Full Paper

Chute Performance and Design for Rapid Flow Conditions

By Alan W. Roberts*
Many industrial chute applications are characterised by rapid flow conditions in which the bulk solid stream thickness or depth is
less than the chute width. Under these conditions, it is possible to describe the stream flow by means of a lumped parameter
model which takes into account the frictional drag around the chute boundaries as well as making allowance for inter-particle
friction. Equations of motion to describe the chute flow are presented and their application to the determination of chute profiles
to achieve optimum flow is illustrated. By means of design examples, the problems associated with the feeding of bulk solids onto
belt conveyors and conveyor transfers are discussed. Criteria for the selection of the most appropriate chute geometry to
minimise chute wear and belt wear at the feed point are presented. The determination of optimum chute profiles to achieve
specified performance criteria is outlined.

1 Introduction

vb

Chutes used in bulk handling operations perform a variety

of operations. For instance, accelerating chutes are employed
to feed bulk materials from slow moving belt or apron feeders
onto conveyor belts as illustrated in Fig. 1. In such installations
the feeder speed is normally limited to about 0.3 m/s, whereas
the conveyor speed may be 5 m/s or higher. In other cases,
transfer chutes are employed to direct the flow of bulk
material from one conveyor belt to one or more conveyors,
often via a three dimensional path. An example of such a
transfer chute is shown in Fig. 2. In this case the discharge from
the delivering conveyor is split and directed onto either of two
receiving conveyors which are at 90 to the delivering
conveyor as shown. The purpose of the dribble chute is to
collect and transfer the cohesive carry-back material from the
belt cleaning system.

Vf

Feeder

h
y

HT

Vey

Vo

Conveyor
Vb

Vex

Gate

Rc2

vex

vd

vey

vb

ve

Figure 2. Feeding onto a belt conveyor.

The majority of industrial chute applications, such as those

described above, involve rapid or accelerated flow conditions.
Such conditions are characterised by thin' stream flow in
which the thickness or depth of the flowing stream of bulk
material remains less than the width of the chute. Very often
the thickness is less than half the stream width. Under these
conditions, it is possible to describe the stream flow by means
of a lumped parameter model which takes takes into account
the frictional drag around the chute boundaries as well as
making allowance for inter-particle friction [1,2].
The importance of correct chute design to ensure efficient
transfer of bulk solids without spillage and blockages and with
minimum chute and belt wear cannot be too strongly
emphasised. The importance is accentuated with the trend
towards higher conveying speeds. The purpose of this paper is
to present an overview of the basic principles of chute design
with particular regard to feeding and transfer in belt
conveying operations as illustrated in Figs. 1 and 2.

2 Chute Flow Model

A. W. Roberts, Centre for Bulk Solids and Particulate Technologies, The

University of Newcastle, NSW., 2308, Australia.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2,

Rc1

Dribble
Chute

Ve

Figure 1. Feeding onto a belt conveyor.

[*]

Curved
Impact
Plate

Studies performed by Roberts [1] showed that under thin

stream accelerated flow through chutes, approximately 82 %
of the energy losses are attributed to the bulk material sliding
along the chute bottom, about 9 % of the losses being due to
sliding against the side walls, with the remaining 9 % due to

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

0930-7516/03/0202-0163$$17.50+.50/0
17.50+.50/0
0930-7516/03/0202-00163

163

Full Paper
inter granular friction. Under these conditions the motion can
be described by a lumped parameter model as shown in Fig. 3.
The basic theory is now reviewed.
.
m v

Ho Ao

"n"
"y"

vo

FD

m v
R

m H A

where a1 = 0.4, a2 = 0.2057.

v Rectangular Cross
Section
B

FN

For shallow bed conditions, the higher order terms may be

neglected so that the remaining linear relationship becomes
identical to Eq. (2)

Velocity
Profile

.
v

m g

The equivalent friction for chutes of circular cross-section

has been analysed by Roberts and Scott [2] and by Parbery and
Roberts [3]. It has been shown that le can be expressed by the
power series
 2


H
H
:::
(3)
le = l 1 + a1 a2
B
B

"s"

"x"

Circular Cross
Section

2.2 Equivalent Friction for Chutes of Varying Width

Figure 3. Chute flow model.

