presented by: mr s. b. singh | head - sales & marketing ......conveyor belt (bf-4 route) towards...

prospare.co.uk

Wear & flow management solution in bulk material handling industries

Presented by: Mr S. B. Singh | Head - Sales & Marketing | Tega Industries Limited

Thursday 22nd May, 2014

An introduction to Tega

A Company synonymous with

revolutionary high technology

products & innovative ideas for

creating a win – win solution in

mineral beneficiation, mining &

material handling industries

world over.

Distributed by ProSpare

An introduction to Tega


State of art 6 manufacturing units in 4 continents & 14 branch offices worldwide

http://www.losugen.com/index.html

A history in wear


Our customers


Wear & flow

problems


Cause & effect of wear

Mechanical

Causes of

Wear

FRICTION:

Rubbing

between two

surfaces

ABRASION:

Removal of

particles

IMPACT: Cracks

and breaks

Chemical / pH

Effect

Effect of

Wear

Degradation

Fines

Generation

Noise Pollution

Material flow in bulk material handling equipments

result in wear which are mainly due to:

• Friction between the adjacent surfaces which

results in wear of the surface

• Abrasion due to removal of the upper surface

particles in contact with the material handled

• Impact force by virtue of the Mass & velocity of

the material which results in breaks or cracks in

the surface

• Chemical /pH effect of the Material handled

which may cause erosion/abrasion of the surface.


Flow patterns & problems in chute / hopper

Material getting clogged inside Spillage due to overflow of chute


Equipment punctures due to impact

Increase of cost due to wear

Direct

Cleanup cost workmen & equipment

Maintenance cost workmen & equipment

Power per ton of material handled

Cost of material not salvaged

Indirect

Less life of equipments

Production loss on unscheduled shutdown

Medical expense and manpower loss for

unsafe working environment

Interest cost on increased working

capital


The Tega philosophy


D. Fragmentation decrease A. Availability increase

L. Life improvement F. Flow improvement

F L D A

New Plant Existing Plant

Savings in cost per ton of material handled

Related Chutes / Equipments

modifications and trajectory mapping to

maximize productivity of the equipment

Analyzing and predicting the wear life of the liners and

optimizing the liner selection to minimize inventory

and un-scheduled shut down

Designing & controlling the

impact stability, flow ability

and noise pollution

Study of flow pattern, lump size & height of fall to access high

impact, abrasion or flow promotion problem area

Reduce maintenance cost

Increase efficiency of the

lining equipment


An engineering approach

Designing best customized solution for various application needs

DEM & FEA technology

Designing and optimizing flow ability, controlling impact stability and wear decay life of liners


SYMTROP proprietary software

Designing and controlling the impact forces and optimized liner selection


Equipment design modification


Wear liner selection


Combination Liner Technology

Study of flow pattern, lump size & height of fall along with other parameters to assess high impact,

abrasion or flow promotion problem area and providing the best customized solution for various application

areas.

Needs to satisfy in various degrees

1. Resistance to impact

2. Resistance to abrasion

3. Resistance to clogging

And at times

4. Resistance to degradation

5. Resistance to fines generation

6. Resistance to chemical/pH effect

7. Resistance to noise pollution

Continuous innovation

Wear & Flow Management Solution


Case studies

Case

Study :1 Sinter De-gradation at Raw material handling Steel Plant


Control of fragmentation of sinter fines

SINTER DEGRADATION STUDY TEST REPORT

SAMPLE COLLECTION DATES FROM 24.7.2013 TO 26.7.2013.

