Low Rolling Resistance for Conveyor Belts

Goodyear Conveyor Belt Products

By David Gallagher Chief Engineer, Conveyor Belts The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Marysville, Ohio USA

Submitted to: International Rubber Conference Melbourne, Australia October, 2000

CONTENTS

TITLE: AUTHOR:

Low Rolling Resistance for Conveyor Belts David D. Gallagher Chief Engineer The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

1. INTRODUCTION TO ROLLING RESISTANCE 2. SMALL SCALE TESTING 3. CASE STUDY 1: OVERLAND COAL CONVEYOR 4. CASE STUDY 2: OVERLAND COPPER ORE CONVEYOR 5. CASE STUDY 3: REGENERATIVE CONVEYOR 6. CONCLUSIONS

1 6 8 17 20 22

1. INTRODUCTION TO ROLLING RESISTANCE

1.1 Background There has been significant technical progress in the transport of bulk materials in the last 10 years. Conveyors have always moved materials over uneven terrain, through mountain tunnels, and around horizontal curves, but today the next step to improved conveyor efficiency is the reduction of power required to operate these high performance systems. Just as some tires provide lower rolling resistance depending on their construction and compounds, a conveyor belt can also be designed to provide lower resistance as it rolls over the supporting idlers. Goodyears investigation into this work can be categorized into three areas: a. Theoretical Analysis b. Laboratory Testing c. Field Data Collection 1.2 Theoretical Analysis The sketch in figure 1 demonstrates the components of a typical conveyor system. The power required to operate a typical conveyor belt has been studied from a theoretical and dynamic test equipment approach by the University of Hannover[1]. They have categorized the frictional resistances into six major components. Indentation rolling resistance Bearing resistance of the idler Flexure of the belt Acceleration of the load onto the belt Flexing of the load between idlers Friction due to plows, scraper, and other devices

Material Loading

Loading chute

B C

A B C

Changing of belt profile

Sag between idlers

Figure 1 Typical conveyor According to this study, the indention of the pulley cover as it passes over the idler creates the largest loss in power for long horizontal belts. A better understanding of this mechanism can be made by looking closer at the idler as seen in figure 2.

Figure 2 Indention schematic The rubber passes through a hysteresis cycle that absorbs power. It has been estimated that on long center horizontal conveyors that the rolling resistance power loss due to the indention effect can reach 61% of the total system power[1].

Pulley Cover Indentation = 61%

18% 9%

1%

5%

6%

61% Bearing resistance of the idler Secondary resistances Extraordinary resistances

Indentation rolling resistance Flexure resistance of the belt Flexure resistance of bulk material

Figure 3 Long horizontal profiles Goodyear has conducted its own studies into this phenonomen from both a theoretical and practical approach to determine which parameters significantly contribute to the rubber hysteresis and which factors can be improved through system design and rubber compounding. 1.3 Goodyear Theoretical Analysis The theoretical analysis begins with a mathematical model developed by Goodyear Research Associates Dr. Alan Gent and Dr. William A. Arnold. An analysis to estimate energy losses due to indenting a belt cover layer by a roller as the belt passes over it can be done utilizing a simple model shown in figure 4. Several simplifying assumptions must be used in the approximate analysis. These assumptions are: (i) The cover compound is linearly-elastic, with Youngs modulus E. (ii) The indentation, d, of the belt is small compared to the cover layer thickness h. (iii) The contact length 2a is small compared to the roller diameter D and small, or at least not much greater than, the cover layer thickness h. (iv) Energy U loss per unit volume of rubber is proportional to the maximum energy W stored per unit volume. (v) The strain is constant along a plane transversing the thickness of the cover layer (line b in figure 4), i.e, uniform compression of the layer with no
2

(vi)

lateral displacements. The side of the belt opposite the side that contacts the roller is held fixed.