In some cases, it is necessary to converge the flow, as

illustrated in Fig. 4. In this case, the equivalent friction is given by





H
tank
(4)
le = l 1 + Kv
(1 +
Bo 2 s tan k
l

2.1 Equivalent Friction for Chutes of Constant Width

The drag force FD due to Coulomb friction is expressed by1)
FD = le FN

(1)

where FN = normal force and le = equivalent friction factor

which takes into account the friction coefficient between the
bulk solid and the chute surface, the stream cross-section and
the internal shear of the bulk solid. For a chute of rectangular
cross-section, le is approximated by


H
(2)
le = l 1 + Kv
B
where l = actual friction coefficient for bulk solid in contact
with chute surface
Kv = pressure ratio, normally Kv = 0.4 to 0.6
H = depth of flowing stream at a particular location
B = width of chute
B

Ho
vo

For continuity of flow,

r A v = Constant
where

(5)

r = bulk density
A = cross-sectional area of flowing stream

2.4 Equations of Motion

Referring to the chute model shown in Fig. 3 and analysing
the dynamic equilibrium conditions, the following differential
equations for the stream velocity may be derived:
Moving Coordinates, Tangential s and Normal n Components
dv
v
+ le
ds
R

g
cos h
v

le sin h = 0

(6)

Cartesian Components, x and y Components

s
p
v

dF

2.3 Continuity of Flow

ds

dx_ x_ y xy xle g1 le y x
+
=0
2
dx
1y x

(7)

and

(8)

Bo

= pn
pn

y y xx_
q
Also v = x_ 2 y_ 2

(9)

The radius of curvature of the path at any arbitrary location is

Figure 4. Chute of varying width.

2 1:5

1)

164

List of symbols at the end of the paper.

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

R=

1y x
y x

0930-7516/03/0202-00164 $ 17.50+.50/0

(10)

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2

Full Paper
2.5 Complete Solution Involving Variation of le
Solutions of the equations of motion need to take account of
the variation of the equivalent friction along the chute.
Assuming the bulk density remains approximately constant,
the combination of Eqs. (2) and (5) allows the equivalent
friction to be expressed as a function of stream velocity. That
is, for a chute of constant width,


C
(11)
le = l 1 1
V
where C1 Kv

vo Ho
H

(12)

vo = initial velocity
Ho = initial stream thickness

For v = vo at h = ho,

2gR
K vo 2
1
4le 2 1

2 le sin ho 3 le cos ho

2le ho

(17)

Special Case:
When ho = 0 and v = vo,
K vo 2

6le g R

14le

(18)

Eq. (11) becomes,


2gR
v=
1 2 le 2 sin h 3le cos h
2
4le 1
+e

For the converging chute of Fig. 4,

2le h

vo 2

0:5

6le R g
2
4le 1

(19)



C
le = l 1 + 2 2
vB

(13)



tan k
where C2 = Kv Bo Ho vo 1
l

3.2 Chute of Constant Width Comparison of Complete and

Approximate Solutions

(14)

B = Bo 2 s tan k

(15)

The complete and approximate solutions are compared in

Fig. 5 for the case of a chute of radius R = 2.0 m for the initial
velocity vo = 4 m/s. The friction angle for the bulk solid in
contact with the chute surface is us = 25. Two initial bed
depths are considered, Ho/B = 0.2 and Ho/B = 0.6.
Fig. 5a) shows the variation of equivalent friction, while
Fig. 5b) compares the exact and approximate solutions for the
velocity distributions. As shown, there is little variation in le
for the smaller Ho/B which explains why the complete and
approximate solutions for the velocity profiles are virtually
identical. Even for the thicker stream for which Ho/B = 0.6,
there is close agreement between the exact and approximated
velocity distributions. The cut-off angle shown in Fig. 5b) is the
angle at which the chute profile should be terminated for it to
be self cleaning. This is further discussed in Section 6.3.

