SOLIDS HANDLING

Solve Solids Handling Problems by Retrotting

Most ow problems are caused by a funnel ow pattern and can be cured by altering the pattern to mass ow, which requires changing the hopper or feeder design. Other methods to x poor ow include mechanical and chemical ow aids.
Herman Purutyan, Brian H. Pittenger, and John W. Carson, Jenike & Johanson, Inc.

n plants and processes involving solids, ineffective and unreliable handling systems are often a primary cause of startup delays, process inefciencies, and equipment downtime. This is a major problem, and its extent was conrmed by a six-year study by the Rand Corp. of 40 solids processing plants in the U.S. and Canada (1). The ndings revealed that 80% of all plants studied experienced solids handling problems. Also, the affected facilities were slow in coming up to speed, with an average startup time for some types (raw, unprocessed solids feedstock) approaching 18 months. Once startup began, poor performance continued to plague these operations with capacity ranging between 40% and 50% of design values. Although considerable engineering resources are usually allocated to processing concerns (e.g., reaction chemistry), design of materials handling systems to prevent problems rarely gets much attention. It is not uncommon to nd, for example, a critical centrifugation step beset with problems because of a frequently plugging transfer chute, or costly downtime (of the centrifuge and the whole process) due to a plugged silo. Many, if not all, of these problems can be avoided by basing the design of solids handling systems on the ow properties of the bulk materials being handled and processed through them. However, in many cases, such systems are designed using prior experience as a basis, which unfortunately usually only points to what does not work instead of what works

best. Other times, the design of the solids handling system is left to the end of the process design, and tted into the space left over from the rest of the processing equipment. What if the equipment is already in place and the process is limping along? Although it is much easier to prevent solids handling problems by using sound design methods at the outset, there are a number of effective retrots that can signicantly improve equipment performance. Retrotting is often more economical than completely replacing the faulty equipment, or living with the problem. The exact choice of a retrot will obviously depend on the nature of the problem, process, product, and constraints. A broad overview of retrot options is discussed in this article, following a discussion of common problems encountered when handling bulk solids.

Common ow problems While handling problems can be encountered in a variety of equipment, the most common occur in silos. (The terms silo, bin, tank, vessel, and bunker are interchangeable. Silo will be used throughout this article to represent such equipment. Hopper is the portion of a silo in which the cross-section changes, such as a cone, wedge, pyramid, or other shape.) The problems in silos consist of: No-ow from a silo is the most common and often the most serious solids handling problem. It can be due to either arching (bridging) or ratholing.

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS APRIL 1998

Copyright

1998 American Institute of Chemical Engineers. All rights reserved. Copying and downloading permitted with restrictions.

SOLIDS HANDLING

Arching occurs when an obstruction in the shape of an arch or a bridge forms above the outlet and prevents any further material discharge. It can be an interlocking arch, where the particles mechanically lock to form the obstruction, or a cohesive arch. An interlocking arch occurs when the particles are large compared to the outlet size of the hopper. A cohesive arch happens when particles pack together to form an obstruction (Figure 1). Ratholing can occur in those silos where flow takes place through a channel that forms within the material. If the material has sufficient cohesive strength, once the channel is emptied, no more discharges (Figure 2). Erratic ow is the result of obstructions alternating between an arch and a rathole. A rathole may collapse due to an external force, such as vibrations created by a train or a fork lift operating nearby, or a ow-aid device such as an air cannon or a vibrator. While some material is likely to discharge, falling material often impacts over the outlet and forms an arch. An arch may break due to a similar external force, and material ow may resume until the ow channel is emptied and a rathole is formed again. Flooding/ushing can occur when handling ne powders such as pigments, additives, or precipitates. When a rathole collapses, the falling particles entrain air and become uidized. Since most solids-handling equipment cannot handle uids, material oods through the feeder uncontrollably. The solids bulk density can often undergo dramatic variations, negatively impacting on downstream packaging or processing equipment. Flooding can also occur when handling ne powders (100 m or smaller) in small vessels with high ll and discharge rates. In such situations, the powder does not have sufficient residence time to deaerate, resulting in ooding through the feeder.

s Figure 1. Interlocking and cohesive arches are common problems in silos.

Interlocking Arch

Cohesive Arch

Flow rate limitation is another problem unique to ne powders. Most ne powders have very low permeabilities and are affected by any movement of interstitial air (or other gases). The pressure gradients caused as a result of this gas movement can retard discharge from a hopper, signicantly limiting the maximum achievable rates. Particle segregation can occur both when handling blends consisting of a number of ingredients, and when handling a homogenous substance with a wide variation in particle size or density. Segregation or demixing of ingredients may prevent a desired chemical reaction, may cause an undesired reaction, or may cause out-ofspec product, resulting in costly product waste or rework. Segregation of nes from the coarse may also have similar effects (2) (Figure 3).

Stagnant

Rathole

s Figure 2. Ratholing can occur in those silos where ow takes place through a channel that forms within the material.

