Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 27

DESIGN OF 20 TPH CAPACITY COAL CONVEYOR SYSTEMS (BELT,

BUCKET, AND SCREW)

A COAL CONVEYOR SYSTEMS DESIGN REPORT


PRESENTED TO
ENGR. DENNIS G. REBUTA
Professor

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS
IN ME 521A MACHINE DESIGN II
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHEASTERN PHILIPPINES
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

SUBMITTED BY

VILLAFUERTE, JAY MARK ROY


Student

MAY 2019

i
Table of Contents
CHAPTER I .......................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 Objectives of the Study ............................................................................... 3
1.3 Statement of the Problem ............................................................................ 3
CHAPTER II ......................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Related Literature ........................................................................................ 5
2.1.1. Belt Conveyors ..................................................................................... 6
2.1.2. Bucket Conveyors .............................................................................. 11
2.1.3. Screw Conveyors ............................................................................... 12
2.2 Related Studies ......................................................................................... 14
2.2.1. Belt Conveyors ................................................................................... 14
2.2.2. Bucket Conveyors .............................................................................. 16
2.2.3. Screw Conveyors ............................................................................... 18
CHAPTER III ...................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Design Considerations .............................................................................. 21
3.2 Design Criteria........................................................................................... 21
3.3 Mechanical Drawing .................................................................................. 21
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 22

ii
iii
CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Presented below are the background and objectives of the study, as well as

the statement of the problem.

Background of the Study

A plant’s productivity is one of the most important factors considered in any

division of work an individual is assigned into. The aggregate of bulk material used

in it may amount to hundreds of thousands of tons, making its storage and

movement have a significant impact on a plant’s productivity; bulk materials’

movement and transportation have varying requirement from other types of

materials and can be treated as continuous thus, are moved in large quantities

(Velury & Kennedy, 1992).

In the United States, 52% of the electricity comes from coal generation.

These plants require massive amounts of coal; a typical 109 kWh/year coal power

plant heats water to 540˚C to produce high pressure steam and in order to meet

those demands, the plant burns 14 000 tons of coal every day. The coal that goes

to a typical coal-fired power plant has minimal processing. It is crushed to

approximately 5 cm in size before it is loaded into the inlet hopper. Coal contains

many impurities. Coal in the Midwest typically contains a lot of sulfur. The pyritic

sulfur, from the mineral FeS, is relatively easy to remove. The coal can be ground

and washed with water. The heavier FeS particles fall to the bottom and can be

separated from the floating coal particles (Shapley, 2011).

In a number of power plants involved in the handling of bulk materials having

poor flow characteristics, it commonly has been the practice to convey such

materials by means of mechanical conveyors. Typically, such conveyors have

consisted of screw conveyors, comprised of an elongated, rotatable auger housed

in an elongated tube. In the use of such conveyors, however, it has been found

that the flow rates of sluggish and cohesive bulk materials is poor, difficult to

1
control, thus a substantial amount of torque is required to operate such conveyors

and such materials tend to build up in the tube around the auger which often is

difficult, time consuming and cumbersome to clean. In addition, because of a lack

of control of the flow rates in such conveyors, it is difficult to accurately meter such

materials as often is required in various processes (Ambs, 2006).

In the screw conveyor, the material partially fills the voids between flights

and is transported due to the rotating screw effect. Overfilling inhibits transport due

to rotation of the particulate material. The belt conveyor is primarily used for

horizontal transportation with relatively small inclination. In the bucket elevator, a

chain or belt carries a series of evenly-spaced buckets that dig into the material at

the lower entry chute/hopper and carry it over the top sprocket, where it is

discharged due to a combination of gravitational and centrifugal effects (Dartnall,

2005).

