conveyor equipment manufacturers association · 2019-06-11 · wilbur, overland conveyor co. inc.;...

THE VOICE OF THE CONVEYOR INDUSTRY OF THE AMERICAS

2019 CEMA ENGINEERING CONFERENCE BULK BELT SYSTEMS AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES COMMITTEE

La Playa Hotel, Naples, FL Tuesday, June 25, 2019 – 2:00 pm

AGENDA

1. Call to Order 2. Attendance and Introductions 3. Review and Approval of June 26, 2018 Minutes (Attached) 4. Old Business

a) Ceramic Lagging – Updates (Continental presentation attached) b) Cleated & Sidewall Belt for Incline Applications – Updates c) Energy Efficiency Scale – Develop Scale – Updates d) Gearless Conveyor Drives – Updates e) Appendix D – Installation Standard – Updates f) Idler Maintenance Safety – Item tabled g) DEM Transfer Chute Design/Analysis – Updates h) High Speed Belt Trajectory – Related to System Design – Tabled – Chapters 1,2 and 6

updates due to tabled decision to not move forward with 8th Edition Belt Book. i) 2nd Printing of 7th Edition, CEMA Belt Conveyors for Bulk Materials – Updates from

Subcommittee review. (Errata List attached)

5. New Business a) CEMA White Paper – Volunteers needed

6. Next Meeting – June 16, 2020, La Playa Hotel, Naples, FL. 7. Adjourn

Paul Ormsbee, Chair Todd Hollingsworth, Vice Chair

Conveyor Equipment Manufacturers Association


MINUTES OF THE CEMA ENGINEERING CONFERENCE

BULK BELT SYSTEMS AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES COMMITTEE Tuesday, June 26, 2018

1. Meeting Called to order at 2:30 pm - Andrew Hustrulid, Shaw Almex Industries Ltd. 2. Attendance and Introductions - 58 attendees. (Attendees list attached). 3. Reviewed and approved minutes from June 27, 2017. 4. Old Business.

a) Review of the Open Project List for Committee (Updates). i. Ceramic Lagging: The goal is to define application requirements, rules, and best practices

Sub-Committee: Paul Ormsbee, Overland Conveyor Co. (chair); Andrew Jennings, Conveyor Dynamics, Inc. Added to the sub-committee: Blaine Stoll, Richwood; Brett DeVries, FLEXCO; Akiko Wakatsuki, Fenner Dunlop; Benjamin Brewer, Douglas Manufacturing Co., Inc.; Robin Steven, ContiTech North America, Inc. The sub-committee will address how to avoid belt wear, and what considerations need to be made when utilizing direct bond ceramic lagging.

ii. Conveyor Belt Scale – Remote Condition Monitoring: The goal is to define belt scale applications – performance / system monitoring, impact on predictive maintenance, interlocking logic, develop tie in with controls group – data collection – web based. Sub-Committee: Rick Tschantz, Imperial Technologies Inc. (chair); Raul Morales, Rexnord Industries LLC; Sergio Zamorano, Sergio Zamorano Ingeniería (ZING); Carl Hessler, FLEXCO; Charlie Ritinski, Sumitomo Machinery Corp. of America; Robin Steven, ContiTech North America, Inc.; Greg Westphall, FLEXCO, Andrew Jennings, Conveyor Dynamics, Inc Rick Tschantz did a presentation about this topic (attached). No further action on this topic.

iii. Pull-Up Calculations for Multiple Load Points: The goal is to simplify calculations. Sub-Committee: Luis Estay, Bechtel Mining & Metals (chair); Paul Ormsbee & Mark Wilbur, Overland Conveyor Co. Inc.; Sergio Zamorano, Sergio Zamorano Ingeniería (ZING) Luis Estay presented a summary about this topic. He compared reality to CEMA feeder calculations: the Bruff method seems to come up with too high of a tension/power, various other methods were evaluated, and it was determined that CEMA is very similar to others. Also, CEMA’s way is acceptable as is for now.

iv. Cleated & Sidewall Belt for Incline Applications: No comments from 2016, cleated belt adds to existing table in the 7th Ed. CEMA Belt Book; Material properties dependent: caking or sticking/lumping materials, molded vs. cleated (fabricated design), specialty belts; create awareness: consider end user preference, specific design based on material



properties (pocket-cleated-molded, maintenance-cleaning, etc.). Interest in exploring topic further. Belt manufacturer’s involvement required. Sub-Committee: Geoff Normanton, Fenner Dunlop (chair); Robin Steven, ContiTech North America, Inc.; Akiko Wakatsuki, Fenner Dunlop Added to the sub-committee: Robin Steven, ContiTech North America, Inc.; Laura Hoggan, Rema TIP TOP/North America, Inc. (her involvement subject to company joining CEMA). Akiko Wakatsuki will investigate it for the next Engineering Conference.