Associated ow problems The following are some results of the ow problems described above: Limited live capacity Although the liquid volume of the silo may be sufficient, its live (usable) capacity can be severely limited due to stagnant material inside. If a rathole forms, then the live capacity of the silo effectively becomes limited to the size of the rathole (see Figure 4); Product degradation When allowed to remain stagnant, some materials may cake, oxidize, spoil, or otherwise change physically or chemically; Incomplete or nonuniform processing In processing vessels where the product may be dried,

s Figure 3. Sifting segregation can result in costly product waste or rework.

cooled, reacted, or purged of volatiles, ow problems give rise to incomplete processing, which may severely reduce process efficiency, result in quality problems, or even lead to dangerous situations, such as

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS APRIL 1998

Large amounts of stagnant material over a feeder can signicantly increase the power required to operate the feeder, in addition to contributing to some of the other problems already discussed.

s Figure 4. A rathole limits the live

capacity of a silo.

when combustible volatiles are only partially removed from the product; Vibration of structure Material ow through silos can result in signicant vibrations, which can be either high-frequency/low-amplitude or low-frequency/high-amplitude (3). If not addressed, these vibrations can result in noise that violates U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, or worse, they can cause failure of the silo structure or nearby equipment; Structural failure Structural failures can occur when large masses of material fall and impact on the outlet of the silo and the feeder, for example, as a result of collapsing arches and ratholes. In addition, silo walls can dent or wrinkle as a result of uneven loads imposed by asymmetric ow channels. These dents and distortions can signicantly weaken a silo and can eventually lead to catastrophic failure (4,5); and Excessive power requirement
Flowing Material

Flow patterns Most of the problems discussed above occur in silos where ow takes place through a channel formed within the bulk solid. This describes a funnel ow pattern, in which some material moves while the rest remains stationary during discharge from the silo (Figure 5). Funnel ow occurs when the sloping hopper walls of a silo are not steep enough and smooth enough for particles to ow along them. Particles slide on themselves rather than the hopper walls, and an internal ow channel develops. Funnel ow silos often have at bottoms or very shallow hopper angles. They may be used reliably, provided that all of the following four conditions are met: 1. Material handled consists entirely of coarse particles usually -in. or larger; 2. Material is free owing particles do not stick to each other; 3. Particles are nondegrading spontaneous combustion, spoilage, aging, or caking do not occur when particles are stagnant for extended durations; and 4. Particle segregation is not a concern. Unless all of these four conditions are met, ow related problems will
s Figure 5.
Funnel ow occurs when the sloping hopper walls of a silo are not steep enough and smooth enough for particles to ow along them.

occur in funnel ow silos. To prevent such problems, a mass-ow silo should be used. Mass ow is dened as the ow pattern where upon withdrawal of any material, all of the contents of a silo move (Figure 6). Mass ow occurs when sloping hopper walls are smooth enough and steep enough for particles to slide along them. This type of ow eliminates ratholing and associated problems of ooding and stagnant material, as well as maximizes the usable capacity of the silo. A third ow pattern, expanded ow, is a combination of mass ow and funnel ow. An expanded ow silo consists of a lower section that is in mass ow and an upper section that is funnel ow (Figure 7). It is typically used to overcome ratholing in large silos by using the mass-ow section to enlarge the ow channel diameter such that a rathole cannot form. To use expanded ow, the material must be nondegrading, segregation must be unimportant, and the particles must be coarse enough not to become uidized. Unless these three conditions are met, expanded ow should not be used.

Stagnant Material

s Figure 6. In mass ow, all of the

contents of a silo move upon withdrawal of any material.

APRIL 1998 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS

SOLIDS HANDLING

RETROFIT OPTIONS The most cost-effective retrot option will depend on the ow properties of the material and the types of constraints that are imposed on the design. In general, retrot options consist of: Hopper modications; Use of inserts; Feeder modications; Flow aids (mechanical and chemical); Air permeation systems; and Fluidization. Hopper modications If the problem is caused by funnel ow, modications to the hopper to convert it to mass ow have a high probability of success. The problems that can be solved by this approach are ow stoppages or erratic discharges due to arching and ratholing, ooding or ushing of ne powders, certain types of segregation, incomplete or nonuniform processing, silo vibrations, and structural problems.

To achieve mass ow, two conditions must be met as a minimum: 1. The sloping walls of the hopper must be steep enough and must have sufficiently low friction to allow particles to ow along them; and 2. The hopper opening must be large enough to overcome arching.

Flow along walls One or more of the following modications may be considered to achieve ow along hopper walls: change the inner hopper surface, the hopper slope, or the hopper geometry. Before modifications are made, the flow properties of a material must be determined. With respect to flow along hopper walls, the critical property is friction that develops between the bulk solid and the hopper wall surface (wall friction). Wall friction of a material can be easily measured in a laboratory using a Jenike Shear Tester (Figure 8), a small sample of the bulk solid, and various wall surfaces.
s Figure 7. An
expanded ow silo consists of a lower section that is in mass ow and an upper section that is funnel ow.

The test is conducted by rst placing the bulk solid in a retaining ring on a at coupon of wall material. Then, various normal forces are applied by placing weights on the cover. Material in the ring is pushed along the stationary wall surface, and the shear force is measured as a function of applied normal force. A typical wall friction test result is shown in Figure 9. The applied normal pressures are plotted on the horizontal axis, and the measured shear values on the vertical axis. Wall friction angle is then dened as the angle formed by drawing a straight line from the origin to a point on the curve. is another way of expressing the coefficient of friction ( = tan ). Once the wall friction angles have been measured, hopper angles for mass ow can be determined using a series of design charts originally developed by Jenike (6). A typical design chart for a conical hopper geometry is shown in Figure 10. This is an example chart and should not be used for design. Complete sets of design charts are given in Ref. 6. In Figure 10, the hopper angles from vertical c are plotted along the horizontal axis. The wall friction angles are on the vertical axis. The chart contains three regions: mass ow, funnel ow, and an uncertain region (which is, in fact, a margin of safety). When considering retrotting an existing hopper, the wall friction tests should be conducted on a number of candidate wall surfaces, which may include liners such as ultra-high

s Figure 8. A Jenike Shear Tester determines friction between a

solid and a wall surface (uncoated or coated).
Exceeds Critical Rathole Diameter Normal Pressure = Weight/Area Bracket Cover Ring Shear Stress = Force/Area

