance (%) = 100% - Weight gained (%)

19
where Wi is weight of briquette before immersion while Wii is weight of briquette after immersion.

2.5 SHATTER RESISTANCE

The shatter resistance might help in simulating the forces encountered when emptying the

briquettes from trucks onto ground, or shifting from one place to another [8]. On top of that, the

safe height of briquette production also could be determined through this particular experiment

testing. The method adopted in the research done by (Law H.C1, 2018) was selected in this study.

The sample was dropped onto the concrete floor from 1 m high for 10 times continuously. Table

top with an adjustable platform together made up the designated height of 1 m

Briquette

Applied force

Free fall

1.0 m

Concrete floor
Figure 6. Schematic diagram for drop test.

(Law H.C1, 2018)

20
Shatter resistance of the briquettes was calculated by using the following equations, whereby the

weight of the sample briquettes was recorded before and after shattering, and thus the percentage

of shatter resistance could be calculated (Law H.C1, 2018)

𝑾𝒊𝒊−𝑾𝒊
Weight loss (%) = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎%
𝑾𝒊

Shatter resistance (%) = 100% - Weight gained (%)

where W1 is initial weight (g) whereas W2 represents final weight (g).

2.6 EFFECTS OF INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT ON THE

PHYSICAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF NORWAY
SPRUCE BRIQUETTES
The moisture content of densified biomass is a limiting parameter influencing the quality of this

solid biofuel. It influences its calorific value, density, mechanical strength and dimensional

stability as well as affecting its production process. This paper deals with experimental research

into the effect of moisture content of the densified material on the final quality of biofuel in the

form of logs (briquettes or pellets). Experiments based on the single axis densification of the spruce

sawdust were carried out with a hydraulic piston press (piston and die), where the densified logs

were produced at room temperature. The effect of moisture content on the qualitative properties

of the logs, including density, change of moisture, expansion and physical changes, and

compressive and impact resistance were studied. The results show the moisture ranges required

for producing good-quality logs. The experiments were evaluated and the moisture content of the

tested material was optimized to achieve the optimum value for the best quality of the solid biofuel.

The dense logs also have high-energy content per unit volume. The research results could be used

21
to develop and optimize industrial technologies and machinery for biomass densification to

achieve high quality solid biofuel. optimized to achieve the optimum value for the best quality of

the solid biofuel. The dense logs also have high-energy content per unit volume. The research

results could be used to develop and optimize industrial technologies and machinery for biomass

densification to achieve high quality solid biofuel. (Miloš Matúš, 2015) concluded that Spruce

sawdust as a wood waste can be densified into high quality briquettes through high-pressure

compaction. Briquettes were produced in an industrial scale process with a hydraulic briquetting

press. For all briquettes studied, the same technical and technological conditions except the initial

moisture content were maintained. The appropriate moisture range for producing good quality

briquettes is from 11% to 16%, and the optimum is in the neighborhood of 13%. When the moisture

content of spruce sawdust is close to the optimum (13%), a pressure of just 16.5 MPa can produce

briquettes with a dry density higher than 0.8 kg.dm-3 (wet density higher than 0.9 kg.dm-3). The

best surface quality of briquettes can be achieved in the range of moisture content from 12.6% to

14.5%. The study shows that the expansion of briquettes made of material with 12.6% initial

moisture content was independent of storage time, with a value of 1.2% of elongation. In the range

of initial moisture content of up to 16.5%, lower physical changes could be seen on the fifth day

after ejection. The smallest values in the physical changes of briquettes during storage time

between the fifth and the ninetieth day after ejection were seen in briquettes with a range of initial

moisture content from 10.3% to 14.5%. The best value of initial moisture content for the storage

process is 12.6%, when the absolute value of physical changes was up to 3.6 %. When the effect

of moisture change was studied, all the briquettes with different initial moisture content had a

tendency to achieve an equilibrium moisture content close to 9% after 5 days of storage. This

phenomenon was confirmed by subsequent measurement after 90 days of storage. The highest

22
compressive resistance was achieved by the briquettes with an initial moisture content of 12.6%,

but a suitable range of moisture content was 11.7%-16.5%. The two methods used for determining

the impact resistance of briquettes showed that the best initial moisture content was 11.7% and

higher. When spruce sawdust has initial moisture content outside of the studied range of 11.7-

16.5%, the production of good quality briquettes in industrial scale processes with a hydraulic

briquetting press is very difficult. The best value of initial moisture content sufficient to cover all

criteria was discovered to be 12.6%. (Miloš Matúš, 2015)

2.7 EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

OF BIOMASS BRIQUETTES FROM DIFFERENT AGRICULTURAL
RESIDUES COMBINATION
Biomass has received tremendous attention as it is one of the best alternatives to replace the use

of fossil fuels for energy generation. However, there are problems associated with the utilization

of raw biomass which could be resolved through densification process. Besides, mixing between

residues could produce a quality briquette, at the same time making good use on the biomass

residues. Rice husk, sugarcane bagasse and spent coffee ground were selected as the biomass

feedstocks for briquettes formation. The mixing ratios of 100:0, 80:20, 60:40, 20:80, 40:60 and

