CONVEYORS

Transfer chute design: a logical approach

As conveyor systems become bigger and faster and the material being conveyed becomes more diverse and complex it has been necessary to develop much better transfer chutes. The design process most probably started, or at least gained momentum, with the development in the late 1980s of what is generally termed the hood and spoon chute for the coal industry.
By Colin Benjamin, Gulf Conveyor Systems At many sites transfers represent the major problems from creating high maintenance burdens through to unreliable production due to unscheduled downtime and the need for larger maintenance windows. Typical transfer related problems are: Dust. Spillage around the transfer. Poor belt tracking. Belt wear along the skirt lines. Ripped belt through material jammed in chute. Blockage. Holes in chute. Rapid liner wear. Given these issues, it is the divergence from what is a practical approach to design towards the more theoretical that forms the basis of what we want to highlight in this paper. The answer is not one or the other but a convergence of both to ensure we design better transfers. In order for this to be done the first thing we need to recognise is that determining the flow characteristics of ores and in particular complex ores is a completely unproven science. What this means is that many of the DEM programs available may approximate the flow of free flowing material such as coal but have virtually no accuracy or relevance when it comes to more complex materials. Newer DEM programs are getting better but as they get better the complexity of the calibration and evaluation process creates further issues in terms of the skills and computing power required to do such work. It is for this reason we wrote the book The Transfer Chute Design Manual (www.conveyorsystemstechnology.com), in which we set out to guide the average engineer through a design process for transfer chutes. The essence of this process is as follows: Initial due diligence. Calculating the trajectory. Managing the flow. Controlling the speed. Presentation of the material. Checking the design.

Hood and spoon chute.

hese transfers remain very popular today in the coal industry where there is free flowing material and abrasion is not a serious issue. This design concept was based on fluid flow and as such relied on the predictability of how ores would flow in order to create a design that performed. The need for predictability in this type of transfer encouraged designers and researchers to review and look at more accurate methods of calculating the various flow parameters required to do such designs starting with the ore flow trajectory off the head pulley. It is also in this area that design and flow dynamic development started to diverge with, on one hand experienced designers working through the practical, and researchers and others developing more theoretical approaches. The experienced transfer chute designers were working on incremental developments and refinements, new ideas such as the WEBA chute and through reverse engineering and scale modelling better design tools. Researchers and others focussed more on developing software models that could be used to evaluate designs before they were built so that a form of reverse engineering could be done on a computer screen in order to develop a viable design. This software has been termed discrete element method (DEM) which, through papers and various forums, has been heavily promoted to the new transfer chute designer as the way of the future. Despite this work both by experienced designers and researchers, transfer chute design has not been adequate in many areas, particularly when we are handling: Run of mine material where the ore sizes can range from 250mm or more down to micro fine material (less than 200 micron). Highly abrasive materials. Cohesive or adhesive ores particularly ores whose characteristics vary significantly with water content. Micro fine material that will easily dust such as alumina. Clays of any type.
Australian Bulk Handling Review: September/October 2011

Initial due diligence

1. Material characteristics
The first thing many designers do is contract to have some form of material evaluation done. In many cases this starts with a shear cell test (usually based on Jenike and Johanssons work). In welldesigned transfers this is not relevant data (it is for hoppers and silos) so it should only be used as a guide and then only if you have data from a wide range of previous such evaluations that can help you categorise the ore. The best approach is to do your own evaluation. Simple avalanching tests to ascertain at what angle the ore can be piled up without it flowing, looking at the effects moisture has on the flow properties, looking at the size range etc. A table follows that can act as a guide. Note well there are a large number of different transfer types and part of the designers task is selecting the right type for the application.

88

CONVEYORS

Material characteristic Fine, dry material likely to cause dust.

Design considerations Such material will easily aerate so it will add bulk through the transfer if this is not considered in the design. This material will usually stick and build up when wet. To avoid this make sure the material velocity through the transfer is maintained.

Transfer chute options Hood and spoon and spiral chutes work well. See the section on dust transfers. With other types of chutes aeration can be a factor. Flow control is the key. Hood and spoon chutes work well as can simple deflectors. Cascade chutes may require additional height and reliance on some lump material to keep such fines from building up. Chutes that do not control the flow should not be used. The best starting point is a hood and spoon chute.