For a designer, these systems, which provide flow, storage, measurement

and control of the particulate solids, are basically systems of individual machines

involving motors, transmissions, friction, corrosion, wear, environmental, structural

strength, control, maintenance considerations, etc. The material flow could be

called “interrupted-continuous”. This is because it often ceases when emerging

from one materials handling machine into the feeding hopper of another. At this

point the kinetic energy (and some potential energy) in the material is lost and

further energy is often required to feed the material to the next machine, as

between the horizontal conveyor in the centre and elevator. The material does not

necessarily flow in the familiar way that many liquids do. There is always friction in

the machine elements and this is present even when the machine is not loaded

with any material. Additionally, the coal will exhibit friction both internally as it

moves against itself and externally as it slides against machine members. When a

machine is operating 24 hours per day for the whole year (except for down-time)

the friction energy can amount to a considerable cost. The machine designer

2
needs to understand where energy is lost and how to maximize the efficiency of

these machines (Dartnall, 2005).

Consequently, it is the principal object of the present design to provide an

improved system and method for conveying bulk materials having poor flow

characteristics with the use of a screw, belt, and bucket type conveyors in which

the flow rate of sluggish and cohesive bulk materials is improved, the torque

required to drive the augers of such conveyors is reduced and a build-up in the

conduit surrounding the auger of such conveyors is reduced if not entirely

eliminated. This design relates to an improved system and method for handling

bulk materials such as coal, and more particularly to an enhanced system and

process for conveying metered amounts of such materials having poor flowability.

1.2 Objectives of the Study

The study aimed to address the following objectives:

1. To develop a design for 50 tph capacity coal conveyor system comprised

of belt, bucket and screw conveyors.

2. To present the calculations for each of the design systems aforementioned

3. To justify the efficiency of each conveyor system design with computations

1.3 Statement of the Problem

The study aimed to answer the following questions:

1. How to develop a conveyor system design that would enable the transport

of 50 tph of coal?

2. What formulae are to be used in computation for factors considered in

designing each conveyor system (belt, bucket and screw)?

3. What values do the computations need to have to justify the efficiency of

each conveyor system?

3
CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

4
In this chapter, the proponent presented the synthesis of related literature, and

studies that are related on the origins, mechanism, design, and efficiency of the

various conveyor systems designed by the researcher, namely, belt, bucket, and

screw conveyors. The literature came from books, online journals, research

articles, and unpublished materials to help the researcher in establishing the

backbone of the study.

2.1 Related Literature

Since the industrial revolution, people have made increasing use of

mechanical methods of handling materials. This has been to such an extent that

in the western world almost everything, including food, raw minerals, building

materials and finished products, has probably been mechanically handled many

times before it reaches the consumer. The materials handling industry is not only

economically significant, but it is fundamental to the productivity of manufacturing

and distribution systems (for example, US companies invest over $90 billion

annually in materials handling technology and systems). The materials handling

industry is very broad, covering almost all industries, including mining, mineral

processing, agricultural production, food processing, power production, chemical

processing, manufacturing, packaging, pharmaceutical production and many

others. The friction losses of mechanical machine elements were discussed to us

students, but the internal and external friction of the particulate materials will need

introduction. This frictional energy loss is sometimes high. A machine such as a

screw conveyor may have unusually high friction loss due to the fact that all

carrying surfaces rub against the bulk solids, whereas a belt conveyor, which

carries the material on a belt supported by rollers, will usually offer a considerably

reduced percentage friction loss. The student researchers are expected to be

familiar with the general machine element design, engineering design processes,

structural analysis, fluid mechanics and engineering thermodynamics. (Dartnall,

2005).

5
2.1.1. Belt Conveyors

Belt conveyors are, in most cases, the most cost-effective solution for

handling bulk material mass flows over short and medium conveying distances.

The belt is a key component of these conveyors and its dynamic characteristics

determine the working performance to a great extent. At present, experimental

research on the dynamic characteristics of conveyor belts is mainly concentrated

on testing dynamic elastic modulus and viscous damping following the

ISO/DP9856 standard. Little research on other dynamic parameters has been

carried out (Hou & Meng, 2008).