Funnel Flow Mass Flow

Bulk Solid

Sample of Wall Material

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS APRIL 1998

40 Shear Stress, lb/ft2 '= Wall Friction Angle, deg. ' 20 10 '2 0 '1 0 0 Normal Pressure, lb/ft2 10 20 c 30 40 50 Uncertain Mass Flow 30 Funnel Flow

s Figure 9. A typical wall friction test result from the

Jenike Shear Tester.

s Figure 10. Data from Figure 9 are used to determine design charts for setting hopper angles for mass ow. ry shows that in plane ow there is no sharp boundary between the massow and the funnel ow regions, so that mass ow is still possible to the right of the boundary in the design charts. This makes the plane ow geometry a more robust design, capable of handling wider variations in material characteristics. Typical plane ow hoppers are shown in Figure 11. Example 3 A silo with a 35-deg. from vertical conical hopper exhibits funnel ow. The hopper is constructed from carbon steel plate. Tests on several wall materials show the lowest wall friction angle to be 20 deg. The design chart shows that a 20-deg. wall friction angle and a 35-deg. conical hopper will still result in funnel ow. A 22-deg. or steeper cone is required for mass ow. However, a transition hopper with 35-deg. sidewall angles will result in mass ow, within the existing hopper height. Thus, replacing the existing hopper with a new transition hopper with 35-deg. side walls will convert the silo to mass ow. In general, when using a plane ow hopper, if the end walls are converging, the length of the outlet must be at least three times its width. For vertical end walls, for example, when a chisel hopper is used, a minimum length-towidth ratio of 2:1 is sufficient. Going from a circular outlet to an elongated outlet will likely require a

molecular-weight polyethylene, smooth or polished stainless steel sheets, or coatings such as various epoxies, polytetrauoroethylene (PTFE), and others. Changing the hopper wall surface can be an option in converting a hopper to mass ow if one of the surfaces tested has a wall friction angle that results in mass ow at the existing hopper angle. Example 1 A silo with a 20deg. from vertical conical hopper exhibits funnel ow. The hopper is constructed from mill nish (No. 1) stainless steel plate. A wall friction test on this surface using the bulk solid handled shows that wall friction angle is 30 deg. The combination of these two numbers plots a point within the funnel ow region of the design chart, which conrms the observation. Another test conducted on a No. 2B-nish stainless steel sheet shows that the wall friction angle is 20 deg. The combination of this wall friction and the hopper angle plots a point within the mass-ow area of the design chart. Thus, lining the existing hopper with a No. 2B-nish stainless steel sheet will convert the silo to mass ow. It is not always possible to nd a hopper surface that results in mass ow at the given hopper angle. In this case, another option is to increase the

slope of the hopper. This may need to be done in combination with changing the hopper surface. Example 2 A silo with a 30deg. from vertical conical hopper exhibits funnel ow. The hopper is constructed from carbon steel plate. Tests on various wall materials show the lowest wall friction angle to be 20 deg. (on a particular epoxy coating). The design chart shows that a 20-deg. wall friction angle and a 30-deg. hopper angle still will result in funnel ow. However, if the hopper could be steepened to 22 deg. from vertical, then a wall surface having a 20-deg. wall friction angle would result in mass ow. Thus, cutting off the existing hopper and installing a new, 22deg.-from-vertical hopper coated with the epoxy tested will convert the silo to mass ow. Making a hopper steeper is not always an option due to, for example, headroom constraints. If mass ow must be achieved in the existing headroom, another option is to replace a conical hopper with a plane ow hopper in which convergence is on two opposing sides only, and the outlet is elongated such as a wedge or transition hopper. The sloping sidewalls of a plane ow hopper can be made 10- to 12-deg. less steep than a cone with the same inner surface and still achieve ow along its walls. In addition, theo-

APRIL 1998 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS

SOLIDS HANDLING

change in the feeder as well. Changes in feeder design are addressed later in this article.

Overcoming arching In addition to modications to ensure ow along hopper walls, mass ow requires that the hopper has an outlet large enough to overcome arching. As shown in Figure 1, two types of arches are possible: interlocking and cohesive. To overcome interlocking arches requires that the diameter of a circular opening be at least 6 to 8 times that of the largest particles handled. Additional considerations may be necessary for aked or stringy materials. The second type of arching, namely cohesive arching, can be analyzed by measuring the cohesiveness of the material. If, at any given point, the cohesive strength of a material exceeds the stresses imposed on it, then a stable arch will form and flow will stop. To prevent arching, it is necessary to ensure that the stresses acting on the mate-

rial are always greater than its cohesive strength. Cohesive strengths of most materials are a function of consolidating pressures. To illustrate this, lets hypothetically assume that a bulk solid is conned in a cylinder with frictionless walls. This bulk solid is consolidated by placing a uniform pressure on its top surface P1. After some period of time, the consolidating pressure is taken off the solid, and the walls of the cylinder are removed without disturbing the column of material. Once the material is unconned (i.e., the walls are removed), pressure is once again applied to the top surface, increasing in magnitude until the column gives out at failure pressure F1. This failure pressue is, in effect, the materials cohesive strength at a consolidating pressure of P1. Given the obvious limitations of this test (such as frictionless walls and a self-sustaining column of material), it cannot be used to obtain cohesive strength values for design. Instead, a Jenike Shear Tester, for example, can s Figure 11.
Plane ow geometry is a more robust design, capable of handling wider variations in material characteristics.