Sampling

Average Size Analysis of 3Days from 24.7.2013 to 26.7.2013

Sample No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Sample ID SP2 SINTER SP3 Sinter SP4 Sinter SP3

Sinter SP3 Sinter SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP4 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

Collection Point

SP2 9001 Conveyour Belt ( Near

SP2 Regular

Auto Sampler)

SP3 9001 Conveyor Belt (Near

SP3 Regular

Auto Sampler)

SP4 9006 Conveyor Belt (Near

SP3 Regular Auto

Sampler)

First Fall of SP3 SINTER

9008 Conveyo

r Belt

Second Fall SP3 SINTER SP3 Bin

Discharge (7J36 C1

Conveyor Belt)

SP3 SINTER SP3 Direct

online without Bin Discharge (7J36 C1

Conveyor Belt)

10J50ACI Conveyor Belt (BF-3

Route) Towards Central Avenue

10J50CI Conveyor Belt (BF-4

Route) Towards

Sinter Plant 2

10J50A Conveyor Belt (BF-3

Route) Towards Central Avenue

10J50 Conveyor Belt (BF-4

Route) Towards

Blast Furnace

3RD Fall 7J37 C1

Conveyor Belt

4th Fall 7J38C1

Conveyor Belt

5Th fall 7J38RC1 Conveyo

r Belt

BF3 Stock House Vibro feeder

BF3 Sinter Return Fines

BF4 Stock House Vibro

feeder


%Size Analysis

+ 50 mm 4.58 8.77 1.84 8.24 3.76 5.03 4.06 4.88 1.08 3.21 1.25 3.31 1.42 3.69 5.22

+40 mm 1.95 3.31 1.65 2.27 2.06 2.46 1.42 2.91 1.69 2.52 1.05 1.30 1.34 2.90 2.88

+30 mm 5.28 5.64 2.91 4.98 3.98 5.59 3.43 4.93 4.43 2.99 4.11 3.87 3.21 5.68 4.90

+20 mm 13.81 16.72 11.73 12.11 13.44 14.14 12.71 13.88 11.42 11.33 11.14 10.77 10.62 19.03 16.37

+16 mm 7.09 6.59 7.16 6.76 6.32 7.90 6.57 6.90 6.55 6.14 5.89 6.33 6.40 8.95 7.44

+10 mm 28.37 24.92 31.87 26.00 26.87 26.27 26.70 24.53 29.86 25.53 27.15 26.71 27.69 32.77 30.60

+8 mm 13.07 13.14 15.11 13.72 13.53 13.75 14.07 13.90 14.97 15.24 16.13 15.01 15.77 12.96 0.71 14.86 0.21

+6.3 mm 9.80 8.25 10.72 10.80 10.12 9.52 9.70 9.45 10.09 10.83 10.64 10.33 11.08 6.42 2.81 8.89 1.70

+ 5 mm 5.06 4.40 5.23 5.85 6.67 6.77 8.76 8.69 6.83 9.91 10.83 9.51 6.93 4.40 23.51 5.27 26.77

+3.15 mm 7.08 5.49 7.68 6.10 8.09 4.73 7.00 5.69 8.79 6.16 6.86 7.30 9.19 2.33 29.68 2.80 37.30

-3.15 mm 3.91 2.79 4.10 3.16 5.15 3.83 5.57 4.24 4.30 6.13 4.95 5.55 6.35 0.85 43.29 0.76 34.01

-5 mm 10.99 8.28 11.78 9.26 13.24 8.56 12.57 9.93 13.08 12.29 11.81 12.85 15.54 3.18 3.56

-10 mm 38.92 34.06 42.83 39.63 43.56 38.61 45.10 41.96 44.98 48.28 49.41 47.70 49.32 26.97 32.59

MPS 16.24 19.31 13.97 17.68 15.17 16.83 14.79 16.41 13.72 14.30 13.17 14.13 13.01 17.99 17.77

Objective: To reduce fragmentation of sinter fines below 5%

Sampling

Sample ID SP2 SINTER SP3

Sinter SP4 Sinter SP3 Sinter SP3 Sinter SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP4 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

SP2/SP3 Sinter

Collection Point/ DATE

SP2 9001 Conv Belt ( Near SP2 Regular

Auto Sampler)

SP3 9001 Conv Belt (Near SP3 Regular

Auto Sampler)

SP4 9006 Conv Belt (Near SP3 Regular

Auto Sampler)

First Fall of SP3 SINTER

9008 Conv Belt

Second Fall SP3 SINTER SP3 Bin

Discharge (7J36 C1

Conv Belt)

SP3 SINTER

SP3 Direct online

without Bin

Discharge (7J36 C1

Conv Belt)

