THE TRANSFER CHUTE DESIGN MANUAL FOR CONVEYOR BELT SYSTEMS By C Benjamin, PyDonecker, S Huque &J Rozentals:The Transfer Chute Design Manual For Conveyor Belt Systems By C Benjamin, P Donecker, § Huque & J Rozentals ‘A Review by Em Prof Peter Arnold and Dr David Hastie, Centre for Bulk Solids and Particulate Technologies Faculty of Engineering, University of Wollongong, nece is no doubt that transfer chutes in conveying systems DPesent operating problems far too frequently. Being a series ink in the overall conveying system means that when the transfer chute fl to perform then the whole conveying system saflers. AS stated by the authors, this book sets out to bring together the way transfer chute design has evolved and to relate this evolution to the “underiying design principles that must be applied if the transfer isto ‘operate with the minimum of maintenance consequences. The text also examines how conflicting outcomes ean be accommodated And howto assess the compromises that may have tobe made ‘The authors are well experienced practical chute designers and ‘operators and the book reflects theie wealth of experience. They frequently point out that an effective chute design requires + Accurate calculation ofthe trajectory + Maintaining conteol over the bulk materia ow + Controlling the bulk material stceam velocities and dust sencration + Ensuring that the presentation of the material to the receiving beleis correct. ‘Like many similar design manuals, this book has its strengths and its weaknesses. Is strengths include + Its coverage ofthe various types of transfer chute that may need ‘consideration, pointing out their advantages and disadvantages + Extensive practical design guidance relating to the various chute types. + "The wealth of practical information relating to such aspects 28 ‘chute liners, maintenance issues, dust control and sealing issues. weaknesses include: ‘+ The lack of comprehensive detail that would allow the user ofthe ‘mama fo actually curry out the calculations that are required as, part of the design process, The authors continually emphasise the importance of accurate trajectory calculations and they pro- vide a wealth of references relating to the topic but in the end they rely on in house’ software that the manual user would need toacquire, for thei calculations, + Similar lack of detail exists for other calculations, for example calculating the velocities through hoods and spoons, The manual user would be foreed to go (othe work of others (ey AW Roberts) tocarry out such calculations +The chapter on trajectories and their comparisons is lacking any ‘comparison to experimentally measured values, tis unforeunate that with all authors having widespread background in the area ‘of conveyor design, none has been able to supply data for com ‘parative purposes to better gauge the accurscy (ot lick thereof) ofthe trajectory models, + Being self published the book has some presentation shortcom: ‘ngs, for exurmple: References that are in error or missing (Powell (1995) isrefered to ona number of occasions but not referenced = it happens to be an Undergraduate Thesis from the University of Wollongong); trajectory methods by BF Goodrich, BTR, Cok. and Connors and S-A.66 are referred toon several ocassions but ose Bus orang Row: Satara 2010 the references are not provided; photographs that ae indistinct figures that are hard to comprehend; drawings that are reduced to suctan extent that they ate illegible; and the inevieabe typos, Despite the above weaknesses this manual provides a valuable insight into the vagaries of chute design and emphasises that the design must not be treated as trivial. In fact there is an underlying philosophy that emphasises that it is generally very cost effective to entrust the design to a well experienced designer. ‘While the authors acknowledge that it has taken them some time to bring the book to fruition, i is a pity that they have not kept up to date with the research and developments that have tak ‘en place during that time. The book contains an extensive range of references and a comprehensive bibliography, however, there are {ew references less than 10 years old. lwo examples are: the 6th edition of the CEMA guide 2006) contains some minor changes to the way trajectories are determined but is not covered; and the use of Golka’s method (1993) of determining trajectories originally lacked the detall on how to determine the divergent cocfficients but a subsequent publication by Golka et al. 2007) has clarified these issues. (One area where its fle that the manual is seriously lacking is inthe application of DEM techniques to chute design. The authors ‘concide their brief coverage of the DEM technique by saying that they ‘believe that using DEM to look at the flow properties of a ‘chute can assist in the design process but itis nota very strong, tool. They state that a more rellable method of testing the design ‘of transfer is using scale model testing. In the last 10 years great strides have been made in the devel: ‘opment of DEM software and the application of ealbration tech ‘niques to enable reliable material parameters tobe incorporated in the DEM models. While DEM analysis can still be expensive so is scale model testing, With the advances made in recent years, DEM. {s proving to be a very valuable too! for chute design, especially ‘when retrofit designs need to be developed, Despite the above weaknesses this manual provides a valuable Insight into the vagaries of chute design and emphasises that the design must not be treated as trivial. Infact there is an underying, philosophy that emphasises that itis generally very cost effective to entrust the design to a well experienced designer. . ‘Contact: Peter Amol, ema = parnld@vowedu.nuTABLE OF CONTENTS 1 1" INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND = Transfer Types and their Evolution MATERIAL TRAJECTORY PREDICTION = The Key to Modern Chute Design BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS DESIGNING AND DRAWING TRANSFERS DESIGN AIDS AND THEIR APPLICATION MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF TRANSFERS DESIGNING TRANSFERS FOR COHESIVE OR WET ORES DESIGNING TRANSFERS ‘TO MANAGE DUST WORKED EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENT TRANSFERS APPENDICES 12 BIBLIOGRAPHYIn today’s conveyor systems, the majority of maintenance and maintenance related delays to production have a common root cause, the design and functionality of the transfer chutes feeding the conveyors. The problems encountered range from catastrophic belt failures (rip or damage), spillage, dust, poor conveyor belt alignment and impact idler failures to fires. It is not surprising therefore that a lot of engineering effort has been focused on transfer chute design. Much of this effort does focus on product solutions and much of the information used to develop these products is proprietary or difficult to access or apply. The consequence in the authors’ opinion is that at many operations where conveyor systems are relied upon, there is inadequate understanding of how a transfer should and does operate. This text sets out to bring together the way transfer chute design has evolved and to relate this evolution to the underlying design principles that must be applied if the transfer is to operate with, the minimum of maintenance consequences. it also explains how conflicting outcomes can be accommodated and how to assess the compromises that must be made in such circumstances. It explains the theory of transfer design, how to apply the theory and also gives background (on techniques that can assist in the design process. Finally it explores more advanced transfer chute design applications and works through some transfer design issues and their solution. This text is addressed to the materials handling design engineer, the maintenance manager and the new mechenical engineer seeking direction when confronted with a conveyor transfer problem, In writing this text the authors have acknowledged the research of others. However we do need to make specific mention of Alan Huth for the pioneering work he managed and directed at the Gladstone Port Authority in Central Queensland, Australia during the mid 1980s. His, lateral application of fuid flow principles to the transfer and handling of washed coal opened up the minds of many engineers to a different approach to transfer chute design. We also acknowledge the Universities of Wollongong and Newcastle and in particular Professor Peter ‘Amold and Professor Alan Roberts for their tireless and persistent research in materials handling and the contribution these institutions have