A belt conveyor is a typical energy conversion system from electrical energy

to mechanical energy. Its energy efficiency can be divided into four components:

performance efficiency, operation efficiency, equipment efficiency, and technology

efficiency. The improvement of energy efficiency can easily put to the operation

efficiency and equipment efficiency for most energy systems. It holds true for belt

conveyors. It is also noted that equipment efficiency, and consequently operation

efficiency, decides performance efficiency which is usually reflected by various

external indicators, such as energy consumption, energy cost, or emission of

greenhouse gas. On the other hand, a performance indicator can drive an

operation in the optimal efficiency mode (Zhang & Xia, 2010)

An inadequately designed conveyor belt system could limit the production

rate or could result in belt overloading, causing spillage, resulting in costly

secondary materials handling. An over-designed belt system could cause a loss of

profits due to unnecessarily high capital and operating costs (Mcnearny & Nie,

2000).

Minimizing overall power consumption is a critical aspect of any project and

belt conveyors are no different. Although belt conveyors have always been an

efficient means of transporting large tonnages as compared to other transport

methods, there are still various methods to reduce power requirements on

overland conveyors. The main resistances of a belt conveyor are made up of:

6
• Idler Resistance

• Rubber indentation due to idler support

• Material/Belt flexure due to sag being idlers

• Alignment

These resistances plus miscellaneous secondary resistances and forces

to overcome gravity (lift) make up the required power to move the material.

In a typical in-plant conveyor of 400m length, power might be broken into

its components as per Figure 1 with lift making up the largest single component

but all friction forces making up the majority.

Figure 1

At the 2004 SME annual meeting, Walter Kung of MAN Takraf presented a

paper titled “The Henderson Coarse Ore Conveying System- A Review of

Commissioning, Start-up and Operation” This project was commissioned in

December 1999 and consisted of a 24 km (3 flights) overland conveying system to

replace the underground mine to mill rail haulage system.

The longest conveyor in this system (PC2) was 16.28 km in length with

475m of lift. The most important system fact was that 50% of the operating power

(~4000 kW at 1783 mtph and 4.6 m/s) was required to turn an empty belt therefore

power efficiency was critical. Very close attention was focused on the idlers, belt

cover rubber and alignment. One way to document relative differences in efficiency

is to use the DIN 22101 standard definition of “equivalent friction factor- f” as a way

to compare the total of the main resistances. In the past, a typical DIN f used for

design of a conveyor like this might be around 0.016. MAN Takraf was estimating

their attention to power would allow them to realize an f of 0.011, a reduction of

7
over 30%. This reduction contributed a significant saving in capital cost of the

equipment. The actual measured results over 6 operating shifts after

commissioning showed the value to be 0.0075, or even 30% lower than expected.

Mr. Kung stated this reduction from expected to result in an additional US$100,

000 savings per year in electricity costs alone.

Unquestionably, the most efficient way to transport material from one point

to the next is as directly as possible. But as we continue to transport longer

distances by conveyor, the possibility of conveying in a straight line is less and less

likely as many natural and man-made obstacles exist. The first horizontally curved

conveyors were installed many years ago, but today it seems just about every

overland conveyor being installed has at least one horizontal change in direction.

And today’s technology allows designers to accommodate these curves relatively

easily.

Figures 2 and 3 shows an overland conveyor transporting coal from the

stockpile to the ship loader at the Tianjin China Port Authority installed on 2003.

Designed by E.J.O’Donovan & Associates and built by Continental Conveyor Ltd

of Australia, this 9 km overland carries 6000 mtph with 4x1500 kW drives installed.

The Wyodak Mine, located in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming, USA, is the

oldest continuously operating coal mine in the US having recorded annual

production since 1923. It currently utilizes an overland (Figure 4) from the new pit

to the plant 756m long (2,482 ft) with a 700m (2,300 ft) horizontal radius. This

proves a conveyor does not need to be extremely long to benefit from a horizontal

turn.

Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4

One of the most interesting developments in technology in the recent past

has been the distribution of power along the conveyor path. Is has not been

8
uncommon to see drives positioned at the head and tail ends of long conveyors

and let the tail drive do the work of pulling the belt back along the return run of the

conveyor. But now that idea has expanded to allow designers to position drive

power wherever it is most needed.

The idea of distributing power in multiple locations on a belt conveyor has

been around for a long time. The first application in the USA was installed at Kaiser

Coal in 1974. It was shortly thereafter that underground coal mining began

consolidating and long wall mines began to realize tremendous growth in output.