L > W 2 W

L
Chisel Hopper

s Figure 12. A
Jenike Shear Tester is used to nd the cohesive strength of a solid.

be used (7) (Figure 12). Normal forces are applied to the cover to consolidate the material, similar to the wall friction tests, and the force required to shear the material is measured. The result of this test is a relationship of cohesive strength to consolidating pressure, called a Flow Function, as shown in Figure 13. Once a materials Flow Function has been determined, minimum outlet sizes to overcome arching can be calculated through a series of design charts created by Jenike (6). Typically, the minimum outlet diameter required to prevent arching across a circular outlet is roughly twice the minimum width required for a slotted outlet. For example, if the minimum outlet diameter to prevent arching is calculated to be 12 in., a 6-in. wide slotted outlet (and at least 18 in. long) is sufficient to prevent arching. It should be noted that given the same size outlet, a bulk solid is more likely to arch in a funnel-ow hopper than in a mass-ow one. Therefore, modifying the hopper to achieve ow along hopper walls may be in itself sufficient to overcome arching. Whether this is the case or not can be conrmed by checking the minimum outlet requirements in mass ow calculated using the cohesive strength test data. Example 4 Arching and ratholing frequently occur in a silo with a 25-deg. from vertical conical hopper having a 12-in. dia. outlet. The hopper is constructed from mill nish (No. 1) stainless steel plate. Wall friction and cohesive strength tests are
Normal Force Cover Ring

L > W 3 W

Shearing Force

L
Transition Hopper

Bulk Solid

Base

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS APRIL 1998

Major Consolidating Pressure, P1

s Figure 13. Typical Flow Function of a solid as determined by Jenike Shear Tester. performed on the material. Cohesive strength tests show that if handled in a mass-ow hopper, the minimum outlet diameter to overcome arching is 12 in. If handled in a funnel-ow hopper, the outlet must be 36 in. or greater to overcome arching and ratholing. In this case, modifying the hopper to achieve ow along hopper walls will solve the arching and ratholing problems. Example 5 Assume that, in the above example, the cohesive strength tests reveal that the minimum outlet required to prevent arching in a massow cone is 24 in. One option is to increase the outlet size to 24 in. and modify the hopper to get mass ow; however, this will limit the feeder choices. Another option is to replace the conical hopper with a transition hopper with a 12-in. wide by 36-in. long outlet.

Combatting ratholing Whether a rathole will form in a silo is also a function of cohesive strength. A rathole will develop if the cohesive strength of the material is greater than the stresses acting on the boundary of a ow channel. Cohesive strength of most materials increases with increasing consolidation pressure. Since consolidation pressure experienced by a bulk solid is a function of the size of a silo, the tendency for a material to rathole increases with increasing silo size. On the other hand, it is common to nd materials cohesive enough to form ratholes

even in small silos (5-ft dia. or less). (Note that ratholes form only in funnel-ow silos.) Once the Flow Function of a material is obtained, critical-ow channel diameters to overcome ratholing can be calculated in a similar manner to outlet sizes. This critical diameter DF is calculated as a function of silo size. To avoid ratholing in a funnel-ow silo, the ow channel must be greater than DF, which will ensure that the stresses at the boundary of the ow channel exceed the strength of the bulk solid. The size of a ow channel is set by the hopper outlet, and is approximately equal to its diameter (if it is circular) or the diagonal of a slotted outlet. Example 6 Ratholes form in a 25-ft dia. silo causing ow stoppages and, at times, uncontrollable uidized discharging of material, which occurs due to collapsing ratholes. The silo cylinder is 35-ft tall, followed by a conical hopper extending to a 12-in. dia. outlet with a screw below. Tests conrm that the 25-deg. from vertical conical hopper fabricated using a No. 1 mill nish stainless steel plate results in funnel ow. The least frictional of all the surfaces tested, a polyethylene liner, requires 19 deg. from vertical to achieve mass ow. Given the size of the silo, it is not practical to replace the hopper with a steeper one. In this case, another option to consider is expanded ow. The 12-in. dia. outlet results in a ow channel that starts at a 12-in. dia. and then expands somewhat upwards. Cohesive strength tests show that the critical rathole diameter DF for this material in a silo of this size is 6 ft. Therefore, ratholing can be overcome by cutting the existing hopper at a 6 ft. diameter and placing below this a 19-deg. from vertical conical hopper lined with the polyethylene sheet tested. This modication will result in mass ow in the silo up to the top of the new hopper section, and funnel ow above. Note that if the material is susceptible to segregation or degradation with time,

Cohesive Strength, F

then other problems may persist even though this modication will result in reliable discharge.

Use of inserts Inserts placed inside hoppers can be used to modify or alter ow in a silo. Early inserts consisted of inverted cones placed near the tops of conical hoppers (Figure 14). In theory, under the right conditions, these inserts can force ow along a portion of hopper wall. However, in practice they rarely achieve ow along hopper walls. Nevertheless, if placed correctly, these inserts can increase the size of the ow channel, therefore activating more of the contents of a silo. Thus, if the only problem is one of limited live capacity of a silo, there may be some merit in considering such an insert. However, if misplaced, these inserts can make problems worse by causing arching. Another type of insert consists of a hopper-within-a-hopper, such as a cone-within-a-cone, or a wedge-within-a-wedge. (This design is a patented.) These inserts can force material ow along hopper walls otherwise too shallow or too frictional for ow (see Figure 15). Example 7 Particle segregation has been a problem in a silo. Although well-blended material is transferred to the silo, the discharge contains large amounts of nes at the beginning and large amounts of coarse particles at the end of a run. The problem is caused by a funnel-ow pattern that results in the center of the silo being discharged rst, followed by the sides. Note that if the bulk solid is susceptible to sifting segregation, the process of lling the silo will result in a higher concentration of nes in the center. If the silo is then emptied in a funnelow pattern, the center is withdrawn rst, followed by the periphery. To remedy the situation, the ow must be converted to mass ow, which results in the sides and the center discharging roughly at the same time, thereby reducing the impact of this side-to-side segregation.

