Chapter 17

Case studies
Part II: Coarse material

17.1 Introduction
For this case study a material has been chosen that has no natural dense phase convey-
ing capability and so can only be conveyed in dilute phase suspension flow in a conven-
tional pneumatic conveying system. The magnesium sulphate had a mean particle size of
about 225 m and so de-aerated very rapidly. The bulk density of the material was about
1010 kg/m3 and the particle density 2350 kg/m3. As with dense phase conveying, the min-
imum conveying air velocity for a material is a critical design parameter, but unlike dense
phase conveying there is no significant change in its value with solids loading ratio.
Data on the pneumatic conveying of magnesium sulphate was presented in Chapter 12.
The material was conveyed through pipeline no. 6 (Figure 12.24) and the conveying
characteristics were presented in Figure 12.23d. It was reported (Section 12.2.6.4) that
the minimum conveying air velocity for the material was about 14 m/s. Tests were car-
ried out with conveying line pressure drop values up to 1.8 bar and the maximum value
of solids loading ratio that could be achieved was about 10.

17.1.1 Dilute phase conveying of magnesium sulphate

To illustrate the scaling process for system design with regard to dilute phase conveying,
the magnesium sulphate is used. Once again just a single point is selected for scaling
but the entire conveying characteristics can be scaled if required.

17.2 Conveying data

A sketch of the test pipeline used for this case study is given in Figure 17.1. It is almost
identical to pipeline no. 6 reported above but the bore of the pipeline was 105 mm
instead of 81 mm.
The pipeline was 95 m long and almost entirely in the horizontal plane. The pipeline
incorporated nine 90° bends and they all had a D/d ratio of 12:1. The pipeline was fed by
a high pressure top discharge blow tank. Conveying characteristics for the magnesium
sulphate conveyed through this pipeline are presented in Figure 17.2.
396 PNEUMATIC CONVEYING DESIGN GUIDE

Pipeline details
Length
95 m
Bore
105 mm
Bends
9  90°
D/d
12

Figure 17.1 Sketch of pipeline no. 15.

Conveying line Limit of Solids

9 pressure drop (bar) conveying loading ratio

8
6
Material mass flow rate (tonne/h)

1.0 5
7
No go area
6 0.8 a 4
5.65 b
5
3
0.6
4

3 2
0.4
2
1
1 0.2
0.33
0
0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40
Air mass flow rate (kg/s)

Figure 17.2 Conveying characteristics for magnesium sulphate in pipeline no. 15.

17.2.1 Conveying duty

It is suggested that a design should be considered for the conveying of the magnesium
sulphate over a horizontal distance of 300 m at a rate of 15 tonne/h and that a positive
displacement blower having a 1 bar gauge delivery pressure capability should be used. It
is proposed that the design should be based on a conveying line pressure drop of 0.85 bar.
The pipeline routing has a total vertical lift of 25 m and incorporates seven 90° bends.
 CASE STUDIES 397

24

Equivalent length of bends (m) 20

16

12

0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Conveying line inlet air velocity (m/s)

Figure 17.3 Equivalent length of bends.

17.2.2 Conveying capability

In dilute phase conveying the pipeline bends can play a very significant role and so data
on the equivalent length of bends from Figure 14.16, and used in the previous case study,
is also required here. It is reproduced in Figure 17.3 for reference. The minimum con-
veying air velocity for the magnesium sulphate in pipeline no. 15 was also 14 m/s. The
conveying line inlet air velocity will be based on a velocity approximately 20 per cent
higher than this as generally recommended.

17.2.3 Summary
Design duty
Material Magnesium sulphate
Mean particle size 225 m
Bulk density b 1010 kg/m3
Particle density p 2350 kg/m3
Pipeline
Horizontal h 300 m
Vertical v 25 m
Bends b 7  90°
Capability
.
Material flow rate mp 40 tonne/h
Minimum air velocity Cmin 14 m/s
Air supply Blower
Delivery pressure p 1.0 bar gauge
Pipeline inlet pressure p1 0.85 bar gauge
Pipeline pressure drop p 0.85 bar
Pipeline inlet velocity C1 1.2  Cmin  17 m/s
398 PNEUMATIC CONVEYING DESIGN GUIDE

Determine
Pipeline bore d.
Free air delivered V0
Power required P

17.3 Procedure
The location of the equivalent operating point on the conveying characteristics for the
test pipeline needs to be established first, taking account of the pressure and air flow
rate requirements. Scaling is conveniently carried out in two stages. In the first stage
scaling is with respect to conveying distance, and this includes both pipeline orientation
and bends. In the second stage the scaling is with respect to pipeline bore. Air only
pressure drop values need to be established and so this procedure is also included.

