Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder Accuracy:

How to achieve it, how to sustain it, how to prove it

By:

Kevin A. Alexeff, P.E.

Manager, Mechanical Design
Stock Equipment Co.
Cleveland, Ohio

William E. Downs
Vice President, Engineering
Stock Equipment Co.
Cleveland, Ohio

Presented at Power-Gen International Conference and Exhibition

Dallas, Texas, U.S.A.
December 9 - 11, 1997
Contents

Page

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
What is accuracy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Factors that affect the accuracy of Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

How to achieve accuracy in Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Gravimetric feeder belt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
System geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

How to sustain accuracy in Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Environmental factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

How to prove accuracy in Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Material Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Chain Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

i
Summary

A Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder is a metering device designed to accurately control continuous
flow of a bulk material into a downstream process. In simple terms, it is a flat belt conveyor with
feedback control of the amount of material conveyed. While much has been written on th e
factors that affect the accuracy of other types of bulk metering devices, very little has bee n
written on Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders. This study focuses on the factors which affect the
accuracy of the modern gravimetric coal feeder. The factors that affect the accuracy of thes e
special flat belt feeders are examined in detail. Then, specific aspects of feeder design ar e
presented which allow one to achieve accurate control of material flow, sustain it for extended
periods, and prove it easily.

Special attention is given to three critical areas. First, proper belt design is critical to achieving
accurate control of material flow. Second, resistance to environmental factors is critical t o
sustaining accurate control of material flow. Third, a design that is conducive to an accurat e
chain test is critical to easily proving accurate control of material flow.

A highly flexible belt is not required for most bulk material conveying applications. However,
belt flexibility is critical to accuracy on gravimetric flat belt feeders. Using a single-ply belt can
reduce the effect of the belt on weighing the material by up to 75 percent versus a two-ply belt.
Both the belting material and the splice must be designed for minimum impact on the weighing
elements.

The environment inside a gravimetric coal feeder is arguably one of the worst environment s
imaginable for accurate operation of a precision instrument -- hot, wet, corrosive and dust-laden.
Yet the measuring components of the feeder must operate continuously in this environment for
sometimes up to a year without recalibration. All of the linkage points in the weighing system
must be designed to be resistant to corrosion and dust build-up.

To prove that a bulk material feeder is accurate, it must be compared with a measuremen t
standard. The only commonly accepted standard for verifying the accuracy of a Flat Belt Bulk
Material Feeder has been to run a material test -- diverting the material into a portable receiver,
then weighing the material on a certified scale. Most flat bel t feeder installations, however, make
material tests difficult and expensive. Simulating material load using chains has been used with
varying results as a way to check calibration data between material tests. But, when the tes t
chains and the feeder are designed together, it is possible to obtain results with chain comparable
to a material test.

1
Introduction

Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder

A Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder is a metering device designed to accurately control continuous
flow of a bulk material into a downstream process. In simple terms, it is a flat belt conveyor with
feedback control of the amount of material conveyed.

There are several ways to achieve control of the amount of material conveyed. One method is
to ensure a constant volume of material on the belt and vary the speed of the conveyor in linear
response to the amount of material required. These feeders are referred to as "volumetric. "
Another method is to insure a constant weight of material on the belt and vary the speed of the
conveyor in linear response to the amount of material required. Early mechanical weighin g
feeders used this type of control.

A more sophisticated approach to this method is to measure both the weight of the material on
the belt and the speed of the conveyor. These two val ues are electronically integrated to produce
the flow rate of the material. The speed of the conveyor is varied throug h a feedback control loop
to maintain the desired flow rate. 1 These feeders are referred to as "gravimetric."