APRIL 1998 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS

SOLIDS HANDLING

The silo consists of a conical hopper sloping at 35 deg. from vertical. Test results show that the existing wall surface requires a 20-deg. conical hopper to achieve mass ow. Perhaps because of headroom limitations, the cost of replacing the hopper, or the downtime required, a new 20-deg. hopper is not feasible. An alternative to this would be to place an 18-deg. cone inside the hopper, forming a cone-within-a-cone system. This will force ow along the 35-deg. hopper walls and convert the silo to mass ow. In addition, the use of this type of hopper insert system results in more-uniform velocities in the silo, which further reduce the impact of segregation. A uniform velocity may also be desirable in silos where residence time of the bulk solid is important, such as in purge vessels, or when cross-contamination as a result of products mixing in the silo during discharge is a concern (8). Example 8 Funnel ow in a purge silo used to remove volatiles from granular polymers is causing incomplete processing, resulting in the volatiles being discharged with the material. This not only creates an explosion hazard, but also causes quality problems. In addition, because of funnel ow, stagnant material in the silo is causing cross-contamination between batches. Converting the purge silo to mass ow ensures a uniform residence time, hence, uniform purging. Mass ow also prevents stagnant material, therefore, cross-contamination across batches. In continuous processes where a different batch is placed on top of another, a certain amount of mixing occurs as the material ows through the silo. Ensuring a uniform velocity prole through the silo can minimize this mixing and minimize changeover waste. Wall friction tests show that the existing hopper slope is too shallow for mass ow regardless of the surface. Since the silo is a pressure vessel, any external change to the hopper would require extensive fabrication

s Figure 16. Retrotted purge silo

yields mass ow.

s Figure 14. Inverted cone placed near the top of a conical hopper can modify or alter ow in a silo.

s Figure 17. A pup tent is useful in

combining ow channels to overcome ratholing.

s Figure 15. Cone-within-a-cone insert

forces material ow along hopper walls otherwise too shallow or too frictional for ow.

and retesting of the structure. The most practical solution is to use a hopper within a hopper insert to convert the ow pattern to mass ow, which also provides a uniform velocity (Figure 16).

Pup tent Another type of insert, often referred to as a pup tent, is useful in combining ow channels to overcome ratholing (Figure 17). The di-

ameter of a ow channel created by combining two ow channels is roughly equal to the sum of the diameters of the individual ow channels. For example, a pup tent could be used to combine the ow channels that form above two adjacent outlets of a silo to dramatically increase the ow channel size to the point that a stable rathole cannot form. Pup tents can also be used to reduce loading on feeders with multiple screws. By carefully placing small pup tents between the screws, the solids pressure acting on each screw,

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS APRIL 1998

s Figure 18.
A belt feeder increases in capacity the direction of ow by using a tapered interface.
Hopper Nose for Stress Relief

Rubber Skirt (Belt Contact Buffer)

Feed Direction Belt Feeder

and, hence, power requirements can be signicantly lowered. Care must be taken, however, to avoid formation of arches over the pup tents.

Feeder modications In addition to the two requirements stated earlier (ow along walls, and an outlet large enough to overcome arching), mass ow also requires that the entire hopper opening be active. Regardless of the slope and the surface nish of the hopper above, if the outlet is partially blocked, funnel ow will occur. The blockage of the outlet could be caused by a lip or a ledge formed due to mismatches, partially closed gates, or a feeder that withdraws material from only a part of the outlet (9). (A feeder is a piece of equipment that is used to meter the discharge of material from a silo.) A common problem, especially when elongated outlets are used, is the inability of a feeder to activate the entire outlet. For ow to occur from the entire length of the outlet, the feeder must have a capacity that increases in the direction of ow. Two feeders commonly used with elongated outlets are belts and screws. When using a belt feeder, the increase in capacity is achieved by using a tapered interface as shown in Figure 18. The increasing capacity along the length is achieved by the

increasing size of the opening as a result of the taper. With a screw feeder, the increase in capacity may be achieved through the use of a tapered shaft as shown in Figure 19a, or by increasing the pitch in

the direction of ow, starting from a half pitch and ending with a full pitch, as shown in Figure 19b. However, both of these methods are limited to a length-to-screw diameter of about 3:1 or less. For longer lengths, the increase from one ight to the next becomes so small that, because of fabrication tolerances, an increase in the direction of feed cannot be guaranteed. The combination of a tapered shaft and increasing pitch sections is used to achieve length-to-diameter ratios of up to about 6:1. For the rst half, a section with a tapered shaft and half pitch is used, which is followed by an increasing pitch section (Figure 19c). Example 9 Arches and ratholes occur in a silo with a wedge hopper. The hopper has a 14-in. wide by 6-ft long outlet. A 6-in. dia. screw in a Vtrough (tapered trough) is used as a feeder. The screw is constant diameter, constant pitch.

a. Tapered Shaft

b. Increasing Pitch

s Figure 19.
Various methods for increasing capacity in the ow direction for screw feeders.

c. Combination Mass-Flow Screw Feeder A = Conical Shaft and Constant Pitch (Feed Section) B = Constant Shaft and Increasing Pitch (Feed Section) C = Constant Shaft and Constant Pitch (Conveying Section)

