Dear Amrit,

May I get a copy of your article " Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Conveying Systems".

Sheng

Sheng612@gmail.com ■

Dear Amrit,

May I get a copy of your article " Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Conveying Systems".

Sheng

Sheng612@gmail.com ■

Dear Federico,

As promised, I investigated whether it is possible to design, using the existing 2 compressors, a raw meal conveying installation for the highest possible capacity at the lowest possible line pressure to ease the screw feeder.

The result, I found, is approx. 200 tons/hr at 1 bar line pressure for a stepped pipeline with diameters 18” – 20”.

The conclusion is that it is not possible to reach the required 215 tons/hr, when the pressure is limited at 1 bar (for keeping the screw pump stable)

The real solution is that the screw pump can handle at least 2.0 bar instead of 0.95 to 1.0 bar (According to Claudius Peters’ website, this must be 2.5 bar).

As the design was guaranteed at 215 tons/hr, claiming the guarantee is the first option.

If the costs for not reaching the capacity are not acceptable for a longer period of time, another screw pump of a better design (2.0 bar) can be applied.

Take care

Teus ■

Dear Federico,

As promised, I investigated whether it is possible to design, using the existing 2 compressors, a raw meal conveying installation for the highest possible capacity at the lowest possible line pressure to ease the screw feeder.

The result, I found, is approx. 200 tons/hr at 1 bar line pressure for a stepped pipeline with diameters 18” – 20”.

The conclusion is that it is not possible to reach the required 215 tons/hr, when the pressure is limited at 1 bar (for keeping the screw pump stable)

The real solution is that the screw pump can handle at least 2.0 bar instead of 0.95 to 1.0 bar (According to Claudius Peters’ website, this must be 2.5 bar).

As the design was guaranteed at 215 tons/hr, claiming the guarantee is the first option.

If the costs for not reaching the capacity are not acceptable for a longer period of time, another screw pump of a better design (2.0 bar) can be applied.

Take care

Teus ■

Dear Teus,

We have demanded the guarantee to the supplier, the problem is that there are various suppliers involved: the supplier of the all the engineering, the subcontractor of the design of the system, the supplier of the equipment, etcetera.

But the information that you gave me is very valuable to discuss with better weapons

Federico ■

Dear Teus,

We have demanded the guarantee to the supplier, the problem is that there are various suppliers involved: the supplier of the all the engineering, the subcontractor of the design of the system, the supplier of the equipment, etcetera.

But the information that you gave me is very valuable to discuss with better weapons

Federico ■

Dear Federico,

The screw pump Amps plotted against the line pressure proofs that the screw pump is the component that cannot handle 1 bar or more.

See attached file

Success

Teus

Attachments

amps_linepressure (PDF)

■

Dear Federico,

The screw pump Amps plotted against the line pressure proofs that the screw pump is the component that cannot handle 1 bar or more.

See attached file

Success

Teus

Attachments

amps_linepressure (PDF)

■

Dear Teus,

Although do not have the final report of the designer of the installation, some comments "off the record" from the supplier agree with your opinion, and they are thinking about changing the pump by one bigger

Federico ■

Dear Teus,

Although do not have the final report of the designer of the installation, some comments "off the record" from the supplier agree with your opinion, and they are thinking about changing the pump by one bigger

Federico ■

Dear Mr. Agarwal,

I received copy of your article”debottleneck …”, it is very interesting to know the principles that regulate the pneumatic conveying, but in my case, not very useful, because the absence of reference values in the article, don’t let us characterize the system, to know where are we standing.

FEderico ■

Dear Mr. Agarwal,

I received copy of your article”debottleneck …”, it is very interesting to know the principles that regulate the pneumatic conveying, but in my case, not very useful, because the absence of reference values in the article, don’t let us characterize the system, to know where are we standing.

FEderico ■

Dear Federico,

The screw pump is just a feeder and does not determine the line pressure.

Therefore make sure that the “new” pump can handle a maximum line pressure of above 2.0 bar.

(preferably 2.5 bar)

Also, redirect the airflow of one compressor through the header box of the pump and the other compressor after the header box as a booster (each compressor its own pipeline). This to save valuable pressure drop for conveying.

A bigger pump might require more power, which could involve electric installation consequences.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear Federico,

The screw pump is just a feeder and does not determine the line pressure.

Therefore make sure that the “new” pump can handle a maximum line pressure of above 2.0 bar.

(preferably 2.5 bar)

Also, redirect the airflow of one compressor through the header box of the pump and the other compressor after the header box as a booster (each compressor its own pipeline). This to save valuable pressure drop for conveying.

A bigger pump might require more power, which could involve electric installation consequences.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear Teus,

we are thinking about trying to run with two pumps in parallel according to the scketch attached. So each pump will receive half solid and half flow, and they join together about 18 meters downstream the pumps.

What do you think about this?