Mining equipment efficiencies and capabilities were improving dramatically. Miners

were looking for ways to increase the size of mining blocks in order to decrease

the percentage of idle time needed to move the large mining equipment from block

to block. Face widths and panel lengths were increasing. When panel lengths were

increased, conveyance concerns began to appear. The power and belt strengths

needed for these lengths approaching 4 -5 km were much larger than had ever

been used underground before. Problems included the large size of high power

drives not to mention being able to handle and move them around. And, although

belting technology could handle the increased strength requirements, it meant

moving to steel reinforced belting that was much heavier and harder to splicing.

Since long wall panel conveyors are constantly advancing and retreating (getting

longer and shorter), miners are always adding or removing rolls of belting from the

system. Moreover, since vulcanized splicing takes several times longer to facilitate,

lost production time due to belt moves over the course of a complete panel during

development and mining would be extreme. Now the need surpassed the risk and

the application of intermediate drives to limit belt tensions and allow the use of

fabric belting on long centre applications was actively pursued. Today,

intermediate drive technology is very well accepted and widely used in

underground coal mining. Many mines around the world have incorporated it into

their current and future mine plans to increase the efficiency of their overall mining

operations. The tension diagram in Figure 5 shows the simple principal and most

9
significant benefit of intermediate belt conveyor drives. This flat, head driven

conveyor has a simple belt tension distribution as shown in black. Although the

Figure 5
average belt tension during each cycle is only about 40% of the peak value, all the

belting must be sized for the maximum. The large drop in the black line at the head

pulley represents the total torque or power required to run the conveyor. By splitting

the power into two locations (red line), the maximum belt tension is reduced by

almost 40% while the total power requirement remains virtually the same. A much

smaller belt can be used and smaller individual power units can be used. To extend

the example further, a second intermediate drive is added (green line) and the

peak belt tension drops further. The tunnelling industry was also quick to adopt this

technology and even take it to higher levels of complexity and sophistication. But

the main need in tunnelling was the necessity of using very tight horizontal curves.

Many publications since 1959 have documented that neglecting belt

elasticity in high capacity and/or long length conveyors during stopping and starting

can lead to incorrect selection of the belting, drives, take-up, etc. Failure to include

transient response to elasticity can result in inaccurate prediction of:

• Maximum belt stresses

• Maximum forces on pulleys

• Minimum belt stresses and material spillage

• Take-up force requirements

• Take-up travel and speed requirements

• Drive slip

• Breakaway torque

• Holdback torque

10
• Load sharing between multiple drives

• Material stability on an incline

It is, therefore, important a mathematical model of the belt conveyor that

takes belt elasticity into account during stopping and starting be considered in

these critical, long applications. A model of the complete conveyor system can be

achieved by dividing the conveyor into a series of finite elements (Alspaugh, 2004).

A simplified Conveyor Equipment Manufacturer’s Association (C.E.M.A)

formula for power to drive a conveyor belt is:

9.81 𝐻𝑊𝑚
𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 (𝑘𝑊 ) = [ ] (𝐿𝑣 ) [𝑘𝑋 + {𝑘𝑌(𝑊𝑚 + 𝑊𝑏) + 0.015𝑊𝑏} + ]
1000 𝐿

where:

L = Horizontal distance between pulley centres (m)

H = Vertical distance between pulley centres (m)

v = Belt velocity (m/s)

Wm = Mass of material per metre run (kg)

Wb = Mass of belt per metre run (kg)

0.015 = Factor accounting for friction in return belt run

kX = Factor from belt slip and idler rotational resistance

= 0.00068(Wm + Wb) + 0.022(rotating mass of idlers per metre) (kg/m)

kY = Resistance of belt to flexure as it moves over the idlers (kg/m)

Figure 6

2.1.2. Bucket Conveyors

Bucket conveyors consist of endless chains or belts to which are attached

buckets to convey bulk material in horizontal, inclined, and vertical paths. The

11
buckets remain in carrying position until they are tipped to discharge the material.

Various discharging mechanisms are available (Britannica, 2019).

