Carrie Hartford - Jenike & Johanson

23/09/2014

Jenike & Johanson Pty Ltd 1

Transfer Chute Design for Increased Throughput – Practical Examples

Conveyors Conference Brisbane – 2014

Carrie Hartford Senior Engineer

Perth Western Australia [email protected]

1 SCIENCE ⏐ENGINEERING ⏐DESIGN

WE ARE: A specialised engineering firm focusing on

providing clients solutions to material handling applications

2

SCIENCE ⏐ENGINEERING ⏐DESIGN

COMPANY PROFILE

� Incorporated in 1966 by Dr. Andrew Jenike � World’s largest firm specializing in materials flow � About 80 personnel world-wide � Offices in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, USA � 7,500+ projects world-wide � Over 11,000 bulk materials tested � 650+ man-years experience


OUR APPROACH

We use a scientific approach, based on the characteristics of the materials handled and

process requirements.

It is not a trial & error approach!

4


OUTLINE

� Review common transfer chute designs � Discuss typical transfer chute problems � Evaluate how to predict wear in transfer chutes � Discuss wear liners � Evaluate increasing throughput with existing

infrastructure � What about different material handled through an

existing system?


VARIOUS CHUTE DESIGNS

For free-flowing rocky material: � Rock box � Micro ledges

Minimise wear.

For fine, sticky material: � Hood and spoon � No ledges

Prevent plugging and minimise buildup.

What if the material is rocky and fine and sticky? � Prevent plugging and minimise wear

6

23/09/2014



ROCK BOX CONFIGURATIONS

Use rock boxes only if material is free-flowing

7

Hematite Iron Ore


ROCK BOX CONFIGURATIONS

Rock box with sticky bauxite leads to frequent head box plugging

Heavy residual left in head box

8


HOOD AND SPOON DESIGN

� Developed in early 1980’s by Jenike & Johanson (US Patent 4,646,910 - August 1985)

� Design reflects novel approach to controlling the material

� Minimises dust generation, centers the load on the receiving belt

� Minimises wear of the receiving belt by giving the load a velocity in the direction of the receiving belt



Sticky fines on impact plate leading to frequent plugging

Proper stream capture with hood (low impact angle)

Proper stream control with spoon

US Patent 4,646,910

Rhino horn

10


COMMON CHUTE FLOW PROBLEMS

� Plugging � Wear of chute surface � Spillage � Buildup � Dust generation � Excessive belt wear

11

Plugging


EXAMPLE CHUTE FLOW PROBLEMS

Wear of chute surface

12

23/09/2014



EXAMPLE CHUTE FLOW PROBLEMS

Spillage

Buildup 13 SCIENCE ⏐ENGINEERING ⏐DESIGN

IMPACT ANGLE & SLIDING FRICTION

V2 = Velocity along chute after impact

V1 = Impact velocity θ = Impact angle φ’ = Wall friction angle

θ

V1

V2

V2V1= cosθ − sinθ tan "φ

Impact angle and sliding friction is critical in chute design: If θ + φ’= 90°, no resultant velocity

14


QUESTIONS ASKED TO MAXIMISE USAGE OF EXISTING PORT INFRASTRUCTURE

� Can we increase the throughput of the same material through the existing design? Consider: �  Belt sizing and speed

�  Loads on the belt �  Support structure

�  Material flow through the chutes

� Can we put a different material through the existing transfer chutes? �  Example: handling magnetite concentrate in iron ore transfer chutes

� What are the implications? �  Will material flow through the chutes?


CASE STUDY

� Iron ore export terminal in South Africa � Belt width: 1650 mm wide � Belt speed: 5.5 m/s � Flow rate: 10,000 tph � Right angle transfer chute

� Rock box used to minimise wear

� Client needed to increase throughput.

16


Increase in fines, mc, & flow rate

Buildup in the chute (eventual plugging)

Changed the flow

path through the

chute

Changed the way material

exited the chute

Spillage, dusting, & premature belt wear

PROGRESSION OF PROBLEMS

Iron Ore

17

TO ANALYSE AND DESIGN CHUTES

•  Bulk density •  Coefficient of sliding friction •  Particle size •  Particle density •  Chute tests

•  Angle of repose •  Drawdown angle •  Wear tests •  Angle of internal friction •  Belt surcharge angle

Flow properties tests needed:

Angle of repose Drawdown angle

23/09/2014



FLOWABILITY COMPARISON

Test results are for example only


BELT SURCHARGE ANGLE TEST

Before test After test


Wear results vary and are dependent on material characteristics such as particle size, shape, and abrasiveness of particles

WEAR TESTS

AR 500

Test results are for example only

Alumina Ceramic

Arcoplate

Wear ratio (wear/

distance moved)

Pressure

Adjustable force

Bulk material In hopper

Collecting Drum

Screw Feeder

Wear coupon mounted in rotating head

Proprietary J&J wear testing apparatus


WEAR LINERS

22

Arcoplate Hand Polish

Alloy Steel

Arcoplate Machined Polish

Alloy Steel

Bisplate 360/400 Di Candilo Steel

Compacted Bed

Duaplate (under flux)

Machined Ground Bradken

Duaplate Flapper Wheel

Polish Bradken

Hardox 450

SSAB

NiHard Bradken

P90 Ceramic

Imatech

Silicon Carbide Ceramic

Concord Engineering

Sure Alloy SA 1750

Standard SAS Global

Tivar 88-2 UHMWPE

Eplas Perth

Surface finish does matter! Installation direction does matter!


WEAR PREDICTION

THROUGH DEM

23

Corrugated wear pattern predicted with DEM matched field experience

SCIENCE ⏐ENGINEERING ⏐DESIGN 24

DEM ANALYSIS OF STICKY IRON ORE

Estimated wear

23/09/2014


SCIENCE ⏐ENGINEERING ⏐DESIGN 25

DEM ANALYSIS OF STICKY IRON ORE Estimated wear



Proper belt loading with spoon

Proper stream capture with hood

26



Other benefits: � Minimal downtown – chute went 2.5

years before changing out the head chute, still not much wear in the spoon.

� Eliminated belt tracking problems � No spillage � Reduced dusting significantly � Obtained desired throughput


OTHER ISSUES FROM INCREASED FLOWRATE

� Example: Material flies over the head chute

28

Head chute height was set based on cross sectional area of material on

belt and material

trajectory.

Belt speed and cross-sectional area of material

on the belt increased to

increase throughput.

Caused some material to fly over the head chute. Chute was also fuller than designed

for.

Resulted in increased

spillage and higher plugging

potential.


CHANGING MATERIAL � Example: Using magnetite in hematite handling

systems with rock boxes � Cycle times of fine, sticky material versus lump

ore needs to be evaluated


CONCLUSION

� Increasing throughput and/or handling different material through existing infrastructure can have significant financial benefits.

� Material testing and DEM are good predictive tools to analyse the feasibility of a usage change.

� DEM can also be used to predict high wear areas of the transfer chute.

30

23/09/2014


QUESTIONS?

31

Carrie Hartford Senior Engineer

Perth Western Australia [email protected]

www.jenike.com