A relationship can be derived between the applied load and the compressive deflection of the cover layer. The mean deformation imposed on the rubber is 2d/3 and the loaded area is 2aw, where w is the belt width. The mean compressive stress t is thus given by:

b h d 2a

Figure 4 Mathematical model Figure 4 is a simple model used to analyze energy losses of a rubber belt passing over a roller.

t=

F 4 E 2d = 2aw 3 3h

(1)

where F is the vertical force acting on the roller, and 4E/3 is the effective compression modulus of a wide thin layer that is constrained from expanding along its width. Hence:

F 16 E ad = w 9 h
From simple geometrical considerations with D>>d, the contact half-width a is related to the indentation depth d by:

(2)

a 2 dD
Thus, the expected relation between applied load F and the indentation d is:
3

(3)

F 16 E d 3 / 2 D 1 / 2 = w 9 h
As the cover layer passes over the roller, energy W is stored in the rubber, per unit volume, given by:

(4)

4 E em W = 3 2
2

(5)

where em denotes the maximum compressive strain d/h. Solving for d in equation (4) gives:

F d = w

2/3

16 9

2 / 3

E 2 / 3 D 1 / 3 h 2 / 3

(6)

Using equations (5) and (6), the energy stored per unit volume is given by:

1 4 W= 2 3

5 / 3

1 / 3

F w

4/3

(hD) 2 / 3

(7)

If assume that a fraction (1 - R) of this energy is lost, where R is the resilience of the rubber compound. Thus, the energy lost per unit volume is:

U=

(1 R ) 4 2 3

5 / 3

F E 1 / 3 w

4/3

(hD) 2 / 3

(8)

In terms of the whole cover layer, the energy consumed in passing over the roller per unit width and per unit distance traveled is:

hU =

(1 R) 4 2 3

5 / 3

F E 1 / 3 w

4/3

h1 / 3 D 2 / 3

(9)

Although the relation in equation 9 is based on simple approximations, it is of the same general form as that given by Hager & Hintz [1], with reference to prior work by others.

1.4 FEA Model and Methods To test the accuracy of the approximate analytical work outlined in the previous section, a two-dimensional FEA model was prepared. A typical 2D mesh used in the analyses is shown in figure 5. The top of the belt was held fixed as depicted in figure 4. The model was made very long in comparison with the thickness so that the ends of the belt were unaffected by the indentation. The ends of the belt had to remain free to move for numerical reasons, i.e., the model was otherwise over-constrained. The spacial resolution on the meshes were 4213 nodes.

Figure 5.

Stress field perpendicular to the belt surface (S22 in figure 1) in a rubber belt indented by a solid roller

Typical values used in the models were 0.2 m long, h = 8 mm, D = 13.3 cm, with an applied load per unit width, F/w, of 5 kN/m. Linear elasticity was employed in the analyses using a typical value for rubber of E = 10 MPa. The modulus was varied about this value. Hyperelasticity was also used to test the validity of the assumption of linear elasticity used in the analytical analysis. Based on the theoretical analysis and FEA model, the following general conclusions have been drawn: 1. Reductions in load have a disproportionately large effect on energy consumption. 2. A larger idler diameter will also reduce the energy consumption. 3. Rubber thickness and modulus parameters have secondary effects on the energy. 4. Pulley cover resilience or hysteresis is the predominate factor in energy consumption. The system designer generally determines the belt width, speed, tonnage, and idler spacing with a keen eye on capital expenses. Therefore the only item that is solely under the belt manufacturers control is the pulley cover characteristics.

2. SMALL SCALE TESTING

2.1 Tan Delta Testing When making laboratory comparisons, Goodyear has used the tan delta test to screen rubber compounds for hysteresis. Tan delta is defined as the ratio of the rubber hysteresis to the elastic modulus or stated in another way as the delay between the stress applied and the resultant strain. A lower tan delta value is expected to provide lower rolling losses on a field conveyor and therefore less horsepower consumed. Tan delta results can be gathered from tension, compression, or shear methods (see figure 6).

Figure 6 Tan delta test models

At this time there are differences of opinion in the professional circles as to the best sample size and exact test procedure for predicting field results. Figure 7 demonstrates the relative tan delta values of several different SBR and natural rubber compounds. It is interesting to note the last curve which represents a pure natural rubber, which Goodyear believes would be the optimum resilient compound.

