帶式輸送機的發(fā)展外文翻譯@中英文翻譯@外文文獻翻譯

附錄 1 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CABLE BELT CONVEYOR lan Main Thomson BSc (Eng.) Managing Director Cable Belt Ltd Summary The early development of belt Conveying is discussed showing how the Cable belt system developed from the same requirements. The various design concepts are compared with those of the troughed belt conveyor highlighting the areas of advantage and disadvantage. The areas of conveying where the Cable Belt system is most useful and the likely developments are outlined. These and other developments have led to many major conveyor installations including a 2 flight 52 km system being constructed to the Cable Belt design. Development of the Cable Belt Conveyor The origin of the belt conveyor is not easy to clearly identify but there are references to simple forms as early as 1795. However it was not until the dramatic increase in the world trading of grain after 1850 that major improvements were made. The first form of conveyor was a flat belt running in a trough which was quickly improved by the introduction of straight idlers to replace sliding friction by rolling friction. The need to increase the capacity and centralise the material load led to the appearance at the same time of both of the most common forms of heavy duty belt conveyors, the troughed belt conveyor and the Cable Belt conveyor. In the late 1860s the use in troughed belt conveyors of straight rollers with conical or dished ends was obsolete until the early 1890s. The introduction in 1865 of inclined straight concentrator idlers led to the conveyor in the Thomas Robins Jnr. patent of 1896, which is regarded as the first troughed belt conveyor. Since that date whilst there have been many important improvements in the detail of the idler, belt and drive construction, the basic concept of the troughed belt conveyor is the same as outlined in the work completed in the early 1900s. The Cable Belt conveyor principle whilst of earlier origin was not developed in a truly successful form until 1952. One of the earliest forms was that developed in 1859 and shown in the sketch fig. 1. This consisted of two parallel endless leather or rubber belts to which were attached at intervals curved meta1 spreaders supporting a canvas trough. There were many other similar conveyors but they all suffered from the same basic defect that the carrying belt was rigidly attached to the driving belts. This led to the disadvantages that the drive belts do not stretch alike and that the spreader bars are stressed and eventually break free from the drive belts. The Cable Belt system successfully overcame these defects and since its introduction has generally been accepted in the conveyor field for Long distance applications. A substantial proportion of the single flight conveyors over 5 km long that have been installed are now of the Cable Belt design. The fundamental design differences made in the Cable Belt system were to use a round drive belt in the form of a wire rope, and not to attach the carrying belt to the drive belts. The first of these changes was aimed at getting over the difficulty of training to run in parallel a pair of flat belts by substituting positively located round cables running in grooved pulleys. Early Belt Conveyor Fig 1 The second change was the point that allowed the Cable Belt system to operate successfully in contrast to the other earlier attempts. The carrying belt merely rests on the drive cables, these cables sitting within shoes which are moulded on the be1t surfaces. It may seem that depending on friction alone the Cable Belt is liable to have the belt slip backwards on the drive cables. However as all belt conveyors depend on friction between the belt and the material carried to allow them to operate at all, the only requirement is that the friction between the belt and the drive cables should be greater than between the belt and the material. This was achieved by shaping the belt shoes to grip the drive cables. It has been possible using Cable Belt belting with specially formed surfaces to run on slope conveyor systems where the overall grade is 21 and with