Regards

Federico

href="https://forum.bulk-online.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=26171&d=1300389118" title="Name: Test two pumps two compressors.pdfViews: 249Size: 30.5 KB">Test two pumps two compressors.pdf ■

Dear Teus,

we are thinking about trying to run with two pumps in parallel according to the scketch attached. So each pump will receive half solid and half flow, and they join together about 18 meters downstream the pumps.

What do you think about this?

Regards

Federico

href="https://forum.bulk-online.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=26171&d=1300389118" title="Name: Test two pumps two compressors.pdfViews: 249Size: 30.5 KB">Test two pumps two compressors.pdf ■

Dear Federico,

The system will work with 2 screw pumps in parallel.

(Although the air velocity in the first 18m is a bit low)

However, I do not think it will not solve your problem as the screw pump cannot cope with the 2.0 bar conveying pressure, which still occurs at the required capacity of 215 tons/hr.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear Federico,

The system will work with 2 screw pumps in parallel.

(Although the air velocity in the first 18m is a bit low)

However, I do not think it will not solve your problem as the screw pump cannot cope with the 2.0 bar conveying pressure, which still occurs at the required capacity of 215 tons/hr.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Teus,

thank you very much. The supplier is coming to the plant again, and will make a new proposal

Federico ■

Teus,

thank you very much. The supplier is coming to the plant again, and will make a new proposal

Federico ■

Dear Federico,

Like to hear the result.

You can also use the private message function of the forum.

Success

Teus ■

Dear Federico,

Like to hear the result.

You can also use the private message function of the forum.

Success

Teus ■

Mr. Agarwal's article, "Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Pneumatic Conveying Systems," was very informative to me. I am a combustible dust explosion consultant and I wanted a better understanding of the theory and design of pneumatic conveying systems. This article was very well written and clearly explained the fundamentals in a way that was easy to follow and understand. Although I have no need to perform calculations for design purposes, I can now speak intelligently with designers about these systems when discussing combustible dust explosion concerns.

Thanks to Mr. Agarwal for making this article available! ■

Mr. Agarwal's article, "Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Pneumatic Conveying Systems," was very informative to me. I am a combustible dust explosion consultant and I wanted a better understanding of the theory and design of pneumatic conveying systems. This article was very well written and clearly explained the fundamentals in a way that was easy to follow and understand. Although I have no need to perform calculations for design purposes, I can now speak intelligently with designers about these systems when discussing combustible dust explosion concerns.

Thanks to Mr. Agarwal for making this article available! ■

Dear Mr. Amit,

First of all thanks for your mail. I am going through your document. I am developing a spread sheet for calculation of pressure drop based on article.

Also my main concern is how to calculate the CFM required for conveying of fly ash particles, hence kindly advice me in this topic.

Thanks & Regards,

J.N. Manivannan ■

Dear Mr. Amit,

First of all thanks for your mail. I am going through your document. I am developing a spread sheet for calculation of pressure drop based on article.

Also my main concern is how to calculate the CFM required for conveying of fly ash particles, hence kindly advice me in this topic.

Thanks & Regards,

J.N. Manivannan ■

Dear J.N. Manivannan,

Before you can calculate the airflow (CFM) you have to determine the air velocity at atmospheric conditions as a factor times the suspension velocity of the fly ash (For Flyash, conveying airvelocity at atmospheric conditions, 1 bar, is approx. 10 m/sec).

The next step is to choose a pipe diameter.

The required compressor displacement is the calculated as air velocity x pipe area.

After modeling the pipe line, a capacity calculation can be made including the sedimentation check.

If the calculated capacity is too low, a bigger pipe line diameter is chosen and the capacity calculation repeated.

It helps, to have some experience in the application, in order to make a first educated guess.

The optimum solution (Highest capacity, lowest energy consumption per ton, investment) is found after some trial and error.

A sophisticated calculation also accounts for the influence of temperatures, relative humidity, compressor type, ambient pressure, air supply pipe lines, filters, various SLR, cooling, booster compressor and feeder type.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear J.N. Manivannan,

Before you can calculate the airflow (CFM) you have to determine the air velocity at atmospheric conditions as a factor times the suspension velocity of the fly ash (For Flyash, conveying airvelocity at atmospheric conditions, 1 bar, is approx. 10 m/sec).

The next step is to choose a pipe diameter.

The required compressor displacement is the calculated as air velocity x pipe area.

After modeling the pipe line, a capacity calculation can be made including the sedimentation check.

If the calculated capacity is too low, a bigger pipe line diameter is chosen and the capacity calculation repeated.

It helps, to have some experience in the application, in order to make a first educated guess.

The optimum solution (Highest capacity, lowest energy consumption per ton, investment) is found after some trial and error.

A sophisticated calculation also accounts for the influence of temperatures, relative humidity, compressor type, ambient pressure, air supply pipe lines, filters, various SLR, cooling, booster compressor and feeder type.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear Mr. Agarwal,

I can say nothing but lots of thanks for your article. It has been done very well and easy to understand. I am running through the theory now. Hopefully, I may learn more base on it.