v. Energy Efficiency Scale – Develop Scale: Europeans have ratings, easy to follow standard for determining ratings of efficiency, 7 levels or grades, temperature & application dependent, reference new Australian Standard 1334: Methods of Testing Conveyor and Elevator Belting, (Rolling resistance / indention); physical properties of rubber vary by compound. The goal is save energy. Belt manufacturers must rate belt for application. Sub-Committee: Robin Steven, ContiTech North America, Inc. (chair); Todd Swinderman, RToddS Engineering, LLC; Andrew Jennings, Conveyor Dynamics, Inc.; Paul Ormsbee, Overland Conveyor Co. Inc.; Akiko Wakatsuki, Fenner Dunlop. Added to the sub-committee: Andrew Hustrulid, Shaw Almex Industries Ltd.; Thomas Hubbert, Dos Santos International Robin Steven did a presentation about this topic. Todd Swinderman has a document discussing all the things that take energy on a conveyor. Some attendees mentioned it is necessary to have a larger scope to define energy efficiency. Further discussion from this committee on this topic for the next Engineering Conference.

vi. Gearless Conveyor Drives: Detail included in 7th Ed. CEMA Belt Book, Chapter 16 “Gearless Conveyor Drives”, application specific, review detail and revise as required. For future inputs on Chapter 13 also. Sub-Committee: Raul Morales, Rexnord Industries LLC (chair); Alexander Vitou, ABB, Eric Jackson, TAKRAF USA, Inc.; Charlie Ritinski, Sumitomo Machinery Corp. of America; Luis Estay, Bechtel Mining & Metals. Added to the sub-committee: Todd Hollingsworth, Engineered Conveyor Systems LLC. Keep this topic active for the next year.

vii. Appendix D – Installation Standards: New conveyor installation – alignment tracking. Need more input/detail from field. For the 8th Ed. CEMA Belt Book. Sub-Committee: Todd Swinderman, RToddS Engineering, LLC (chair); Rick Tschantz, Imperial Technologies Inc.; Ian Landry, Hatch Todd Swinderman asked for contacts with people who actually align and install conveyors, Laura Hoggan, Rema Tip Top North America, Inc. volunteered to provided contacts.

viii. Idler Maintenance Safety: Change Out Technology. Automated system – equipment development – innovations. Idler- robotic arm – video from Australia. Safety. Sub-Committee: Ian Landry, Hatch (chair); Eric Jackson TAKRAF USA, Inc. This item was tabled since no committee members were present.


ix. CEMA 8th Ed. CEMA Belt Book – Updates from AM 2018 Naylu Garces mentioned that in 2018 CEMA Annual Meeting it was decided the 2nd printing of 7th Ed. CEMA Belt Book, is to be updated to include all accumulated errata for all languages. The sub-committee will review the errata list. Sub-Committee: Andrew Hustrulid, Shaw Almex Industries Ltd. (Chair); Andrew Jennings, Conveyor Dynamics, Inc.; Todd Swinderman, RToddS Engineering LLC; Paul Ormsbee, Overland Conveyor Co., Inc.; Rick Tschantz, Imperial Technologies Inc.; Benjamin Brewer, Douglas Manufacturing Co., Inc.

x. DEM Transfer Chute Design/Analysis: Research study, define material properties. Sub-Committee: Matthew Koca, FLEXCO (chair); Andrew Jennings, Conveyor Dynamics, Inc.; Paul Ormsbee, Overland Conveyor Co., Inc. Added to the sub-committee: Andrew Hustrulid, Shaw Almex Industries Ltd.; Todd Hollingsworth, Engineered Conveyor Systems LLC. The purpose of this is to provide context and warning against misuse. No standard exists to characterize materials. Further investigation from this sub-committee for the next Engineering Conference.

xi. High Speed Belt Trajectory – Related to System Design: Transfer tower – chute design. Edit existing information in Chapters 1 & 2 (Todd Swinderman) in 7th Ed. CEMA Belt Book. Solicit input for consideration. Todd Swinderman mention that things will fall out as chapter 1 and 2 are redone for the 8th Ed. CEMA Belt Book. Todd Hollingsworth, Engineered Conveyor Systems LLC. volunteered to be part of this project.

5. New Business

a) 2nd Printing of 7th Ed. CEMA Belt Book – Errata Review. Refer to item 4. ix for the sub-committee.

b) CEMA White Paper – Volunteers needed Bob Hawkins, Komatsu Mining Corp. volunteered.

c) Proposed Improvements for Chapter 6 for the CEMA 8th Edition Presentation – Paul Ormsbee (attached). It was agreed to submit the idler drag estimate table to idler committee with three (3) main purposes:

- Look at printing realistic drag values - Look at re-testing idlers with funding from OR - The Chair of this meeting needs to make a case to the OR

Phil Hannigan mentioned that CEMA has reserves that could be earmarked to conduct the study should the OR’s approve. Currently no funds are available for these studies.

d) YTD Belt Book Sales Report - Spanish = 9 sold - English = 126 sold - Portuguese = no numbers available. < 23 books (this total is not for 2018 but rather

the total sold since 2015) e) Reschedule Committee

Motion to move this committee to earlier in the conference, so we could have better flow into other committees. This will be mentioned at the closing meeting.


f) Predictive Maintenance Open discussion about this topic, considering combining it with remote condition monitoring sub-committee. This topic will be discussed as a potential new sub-committee during next engineering conference meeting. The subject will cover both online and offline monitoring of conveyors.