17.3.1 Operating point

The operating point on the conveying characteristics for the test pipeline on Figure
17.2 must first be identified. Since the pressure drop line has been chosen as 0.85 bar
and the conveying line inlet air velocity has been determined as 17 m/s, the appropri-
ate air mass flow rate can be calculated. This can be determined from Equation (13.1),
reproduced here as Equation (17.1) for reference and use:

2.74 p1d 2C1

ṁa  kg/s (17.1)
T1

.
where ma is the air mass flow rate (kg/s); p1, the conveying line inlet air pressure
(185 kN/m2 abs); d, the pipeline bore (0.105 m); C1, the conveying line inlet air velocity
(17 m/s) and T1, the conveying line inlet air temperature (288 K (15°C)).
Substituting these values in Equation (17.1) gives
.
ma  0.330 kg/s

This operating point is located on Figure 17.2 as point (a) and it will be seen that it is
approximately 20 per cent in-board from the conveying limit.

17.3.2 Air only pressure drop values

The air only pressure drop for a pipeline, pa , can be determined using Equation
(10.14), reproduced here as Equation (17.2).

 0.5 
 1.34m˙ a2   bar
pa  1.0  4   1.0 (17.2)
 d  105  
 

where   (4fL)/d ∑k from Equation (10.11).

 CASE STUDIES 399

17.3.2.1 Test pipeline

Taking the pipeline friction factor, f, to be 0.0045, the length of the test pipeline, L, as
95 m, the pipeline bore, d, as 0.105 m, and the bend loss coefficient as 0.2 (Figure
10.6) for each of nine bends, gives:

4  0.0045  95
  (9  0.2)  18.1
0.105

Substituting this value, the air flow rate of 0.330 kg/s and the pipeline bore of 0.105 m
into Equation (17.2) gives:

pa  0.103 bar

From this it will be seen that the air only pressure drop is quite significant for dilute
phase flow. This value of pressure drop is automatically included in the conveying
characteristics in Figure 17.2. A constant pressure drop line of 0.103 bar, if included
on the plot, would strike the horizontal axis at an air flow rate of 0.330 kg/s. It also
means that at the operating point only 0.8500.103  0.747 bar is used for conveying
material. This value will decrease with increase in pipeline length.

17.3.2.2 Plant pipeline of 105 mm bore

The actual length of the plant pipeline is 325 m and it is this length that needs to be
used to evaluate the air only pressure drop for the plant pipeline having the same bore
as the test pipeline. Taking the pipeline friction factor, f, to be 0.0045, the length of the
plant pipeline, L, as 325 m, the pipeline bore, d, as 0.105 m and the bend loss coeffi-
cient as 0.2 (Figure 10.6) for each of seven bends, gives:

4  0.0045  325
  (7  0.2)  57.1
0.105

Substituting this value, the air flow rate of 0.330 kg/s and the pipeline bore of 0.105 m
into Equation (17.2) gives:

pa  0.298 bar

This represents an increase in air only pressure drop of 0.298  0.103  0.195 bar. This
means that instead of having 0.747 bar for conveying material, it is now reduced to
0.747  0.195  0.552 bar. This represents a 26 per cent reduction in available pressure
drop and so this will have a very significant effect on the material flow rate that can be
achieved. This is in addition to the reduction as a consequence of scaling to a longer
pipeline.
To achieve the 15 tonne/h in the plant pipeline, however, a much larger bore pipeline
will be required and this will improve the situation considerably. When the conveying
characteristics are scaled in total these features can be seen, as with Figures 14.1, 14.4
400 PNEUMATIC CONVEYING DESIGN GUIDE

and 14.5. When only a single point is used the intermediate stage of the data scaled to
the plant pipeline, of the test pipeline bore, is not available. This means that a value for
the plant pipeline bore needs to be selected at this point. If the value chosen does not
meet the required duty the calculation will have to return to this point with an updated
value. For 15 tonne/h a bore of 250 mm will be selected.

17.3.2.3 Plant pipeline of 250 mm bore

Taking the pipeline friction factor, f, to be 0.0045, the length of the plant pipeline, L, as
325 m, the pipeline bore, d, as 0.250 m and the bend loss coefficient as 0.2 (Figure 10.6)
for each of seven bends, gives:

4  0.0045  325
  (7  0.2)  24.8
0.25

For the larger bore of pipeline a new air flow rate will be required. This can either be
determined by using Equation (17.1), as for the test pipeline, or scaling the 0.330 kg/s
for the test pipeline in proportion to the larger pipe section area. Either way the new air
flow rate will come to 1.87 kg/s.
Substituting the new value for , the new air flow rate of 1.87 kg/s and the pipeline
bore of 0.250 m into Equation (17.2) gives:

pa  0.139 bar

The original operating point on the material conveying characteristics on Figure 17.2
was set at a pressure drop of 0.85 bar (point a). For the plant pipeline the air only pres-
sure drop is 0.139 bar whereas for the test pipeline it is 0.103 bar, which represents an
increase of 0.036 bar. The operating point on Figure 17.2 therefore needs to be reduced
by this amount for scaling purposes, to take account of the difference in air only pressure
drop values. The new operating point (b) is therefore at a pressure drop of 0.814 bar.