APRIL 1998 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS

SOLIDS HANDLING

The ratholes form over the back of the screw. Since the screw is constant pitch and constant diameter, its capacity is equal to the capacity of the rst ight, and is constant along its length. The rst ight withdraws material from directly above it, and becomes full. The successive rotations of the screw convey the contents of the rst ight forward to the second ight, which, having the same capacity, is lled with material from the rst ight. This prevents any more material entering the ight from above, so the material forward of the rst ight remains stagnant. This creates a ow channel over the rst ight, and if the material is cohesive, a rathole forms when the ow channel is emptied. (Structural failures have also occurred in a number of cases as a result of the ow channel which develops along the walls of the silo.) The solution is to replace the feeder with a 14-in. dia. mass-ow screw feeder, as shown in Figure 19c, placed in a U-trough. A mass-ow screw feeder with a uniform increase in capacity along the length of the outlet will activate the entire outlet. A screw with a diameter equal to the width of the slot ensures that the entire width of the slot is active, which is imperative to achieve mass ow. Note that the shallow sidewalls of a V-trough prevent mass ow even if a mass-ow screw and mass-ow hopper are used.

s Figure 20.
Air cannons quickly release a volume of high-pressure air or other gas into the bin creating a pressure front which applies additional stresses on an arch to break it.

Rotary valves Rotary valves are frequently used as feeders. In some applications, these feeders also serve as a pressure seal, for example, feeding a pneumatic conveying line or a reactor at a higher pressure than the silo. Rotary valves used as feeders below hoppers often tend to withdraw material only from a part of the hopper outlet. As the rotor turns, its pockets begin to ll as they become exposed. If a pocket lls with material before it travels the entire length of the outlet, then mass ow is hindered as a result of a partially active outlet.

To overcome this problem, a vertical section should be placed between the rotary valve and the hopper outlet. Making this vertical section approximately one outlet dia. tall is typically sufficient to allow the material ow to expand so as not to interfere with discharge from the hopper. When feeding into higher-pressure environments, especially when handling ne powders, the effect of gas movement in the system becomes signicant. If a rotary valve is not vented properly, gas leakage through the valve into the silo can signicantly reduce the maximum rate at which material can exit the silo. The upward moving gas acts as a body force on the powder, opposite to gravity, retarding ow. In some cases, this gas backow can actually cause material to arch in the hopper, completely stopping discharge. This problem can be avoided by providing proper venting to allow the gas to travel an alternative path, and reducing the amount of gas leakage by properly maintaining the rotary valve (11).

Use of ow aids Flow aids are devices or substances often used to assist gravity in promoting material flow. Flow aids can be grouped in two classes: mechanical and chemical. Common mechanical flow aid devices include air cannons, vibrators, vibrating discharges, and agitators. Chemical flow aids include powdered additives such as fumed silica and magnesium stearate, or liquid additives such as freeze-conditioning agents.

Mechanical ow aids: Air cannons Flow properties of many materials change with increasing time under pressure. For example, a bulk solid may ow out of a certain hopper reliably as long as discharge from the silo is continuous. However, after stopping discharge for some time, say overnight or over a weekend, the same material may not ow as a result of an arch that has formed. Air cannons may be an excellent choice for a situation such as this. These devices work by quickly releasing a volume of high-pressure air or other gas into the bin (Figure 20). This action creates a pressure front, which applies additional stresses on an arch to break it. The size, number, and location of the air cannons required depend on the cohesive strength of the material and the dimensions of the silo. Once the materials strength is measured, mathematical analyses can be used to determine the specics of the air cannons required. While these devices are effective in breaking arches that form after material has been stored at rest, if the problem is due to arch formation during continuous ow, air cannons are at best a band-aid solution, and an alternative means of alleviating the problem should be considered such as previously mentioned. Air cannons are also ineffective in overcoming ratholing. Once an air cannon is fired and a path is cleared from the cannon to the rathole, any subsequent operation of that cannon becomes useless, as air

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS APRIL 1998

just travels through the path without disturbing any additional material. To disturb sufficient material to actually collapse a rathole would require an unreasonably large number of air cannons. Even so, a collapsing rathole with large masses of material falling could cause structural damage to the silo and to the equipment below. Example 10 Arches form in a silo every Monday morning after a system has been shut down for the weekend. The silo consists of a conical hopper with a 14-in. dia. outlet. Operators poke the silo with rods until ow is established, after which the silo operates well for the entire week. Wall friction tests show that the silos hopper section is sufficiently steep and has low enough friction to provide mass ow. Cohesive strength tests indicate that the minimum outlet size required to overcome arching during continuous ow in a mass-ow silo is 10 in. However, after three days at rest under pressure in a silo, the cohesive strength increases such that the minimum outlet required to overcome arching becomes 3 ft, 6 in. An air cannon analysis shows that two air cannons placed at the 4-ft dia. level are sufficient to overcome arching after a weekend at rest.

s Figure 21.
A vibrating discharger activates a large cross-section via an insert, commonly an inverted cone or a dish.

crease in cohesive strength if subjected to forces beyond gravity), such devices may exacerbate the problem. Vibrators are better used to reduce buildup in chutes. By denition, chutes are surfaces on which a bed of bulk solid slides, in contrast to hoppers, which are geometries 100% full of material. Such devices include cyclones and dust collection hoppers, which act as chutes.