Bulk Solids Handling Research Associates

World Leaders with Over 30 Years
Experience in Bulk Solids Handling Research and Consulting

TUNRA

Fine material that can absorb water.

Clay material, highly cohesive.

Very difficult to manage. Must keep material speed high. Could consider maintaining a wetted surface on the key transfer elements. Chute maintenance is the key as site will modify any design that does not manage this issue.

Highly abrasive material.

The key is designing a chute that promotes ore on ore flow. Cascade chute and rock boxes incorporate that in their design concept so they are the starting points. The starting point is a cascade chute. You need height. Could be a combination chute. Best solution at low speeds is the autogenous rock box. At very low belt to belt heights a bash plate could be looked at. If the belt speed is greater than 2.5m/s then first look at modifying the rock box so that it can handle the material volume otherwise some form of cascade chute with much larger ledges should be looked at.

RESEARCH AND CONSULTING CAPABILITIES...

Materials Testing
Flow Properties Testing Dust (Environmental) Testing Abrasive Wear, Erosion & Attrition Conveyor Belt Testing Idler Roll Testing Pneumatic Conveying Hydraulic Conveying

Combination highly abrasive and wet fines.

Not only chute maintenance is a factor but chute blocking due to build up. Energy absorption is the key. Hopefully the belt speed is low. If not there is a serious management problem.

Very large lumps.

Conveying Materials Handling Equipment Consultancy

Bin Design, Wall Loads & Flow Patterns Stockpile Draw-Down Geometries Stockpile Live Capacity Estimates Belt Conveying Design Reviews and Audits Conveyor Motion Resistance Calculations Feeder Performance and Load Calculations Pneumatic Conveying Scale Modelling Transfer Chute Conceptual Designs Wear & Flow Design Optimisations Hydraulic Conveying Instrumentation Fatigue Testing General Materials Handling Design Audits Site Visits Professional Development Courses

2. Belt speeds
In combination with the above we need to consider the material volumes we need to handle and weigh this up against the capital cost. In the past if we were handling large abrasive materials we made sure that the conveyor speeds were very slow. This is not happening today, in most cases the choice is being made independent of the material characteristics. The consequence is that wear and impact damage become very significant operating factors that maintenance must manage. Tests on some iron ores have shown that wear on a substrate (liner material) can be accelerated by a factor of four by doubling the material speed through the transfer.

Contact us at...

www.bulksolids.com.au
or call

+61 2 4033 9055

Australian Bulk Handling Review: September/October 2011

89

CONVEYORS

3. Differential stopping times between belts

If you have an inclined belt immediately after a flat belt then in an emergency stop situation the inclined belt will stop a lot quicker than the flat belt. This has to be managed. It may be possible to solve the problem through incorporating some sort of delay in the PLC logic, it may for safety reasons require brakes. What cannot be ignored is that if the issue is not addressed at the design stage we have the capacity to bury a belt at the transfer point.

then the trajectory will be lower), belt angles of inclination (inclusive of the transition angle), if there are ore variations (e.g. wetter ores) then the trajectory will vary.

4. Drop heights between belts

If you are handling large material sizes or highly abrasive material the starting point is minimising the drop height. If the transfer angle is oblique there are minimum height differentials needed to create the change of angles and this varies with the type of transfer selected. If you are handling cohesive materials you may need more height so that the material is kept moving through the transfer.

Observing trajectory.

5. Samplers, trippers, bifurcated chutes

Generally all these situations demand more height between the belts.