10J50ACI Conv Belt

(BF-3 Route) Toward

s Central Avenue

10J50CI Conv

Belt (BF-4 Route) Towards

Sinter Plant 2

10J50A Conv Belt

(BF-3 Route)

Towards Central Avenue

10J50 Conv

Belt (BF-4 Route) Towards

Blast Furnace

7J37 C1 Conv Belt

3RD Fall 7J38C1 Conv Belt

4Th fall 7J38RC1

Conv Belt


feeder



feeder


23.07.2013

Time 15:55 Hrs 12:45 Hrs 12:35 Hrs 13:00 Hrs 13:20 Hrs 16:20 Hrs

16:40 Hrs

16:45 Hrs 17:10 Hrs 17:35 Hrs

17:40 Hrs

17:33 Hrs

17:40 Hrs 17:56 Hrs 18:00 Hrs

18:15 Hrs

%Size Analysis

-5 mm - - - - - - - - 9.84 14.36 12.73 13.08 14.69 0.42 - 2.04 -

24.07.2013

-5 mm 11.36 9.71 9.78 10.07 17.38 8.48 10.23 9.72 13.22 12.08 12.99 16.24 3.15 - 5.18 -

25.07.2013

-5 mm 13.10 8.72 13.35 7.34 15.46 7.89 16.06 9.33 14.93 15.50 11.60 13.89 18.90 3.40 - 4.02 -

26.07.2013

-5 mm 8.50 6.40 12.21 10.38 6.88 9.31 11.42 10.73 11.10 9.09 11.76 11.86 11.48 3.00 - 1.49 -

27.07.2013

-5 mm 8.63 5.37 7.89 6.18 12.20 7.46 12.66 6.43

31.07.2013

-5 mm 3.37 7.51 11.32 3.92 15.66 8.58 15.80 13.67 0.30 - 0.47 -

Sampling

1 SP2 9001 9.50

% o

f fine

s b

elo

w 5

mm

2 SP3 9001 7.54

3 SP4 9006 11.10

4 9008 7.86

5 SP3 Bin

Discharge 14.44

6 SP3 Direct

online 8.32

7 10J50ACI 13.29

8 10J50CI 9.93

9 BF-3 Route 12.16

10 BF-4 ISC01 14.36

11 7J37 C1 11.92

12 7J38C1 13.03

13 BF-3 Tripper 15.47


Operational parameters & existing chute layout

INCOMING

CONVEYOR 10J50C1 10J50AC1 Unit

Belt Width 1400 1400 MM

Belt Speed 1.75 1.5 M/Sec

Capacity 1000 1000 TPH

Head Pulley Dia. 800 800 MM

Troughing Angle

(C/Idler) 45 45 Deg.

Belt Thickness 17 17 MM

Inclination Angle

(Discharge End) 0 0 Deg.

Material Sinter Sinter

Bulk Density 2 2 T/M3

Max. Lump Size -50 -50 MM

Moisture Content = 1 %< = 1 %<

RECEIVING

CONVEYOR

10J50C2/7J

37C2

10J50C2/7J3

7C1

Belt Width 1400/1400 1400/1400 MM

Belt Speed 2/1.75 2/1.75 M/Sec

Capacity 1500/1000 1500/1000 TPH

Troughing Angle

(C/Idler) 35 / 35 35 / 35 Deg.


