Dear Sir

Calculations for pipe conveyor cannot be done under this forum. These calculations are properitry for pipe conveyor suppliers and method of calculation differ from manufacturerto manufacturer However basic difference in pipe conveyor and belt conveyor horsepower calculation is as follows

1.0 IDLER BEARING CHURNING RESISTANCE

In case of pipe conveyor Idler friction due to bearing and seal churning is much more in pipe conveyor compared to conventional conveyor.

In conventional conveyor no of rollers on carrying side are 3 and 1 roller on return side on double carrying side spacing

If you refer CEMA Ai factor is to be calculated considering 6 rolls on carrying side and six rolls on return side after 1 spacing.

In other terms in conventional conveyors total 3.5 carrying and return rollers are provided at each idler spacing where as in pipe conveyors 12 rollers are provided after each idler spacing accordingly Ai factor is increased by 12/3.5 = 3.42 times

2.0Power Required to open and close the pipe

When ever you open and close the pipe there is additional load on adjustable idler rollers bigger the pipe diameter larger the load on rollers . All manufacturers are having there own methods to calculate this load. It is difficult to define this load as same is dependent on rigidity of the belt.. Belt manufacturers are rigidity factor based on pipe conveyor requirement.

3.0Power Required To Negotiate Curves

To negotiate horizontal curve or vertical curve additional power is exerted on rollers in the direction of curve, This load on the rollers can be calculated from tension in the belt at curve point and angle of change at roller location

You will find the value of this load is more where tension is more , in other words curve near head end will have more load on rollers compared to curve near tail end similarly curve on carrying side will have more load compared to return side.

4.0Power Required To keep the belt closed

As at each panel location pipe conveyor belt exerts force on roller as belt tries to open . this additional load is much more in new belt and reduces after some time .This force depends on Belt rigidity factor.

All other tensions are calculated in same way as of conventional conveyors.

A R SINGH ■

Dear Mr Khalid,

Go to site as given below:

www.ckit.co.za

Regards.

A.Banerjee ■

Dear Mr Khald

www.ckit.co.za is a good site to know about pipe conveyor. In my openion pipe conveyor calculation methods are different from different manufacturers and also depends of quality of belt procured. I donot think anybody will give you complete detailed calculations of these conveyors

A R SINGH ■

Dear MR. Khalid,

Open the site.Look at top. Click on PIPE. Watch the left corner. Click on POWER CALS.You will get .All we get help from this site. It is ment for all types of conveyor.I down loaded 60 pages from it.I request you open the site from your internet connection instead of going from FORUM.Please look care fully, you will get.

Regards.

A.Banerjee ■

Dear Khalid

I fully agree with you calculation method is not indicated on this site

A R SINGH ■

Dear MR.Khalid,

The type of information you want, is not available in this free site.Then you have to collect design manual of JPC & Bridge stone.In this forum how can I give those to you.

Regards,

A.Banerjee ■

Dear Mr.Khalid,

I tried 4 times to forward some documents on the above subject, but failed.Sorroy..

Regards.

A.Banerjee ■

Pipe Conveyor Power Calculation

The calculation of power requirements and associated tensions to pipe conveyors is not that different from the belt conveyor analysis, and using the procedures as defined in CEMA will produce a close approximation.

The variations from CEMA relate to idler quantity, pipe closing and curve analysis. Although these issues tend to add some mystery to the analysis they are in themselves very simple.

Idler Quantity

As stated above there is generally 6 rolls carry and return which is up to three times more than on conventional conveyors however idler spacing are nominally 2m and only the bottom carry rolls (three off), offer any real resistance, in fact it is common practice to use only three rolls on the return strand.

Of more interest is the diameter of the roll, which plays a significant part in the power used by pipe conveyors. The original design concepts proposed by JPC used 60 to 80mm diameter rolls, which proved to offer poor reliability, running at some 1000 rpm, and therefore high in power consumption.