0:100 were used for three different combinations. The briquettes were then compacted at 300 bars

and 150°C for 30 s. The mechanical properties of the briquettes were measured with respects to

their shatter resistance, abrasive resistance as well as water resistance. The mechanical properties

of the briquettes could be effectively improved by mixing between the residues as compared to the

pure materials. The result showed that briquettes formed with 40: 60 of RH to SB; 20: 80 of RH

to SCG and 20: 80 of SB to SCG were among the optimum mixing ratio for the respective

23
combination fulfilling the specifications of the mechanical strength and durability. (Law H.C1,

2018)

2.8 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSICO-MECHANICAL PROPERTIES,

COMPACTING PRESSURE AND MIXING PROPORTION OF BRIQUETTES
PRODUCED FROM MAIZE COBS AND SAWDUST
According to (Stephen J. Mitchual, 2014), the relationship between selected physico-mechanical

properties, compacting pressure and mixing proportion of briquettes produced from combination

of maize cob particles and sawdust of low, medium and high-density timber species. Particle sizes

of maize cobs and sawdust used for the study were ≤1 mm. The two materials were combined at

mixing percentages of 90:10, 70:30 and 50:50 (Sawdust: maize cobs). Briquettes were produced

at room temperature (28˚C) using compacting pressures 20, 30, 40 and 50 MPa. The results

suggested that combining maize cob particles with sawdust of low, medium and high-density wood

species could significantly enhance the relaxed density, compressive strength in cleft and impact

resistance index of briquettes produced from agricultural biomass residue like maize cobs. The

results further indicated that the physical and mechanical characteristics of briquettes produced

from combinations of sawdust of low density species and maize cobs were exceptionally higher

than that produced from combinations of maize cob particles, and medium density and high-

density timber species. The R2 values for the regression model between the independent variables

(mixing percentage and compacting pressure) and relaxed density, compressive strength in cleft

and impact resistance index of briquettes produced from combinations of maize cob particles and

sawdust of low density species (Ceiba pentandra) were 0.966, 0.932 and 0.710 respectively. This

study provides a hope for briquetting maize cobs at room temperature using a low compacting

pressure

24
 CHAPTER THREE

3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 MATERIALS COLLECTIONS
Both investigated waste materials, groundnut shell (Arachis hypogaea) and sugarcane bagasse

(Saccharum officinarum) were collected in large quantity at Ipata market, and was transported for

pretreatment at the university of Ilorin wood lab.

3.2 PRETREATMENT AND PREPARATION

Agricultural residues ground nut shell(GS) and sugar cane bagasse(SCB) were used in the

production of the briquette after considering several factors such as their availability, accessibility,

compatibility when mixed together as well as their cost to acquire them. In sample preparation

stage, these biomass residues were sorted manually in other to remove unwanted materials such as

wood, bone and metal. After which the samples were evenly mixed and sun dried to reduce the

moisture content to avoid biological decay of wet samples. The binder used was cassava starch

which was mixed with hot water after it has been sun dried for 2 days and stirred properly in other

to form a starch gel. The sun-dried samples were reduced in size with the use of a grinding

machine. Three different particle sizes 0.5mm, 1mm and 1.5mm representing fine, medium and

coarse respectively were selected for this work (Nasiru Shuaibu, 2016). The milled and sieved

samples were stored in air-tight sample bottles to avoid further interaction with air. The milled

sugar cane bagasse and groundnut shell were thoroughly mixed together with the starch gel to

obtain a uniformly blended mixture. Mixtures were prepared for groundnut shell to sugar cane

bagasse in the ratio of 90%GS:10%SCB, 80%GS:20%SCB, 70%GS:30%SCB, 60%GS:40%SCB,

50%GS:50%SCB, 40%GS:60%SCB and vice versa. The briquetting of the pre-treated sample was

done using a low-pressure manual compression machine. Ten (10) different formulations were

used to produce ten briquette samples by pressing the mold in a compression molding machine at

25
a pressure of 25kPa and 35kPa respectively. (Stephen J. Mitchual, 2014). The briquettes were

allowed to cool and dry naturally for 2 weeks before carrying out physical and mechanical analysis.

Immediately after the extrusion from the mold, the briquette length, breath and height was

measured using Vernier caliper. The Briquettes masses were determined with a digital scale.

Therefore, the (initial) density of each newly formed briquette were evaluated for each

combination. Additionally, the dimensions of each briquette formed will be measured after 5, 10,

30, 60, 1440, 10080 minutes and 19-day period to determine the diametric and longitudinal

expansion, along with the relaxed density of briquette. (Tamilvanan, 2013) (O. A. Oyelaran, 2014)

PRODUCTION PROCESS

Fig 3.1 Pretreatment of raw sugar cane bagasse (sun drying for 2weeks before grinding)

26
 Fig 3.2 Starch preparation

Fig 3.3 Packaging of mixed samples inside a tight nylon to avoid interaction with air

27
 Production of briquettes using a 220kN manual compression machine

Fig 3.2 Manual compression machine

3.3 CHARACTERISATION OF THE BRIQUETTE SAMPLES

The characterization of the briquette samples was done to evaluate the physical properties, and

mechanical properties. The briquettes formed from the experiment were subjected to these

varying tests to determine their physical and mechanical characteristics and properties. These

include: Change in length and diameter: The length of the briquette formed after compaction was

determine using a meter rule and the diameter by a Vernier caliper. Also, the handling properties,

surface texture as well as color of the produced briquettes could be visually examined. The

mechanical properties that would be tested for are as follows using standard methods.