made to the theoreticat understanding of material properties and their low and handling ability characteristics. It is the marriage of the practical with the theory that translates today into the possibilty of meeting most transfer chute design challenges. In concluding this general introduction we acknowledge that transfer chute design remains a vexatious problem within the materials handling industry. We however see the problem as lack of knowledge and poor understanding of the design principles that need to be applied It is compounded by some over zealous application of design software that is promoted as a solution rather than an ald. The aim of this text is to address these issues by comprehensively drawing together the collective expertise and experience of the authors, who together have well ‘over 100 man years experience in the materials handling industry covering academic research, system design and maintenance management. Stated in anather way this text covers the theoretical to the very practical and everything in between.4.1. Introduction to Conveyor Transfers nnects a conveyor belt to a feed source 0 screen, a crusher or a belt feeder. The heigh to as high as 10 metres or more. Mos ight. The basic function of all transfers is to channel | being transferred onto a receiving belt such that th: ‘A conveyor transfer is any static interface that cor material. The feed source can be another conveyor, @ of the transfer operation can be very low, less than a metre, transfers range from 1.5 to 3.0 metres in hei through their geometric design, the material material can be transported to another location. ‘The range of materials handled by transfers Is as broad as that hancled by conveyor systems and cov materials that can be: Wet material that may also flow very poorly salve water content. fatal with e» Powders Very fluid, that is it flows very well Dusty material that is easily aorated 1m Containing lumps that can weigh individually up to a tonne or more Highly abrasive and/or corrosive materia! im Very friable material that will break down under any impact {Sized material that isin its final product form and needs to remain so im Material that has high clay or of similar composition that flows poorly . . . There may also be combinations ofthe above that complicates the process of designing a transfer that rrandle the material. Another basic consideration isthe capacity of the conveyor system. The design and bra conveyor bel is based! on the peak tonnage that needs to be handled in volumetric terms. nother Wet She bate density of the material must be allowed for and itis important to note that this can be very much i than tho specific gravity as some materials are very porous and/or easily aerated. A transfer chute need Te designed that reflects these peak tonnage considerations. It is of no use ifthe system is designed f¢ certain igure based on the sizing ofthe conveyors only to find thatthe transfer system cannot relably Nan such volumes. Typically in such circumstances chute blockages occur and in many cases abnormal < rapid conveyor belt weer also occurs along the skirt fines. of wear on the face of be managed the consequi In any design where material flow i 6 shuts must be considered. The design process is usually augmented by allowing for the inclusion of su Selected wear resistant ining material to be fixed to the structural members of the ‘contact with the material as it lows through the transter. In considering the basics the po: and dust that could be generated through the transfer process rust also be acicress Jone using a combination of a wear reslatant liner and some form of sealing system, usually made of ru Ifall of the above are diligently considered, the transfer cht if not, there wi aintensnee problems that can easily translate to production problems through capacity constraint time or system damage. 6 > CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD > MATQuality engineering that comprehensively considers all aspects of a design before committing the design to fabrication can be very expensive and time consuming. Time and money drives our industry so it is not surprising that something as banal as a transfer point in a conveyor system can be overlooked or poorly considered during any initial designing of a materials handling facility. This oversight is supplemented by the fact that very few project engineers understand the basics of transfer chute design and very few engineers, unless they are maintenance engineers, understand the consequences of these oversights. Not all demand a rigorous design process, All demand that the person responsible for their design has a good understanding of transfer chute design so that any design decisions are made with foresight as to the possible consequences to the functionality ofthe plant of which they willbe part. There are compelling y this should be the case and this is best llustrated by detailing a variety of examples of wivat can .nd has happened with unfortunate frequency. 28075 ¥ ‘The photo (Figure 1.1) shows the problem when the chute geometry is poor. The consequences to maintenance and production become obvious but the rectification can be most difficult as any re- build is far more expensive than designing a transfer correctly in the first place. Figure 1.1 ~ Standard short term approach is to patch the chuteOther than the environmental issues and the problems this may cause, particularly the health risk to operators, there is the possibilty of an explosion if the dust level of a suitably combus material builds up within the transfer and is ignited through some build up of static electricity. Figure 1.2 - Serious Dust Hazard created at the Transfer 1.23 Fire ‘Most transfer points use some form of impact mitigation. If oversize or randomly shaped material is being handled and the chute geometry is poor material can get trapped in a manner such that a friction fire can occur. ‘A further possibilty is it combustible (coal) material is being handled the ‘riction developed to create the fre may not require material getting jammed but simply build up around the sealing system. {8 > CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD ? MATERIAL FLOW CONTROLFigure 1.3 - The rubber in this disc had reverted suggesting temperatures had reached over 250 degrees centigrade, enough to ignite coal or grain dust and eventually the rubber itself This is usually caused by material getting trapped between the inner wear liner in a transfer and the ‘outer sealing system or under the skirt system itself. tis usually caused by the belt being overloaded, loaded in a very uncontrolled manner such that material impacts or is deflected against the skirting system or the belt is being loaded at a reverse angle to its inclination creating material ‘boil’ as the belt has to re-accolorate the load. Figure 1.4 - Severe wear is through the layers of fabric along the skirt lines. This will see the belt changed out well before it should have been necessary through normal wear1.25 Spillage This is usually created by not at the correct inclination ro-accelorated at the load point. not loading the belt centrally, very poorly, in an uncontrolled manner o1 ‘when loading an inclined conveyor such that the material has to be is causes either material to spill out the back of the cc It tracks off constant cleaning up, there is produc means that the con the pr of its dri Figure 1.5 - Typical spillage from a poorly designed transferConveyor systems are capital intensive. If the transfer cannot handle the tonnage then a great deal of money has been wasted not to mention maintenance down time when chutes block up and require cleaning out. The following illustration is an actual case that required the chute to be dug out using shovels when it blocked. The chute capacity was less than half the theoretical belt capacity. 9t illustrates what happens If the system capacity is greater than the transfer capacity The illustrations above are not isolated instances but unfortunately typical issues that confront maintenance ‘and production engineers every day. Many of the issues occur in combination, many are addressed in a manner that means the consequences are poor system reliability and regular maintenance that cou! eliminated. Itis usually not dificult to identify the real costs associated with the above problems and transiate this to a justification for action. The key is ensuring that these types of potential problems are avoided. The above also clearly illustrates the benefits of good design at the conceptual stage of any system developmen gen avoided. as all these problems could haveBASIC TRANSFER TYPES ‘THE BASH OR IMPACT PLATE THE DEFLECTOR THE ROCK BOX ‘THE SPIRAL CHUTE ‘THE CASCADE CHUTE ‘THE ‘HOOD AND SPOON’ CHUTESe 2 BACKGROUND ~ BASIC TRANSFER TYPES | In the bulk materials handling industry the importance of transfer chutes in the design and operation of conveyor systems was not initially generally recognised as most early conveyors operated at very modest speeds and their duties were not challenging. Early challenges came with the large material handling systems installed by Rheinbraun in the lignite mines in Germany and it was here that a lot of the early work on different transfer designs was initiated. Most designs however evolved from fundamental concepts and this is why looking at the basic transfer types and their i evolution is important. 