6. Election of a Vice Chair - Todd Hollingsworth, Engineered Conveyor Systems LLC. 7. Next Meeting – June 25, 2019, La Playa Hotel, Naples. 8. Adjourn at 4:00 pm. Respectfully submitted,

Andrew Hustrulid, Chair Paul Ormsbee, Vice Chair

Bitte decken Sie die schraffierte Fläche mit einem Bild ab.Please cover the shaded area with a picture.

(24,4 x 7,6 cm)

Ceramic vs Rubber Pulley Lagging FEA StudyContinental/CDI

www.contitech.de

Property of Continental shared with CEMA Ceramic Lagging Subcommittee May 2019

FEA Study of Pulley Lagging

› Higher stress in the bottom cover at entrance, decreasing over wrap angle

FEA Model of Belt Wrapped Around Pulley

3 May 20192Author, © ContiTech AG



- Belt/tile contact produces high pressures - T1 /T2 produces tilted pressure distibutions on tiles and around pulley

Pressure Distribution with Closed Spaced Ceramic Lagging




- Wide spaced ceramic tiles result in belt contacting the rubber lagging - Overall contact pressure is not reduced due to sparce spacing

Pressure Distribution with Wide Spaced Ceramic Lagging




- The rubber lagging has the lowest contact pressure - Tilted pressure distribution is less than for ceramic tiles

Pressure Distribution with Diamond Grooved Rubber Lagging




Lagging Type Maximum Pressure

Close Spaced Ceramic Tile 114% of Rubber Lagging

Wide Spaced Ceramic Tile 126% of Rubber Lagging

Diamond Grooved Rubber Lagging 100% of Rubber Lagging

Summary of Peak PressuresCeramic close and wide spaced vs all rubber lagging




› Ceramic tile pulley lagging creates higher belt contact pressures than all rubber lagging

› Contact pressure on the ceramic tiles spikes at the leading and trailing edges

› For a driven pulley, the leading and trailing peak tile pressures create a torque on the tile

› For conditions of very high torque on ceramic tiles, there is the potential that the torque can exceed the embedded tile adhesion. That is, tiles can break loose.

Conclusions




for your attention!Thank you



5672 Strand Ct., Suite 2, Naples, Florida 34110 Tel: (239) - 514-3441 • Fax: (239) - 514-3470

www.cemanet.org

ERRATA BELT CONVEYORS FOR BULK MATERIALS, 7th Edition

As of February 7, 2019

CHAPTER 2

• Page 29

- On Table 2.21, some Organization’s descriptions are incorrect:

∗ ASTM = American Society for Testing and Materials.

∗ BOCA = Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc.

∗ ISO = International Organization for Standardization.

• Page 46

- Figure 2.34 was corrected. The location of dimension G arrow was changed. It was pointing to the tail pulley and now points to the structure. (Todd Swinderman)

CHAPTER 3

• Page 52

- Table 3.4 - Flowability, angle of repose ranges does not match with Table 3.3 and Table 6.96. Also compares with ANSI/CEMA Standard 550.

• Page 53

- Table 3.5 should be updated according to the updates in ANSI/CEMA standard No. 550.

• Page 56

- On ‘Where’ table, the reference should read: ‘Ref. Chapter 4 Equations: 4.11 for bc and 4.20 for bwmc. (Todd Swinderman)



CHAPTER 4

• Pages 64

- The symbol for tonnage in the paragraph not match with equation 4.5. It should be Q?

• Page 72

- In Bwe formula, the bwe value should be 0.05360. (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 76

- On the paragraph, the symbol bf should read wf. (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 77

- The title of Equation 4.35 should it read: wf, dimensionless ratio…’ (Todd Swinderman)

- Wf means ‘width of bulk material on 100% full belt’ or ‘distance from belt edge of three equal roll troughing idler for belt width, BW’? (see ‘where’ table and title of eq. 4.36).

CHAPTER 5

• Page 102

- Reference Table 5.58 is wrong. 5.58 and 5.59 are Figures. 6.60 and 6.61 are Tables.

• Page 103

- The description of Figures 5.20 and 5.21 should be interchanged. (Todd Swinderman)

- Reference Table 5.53 is wrong. 5.53 is a Figure.