particular sections of 28, without experiencing slipping of the belt on the drive cables. Whilst the Cable Belt conveyor was developed at a time when the powers available of up to 300 kW were regarded as outstanding the basic concept is still retained even when now, single conveyors of 30000 metre length and 8000 kW power are being built. The terminal units are similar to those in a conventional troughed conveyor except that they also serve to separate and rejoin the carrying belt and drive cables. A typical example of a head discharge unit is shown in fig. 6. Obviously the terminals other than the drive unit are more complex than in a conventional troughed conveyor and take up more space particularly in the case of the tensioning arrangements. This is not true of the drive as for a comparable power rating it is compact and has the advantage that it can be located remote from the Cable Belt conveyor belt line. Head Discharge Unit Fig 6 As the modulus of elasticity of the drive cables is kept relatively low in order to allow the use of very low starting torques and each drive cable is tensioned, the tension system does require substantial take-up space and is more complex as is illustrated in fig. 7. Typical Tensioning Arrangement Fig 7 The concepts behind the design of the Cable Belt conveyor are very similar to a conventional conveyor in that there is conveyor friction and the vertical alignment is a series of catenaries but of course the factors used vary considerably because of the different characteristics. The conveyor friction losses are considerably reduced principally because of the significantly lower number and weight of moving parts in a comparable system. This reduction is normally in the order of 30%. In addition the friction losses due to the working of belt and material as they pass over the idlers are significantly less. it has been determined empirically that there is in the order of a 10% reduction in the friction losses. The establishing of the facts, even on a comparative basis, with regard to conveyor friction has proved difficult as all the data is empirical and the various design standards can show markedly different results. In addition conveyor friction will vary with temperature, age and standards of installation and maintenance. However in a recent major installation it has been possible to compare the friction values, at least on a design basis and as can be seen below these bear out the differences. Conventional Cable Belt Number of Rotating Parts 100 76 Weight of Moving Parts 100 64 Friction Losses 100 67 In determining the vertical alignment of the Cable Belt system whilst the formulae and calculation are the same, great care must be exercised as it is not possible to allow lift off in catenaries to occur. Early Cable Belt Belting Fig 2 Intermediate Cable Belt Belting Fig 3 Modern Cable Belt Belting Fig 4 The Cable Belt is best defined as a belt conveyor with a laterally rigid but longitudinally flexible carrying belt which is supported at or near its edges on two parallel endless looms of drive cable, these cables in turn being supported at intervals by grooved pul1eys. The integral reduction gear and drive unit drives both drive cab1es and incorporates a differential to equalise tensions in the cables. In addition each of the drive cable circuits is separately tensioned to allow for the differential stretch of these during operation. The unique feature of the Cable Belt system is the belt. Originally this was a fabric reinforced rubber belt which had moulded into it spring steel straps at 450 mm intervals. These straps protruded beyond the edges of the bell as illustrated in fig. 2, and had mechanically attached to them a metal shoe with rubber Lining where it gripped the drive cable. This was superseded by a one piece moulded construction shown in fig. 3 where smaller cross section straps at intervals of 100 mm were moulded entirely within the belt and the shoes to grip the drive cables were continuous mouldings along the edge of the belt. Typical 4 Pulley Line Stand Fig 5 Recently a further change was made, illustrated in fig. 4 whereby the shoes which grip the