2.4 The Bash or Impact Plate ‘The Bash Piate, of Impact Plate, is a surface introduced into the flow stream of product to cause it to impact and flow in a different direction. It is the crudest and earliest form of transfer causing direction change. This is a brute force approach. On Impact the component of velocity perpendi ct plate is predominately dissipated, The primary function is to drop the material vertically or close to vertically down onto the receiving belt. The use of impact plates may causo degradation of some products. They also generally create and liberate dust, generate nolse and lead to spillage and problems around the skirt line o t! wving conveyor. The impact plate is subjec ‘and impact wear by lumps and the product (with some mineral the fines component can be very abrasive). Spocial care needs to be taken to choose a suitable ial for lining the surface of the impact plate and even with care the life eyo'e of the plate can be very ‘The advantages of this type of transfer are obvious, they are cheap and easy to design and inexpensive to build and install, The problems are however numerous and include; Dust Product deg Spillage Chute blockages (when wet, sticky material is being handled) Transter capacity less than belt capac High Poor be intenance ife (receiving trophic failure of the receiving belt through belt ri. Possibility of cata When are such devices used given the abo. 1 I thore is a slow moving belt system, low transfer height and capacity is not an issue but some form of basic flow control is required, ther. an impact plate may be the solution. There are also applications where the material being transferred is so aggressive in torms of impact oF wear that more sophisticated designs cannot be justified. It must be remembered that there are large number of chutes currently in existence that use impact plates as the basic flow control ms the following chapters there are a number of concepts that could be applied to improve the performance of these existing transfers if the issues above represent operational problems. 14 > CONVEVOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTO > NATERIAL FLOW CONTROLFigure 2.1 - A typical Impact Plate used in the iron ore industry plate is to be us Design considerations that could absorb the energy contained in to th ving belt? How will the material the plate pivot in order to be Ist adjustable so that changes can be made to the material flow ut or relined, Jes so that it can be easily ch ining material Figure 2.2 ~ Basic Design of an Impact Plate| 2 BACKGROUND ~ BASIC TRANSFER TYPES This is really an extension or more correctly a natural evolution of the impact plate. As conveyor speeds increase 50 does the likelihood of the material ‘bouncing’ off the face of an impact plate creating very uncontrolled material flow within the transfer chute. This in turn leads to poor loading “onto the receiving belt and as a consequence, tracking problems. It is these considerations that saw modifications being made to the impact plate so the plate became a deflector whereby the material flow at the top end of the transfer was much more controlled. This was achieved by shaping the plate in a shallow curve, The essence of making a deflector work is either knowing the material trajectory or designing the deflector such that it can be adjusted to accommodate the material trajectory. Itis for this reason the authors boliove that the earliest deflectors were designed and built as retro-fits by site based engineers to address perceived problems with existing transfers. ‘ol However it has the followin ‘obviously improves material low cor disadvantages; ate is longer than with a bash plate with the consequence the load to blocks cohesive The use of deflect The material contact with the defiector material flow through the transfer is slowed. This material Liner wear is a big aly with lump material “The positioning of the deflector is critical, Incorrect positioning can lead to the transfor Unless there is. a lage, associated with bi Jer issue, espor king. above the recelving belt, imilar deflector position’ fery effective. They are reasonably inexpensive to ith material that is not abrasive. They are Deflectors are @ very popular and in the right circumnstane design and Install, They are best used with sized ore and work best not recommended with large lumpy ore, in high impact applications or with variable speed conveyors (unk the deflector can be adjusted for speed changes), Figure 2.3 - A typical deflector, note it is curved and designed, through its radius to steer the ore vertically 46.» CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROLthe material trajo When designing a deflector the critical issue ory. If tis to be retro-fitted on site, then site observations are the best design tool. Ideally the deflector should intercept the ore stream at an angle of less than 20 degrees. If the design is to be done from first principles then go to Chapter 3 as correctly ing the trajectory is a ortical factor. If the material being handled is wet and cohesive then the material speed through the deflector is absolutely critical. Intercepting the ore stream lower down in the ore trajectory to ensure the material speed is maintained through the transfer may need to be considered. The probler associated with cohesive materials are dealt with in more detail in Chapters 5 and 6. Figure 2.4 ~ A typical deflector design 2.3 The Rock Box ‘The Rock Box was developed to absorb the high energy impact associated with handling large rocks that would otherwise severely damage or cause the receiving belt to be ripped. It is designed as a rock ledge in the form of an open box such that the ore can flow into the box and as it fills, overflow onto the receiving belt. Some original designs allowed the ‘box’ to empty however most designs today rely on the box always being filled with ore and the ore itself acting as the impact or wear surface (sometimes termed autogenous rock boxes). In order to retain material in the box there can be a small ledge at the front opening of the box. When set up correctly the ore will assume a rill angle (angle of repose) dependent on the ore type of usually between 35 ~ 45 degrees and it is from this surface the ore deflects onto the receiving belt. This form of transfer was very popular in the hard rock industry when the conveyor belt speeds were relatively slow. They were robust, required little maintenance and would minimise the impact onto the receiving belts if correctly set up. They do however have a number of issues As they slow the material flow through the transfer significantly they become the limiting factor in the capacity of the conveyor system. Once belt speeds exceed 2.5m/s care must be taken to match the transfer capacity to the belt capacitySSS. 