0.7 0.6 TAN DELTA 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -50 ` A B C D E OPTIMIZED

-75

-25

25

50

75

TEMPERATURE (DEG C)

Figure 7 Tan delta results at 10 Hz 2% strain

6

Unfortunately pure gum is not a practical option for conveyor belt covers since the addition of carbon black and other processing agents will increase the tan delta value. 2.2 DYNAMIC TESTING In addition to the small-scale laboratory tests used to quantify resistance properties of compounds, Goodyear has tested a number of belt constructions on a 38 x 14 endless dynamic test machine at the University of Hannover. This test measures the indention of a single roller indented into the belt cover as the force per idler per unit width by isolating the pulley cover hysteresis. The data is then plotted with respect to time and temperature. The results of three Goodyear test belts at varying temperatures can be seen in Figure 8. The results correlate with the tan delta trends and confirm lower tan delta values provide lower power reduction under dynamic conditions.

FORCE PER IDLER (N/M)

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 TEMPERATURE (DEG C) A B D

Figure 8 Dynamic roller indention test results

3. CASE STUDY 1: OVERLAND COAL CONVEYOR

3.1 Requirements As with all laboratory investigations, the final analysis is in the field. However data collection in the field is far more difficult than in the laboratory. For example each motor must be monitored while varying the tonnages across the belts. Long center belts are expensive investments for the user and are generally only replaced every 5 to 15 years. Timing and good fortune are necessary to enable data collection on the same system with two identical belts except with different pulley cover compounds and still be able to gather data at approximately the same temperatures.

3.2 Case Study 1: Goodyear Measurements Goodyear was able to locate several of these opportunities. One customer permitted an extensive 1 year study on a 23,000 x 54 ST 2500 coal handling steel cord belt with x covers (Figure 9). The study involved recording power reading on the original belt with compound A pulley cover and a follow-up study with a replacement belt of the same construction except with the bottom cover being specially formulated with a low rolling resistance pulley cover. Since all parameters except the pulley cover would be identical any difference in motor performance could be attributed to the pulley cover.

CASE STUDY 1 : OVERLAND COAL CONVEYOR Centers: Belt: 23,000 Ft 54 Flexsteel 2100
CONVEYOR PROFILE
ELEVATION (FT) 1500 1000 500 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 LENGTH (FT)
HEAD

TAIL

DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ------------->

Figure 9 System parameters Goodyear initiated the study by installing four data loggers into the conveyor electrical control panel for continuous recording of: Ambient temperature Belt Speed Tonnage at the weigh scale Wattmeter readings on each of (4) motor

This data was accumulated and analyzed for five months. Goodyear then contracted Conveyor Dynamics Incorporated (CDI) to conduct strain gauge measurements on the drive shafts. The propose was to validate the wattmeter approach to studying power consumption. 3.3 Strain Gauge Measurements: CDI Under CDI direction we returned to site and installed the following additional field measurements (figure 10) over a 3-day period to support their investigation: Belt velocity on the carry side of the conveyor at the head. Belt velocity on the return side of the conveyor at the tail. Torque measurements at each of the four head drives. Torque measurements at the tail drive.

Figure 10 Installing tachometer on carrying side of belt The four drives are labeled A-E as shown in figure #11. Only one of the secondary drives (C or E) was in operation at any one time.

Drive B

HEAD

Tail

Drive A

Drive E Drive D Drive C

Figure #11 Drive arrangement & identification.

9

3.3.1 Torque Measurements By CDI

3.3.1.1 Head Drives Four strain gauges were applied to each of the five drive shafts at the head and tail of the conveyor system. The strain gauges were applied in such a fashion as to negate all bending and compressive forces. This allows only the true torsion forces to be measured. The signals from the strain gauges were then amplified and converted into a FM frequency. This allows the data to be transmitted from a transmitting antenna mounted on the shaft to an externally mounted receiving antenna. The external antenna then transmits the FM signal to a receiving unit and this in turn relays the data to the data acquisition unit. A typical strain gauge arrangement is shown in Figure #12.
Receiving Antenna Transmitting Antenna Transmitter

Strain-gauge bridges

Figure 12 A typical strain gauge measurement setup. Preparation of the shaft for strain gauge installation is critical to assure reliable measurements. Figure 13 demonstrates the removal of grease from the shaft before sanding, polishing, cleaning with acetone and finally cementing the strain gauge in place. The process, including telemetry installation required 5-6 man-hours per shaft.

