Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Starting point
Flotation machine life-cycle energy cost is significant compared to initial investment There are both economical and environmental reasons to concentrate on energy efficiency
Choice of Technology Size matters! Mechanism rpm Electric system Power transmission
In a Real Case
a) Energy cost $0,05 / kWh Outotec "Self Aspirated" 300 257 160 280 40 0 200 280 0,67 1,09 8 300 8 300 1 328 000 2 324 000 $0,05 $0,05 $66 400 $116 200 12 3600 $796 800 14 3598 $1 626 800 $830 000 b) Energy cost $0,10 / kWh Outotec "Self Aspirated" 300 257 160 280 40 0 200 280 0,67 1,09 8 300 8 300 1 328 000 2 324 000 $0,10 $0,10 $132 800 $232 400 12 3600 $1 593 600 14 3598 $3 253 600 $1 660 000
Cell Volume, m3 Energy consumption in Mechanism, kW Energy consumption in Blower, kW Energy consumption in Total, kW Specific energy, kW/m3 Hours / year Total energy consumption / cell / year, kW Energy cost, US$/kWh Energy cost US$/year x cell Number of Cells Total Volume Cost of Total Energy , US$/year Comparison per Year
Size matters!
1800 m3 flotation volume the options Consider a plant requiring 1800 m3 of rougher/scavenger volume. Three possible scenarios for this volume can be: a) 18 x 100 m3 cells in 2 rows of 9. b) 12 x 150 m3 cells in 2 rows of 6. c) 9 x 200 m3 cells in 1 row of 9. d) 6 x 300 m3 cells in 1 row of 6
6
From the table we can see that the use of 300 m3 cells leads to a 1. Reduction in capital equipment cost of 50 % when compared to using 100 m3. 2. A decrease in plant footprint area of 54 % 3. Savings of 28% and 50 % for power and air requirements 4. Savings in maintenance: 6 shafts instead of 18 equal time per shaft means 67% reduction in maintenance time!!
7
P *k *n * D
3
P = drawn Power rho = density k = power factor (efficiency of the mechanism) n = shaft / rotor speed D = rotor diameter
P *k *n * D
3
10% reduction in the Speed equals
30 % reduction in Energy ~ 20% reduction in Wear Rate
If the transmission ratio allows. Practical limit is 1:8 Variable Frequency Drive (Converter) Only if you have low voltage motors (max 690 V)
In a Real Case
Case 2 - TankCell 300 with Optimized Speed Outotec Outotec 300 300 -5 % -10 % 137 117 40 40 177 157 0,59 0,52 8 300 8 300 1 138 594 968 112 $0,10 $0,10 $113 859 $96 811 12 $1 366 313 -$227 287 12 $1 161 734 -$431 866
Cell Volume, m3 Speed Energy consumption in Mechanism, kW Energy consumption in Blower, kW Energy consumption in Total, kW Specific energy, kW/m3 Hours / year Energy cost, US$/kWh Energy cost US$/year x cell Number of Cells Cost of Total Energy , US$/year Comparison per Year
Outotec 300 Nominal 160 40 200 0,67 8 300 1 328 000 $0,10 $132 800 12 $1 593 600
Outotec 300 -15 % 98 40 138 0,46 8 300 815 558 $0,10 $81 556 12 $978 670 -$614 930
Note:
TankCell 300 at Chuquicamata at specific power of
0,49 kW/m3 produced over 5% better recovery than TankCell 160 at higher sp. Power.
Metallurgy?
Can rotor speed be reduced without sacrificing the metallurgy? -> plant tests with Outotec FloatForce Flotation mechanism
Recovery/Grade [%] .
On Electric Systems
Frequency Converters have become significantly cheaper HOWEVER, they are only cheap for LOW VOLTAGE systems, < 690 V.
In a Real Case
Case 2 - TankCell 300 with Optimized Speed Outotec Outotec 300 300 -5 % -10 % 137 117 40 40 177 157 0,59 0,52 8 300 8 300 1 138 594 968 112 $0,10 $0,10 $113 859 $96 811 12 $1 366 313 -$227 287 12 $1 161 734 -$431 866
Cell Volume, m3 Speed Energy consumption in Mechanism, kW Energy consumption in Blower, kW Energy consumption in Total, kW Specific energy, kW/m3 Hours / year Energy cost, US$/kWh Energy cost US$/year x cell Number of Cells Cost of Total Energy , US$/year Comparison per Year
Outotec 300 Nominal 160 40 200 0,67 8 300 1 328 000 $0,10 $132 800 12 $1 593 600
Outotec 300 -15 % 98 40 138 0,46 8 300 815 558 $0,10 $81 556 12 $978 670 -$614 930
NOTE:
If VSD costs ~ USD 18 000 / unit With 5% speed decrease Pay-off in ONE YEAR!!
Power Transmission
Drive mechanism efficiency Every drive component has its own efficiency Typical electric motors 95% (when selected correctly) Bearing unit 99% V-belts 90-98% (when aligned and tightened correctly) Two-stage gearbox 98% (when size is correct) Frequency converter 96-98% Everything has to be installed properly E.g. incorrect belt alignment can cause significant losses Case example!
80 000 vDrive
60 000
vDrive (0,54 deg angle fault) vDrive (1,08 deg angle fault)
40 000
eDrive
Gearbox+v-belt drive
20 000
0 1 3 5 7 9 11 Years [a] 13 15 17 19
V-belt drives
Feasible for the small cell sizes <70m3 Expensive Motors Low speed High bearing load Low start-up torque Tightening of belts Changing of belts Poor efficiency when (usually) misaligned Noisy
One oil change / year Synthetic oils One oil change / 3 years
Conclusions
Flotation life cycle energy cost is significant compared to initial investment Energy consumption can be significantly reduced via: Correct choice of technology enabling slower rotor
speed Using as big Flotation Cells as possible Correct selection of the Electric system Correct selection and maintenance of Power transmission
Acknowledgements
Mr Antti Rinne, Mr Aleksi Peltola and Mr Sami Grnstrand, Outotec People at Boliden Harjavalta People at Inmet Pyhsalmi