• Page 104

- In the Where box there is a typo on “k” units. It should be [lbf/ft (N/m)]

- Equation 5.22, should be: ( )= + × × ×LF W 2 k W H according to ANSI/CEMA std 502 (Paul

Schmidgall, Superior Industries / Todd Swinderman)

- Equation 5.23, should be: ( )( )

= × ×

= × ×

S

S

F 0.1389 Q H (lbf)

F 0.1234 Q H (N) according to ANSI/CEMA std 502 (Paul

Schmidgall, Superior Industries / Todd Swinderman)

- Above Table 5.24 in the text reference of Table 5.23 should be changed to Table 5.24, because 5.23 is an Equation. (Todd Swinderman)

- Table 5.24 roll diameters conversion for 6” and 7” to mm are incorrect. They should be: 6” should be: 152 mm and 7" should be: 178 mm. (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 107

- Equation 5.26 is incomplete according to CEMA std 502. The formula showed in the BBK is just for metric calculation. It should be:

( )( )6

×=

× i

d TIML

S or ( )

2×

= ×i

d TIML

Sfor metric.


• Page 115

- Compare this example with ANSI/CEMA std 502 for H value. They are different.

• Page 116

- On Figure 5.46, the reference “Table 4.9” is incorrect. 4.9 is a Figure. The correct reference is Table 4.43.

- On Figure 5.46, on full belt loads, the units should be lbf/ft.

• Page 117

- On Figure 5.47, conversion for CIL in metric is incorrect. It should be 1077.4 lbf (488 kgf).

- References from Table 5.39 are incorrect. It should be CEMA Class D x 35° = 1070 lbf (485 kgf).

- Equation used for IML is for metric calculation according to CEMA std 502. The formula used should be:

( )( )

( )( )

0.0208 37,00032.119

6 6 4× ×

= = =× ×i

d TIML

S???

• Page 118

- On Figure 5.49, in the Equation for CIL, KI symbol is incorrect. It should be K1.

• Page 119


• Page 120

- Figure 5.53 should be changed as follows: (Todd Swinderman)


• Page 121

- The fourth line in Figure 5.56 says that K2 is derived from Figure 5.28 which is incorrect, the reference should be Figure 5.30. (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 122

- The statement about impact idlers should read: Impact idlers CEMA class D6 x 35° at 2 ft (0.61 m) spacing with 144,000 hrs predicted bearing L10 life. (CEMA 2016 Eng. Conference)

- The statement about return idlers should read: Return idlers CEMA class D6 x 35° at 12 ft (3.7 m) spacing with 82,800 hrs predicted bearing L10 life.

CEMA ClassEi

[lbf-ft (N-m)]Maximum Lump Size

[in (mm)]B 40 (54) 4 (102)C 160 (217) 6 (152)D 240 (325) 8 (203)E 460 (624) 12 (305)F 870 (1180) 18 (457)

3-Roll Rubber Impact Idlers (Equal Length Rolls)


• Page 123

- On Example Conclusion, the return idler should be at 12 ft (3.7m) instead of 10 ft according to page 122.

CHAPTER 6

• Page 139

- F description should read: external loads affecting ∆Tn, units as needed [lbf (kgf)] or Normalized indentation factor (dimensionless) according to page 163 (Equation 6.44)

• Page 142

- The Equation 6.6 should be:

( )( ) ( )e t x y b b m y p am acT L K K K W 0.015 W W L K H T T T= × × + × + × + × × ± + + + (Todd Swinderman)

- The conversion for Maximum Belt Width should read 96 in (2438 mm)

• Page 143

- The Equation 6.8 should be: ∆ = ∆ + ∆ + ∆∑ ∑ ∑n Energy n Main n Point nT T T T (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 145

- Descriptions of ref. equation 6.25 in this table is showed different to the description given on page 153 below this equation.

- Descriptions of ref. equation 6.33 in this table is showed different to the description given on page 157 below this equation.

- Ref. equation 6.38 is wrong. 6.38 is a Figure. - Descriptions of ref. equations 6.38 & 6.60 in this table is showed different to the description

given on page 173 below equation 6.60. - Descriptions of ref. equation 6.67 in this table is showed different to the description given

on page 181 below this equation. - Descriptions of ref. equation 6.85 in this table is showed different to the description given

on page 187 below this equation. - Ref. equation 6.93 is wrong. It should be 6.92 according to the symbol ∆Tmzn. - Descriptions of ref. equation 6.93 or 6.92 in this table is showed different to the description

given on page 192 below this equation. - Ref. equation 6.112 is wrong. 6.112 is a figure. Which is the correct reference regarding to

∆Tpn? - Ref. equation 6.107 is wrong, 6.107 is a figure. It should be 6.106 according to the symbol

∆Tbcn and the description. - Ref. equation 6.110 is wrong. It should be 6.109 according to the symbol ∆Tdpn and

description. - Ref. equation 6.112 is wrong. 6.112 is a figure. It should be 6.111 according to the symbol

∆Temn and the description.


• Page 148

- On the title, it should read: Energy Related Tensions, nEnergy

T∆∑ according to page 143 in

the components of the Universal Method equation.

• Page 150

- On the title, it should read: Main Resistances, nMainT∆∑ according to page 143 in the

components of the Universal Method equation.

• Page 151

- Ln description is missing in “Where” table

• Page 154

- On the paragraph, Kit and Riv should read KiT and RiV respectively, according to where table.