Figure 13 Cleaning shaft in preparation for strain gauge

10

Rigid Coupling

Pillow Block

Drive Pulley

Gearbox

Each of the strain gauge sets were wired together to form a Wheatstone bridge. This system is calibrated by shunting one leg of the Wheatstone bridge with a known resistance. This is in-turn converted to a resulting torque. The total power can then simply be calculated using:

P=
Where:

2 f Torque GB

P = Total Power F = Shaft Frequency T = Shaft Torque GB = Gearbox Ratio Each of the four head drives had previously been installed with Goodyear wattmeters. Each wattmeter produces a 4-20 mA output. Both the CDI data acquisition system and the long-term Goodyear data loggers recorded this output. The Goodyear system sampled at a constant 10-second interval where as the CDI system sampled at various rates from 25 milli-seconds to 2.0 seconds deepening on the individual test. Again the conveyor was monitored at different tonnages and comparison made between the wattmeter output and the torque measurements. Figure 14 is a plot of Drive A power with both measurements.

Motor Power - A Operational Start - Empty

1000 900 800 700 TQ - Pwr A GY - Pwr - A

Motor Power (HP)

600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Ti

( )

Figure 14 Power vs Time (Sec) Drive-A empty belt. The correlation between strain gauge and wattmeters is very close. The conveyor was then run at a steady load of 2040 TPH and again comparison made with the data collected. Results are shown in Figure 15 Examination of the graph indicates a very close correlation in the curve profile except with an approximate 6% lower value for the strain gauge. This difference is explained by understanding the
11

wattmeters measure total motor power including coupling, gearbox, and drive losses, while the strain gauge only measure power to the drive pulley. Also the drive losses increase with increased tonnage.

Motor Power - A Steady State - 2040 T/H

1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

TQ - Pwr A GY - Pwr - A

Motor Power (HP)

Approximately 30 (6%) HP Differential

( )

Figure 15 Power vs Time (Sec) Drive-A at 2040 T/H.

3.3.2

Conclusion of Strain Gauge Analysis

The same technique was used to monitor the other three drives at different tonnages. The data from each motor compared favorably between the two systems of data collection. It was concluded that the strain gauge field measurements successfully verified the functionality of the wattmeters as a means for determining conveyor power. 3.4 INSTRUMENTION OF REPLACEMENT BELT Approximately 1 month after verification of the Goodyear wattmeters the entire belt was changed out and replaced (figure 16) with an identical belt except with the Goodyear rolling resistant pulley cover. Ten months after the installation of the new belt the motor shafts were again instrumented with strain gauges. Similar results were recorded which again verified the wattmeter concept.

12

Stringing rolls onto system

Splicing rolls together

Figure 16 Installation of new belt The use of continuous monitoring data collecting units on the overland conveyor permitted a view of all the parameters over time and with the fluctuation of temperature. For example, figure 17 depicts a range of data during a 1-month period.

MOTOR POWER

TONNAGE

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE

BELT SPEED

Figure 17 Sample of data collection for 1-month period

Figure 18 is expanded from the same data and shows a 1-shift period, which is used to calculate the power consumed.
13

MOTOR POWER

TONNAGE

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE

BELT SPEED

Figure 18 Sample of data collection for 1-shift period Using this technique we were able to make a number of important observations between the old and new belts. 1. A new belt has a certain amount of stiffness and requires time to break-in and before stable power reading could be measured. Figures 19 and 20 demonstrate this effect over a period of 30 days with empty and loaded belt.