The factors that affect the accuracy of both types o f flat belt feeders are similar in many respects.
Gravimetric feeders are, however, by nature much more complex. There are many more factors

Figure 1
Typical Flat Belt Coal Feeder

2
that affect the accuracy of gravimetric feeders. So why use gravimetric feeders? Many bul k
materials have a bulk density that varies considerably over relatively short periods of time. Coal
is a perfect example. The bulk density of coal taken from an open pile can easily vary up to 20
or 30 percent. Since a volumetric feeder assumes constant density, the weight basis feed rat e
from a volumetric feeder will vary along with the density. 2

While much has been written about the factors that affect the accuracy of other types of bul k
weighing devices,3 especially troughed-belt conveyor scales,4,5,6,7,8 very little has been written
about Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders. 9,10 Colijn, Abbott, Fristedt, and others have presente d
theoretical models that attempt to quantify likely sources of error, focusing mainly on idle r
misalignment. The study by Abbott et al. is one of the few attempts to verify these model s
experimentally. However, except for an early investigation into speed sensing, 11 their focus has
been on troughed-belt conveyors. Flat belt feeder s have been treated as a special case, or subset,
of troughed-belt conveyor scales. In fact, flat belt feeders have a unique set of factors that affect
accuracy. This study focuses on the factors which affect t he accuracy of the modern gravimetric,
flat belt coal feeder (shown in Figure 1). Much of the information presented has been gaine d
during a comprehensive three-year study, recently completed, at Stock Equipment Company in
Chagrin Falls, Ohio.

What is accuracy?

Before discussing the factors that affect the accuracy of Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders, it i s
necessary to understand what accuracy is. Accuracy has two components: bias and precision.
Bias is the degree of agreement between a measured property and an accepted reference value
for that property. Precision is
the degree of agreement
between two or more
measurements of the same
property. Precision, in turn,
can be broken down into two
components: repeatability
and reproducibility.
Repeatability is the degree of
agreement between individual Figure 2 - Precision versus Bias
measurements taken by the
same operator under identical conditions within a relatively short period. Reproducibility is the
degree of agreement between groups of measurements taken by different operators, or unde r
different conditions, or at different times.

Error is a term used to describe the relative magnitu de of the difference between two values. We
use different expressions of error to describe the different components of accuracy. Offset error
is often used to describe bias. Random error is often used to describe repeatability, and operator
error is often used to describe reproducibility.

3
Factors that affect the accuracy of Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders

How can the factors that affect the accuracy of Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders be identified? It
is useful to start with a theoretical model. However, a theoretical model is only useful i n
identifying where to look for sources of error. It cannot predict the accuracy of a system. This
is where physical testing takes over. Experiments designed to isolate the effects of certai n
variables, and determine their influence on the rest of the system, are necessary to identify the
factors that affect accuracy. Then, ideally, these factors are ver ified under actual field conditions.

How to achieve accuracy in Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders

Gravimetric feeder belt

A model of the factors associated with the belt and their effect on weighing accuracy, which can
be used for a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder, was d eveloped by Hyer. 12 This model assumes that
the weigh system is symetrical. That is the approach angle of the belt into the weigh system is
the same as the retreat angle of the belt out of the weigh system.

nQL 2TD 24 E I D
P ± ( )
cos L L3

where: P = Force on scale, pounds

n = Number of weighing idlers
Q= Belt load, pounds per inch
L = Idler spacing, inches
= Angle of conveyor incline, degrees
T = Belt tension, pounds
D= Idler misalignment, inches
E = Modulus of elasticity of belt, pounds per square inch
I = Moment of inertia of belt cross section, inches to fourth power

It is convenient to recognize that the force sensed b y the scale (P) is the actual weight of material
on the belt plus (or minus) an error caused by the operating parameters of the conveyor belt. The
error term can be expressed as a percentage of the actual weight of material, dividing it by the
actual weight and multiplying by 100 percent:

2TD 24 E I D
( )
L L3
e% ×100%
nQL
cos

4
Rearranging yields:

100 cos 2TD 24 E I D

e% ( )
nQ L 2
L4

Here, the first term in the parentheses relates to the error in weigh ing imposed on the system from
belt tension (T). The second term in the parentheses relates to the error in weighing imposed on
the system from belt stiffness (E·I). In troughed-belt conveyor scale applications, the effect of
belt stiffness is minimized by using an
idler spacing that is as large as possible,
usually 36 inches or more. Since the
error imposed on the system from belt
stiffness is inversely proportional to the
fourth power of idler spacing, belt
stiffness is of little concern. A coal
feeder, though, has extreme constraints
on the idler spacing possible due to the
envelope requirements of most
installations. At a typical idler spacing
of only 18 inches, the model suggests
belt stiffness is a significant factor in
feeder accuracy. Experimental
evidence supports this. A typical two- Figure 3
ply belt represents about 10 percent of
the total weigh system loading. Tests show that even the best feeder belts can vary in apparent
weight (the weight sensed by the weigh system at any given time) by up to 70 percent (see Figure
3).

Historically, Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders have used two-ply belts for a combination o f
durability and accuracy. A "continuous" construction, or vulcanized splic e, was used to minimize
the effect of the belt on the weighing
system.13 The two plies, though, act
like an I-beam for the moment of inertia
(I) in the model above. Structural
Engineers know that an I-beam has an
extremely high strength-to-weight ratio
in bending when compared with a
rectangular bar of equal cross sectional
area. That is why floors are supported
by I-beams. The two plies of belt act
like the flanges of an I-beam, increasing
the stiffness (see Figure 4).
Figure 4

5
Recent developments in feeder belt
construction allow a single-ply,
mechanically spliced belt with the same
tensile strength and durability of a two-
ply continuous belt. Tests show that the
variation in apparent weight of the
single-ply belt was less than 25 percent
of the variation of the two-ply belt (see
Figure 5).

System geometry Figure 5

The other significant factor suggested by the model above is idler misalignment (D). Since belt
tension (T) in the weighing area of a flat belt feeder, ve ry much unlike a troughed-belt conveyor,
is determined by the force required to shear material out of the inlet, there is little that can b e
done to reduce belt tension. However, the idler misalignment can be controlled. Since idle r
misalignment is a function of both variation in initial roller placement and load cell deflection,
it can never be completely eliminated. Initial roller placement can be controlled by a carefully
designed calibration procedure. Load cell deflection can be minimized in the design of the load
cell itself. Most commercial load cells used in feeder applications are not designed to minimize
deflection over full load. Load cells should be carefully selected for a designed deflection over
full load of 0.004" or less. Using a weigh system designed with two load cells, instead of one,
will cut deflection in half. When the weigh system is properly designed, with approximatel y
equal tare weight and material load, both totaling very nearly the capacity of the load cells ,
deflection (D) is minimized.

Hyer's model, above, only partially addresses the forces that affect the weigh system of short -
centered flat belt feeders. Since nothing has been previously published on the subject, we have
developed our own theoretical models. 14,15,16 The derivation of these models is too complex for
the scope of this paper. However, the most significant contribution is duplicated here:

M d b
F P ± (1 )
l r b

where:
F = Force transmitted to load cell, pounds
P = Force on scale, pounds
M = Moment resulting from bearing
friction, inch-pounds
l = Drag link length, inches
d = Drag link anchor elevation, inches
r = Weighing idler radius, inches
b = Bearing effective radius, inches

6
Again, it is convenient to express the error term as a percentage of the actual force (P):

100 M d b
e% (1 )
Pl r b

This model suggests that in order to minimize the effects of transferring the force on the scale to
the load cells through an idler roll, the bearing friction, and thus the resulting moment (M), must
be minimized. The resultant moment on the weighing system must be counterbalanced with a
long drag link (l). And, the ideal location for the anchor point on the drag link is directly in line
with the top of the weighing idler roll (d = r). The other models point out the importance o f
maintaining the alignment in the linkages that transfer the force through the load cell. Some of
these factors are minimal in a typical troughed-belt conveyor scale application and can b e
ignored. But all must be taken into consideration in a short-centered flat belt feeder.

Electronics

The typical Flat Belt Bulk Material

Feeder uses an electronic controller,
based on digital microprocessor
technology, to perform the calculations
necessary to integrate the weight of the
material and the speed of the conveyor
into the flow rate. Like the mechanical
Figure 7
components, above, the electronic
Typical Flat Belt Feeder Control
controller must be designed to minimize
error. The system that measures the weight and the system that measures the speed are bot h
potential sources of error for the electronic controller.

Weight Measurement. An electrical force transducer, or load cell, is commonly used to measure
the force transmitted through the weighing idler. A load cell is a device that produces a n
electrical signal proportional to the applied force. Strain gages are used to convert deflection of
the cell into the electrical signal. Precision strain gage load cells are suitable for use in a flat belt
feeder as long as they are sealed from the harsh environment and barometrically insensitive.

Strain gage load cells are powered by an excitation voltage and have an output signal usuall y
rated as millivolts per volt of excitation. For example, a load cell with 10 VDC applied as the
excitation voltage and a nominal output rating of 3 mV/V will have a full scale output signal of
30 mV. With such a small output signal, care must be taken to accurately measure the voltage.
Even with the most accurate voltage measurement, a commercial load cell must be chosen that
maximizes this output signal.

The accuracy of the weight reading is directly dependant on the stability of the strain gage bridge
excitation voltage.17 Any change in the excitation power supply will have a subsequent change
in the output signal of the load cell, which is interpreted by the controller as a change in weight.

7
Of course, it is the excitation voltage directly at the load cell that determines the output voltage.
Since cable resistance varies with temperature, the voltage directly at the load cell will var y
slightly from the power supply voltage over any given temperature range. These mino r
temperature effects, inherent in the electronics and load c ell cabling system, can be compensated
for by using a six-wire load cell cable and an excitation voltage sensing system. This allows the
controller to make a true ratiometric measurement of the change in output voltage relative to the
change in excitation voltage. This change in output represents only the weight change, and not
the effects from temperature and power supply changes.

The small analog signal output from the load cell is converted to a digital signal by an analog-to-
digital converter for input to the microprocessor. The analog-to-digital converter is anothe r
potential source of error that must be minimized. Resolution is importa nt to accuracy, to a certain
point. But resolution means nothing if the analog-to-digital converter is not linear within ±0.05
percent over the normal operating range of the system. Also, the electronic controller shoul d
perform a calibration of the analog-to-digital convertor chip to el iminate the zero-scale and span-
scale errors. This calibration must be performed often to assure that temperature drift effects are
removed.

Speed Measurement. There are many methods, and difficulties, with accurately measuring the
belt speed. A speed sensor is used to provide a rotational sp eed proportional to belt speed. Since
belt tension varies considerably at various locations around the conveyor, the ideal location to
measure the belt speed is at the weighing idler. Belt speed measurement at the weighing idler is
not practical, however, since it will introduce a reaction force in the weighing system an d
adversely effect the weighing accuracy. As alternatives, the speed sensor can be mounted at the
tail pulley, at an idler roll, or at the driven head pulley. The driven head pulley gives a n
advantage in a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder, having close proximity to the weigh system and
therefore the closest belt tension and speed. The advantage of not having the speed sensor
mounted the driven head pulley is that the effects of belt slippage or breakage are minimized .
This could be an important consideration in long troughed-belt conveyor scale applications. It
is less of an advantage in gravimetric flat belt feeder applications where belt tension is always
reletively low.

An accurate and reliable method for sensing belt speed is to measure the belt drive motor speed
and directly correlate this to belt speed. The correlation can be made by directly measuring belt
speed, with the use of precision optical switches placed over the weigh plane, during calibration
of the gravimetric feeder. This method virtually eliminates the usual problems involved i n
measuring belt speed at a pulley or roller (ie: material accumulation aroun d the tail pulley or idler
rolls causes nonrepeatability of the belt speed measurement).

A tachometer is mechanically coupled directly to the output of the drive motor. This keeps the
belt measurement instrumentation outside the harsh environment of th e feeder, thereby increasing
the reliability of the device. The tachometer signal can be measured to an accuracy of withi n
0.05% through the use of a stable crystal oscillator as a reference. This allows the belt spee d
signal, in total, to be accurate to within ±0.10 percent of true speed.

8
There is one last design consideration for the electronic controller of a gravimetric flat belt feeder,
which holds true for any microprocessor based instrument where accuracy is demanded. Th e
stability of the electrical inputs and outputs are dependant upon a stringent grounding schem e
where the analog and digital ground circuits are separated. This separation minimizes an y
electrical noise coupling which the load cell cables and speed sensor wiring may induce. Filters
may also be used for the six wire load cell cable, including the excitation sensing lines, to shunt
any induced RFI to the ground circuit before the noise is injected into the microprocessor circuits.