• Page 155

- On table 6.29, Kiv should read KiV according to ‘where’ table on page 154. - On the paragraph, Riv should read RiV according to ‘where’ table on page 154. - KiTb value for "E" CEMA Idler Series should read -0.0067 (-0.0121) instead of -0.0067 (-0121). (Todd

Swinderman)

• Page 161

- Should BW be added on this ‘where’ table because is part of equation 6.39?

• Page 162

- Dr definition is incomplete according to page 154

• Page 163

- On ‘where’ table below Equation 6.44, T symbol is missing the subscript. It should be Tc.

- Equation 6.44 description should read: F, external loads affecting ∆Tn, units as needed [lbf (kgf)] or Normalized indentation factor (dimensionless)

• Page 164

- On ‘where’ table below Equation 6.46, T symbol is missing the subscript. It should be Tc.

- Review notes in Equation 6.46. ci should be c1,

• Page 173


• Page 176


• 1

- Some definitions in ‘where’ table does not match with the descriptions on the equations above:

∗ imnT∆ description should read ‘idler misalignment force’ or ‘tension loss in flight ”n” from idler misalignment’.


∗ Cim description shows the wrong formula according to Equation 6.68. The description should be ‘design factor for frictional resistance due to idler misalignment’?

∗ eA∆ description should read ‘effective total alignment deviation from perpendicular to belt travel’ or ‘effective total deviation from perpendicular to belt travel’.

• Page 183

- Aei on Equation 6.75 title should read ∆Aei according to the equation and the description is incomplete.

• Page 184

- Reference equation 6.151 is wrong. 6.151 is a Figure

• Page 185

- Reference figure 4.24 is wrong. 4.24 is an equation. This is not the correct reference.

• Page 186

- The symbol ∆Tmgn on the table should read ∆Tgmn according to equation 6.82

• Page 187

- Definitions of equation 6.83 and sbnT∆ on ‘where’ table does not match.

- Csb is sliding friction factor according to ‘where’ table or slider bed sliding friction coefficients according to Table 6.84 description?

- Equation 6.85 is missing factor “2” to make the calculation correct for skirtboard material resistance on both sides of the skirtboards. It should read. (Todd Swinderman)

( )∆ = × × × ×2 2sn s ms n rsT C D L R

• Page 189

- Table 6.88, the Cs factors kgf are wrong. It should be as follows: (Todd Swinderman)


The calculation example Figure 6.89 is correct for Imperial units and with the revised metric Cs factor, it would be correct for metric as well. • Page 191

- Equation used for IML is for metric calculation according to CEMA std 502. The formula used should be:

( )( )

( )( )

0.125 40,707169.6

6 6 5i

d TIML

S× ×

= = =× ×

???

Cs Factorlbf/(in2-ft)

Cs Factorkgf/(mm2-m)

Alumina, pulverized, dry 0.121 0.0002791

Ashes, coal, dry 0.057 0.0001315

Bauxite, ground 0.188 0.0004336

Beans, navy, dry 0.08 0.0001845

Borax 0.073 0.0001684

Bran, granular 0.024 0.0000554

Cement, Portland, dry 0.212 0.0004890

Cement clinker 0.123 0.0002837

Clay, ceramic, dry fines 0.092 0.0002122

Coal, anthracite, sized 0.054 0.0001245

Coal, bituminous, mined 0.075 0.0001730

Coke, ground fine 0.045 0.0001038

Coke, lumps and fines 0.019 0.0000438

Copra, lumpy 0.02 0.0000461

Cullet 0.084 0.0001937

Flour, wheat 0.027 0.0000623

Grains, wheat, corn or rye 0.043 0.0000992

Gravel, bank run 0.115 0.0002652

Gypsum, 1/2" screenings 0.09 0.0002076

Iron ore, 200 lbf/ft3 0.276 0.0006366

Lime, burned, 1/8" 0.117 0.0002699

Lime, hydrated 0.049 0.0001130

Limestone, pulverized, dry 0.128 0.0002952

Magnesium chloride, dry 0.028 0.0000646

Oats 0.022 0.0000507

Phosphate rock, dry, broken 0.018 0.0000415

Salt, common, dry, fine 0.081 0.0001868

Sand, dry, bank 0.137 0.0003160

Sawdust, dry 0.008 0.0000185

Soda ash, heavy 0.07 0.0001615

Starch, small lumps 0.062 0.0001430

Sugar, granulated dry 0.034 0.0000784

Wood chips, hogged fuel 0.009 0.0000208


• Page 192

- In the second paragraph should read: Table 6.88 provides a material friction factor, Cs.

- On Equation 6.92, should be:

( )2mzn n

mznin

W LTS×

∆ =

• Page 193

- On ‘Where Box’, the reference to Table 6.97 is incorrect. It should read Table 6.96. (Al Reicks)

- The description of Cmz do not match with the description on Table 6.96

- On Table 6.96, flowability ranges are not the same comparative with tables 3.3 and 3.4

• Page 194

- On Figure 6.97: (Allen Reicks/Todd Swinderman)

∆Ys2 is not 7%. It should be 0.7%

Exp 1.938 is incorrect. It should be Exp 2.151

Si2 value in Rmz formula should be 5 ft.

bd symbol is incorrect. It should be dm.

