What type of advice are you seeking, free or comprehensive professional support?

1. The belt width is larger than would be conventional - it would be closer to 1400mm wide and for less than your nominated belt strength

2. Power is about 25-30% larger than necessary - maybe there is some alternative justification.

3. Why the booster mid drive? Did the client do something unusual with the geometry? It would not be recommended with a normal design. Two head drives would seem sufficient.

4. Our speed recommendation will exceed your 4.5 m/s. The speed, width, idler count (noise), dynamics, system cost, and reliability can be argued as to the best fit for purpose. In world-wide competition, the proposed design would not be accepted for both cost and reliability. However, there are circumstances which need to be considered which are not evident in your information:

a) ventilation flow - con-current or counter-current and at what velocity? Will a cover be of value?

b) particle size distribution?

c) is cost an issue or are the specifications set in stone?

d) material density and largest lumt size?

e) idler trough configuration and spacing?

f) L-10 Life of idlers?

g) if noise is an issue then larger idler spacing and speed may offer significant advantages in maintenance and overall performance

e) there are many more questions which should be evaluated outside the forum.

5. You should be informed of the best application of a counterweigth system. Some designs will deliver unacceptably high dynamic shock-waves exceeding normal steady-state forces to the return strand that have likely not be accounted for by the designer. ■

I might add that heavy-duty designs are our specialty. Belts with specificaltions to:

1. capacity .............. 20,000 t/h (iron ore)

2. Speed ................. 8.5 m/s (coal drift & overland)

3. Belt strength ...... ST-8000 N/mm - ST-10,000 N/mm in construction

4. Power ................ 10,000 kW/in a single flight

5. Length ............... 20,300 m in a single flight ■