I assume that the removed rollers are not then rebuilt and reused. Following is a typical method for designating for each plant conveyor number:

1. Allocate an index to track each idler support stringer frame set, which is numerically set from tail to head as 1,2,3...

2. Allocate an index for each position within the stringer frame set and whether it is carry or return idlersuch as 1,2,3,4 or more per frame set and C or R to carry or return

3. When they are removed ID left, center or right hand such as LT,CT,or RT

Then we get to record every roll exchange, by example 56-2-C-RT, to record the 56th stringer, second idler set, carry side, and right hand. This is done with entry into a database spread sheet so that it can be searched by attributes. ■

Hi David,

Your strategy of tracking idler usage by failure type and location is a very good idea and one that is extremely useful as far as maintenance reduction is concerned. In a well maintained conveyor system idler maintenance can represent 40% of the routine workload. In respect to tracking idler usage, CRA-ATD, a division of Rio that has now been disbanded, developed an excellent piece of software that unfortunately they did not maintain post 2000. Our company developed a copy of this software and then further developed it. There is the opportunity to further develop this software so you can basically scan in the data but the starting point that puts many people off is the one you are looking at now, the need to set up a tagging system so that you can uniquely identify the location of each idler. If you are interested in what we have done, send me an email on colin.benjamin@gcsm.com.au and I will send you further info.

Regards

Colin Benjamin

Gulf Conveyor Systems P/L ■

Hi,

I am just curious as to what end purpose is this idea/proposal.

We numbered our idler frame from the head end towards the tail

This is for location for replacements and ID failed locations.

However, we use a tag and the ID is not recorded in general.

If U are trying to get the B10 life etc - then I think that U will find tracking this over the years a big task.

We did RCA on our failures.

In one case, we found that wind blown stockpile dust - one main direction was causing the roll failures - cheap seals. Yet all the other conveyors worked well.....it was the dust....and sitting on the seals of the wing idlers

In other words - field data and talking to the fitters and making obs etc can reap improvements without setting up some elaborate system and waiting years.

If U go the numbering system - U may wish to look at bar coding and then having scanners with the walkby attendents or fitters....

U will also need to capture motor run time hours - should be able to do with wih your SCADA.

Cheers

James ■

Hi David,

Tracking idlers has been a topic for discussion over many years and people often have two thoughts regarding the benefits.

For those who have an obvious high usage of idlers (based on stock ordering) do benefit from tracking idler usage, and along with local knowledge from fitters and engineers in the field not only can justify but pinpoint high usage areas and causes on individual conveyors.

For those how do not have an obvious problem, ie. only replace a handful of idlers every month or so, the cost of establishing and maintaining a Idler Tracking system can often outweigh the potential savings.

More importantly, idler failures must be viewed as a potential risk to a conveyor system, and the associated potential effects due to these failures is where understanding idler failures is very beneficial.

Our company has developed a comprehensive Idler Management system that incorporates the software and the implementation of the system.

If you would like further information, please contact me on peterm@pdsonline.com.au and I would be happy to discuss further.

Regards

Peter McCurdy

Productivity Development Solutions ■

Hi David

I recall the development of the idler tracking system at CRA ATD all those years ago, mentiuoned above. There were a lot of conveyors involved, and the method of numbering of the idler frames was a significant issue. In the initial development stages numbers were painted on by hand, but that was a big task and not all that effective. An efficient tagging system might be an improvement.

A numbering system has further advantages in terms of the process of idler replacement. If the idler frames have a unique code, then that code can be checked against the records for that conveyor and the correct idler collected from the stock before heading out to do a replacement. This can save a surprising amount of time.

The story James tells about the stockpile dust reminds me of a similar situation where the conveyor was crossing a causeway. There was a salt stockpile upwind as well. The number of failures on that section of the conveyor was significantly higher than on the rest of the conveyor and it was mainly happening on the side facing the prevailing wind. It turned out to be corrosion of seals and bearings.

It was noticeable that the vast majority of the idlers were from the initial installation. They had been running for 15 years or more. The areas of high failure that showed up quite quickly were mostly as you would expect where there was dust or slurry getting through the seals.

So, apart from the overall benefit of having a numbering system in place, I would expect your tracking to firstly pick up the hot spots that will correlate with visual plant inspection, then the more subtle effects that might not be picked up so easily by inspection, and that any long term idler life issues would be lost in the statistical haze.

As a matter of interest, I spent many hours of experimentation in our laboratories to see if we could implement an in-belt sensor to detect peelers, but without any success. But even peelers, which can cause the most grief, might be more easily dealt with by a regular daily walk of each belt.

Best of luck with whatever you decide. ■

Dear Peter, Peter, Dave & All

The indexing system I described is based Channar. From memory, I do not believe the tags to each stringer assembly were hand painted. I thought they were all stenciled onto vertical mounted plates. This ID serves multiple purposes:

a)Belt alignment notations,

b)Frame anomalies,

c)Wind hood problems,

d)Sleeper, piers, pad or other support settlement,

e)Structural corrosion,

f)Idler replacement with notes,

g) Excessive vibration

h)Instrumentation contact faults

i)et al

These can be identified and recorded to track environmental and other elements that need attention.

Any good maintenance practice records the failed rolls, and other events noted, even if they number in the 1-5's and not 10’s-20 per week or per month. It is no big deal to record the timing and location of these conditions including failed roller position on a sheet of paper, on a clipboard and then enter it into the plant database when the daily/monthly or random tour is complete. This is, at most, a 5-minute exercise. It can then become a talking point, without the fog, when it becomes obvious to do more than just record.

I think I will implement this as a "to do" with a little support program to assist maintenance personnel. ■

G'day Larry,

I guess I consider stencilling to be a form of hand painting And it does take some effort to fit a belt like Channar with plates and numbers you would have to admit.

There are differences between long belts and the smaller ones nested in process plant where access and obscuration by slurry etc. can be a problem. Horses for courses.

But I do support all the points you have made above. Numbering has many benefits with respect to maintenance. It is surprising in some ways that it was not implemented much earlier and more widely.

In fact, it would seem to me to be a good idea to do it as a matter of course at installation of all new plant. In which case there is some room for innovative thinking.

Cheers ■

Numbering should be a must. The maintainer may not always be the inspector.

Helps ID the location and save time.

I still think that we need to look at the ROI -how much $ are spent on idlers/replacement and cost of addtional "preventative" (aka data collection) and resulting return.

We have a quite few belts on site and idlers is not the issue in terms of costs ie scratch only where it itches.

I did a trial with another supplier idlers - type A and type B alternating on the same belt with issues. Got lost in the fog on tracking and results....

With Garlan idler sets - our maintainers usally change the whole set rather than pull them apart and replace the faulty idler roll - quicker/easier but not necc. cheaper???

Also, sorting out the minimum order qty from the supplier - as some roll sets are not common wrt cost minimisation and usage is another area of cost saving potential including supplier held inventory can pay dividends

I think that we also should be looking a safe change out practices as well..this includes belt lifting and also idler roll control/handling esp with overhead belts.

Cheers

James ■