fluidcon - ficemficem.org/boletines/boletines2014/boletin_de_resultados_ct_2014... · bucket...
TRANSCRIPT
FLUIDCON
Pneumatic conveying with FLUIDCON Operating experience and results
by Claudius Peters
The Problem
• Raw Meal from Silo to Preheater Tower
Preheater
tower Raw meal silo
Solution A: Bucket elevator
& air slide
Solution B: Pneumatic pipe transport
The Solution
FLUIDCON
• The pneumatic conveying system with the advantages of pipe and air slide transport
• Developed and patented by Claudius Peters
FLUIDCON
View inside the FLUIDCON pipe What means FLUIDCON
• The system is a combination of air slide transport and pneumatic pipe conveying
FLUIDCON
Air Slide Transport Features:
• Fluidisation of material
• Material flow by gravity
• Need of height difference
• Only inclined arrangement
• Low conveying velocity
• Low wear / abrasion
• Low energy consumption
FLUIDCON
Conventional conveying pipe Features:
• Fluidisation of material
• Material flow by air stream
• Various conveying routing: Up, down, horizontal, inclined
• Flexible routing
• High energy consumption
• High wear / abrasion
• High conveying velocity
FLUIDCON
Claudius Peters FLUIDCON Features:
• Fluidisation of material
• Various conveying routing: Up, down, horizontal
• Inclinded transport with inclination up to 30 %
• Flexible routing
• Lower conveying velocity
• Lower wear / abrasion
• Lower energy consumption
FLUIDCON Design
Fluidcon pipe Aeration pad
• Homogeneous aeration • Dust tight • One socket for aeration & fastening • Exchange separately
FLUIDCON Design
Aeration pad within the pipe Dust tight design
Fabric
Fasteners
Air socket Fabric
Fasteners
Air socket
Optional: Wear protection
by perforated plate
Suitable Materials
for FLUIDCON
Evaluation of the material with the bulk material
classification in groups according to Geldart
• A) Fluid and expanded under aeration
• B) Fluid but no expansion under aeration
• C) Small particle size / cohesive,
difficult to aerate
• D) Larger particle size / difficult to aerate,
high aeration velocity is requested
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Proved Materials for FLUIDCON
Average particle diameter dS,50 [µm]
Dif
fere
nce o
f d
en
sit
ies ρ
S -
ρF [
kg
/m³]
Group D Group B
Iron-II-Sulphate
Petcoke
Hydrated Alumina
Hydrated Alumina
Alumina
Cement
Titanium Ore
Gypsum
Fly Ash
FGD-Gypsum
Cement
Kiln Dust
Group A Group C
FLUIDCON
• The system is suitable for wide ranges of
materials
• Especially typical building materials and
additives are within this range
• Cement, raw meal, lime, gypsum, blasted
furnace slag
• Critical materials are to be tested in the
technical center of Claudius Peters
FLUIDCON
Principle of design
Feeding device Pump
Pressure vessel
Rotary lock
Double pendulum flap
FLUIDCON- conveying pipe
Pressure generator
Blower
Compressor
Network
Separator
Cyclone
Troughed filter
Bin mounted filter
Conveying air
Bulk material
Bulk material
FLUIDCON
Feeding devices
Suitable with all industry feeders • X-Pump • Pressure vessel • Star feeder
• Double pendulum flap
FLUIDCON Various feeding devices
X-Pump Star feeder
FLUIDCON Various routings
FLUIDCON Various routing
FLUIDCON
Flow sheet of a system
Pressure
generator
Air flow for fluidization
Feeding device
Aerated FLUIDCON- pipe
Receiving bin
PIC
M
Air flow for
conveying
FIC FIC FIC FIC
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
FLUIDCON
Comparison of pulsation
Conveyance with FLUIDCON:
• Continuous massflow
• Reduced pulsation
Time t V
Weig
ht
G
Pre
ssu
re p
We
igh
t G
S
Pre
ssu
re p
R
Time t V
Conveyance of Titanium Ore
with conventional pipe
S
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
FLUIDCON
Comparison of a cement conveyance
DESIGN DATA:
Bulk Material: Cement 1
Mass Flow: 100 t/h
Conveying Distance: 200 m
Conveying Height: 25 m at the end of conveying line
Pipe Diameter: DN 250
Feeding Device: Claudius Peters pump X-250
+ 117 % 45,1 20,8 SOLID/AIR RATIO [kg(S)/kg(F)]
82.400
10,8
2,5
0,77
1.990
33
FLUIDCON
- 78% 11,5 INITIAL VELOCITY [m/s]
- 54 % 23,3 FINAL VELOCITY [m/s]
- 52% 172.000 OPERATION COST [EURO/a]*
- 26% 1,04 PRESSURE DROP [barü]
- 52% 4.140 AIR VOLUME FLOW [Nm³/h]
- 35% 51 POWER AT COUPLING [kW]
Comparison Conventional
*1 kWh = 0,010 €
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
P (Pneumatic)
P (Belt)`
FLUIDCON
Comparison of power consumptions
0,1
1
10
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000
1,3
6,5
32
Conveying
distance [m]
Conventional pipe
FLUIDCON
Aeroslide
FLUIDCON Price advantages
In comparison with conventional pipe conveying
• Marginally higher installation costs
• Modification of existing piping systems available
• Considerable lower operating costs
– Equal/higher throughput
– Less repairs and replacements
– Considerable lower power consumption
CASE STUDIES Operational FLUIDCON systems
Cement conveying
in Russia Bulk Solid Cement
Conveying gas Air
Type of Solid Feeder X-Pump
Type of Conveying System Conventional FLUIDCON
Solid mass flow [t/h] 135 135
Total conveying distance [m] 153 153
Including: Total height [m] 9 9
Total gas volume flow at 1 bar 20°C
[m³/h] 4364 2237
Gas Velocity at pipe inlet [m/s] 10.2 3
Gas Velocity at pipe outlet [m/s] 22.7 11.2
Solid/air ratio at pipe inlet [kgs/kgf] 27.2 32
Pipe pressure difference [bar] 1.3 1.1
Total pressure difference [bar] 1.6 1.4
Power consumption of Compressor
[kW] 173 86
Power consumption of X-pump
[kW] 87 70
Total power consumption [kW] 260 156
Total specific power consumption
[kWh / (t·100 m)]
1.259 0.755
Power Consumption relative to conventional conveying
% 100 60
• Lower velocity
• Lower Pressure
• 40 % of the original power consumption.
