FLUIDCON. Pneumatic conveying with FLUIDCON Operating experience and results by Claudius Peters

Transcription

1

2 Pneumatic conveying with Operating experience and results by Claudius Peters

3 The Problem Raw Meal from Silo to Preheater Tower Raw meal silo Solution A: Bucket elevator & air slide Preheater tower Solution B: Pneumatic pipe transport

4 The Solution The pneumatic conveying system with the advantages of pipe and air slide transport Developed and patented by Claudius Peters

5 View inside the pipe What means The system is a combination of air slide transport and pneumatic pipe conveying

6 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

7 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

8 Claudius Peters 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

9 Design Fluidcon pipe Aeration pad Homogeneous aeration Dust tight One socket for aeration & fastening Exchange separately

10 Design Aeration pad within the pipe Dust tight design Optional: Wear protection by perforated plate Fabric Fasteners Air socket Fabric Fasteners Air socket

11 Suitable Materials for 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

12 Difference of densities ρ S - ρ F [kg/m³] Proved Materials for Group B Group D Alumina Hydrated Alumina Iron-II-Sulphate Hydrated Alumina Cement Titanium Ore Gypsum Fly Ash FGD-Gypsum Cement Kiln Dust Petcoke Group C Group A Average particle diameter d S,50 [µm] A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

13 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

14 Principle of design Bulk material Blower Compressor Network Feeding device Pump Pressure vessel Rotary lock Double pendulum flap - conveying pipe Conveying air Cyclone Troughed filter Bin mounted filter Separator Pressure generator Bulk material

15 Feeding devices Suitable with all industry feeders X-Pump Pressure vessel Star feeder Double pendulum flap

16 Various feeding devices X-Pump Star feeder

17 Various routings

18 Various routing

19 Flow sheet of a system Feeding device Receiving bin Aerated - pipe M PIC Air flow for conveying Pressure generator FIC FIC FIC FIC Air flow for fluidization

20 Weight G Pressure p Comparison of pulsation Weight G S Pressure p R S Conveyance of Titanium Ore with conventional pipe Time t V Conveyance with : Continuous massflow Reduced pulsation Time t V A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

21 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 Conventional Comparison POWER AT COUPLING [kw] % AIR VOLUME FLOW [Nm³/h] % PRESSURE DROP [bar ü ] 1,04 0,77-26% INITIAL VELOCITY [m/s] 11,5 2,5-78% FINAL VELOCITY [m/s] 23,3 10,8-54 % SOLID/AIR RATIO [kg (S) /kg (F) ] 20,8 45, % OPERATION COST [EURO/a]* % *1 kwh = 0,010 A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

22 Comparison of power consumptions P (Pneumatic) P (Belt)` Conventional pipe 10 6,5 1 1,3 Aeroslide 0, Conveying distance [m] A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

23 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

24 Operational systems CASE STUDIES

25 Cement conveying in Russia Bulk Solid Cement Conveying gas Air Type of Solid Feeder X-Pump Type of Conveying System Conventio nal Solid mass flow [t/h] Total conveying distance [m] Including: Total height [m] 9 9 Total gas volume flow at 1 bar 20 C [m³/h] Gas Velocity at pipe inlet [m/s] Gas Velocity at pipe outlet [m/s] Solid/air ratio at pipe inlet [kg s /kg f ] Pipe pressure difference [bar] Total pressure difference [bar] Power consumption of Compressor [kw] Power consumption of X- pump [kw] Total power consumption [kw] Total specific power [kwh / consumption (t 100 m)] Power Consumption relative to conventional conveying % Lower velocity Lower Pressure 40 % of the original power consumption. Assuming electricity costs of X /kwh total savings of Y /year.

26 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 Solid mass flow [t/h] Total conveying distance [m] Including: Total height [m] Total gas volume flow at 1 bar 20 C [m³/h] Gas Velocity at pipe inlet [m/s] Gas Velocity at pipe outlet [m/s] Solid/air ratio at pipe inlet [kgs/kgf] Pipe pressure difference [bar] Total pressure difference [bar] Power consumption of Compressor [kw] Power consumption of X-pump [kw] Total power consumption [kw] Total specific power [kwh / consumption (t 100 m)] Power Consumption relative to conventional conveying %

27 Return to Problem Raw Meal from Silo to Preheater Tower Raw meal silo Solution A: Bucket elevator & air slide Preheater tower Solution B: Pneumatic pipe transport

28 Wietersdorfer & Peggauer Zementwerke GmbH Plant Wietersdorf, Austria CASE STUDIES

29 Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A - Factory survey Homosilo Raw meal mill 4 Preheater- elevator Cement mill Bulk loader A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

30 Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A - Variations Elevator with aeroslides Preheater- elevator Homosilo Pressure vessel conveyor Pump conveyor Pipe belt conveyor A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

31 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 - % - - % % - % % + + % positiv negativ neutral A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

32 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) x 90 Conveyance to BE- head + 100m x 90 Conveyance into cement mill A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

33 Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A - Feeding feeding with X-Pump Silo discharge of homo silo X- Pump A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

34 Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A - Pipe routing A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

35 Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A - Visualisation A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

36 Wietersdorfer & Peggauer A - Summary und forecast All expectations have been met No risk factor has occured Optimum operating behaviour Opimum flexibility regarding further factory planning 2 additional plants are ordered With kind support and approval by Mr. Dipl.-Ing. Peter Schwei (W&P), extracts from the presentation held on the -Open-Day, May 10-12, 2006, Buxtehude A Langley Holdings Company Claudius Peters Projects GmbH

37 FACTS & DATA

38 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

39 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

40 Conclusion protects environment offers flexible conveying path reduces wear reduces energy consumption reduces operating costs improves profitability