CDI conducted extensive tests in the field of rubber / roll relationships and produced a very significant paper, “The Power of Rubber”, which seriously questioned the use of small roll diameters, (amongst other things), especially for long overland systems.

Note the paper is available at :-http://www.ckit.co.za/secure/conveyor/papers/troughed/rubber/rubber.htm

Applying the concepts of larger roll diameters to pipe conveyor designs has also resulted in the decrease in power drawn by pipe conveyors, in fact it is very unusual in pipe conveyor design to see roll diameters of less than 114mm and with very little exception the larger overland pipe conveyors are tending to use the 150 mm roll diameters.

The exceptions are with budget constraints where designers are taking short cuts knowingly passing on the costs to the client in the form of very high operating and maintenance costs, obviously doing little to promote the use of pipe conveyors in the future.

Pipe Closing

The power attributed to pipe closing is also almost insignificant, especially in longer installations; there is however a rider to this and that relates to initial operation, (commissioning). Here we see that empty belt power demand can often be running at installed motor power. This is a result of the stiffness of the belt and we see that within days correctly selected belts will run-in and be absorbing the power calculated.

Curve Analysis

Here is probably the real difference between the design of belt and pipe conveyors. The pipe conveyor is promoted with the aim of removing transfer points, (Transfer Points Must be Earned), requiring that they are often required to negotiate tight horizontal and vertical curves.

As stated above the theoretical approach to the analysis is again simple, (Mr AR Singh), however it is not the mathematics, which dictate, but the actual idler layout in the curve together with the panel location and finally the belt configuration, this is where invariably the design fails.

So to conclude, the simple design calculator provided on the Ckit Web site is only a guide, to be used to select order of magnitude data, should one wish to proceed further then I think a look at the CDI web site may assist in obtaining a very comprehensive power and tension calculator.

However the real secret in good pipe conveyor design is to produce a sensible layout and work with a truly dedicated conveyor belt manufacturer.

Phil Staples

Ckit ■

Dear Peter,

Please pass on my thanks to Mr. Staples for his expository on pipe conveyor design and on CDI.

I heard he had died and was received at your gate. We now know this to be true.

Please wish him my best. ■

Dear Phil

It is nice to see you on forum sfter long time. This forum was not live without you

A R SINGH ■

Pipe Conveyor Power Calculation

The calculation of power requirements and associated tensions to pipe conveyors is not that different from the belt conveyor analysis, and using the procedures as defined in CEMA will produce a close approximation.

The variations from CEMA relate to idler quantity, pipe closing and curve analysis. Although these issues tend to add some mystery to the analysis they are in themselves very simple.

Idler Quantity

As stated above there is generally 6 rolls carry and return which is up to three times more than on conventional conveyors however idler spacing are nominally 2m and only the bottom carry rolls (three off), offer any real resistance, in fact it is common practice to use only three rolls on the return strand.

Of more interest is the diameter of the roll, which plays a significant part in the power used by pipe conveyors. The original design concepts proposed by JPC used 60 to 80mm diameter rolls, which proved to offer poor reliability, running at some 1000 rpm, and therefore high in power consumption.

CDI conducted extensive tests in the field of rubber / roll relationships and produced a very significant paper, “The Power of Rubber”, which seriously questioned the use of small roll diameters, (amongst other things), especially for long overland systems.

Note the paper is available at :-http://www.ckit.co.za/secure/conveyor/papers/troughed/rubber/rubber.htm

Applying the concepts of larger roll diameters to pipe conveyor designs has also resulted in the decrease in power drawn by pipe conveyors, in fact it is very unusual in pipe conveyor design to see roll diameters of less than 114mm and with very little exception the larger overland pipe conveyors are tending to use the 150 mm roll diameters.

The exceptions are with budget constraints where designers are taking short cuts knowingly passing on the costs to the client in the form of very high operating and maintenance costs, obviously doing little to promote the use of pipe conveyors in the future.