Bucket Conveyors are integrated with double strand roller chains that can

lift the load on a horizontal and inclined profile. Ideal for handling abrasive and hot

material, these bucket conveyors are known for their strong body and low power

consumption. These are used for vertical transportation of bulk and small grain

size materials. The conveyors are used in food, agricultural, pharmaceutical,

cosmetics, chemical, ceramic and glass industry, but also for transportation of bulk

materials in heavy industry. The conveyors allow vertical transportation. The

material transport is without spillage and contamination, the closed conveyor

design prevents dusting. Variety of configuration allows installation of the bucket

conveyors on sites with very limited space.

An ideal design for bucket conveyor is one with a pair of parallel draw

elements between which the buckets are supported on spindles about which they

rotate pendulum fashion. Forward rollers are mounted on the ends of the spindles

and rear rollers are mounted at the opposite edge of the bucket. Each bucket has

a flange or lip which overlaps the top edge of an adjacent bucket. The rollers on

the buckets engage guide rails to properly orient the buckets as they pass over

return gears and from the loading area to the dumping area and back again. By

maintaining proper orientation of the buckets, the load level of each bucket and

thus the capacity of the conveyor is increased. The bucket conveyor is of simple

design, has low wear and high conveying capacity (Glowatzki, 1988).

2.1.3. Screw Conveyors

Screw conveyors consist of revolving shafts with continuous or broken spiral

flighting that operates inside a casing. Powered by an electric motor and suitable

gearing, the screw conveyor usually operates in one direction only to move fine

bulk material such as meal, seed, and coal (Britannica, 2019). The said system is

composed of several parts. It is composed of a pipe with a welded steel strip that

12
is formed into a continuous helix. The helix is referred to as the flighting. The

distance along the pipe from one point on the flighting to the next similar point is

called the “pitch”. Couplings and shafts refer to the mechanisms by which

two screw conveyors are joined. Hangers are used to provide support and

maintain alignment of the screw conveyor. The screw conveyor may be housed in

a “tube” or “trough”. The tube is a hollow cylinder, whereas the trough has a “U”

shape, hence the term “U-trough” augers.The theoretical capacity of a full screw

conveyor is:

𝐶𝑐𝑎𝑝 = (𝐷 2 − 𝑑 2 )(𝑃𝑁)(36.6)

where:

Ccap= volumetric capacity of full screw conveyor, ft3/h

D = diameter of shaft, (in.)

d = diameter of screw, (in.)

P = pitch of the auger (usually the pitch is equal to D), (in.)

N = revolutions per minute of the shaft.

The actual capacity of the screw conveyor may be one-third to one-half of

the theoretical capacity because of material characteristics, screw-housing

clearance, and the degree of elevation. Horsepower requirements are difficult to

determine because of the variations between different augers and materials. The

following equation estimates the horsepower required for an auger operating in the

horizontal positioning.

𝐶ℎ𝑝 = 𝐶𝑐𝑎𝑝 𝐿𝑊𝐹(33 000)

where:

Chp = computed horsepower

Ccap = volumetric conveyor capacity, ft3/min

L = conveyor length, ft

W = bulk weight of material, lb/ft3

13
F = material factor.

The horsepower in equation must be adjusted for horsepower under 5.0 hp:

If Chp < 1, hp = 2.0Chp

If 1 ≤ Chp < 2, hp = 1.5Chp

If 2 ≤ Chp < 4, hp = 1.25Chp

If 4 ≤ Chp < 5, hp = 1.1Chp

If Chp ≥5, hp = Chp

where hp = horsepower of horizontal auger.

Screw conveyors become less efficient when they are used to convey

material vertically. Capacity decreases with inclination about 30% for a 15°

inclination and about 55% for a 25° inclination. Relying heavily upon friction for

their operation, screw conveyors tend to wear rapidly, especially their flighting, and

they are inefficient in use of energy. Torque on the screw can be substantial;

therefore, less-expensive units with lightweight shafts should be driven from the

input end, especially if the flighting is not attached continuously along the shaft.