∆Tmz2 formula should include the case correction factor Rrmz as a variable and with a value of 1.0, as follows:

2 2 22 2 2 2

2 2

18.86 ft-lbf 500 ft 1.0 (171.2 kgf) or 0.75 1.1225 ft

mz mzmz rmz

i i

W L W lbf kgfT RS S ft m

× × ∆ = × = × = =

• Page 195

- C1in description on equation 6.100 is incomplete.

• Page 196

- Reference to equation 6.100 is wrong. It should be reference to equation 6.99 both cases.

- Add definition for Sin and Cpiw on “where” table.

• Page 197

- On the title, it should read: Point Sources of Tension, int nPo

T∆∑ according to page 143 in

the components of the Universal Method equation.

• Page 201

- ∆Ten description should be added on “where” table below Equation 6.110.

• Page 206

- Reference Figure 6.113 is wrong. 6.113 is an Equation.

• Page 207

- There is not where table for Equation 6.113


• Page 208

- Equation 6.115 should read:

( ) ( )2

8m b i

s

W W SY

T+ ×

∆ =×

- According to equation 6.115, the equation 6.116 should be:

( ) ( )2

100%8

m b is

W W SY

T+ ×

∆ = ××

• Page 209

- Reference Table 6.119 is wrong. 6.119 is an Equation.

• Page 210

- Reference Table 6.104 is wrong. 6.104 is an Equation

• Page 212

- Equation 6.122 should be: ∆ = × minnV a T (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 213

- On Equation 6.124, the symbol td does not match with the symbol in the description.

• 1

- The first line of the page is repeated from page 220 above of Figure 6.134.

• Page 224

- Equation 6.136 has not ‘where’ table with the descriptions of the components.

• Page 229

- On ‘where’ table for Equation 6.138, ∆Tem is missing.

- The units in Equation 6.139 should be in ‘where’ table.

- ‘Where’ table for Equation 6.139 is incomplete. Some symbols are missing: enT∆ , V.

• Page 241

- The symbol ∆∑ nmainn

T should read ∆∑ main nn

T

• Page 245

- The symbol for tension at take-up pulley is Ttu (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 251

- On Equation 6.148, the description should read: Sicn, Critical idler spacing sensitive to belt flap for flight n??

- On Figure 6.149, in the last line, the m symbol is incorrect. It should be mm = 1, according to ‘where’ table above.

• Page 255:

- At the table 6.150, the symbol for bulk density should be γm


- The symbol for surcharge angle should be ɸs or Φs? - The symbol for repose angle should be ɸr or Φr?

• Page 258

- Reference Figure 6.99 is wrong. 6.99 is an equation.

• Page 266

- The reference to Figure 6.144 is incorrect. It should read Figure 6.157. (Todd Swinderman)

CHAPTER 7

• Page 290

- Reference Charts 7.27 and 7.29 is wrong. It should read Tables 7.27 and 7.29.

• Page 292

- On the title of equation 7.31 should be read: ‘He, Total free fall calculation’ and it should be added in the nomenclature table in page 293

- Should the symbol of the title of equation 7.31 read: ‘He’ or ‘Hf’ according to the table next to the equation?

- Different meanings here regarding to Hf and He. It isn’t consistent here with the ‘where’ table next to the equation 7.31

• Page 293

- On ‘where’ table, Hf description should read: Free fall distance. (Todd Swinderman)

CHAPTER 8

• Page 330

- D and D2 should be added on description table

- Should the unit for tan (α) be dimensionless?

• Page 346

- The reference to NGLI number is incorrect. It should read NLGI number. (Todd Swinderman)

CHAPTER 9

• Page 353

- In Figure 9.2 there is an error concerning the location of point "c1". It should be: (Todd Swinderman)


• Page 355

- On ‘where’ table, ric isn’t appears on Equations 9.5 and 9.6. Should be deleted or is there a typo?

• Page 358

- In Figure 9.12 there is an error concerning the location of point "c1". It should be: (Todd Swinderman)

• Pages 359

- Is title of Equation 9.14 incomplete?

• Pages 360

- In the title of Equation 9.18 should be read: ‘n, Number of equal idler spacing in convex curve’ or in the equation should be changed “n” for “N”?

• Pages 366

- Equation 9.37 is wrong. 9.37 should be figure.

- ‘Where’ table is missing from equation 9.26 through equation 9.39

CHAPTER 10

• Page 375

- “k” should read: ‘cross-sectional area reduction factor’ instead of constant in Table 10.2 and the title for the same table. (Todd Swinderman)


• Page 399

- The description of Rv, doesn’t appears in this page. It just explained on nomenclature, appendix B.