Best Regards,

Sheng. ■

Dear Mr. Agarwal,

I can say nothing but lots of thanks for your article. It has been done very well and easy to understand. I am running through the theory now. Hopefully, I may learn more base on it.

Best Regards,

Sheng. ■

Dear Mr Agarwal,

Could you send me a copy of your article "Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Pneumatic Conveying Systems" published in Powder Handling and Processing magazine?

Thanks in advance.

Jerome Desrochers

jeromedesrochers@hotmail.com ■

Dear Mr Agarwal,

Could you send me a copy of your article "Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Pneumatic Conveying Systems" published in Powder Handling and Processing magazine?

Thanks in advance.

Jerome Desrochers

jeromedesrochers@hotmail.com ■

Sir thank you for the article. I have use it for our conveying system.

However we still have problems. feeding system is positve.

Anyone who has the idea how to design the feeder? ■

Sir thank you for the article. I have use it for our conveying system.

However we still have problems. feeding system is positve.

Anyone who has the idea how to design the feeder? ■

Dear emeliano.aron,

If you explain your system and the nature of your problem, then a more specific reply is possible.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear emeliano.aron,

If you explain your system and the nature of your problem, then a more specific reply is possible.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Originally Posted by Teus Tuinenburg

Dear emeliano.aron,

If you explain your system and the nature of your problem, then a more specific reply is possible.

Have a nice day

Teus

Good Day to All,

Our system is more on a venturi - nozzle system. There is a nozzle at the blower part, and a venturi at the inlet of the conveying pipe. Due to the possitive pressure and the material being a low dense, it would hand up at the feeder thus limiting our conveying. I'm attaching a sketch of our system.

My question is anyone who knows how to design the dosing system? the nozzle? the venturi so as not to have a positive pressure?

Attachments

pneumaticJPEG:forum_attachments/file_container/pneumatic.jpg (BMP)

■

Originally Posted by Teus Tuinenburg

Dear emeliano.aron,

If you explain your system and the nature of your problem, then a more specific reply is possible.

Have a nice day

Teus

Good Day to All,

Our system is more on a venturi - nozzle system. There is a nozzle at the blower part, and a venturi at the inlet of the conveying pipe. Due to the possitive pressure and the material being a low dense, it would hand up at the feeder thus limiting our conveying. I'm attaching a sketch of our system.

My question is anyone who knows how to design the dosing system? the nozzle? the venturi so as not to have a positive pressure?

Attachments

pneumaticJPEG:forum_attachments/file_container/pneumatic.jpg (BMP)

■

Dear emeliano.aron,

Venturi eductor systems are very sensitive for pressures and temperatures.

They are normally for very low conveying pressures.

There should be a slight negative pressure at the eductor intake and the kinetic energy of the air exiting the nozzle is converted into air pressure + kinetic energy of the conveyed material.

The converted air pressure is used for the pneumatic conveying losses.

All these energies have to be balanced.

F.i in your case:

- overfeeding causes too much conveying pressure and the nozzle becomes sub critical and feeds less air, increasing the pressure problem.

- Impropriate design of installation (Too small eductor, freezing eductor, too long pipeline, etc)

Have you consulted your supplier?

Have a look at:

http://www.foxvalve.com/

and

http://www.enviro-engineering.de/english/aboutus.php

For a proper evaluation of your system by an experienced expert (In this case, not me), more information is needed.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear emeliano.aron,

Venturi eductor systems are very sensitive for pressures and temperatures.

They are normally for very low conveying pressures.

There should be a slight negative pressure at the eductor intake and the kinetic energy of the air exiting the nozzle is converted into air pressure + kinetic energy of the conveyed material.

The converted air pressure is used for the pneumatic conveying losses.

All these energies have to be balanced.

F.i in your case:

- overfeeding causes too much conveying pressure and the nozzle becomes sub critical and feeds less air, increasing the pressure problem.

- Impropriate design of installation (Too small eductor, freezing eductor, too long pipeline, etc)

Have you consulted your supplier?

Have a look at:

http://www.foxvalve.com/

and

http://www.enviro-engineering.de/english/aboutus.php

For a proper evaluation of your system by an experienced expert (In this case, not me), more information is needed.

Have a nice day

Teus ■

Dear Mr Agarwal,

Thank you very much for the article. I found it is easy to follow, step by step. It explained the theory of pneumatic conveying system, very easy to understand. It was very helpful in my initial calculation. Thanks again.

Best regards,

Suraphan ■

Dear Mr Agarwal,

Thank you very much for the article. I found it is easy to follow, step by step. It explained the theory of pneumatic conveying system, very easy to understand. It was very helpful in my initial calculation. Thanks again.

Best regards,

Suraphan ■

Dear Mr. Amrit,

Thank you for your article "Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Pneumatic Conveying Systems". Article is very useful and very user friendly for calculation.

Regards ■

Dear Mr. Amrit,

Thank you for your article "Theory and Design of Dilute Phase Pneumatic Conveying Systems". Article is very useful and very user friendly for calculation.

Regards ■