This wraps the flighting more tightly about the shaft due to torsional deflection,

increasing greatly its torsional rigidity. If driven from the discharge end, shaft

deflection compresses the flighting, which may lead to its buckling and, in extreme

cases, to breaking of the welds and crumpling of sections of flighting inside the

tube. The limiting angle depends upon the coefficient of sliding friction of the corn

on steel and the pitch-to-diameter ratio of the screw. Capacity decreases as slope

increases (Elsevier B.V., 2019).

2.2 Related Studies

2.2.1. Belt Conveyors

Belt conveyors are widely used for handling bulk material over short to

medium conveying distances because of their high efficiency of transportation as

compared to other transport methods. Energy cost forms a large part of the

operational cost (up to 40% of belt conveyor systems. As a whole, the material

14
handling is consuming a considerable proportion of the total power supply, for

instance, 10% of the electricity supply is consumed by the material handling sector

in South Africa. Hence, it is significant to improve energy efficiency of belt

conveyors to reduce the energy consumption or the energy cost of material

handling, which is one of the development focuses of the belt conveyor technology.

The equipment efficiency of belt conveyor is improved either by introducing

highly efficient equipment or improving the efficiency of the existing equipment.

The idler, belt and drive system are the main targets for equipment efficiency. The

entire longitudinal main resistances are transferred via the idlers; hence the idlers

have a great impact on the efficiency of belt conveyors. The energy consumption

of long distance conveyors is reduced by improving the arrangement of the idlers.

The performance of the belt is crucially influenced by the flexure resistance, which

is the most important contributing factor to total resistance. Energy optimized belts

are developed by improving the structure and rubber compounds of the belts and

the improvement of energy efficiency of belt conveyors can also be achieved at an

operational level.

Operation efficiency of an energy system is improved through the

coordination of two or more internal sub-systems, or through the coordination of

the system components and time, or through the coordination of the system and

human operators. They coordinate the on/off status of the belt conveyors and time

to achieve higher operation efficiency, and consequently higher performance

efficiency. However, these methods are designed to save cost instead of energy

because they just shift the work to different period of time according to the time-of-

use (TOU) tariff. In the literature, speed control is recommended for energy

efficiency of belt conveyor systems. The aim is to control the belt speed to keep a

constantly high amount of material along the whole belt. The proper coordination

of feed rate and belt speed is believed to have high operation efficiency in the

majority of the literature.

15
Nowadays, the idea of speed control has been adopted by industry and

successfully applied to some practical projects. The current strategy of speed

control employs lower level control loops or multi-speed drive to improve the

operation efficiency of an individual belt conveyor. Extra instruments, such as the

laser scanner and the radiation density measuring device are needed to measure

the loading level, which is the control variable of the current control strategy.

Furthermore, the current control strategy cannot be used to deal with the system

constraints and external constraints, such as TOU tariff and storage capacities,

especially in cases when there is a need to coordinate multiple belt conveyors of

a conveying system.

The main purpose of the paper was to introduce optimal control to belt

conveyor systems to improve the energy efficiency. An optimal switching control

strategy and a VSD based optimal control strategy were proposed. Started with

energy calculation model of belt conveyors, then the optimal switching control

problem and the VSD based optimal control problem for operation efficiency of belt

conveyor systems were formulated. The researchers took the TOU tariff into

account and considered other relevant constraints to achieve the minimization of

energy cost. This economic indicator of performance efficiency was employed by

the two optimal control strategies to drive the operation of the belt conveyor system

in its optimal efficiency. They made use of a coal conveying system, including five

belt conveyors, in a coal-fired power plant as a case study. The optimal switching

control strategy, the VSD based optimal control strategy and the current control

strategy was applied to the said coal conveying system, respectively (Zhang & Xia,

2010).

