Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Dual lines each at 50 or 66% of full rate are always nice, but they cost!
It's a balancing act, the extra up front cost v. possible demurrage costs in the event of a mechanical failure.
Sad to say in most cases minimising the up front cost is usually what happens.
Old saying, "Price beats specification" ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Well put designer. Usually no one puts that much money into a system (and all the additional controls etc.!) The only thing I can recommend is for you to ask your OEMs for critical spares and order them as part of the new equipment order. That is almost always cheaper than buying them afterwards and you end up not spending a blooming fortune when you do end up needing the parts in a hurry. ■
Soy
Ralfweiser and designer are right as any installation should have spares.
The bucket elevator will have an access ladder with a cage guard from the ground up.
A single bucket elevator is used to move grain from a single recieving point and and to a single delivery point for load out in all cases here in the states but planning is the key along with house keeping and maintenance.
What happens is the dried grain is delivered and dumped in the hopper and lifted to the top of the elevator and a gate in one of the tubes is opened to one of the bins for storage.
The other gates to the other tubes are closed to prevent the grain from going anywhere else but the desired bin.
Properly designed and maintained bucket elevators used for grain last for many, many years in service.
As long as it is properly sized(one size larger than the minimum recommended for your installation it will last a long time with few if any problems if it is maintained and have a reputable supplier for repairs and parts you will have no problems. ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by gussosa
As the facility will be supplying a sea port and the cost of having a ship waiting is great, I thought that some kind of redundancy in the conveyors would be a good idea. Specifically, the belt conveyor that takes the grain out of the flat storage and the bucket elevator that loads the outgoing trucks might be two or three instead of only one.
....... and the height of the bucket elevator (at least in the first design) will be 68 meters.
"outgoing trucks" suggests that this is an import terminal in which case your only concern is getting the stuff out of the ship. Your unloading method should simply incorporate means to load trucks directly which will nullify demurrage if the conveyors or elevators, regardless of their number, pack in.
What is the significance or relationship between 68m and first design? ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
68m is a long way up in the air. Does the bucket elevator really have to be that tall? ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by RalfWeiserAnother problem is that there is a terrible lack of properly trained mechanics to do the job. ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by lzaharisAs long as it is properly sized(one size larger than the minimum recommended for your installation it will last a long time with few if any problems if it is maintained and have a reputable supplier for repairs and parts you will have no problems.
The same is said of gears and bearings, and they still break in the middle of the work. I know that what you suggest is what is usually done, but I don´t trust much in that system. It seems to me more like a danger to live, considering the scarcity of money, rather than sound engineering practice.
But I am just a newbie in this area. Maybe I am getting this the wrong way. ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by designerYes, to load the elevated hoppers that will load the trucks. The alternative is using a belt conveyor or a redler to reduce the total height of the elevator; using electric power instead of gravity. That would decrease the height to about 30 meters.
In my defense I must say that I did the first design in a rush (pressured by the customer) and then everybody started to work using it as a basis and it was too late to change.
If I can get some extra time I will surely change that. ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by louispanjangWhat is the significance or relationship between 68m and first design?
This is an export facility. The problem is that the port is crowded and the port authorities won't allow to build a grain storage plant there. The City Hall won't allow a grain elevator facility in the middle of the city neither. So my customer had to look for a place out of town where to dry and store the grain until the ship arrives and then use a truck fleet to take the grain to the port. I believe he will use a pneumatic conveyor there to load the ships, but that is not part of the project. ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by gussosaNB, Redler is a registered trade mark, so a Redler conveyor is a conveyor made by Redler or it's agents. The generic term is an en-masse conveyor. It's a bit like all vacuum cleaners being referred to as "Hoovers" even when made by Electrolux (or Dyson). ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by designerWell, in South America it means chain conveyor. But I know my mistake. I used to be Redler's dealer in Uruguay and I still like them. Sorry. ■
Re: Redundancy In Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
Originally Posted by gussosaIt is not an export facility either; It is a truck loading facililty! Six hundred tonnes per hour involves 2+1 loading points dispatching a vehicle every 144 seconds. That gives you 288 seconds to position, load & weigh each consignment. I agree with the City Hall that you need plenty of space out of town.
Sixty eight metres is absurdly high for a truck loading application. You certainly wouldn't get permission for something like that in Europe. ■
Redundancy in Conveyors & Bucket Elevators
I am planning a facility for the storage of soy. The kernel of it is a flat storage building for 45000 MT.
As the facility will be supplying a sea port and the cost of having a ship waiting is great, I thought that some kind of redundancy in the conveyors would be a good idea. Specifically, the belt conveyor that takes the grain out of the flat storage and the bucket elevator that loads the outgoing trucks might be two or three instead of only one.
Have you seen anything like this? Do you know if it can be done?
What about putting 3 belt conveyors and 3 bucket elevators in parallel, each of 300 MT/hour (50% total capacity)?
I have asked several people and reviewed bibliography but can't find anything similar.
The total capacity for grain extraction will be 600 MT/hour. The length of the belt conveyor will be 180 meters and the height of the bucket elevator (at least in the first design) will be 68 meters. ■