Bo = initial chute width

le given, as appropriate, by Eq. (11) or (14) is substituted into
Eq. (6) or (7) which may then be solved numerically.

3 Chutes of Constant Curvature

In order to illustrate the solution of the flow equations, the
case of chutes of constant curvature and rectangular crosssection is considered. The more exact solution involves the
variation of le to be taken into account. However an
approximate solution will often give satisfactory results.

3.1 Approximate Solution

If the curved section of the chute is of constant radius R and
le is assumed constant at an average value for the stream, it
may be shown that the solution of Eq. (6) leads to the equation
below for the velocity at any location h.

v=

s
2gR
1 2 le 2 sin h 3 le cos h Ke 2le h (16)
2
4le 1

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2,

3.3 Converging Chute of Constant Radius

The case of a chute profile of the type shown in Fig. 4 is now
examined. As an example, the chute radius R = 3.0 m, the initial
chute width is Bo = 1.0 m, the initial velocity is vo = 4 m/s at ho = 0
and the friction angle us = 25. Three profiles are compared,
k = 0, that is, constant width, k = 2.5 and k = 5. Fig. 6a) shows
the stream velocities, while Fig. 6b) shows the variation in chute
width H and stream thickness or depth as a ratio of chute width,
that is, H/B. The angles k = 0 to 2.5 give acceptable
performance. However, the convergence angle of k = 5 causes
the stream thickness to increase significantly beyond the angular
position of h = 40. For k = 5 the cut-off angle for the converging
section should be not greater than 40.

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

0930-7516/03/0202-00165 $ 17.50+.50/0

165

Full Paper

a)

a)

0.6

STREAM VELOCITY (m/s)

0.55

Vo = 4 m/s R = 2.0 m
0.5
Cut Off Angle

EQUIVALENT FRICTION

Velocity for Lambda = 0 deg

ue for Ho/B = 0.2

0.45

ue for Ho/B = 0.6

Velocity for Lambda = 2.5 deg

Velocity for Lambda = 5 deg

5.5

4.5

4
0

0.4
0

10

20

30

40

50

10

20

60

30

40

50

60

ANGULAR POSITION (deg.)

ANGULAR POSITION (deg)

b)
b)

B for Lambda = 0 deg

B for Lambda = 2.5 deg
B for Lambda = 5 deg
H/B for Lambda = 0 deg
H/B for Lambda = 2.5 deg
H/B for Lambda = 5 deg

STREAM THICKNESS H (m) and RATIO H/B

Vo = 4 m/s R = 2.0 m
4
Vel for Variable ue, Ho/B=0.2
Vel for Const. ue = 0.5
Vel for Variable ue, Ho/B =-0.6
Vel for Const. ue = 0.58

3.5

Cut-Off Angle

VELOCITY (m/s)

4.5

3
0

10

20
30
40
50
ANGULAR POSITION (deg)

1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0

60

10

20
30
40
ANGULAR POSITION (deg.)

50

60

Figure 5. Flow through chute of constant radius, Vo = 4 m/s; R = 2.0 m;

l = tan 25 = 0.466.

Figure 6. Flow through converging chute of constant radius, Vo = 4 m/s; R = 3.0 m;

l = tan 25 = 0.466.

4 Inverted Curved Chute Sections

For v = vo at h = ho, then

(
)
2gR
2
2
2 leho
K = vo
2 [3 le cos ho + (2 le 1) sin ho] e
14le
(22)

Inverted curved chute sections are often employed in the

impact zone of transfer chutes as illustrated in Fig. 2. The
method outlined above for curved chutes may be readily
adapted to inverted curved chute sections as depicted by the
model of Fig. 7.
Noting that FD = le FN , it may be shown that the differential
equation in moving coordinates is given by

dv
gR
+ le v =
(cos h + le sin h)
dh
v

166

"n"

FD
m
R

(20)

where le = equivalent friction factor as previously defined.

For a constant radius and assuming le is constant at an
average value for the stream, the solution of Eq. (20) is
s
2gR
2l h
v=
sinh2le 2 1 3 le cos h Ke e
2
4le 1

m v

FN

m v2
R

m g

.
v

B
Cross Section
"t"

Figure 7. Inverted curved chute model.

Special Case:
(21)

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

v = vo at ho = p2
0930-7516/03/0202-00166 $ 17.50+.50/0

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2

Full Paper

K=
and

vo2


2gR
2
[
2
l

1]
ele p
e
2
14le

(23)

2gR
sin h 2le 2
2
4le 1

v=

+e

le p


2h
vo 2

5.2 Special Case Straight Inclined Chute

1 3le cos h

0:5
2 R g 2 le 2 1
4 le 2 1

(24)

Eqs. (20) to (24) apply during positive contact, that is, when
v2
sin h
Rg

The factor Kc < 1.0. For rapid thin stream flow Kc 0.8. As
the stream thickness increases Kc will reduce.

(25)

Eqs. (26) and (27) apply to any chute profile. For a straight
inclined chute, R = . In this case Eq. (26) becomes
Wc =

Qm Kc tan us g sin h
B

(28)

For a constant flow rate and assuming that K c is

approximately constant, then, theoretically, the wear along a
straight inclined chute is constant and independent of the
velocity variation.

5 Wear in Chutes
Chute wear is a combination of abrasive and impact wear.
Abrasive wear may be analysed by considering the mechanics
of chute flow as will be now described.

5.1 Abrasive Wear Factor for Chutes

In cases where the bulk solid moves as a continuous stream
under rapid flow conditions, the abrasive or rubbing wear is a
function of the normal pressure and rubbing velocity.
Consider the general case of a curved chute of rectangular
cross-section as illustrated by the chute flow model of Fig. 3.
An abrasive factor Wc for wear of the chute bottom surface is
given by
Wc =

Qm Kc tan u
NWR
B

(26)

Wc has units of (N/ms)

NWR is a non-dimensional abrasive wear number and is given
by
NWR

v2
+ g sin h
R

(27)

Where
= mass flow rate (kg/s)

Kc

v
vs

= average stream velocity at section considered

= rubbing velocity for bulk solid on chute bottom surface
= friction angle for bulk solid on chute surface
= chute width
= radius of curvature
= chute slope angle measured from the vertical

vs
v

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2,

Eq. (26) applies to the chute bottom surface. For the side
walls, the wear will be much less, varying from zero at the
stream surface to a maximum at the chute bottom. Assuming
the side wall pressure to increase linearly from zero at the
stream surface to a maximum value at the bottom then the
average wear on the side walls can be estimated from
Wcsw =

Wc Kv
2 Kc

(29)

Where Kc and Kv are as previously defined. If, for example

Kc = 0.8 and Kv = 0.4, then the average side wall wear is 25 % of
the chute bottom surface wear.

5.4 Impact Wear in Chutes

Impact wear may occur at points of entry or points of sudden
change in direction. For ductile materials, greatest wear is
caused when impingement angles are low, that is in the order
of 15 to 30. For hard brittle materials, greatest impact
damage occurs at steep impingement angles, that is angles in
the vicinity of 90.

6 Feeding onto Belt Conveyor

Qm

us
B
R
h

5.3 Abrasive Wear of Chute Side Walls

A common application of gravity flow chutes is in the

loading of bulk solids onto belt conveyors. The application is
illustrated in Fig. 1 which shows a gravity feed chute used in
conjunction with a belt or apron feeder. The normal operating
speeds of such feeders is quite low with vf 0.3 m/s. Hence the
chute must not only direct the bulk solid onto the belt without
spillage, but it must also allow the bulk solid to be accelerated
so that at the point of discharge onto the belt, the horizontal
component, vey, of the discharge velocity matches, as close as
possible, the belt speed.

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

0930-7516/03/0202-00167 $ 17.50+.50/0

167

Full Paper
The bulk solid falls vertically through a height h' before
making contact with the curved section of the feed chute. In
view of the very low speed of the feeder, the velocity, vo, of first
contact with the curved section of the feed chute will be,
essentially, in the vertical direction.

where lb = friction coefficient between bulk solid and belt

surface
r = bulk density

6.1 Free Fall of Bulk Solid

The system shown in Fig. 1 is considered in which coal is

being fed at the rate of 1000 t/h from a belt feeder moving at
0.3 m/s. The overall height HT = 5 m, the bulk density r = 0.8 t/
m3 and the belt speed vb = 6 m/s. The friction angle for the coal
on the chute surface is us = 25 and the coefficient of friction
for the coal in contact with the conveyor belt surface lb = 0.6.
The chute cut-off angle w = 35 for which ho = 55.

For the free fall section, the velocity vo may be estimated

from
vo =

p
vfo 2 2 g h

(30)

Eq. (30) neglects air resistance, which in the case of this

feeding example, is likely to be small. If air resistance is taken
into account, the relationship between height of drop, h, and
velocity, vo, is,
2
1
6
v2
h loge 6
4
g
1

3
vfo
v 7
7
vo 5
v



vo vfo
v
g

(31)

where v1 = terminal velocity

vfo = vertical component of velocity of bulk solid discharging from feeder
vo = velocity corresponding to drop height h' at
point of impact with chute.

6.2 Chute Profile and Belt Wear

For a given overall height of drop, HT, (Fig. 1), various
combinations of free fall heights, h, and chute geometries may
be examined. It is essential to select the best geometry to meet
the performance requirements within the practical constraints
of the installation. An overriding consideration is need to
minimise chute wear as well as belt wear at the feed point. At
the same time it is necessary to ensure that the chute slope
angle w at the belt conveyor feed point is sufficiently large for
the chute to be self cleaning during start-up following each
shut-down with bulk solid still retained in the chute. The latter
objective is governed by the condition
w > tan1 (le) + 5

(32)

Since the discharge slope angle of the chute ho = (90 w), of

necessity, there will be an appreciable vertical component vex
of the exit velocity. This component, when combined with the
bulk density gives rise to the impact pressure, r vex2, on the
belt. When linked with the relative rubbing velocity (vb vey),
the relative wear parameter Wa is obtained [4].
Wa = lb r vex2 (vb vey) (kPa/m s)
168

(33)

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

7 Chute Design Examples

7.1 Vertical Drop and Constant Curvature Chutes

Various combinations of drop heights, h, and corresponding
radii of curvature, R, to meet the geometrical constraints of
the system are examined. These arrangements are illustrated
in Fig. 8a). For each of these combinations, the initial velocity
vo for the point of contact with the chute profile following the
free fall have been determined and the velocity distribution
around the constant radius chute have been computed
together with the belt wear at the feed point. The results of
this exercise are presented in Figs. 8b) and 8c).
It is interesting to observe from Fig. 8b) that the velocities
corresponding to h = 46 are the same for all chutes. Despite
the wide variation in the initial velocities at the first contact
point with the curved chute sections, the velocities at discharge
are almost the same varying from 6.18 m/s for the drop of h =
4.18 m with the R = 1.0 m radius chute to ve = 6.35 m/s for the
drop h = 1.73 m with the R = 4.0 m radius chute. This is shown
in Fig. 8c) which presents the discharge velocities, ve, belt wear
Wa and initial drop height, h, as functions of chute radius R. It
is evident that the smaller the chute radius, the more energy
the chute absorbs and this implies greater wear of the chute
surface. The best performance is obtained with a smaller drop
height and larger chute radius.

7.2 Constant Curvature and Parabolic Chute Profiles

The example discussed in the previous section is again
considered in this case, a comparison is made between a chute
of constant curvature and a chute of parabolic geometry. The
coal is allowed to drop a distance of h = 1.73 m before coming
into contact with each chute, the velocity of initial chute
contact being 5.82 m/s. The constant curvature chute has a
radius of R = 4.0 m. The total drop height is HT = 5.0 m and the
cut off angle ho = 55. The equation of the parabolic chute is
y = C x2
where

(34)
C = 0.218

0930-7516/03/0202-00168 $ 17.50+.50/0

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2

Full Paper
This value of C satisfies the cut-off condition of y(x) =
tan(55) corresponding to x = 3.27 m which is based on
HT = 5.0 m. Substituting y(x) = 2 C x, y(x) = 2C and le as
defined by Eq. (11) into Eqs. (7) and (8) and solving to obtain x_

a)

VERTICAL DISTANCE (m)

R=1m
R=2m
R=3m
R=4m

R=

0.5

1.5

1
2 1:5
1 2 C x
2C

(35)

The energy loss has a more favourable distribution for the

parabolic chute profile as is the chute wear. The nondimensional chute wear profiles determined in accordance
with Eq. (26) are plotted in Fig. 10. The exit velocity for the
parabolic chute is ve = 6.37 m/s which is almost identical with
ve = 6.35 m/s for the constant curvature chute.

-0.5

p
and y_ as functions of x. The velocity v = x_ 2 y_ 2 is then
obtained.
The results are presented in Fig. 9. Fig. 9a) compares the
chute profiles, while Fig. 9b) presents the velocity profiles. The
constant curvature chute shows that the velocity increases to a
maximum and then decreases as the coal is subjected to
retardation. On the other hand, the parabolic chute shows the
velocity increasing steadily approaching a maximum value
asymptotic value towards the cut-off point. This indicates that
the coal is being accelerated over the entire chute. The velocity
distribution for the parabolic chute is more favourable than
for the constant radius chute. This is because of the increasing
radius of curvature of the parabolic chute as given by

HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (m)

b)

a)

9.5

R=1.0 m; h=4.18 m; Vo=9.06 m/s

R=2.0 m; h=3.36 m; Vo=8.12 m/s
R=3.0 m; h=2.54 m; Vo=7.06 m/s
R=4.0 m; h=1.73 m; Vo = 5.82 m/s

8.5

7.5
7

6
5.5
0

10

20

30

40

50

Parabolic Chute

6.4

6.35

6.3

6.25

6.2
Ve (m/s)

2.5

3.5

6.15
4.5

STREAM VELOCITY v (m/s)

EXIT VELOCITY Ve (m/s)

Wa (kPa m/s)
h (m)

1.5

2
2.5

3.5

b)

1.5

1
0.5

60

ANGULAR POSITION (deg)

WEAR AT FEED POINT Wa (kPa m/s)

INITIAL DROP HEIGHT h (m)

2.5

6.5

c)

COORDINATE y (m)
0.5
1
1.5
2
Const Radius Chute

0.5
COORDINATE x (m)

VELOCITY (m/s)

6.5

6
v (m/s) for Parabolic Chute
v (m/s) for Const Radius Chute
5.5
0

CHUTE RADIUS OF CURVATURE R (m)

Figure 8. Feed through drop height followed by chute of constant radius R.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2,

0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
VERTICAL COORDINATE POSITION x (m)

Figure 9. Comparison of constant radius and parabolic chutes.

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

0930-7516/03/0202-00169 $ 17.50+.50/0

169

Full Paper

NON-DIMENSIONAL WEAR NWR

2
NW R for Parabolic Chute
NW R for Const. Radius Chute

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

Initial Velocity = 5.82 m/s

1

0.8
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

VERTICAL COORDINATE POSITION x (m)

Figure 10. Non-dimensional wear profiles for constant radius and parabolic
chutes.

8 Discussion
The foregoing examples may be examined in terms of the
exit velocity ve determined from the energy and frictional
work relationship. For the system of Fig. 3, ve is given by


0:5
xRe
(36)
ve = [vfo2 + 2 g HT] [2 g leye)] 2 le x_ 2 ydx

Bo
C
C1, C2
FD
g
H
Ho
HT
h
Kc
Kv
m
NWR
n
Qm
R
s
t
v
vb
ve
vex
vey
vfo

where vfo = initial vertical velocity of bulk solid discharging

from feeder
ye = horizontal coordinate of curved chute at exit
point
The first term in square brackets of Eq. (36) depends on vfo
and HT, which are the same for all chutes considered. The
second term in square brackets depends on the horizontal exit
coordinate ye which, in turn, depends on the chute profile and
cut-off angle he. The latter is the same for all chutes
considered. The last term containing the integral depends on
the vertical component of the chute velocity, x, and chute
curvature term y. Despite the wide variation of the chute
profiles in the examples considered, there was little variation
in the final exit velocity ve.
While this paper has concentrated on chutes of specified
geometrical form, it is possible to determine the required
chute profile y(x) to maximize either the exit velocity or
horizontal component of the exit velocity or, in other cases, to
minimize the transit time. Analytical methods, such as those
based on the calculus of variations, as well as numerical
procedures may be used to obtain solutions in such cases.
Examples of research dealing with chute optimization are
presented in [57].

vo
vs
v
Wa
Wc
Wcsw
x
x
y
y
y
y
us
w
r
l
lb
le
h
ho

initial width of chute

constant for parabolic chute profile
constants in equivalent friction equations
drag force
acceleration due to gravity
steam depth or thickness
initial depth or thickness
total height of chute
height of free fall
ratio vvs
pressure ratio
mass
non-dimensional abrasive wear number
normal coordinate
mass flow rate
radius of curvature
distance around chute
time
velocity
belt velocity
exit velocity
x component of exit velocity
y component of exit velocity
vertical component of velocity of bulk solid
discharging from feeder
initial velocity
sliding velocity along chute bottom surface
terminal velocity
abrasive wear factor for conveyor belt
abrasive wear factor
abrasive wear factor for chute side walls
vertical coordinate distance
x component of velocity
horizontal coordinate distance
y component of velocity
slope dy
dx
2
change of slope d 2y
dx
friction angle for bulk solid on chute surface
chute cut-off slope angle relative to horizontal
bulk density
friction coefficient for bulk solid in contact with chute
surface
friction coefficient between bulk solid and belt surface
equivalent friction factor
chute slope angle measured from the vertical
initial chute slope angle

References

Received: October 25, 2002 [CET 1716]

[1]

Symbols used
A
cross-sectional area of flowing stream
a1, a2 constants
B
chute width
170

2003 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]

A. W. Roberts, Transactions of ASME, J. Eng. Industry, Series B 1969, 91

(2), 373.
A. W. Roberts, O. J. Scott, Bulk Solids Handling 1981, 1 (4), 715.
R. D. Parbery, A. W. Roberts, Powder Technol. 1986, 48, 75.
A. W. Roberts, S. J. Wiche, Bulk Solids Handling 1999, 19 (1), 35.
W. H. Charlton, A. W. Roberts, J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1970, 15, 292.
W. H. Charlton, C. Chiarella, A. W. Roberts, J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1975, 20, 39.
C. Chiarella, W. H. Charlton, A. W. Roberts, Transactions of ASME,
J. Eng. Industry, Series B 1975, 97 (1), 10.

0930-7516/03/0202-00170 $ 17.50+.50/0

Chem. Eng. Technol. 26 (2003) 2