Existing chute – DEM simulation


../Belt Conveyor Discharge Trajectory.xls

Effect of impact on steel liner

Fatigue failure Degradation



Effect of impact on steel liner

Problem analysis

Reason for fragmentation

• Material collision on liner plate due to fall of height

• High kinetic energy resulting high impact load on chute back plate


Problem

• Increase of % fines below 5mm in the range of 15% maximum

• Chute punctured in impact area

• Less Life

• Unhealthy work place due to high noise level & spillage

Effect of stone on rubber plate



Johnson Holmquist Crack Softening Model

Proposed chute layout


Wear life calculation – SYMEROS proprietary software

5/19/2014 Distributed by ProSpare

B Angle Correction Factor - 0.83

β Crack Growth Constant - 4.2 89 0.008

θ Crack Angle ( ͦ) 15 80 0.08

ρp Bulk Density of Particle kg/mt^3 900 70 0.18

ρr Liner Density kg/mt^3 1130 60 0.58

Vo Impacting Velocity mt/sec 4.7 50 0.66

R Particle Radius mt 0.04 40 0.78

f Friction Co-Efficient 0.845 30 0.845

E Young's Modulus of Liner N/mt^2 0.0005 20 0.85

μ Poisson Ratio - 0.49 10 0.85

Q Impact Angle Function - 0.024131956 5 0.85

α Impact Angle ( ͦ) 30 0 0.85

ε Erosion Rate mm^3/grm. 1.40E-05

m' Mass Flow Rate kg/sec 36

Lw Liner Width mt 0.8

Li Impact Length mt 0.444

T Liner Thickness mt 0.08

Lf Liner Life month 21.75

Lc Corrected Liner Life month 17

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0 20 40 60 80 100

Fric

tio

n C

o-E

ffic

ien

t

Angle of Impact

Solution offered to minimize fragmentation Equipment Profile

1. Trajectory shifted with the help of modification

2. The modifications carried out related to impact area considering height of drop

3. Impact angle changed - Result in reduction of Kinetic energy & impact load

Liner Profile

1. Liner changed from metallic to non metallic to reduce de gradation having density of 1.2gm/cc. So reduction of weight.

Due to lower weight of the Tega liners the total chute weight greatly reduces thereby reducing the load on the structural

system

2. Proposed Tega Liner : Due to Hyper elastic behavior of the liner material K.E of the lump will be converted to strain

energy of the liner due to high resilience with respect to existing liner & as a result plastic strain rate of the lump (έp=0) is

zero i.e. no deformation or breakage of the lump will occur. No visible deformation present in Lump that clearly indicates no

further crack generation.

3. Because of its dampening property of Tega Combi Liners it protects the equipment lined, from shocks and thereby

reduced metal fatigue leading to longer life of the mother plate.

4. The wear pattern of Tega Liners can be predicted fairly accurately, thus making it possible to plant maintenance

schedules and eliminating the need for continuous attention and maintenance.

5. Excellent reduction in noise level and good sound absorption which leads in improving working environment and raising

the efficiency of the workers.

6. No probability of belt damage due to dislodging of liners during operation.


R.O.I.


RMHS Line feeding to BF 4 & BF 3

Description

Material going to Blast

Furnace Stock House 4

TPH 1000

Total Sinter Fines 18%, MT/HR 180

Sinter > 5mm 10%, MT/HR 100

Sinter Price USD/ MT 70

Cost incurred towards Return Fines to RMHS 10

Total Price of Sinter 80

Considering 20 hrs / day of operation, generation of fines

below 5mm in MT

2000

Total cost of Sinter loss due to de gradation / fines generation/

day in MILLION USD

0.2

Total Loss / Month / Chute, MILLION USD 6

Total Loss / Annum / Chute, MILLION USD 72

Considering to resist 2% degradation / Chute / Annum 1.44

Our Cost/Chute in MILLION USD 0.05

ROI No. of Days 12.65

Case studies

Case

Study :2


Slag Granulation Unit of a Steel Plant

Transfer chute slag granulation plant


Problem

• 2 shutdown per month to repair chute.

• Chute clogging and overflow.

• Spillage & wastage of saleable slag.

Financial effect

• Loss of Saleable Slag 500MT / month

• Liner replacement US$ 2400 per month

• Workmen cost of removing spillage &

maintenance US$ 1800 per month

Manganese steel liner

Transfer chute at SGP


Solution

• Redesigned the chute from octagonal

to rectangular shape.

• Changed the steel liner with high wear

resistant ceramic rubber composite liner.

Result

• Productivity increased from 71% to

96%

• Chute damage and clogging eliminated

• Downtime and chute overflow

eliminated

• Chute life increased to 2 years

• Workmen engaged for maintenance

and spillage removal reduced by 80%.

Thank you

prospare.co.uk

presented by: mr s. b. singh | head - sales & marketing ......conveyor belt (bf-4 route) towards...

Documents