2.2.2. Bucket Conveyors

A bucket conveyor of the present type is known from German Pat. No. 2546

748 in which the adjacent lip of each bucket engages the lip of the neighbouring

bucket to prevent the contents of the buckets from spilling in the loading area. For

16
this purpose, the interlocking bucket lips are hook-shaped, which also serves the

purpose of maintaining a distance between each lip and the lip which it overlaps

without allowing spillage. This distance is necessary so as to allow the swing

buckets to swing positively and adopt a stable position. However, this is also a

swing bucket conveyor system, its design will suffer from the same disadvantages

of complexity, especially on account of the means provided to control the buckets

and prevent them from tipping. The purpose of the design is to provide a bucket

conveyor which does not suffer from the disadvantages of known bucket

conveyors, i.e., a system of simple design and consequently low cost, which

provides high conveying capacity and which furthermore does not incorporate

components subject to high wear rates. The fundamental concept of the design

consists of essentially combining the advantages of both types of conveyors

described above and avoiding their disadvantages. This bucket conveyor operates

partially like a swing bucket conveyor so that the bucket fill level and thus the

capacity of the system are relatively high. On the other hand, unlike existing type

of bucket conveyors, this system does not require any complex means of control,

since care is taken to insure that the buckets cannot tip out of the conveyor path

against the bearing direction of the support lips. As in the case of existing bucket

conveyor systems, the buckets will also adopt positions in which the filling opening

faces downwards and the load tipped out. The means of preventing spillage may

consist of fixed bearing rails comprising cam surfaces on which the side of the

buckets opposite the side from which the bucket is suspended are preferably

supported by means of lateral studs or rollers. Orientation of the buckets may also

be controlled by stops comprising the walls of the buckets themselves which

engage with corresponding counter stops in adjacent buckets or on the draw gear.

These stops and/or counter stops may be formed by sizing the walls of adjacent

buckets and the distances between them, so that as the buckets tend to tip away

from the conveyor path, they collide with one another and tipping is thus prevented.

17
A further way of preventing tipping consists of employing springs with which the

buckets are preloaded against tipping movement.

In a particularly useful embodiment of the present invention guide or support

means are provided for preventing the buckets quite simply from hanging down

from their spindles as they are conveyed upwards, which would tend to limit the

load level. These means insure that the buckets are displaced from their hanging

position to a position in which the filling opening is largely directed upwards, so

that the load level and thus the capacity of the conveyor are increased. Displacing

or swinging the buckets sideways away from their hanging position exerts

transverse loads on the draw gear or endless chain which it is perfectly able to

accept. The displacement resulting from these lateral tractive forces can be

compensated by providing the guide rails with a suitable cam configuration. The

draw gear can be maintained in a normal straight position, despite the side forces

exerted upon it, provided support rollers on the bucket are fitted. An especially

useful construction prevents this sideways displacement by the provision of a

counter guide rail. Any of the components of the draw gear or any special parts

can slide along the counter guide surface; however, the best solution is to employ

guide rollers which can be provided quite simply on extensions of the spindles

about which the buckets are allowed to swing freely. In another version of the

invention, the two guide surfaces consist of the two opposite edges of a guide rail,

both ends of which are preferably sickle-shaped so that the rollers can run on and

off them easily and smoothly. A fixed stop may be provided to abut the side of the

bucket at the entry point so that the buckets are slightly tipped at this point, allowing

the lateral projections to run up onto the guide surfaces (Glowatzki, 1988).

2.2.3. Screw Conveyors

A screw conveyor of the present type is known from US Pat. No. 7,137,759

B1. Its principal object is achieved by providing a bulk material handling system

generally consisting of means for holding a supply of such material; means for

18
conveying the material including a first conduit formed of a permeable material

having an inlet communicating with an outlet of a material holding means and an

outlet, a second conduit formed of an impermeable material encompassing and

spaced from the permeable conduit, providing a chamber there between, and an

auger disposed in the permeable conduit for transporting material received through

the inlet to the outlet thereof, means for rotatable driving the auger, and means for

supplying a fluidizing gas under pressure to the chamber whereby such fluidizing

gas penetrates the inner permeable conduit encasing the auger, which forms a

boundary layer consisting of a mixture of fluidizing gas and particles of the bulk

material being conveyed, thus reducing surface friction and correspondingly

enhancing the flow of material propelled by the auger. In such an arrangement, the

flow rate may be more readily controlled by simply controlling the speed of the

drive motor for the auger. More accurate amounts of material may be metered

simply by monitoring the feed rate of material being discharged from the screw

conveyor, comparing such feed rate with a selected feed rate and correspondingly

adjusting such feed rate by controlling the speed of the drive motor for the screw