• Page 417

- There are symbols not explained in the where table or in the paragraphs: A, B, C, Ne, Nm.

- On ‘where’ table and equation 10.74, the symbol for coefficient of friction… should be eµ according to figure 10.73?

• Page 419

- On ‘where’ table, units for each component are missing.

• Page 421

- On ‘where’ table, in L description, the reference Figure 4.13 is incorrect. The correct reference should be Equation 4.11. (Todd Swinderman)

- Tcenter in ‘where’ table should read: sandwich belt center tension (Todd Swinderman)

- Tedge in ‘where’ table should read: sandwich belt edge tension (Todd Swinderman)

CHAPTER 11

• Page 438

- The reference Table 4.4 in Figure 11.7 is incorrect. The correct reference should be Table 4.6. (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 448

- Typo? On the second to last paragraph, it should read ‘cementitious materials’?

• Pages 455,456

- The statement in example on Table 11.48 is missing, compare with CEMA std 575.

- Replace Equation 11.47 according to CEMA std 575. (Todd Swinderman)

−

−

= ×

= ×

24

22

8.03 10 ..... Imperial

W 7.72 10 ..... Metric

e

me

m

QW xk

Qxk

Add the notes: (according Todd Swinderman’ email)

This calculation is generally not dominate on conveyors of less than 3000 stph

For impact cradle, rating use the larger of the 2 calculations: Lump Impact or Stream Impact.

He also says for a flowing stream of material do not add the mass of the lumps, use the tph of the stream


CHAPTER 12

• Page 494

- On Table 12.13, It should be Dispersoids?

• Page 499

- Qind description should be corrected. It should read: Volume of induced air into the transfer

point 3 3ft m

min s

(Todd Swinderman)

• Page 513

- La description should be distance or length in order to be consistent. Please review description on equation 12.45 and the ‘where’ table below.

• Page 519

- The reference from MHEA document should read “Guide to the Design of Transfer Chutes and Chute Linings for Bulk Materials” (1989)

• Page 520

- 12% CR should read 12% Cr due to Cr is a chemical symbol.

• Page 527

- Consistency. The title should be “Vibratory feeders” or “vibrating feeders” according to how is mentioned in the paragraph.

• Page 531

- Table 12.62 doesn’t match with Table 3.4 and ANSI/CEMA standard No. 550.

• Page 539

- Should the title of equation 12.77 read iQT∆ or

iQT ? - Should the title of equation 12.79 read sT∆ or sT ?

• Page 540

- Should the title of equation 12.80 read e feederT −∆ or e feederT − ? • Page 553

- Equation 12.96, it should have an equal to or greater than sign where it currently only has a

greater than sign. The Equation should be: 2

1.0s

s

Vg r

≥×

(Todd Swinderman)

• Page 559 - Equation 12.108, it should have a less than sign where it currently only has a greater than

sign. The Equation should be: (Todd Swinderman) 2s

s

Vg r×

<1.0

• Page 562 - Reference to equation 12.94 is wrong. 12.94 is a figure.

• Page 565 - The reference Table 12.86 is incorrect. It should read Table 12.88. (Todd Swinderman)


CHAPTER 14 • Page 651

- On Table 14.14: ∗ ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials or ASTM International ∗ MSHA: US Mine Safety and Health Administration ∗ ISO: International Organization for Standardization ∗ AGA is not included here but there is an example from them on Table 14.15. Do we

need to include it here? (AGA: American Galvanizers Association. www.galvanizeit.org)

∗ ASME is not included here but there is an example from them on Table 14.15. Do we need to include it here? (ASME: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. www.asme.org)

∗ CSA is not included here but there is an example from them on Table 14.15. Do we need to include it here? (CSA: Canadian Standards Association. www.csagroup.org)

∗ ASSE is not included here but there is an example from them on Table 14.15. Do we need to include it here? (ASSE: The American Society of Safety Engineers. www.asse.org)

• Page 652 - On Table 14.15:

∗ AWS – AWS D1.1/D1.1M “Structural Welding Code – Steel” ∗ AGA – AGA Design Guide “The Design of Products to be Hot-Dip Galvanized after

Fabrication” ∗ OSHA – 29 CRF Part 1910 “Occupational Safety and Health Standards” ∗ MSHA – 30 CRF Parts 1-199 “Mineral Resources” ∗ ASME/ANSI – B20.1 “Safety Standard for Conveyors and Related Equipment” ∗ ISO – ISO 7149:1982 “Continuous Handling Equipment -- Safety Code -- Special Rules” ∗ ISO - ISO 5045 was withdrawn according to ISO website ∗ ISO - ISO 1819: 1977 “Continuous Mechanical Handling Equipment – Safety Code –

General Rules” (this standard and ISO 7149 has the same name, we could keep one) ∗ CSA – Z432-16 “Safeguarding of Machinery” ∗ CEMA – CEMA Brochure No. 201 “Safety Label Brochure” ∗ MSHA – US Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration - “MSHA’s