2 BACKGROUND — BASIC TRANSFER TYPES They do lead to material degradation, dust and noise. When handling wet, cohesive material they are prone to blocking from excessive build up therefore they require regular clean The product lands on the receiving belt with ittle or no horizontal velocity. As the receiving belt has to fully accelerate the product, there is increased belt wear Notwithstanding the above, when handling large high impact material, this type of transfer should be nsidered. They should also be considered when handling very abrasive material as they generate ore on ore flow thus eliminating liner wear as a factor. They also have the advantage of not requiring a great deal of separation between the delivering and receiving belts ie, low height transfers. Rock box ‘Transfer support frame Skirt system | L Figure 2.5 - Rock Box 18 > CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROL<= FComeyor Figure 2.6 ~ Sequential Rock Boxes transfer Jes8en from theabove, getting the material trajectory right simportant with rock boxesas with ot types.as you need to promote ore on ore flow. Ironly one rack boxis usedit shouldbe set up over the recelving belt asitis critical that the ore low is directed onto the receiving bolt with as much controlas possible, Itis also possible ‘0x or partially infll the comers to try and centralise or promote material flow as ser Conveyor = tf material sticky cohesive and likely to | | block, install triangular | | fi | ledges as detailed <= Fonveyor (- 9 Figure 2.7 - Possible modification for cohesive material2 BACKGROUND ~ BASIC TRANSFER TYPES Spiral product lowering chutes are used to limit the exit velocity at the bottom of the chute, They evolved out of the package handling industry where such chutes are common place. The key design feature is ensuring the decline angle of the spiral is greater than the angle of repose of the product (rll angle) such that the material will maintain momentum down the spiral with due allowance for the friction between the product and the spiral chute surface. The key feature is that the product is fully guided through the entire transfer. The key constraint when using a spiral chute conceptis that the material being handled must be relatively free flowing. Cohesive materials will quickly block the spiral. Other issues inclu Spirals tend to segregate the lumps in the product mass. The fines tend to slow down and flow to the side ol the spiral while lumps tend to speed up and run centrally in the spiral chute. i froe water is present the material being handled can flow down the transfer in an uncontrolled manner. Plate or liner wear is an issue due to the guided nature of the material flow. They are relatively expensive to design for the inexperienced designer. They are relatively inexpensive to build but can be expensive to mainte The drop height can be quite modest particulary if the material input speed is low, more height is requirec I there is more speed. The height also increases if the material being handled is being re-directed at ar oblique angle. As they do not slow the material to the same extent as cascade chutes, the height requirec 's generally between a cascade and hood and spoon chute. The ore being transferred must be presented correctly into the top of the spiral and this sometimes means that spiral chutes have to incorporate a deflector at the top end of the transfer. Spiral chutes are primarily used in the material handling industry to transfer powders that are dy, free flowing ‘and subject to aeration and therefore dust generation if transferred using conventional transfer technology Such industries as the Cement Clinker and Alumina industries could find this a very viable solution as bot have major problems with dust generation. They have also been adapted for handling other bulk materials ‘especially coal by some designers but their widespread use has been limited by the specialised nature 0 the design process. They do have the benefit of presenting the material being handled onto the receiving conveyor in a very controlled manner and this aspect alone can justify their use. If the drop height onto the receiving conveyor is relatively low (less than three metres), the material is free flowing and likely to degrade lr generate dust, then a spiral chute should be considered. rs > e Figure 2.8 ~ Photos of a spiral chute for a coal mine (courtesy Don Kelly)eee 2.5 The Cascade Chute With cascade chutes the product stream falls from one chute section to another like a waterfall They are in many ways an advancement on the rock box in that essentially they consist of a number of ledges rather than one or two. There are essentially two types of cascade chutes, one that is designed primarily to control the material speed through the transfer and the other that is designed primarily to promote ore on ore flow and thus substantially extend the maintenance windows when dealing with highly abrasive materials. In the case of the most widely promoted cascade chute, the Weba Chute™ that is designed and supplied by M&d) Engineering of South Africa, the concept combines both features. “The most widely known chute concept where the design was primarily focused on material speed was developed by Cleveland Cascades Ltd of the United Kingdom. It is promoted for ship loading and stockpile ransfer applications. Itis @ relatively expensive solution but given thal it was developed for very specific applications it must be considered where dust and material degradation are issues. The following picture (Figure 2.9) shows the basic design. A feature not required for most transfer applications is the extendibilty of the chute, Figure 2.9 - Cleveland Cascade Chute Other concepts used to contro! material speed using the cascade principle are the insertion of micro ledges as inside liners of the transfer. This type of solution is more generally looked at in later Chapters. In most instances today cascade chutes are being supplied as ‘product soiutions' rather than as designs. The reason for this is some concepts are subject to patents but moreover the design of this type of chute requires 1 great deal of care and experience. The key issues when looking at such chutes are; As thoy are sold primatily as product solutions they tend to be relatively expensive, ign criteria is four times the width of the belt delivering the where they are being retro-fitted the delivery belt Tho drop height (in the case of Weba the de ore flow) requirements are such that in many needs to be lifted, on ore flow tt While they do extend the life cycle of the chute as they promote o ey stil wear out and given the relative complexity of their design, replacement is expensive and time consuming, through the transfer they can block when handling wet, cohes As they slow the material speed doy material While there are the above limitations this tyoe of chute has wide applications especially when the have been lifted above 2.5m/s making the use of rock boxes problematic due to the capacity con: cycle. If desig lent start kicking in above this speed. They do substantially extend the maintenan ‘olled manner. They are they also pre: abrasive, lumpy mater ent the ore on the receiving beit in a very con | that is relatively free flowing, ‘aging as that have to be considered; f design is Ihen designing this type of chute there ‘The material trajectory into the chu caloulation is a combination of angle change {i2. material direction chang and angle of repose of the material being handled. om The transfer height. The delivery to receiving), lump si her the finer material is free flowing, yarticularly the mix of lump to fines and and size will affect the structural design of the ledges. The shape and orientation of the ledges must be uniform so as to promote a uniform directional ‘ange in the material flow plus ensure the material is centralised when delivering to the receiving bel This is done by slightly offsetting each ledge such that each unit can be fanned cut to induce some in the flow stream, The angles can be adjusted in the field to ensure 1 recelving belt characteristics material weight igning the micro feeding to at the Cleveland Cascade concept in any detail as it is a specialised however to look at the Weba Chute given its wide range of apolications and has a series of ledges as shown in Figure 2:10; It is not the au application. It is impor popularity. The Weba Chute omnes RS cad boett Figure 2.10 ~ Top end of a Weba Chute looking upFigure 2.11 - Note the Weba Chute is designed to retain ore on the ledges so there is ore on ore flow In the Weba Chute the ledges are spiralled down so that the ore flow is presented in the direction of the receiving belt. Each ledge Is proud of the preceding ledge such that material is captured and retained on the ledge 80 as to protect the ledge surface from abrasive wear. The design principles used are the same as referenced above for all cascad s. Notwithstanding the design features the ledges still get damaged ‘and do wear such that they need periodic replaceent. The great virtue is that they extend the maintenance le significantly plus control the material flow in a manner that minimises spillage and dust. Providing the material is relatively free fiowing they are very effective particularly when handling larger, abrasive lump material. They have hot en known to block when handling wet cohesive matorial Figure 2.12 - The Weba Cascade Chute ‘A more general form of cascade chute is one that incorporates a series of ledges to promote ore on or and thus significantly extending the maintenance cycle. There are many variations to this theme however the following photo demonstrates what you are setting out to achieve.igure 2.14 ~ Cascade chute incorporating micro ledges (rib cage) Between the patented Waba Chute and the simple rib cage type Jadge system there are obviously man variations to the theme. The design principles that need to be applied are however the Figure 2.15 - Another cascade type chute configuration 2a eee, ee 2.6 The ‘Hood and Spoon’ Chute ‘The name of ‘Hood and Spoon’ chutes was given to a chute designed and developed conceptually by Alan Huth at the Gladstone Port Authority where the initial concept was used to improve the loading of coal ships at the Port. tis called the ‘Hood and Spoon’ because the concept incorporated a parabolic shaped dished hood deflector at the top of the chute and a similar spoon deflector at the bottom to deliver the material onto the receiving belt. The design principles however come from fluid mechanics where, by treating the material flow as a fluid rather then a solid, the designer seeks to steer the material through the transfer by first turning the material flow vertically then picking up the vertical flow in a manner that delivers the material in a controlled way onto the receiving belt. The essence of this type of transfer is low material intercept angles and as much as possible preserving the material momentum through the transfer. It can also be argued that the development of this type of transfer in the mid 1980s was the catalyst for a significant re- application of sound engineering principles to the design of transfer chutes and this has led to a very significant improvement in the design and performance of transfer chutes. This type of transfer evolved from the coal industry and while it has been widely used outside of the coal industry it has the folowing constraints; 11 More than any other type of transfer it relies on accurate engineering especially in the calculation of the trajectory. Many failures or poor performances are a direct result of inadequate or poor engineering. IE The two deflector components are subject to wear so when handling abrasive materials defector life can be a serious issue. Im Ifthe drop height Is excessive (over 5 metres) controling the material speed can become a significant issue, 1m Asthe design relies on flu fow control the surface roughness of the lining material will affect the performance of the transfer. Ths is a significant factor when handfing wet or cohesive materials that could block a transter. Like the cascade chutes, these chutes have a very wide range of applications. They are particularly popular in the coal industry within Australia, reflecting in part the fact they were originally developed in Australia, Other than coal they are very well suited for any free flowing material where the material size is less than 50mm. They can be used to handle larger material and have been designed for applications where material size has been up to one metre but abrasion and liner selection then become significant issues. Their particular virtue is the high capacity of these transfers and the ability to handle wet, cohesive materials. Given the fact they utilise basic fluid flow design concepts, this type of chute can be used to manage free flowing water in an ore stream (dewatering transfers, = see Chapter 8) and dust (dust management in transfers - see Chapter 9). Other major benefits of this type of transfer are the ease at which key components can be made as rotable spares, the ease of access for maintenance and the relative inexpensive cost when compared to say, cascade chutes. When designing these transfors there are many parameters to consider. They key ones are; 1. Material Trajectory 2. Conveyor Orientation 3. Drop height of the transfer m4. Material characteristics 252 BACKGROUND ~ BASIC TRANSFER TYPES ‘A woll designed transfer using this type of technology however will consider a very broad range of input data. This is covered in later chap! Figure 2.16 ~ Hood and Spoon chute 2.7 Conclusion There are many reasonably exotic transfer types that have been developed over the years. However what has been covered above represents the vast majority of all transfer applications in the bulk materials industry. There is however no logical reason why transfers cannot and are not developed that are a combination of the above concepts. In fact there are proponents of the Hood and Spoon chute concept offering cascade type retro-fit liners in order improve the life cycle of the chute components. The key issues, as will be covered in more detail later, are to make the best design selection both from an operation and maintenance viewpoint. 26 > CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROLCHAPTER 3 MATERIAL TRAJECTORY PREDICTIONS THE KEY TO MODERN CHUTE DESIGN 3.1 INTRODUCTION 28 3.2 MATERIAL DISCHARGE AND TRAJECTORY TECHNIQUES 29 3.24 Introduction to material discharge 29 3.2.2 Material height calculations 36 3.2.3 Method of Korzen 14 3.2.4 Method of Booth 38 3.2.5 Method of Golka 39 3.2.6 Method of Dunlop i 3.2.7 — Method of Goodyear 40 8.2.8 Method of MHEA (early version) 40 3.2.9 Method of CEMA a 3.210 Method of MHEA (updated version) 42 3.2.11 Method of BTR 43 3.212 Method of Goodrich 43 3.243 Method of S-A 66 43 3.3 DISCHARGE AND TRAJECTORY PREDICTION 44 ‘TECHNIQUE COMPARISONS 3.3.1 Overview 44 3.3.2 Spreadsheet set up 45 3.3.3 Comparison of high speed conveying conditions 4 3.3.4 Comparison of low speed conveying conditions 48 3.4 OVERALL COMMENTS AND SUMMARY. . 61 NOMENCLATURE eesa | 3 MATERIAL TRAJECTORY PREDICTIONS 3.1 Introduction ‘The prediction of the material path as it leaves the conveyor head pulley is the key to modern chute design, primarily as itis the first step in the design of a transfer chute system. If discharge and trajectory aspects are not correctly determined, problems will occur later along the material path. Initially when the material hits the upper chute element, and then once again when the material drops into the lower sections of the transfer. A transfer chute design that considers the system Variables, such as discharge conveyor geometry and material characteristics, is significantly closer to eliminating most common transfer chute problems than one that does not. Those in industry have traditionally addressed prediction of the material trajectory using basic tile motion equations with litle thought to material properties and conveyor geometry. Then the upper chute ‘element has been placed by means of trial and error, with successful problem solving dependent on past ‘experience and a thorough under: anding of bulk material behaviour. rently available, from the be niques noted .ed. The design methods available to calculate or the chapter will investigate ‘and those popuier hose ‘This chapter will examine material trajectory literature above to complex iterative procedures that are soldom us predict material discharge velocties and trajectories will be reviewed. Note thi ‘only those works that have been frequently referred to In transfer chute literature to dat in industry. Obscure amalgamations of methods that are not available in the public domain such as observed by the authors in many mining and processing facilties will not be examined. in reviewing the predictive methods of calculating trajectories the most accurate way to assess # you have an existing transfer handling the samo materials. As many transfers are retro-fttod a very important option for @ ‘and the use of scale modelling to assess transfer 6 covered in later chapters, alectories is is becomes signs are While this Chapter is @ basically a literature review conclusions are drawn as the author's have done their ‘own research and through this have developed a trajectory model. As described in Chapter 6, through this research, a software programme has been developed that allows both trajectory predictions and velocity profiles to bo calculated through the transfer, The basis of this research is contained within the following @s is pointed out at the end of the Chapter. This Is the trajectory model that has been used in this book where ‘examples have been given. There has been the opportunity of testing these predicted trajectories against al fold results over a long time frame and with a very broad range of materials, Using the results obt further refinements were made such that trajectories predicted using this software can be reliably used in all transfer chute designs. 