Empty Belt 100 POWER - kW 98 96 94 92 90

09/26/1999 10/03/1999 10/10/1999 10/17/1999 10/24/1999

Figure 19 Start up break-in power for empty belt

14

FULLY LOADED BELT

1900 1850 POWER KW 1800 1750 1700 1650
99 11 9 /0 4/ 19 99 99 9 99 9 99 9 99 9 4/ 1 0/ 1 1/ 1 3/ 1 7/ 1 99 9 10 /2 8/ 1

09 /2

10 /1

10 /0

Figure 20 Break-in power vs. time on loaded belt 2. After the belt power requirement stabilized data was taken to compare the older belt with the newer belt. Figure 21 shows the comparison of the original belt vs. the replacement belt supplied with the rolling resistance pulley cover. An approximate 6% reduction in rolling resistance is achieved with the replacement compound.

OVERLAND CONVEYOR
16% REDUCTION FROM DEFAULT CEMA : 55 - 60 F

HORSEPOWER (HP)

2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 TONNAGE (TPH)

CEMA

COMP A

10 /2

09 /3

COMP D

Figure 21 Power comparison: original vs. rolling resistant compound Using the continuous monitoring of the ambient temperature, a comparison of the power reading was assembled at -5 deg. F and 55 deg. F with identical loading. It can be seen in figure 22 that over 15% more power is required for running both the empty and loaded belt in cold temperatures.

15

WARM VS COLD TEMPERATURE

POWER - KW 3000 2000 1000 0 Empty -5 F 55 F Full 1178 1000 1913 1657

Figure 22 Power data demonstrating 15% increase in cold temperature

16

4. CASE STUDY 2 4.1 Overland Conveyor Copper Ore

Goodyear was also able to conduct another field test with similar although not as extensive instrumentation. On this conveyor the data was collected over a period of days and not continuously over a period of months. Goodyear instrumented the conveyor seen in figure 23 and 24 for power consumption with compound B pulley cover[2].

Centers: 6810 Ft Belt: ST 3500 72 x 5/8 x1/4 Primary Drive: 2 x 1000 kW Secondary Drive: 1 x 1000 kW Tail Drive: 1 x 1000 kW Material: Copper Ore

Figure 23 Case 2 System Data

CONVEYOR INSTRUMENTATION SCHEMATIC

VERTICAL : FT

400 200 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE :FT

1 Tail Motor

1 Secondary Motor 2 Primary Motors

BELT SPEED

Weigh Scale

Data Logger

Figure 24 Case 2 Instrumentation Schematic

17

4.2 Replacement Belt

Six months after the original data was collected a new belt was installed on this system with the identical belt construction except with compound B was replaced with compound A pulley cover (figure 25).

Figure 25 Belt changeout The replacement belt was allowed to break in for several months before the power readings were gathered. The data for all 4 motors were correlated with the corresponding time period for tonnage and averaged over a period of several minutes to provide the most accurate results. The tonnage was collected by connecting into the weigh scale. The ambient temperature was 35 degree F. The customer was very cooperative by allowing the trucks to accumulate behind the crusher while empty tonnage readings were taken. This allowed a sufficient material inventory to build up permitting a constant tonnage reading at half and full loading.

5000 TPH

10000 TPH

Figure 26 Tonnage comparison

18

A comparison of 5000 TPH vs. 10000 TPH on a 72 belt is shown in figure 26. The difference in power between compound A and compound B pulley covers was measured at 200 kW (12.6%) at half loading and 310 kW (10.3%) at full loading (figure 27).

10.3% DIFFERENCE
POWER (KW) 3500 2500 1500 12.6% Difference 500 0 COMP A
200 kW 310 kW

5000 10000 TONNAGE (TPH) COMP B COMP A Repeat

Figure 27 Power vs. compound comparison These power trends are reasonable and consistent with theoretical assumptions for several reasons: As a verification of this technique the conveyor was instrumented a second time after an additional two years operation. The results were plotted together and are nearly identical to the original values as seen in figure 27. The only difference was the lack of a data point at the 5000 TPH loading. During the repeat study, the mining operation was running at full capacity and could not reduce the tonnage. The shape of the power curve therefore is somewhat flatter at the 5000 TPH due to the missing data point. However the position of the curve at empty and fully loaded are almost identical. From this we conclude the slope of the power vs. tonnage is not a straight line but is concave upward.

19

5. CASE STUDY 3: REGENERATIVE CONVEYOR

5.1 Downhill Coal System Goodyear also had the opportunity to conduct power measurements on a downhill conveyor that required power when empty but becomes regenerative when loaded. The system details are listed in figure 28.

Centers: 7400 ft Decline: 305 ft Belt: 42 Flexsteel 1500 5/16 x 1/4 Drives: Tail 500 Hp Material: Clean Coal
CONVEYOR PROFILE : DOWNHILL
HEIGHT (FT) 400 300 200 100 0 0 2000 4000 LENGTH (FT) 6000 8000

Figure 28 Case 3 system data This conveyor was originally installed with a compound A pulley cover. The replacement belt was made to the exact same specification except the pulley cover was replaced with a rolling resistant compound for direct field comparison. Again data was gathered on site with the cooperation of site personnel to accurately measure the tonnage over the weigh scale and correlate it with the power required for the belt. Figure 29 depicts these results[2] which can be summarized as follows:

Both belts require the same amount of power when running empty. Increasing the tonnage reduces the power required until it eventually becomes regenerative. Compound D becomes regenerative at a lesser tonnage due to its superior rolling resistance properties. The greater the tonnage the more significant the difference between the power required between the compounds.

20

COMP A

COMP D

POWER (HP)

100 50

28% DIFFERENCE
0 -50 0 500 1000 TONNAGE (TPH) 1500 2000

Figure 29 Power comparisons on regenerative belt

21

6. CONCLUSION
6.1 Summary of Results The data accumulated from the three field conveyor correlate very well with the Goodyear theoretical analysis and can be summarized as follows: 1. The tan delta component of energy loss is a valuable tool for correlating rolling resistance of rubber compounds. 2. Wattmeter data is a valid technique for power comparison on field conveyors. 3. Rolling resistance increases with: a. Increase in material density b. Increase in tonnage c. Increase in belt width 4. Increased tonnage vs. increased power consumption is not linearly dependent. 5. The belt pulley cover compound has little effect on the power consumption of an empty belt due to the small amount of indention into the idler. 6. New belts require several weeks to several months break-in time depending on system length and the number of pulleys before power readings stabilize. 7. Low tan delta compounds increase power requirements on regenerative systems. 8. Power requirements increase significantly as temperature decreases. 9. Operating costs of long center horizontal conveyors can be reduced with a more efficient rolling resistant belt pulley cover. 6.2 Recommendations The cost of the rolling resistant compound is a premium over other compounds. However, on those installations where the benefits can be fully utilized, the compound more than compensates for its additional expense through reduction in power costs and more importantly capital costs by permitting the design of smaller motors, pulleys, gear boxes, shafts, bearings, idlers, and steel structure. The benefits of a superior rolling resistant compound can best be realized on long horizontal systems utilizing wide, fully loaded belts, carrying high density material.

POTENTIAL COST SAVINGS

ANNUAL SAVINGS ON 4000 kW
$80,000 $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 $0.035 $0.055 5% 10%

Figure 30 Cost analysis for energy savings

22

Figure 30 demonstrates four possible savings scenarios that might be achieved on the conveyor discussed in Case Study 2. Using electrical costs of $0.035 and $0.055 per kW-hour. The graphs also demonstrates the savings to the mine operation with two different pulley covers that would reduce the overall power consumption by 5% and 10%. Depending on the cost per kW-hour and conveyor profile, it is possible to achieve savings in excess of US $ 50,000 annually on long horizontal conveyors where the full benefits of the improved rolling resistant compounds are optimized.

REFERENCES [1] Hager & Hintz, The Energy-Saving Design of Belts for Long Conveyor Systems, Bulk Solids Handling, Vol. 13, No 4, Nov. 1993 [2] Gallagher, David Reduced Power Consumption for Conveyor Belts, SME Bulk Material Handling by Conveyor Belt III, Feb. 2000 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dr. Alan Gent, Research Associate, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Dr. William A Arnold, Research Associate, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company David Kruse, Project Engineer, Conveyor Dynamics Inc. Ryan Lemmon, Project Engineer, Conveyor Dynamics Inc. John Gartland, Project Engineer, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Kevin Xie, Development Compounder, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

23