Guide to Equipment Guarding” ∗ ASSE - ANSI/ ASSE Z244.1-2016 “The Control of Hazardous Energy Lockout, Tagout and

Alternative Methods” ∗ ANSI/ASME B15.1 was withdrawn according to SAI GLOBAL website. Superseded by

ANSI B11.19-2010 “Performance Requirements for Safeguarding” ∗ ASSE – “Conveyor Safety” - George A. Schultz (2000). USA. Safety in the Design and

Operation of Material Handling Systems • Page 661

- On ‘Guarding Resources’ paragraph: ∗ ASME B20.1 – 2015 Safety Standards for Conveyors and Related Equipment (USA) ∗ ANSI B11.3-2012 Safety Requirements for Power Press Brakes (USA) ∗ AS 1755-2000 (no longer available) was superseded in part by AS/NZS 4024.3614:2015

“Australian/New Zealand Standard- Safety of Machinery, Part 3614: Conveyors –

http://www.galvanizeit.org/

http://www.asme.org/

http://www.csagroup.org/

http://www.asse.org/


Mobile and Transportable Conveyors” and AS/NZS 4024.3610:2015 “Australian/New Zealand Standard- Safety of Machinery, Part 3610: Conveyors – General Requirements”

∗ RG490 should be reference as CSST “A User’s Guide to Conveyor Belt Safety Protection from Danger Zones”

∗ European Standard EN 620:2002+A1:2010 “Continuous handling equipment and systems - Safety and EMC requirements for fixed belt conveyors for bulk materials”

∗ MSHA – 30 CRF Parts 1-199 “Mineral Resources” (USA). Not Mexican standard ∗ MSHA – US Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration - “MSHA’s

Guide to Equipment Guarding” OT 3 Revised 2004 • Page 663

- The reference should read ANSI B11.3-2012 and MIL-STD 882… • Page 668

- The reference should read ANSI B11.3-2012 and MIL-STD 882.... • Page 670

- The references in Table 14.42 are incorrect. Table 14.34 should be Table 14.36 and Table 14.35 should be Table 14.34.

CHAPTER 15 • Pages 681, 684

- The ‘where’ table components needs units, for consistency. • Page 687

- In where table, Ttumax and Ttumin should be Ttu-max and Ttu-min according to Equations 15.10 and 15.11.

- Components need units in ‘where’ table. • Page 688

- On Figure 15.13, K should be Ksh according to ‘where’ table on page 687. • Page 690

- Equation 15.14 should read: abPE m g h m g s= × × + × × according to the example on figure 15.17?

- Equation 15.15 should read: ab

PERsη

=×

according to the example on figure 15.17?

- Units for each component in ‘where’ table are missing • Page 691

- On Figure 15.17, first line, sab = 1.2 m should read s = 1.2 m according to formula below this line?

CHAPTER 16 • Page 712

- The units for carrying side volume, carrying side fan selection, fan selected should be ft3/min • Page 713

- On Table 16.26 ∗ Wcf description should be: Material cross sectional area on belt.


∗ Units are missing • Page 714

- Reference inside Figure 16.28 should read from Figure 16.24. - Figure 16.29 should be called Equation 16.29

- In Figure 16.30, Vd formula should read d rsfm

QV Rγ

= × according to the formula above

- The references on the bullet points should read ‘…use a friction factor between…’ • Page 715

- On the ‘given’ table ∗ The unit for γm should read [lbf/ft3 (kgf/m3)]?? ∗ The unit for Wb should read [lbf/ft (kgf/m)]?? ∗ The unit for Wm should read [lbm/ft (kgf/m)]??? ∗ The value for friction factor is missing. Ff = 0.02 according to figure 16.22. ∗ The descriptions for Tam, Tac, Tss, Tssn, Tpm, TQ are missing ∗ L value should be 394 ft according to Figure 16.32 or should be the symbol Ln? ∗ Ln is extra. It isn’t necessary according to Figure 16.32

- On Equation 16.31, TQ is missing according to Figure 16.32. It should be: ( ) ( ) ( )e f m b f b m am ac ss ssn prn QT F W W L F W L W H T T T T T T= × + × + × × + × + + + + + +

• Page 716 - What Ered mean? There is not explained on the ‘given’ table on page 715

LIST OF EQUATIONS, FIGURES AND TABLES (LOF) • Page 752

- Figure 10.85 title is incorrect. It should read ‘L-profile truck unloading’. (Todd Swinderman) APPENDIX C • Page 789

- At the top of the page, KX in the title line should be Kx (Todd Swinderman) - Figure C.4 should be Equation C.4. (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 790 - Figure C.4 reference should be Equation C.4. (Todd Swinderman)

• Page 792 - The title of Table C.8 is incorrect. It should read: Ky, Values for conveyors 1000 to 3000 ft

long. (Todd Swinderman) • Page 796

- The reference in the paragraph about Figure C.12 is wrong. C.12 is a Table.

conveyor equipment manufacturers association · 2019-06-11 · wilbur, overland conveyor co. inc.;...

Documents