28 ) CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTO. > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROL_p:XG }\}e esse 3.2 Material Discharge and Trajectory Techniques 3.2.4 Introduction to Material Discharge Material discharge is one of the most critical aspects in transfer chute design as it determines the exact point at which the material leaves the belt. A number of different methods exist in the literature for modelling material discharge, such as the works of Arnold & Hill (1989, 1990, 1990b, 1991a, 1991b, 1993), Booth (1934), BFGoodrich (n.d.), BTR (n.d.), CEMA (1997), Colijn & Conners (1972), Dunlop (1982), Golka (1993a}, Goodyear (1976), Korzen (1984b, 1989), MHEA (1986, 1989), $-A 66 (n.d_), Roberts (1997b, 2001) and Roberts et al. (1987). \d Arnold & Hill (19902, 1991a, 1991b}, derivations for material discharge can ischarge, where the material wraps around the head pulley to some extent e, where the material will di 18 point of tangen ween the ‘As shown by Amold (1993) be divide before discharging; and fast dischar into two are belt and head pulley. An important aspect of accurate trajectory prediction is the determination of the wrap angle (aig) and discharge velocity, Korzen (1989) and Roberts (1997 ‘method of determining whether @ conveyor belt is running in the high or slow a belt can be described as high-speed if it meets the condition shown in Equation 3.1 1) provide the most comprehensive ed condition. In their work, Equation 3.1 A belt can be described as slow-speed if the condition in Equation 3.2 is met Equation 3.2 ve os - < cos ay Reg yh, Other condition methods are available and shall be described in Sections 3.4.4 to 3.4.13 though these generally do not include the term containing the adhesive ponent ‘Once the bulk solid stream has separated from the conveyor belt, it undergoes a period of free fall until it hits the impact plate, Prediction of the trajectory path for bulk materials has been presented in the papers of Amold (1993), Amold & Hil (1989, 1991a}, Booth (1984), Golka (1992, 1993a), Korzen (1986, 1989}, Page (1991), Roberts (2001), Roberts at al. (1987), Rozentals (1991), and Snow (1991), as well as in the published ommendations and manufacturer's conveyor belt manuals of Amold & Hill (19915), BFGoodrich (n.c.), BTR (n.d), CEMA (1997), Dunlop (1982), Goodyear (1976), MHEA (1986) and S-A 66 (n.d). The relatively large amount of literature available for this aspect of chute design stems from the fact that a close approximation of the material trajectory off the head pulley of the conveyor system is among the first steps towards designing a dependable transfer chute, Evidenced from citations jn literature and the primary author's industrial experience, the concepts of discharge and material trajectory prediction outlined in the papers of Booth (1934), Golka (1993a), and Korzen (1989), and published manuals BFGoodrich handbook (n.d), BTR (0.4) CEMA (1997), Dunlop (1982), Goodyear (1976), MHEA (1986, 1989), and S-A 6 n.d) are the most popular and shall be reviewed in greater detail here. Drag effects for trajectories can be considered, though Arnold & Hill (19915) at air drag effects should be investigated only ifthe material is to be thrown greater than 5 metres.a ES TY 3 MATERIAL TRAJECTORY PREDICTIONS 3.2.2 Material Height Calculations ‘The material height upon the belt prior to discharge is required as this is the starting point for the Upper trajectory limit. Techniques of calculating material height were absent in some of the available work such as the trajectory prediction methods of Booth (1934), BF Goodrich (n.d.), BTR (n.d), Dunlop (1982), Golka (1993a), Goodyear (1976) and S-A 66 (n.d,). In Korzen’s (1989) work the height of the material upon the belt prior to discharge at high-speed conditions is given by: Equation 3.3 hy pbVe For slow speed conditions, the belt velocity vs replaced by the discharge velocity vin Equation 3.3. tis ideal howeve the comprehensive theory detaled in Arnold & Hil (1981b) and Powel's (1905) work, whion ed upor y in the two MHEA (1986, ‘and CEMA (1997) guides, to calculate material height upon the belt. Major aspects of this work are outlined below. An understanding of the geometry involved for slculating the material height and centroid of material is important and shall now be desorib The volumett capacity of material on a conveyor belt is dependent upon the beit’s velocity and the material ‘ectional area. Certain techniques Ike that of Korzen (1989) base their area calculations upon the material's bulk density, which is not an accurate mathod by which to calculate the o re due to material densities varying during conveying operations. A prime exampie is the mining industry, where particulate matter can range between raw coal with lumps to finished product, possibly causing variations in the bulk density for a particular conveyor. load Powell (1995) recommends the belt load cross-sectional area be calculated fr and the geometry of the conveyor, The calculations for determining the cro: two assumptions. The first is @ constant volumeiric flow rate enabling the use of a constant edge distance. This is the distance from the edge of the belt to the edge of the material loaded on the belt. The second assumption is that the free surface of the material burden on the bolt is to represent an arc of a cirole whose fends are tangent to the material surcharge angie at the edge of the load, ym a material's surcharge angle ectional area are based upon ional area for troughed (three Idlers) and flat (single idler) conveyor belt SEMA (1997) manual. The derivation for roughed (two idlers) was devised by Powell (1995). The derivation for troughed (five idlers) snot detailed in literature, and has not been consi¢ However the equations derived from conveyor geometry after an analysis is conducted upon .qual-rol roughing ialer systems to determine edge distances for high and siow-speeds, and also idler belt length proportional ratios, Additionally, the calculations can be that the material load upon the belt is centrally applied and hence the two sets of outer idler aporoximately the same a The derivation of load oross-s configurations canbe foundin the here somewhat simpitied if it Is assumed ined at od belts with only two idlers can be broken in own in and the lower triangular area ‘The load cross-section on troug Figure 3.1, the upper circular segment are: wo portions a 130.) CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LID > MATERIAL FLOW CONT#OLFigure 3.1 ~ Load cross-section areas on a two idler belt ‘The circular segment area is found from: Equation 3.4 Th sind 02 A (0.455b - C,) cos B, |? sin X The area of the lower triangular portion is found from: Equation 3.5 = ((0.455b - C,) cos B, tan (tan B,) The constant C The total area 023 for vy < 8.5 ms* and C; = 0.048 for v, > 3.5 ms: mination of the two areas, given by Equation 3.6Figure 3.2 - Load cross-section areas on a three idler belt ‘The circular segment area is found from: Equation 3.7 180 2 A, =| ———_——___——_. 0.1855b + C, + (0.2595b - C,) cos B, | | m sin 2h sin \ The area of the lower trapezoidal portion is found from: Equation 3.8 A, = (0.037 1b + 0.00625 + (0.2595b - C2) cos B,). ((2595b - C,) sin B,) “The constant C2 = 0.026 for vp < 3.5 ms" and C; = 0.051 for Ve ‘The total area is calculated from the combination of the two areas, given by Equation 3.9 Ar = At AD The load sion area on fat belts is made up of only one section, that of the segment of a circle, an’ Is llustrated in Figure 3.3, 52.) CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LID > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROL| Figure 9.3 ~ Load cross-section areas on a flat belt ed from Equation 3.10 (0.455b - C,) )* A, | sind The constant ©; = 0.028 for v < 35 ms and G we> 35 ms The material centr of gravity and height ofthe material upon the be a 1 design 0. These can ba calculated once the load area of material nas been c he formulas presented are reproduced from the work of Powell (1998). An teratve anproach is used to calculate the centre of ‘and material height for troughed belts (two and 9¢ Idlers) -quation 3.11 is firstly minimized: Equation 3.11 Flix) = 8x3 + 4xyb 10 obtain Equation 3.12 F'%) = 9x + dbwe 31d to find the final value of the height of material on the belt (x): Equation 3.13 is then ite Equation 3.13 ‘ | F%) F(x) ‘The centre of gravity for fat belts can be calculated by solving Equation 3.15 + cosh (0.89b - C,)? | (0.446b - C,) = warn sind (046 for vs < 3.5 ms" and C3 = 0.096 for v, > 3.5 ms". Roberts (200 a method to calculate height of material upon the belt prior to discharge with the theory follows. Referting to Figure 3.4, assuming a thrae-idler system and parabolic surcharge profil the load cros is glven by Equation 3.16 Ar = Aec + bac where Aac is a non-dimensional cr .ctional area factor and Lec Is the contact perimeter found trom: Equation 3.17 Lac = be + 2le 134) CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROLFigure 3.4 - Cross-section of troughed belt factor can The cross-sectional be found from Equation 3.18 ff rt tand Asc = ———s sin By + — sin 28, + (1+ 2ry 2 6 [1+4r cos p, + 27? (1 +e08 za Where Equation 3.19 The height of the material prior to discharge is approximated from: Equation 3.20 Ar “Lak hy ce the material height prior to discharge is calculated, the disc calculated, Each prediction method shall now be reviews and trajectory can be 53 MATERIAL TRAJECTORY PREDICTIONS 3.2.3 Method of Korzen ‘The method of Korzen (1989) provides the most thorough and detailed analytical method of al the choices available in literature. The method is particularly useful for materials possessing higt ‘amounts of adhesion as itis the only model available that uses the concept of adhesion and inertiz of the material on the belt and allowance is made for the variation in static and kinematic friction. Using Equation 3.2 and replacing the discharge angle oty with the bett inclination angle it can be determin ‘whether the slow-speed belt condition has been met. When this s the case the angle at which the material slips a, on the belt as it begins to wrap. the discharge pulley can be found from Equation 3.21 7 ve 20, a, = tan“ p, + sin | sin (tan p.,) - - Rog yhy The positive or negative signs depend upon the belt inciination. A ‘+ is used for descending belts and a ~' fo an ascending belt. A value for the static friction coefficient can be estimated from (Arnold & Hill 19916}: Equation 3.22 Ka, tand,, b (o,+ 04) The normal stress 0; can be found by approximating conditions on the belt with a hydrostatic (Arnold & Hill 19910) Equation 3.23 oy = pah, ‘The separation angle and aischarge velo Equation 3.24 2R.g 2 (y) = Com + VE Com ene 4pr -1 foey -B ws] 36.) CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROL———eEE—aeee— = ‘The integration constant G can be found by substituting the inital conditions into Equation 8.24 which are: Equation 3.25 > vib) =v Once a value forC has been obtained from substituting the iia conditions, and expression forthe di velocity via.) = vy can be ptained from Equation 3.24 and is given by: Equation 3.26 Ve Reg cos ay ‘The method measures discharge velocity from haif the material stream height, which is not as accurate as other methods such as that detailed in the CEMA (1997) hand to calculate material stream height and cross sectional area but require urate, One drawback is that it does not include sition effects, provides formulas e rass fk ion 3.26 gives the velocity of the material stream centre line, whi upper and lower material stream limits at high speed-concitions, y given in Eq To celculato the intial velootes used forthe upper and! lower trsjectries at slow-speed conditions, Korzen provides Equation 3.27 and Equation 8.28 forthe upper an over Its respectively Equation 3.27 Equation 3.28 Rth, v v R Nesom M8 EO Ghy simmer M8" ROB, Korzen provides an extensive analvss on ar cag effects in his work if air drag is 8 factor. The eect of drag are included in his theory to he! approximation method is used to solve the expr particle solid density, equivalent diameter, correc drag coefficient as well as properties of the atmosphe air drag can then be obtained using this information clory after the material has lett the belt, A multi-step eloped by Korzen for air drag. Properties includ jon factors allowing for the effect of grain shape on the air ir must be obtained. A value for the coefficient of3 MATERIAL TRA\ CTORY PREDICTIONS 3.2.4 Method of Booth ‘The method of Booth (1934) is essentially a combined analytical-graphical approach. The method provides a chart from which the angle of material discharge can be found, though it doesn't provide calculations to determine material height at discharge point. Booth proposed taking material slippage into consideration but the technique does not take into account the inertia of the particle or any adhesion the particles may have with the belt. For fast belts, a more traditional approac! used that concentrates only on belt velocity. The conditions for slow-speed belts are met when Equation 3,29 holds: Equation 3.29 ve < cos Ro hen ths is the case, the angle at which the material begins to slip on the belt ap around he dischar y can be found from: Equation 3:30 : v sin 0, cos a, - — oR, Bs which simplifies to Equation 3.31 a,=tan neti’ [ancora -[ vi \| Reg without the adhesion term ically the same as Equation Equation 3.31 is measured from the centre ofthe discharge pulley 10 the top surface ofthe ett n Equation332 ; v* 2p. - 1) cos -3p sin (W) (2k = Neos-3n sin | corns 2aR, (4uc +1) 38 > CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROL—————————_—____—_—_—_—________ ‘quation 3.32 which are: The integration constant C can be found by substituting the intial conditions into Ec Equation 3.33, > vib) ined by sim An expression for the discharge vel ‘and separation angle ot. can be obt uation 3.32 and Equation 3.24 Ve= J COS Oy Booth only illustrates how to plot the inner edge of the material stream. The method doesn't analy’ the method to plot the o ure whicl con designing chutes for afficioney and 0 tiveness, Also, the character pattern are not mentioned ie. whether it exp. ong its fight path, it remains parallel, or contra solving Equation 3.34 of the material strearn 3.2.5 Method of Golka Golka (1993a) attempted to simplify discharge trajectories by presenting formulas in Cartesian equation format for varying belt discharge velocity scenarios. His method however only used the concept of centripetal acceleration. It defines a critical speed as: Equation 3.35, Ve GR cos.ay jure to caloulate the height of material at the discharge point for fast conditions. For slow-speed conditions formulas are provided for the material height based on continuity fiow relationship, but stil require the original material height for it to work. Golka also introduced ‘diverg coefficients’ sent the influence of air resistance, size distribution, permeability, particle segregation, the effect of the wind in an open area, and other factors on the theoretical path of the material trajec though no mention is made of how to obtain the coefficiant values, Golka’s method doesn't provide a prox Fr3.2.6 Method of Dunlop The method of Dunlop (1982) is essentially a graphical approach that is straightforward to implement, and parallels the analytical method by Booth (1934); hence the results are very similar to Booth’s method. The concept of friction acting between the material and the belt is used. Despite the Dunlop calculations to nto width, mat it, material adhesion characteristics, @ distances. Also, the method is limited to pulleys ec 0 traditional a is used that concent ique, The Dunlop method only iustrates how to plot the Inner edge of the material ly provide the method to plot the outer edge of the material stream. The manual 1 size, and wind currents influence the trajectory, but no calculations or characteristics of the tern a mioned it remains parallel, or con ple drawings impl terial stream i, although the & 3.2.7 Method of Goodyear The Goodyear (1976) manual only uses the concept of centripetal acceleration in its analysis. Condition given in Equation 3.96 holds, high-speed concitions result, otherwise slow-speed is Equation 3.36 : va > cos a, oR. For slow-speed conailions, the lefthand hod of Goodye: \d doesn't cons! provides the trajectory of the material at one Equation 3.26 is set to a doesn't provide calculations jor the effects of material interactior lf load depth. to the cosine of ato determine determine material ioad height at with the belt. The thod on 3.2.8 Method of MHEA (Early Version) The first MHEA (1986) guide fundamentally uses a graphical approach. Tables are provided for the most common arrangements of belt width, trough angle, and material surcharge angle, to obtain the distance from the centre of mass to the pulley centre line. Tables are also provided to determine the angle factor, tension factor and specific modulus and the corresponding formula to caloulate the transition distance.