17.3.3 Equivalent lengths

The equivalent length of a pipeline for the conveying of material takes the length of hori-
zontal pipeline as the reference value. To this is added an equivalent length of straight
horizontal pipeline, both for the vertically up sections of pipeline and for the bends in the
pipeline. These two elements were considered in Chapter 14 on ‘Pipeline scaling param-
eters’. This procedure was considered at this point in the previous case study and an
expression for the equivalent length, Le, of a pipeline was given with Equation (16.3).
This is reproduced here as Equation (17.3) for use in this case study:

Le  h  2v  Nb m (17.3)

where h is the total length of horizontal sections of pipeline; v, the total length of verti-
cally up sections of pipeline; N, the total number of bends in pipeline and b, the equiva-
lent length of each bend.
 CASE STUDIES 401

17.3.3.1 Test pipeline

A sketch of the test pipeline is given in Figure 17.1 and from this it will be seen that
the equivalent length of the test pipeline, Le1, is:

Le1  95  (2  0)  (9  20)  275 m

There is no significant vertical lift and there are nine bends in the test pipeline. With a
conveying line inlet air velocity of 17 m/s the equivalent length of the bends, from
Figure 17.3, is about 20 m each. It will be seen from this that the bends can have a dom-
inating effect in dilute phase conveying systems.

17.3.3.2 Plant pipeline

The equivalent length of the plant pipeline, Le2, with 300 m of horizontal pipeline, 25 m
of vertical pipeline and seven 90° bends is:

Le2  300  (2  25)  (7  20)  490 m

17.3.4 Scaling
The data for the test pipeline can now be scaled to that for the plant pipeline. The first
stage is in terms of equivalent length and the second in terms of pipeline bore.

17.3.4.1 Scaling for length

The scaling model for pipeline length is given in Equation (14.4) and is reproduced
here in Equation (17.4):
Le1 275
m˙ p2  m˙ p1  5.65   3.17 tonne/h (17.4)
Le2 490

The two equivalent lengths were determined immediately above, and the material flow
rate for the test pipeline of 5.65 tonne/h was obtained from the revised operating point
on Figure 17.2; 3.17 tonne/h is the material flow rate that would be expected, for the
same conveying line pressure drop and air flow rate, if the pipeline had the same bore as
the test pipeline.

17.3.4.2 Scaling for bore

A scaling model for pipeline bore is given in Equation (14.8). This is reproduced here as
Equation (17.5) for application in this case:
2
d 
m˙ p2  m˙ p1   2  (17.5)
 d1 
402 PNEUMATIC CONVEYING DESIGN GUIDE

It is the 3.17 tonne/h that needs to be scaled here and substituting data into this equa-
tion gives:

2
 250 
 3.17     18.0 tonne/h
 105 

This is greater than the 15 tonne/h required, but significantly less than 15 tonne/h would
be achieved with a smaller 200 mm bore pipeline. A pressure greater than 1.0 bar would
be needed if it was required to use a 200 mm bore pipeline, but then it would not be pos-
sible to use a positive displacement blower.
With a conveying line inlet air pressure of 0.85 bar gauge the case for stepping the
pipeline to a larger bore is marginal. Little improvement in conveying performance
would be achieved, but it would certainly help if there was a need to reduce erosive wear
of particle degradation.

17.3.5 Air requirements

An air supply pressure of 0.85 bar gauge was selected at the outset and so the free air
flow rate and an approximate value for the power supply are now required.

17.3.5.1 Air flow rate

The air flow rate will be evaluated for the 250 mm bore pipeline, assuming that the air
supply pressure will be about 0.85 bar gauge. The equations for evaluating air flow rate
were developed in Chapter 9. The design here is based on a conveying line inlet air veloc-
ity of 17 m/s and Equation (9.10), reproduced here as Equation (17.6) is appropriate:

d 2 p1C1 3 0.2502  185  17

V˙0  2.23 m /s  2.23   1.522 m 3 /s (17.6)
T1 288

This is the volumetric flow rate of the air at free air conditions, which are the reference
conditions required for the specification of a compressor.

17.3.5.2 Power required

An approximate value for the compressor drive power required was presented in Equation
(6.5) and this is reproduced here as Equation (17.7):

p   185 
P  203V˙0 ln 4  kW  203  1.522 ln   190 kW (17.7)
 p3   100 

17.3.5.3 Specific cost

Pneumatic conveying, and particularly dilute phase conveying, does require high energy
levels. The cost of transporting material, therefore, is often taken into account when
 CASE STUDIES 403

selecting a conveying system. With an estimated value for power required it is possible to
evaluate conveying costs.
If the unit cost of electricity is taken as €0.10/kW h the specific cost can be
evaluated as follows:

h 10c
Specific cost  190 kW    € 1.06 per tonne conveyed
18 tonne kW.h

17.3.5.4 Solids loading ratio

The solids loading ratio, , does not feature at all in these calculations. It is often
quoted for reference and so its value will be:

18
  2.7
3.6  1.87

As can be seen this is very dilute phase conveying, as expected, but is typical of low
pressure long distance conveying systems handling this type of material.