Calculating the trajectory

The key to modern transfer chute design is calculating the trajectory of the ore flow off the head pulley of the delivery belt. The researchers in this area have published many papers. The topic is also too complex and detailed to go through in the time we have therefore we will summarise a few points. If you can access conveyors carrying similar material at similar speeds you can get a pretty good idea of the trajectory by observation. Just remember if you use this approach you must make allowance for the flow rate (if the belt is only 50% full

It is better to overestimate the top flow trajectory by a small amount than underestimate it at all. Be conservative as this wont affect your transfer design, the converse can lead to disasters. It is better to overestimate the bottom end trajectory than to under estimate it otherwise you will not be handling the wet and more cohesive particles in a manner that avoids build up. Remember that as the ore flows along a conveyor belt the fines and water laden material separate for the larger lumps such that the top flow of a trajectory will be the larger, abrasive material, the bottom flow the wetter, more cohesive material. This separation occurs with all sizes of materials where there is differential size so the effect can be seen with minus 6mm ores just as easily with minus 300mm material. Failure to recognise this and allow for it can result in a very poor transfer outcome. See above.

Tailored Solutions
Whether its a micron, a metre, or any size in between, we can help you separate it. At iBulk we deliver separation solutions that are designed, built and commissioned to meet the specic requirements of each project. We take the time to understand the intricacies of each job and provide a shortlist of alternatives, before heading into the test lab to research the nal selection. Our design team puts together a 3D Model of the actual piece of equipment, ensuring it will integrate seamlessly into your current production line. Then we manufacture it. In a nutshell, Tailored Solutions.

Fine

Ultra Fine

How do we do it? We listen.

Feeding Screening Conveying Processing

Check out our NEW website!

NCAIB/018

ROM/Aggregate

Coarse/Medium

www.ibulk.com.au

VIC / NSW: (03) 9768 3955 SA / WA / NT: (08) 8339 7160 QLD: (07) 3823 4405 NZ: 04 387 7009

CONVEYORS

Failure to allow for separation of materials with differential size can result in very poor transfer outcomes.

A typical case where presentation was ignored.

Managing the flow

The next key step is to manage the material flow through the chute. Simply, if you do not control the flow, your design outcome is questionable. The key to flow control is intercepting the material trajectory at shallow angles. This angle varies with transfer types but a good rule of thumb is 20 degrees or less. The second important aspect is to make sure you intercept all of the flow, not just part of it. This is where the bottom half of your trajectory calculation comes in.

Skirt maintenance issues poor presentations leads to high skirt maintenance and spillage that no amount of skirt design will address. Photo above shows a typical case where presentation was ignored.

Checking the design

There are two generally accepted methods: using a computer based method (DEM) and the far less popular dynamic scale modelling. Without going into detail we: Rarely do any evaluation when we are designing transfer for free flowing materials as the science is pretty sound and the experience levels high as far as what creates a successful transfer. If we are looking at a difficult transfer design, or one where we are handling difficult material, we will always use dynamic scale modelling as we believe it is more accurate and the science far better developed at this stage when compared to DEM. We always go back to look at the results of any transfer we work on as this is the best way to grow our knowledge and refine our techniques. As we have been doing this for a very long time, we believe we are able to achieve pretty good and very predictable outcomes even in the most challenging of situations. We remain very interested in DEM both for the ongoing research that occasionally creates additional insight and because eventually it will catch up. We do however caution any engineer about using some of the commercial programmes that are freely available. Concluding, there is a way forward for us to design far better transfers. It is not about complicating life but following basic steps, being aware of what is best practice, picking the right transfer for the challenge and not looking for miracles.

Controlling the material speed

High material speed means higher wear; with iron ore, for instance, the wear rate factor is four times the speed increase. If the material speed is too low, cohesive materials may build up and block the transfer. The key therefore is understanding the materials you are dealing with, knowing the more cohesive fines will be at the bottom of the trajectory and creating a design that is best fit for the issues you are facing.

Presentation of the material onto the receiving belt

If you do not present the ore to the receiving belt centrally and correctly you can end up with: Severe spillage This can be extremely serious in the case of reverse loading, i.e. where the receiving belt is inclined and the transfer drops the ore vertically down. Excessive belt wear This occurs if the belt has to reaccelerate the ore flow. Belt tracking issues This occurs if the ore presents off centre or with some lateral flow. Increased power consumption all the above translates to wasted energy, i.e. excess power consumption that in extreme cases can see belts bog out for no easily apparent reason. Belt damage you do not load correctly then there is a real risk of damaging the belt catastrophically.

Contact: Colin Benjamin, email cbe10699@bigpond.net.au

Australian Bulk Handling Review: September/October 2011

91