=e —_-""n nn ns = _ _=E ‘material interaction with the belt. Only the concept of cen The method does not consider the effect al It the term on the lettin Equation 3.37 below is greater than 1, high-speed acceleration is used in the analy sonditions result, otherwise slow-speed conditions result and the wrap angle Ota mu Equation 3.37 ve 08 04 aR. Ilustrates how to plot both the inner and outer edges of the material siream. The angle at whic .ctory begins can be calculated from Equation 3.38 Ri R 3.2.9 Method of CEMA The CEMA (1997) guide describes an approach that is essentially the same as that of the first MHEA (1986) guide, It addresses five aspects when examining material discharge: centre of mass, velocities, start of trajectory, load shape, and separation angle, Almost all standard combinations of belt width, troughing idlers and bulk material characteristics are accounted for. Tables are provided to calculate the load height and centre of gravity of the material. Formulas are also provided to calculate the distance from the pulley to material siream centre of mass. Using this distance and the pulley rotational speed the tangential velocity is calculated. nal forces between | rather it only nthe belt, namely fic hesive properties of the mater The technique does not consider the effect the material and belt, inertia effects ofthe material on the bot, and 2 Equation 3.39 ve 08 14 oR, The guide suggests that the plot of the material trajactory yields a parallel path for the upper and lower futty, oF di ;ged from a very high-speed be! tly ry mits, though if the material divergent path will result| 3 MATERIAL TRAJECTORY PREDICTIONS 3.2.10 Method of MHEA (Updated Version) “Tho second MHEA (1989) guide provides atable to calculate the material load height at the discharge pulley. Discussions are provided on adjustments for material discharge, namely pulley height and bolt sag, and belt edge materials. Tables are provided for determining approximate values for the critical velocity and discharge angles. Charts are also provided for determining the critical velocity and discharge angle for slow-speed belts. The pulley rotational equal to the belt «is used to caloulate the load stream velocity thi Jocity. The fast or slow-speed belt condition is determin assumed to be approximately yy comparison to a critical 1s are deemed velocity v, shown as Equation 3.40. Ifthe v. then the conweying conc high-speed, otherwise they are considered slow-speed. Equation 3.40 ve = _[/oR. 008 a For low-speed bets the sighly mocfed formula shown by Equation 8.41 is proposed to account for particle sparture point, The method does not consider the effec of centripetal acceleration is used as its basis. velocity Increases under gravity and lifting n of material interaction with the belt, and the co Equation 9.41 COS 4 The MH.E.A guide provides a rot analytically provide the method to plot the outer edge of the mater calculated from: 110 incorporate the effects of lumps in the trajectory piet though does tream, Tho dis Equation 3.42, Vp COS ay Ve cos ay CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PIY LTD ? MATERIAL FLOW CONTROLi... . . 3.2.11 Method of BTR ‘The method outlined in the BTR (n.c.) Conveyor Belt Manual combines a theoretical and graphical method similar to many of the techniques discussed. For this method, high-speed conditions occur when Equation 3.43 is satisfied Equation 3.43 2 Yo >1 GR, cos 0, below Is less than 4, th to some extent. This If the factor on the left side of the Equation where the material wraps around the pull speed condition exists n be calculated Equation 3.44 Only a method to plot the underside of the trajectory path is shown. 3.2.12 Method of 8F Goodrich The BF Goodrich (n.c.) Engineering Handbook describes an identical method to the BTR (n.d.) Conveyor Belt Manual for determining discharge characteristics and also plotting the trajectory. 3.2.13. Method of S-A 66 ‘The S-A 66 (n.d.) Catalogue uses a combined theoretical and graphical technique where the high and slow-speed conditions are only determined by the speed of the belt. For all conditions the material stream is assumed to have a trajectory at the point of tangency between the belt and the head pulley. A high-speed condition results if the theoretical stream does not intersect the pulley as itis plotted away from the point of trajectory. Slow-speed condition results when the theoretical trajectory cuts into the belt and it is assumod that the material wraps around the head pulley for a distance. To find the point at which the theoretical trajectory will leave the belt, a line must be drawn from the pulley centre through the point on the current trajectory closest to the pulley centre. The point at which this line crosses the top of the belt is the point of trajectory. Also, the method assumes that the maximum point of trajectory occurs at 45 degrees from the vertical from the centre of the pulley which the author's experience has shown to be incorrect. This technique only discusses plotting the underside of the material stream. 2a3.3 Discharge and Trajectory Prediction Technique Comparisons Most of the methods described above have been developed primarily for industrial use, hence the lack of analytical complexity. The authors’ experience has shown the more theory intensive techniques has been neglected as they have been considered too time consuming to implement. Comparisons between the discharge and trajectory prediction methods described above shall now be presented for random sets of parameters. As certain derivations have been experimentally validated, these will be used as a reference point in determining the ideal design method. Air entrainment issues will not be examined, as the area is complex in nature and can embody an individual piece of research in itself, and itis also not a factor for relatively small drop heights when using coarse bulk material. 3.3.1 Overview of Trajectory Design Methods Before proceeding, a quick recap. The most comprehensive technique available in the literature was that described by Korzen (1989), which was the oniy mo lable that used the concept of achesion and inertia of the mate lowance was made for the variation in static and kinematic friction. Booth (1934) included the ef ,gen the particle and the belt, b include adhesive effects in the analysis, These two techniques reauire iterative procedures to obtain resuts. Similar to Booth, Dunlop (1982) used the concept of friction acting betweon the material and the belt. The work of Golka (1993), Goodyear (1976), the CEMA (1997) and two MHEA (1988, 1989) guides, and the BTR (n.d), Goodtich (n.d) and $-A 66 (n.d) all essentially only use the concept of centripetal acceleration in their work, however these ate relatively straightforward to implement and use, hence their popularity in industry. If friction andlor adhesive effects are prominent between the material and convayor belt they will have an influence on the discharge process and associated trajectory, so the method to use must be carefully chosen. The discharge angle, or separation angle of the material stream with the belt (a) can be determined in a number of ways, as outlined for each method from Section 3.2.3 to Section 3.2.19 above, and is plotted in Figure 3.5 for a range of belt velocities. There is a difference of up to 27 degrees at the very slow belt velocities between the methods of Booth and Dunlop compared-to those of Golka, MHEA (1986), Goodyear ‘and CEMA, with a greater difference if Korzen’s method is considered. There is a difference of up to 1 degrees if the comprehensive work of Korzen, Booth and Dunlop is compared to the second MHEA (1983) ‘Quide which uses a moditied discharge formula. The differences will shortly be highlighted with a comparison for high and slow-speed conveying conditions between these major published prediction methods, however a few brief comments must be made. At frst glance it would seem that the methods of Korzen, Booth and Dunlop are superior to those of Golka (1993a), Goodyear (1976), the CEMA (1997) and two MHEA (1986, 1989) guides, and the manuals of BTR (0.4), BF Goodrich (n.d) and 8-A 66 (n.d). Some of these techniques however, such as the CEMA and MHEA guides have superior elements in their derivations of the discharge pro« ed to Korzen, Booth or Dunlop. These include material centre of mass calculations and determination of the cross-sectional area of the material strear 1 ate derived from the conveyor geometry rather than the conveying mat properties and was explored in Section 3.2.2 above. whi Arnold & Hil (1989, 1990a, 1990b, 19912, 19916, 1991c) and Amold (1993) also made comparisons and recomm- endations regarding a number of the methods described here. However many of the techniques described here such as Golka (1993a), Goodyear (1976), BTR (n.d), BF Goodrich (n.c) and S-A 66 (p.c,) were not featured, and the actual specifics of the comparisons (e.g. type of software used, experimental data to plot relevant figures) Were not sufficiently detaled. The next few sections will describe the comparisons made between trajectory prediction methods. Ag.) CONVEYOR TRANSFER DESIGN PTY LTD. > MATERIAL FLOW CONTROL