drive cable on the material carrying run have been moved inwards. This increases the stability of the belt when subjected to overloading and in addition allows the use of smaller cross section straps. Angle Station Fig 8 It is normal that on a typical long centre conveyor the eventual replacement of the belt is not for reasons of abrasion of the surface or mechanical damage, but due to the various ageing processes that affect rubber compounds such as heat, sunlight, and ozone. As a result it has been necessary to develop special synthetic rubber compounds that are inherently resistant to ageing. The specification of the drive cables whilst similar superficially to a normal wire rope are specially made to a Cable Belt specification with design criteria laid down for individual wire size, fatigue life and internal lubrication. They are of galvanised construction, Langs Lay with either a fibre or wire rope core. Currently they are used in sizes up to 60 mm diameter and breaking loads of 260 tonnes. As this is the tension reinforcing member of the Cable Belt system great attention is paid to reducing the number of splices and drive cables of up to 100 tonnes weight for each section have been used. Along the line of the conveyor it is supported at intervals of between 5 and 10 metres by grooved pulleys approximately 300 mm in diameter. Previously these pulleys were of a hardened steel construction but the current design is for a pulley with a replacement rubber lined tread. These pulleys are mounted in pairs on articulated arms which allow the conveyor to self align and equalise the loads on each pulley as can be seen in fig. 5. Whilst this condition is normally avoided in all conveyor design, it is essential, to prevent derailment of the drive cables, to design catenaries correctly and conservatively. As is well known the normal catenary formulae are approximations which allow a factor of safety against lift off. In designing the Cable Belt system the same formulae and factors are used, but effectively the protection against lift off is increased by determining worst possible loading conditions and limiting the starting torques. This situation is helped in that the conveyor friction is such and modulus of the drive cables is selected to ensure that there is virtually no additional breakaway torque required even to start a long flat overland Cable Belt system. The major difference in designing a Cable Belt conveyor lies in the separation of the carrying belt and the drive cables. Whilst good design practice requires that they should be kept together, the ability to separate them does give considerable flexibility in design and allows the introduction of concepts unknown in the conventional belt conveyor. The most widely used of these is in the many circumstances where a straight line route or one incorporating curves is not feasible, and the unit known as an angle station is employed. As can be seen from fig. 9 this allows any angle up to 320 to be accommodated and still retain the feature of a single drive but incorporate two separate carrying belt circuits. This feature is used in about 30% of the Cable Belt installations. The other concept that is widely used is as mentioned earlier, the ability to place the drive unit remote from the belt line. This feature, which is unique, allows the drive unit and its associated electrical equipment to be located in a position with easy access for maintenance but away from the dust and dirt associated with a conveyor discharge or return belt line. This flexibility also allows the drive unit to be placed at any point in the conveyor, including if necessary on the material carrying run of the drive cables. The other part of the Cable Belt design that is unique is the tensioning system and there is no doubt that this is more complex and takes greater space than would be required in a troughed belt conveyor. There are several reasons for this but the principal reason is the necessity to provide equipment to separately tension each drive cable and the carrying belt. Whilst the tension in the carrying belt is nominal it is still necessary to cater for the drive cable tension movement, particularly in long flat conveyors which, of necessity, are tensioned at or near the drive unit. In such conveyors the tension movement of the drive cables is substantial during the start sequence. Before the whole conveyor is moving the effect is that it is necessary to store in the carrying belt tension system a length of belt equivalent to the elastic stretch of the drive cables. This of course is released when the conveyor stops. In a typical 15000 metre long conveyor this stretch can be up to 80 metres. The main reason for taking up a greater space than a troughed belt conveyor is the necessity to cater for both the permanent stretch and the relatively high elastic stretch of the drive cables. The permanent stretch of about 1% which occurs in the first few hundred hours of running could be eliminated during manufacture but it conveniently provides the necessary space for splicing of the cable as well as generating extra cable which can be used when resplicing is necessary The choice of the modulus that governs the elastic stretch is a compromise between minimising the stretch to reduce the space requirements and having sufficient stretch to ensure very low breakaway torques. As can be seen from the foregoing information the Cable Belt system while fulfilling the same role in many ways is quite different from the troughed belt conveyor. As most conveyors are of short length and low horsepower there is no doubt that the troughed belt conveyor is the correct solution for many conveyor applications. However in those areas of long lengths or high lifts the Cable Belt system often shows decisive advantages and in those cases where its unique design concepts can be used it may be the only choice. To define the precise applications which a Cable Belt system is suitable for is difficult, as nearly one third of the systems installed are in applications in which they were not the most competitive solution. In each case they were chosen for one of the unusual features that the system offers. As a general rule the Cable Belt in its current form is not technically suitable for short centre conveyors mainly due to the size of the terminals. In addition to the cost of the terminal equipment the main cost component of any belt conveyor, the belt, in the Cable Belt system has a constant cost irrespective of the power requirements. This 1oads the capital cost on low power conveyors but reduces it on high power conveyors in comparison with a troughed belt conveyor. In summary the current competitive situation of the Cable Belt system appears to be :- In slope conveyors of less than 750 kW or level conveyors of less than 3000 metre length the Cable Be1t is not the most competitive solution. Above these parameters the Cable Belt becomes increasingly competitive in capital cost. In leve1 conveyors where the power due to friction losses is a substantial part of the total, the operating costs of the Cable Belt system are becoming increasingly attractive. In other cases there does not appear to be any significant differences. There is one significant development of the Cable Belt system which is currently undergoing field trials. When generally available in the next few years it should, for the same capital cost, show a significant reduction in operating costs. This involves the production of a drive cable where the individual wire reinforcing strands are separately moulded within an elastomer giving a round steel and elastomer drive cable. Initial results have been most encouraging with a three fold increase in the fatigue life as against a conventional steel wire rope. Recent developments in the Cable Belt system show that it can effectively compete with rail transport over distances which until now have not been regarded as suitable for conveyor systems. As an example there is currently being constructed in Western Australia for Worsley Alumina Pty. Ltd. a two flight, 52000 metre Cable Belt conveyor system To be operated by Worsley Alumina Pty Ltd., and located near Perth., W. Australia, this installation incorporates two Cable Belt conveyors in tandem and is an overland system which transports crushed bauxite from the mine to a refinery. At the intersection of the two conveyors, the material is turned through 50 (to the left) by means of chutes and rock boxes and fed to the second stage Cable Belt conveyor. Both the conveyors are angle drive conveyors with their drive and tension units located at the transfer/discharge ends of each conveyor. To minimise spares holdings, the conveyors have been standardised with almost complete interchangeability of components. Length: 31000m 21000m Difference in elevation: (Fall) 72m 14m Material: Bauxite Density: (Specific Gravity) 1520 kb/m Rated capacity: 2040 m.t.p.h. Annual tonnage: 9,06 x 106 Belt width: 900 mm Operating speed: 6,35 m/sec Drive cable: 57 mm dia. Linestand pitch: 4,75 m Power: 5300 kW 3600 kW In conclusion it would appear that the Cable Belt system has the capability of further development which should permit, the expansion of belt conveying into even longer economic lengths than those currently under construction. The Author wishes to acknowledge the assistance given by Worsley Alumna Pty. Ltd., and the Cable Belt companies in the preparation of this paper. References: 1.Belt Conveying and Belt Elevators - Hetzel and Albright John Wiley & sons 2.The Fu11ing Resistance of Belt Conveyors - H.P. Lachman 附錄 2 鋼絞線帶式輸送機的發(fā)展 托馬森 （英） 總經(jīng)理 鋼絞線帶式 輸送機有限公司 摘 要： 早期帶式輸送機的發(fā)展被認為是與鋼絞線帶式系統(tǒng)相同的需求而發(fā)展起來的，其本質就是各種設計原理與槽形帶式輸送機突出部分的優(yōu)缺點進行比較，而這一部分的發(fā)展恰恰表明，在傳送系統(tǒng)中最可能也最有用的發(fā)展，就是對其外形輪廓的改進，這些使得在一些大型鋼絞線設計建造中，考慮安 裝長達 52 千米的螺紋槽系統(tǒng)（ 2 個）。 鋼絞線帶式輸送機發(fā)展 在 1795 年時，最初的帶式輸送機不便于操作，而且僅涉及一些簡單的外形，直到 1850年后，隨著世界范圍內的谷物貨量大量增加，促使傳送帶技術有了較大的改進。 第一種形式的 傳送機是在一個槽形及其內運行的水平傳送帶，其工作原理是引進導輪系統(tǒng)用滾動摩擦來替代滑動摩擦，以便減少傳送中的摩擦損失。隨著需求的不斷增長以及大量的集中裝卸貨物的需要，使得在這一時期最普遍的貨物帶式輸送機。草型帶式輸送機以及鋼絞線帶式輸送機都獲得較大發(fā)展。 在 1860 年后期，大量使用帶有錐形或蝶形滾動導輪的槽形帶式傳送機，直到 1890 年才過時被淘汰。 1865 年傾向于將直線集中器或跨輪引入到傳送機發(fā)明設計中，這使得托馬斯 .羅賓在 1896 年獲得該產(chǎn)品的專利權，被認為是歷史上第一臺槽形帶式輸送機。從那時起，許多重大 改進在跨輪傳送帶和操作結構等一些細節(jié)方面。但在 1900 年早期，所有的槽形帶式輸送機都具有相同的外型，在外型上并沒有改進。 同最初的機器相比，鋼絞線帶式輸送機真正意義上獲得較大成功的發(fā)展是在 1952 年，而在 1859 年，最早期的設計形式之一，如圖一所示。 圖中包括兩條平行無較差的皮帶制成膠質的傳送帶，被按一定距離貼附在彎曲的金屬表面上，使得這種帆布式槽形帶式輸送機正常運行，也有許多相似的輸送帶類型，但它們承受從動帶被剛性的貼附在主動帶上，這些基本相同的缺點 這也導致許多缺點 例如：主動帶并不能完全與草圖設計 吻合，或者是潤滑劑承受重壓，最終從主動帶脫落等。 圖一 鋼絞線傳動帶系統(tǒng)成功地克服了這些缺點，并且這一技術被大范圍的用在傳送機長距離的應用中?，F(xiàn)在一種單臂長 54 米的螺紋槽系統(tǒng)已經(jīng)被考慮在設計中。 鋼絞線傳送帶系統(tǒng)設計原理的基本不同在于采用一種圓形的金屬線形式的主動帶，而不是傳統(tǒng)的將從動帶附著在主動帶上。第一步改變致力于克服通過三角皮帶輪式運行中的水平傳送帶被鋼絞線替代所產(chǎn)生的困難。第二步改變是著眼于鋼絞線傳送帶系統(tǒng)本身可以進行操作，這與早期設計的目標恰恰相反。主動帶主要依附于從動帶上，這些鋼絞 線被放置在傳送帶表面壓制好的滑軌上，它或許是緊依靠摩擦力是鋼絞線傳送帶在主動帶上向后滑行，然而同所有帶式輸送機依靠摩擦力在傳送帶上運載貨物相比，鋼絞線時僅需滿足在傳送帶和主動鋼絞線間的摩擦力應大于在傳送帶和貨物之間的摩擦力，這應使得傳送帶制動器僅僅牢固在主動鋼絞線上。 鋼絞線帶式輸送機也可用于特殊形式的表面，在斜面?zhèn)魉蜋C整體系統(tǒng)中等級是 21，一些特殊形式的可達 28，在傳動鋼絞線上不存在打滑脫落的現(xiàn)象。 鋼絞線帶式輸送機伴隨著發(fā)動機進一步發(fā)展而發(fā)展的，當發(fā)動機功率達到 300 千瓦時（被認為是最杰出的設計）；由此 而開始建造長達 3000 米，功率 8000 千瓦的傳送機。 鋼絞線傳送給與槽形傳送機除在工作方式上不同，其它一些末端的輸出單元是相似的，也聯(lián)合從動帶與主動帶，一個典型的例子是上部的卸貨裝置，如圖六所示： 圖六 明顯地，除傳動單元終端設備之外的其他設備要比傳統(tǒng)的槽形帶式輸送機復雜得多，并且占據(jù)更多的空間，特別是在考慮張力等作用下更是如此，這并不是真正意義上的傳動裝置，而是僅對其功率額定值進行比較，當它滿負載時，需能控制運處的鋼絞線傳送機正常工作。 傳動鋼絞線的張力模數(shù)保持在相對低的水平是為了獲得較低的初始扭矩， 并且當每個傳動鋼絞線拉緊時，張力系統(tǒng)需要占據(jù)較大的空間，并且更復雜，如圖七所示： 圖七 后期的鋼絞線帶式輸送機設計理念與傳統(tǒng)的非常相似的，在傳送機中也存在摩擦，并且垂直找平裝置是一系列的懸垂鏈，但如果應用于不同的領域，應考慮各種不同的性能，且考慮降低傳送機的摩擦損失，可以通過減少動件的數(shù)量和重量，這種損失正常值為 30%，而額定的摩擦損失取決于工作中的傳送帶與貨物之間的損失，而采用滑輪裝置可大大減少這種損失，理論上測量能答曰降低 10%的損失，做一基本比較，這一事實很令人吃驚。關于摩擦損失已經(jīng)證實往往很難克 服，并且所有的觀測數(shù)據(jù)和設計標準，顯示出不同的測試結果，另外摩擦損失取決于各種因素， 此外，輸送機摩擦將隨著安裝和維護的溫度，壽命和標準變化。在一些大型設備安裝中，比較部分摩擦值至少在一個基本設計中能看到如下不同之處： 傳統(tǒng)型 鋼絞線型 回轉件數(shù)量 100 76 可動件數(shù)量 100 64 摩擦損失 100 67 鋼絞線帶式輸送機的垂直找平系統(tǒng)與槽形機設計和計算原理是相同的，必須進行反復測試確保懸垂鏈脫落這樣的事情不會發(fā)生。鋼絞線傳送帶被定義為橫向堅固縱向輕柔的帶式輸送機，而從動帶依附于兩條平行 主動帶的側翼或邊緣部分。減速齒輪箱和活動單元來對主動鋼絞線進行控制，以及對不同鋼絞線拉伸張力的差別超界調整。此外，每一根主動鋼絞線在工作中允許承受不同的拉伸力。 鋼絞線傳送帶獨特的特點是體現(xiàn)在傳送帶上，最初是一種加強橡膠傳送帶，被鑄造在以450 毫米為間隔的彈簧搭接片上，這些搭接片伸出起搭架輪之外，如圖二所示，并且機械的附著在金屬制動器上，橡膠傳送帶與主動鋼絞線相連，這可以被一種鑄造結構所代替，如圖三所示，一些較小的交叉搭接片以間隔 100 毫米的距離完全鑄造在傳動帶和制動器上，以便使主動鋼絞線僅僅固定在傳動帶邊 緣。最近，已經(jīng)對此作進一步改進，如圖四，當貨物在其上移動時，制動器僅僅控制主動鋼絞線，這也使得當發(fā)生超重時，增加傳送帶的穩(wěn)定性。另外可以采用更好的交叉搭接片。 圖二 圖三 圖四 長期集中使用傳送機，最終得更換傳送帶，這是很正常的，或者是由于表面的摩擦損失造成的 ,或許是機械性的損壞，但主要取決各個部分的壽命，例如影響橡膠、化合物壽命的因素有熱障、光照和氧化等，因此必須發(fā)展特種橡膠化合物來增加其壽命。 主動鋼絞線的特點使它可以近似的被那些金屬線大小、抗疲勞性和內部的潤滑性符合鋼絞性設計特點的金屬線所 代替