Vibrators Vibrators impart continuous body forces to the material through the walls of the handling equipment. These devices are often mounted on the hopper sections of silos. Some models deliver low-frequency/highamplitude forces, much like a hammer blow. Others produce high-frequency/low-amplitude forces through, for example, rotating a set of unbalanced masses. The effect of such devices on most arching and ratholing problems is minimal. The additional force required is usually not delivered where it is needed, namely at an arch or a rathole. Furthermore, when dealing with pressure-sensitive materials (those materials that exhibit an in-

Vibrating dischargers Mounted at the outlet of a hopper, a vibrating discharger activates a large cross-section. Activation is achieved by an insert, commonly an inverted cone or a dish, that vibrates along with the outer shell in a gyratory motion caused by a set of unbalanced rotating weights or a vertical motion by hydraulic or pneumatic actuators. Product ows around the insert into a conical section below, which typically operates as a chute (Figure 21). To the extent that it activates a large cross-section, this device can be used to overcome a number of ow problems, provided a few basics are adhered to. If a vibrating discharger is used at the outlet of a funnel-ow silo, then the ow channel created will approximate the size of the outlet (i.e., the top diameter of the discharger). If this ow channel is larger than the critical rathole diameter discussed above, then stable ratholes should not form, even though the pattern is funnel ow. In this case, if segregation and degradation of the solid is not a concern, a discharger could provide reliable ow. If, on the other hand, the ow channel is not large enough to

overcome ratholing, ow stoppages and other ow problems related to funnel ow and ratholing will occur. It is possible to overcome this problem by ensuring that the hopper above the discharger is designed for mass ow. Since the discharger is isolated from the hopper above, the vibrations do not affect ow in the hopper, and procedures for obtaining mass ow, as described above, apply. Vibrating dischargers may cause more problems than they solve if used with pressure-sensitive solids. The energy input can actually pack material and cause ow stoppages. With certain materials (this depends on the material and the circumstances), distinct ow channels form in four quadrants of the outlet, caused by the insert supports, and this can asymmetrically load the silo above. Such loads can result in structural damage to the silo (5). A distinction must be made between a discharger and a feeder. A discharger is a device that promotes ow, but does not control its rate. A feeder, on the other hand, is used to meter bulk solids. Therefore, if the rate of discharge is to be controlled, a feeder must be used below the discharger. In this case, care must be taken that material does not ll the area between the discharger and the feeder and get compacted by vibrations. Vibrating dischargers should be operated on an on/off cycle as suggested by the manufacturer, even if the bulk solid seems to ow without any vibrations. Not operating the vibrating discharger can easily result in distinct ow channels, which can load the silo asymmetrically. Struc-

APRIL 1998 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS

SOLIDS HANDLING

tural failures have occurred in a number of silos where the discharger was not being vibrated.

s Figure 22.
Typical placements of air permeation systems. Care must be taken to ensure that the system does not prevent mass ow.

Agitators/exible walls Paddles, moving arms, and exible walls are sometimes effective in overcoming arching and ratholing problems; however, these solutions are typically limited to relatively small hoppers (several hundred pounds capacity), where solids pressures and the power required to operate them are small. A number of commercially available feeders employ agitation effectively, and are especially useful when low discharge rates are required with cohesive bulk solids. Chemical ow aids A number of chemicals have been successfully used as ow aids to alter the ow properties of the bulk solid handled. These additives, in general, work by preventing the host particles from adhering to each other, which is accomplished by coating the surface of each particle, removing free moisture, or preventing the freezing of that moisture. Generally, these additives are dry powders, such as silicates, stearates, or phosphates. Their effectiveness and the amount required can easily be determined by conducting cohesive strength tests on samples prepared in a lab. Some of the considerations of this approach include the compatibility of the additive with the material handled and the process, the cost of the additive, and the cost of an additional handling system to deliver and mix the additive. Generally, this approach is considered to be one of the last resorts in solving a ow problem. Liquid additives have been used as freeze-conditioning agents to prevent freezing of moist materials that are subjected to low temperatures, such as coal transported by rail or ores stored outside. Air-permeation systems When handling ne powders (e.g., all particles 100 m and smaller), the effect of interstitial air or gas can be

signicant. As briey discussed above, one of these effects is limiting the discharge rate. As the material moves from the top of the silo toward its outlet, the pressures exerted on it at rst increase, resulting in a rise in bulk density. This causes the particles to become packed closer together, which forces out a certain amount of gas between them. As the material continues to move through the hopper toward the outlet, the consolidating pressures are reduced and the bulk density decreases. This can result in a slight amount of vacuum between the particles in the hopper, which often creates a gas ow inward through the outlet, counter to the solids ow. As the rate of discharge increases, so does the amount of vacuum; hence, the body forces exerted on the material by the counterowing gas go up. Eventually, this body force becomes equal and opposite to the force of gravity, setting the upper limit to material discharge. The ow rate that is limited by this mechanism can be increased by supplying gas into the material using an air-permeation system, which reduces the amount of gas ow in through the outlet. Typical placements of air permeation systems are shown in Figure 22. Care must be taken to ensure that the gas permeation system does not prevent mass ow. The air requirements for these systems are a function of the permeability of the bulk solid and are typically very low. Injecting excessive amounts of air can result in uidization of the hoppers contents, and may lead to ooding.