• Assuming electricity costs of X €/kWh total savings of Y €/year.
Blast-furnace slag meal
conveying in Germany Bulk Solid Ground blast surface slag Conveying gas Air Type of Solid Feeder X-Pump
Type of Conveying System Conventional FLUIDCON Solid mass flow [t/h] 100 100
Total conveying distance [m] 300 300
Including: Total height [m] 22 22 Total gas volume flow at 1 bar 20°C
[m³/h] 7.088 3.622
Gas Velocity at pipe inlet [m/s] 11.3 2.8
Gas Velocity at pipe outlet [m/s] 24.2 12.8
Solid/air ratio at pipe inlet [kgs/kgf] 12 56
Pipe pressure difference [bar] 1.18 0.84
Total pressure difference [bar] 1.48 1.14
Power consumption of Compressor
[kW] 305 114
Power consumption of X-pump
[kW] 77 44
Total power consumption [kW] 382 158
Total specific power consumption
[kWh / (t·100 m)]
1.273 0.527
Power Consumption relative to conventional conveying
% 100 41
Return to Problem
• Raw Meal from Silo to Preheater Tower
Preheater
tower Raw meal silo
Solution A: Bucket elevator
& air slide
Solution B: Pneumatic pipe transport
CASE STUDIES
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer Zementwerke GmbH Plant Wietersdorf, Austria
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Factory survey
Homosilo
Raw meal mill 4 Preheater- elevator
Bulk loader
Cement mill
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Variations
Homosilo
Elevator with
aeroslides
• Pressure vessel conveyor
• Pump conveyor
• Pipe belt conveyor
Preheater- elevator
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Decision matrix
Power
consumption Reliability
Maintenance
cost Flexibility
Environmental
behaviour
Capital
expenditure
Type of
Conveyance general
Clocking
risk
Power
failure
behaviour
Bucket elevator
and aeroslides + + + + + - + -
Pressure vessel
without bypass % - % % % + + %
Pressure vessel
with bypass % % % % - + +
-
Pump conveyor
- % - - % + + +
Belt conveyor
+ + + + - - - -
Pipe belt
conveyor + + + + - - % -
FLUIDCON
% + + + % + + %
neutral positiv negativ
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Technical design
Conveying data
Conveyance Capacity horizontally vertically Bends
Raw Meal [t/h] [m] [m] [Pcs.]
Basic design
(Conveyance to BE- inlet) 125 194 0 2 x 90
Conveyance to BE- head + 100m 90 194 100 3 x 90
Conveyance into cement mill 40 344 0
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Feeding
Silo discharge
of homo silo
FLUIDCON feeding
with X-Pump
X- Pump
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Pipe routing
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Visualisation
A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH
Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A -
Summary und forecast
With kind support and approval by Mr. Dipl.-Ing. Peter Schwei (W&P),
extracts from the presentation held on the FLUIDCON-Open-Day, May 10-12, 2006, Buxtehude
• All expectations have been met
• No risk factor has occured
• Optimum operating behaviour
• Opimum flexibility regarding further
factory planning
• 2 additional plants are ordered
FACTS & DATA
FLUIDCON Facts & Data
• Claudius Peters References: 90 all over the world
• Realised mass troughput: up to 300 t/h
• Realised conveying distances: up to 480 m
• Wide range of materials
• Restart time: Below 1 minute
• Flexible pipe routing
• Various feeders
FLUIDCON Facts & Data
• Less amount of conveying air: approx. 40 % (depending on actual data)
• Less operating velocity: approx. 50 % (at outlet depending on actual data)
• Less power consumption: approx. 40 % (depending on actual data)
• Less operating pressure
• Less wear on system
• Less maintenance
• Reduced pulsation
Conclusion
• FLUIDCON protects environment
• FLUIDCON offers flexible conveying path
• FLUIDCON reduces wear
• FLUIDCON reduces energy consumption
• FLUIDCON reduces operating costs
• FLUIDCON improves profitability