Pipe Closing

The power attributed to pipe closing is also almost insignificant, especially in longer installations; there is however a rider to this and that relates to initial operation, (commissioning). Here we see that empty belt power demand can often be running at installed motor power. This is a result of the stiffness of the belt and we see that within days correctly selected belts will run-in and be absorbing the power calculated.

Curve Analysis

Here is probably the real difference between the design of belt and pipe conveyors. The pipe conveyor is promoted with the aim of removing transfer points, (Transfer Points Must be Earned), requiring that they are often required to negotiate tight horizontal and vertical curves.

As stated above the theoretical approach to the analysis is again simple, (Mr AR Singh), however it is not the mathematics, which dictate, but the actual idler layout in the curve together with the panel location and finally the belt configuration, this is where invariably the design fails.

So to conclude, the simple design calculator provided on the Ckit Web site is only a guide, to be used to select order of magnitude data, should one wish to proceed further then I think a look at the CDI web site may assist in obtaining a very comprehensive power and tension calculator.

However the real secret in good pipe conveyor design is to produce a sensible layout and work with a truly dedicated conveyor belt manufacturer.

Phil Staples

Ckit ■

Pipe Conveyor Power Calculation

The calculation of power requirements and associated tensions to pipe conveyors is not that different from the belt conveyor analysis, and using the procedures as defined in CEMA will produce a close approximation.

The variations from CEMA relate to idler quantity, pipe closing and curve analysis. Although these issues tend to add some mystery to the analysis they are in themselves very simple.

Idler Quantity

As stated above there is generally 6 rolls carry and return which is up to three times more than on conventional conveyors however idler spacing are nominally 2m and only the bottom carry rolls (three off), offer any real resistance, in fact it is common practice to use only three rolls on the return strand.

Of more interest is the diameter of the roll, which plays a significant part in the power used by pipe conveyors. The original design concepts proposed by JPC used 60 to 80mm diameter rolls, which proved to offer poor reliability, running at some 1000 rpm, and therefore high in power consumption.

CDI conducted extensive tests in the field of rubber / roll relationships and produced a very significant paper, “The Power of Rubber”, which seriously questioned the use of small roll diameters, (amongst other things), especially for long overland systems.

Note the paper is available at :-http://www.ckit.co.za/secure/conveyor/papers/troughed/rubber/rubber.htm

Applying the concepts of larger roll diameters to pipe conveyor designs has also resulted in the decrease in power drawn by pipe conveyors, in fact it is very unusual in pipe conveyor design to see roll diameters of less than 114mm and with very little exception the larger overland pipe conveyors are tending to use the 150 mm roll diameters.

The exceptions are with budget constraints where designers are taking short cuts knowingly passing on the costs to the client in the form of very high operating and maintenance costs, obviously doing little to promote the use of pipe conveyors in the future.

Pipe Closing

The power attributed to pipe closing is also almost insignificant, especially in longer installations; there is however a rider to this and that relates to initial operation, (commissioning). Here we see that empty belt power demand can often be running at installed motor power. This is a result of the stiffness of the belt and we see that within days correctly selected belts will run-in and be absorbing the power calculated.

Curve Analysis

Here is probably the real difference between the design of belt and pipe conveyors. The pipe conveyor is promoted with the aim of removing transfer points, (Transfer Points Must be Earned), requiring that they are often required to negotiate tight horizontal and vertical curves.

As stated above the theoretical approach to the analysis is again simple, (Mr AR Singh), however it is not the mathematics, which dictate, but the actual idler layout in the curve together with the panel location and finally the belt configuration, this is where invariably the design fails.

So to conclude, the simple design calculator provided on the Ckit Web site is only a guide, to be used to select order of magnitude data, should one wish to proceed further then I think a look at the CDI web site may assist in obtaining a very comprehensive power and tension calculator.

However the real secret in good pipe conveyor design is to produce a sensible layout and work with a truly dedicated conveyor belt manufacturer.

Phil Staples

Ckit ■