Literature Cited
1. Merrow, E. W, Estimating Startup Times for Solids-Processing Plants, Chem. Eng., p. 89 (Oct. 24, 1988). 2. Carson, J. W., et al., Understanding and Eliminating Particle Segregation Problems, Bulk Solids Handling, 6, pp. 139144 (Feb. 1986). 3. Purutyan, H., et al., Identifying and Controlling Silo Vibration Mechanisms, Powder & Bulk Eng., Part I, 8 (11), pp. 5865 (Nov. 1994); Part II, 8 (12), pp. 1928 (Dec. 1994). 4. Jenkyn, R. T., and D. J. Goodwill, Silo Failures: Lessons to Be Learned, Eng. Digest (Sept. 1987). 5. Carson, J. W., and R. T. Jenkyn, Load Development and Structural Considerations in Silo Design, paper presented at Reliable Flow of Particulate Solids II, Oslo, Norway (Aug. 1993). 6. Jenike, A. W., Storage and Flow of Solids, Bulletin No. 123, University of Utah Engineering Experimental Station, Salt Lake City (Nov. 1964). 7. American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Shear Testing Method for Bulk Solids Using the Jenike Shear Cell, ASTM Standard D6128, ASTM, Philadelphia. 8. Carson, J. W., et al., Bulk Solid Purge and Conditioning Vessels, Chem. Proc., 58 (8), pp. 7780 (Aug. 1995). 9. Carson, J. W., and G. Petro, Feeder Selection Guidelines, Chem. Proc. 1997 Powder & Solids Annual, pp. 4043 (1977). 10. Marinelli, J., and J. W. Carson, Use Screw Feeders Effectively, Chem. Eng. Progress, 88 (12), pp. 4751 (Dec. 1992). 11. Carson, J. W., Interfacing Bulk Solids Conveyors with Upstream Equipment, AIChE Symposium on Solids Conveying and Separation, AIChE, New York (Nov. 18, 1987).

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS APRIL 1998

Fluidization This may also be an option if the material handled is ne and easily uidizable. Fluidization is especially useful where high discharge rates (e.g., 1,000 ton/h) are required. Gas injected through permeable membranes near or at the bottom of the hopper is used to uidize the contents of a silo. This changes the characteristics of the bulk solid almost completely, making it behave more like a uid. The gas must be uniformly distributed through the material to prevent localized uidization or ow channels. If a fast-owing ow channel or a rathole develops, then most of the uidization gas moves through that path, losing its ability to uidize any more material. Additional considerations when evaluating this as an option include the need for dry or conditioned gas, the requirement of an additional system to handle and clean the gas after use, and discharging with low density and a uctuating rate.

To sum up While it is preferable to avoid handling problems by designing equipment based on flow characteristics of a bulk solid, problems in existing equipment can be alleviated. The majority of flow problems are caused by the existence of a funnel-flow pattern. These problems can be solved by altering the flow pattern to mass flow, which requires changing the hopper or feeder design as outlined above. In addition, a number of other methods, such as use of mechanical and chemical flow aids, fluidization, and air permeation, may be useful means of addressing these problems. A quick guide to the potential effectiveness of most of the various options presented is given in Table 1. This listing is intended as a starting point in considering alternatives, and is in no way definitive or all-inclusive. However, understanding the problem and its causes, as

well as the flow properties of the bulk solid handled, should form the basis for any retrofit to alleviate the CEP problem.
H. PURUTYAN is a senior project engineer at Jenike & Johanson, Inc. Westford, MA (978/392-0300; Fax: 978/392-9980; e-mail: hpurutyan@jenike.com). Since joining the rm in 1991, he has been involved in designing reliable handling systems for a variety of applications, ranging from degassing/purging vessels for olens to storage and feeding systems for cement plants. He has extensive experience with a wide range of difficult-tohandle materials such as synthetic gypsum, kaolin clay, fertilizers, and titanium dioxide. Purutyan regularly lectures on the subject of bulk solids handling through AIChE and to individual companies, has authored a number of articles on the subject, and is the holder of two patents. He received both his BS and MS from Worcester Polytechnic Institute. He is currently pursuing an MBA degree at Babson College.

Table 1. A quick guide to the effectiveness of the various retrofit options.

Problem Arching Solution Hopper Modications Liner Transition Hopper Expanded Flow Larger Outlet Inserts Inverted Cone Hopper-in-Hopper Pup Tent Feeder Modications Mass-Flow Screw Mass-Flow Belt Interface Vented Rotary Valve Flow-Aid Devices Air Cannon Vibration Agitation Aeration Air Permeation Fluidization Good Good Good Good Poor Good Poor Good Good Good Good Fair Good Poor Good Good Good Good Fair Fair Good Fair Good Good Poor Fair Fair Good Poor Fair Good Good Good Poor Fair Good Poor Good Good Poor Poor Poor Fair Poor Good Poor Fair Poor Good Poor Poor Poor Good Good Good Poor Poor Poor Good Good Good Good Poor Poor Fair Good Poor Fair Fair Poor Poor Poor Fair Poor Poor Ratholing Flooding Rate Limiting Segregating

B. H. PITTENGER is a senior project engineer at Jenike & Johanson Inc., Westford, MA (978/392-0300; Fax: 978/392-9980; e-mail: bhpittenger@jenike.com). Since joining J&J, he has designed bulk-solids storage and handling systems ranging from conditioning silos for food and chemicals, to simple and accurate batch dosing systems in processing plants, to developing antisegregation systems for powdered metals and pharmaceuticals. He previously worked at General Electric as a production, systems, and quality engineer, and as a shift and plant supervisor. With GEs Corporate Audit Staff, he provided systems design to many GE businesses, including Quartz Products, Plastics Europe, Aerospace, and Power Generation. He has published many papers and lectures on solids ow for several professional organizations. Pittenger has a BS from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and is completing his MS at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. J. W. CARSON is president of Jenike & Johanson, Inc. Westford, MA (978/392-0300; Fax: 978/3929980; e-mail: jwcarson@jenike.com). He joined the rm in 1970 and has been active in research, consulting, and management. Carson is the author of over 50 technical papers and articles in the areas of bin loads, ow of ne powders, vibration, and using computers to analyze solids ow. He lectures extensively on the topic of ne powder storage and ow of solids, and devotes much of his time to consulting with clients. He received a BS in mechanical engineering from Northwestern University, and a PhD from MIT, and is a member of AIChE.

APRIL 1998 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRESS