Multiple Conveyor Belt Cleaners Lessen Carryback Problems

The longtime rule-of-thumb for conveyors was that only one cleaner was needed to solve carryback problems and help keep belt replacement costs under control. That is now being rethought. Belt-cleaning systems manufacturers, designers, and users are shifting to the view that multiple cleaners, placed at key locations on the conveyor and properly maintained, are necessary to solve today's material build-up (carryback) problems. There are still not many statistics on conveyor belt cleaning. But some recent studies support this belief. One study contends that the plant maintenance engineer's biggest problem is keeping the conveyor system running efficiently. The study also said the conveyor itself is responsible for most plant shutdowns. An unscheduled conveyor shutdown can cost more than $100,000/hr and run into millions in lost production in a given year. Other studies pointed out that belt replacement is the greatest single cost of the conveyor system. These studies allude to an important fact: cleaner belts lead to reliability and longer belt life. They showed that a critical relationship exists between characteristics of material being moved and the design of all major conveyor components. In practically all situations this relationship is keyed to belt cleaners, which have long been considered "add-ons" or "accessories." At the Fifth International Coal Utilization Exhibition and Conference, the Sammis Station-Ohio Edison Co. said it installed four belt cleaners on each problem belt. The company found that under certain conditions, when the coal is wet and sticky, carryback can be so heavy that it will flow over two cleaners. Before installing the cleaners, it was necessary to schedule a cleanup crew of four men each day and rent a large vacuum truck for an eight-hour shift. In addition, the company dredged the harbor three times a year, to remove coal spillage. Once the cleaners became operational, however, cleanup costs were reduced to a few days labor every third month. Renting the vacuum truck crew was also eliminated, and harbor dredging became necessary only once each year. In addition, the Mechanical Handling Engineers' Association (MHEA) in London pointed out that standards for cleaners are sorely lacking in the industry. MHEA called for instituting such standards in the future. They also reaffirm using multiple belt cleaners for increased efficiency. MHEA pointed out that some conveyor belts can be cleaned by one device, provided that it is correctly installed and adequately maintained. But MHEA recommended that a system approach be adopted, since this has proved more effective in practice. There are two main reasons why one belt cleaner fails to solve most carryback problems. First, management often reasons that the design of the current cleaner has probably been around for years, so it "must be good." This logic leads to a continued investment in keeping the current model operating, which includes pouring substantial sums of money in "housekeeping" manpower hours because the cleaner does not clean. Second, most single-belt cleaners are specified too late in the design process (indeed, some after the system is operational). This complicates matters since cleaning efficiency is directly proportional to when they are specified: the later the specification, the less efficiency. Cleaning equipment should be taken into consideration before the conveyor's structure is designed and fabricated. Otherwise the space available to install adequate cleaning equipment at the head pulley may be inadequate. Instead of matching conveyor with proper cleaner (as would occur during the design of the conveyor itself), designing a cleaning system "after-the-fact" becomes a matter of matching cleaner to conveyor. This limits choices in cleaners and, therefore, overall cleaning effectiveness. This is why after-the-fact designs of single belt cleaners are costly and rarely successful. While it is always best to specify belt cleaners during early design stages, the multiple-cleaner systems approach makes the timing of cleaner installation less critical. Because of flexible mounting hardware, a well-designed system can lead to 99% efficiency in cleaning and put an end to carryback even after a system is operational. Multiple-Cleaner Systems Approach In a multiple-cleaner system approach, the first step is to achieve a thorough understanding of the material to be moved under the worst conditions. With such un-