conveyor, monitoring the loss of weight of material fed into the screw conveyor,

comparing such loss of weight with a selected weight and adjusting the speed

and/or discontinuing the operation of the drive motor; and monitoring a gain of

weight of material discharged from such screw conveyor, comparing such weight

to a predetermined weight and correspondingly adjusting the speed and/or

discontinuing the operation of the drive motor. The supply of fluidizing air to the

inner conduit of the screw conveyor surrounding the auger functions not only to

improve the flow rate of sluggish and cohesive materials through the screw

conveyor but reduces the amount of torque required to drive the auger of the

conveyor, permits more precise control of the flow rate and prevents the build-up

of material in the conveyor requiring periodic cleaning.

In the use of any of the described systems, it will be appreciated that

controllable amounts of bulk material may be conveyed from a first site to a second

19
site for processing or other purposes. In the arrangement utilizing a flow meter to

measure the mass flow rate from the screw conveyor, it is possible to operate such

system in a batch mode by numerically integrating the mass flow rate signal from

the solid mass flow meter although the accuracy may not be as good as the weight

gain or weight loss systems. Although a single auger profile is illustrated, it further

is to be understood that augers of different flights may be utilized within the scope

of the invention including helicoids, ribbon, cut, cut and folded, fixed or adjustable

mixing paddles, non-metallic, hollow, brush and other flights. It further will be

appreciated that the screw conveyor may be of a modular construction comprised

of a number of components that may be configured as desired and readily

disassembled for cleaning, maintaining or repairing and quickly reassembled and

placed in service. The provision for supplying fluidizing air to the material flow

passageways of the conveyor not only enhances the flow rate of the material being

conveyed and reduces if not eliminates the deposit of material but provides for a

more precise metering of the material being conveyed and substantially reduces

the torque required to drive the conveyor. From the foregoing detailed description,

it will be evident that there are a number of changes, adaptations and modifications

of the present invention, which come within the province of those persons having

ordinary skill in the art to which the aforementioned invention pertains.

20
CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presented the measures taken in developing the design; with

utilizing design considerations and criteria as its main purpose. Also, the

mechanical drawing for the belt, screw, and bucket conveyor systems are

presented herein.

3.1 Design Considerations

3.2 Design Criteria

3.3 Mechanical Drawing

21
REFERENCES

Alspaugh, M. A. (2004). Latest Developments in Belt Conveyor Technology.


MINExpo , (pp. 5-11). Las Vegas, Nevada, United States of America.

Ambs, R. W. (2006). Patent No. US 7,137,759 B1. Williamsport, Pennsylvania,


United States of America.

Britannica. (2019). Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved May 25, 2019, from


Encyclopaedia Britannica:
https://www.britannica.com/technology/conveyor#ref195010

Dartnall, W. J. (2005). A General Approach for Introducing Materials Handling


Topics in a Mechanical. 2005 ASME International Mechanical Engineering
Congress and Exposition (pp. 3-7). Orlando, Florida, United States of
America: ASME.

Elsevier B.V. (2019). ScienceDirect. Retrieved May 25, 2019, from


ScienceDirect: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-
biological-sciences/screw-conveyor

22
Glowatzki, W. (1988). Patent No. 4,770,287. Isernhagen 2, Fed. Rep. of
Germany.

Hou, Y.-f., & Meng, Q.-r. (2008). Dynamic characteristics of conveyor belts.
JournalL of China University of Mining and Technology, 2-6.

Kung, W. (2004). The Henderson Coarse Ore Conveying System- A Review of


Commissioning, Start-up and Operation. SME .

Mcnearny, R. L., & Nie, Z. (2000). Simulation of a conveyor belt network at an


underground mine. Mineral Resources Engineering, 343-355.

Shapley. (2011). Chemistry of Environment. Champaign, Illinois, United States of


America.

Velury, J., & Kennedy, W. (1992). A systematic procedure for the selection of
bulk material handling equipment. International Journal of Production
Economics, 233-240.

Zhang, S., & Xia, X. (2010). Optimal control of operation efficiency of belt
conveyor systems. Applied Energy - Elsevier, 9-18.

23
1