28
3.3.1 DETERMINATION OF THE RELAXED DENSITY OF THE BRIQUETTES SAMPLES:

The relaxed density (Dre) and relaxation ratio (Rr) of the briquettes were determined in the dry

condition of the briquette. The relaxed density (density determined when dried) was calculated as

the ratio of the briquette weight (kg) to the volume (m3). This gave an indication of the relative

stability of the briquette after compression (Okongwu, 2016). The relaxation ratio was calculated

as the ratio of compressed density to relaxed density of the briquettes.

𝑾𝒔𝒅
Dre = (kg𝒎−𝟑 )
𝑽𝒔𝒅

where, Wsd = weight of the briquette after sun drying (kg);

Vsd = volume of the briquette after sun drying (m3)

3.3.2 DURABILITY TEST ON THE BRIQUETTES SAMPLES

According to Anna, the durability of the briquettes was determined using a pellet durability

tester. About 400 g of briquettes will be divided into two batches of 200 g each. Each batch will

be placed in the pellet durability tester for a period of 1 min and operated at 20 rpm. The sample

will then be placed on an 8 sieve (8 mm) before and after tumbling and measured for the mass

retained on the screen. The pellet durability was then calculated using the following equation.

𝐌𝐚𝐭
Durability = 𝐌𝐛𝐭

where Mat is the mass (g) of the briquettes retained on the screen after tumbling and Mbt is the

mass (g) of the briquettes retained on the screen before tumbling. (Anna Brunerová, 2018)

29
3.3.3 DETERMINATION OF THE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF BRIQUETTES SAMPLES:

The compressive strength of the briquette samples was determined using a compressive strength

testing machine Model 2914. This machine is 1000kN capacity capable of compressing non-

metallic objects/materials. It is powered by electricity, but hydraulically operated. The length and

width of the samples will be measured and recorded. The machine will be switched on from the

mains and allowed to warm up for about 3 mins. The samples will then put on the movable bed,

and the control lever applied upward to bring contact between the upper fixed bed and the movable

lower bed on which the samples will be sitting. The reading will be taken immediately crack is

noticed in the samples, an indication that the samples have been compressed. The value of the

reading recorded from the machine is the compressive force or test force. The compressive strength

of the samples will be calculated using the formula below. The unit is given by N/mm2 (OLIVIA,

2010)

𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆/ 𝒕𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆 (𝑭𝒕)

Compressive Strength =
𝑪𝒓𝒐𝒔𝒔 𝒔𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝑨𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 (𝑨𝒄)

3.3.4 MOISTURE CONTENT OF BRIQUETTES SAMPLES

The moisture content (% wet basis) of the rice husk sample and the briquette samples was

determined by drying the sample in a hot air oven set at 103 ± 3 °C until the sample reached a

constant weight (Okongwu, 2016). The samples will be removed from the oven, cooled in a

desiccator, and weighed at a time interval of 1 h until a previously recorded weight is read after an

hour. The moisture content will then be calculated. (Taiwo I. Oyedemi, 2015)

𝐈𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐖𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐖𝟏−𝐃𝐫𝐲 𝐰𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐖𝟐

%MC = * 100
𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒘𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝑾𝟏

30
3.3.5 COMPRESSED DENSITY THE BRIQUETTES SAMPLES

The mean compressed density (Dco) of the briquettes was determined immediately after ejection

from the mold as a ratio of measured mass (kg) over calculated volume (m3) as shown below. The

weight will be obtained using a digital weighing scale and the volume calculated by taking the

linear dimensions (height and diameter) of the briquette using a SKOLE digital caliper. (Okongwu,

2016)

𝑾𝒆𝒋 −𝟑
Dco = (𝝅𝒉𝒓 𝟐) (kg𝒎 )

where, Wej = weight of briquette on ejection from the mold (kg); h = height of briquette (m); r =
radius of the briquette (m).

3.3.6 WATER RESISTANCE OF THE BRIQUETTES SAMPLES

The water resistance of the briquette was determined by immersing the briquette in a container
filled with cold tap water (24 °C) and measuring the time required for the onset of dispersion

in water. The higher the water resistance time, the more stable the briquette is in terms of
weathering resistance.

3.3.7 SHATTER RESISTANCE

The shatter resistance might help in simulating the forces encountered when emptying the

briquettes from trucks onto ground, or shifting from one place to another [8]. On top of that, the

safe height of briquette production also could be determined through this particular experiment

testing. The method adopted in the research done by (Law H.C1, 2018) was selected in this study.

The sample was dropped onto the concrete floor from 1 m high for 10 times continuously. Table

top with an adjustable platform together made up the designated height of 1 m

31
 Briquette

Applied force

Free fall

1.0 m

Concrete floor

Figure 7. Schematic diagram for drop test.

(Law H.C1, 2018)

Shatter resistance of the briquettes was calculated by using the following equations, whereby the

weight of the sample briquettes was recorded before and after shattering, and thus the percentage

of shatter resistance could be calculated (Law H.C1, 2018)

𝑾𝒊−𝑾𝒊𝒊
Weight loss (%) = × 𝟏𝟎𝟎%
𝑾𝒊

Shatter resistance (%) = 100% - Weight loss (%)

where W1 is initial weight (g) whereas W2 represents final weight (g).

3.5 POROSITY TEST ON THE BRIQUETTES SAMPLES

The porosity test determines the cell opening of the briquettes. The porosity test was carried out

by accurately weighing an equal dimension of the various briquette samples. The briquette samples

were immersed in 100ml of water for 3mins. The excess water was allowed to drain out. The

32
volume of water drained out, the volume of water retained in the briquette samples and the weight

of the briquette after immersing in water was noted and recorded. (OLIVIA, 2010)

𝑴𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒂𝒃𝒔𝒐𝒓𝒃𝒆𝒅

Porosity Index = 𝑴𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆

3.6 PROCESSING FACTORS

The processing factors that will be considered for this project are as follows

I. Effect of mixing ratio on the briquettes samples relative to the mechanical characterisation

II. Effect of varying particle sizes on the briquettes samples relative to the mechanical

characterisation

III. Effect of varying the compacting pressures on the briquettes samples relative to the

mechanical tests

33
 CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The quality of the sampled briquettes assessed based on their physical condition revealed that their

external surface was smooth and the structure of the cross section was compact and homogenous.

The density of the sugar cane bagasse and groundnut shell was found to be 1,100 kg/m3 and

34
respectively and falls within the range recommended by *[19]* for briquettes produced by

compression machine extrusion process. The hole in the center helps in combustion because of

sufficient circulation of air. It also provides sufficient toughness to withstand exposure and shocks

of transportation and storage.

Fig 4.1 Samples 0.5mm briquettes produced with 10g of starch to 50g of mixed samples of

SGS:GS at different mixing ratio

Fig4.2 samples of 1mm briquettes produced with 15g of starch to 50g of mixed samples of

SGS:GS at different mixing ratio

35
 Fig 4.3 samples of 1.4mm briquettes produced with 18g of starch to 50g of mixed samples of

SGS:GS at different mixing ratio

Fig 4.4 Biomass briquettes from ground shell and sugar cane bagasse

36
The next section of this chapter will be looking at the results from physico-mechanical

characteristics of the produced briquettes and discussion the effects of the following processing

factors

I. Effect of mixing ratio on the briquettes samples relative to the mechanical

characterisation

II. Effect of varying particle sizes on the briquettes samples relative to the mechanical

characterisation

III. Effect of varying the compacting pressures on the briquettes samples relative to the

mechanical tests

Shattering index and compressive strength is a measure of the ability of a briquette to withstand

mechanical handling. The durability of briquettes is a very important parameter to be considered

for transportation processes and feeding combustion equipment.

Mixing ratio 0.5mm 1mm 1.4mm

37
SGC:GS

10:90 8.62 7.72 7.21

20:80 8.55 7.66 7.15

30:70 8.32 7.48 7.01

40:60 8.21 7.35 6.93

50:50 7.95 7.19 6.82

60:40 7.36 6.97 6.70

70:30 7.10 6.65 6.63

80:20 6.97 6.42 6.57

90:10 6.74 6.33 6.48

Fig 4.1 Effects of particle sizes on compressive strength at compaction pressure of 25Kn

38
 Effects of particle sizes on
compressive strenght
10
COMPRESSIVE STRENGHT 8
6
4
2
0
90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%
GS 10% GS 20% GS 30% GS 40% GS 50% GS 60% GS 70% GS 80% GS 90%
SCB SCB SCB SCB SCB SCB SCB SCB SCB
MIXING RATIO

0.5MM 1.0MM 1.4MM

Fig 4.1 Effect of particle sizes on compressive strength

From the table and figure above

39
 Mixing ratio 25kN 35Kn

SGC:GS

10:90 8.62 18.96

20:80 8.55 16.92

30:70 8.32 15.55

40:60 8.21 14.36

50:50 7.95 15.10

60:40 7.36 12.95

70:30 7.10 13.42

80:20 6.97 11.77

90:10 6.74 11.12

Table 4.2 Effect of compaction on the compressive strength at 0.5mm

40
 EFFECT OF COMPACTION PRESSURE
ON COMPRESSIVE STRENGHT
20
COMPRESSIVE STRENGHT 15
10
5
0
90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%
SCB 10% SCB 20% SCB 30% SCB 40% SCB 50% SCB 60% SCB 70% SCB 80% SCB 90%
GS GS GS GS GS GS GS GS GS
MIXING RATIO

25kPa 35kPa

Fig 4.2 Effect of compaction pressure on compressive strength

From the table above

Mixing ratio 0.5mm 1mm 1.4mm

SGC:GS

10:90
94.23077 87.23404 61.40351

20:80
93.33333 86.66667 64.91228

41
30:70
94 86.04651 63.63636

40:60
92.30769 86.66667 68.51852

50:50
96.07843 83.67347 69.09091

60:40
94 88 59.32203

70:30
94.44444 88.67925 65

80:20
94.33962 88.88889 64.51613

90:10
94.44444 89.09091

Table 4.5 Comparing the durability of briquettes with particle sizes at 25kN

EFFECT OF PARTICLE SIZES ON

DURABILITY
100

95
DURABILITY

90

85

80
10:90 20:80 30:70 40:60 50:50 60:40 70:30 80:20 90:10
MIXING RATIO

Abrasive resis Abrasive resis Abrasive resis

Fig 4.5 Effect of particle sizes on durability

42
From the above table and graph, it could be seen that briquettes produced from 0.5mm size have

the best durability i.e. they have the ability to withstand mechanical handling also among the

0.5mm briquettes the mixing ratio with the best durability is briquettes with 50:50 SGS:GS

Mixing ratio

SGC:GS
0.5mm 1mm 1.4mm

10:90
81.08108 45.09804 5.882353

20:80
97.94643 18.18182 6.818182

30:70
97.96364 24 10

40:60
97.96429 45.61404 8.77193

50:50
97.98246 59.64912 5.263158

60:40
97.87273 47.27273 9.090909

70:30
97.84615 26.92308 3.846154

80:20
97.94444 35.18519 5.555556

90:10
97.98113 30.18868 5.882353

Fig 4.6 Effects of particle size on water resistance at compaction pressure of 25kN

43
 Effect of particle sizes on water
resistance
120
WATER RESISTACE 100
80
60
40
20
0
10:90 20:80 30:70 40:60 50:50 60:40 70:30 80:20 90:10
MIXING RATIO

0.5mm 1.00mm 1.4mm

Fig 4.6 effects of particle sizes on water

From the table and graph above it can be deduce that particle size has considerable effects on

water resistance, increase in particle size decreases the percentage water resistance and 0.5mm

briquettes samples gives the highest water resistance which is a good mechanical property as it

has the ability to resist water due to smaller pore sizes. Particle size of 0.5mm with mixing ratio

of 50:50 SGB:GS has the highest percentage water resistance.

44
 Mixing ratio 25kN 35Kn

SGC:GS

10:90
673.2363 712.0768

20:80
679.7097 712.0768

30:70
673.2363 725.0237

40:60
682.2991 712.0768

50:50
687.4778 723.729

60:40
690.0672 750.9174

70:30
692.6565 725.0237

80:20
692.6565 725.0237

90:10
699.13 750.9174

Table 4.7 Effects of compaction pressure on relaxed density at 0.5mm briquette sample

45
 EFFECT OF COMPACTION PRESSURE
ON RELAXED DENSITY
800
RELAXED DENSITY
750

700

650

600
10:90 20:80 30:70 40:60 50:50 60:40 70:30 80:20 90:10
MIXIG RATIO
SGB:GS

25kN 35kN

Fig 4.7 Effect of compaction pressure on relaxed density

From the above table and figure above it could be deduce that compaction pressure has an

obvious effect on density of the briquettes after drying known as relaxed density. Relaxed

density is a very important mechanical property as shows how the briquettes will reduce in

weight after a considerable time. From the data above, increase in compaction pressure increases

the relaxed density i.e. 35kN gave a better relaxed density to 25kN and a mixing ratio of 60:40

SGB:GS gave the highest relaxed density

46
Mixing ratio 0.5mm 1mm 1.4mm

SGC:GS

10:90
803.4894 673.2363 584.356

20:80
832.7072 679.7097 596.0431

30:70
788.8805 673.2363 607.7302

40:60
803.4894 682.2991 619.4173

50:50
803.4894 687.4778 607.7302

60:40
803.4894 690.0672 631.1044

70:30
818.0983 692.6565 642.7916

80:20
832.7072 692.6565 642.7916

90:10
803.4894 699.13 642.7916

Table 4.8 Effects of particle sizes on relaxed density at 25kN

47
 EFFECT OF PARTICLE SIZES ON
RELAXED DENSITY
1000

800
RELAXED DESITY

600

400

200

0
10:90 20:80 30:70 40:60 50:50 60:40 70:30 80:20 90:10
MIXING RATIO

0.50mm 1.0mm 1.40mm

Fig 4.8 Effects of particles sizes on relaxed density

From the table and figure above, it was deduced that change in particle size has an effects on the

relaxed density. Increase in particle size of the briquette decreases the relaxed density. Mixing

ratio does not have a considerable effect on the relaxed density. And 0.5mm size of briquettes

produced from 20SGB:80GS gave the highest relaxed density at 25kN compaction pressure of

832.7072kg/m3

48
Mixing ratio 25kN 35Kn

SGC:GS

10:90
94.23077 98.07692

20:80
93.33333 97.77778

30:70
94 98

40:60
92.30769 98.07692

50:50
96.07843 98.03922

60:40
94 98

70:30
94.44444 94.44444

80:20
94.33962 98.11321

90:10
94.44444 98.14815

Table 4.9 Effect of compaction pressure on durability

49
 Effect of compaction pressure on
durability
100
98

DURABILITY
96
94
92
90
88
10:90 20:80 30:70 40:60 50:50 60:40 70:30 80:20 90:10
MIXING RATIO

25kN 35kN

Fig 4.9 Effect of compaction pressure on durability

From the above table and figure it was deduced that compaction pressure has a considerably

effect on the durability of the briquettes. Briquettes produced with compaction pressure of 35kN

results to an increase in durability of the briquettes. Briquettes sample produced at mixing ratio

of 50SGB:50GS gives the highest percentage durability of 98%.

Mixing ratio 0.5mm 1mm 1.4mm

SGC:GS

10:90 94.23077 87.23404 61.40351

20:80 93.33333 86.66667 64.91228

30:70 94 86.04651 63.63636

40:60 92.30769 86.66667 68.51852

50
50:50 96.07843 83.67347 69.09091

60:40 94 88 59.32203

70:30 94.44444 88.67925 65

80:20 94.33962 88.88889 64.51613

90:10 94.44444 89.09091

51
 CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, from the tests results discussed in chapter 4 after analyzing the effect of mixing

ratio, particle sizes and compression pressure on the physical and mechanical properties of the

briquettes was investigated. Biomass briquettes made with smaller particle size showed high

compressed and relaxed density. *The focus of this study was on the possibility of using energy

crops (straw and wood origin) which were processed by pressing on the form of briquettes. The

main objective was to evaluate whole pressing process, physical, mechanical and chemical

properties of produced briquettes. The particle size significantly affects the quality of briquettes.

The moisture content is essential condition for secure pressing process of biomass. As another

essential property of briquettes appear to be mechanical resistance which is important from the

perspective of transportation and handling and prevents separation of fine particles to dangerous

quantity (danger of explosion). Only two of selected energy crops meets the standard (≥ 95 %),

Sida hermaprodita and Spartina pectinata, specifically. For other tested energy crops lower results

was observed. Practical use of suitable biomass for the production of solid biofuels is linked with

relatively large variations in their quality. Determination of methodology and description for

meeting requirements of quality and it gives an assurance that they met the required properties of

fuels based on biomass

5.2 RECOMMENDATION
Production and physico-mechanical characterization of biomass briquettes has been a great project

to embark in fact it is a project that i will love to further but honestly the environment with which

the project was carried out is not the best. I would recommend faculty of engineering as well as

university of Ilorin as a whole to see to equipping the mechanical laboratory with more versatile

52
machine such as automatic compression machine compare to manual that took several minutes just

to produce a sample of briquette. Also it shouldn’t be just one as everyone that worked in the civil

lab used the same manual compression for both crushing of their concrete and compression of

biomass; this made the work slow and most times we had to wait for one another to work on the

project. also the lab should try to equip the lab with machines like grinding machine, more digital

weighing balance this is because we had to

borrow to carry out most of our test.

Also I would say project involving renewable energy should be encourage more in the university

and finally final year project is a very sensitive period of learning and putting to practice

combination of everything we have so far In the university, in the sense I would recommend that

for Engineering student especially students in mechanical engineering , they would need more time

to carry out a good project .in the sense I would recommend that final year project should be

compulsorily given to 400l students in the faculty of engineering and technology before they go

for their 6 months internship and that production / fabrication of their project should start first

semester .this will go a long way in making final year students in mechanical engineering

especially dwell well on their project and perform a good final year project.

53
 4.0 REFERENCES

Alhassan, E. a. O. J., 2015. Briquetting characteristics of some agricultural residues using starch
as binder. Ethopian journal of environmental studies.

Aneke, O. F. O. a. b. S. A. a. N. N., 2014. Biomass Briquetting and Rural Development in

Nigeria. Volume 3.

Anna Brunerová, H. R. a. M. B., 2018. Bamboo Fiber and Sugarcane Skin as a Bio-Briquette
Fuel. 16 August.

Anon., 1995. Bagasse combustion in sugar mills. Volume 5,Chapter 10.

Anon., 2015. Briquette Machine. [Online]

Available at:
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=briquette+machine&chips=q:briquette+machine,g
_1:biomass+briquette:K44uk12cKcY%3D&usg=AI4_-kR88bektcu5FZx-
wikZNEKKT56DtQ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiut4qdzfLgAhXv01kKHfh2BlMQ4lYITCgU&biw
=1366&bih=698&dpr=1#imgrc=bHmaAmcZRMfUpM
[Accessed 2019].

Anon., 2015. Groundnut shell. [Online]

Available at:
https://www.google.com/search?q=groundnut+shell&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ah
UKEwjMpL6xzvLgAhWRTN8KHeu8BxoQ_AUIDigB&biw=1366&bih=698
[Accessed 12 March 2019].

Anon., 2015. Sugar Cane Bagasse. [Online]

Available at:
https://www.google.com/search?q=groundnut+shell&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ah
UKEwjMpL6xzvLgAhWRTN8KHeu8BxoQ_AUIDigB&biw=1366&bih=698
[Accessed 2019].

Arry Y Nurhayatia, Y. C. H. W. H., 2015. Endeavoring to Food Sustainability by Promoting

Corn Cob and rice husks briquetting to fuel energy for small scale industries and household
communities.

Ayman Hafiz Amer Eissa, A. R. O. A., 2018. Study on Some Mechanical and Chemical
Properties of Agro Residual Briquettes Produced from Date Palm Fronds. International Journal
of Science and Qualitative Analysis.

Bolaji, B. O., 2012. Effects of unsustainable use of biomass energy for cooking and strategies for
their reduction in develping countries. Volume 2.

54
Fasina, K. J. S. a. O., 2013. Biomass resources and bioenergy potentials in Nigeria. Volume 8.

Felfli, f. O. ,. J. ,. D. L. C. a. P. W., 2011. biomass briquttes and its perspective in brazil..

Volume 35.

harley, k., 2014. fuel briquettes, fuel briquettes: s.n.

Ige Ayodeji Rapheal, E. C. M. H. L. G. A. I. A., 2018. Effect of Binder on Physico-chemical

Properties of Fuel Briquettes Produced from Watermelon Peels. AASCIT Journal of Energy.

Law H.C1, G. L. a. G. H., 2018. Experimental Study on the Mechanical Properties of Biomass
Briquettes from Different Agricultural Residues Combination.

learner, A., n.d. Bomb calorimeter. [Online]

Available at:
https://www.google.com/search?q=bomb+calorimeter&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0a
hUKEwiXyff_y_LgAhWRNd8KHTQdCUsQ_AUIDigB&biw=1366&bih=698

Miloš Matúš, P. K. Ľ. Š. J. B., 2015. Effects of Initial Moisture Content on the Physical and
Mechanical Properties of Norway Spruce Briquettes. International Journal of Environmental
and Ecological Engineering.

Mishra, P. G. &. S., 1996. BIOMASS BRIQUETTING:TECHNOLOGY AND PRACTICES.

Bangkok: REGIONAL WOOD ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME IN ASIA.

Nasiru Shuaibu, H. D. a. A. A. B., 2016. Evaluating Groundnut Shell Briquettes as High Grade
Fuels for Domestic Cooking; Part 2: Modeling the Effect of Processing Parameters on the
Combustion Characteristics of the Briquettes. International Journal of Engineering and Modern
Technology, Volume 2.

Nhavare, T. S. D., 2014. Success biomass briquettes, Nhavare: s.n.

O. A. Oyelaran, B. O. B. M. A. W. a. M. F. A., 2014. Characterization of Briquettes Produced

from Groundnut Shell and Waste Paper Admixture.

Okongwu, O. F. O. &. K. C., 2016. Characterization of fuel briquettesmade from a blend of rice
husk and palm oil mill sludge. Biomass conversion.

Oladeji, J. T., 2015. Theoretical Aspects of Biomass Briquetting: A Review Study. Volume 5.

Oladeji, J. T., 2015. Theoretical Aspects of Biomass Briquetting: A Review Study. Journal of
Energy Technologies and Policy, Volume 3.

OLIVIA, I. N., 2010. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF COAL BRIQUETTE BLENDS WITH

GROUNDNUT.

55
Onuegbu, N. I. O. F. O. a. I. O., 2012. preparation of environmental friendly bio-coal briquette
from groundnut shell and maize cob. Volume 4.

Oyelaran, O. A., 2015. Evaluating the bio-energy potential of groundnut shell and sugarcane
bagasse waste composite. Volume 4.

Rabiu, A. B. L. O. A. ,. H. a. A. V., 2018. Combustion characteristics of selected Tropical wood

residues in Relation to Particle size. The 33rd International conference on solid waste technology
and management.

Shrestha, P. D. K. R., 2014. Study on Feasibility and Market Identification of Densified Biomass
Briquettes.

Sokhansanj, P. S. L. a. S., 2014. Engineering Properties of Biomass. Biomass and Bioenergy

Research Group, Clean Energy Research Center,.

Stephen J. Mitchual, K. F.-M. N. A. D., 2014. Relationship between Physico-Mechanical

Properties, Compacting Pressure and Mixing Proportion of Briquettes Produced from maize cobs
and saw dusts. Journal of Sustainable Bioenergy Systems,.

Taiwo I. Oyedemi, D. B. O. A. I. A. E. E., 2015. A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF BRIQUETTE PRODUCED FROM TICK AND GMELINA
SAWDUST. International Journal of Engineering Research and Reviews.

Tamilvanan, A., 2013. Preparation of Biomass Briquettes using Various Agro- Residues and
Waste.

Toussaint, E. C., 2007. Converting Sugarcane Waste into Charcoal for Haiti.

56
 APPENDIX

Samples Durability Compressed Relaxed Compressive Moisture Water Shatter Hardness Porosity

Density density strength content resistance resistance

SGB:GS

(kg/m3) (kg/m3)

10:90
94.23077 847.3161366 803.4894 81.08108 96.15385 18.91892
8.62

20:80
93.33333 832.7072377 832.7072 97.94643 95.55556 5.357143
8.55

30:70
94 832.7072377 788.8805 97.96364 96 3.636364
8.32

40:60
92.30769 905.7517322 803.4894 97.96429 98.07692 3.571429
8.21

50:50
96.07843 861.9250355 803.4894 97.98246 96.07843 1.754386
7.95

60:40
94 803.4894399 803.4894 97.87273 96 12.72727
7.36

70:30
94.44444 803.4894399 818.0983 97.84615 96.2963 15.38462
7.10

80:20
94.33962 847.3161366 832.7072 97.94444 96.22642 5.555556
6.97

90:10
94.44444 905.7517322 803.4894 97.98113 96.2963 1.886792
6.74

57
 Table 6.1 showing the mechanical tests for briquettes at 0.5mm and compressed at 25kN

Samples Durability Compressed Relaxed Compressive Moisture Water Shatter Hardness Porosity

Density density strength content resistance resistance

SGB:GS

(kg/m3) (kg/m3)

10:90
98.07692 832.7072377 832.7072 98.11321 1.886792
8.94

20:80
97.77778 818.0983388 847.3161 97.98148 1.851852
8.70

30:70
98 803.4894399 832.7072 97.98113 1.886792
8.48

40:60
98.07692 818.0983388 832.7072 97.96154 3.846154
8.39

50:50
98.03922 847.3161366 847.3161 97.94545 5.454545
8.10

60:40
98 803.4894399 832.7072 97.96078 3.921569
7.45

70:30
94.44444 788.8805409 847.3161 97.96 4
7.15

58
80:20
98.11321 803.4894399 847.3161 97.98039 1.960784
7.06

90:10
98.14815 788.8805409 818.0983 97.94 6
6.85

Table 6.2 showing the mechanical tests for briquettes at0.5mm and compressed at 35kN

59
Samples Durability Compressed Relaxed density Compressive Moisture % Water Shatter Hardness %Porosity

Density strength content resistance resistance index

SGB:GS (kg/m3) at

(kg/m3) at
(25kN)

(25kN)

10:90
87.23404 766.9671926 699.1299716 45.09804 18.91891892
7.72

20:80
86.66667 766.9671926 725.0236742 18.18182 5.357142857
7.66

30:70
86.04651 633.0522859 725.0236742 24 7.272727273
7.48

40:60
86.66667 766.9671926 699.1299716 45.61404 8.928571429
7.35

50:50
83.67347 754.7931102 737.9705256 59.64912 8.771929825
7.19

60:40
88 766.9671926 712.0768229 47.27273 12.72727273
6.97

70:30
88.67925 754.7931102 673.2362689 26.92308 15.38461538
6.65

80:20
88.88889 766.9671926 699.1299716 35.18519 5.555555556
6.42

90:10
89.09091 766.9671926 686.1831203 30.18868 11.32075472
6.33

60
 Table 6.2 showing the mechanical tests for briquettes at 1mm and compressed at 25kN

Samples Durability Compressed Relaxed Compressive Moisture % Water % Shatter %

Density density strength content resistance resistance Porosity

SGB:GS

(kg/m3) (kg/m3)

10:90
742.6190277 686.1831203 60 95.74468 40
7.97

20:80
754.7931102 621.4488636 46.51163 95.55556 53.48837
7.80

30:70
620.8782035 556.714607 57.44681 95.34884 42.55319
7.61

40:60
754.7931102 673.2362689 69.09091 93.33333 30.90909
7.40

50:50
742.6190277 699.1299716 72.22222 95.91837 27.77778
7.31

60:40
742.6190277 686.1831203 55.76923 96 44.23077
7.15

70:30
742.6190277 725.0236742 50 98.11321 50
6.77

61
 80:20
754.7931102 712.0768229 54.90196 96.2963 45.09804
6.56

Table 6.3 showing the mechanical tests for briquettes at 1mm and compressed at 35Kn

Samples Durability Compressed Relaxed Compressive Moisture % Water % Shatter Hardness %

Density density strength content resistance resistance Porosity

SGB:GS

(kg/m3) (kg/m3)

10:90
61.40351 736.2885 584.356 5.882353 96.49123 94.11765
7.21

20:80
64.91228 736.2885 596.0431 6.818182 96.49123 93.18182
7.15

30:70
63.63636 724.6014 607.7302 10 94.54545 90
7.01

40:60
68.51852 736.2885 619.4173 8.77193 96.2963 91.22807
6.93

50:50
69.09091 724.6014 607.7302 5.263158 94.54545 94.73684
6.82

62
60:40
59.32203 747.9756 631.1044 9.090909 81.35593 90.90909
6.70

70:30
65 759.6627 642.7916 3.846154 86.66667 96.15385
6.63

80:20
64.51613 759.6627 642.7916 5.555556 82.25806 94.44444
6.57

6.48

Table 6.4 showing the mechanical tests for briquettes at 1.4mm and compressed at 25kN

Samples Durabi Compresse Relaxed Compressi Moisture % Water Shatter Hardnes %

lity d Density density ve strength content resistance resistance s Porosity

SGS:GS

(kg/m3) (kg/m3)

10:90
712.9143 642.7916 5.882353 94.11765
7.39

20:80
701.2271 654.4787 6.818182 93.18182
7.27

30:70
689.54 666.1658 10 90
7.07

63
40:60
701.2271 701.2271 8.77193 91.22807
6.99

50:50
689.54 689.54 5.263158 94.73684
6.91

60:40
712.9143 712.9143 9.090909 90.90909
6.77

70:30
701.2271 701.2271 3.846154 96.15385
6.66

80:20
712.9143 712.9143 5.555556 94.44444
6.63

90:10
701.2271 701.2271 7.54717 92.45283
6.51

Table 6.5 showing the mechanical tests for briquettes at 1.4mm and compressed at 35kN

64