How to sustain accuracy in Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders

Environmental factors

The environment inside a gravimetric coal feeder is arguably one of the worst environment s
imaginable for accurate operation of a precision instrument -- hot, wet, corrosive and dust-laden.
The ambient temperature near the boiler on the feeder floor of a power plant can be well ove r
100 o F. The inside of the feeder can be exposed to continuous temperatures of up to 140 o
F.
o
Steam inerting, periodically flooding the environment in side the feeder with 250 F steam, is used
to reduce the risk of fires and explosions. And moisture from the steam, or from the coal itself,
reacts with sulfur in coal dust to form acidic condensation. The p resence of moisture encourages
coal dust to build up on every exposed surface. Yet the measuring components of the feede r
must operate continuously in this environment for sometimes up to a year without recalibration.
How can the weigh system of a feeder sustain better than ±1/2 percent accuracy in thi s
environment?

All of the linkage points in the weighing system must be designed to be resistant to changes in
temperature, corrosion and dust build-up. While many sources of error described above ar e
biases, and may be calibrated out of the total error, changes in temperature, corrosion, and dust
build-up affect repeatability. These environmental factors can greatly affect the accuracy of the
feedrate over time.

To minimize dust build-up, horizontal flat surfaces should be eliminated to the greatest exten t
possible. Pivots should be designed to transfer only the force on the scale to the load cell and be
resistant to corrosion. Early mechanical weighing feeders used knife-edge pivots for this purpose.
But knife-edge pivots only isolate the weigh system about one axis. The load cells in a n
electronic gravimetric feeder really must be isolated about every axis perpendicular to the force
on the scale. For this, a point-contact pivot is required. Spherical bearings simulate a point-
contact pivot, but they have large surface contact and freeze when subjected to corrosion an d
dust. A pin-and-ring pivot provides the ideal isolation for the load cell. Two curved surfaces of
different radius provide theoretical point-contact, insuring high surface pressure, which helps to
keep the pivot free of dust and corrosion. For the drag link anchor, a flexure is the ideal pivot --
it has zero stiction and is impervious to dust and corrosion.

9
A free-hanging load cell that is not constrained in any direction, except in the direction the force
is applied to the scale, also protects the weigh system from outside forces caused b y
environmental factors such as change in temperature, foreign objects, and vibration. Thes e
outside forces affect the accuracy of the weigh system by introducing random error.

Maintenance

The owner of a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder can have sig nificant impact on the accuracy of the
feeder in two ways: preventive maintenance and calibration. The importance of preventiv e
maintenance is obvious, and the manufacturer's guidelines for care and cleaning should b e
followed explicitly. These guidelines should include steps to prevent the environmental effects,
above, from overwhelming the weigh system's capability to overcome them. Perhaps mor e
important, though, is a properly designed and implemented calibration procedure. The feede r
must be designed with a means to accurately calibrate the weigh system.

The error imposed on the system from belt tension is well understood. If the weighing idler is
too high, tension on the belt pushes down on the roll adding to the material weight. If th e
weighing idler is too low, tension on the belt holds up a portion of the material subtracting from
the material weight. As stated earlier, a carefully designed calibration procedure can help t o
control idler misalignment and, therefore, reduce t he total system error. A typical flat belt feeder
must have the weighing idler positioned accurately on the order of ±0.001 inch.

The first step is to align the weighing idler with the fixed idlers. This must be done with a load
very near to the normal material weight on the weighing idler. To simulate the load, a test weight
is applied to the weigh system. Then, the elevation of the weighing idler is adjusted to align it
with the fixed idlers. To do this within ±0.001 inch requires a very accurate straightedge an d
sufficient resolution on the adjustment of the idler elevation. This is difficult to achieve i n
practice.

Even if the weighing idler could be positioned with the required precision, it still would not be
in the correct location. A test weight applied to the weigh system does not increase the bel t
tension as a material load does. As a result, the belt effects are not properly accounted for. To
correct this, a belt perturbation procedure, similar to that proposed by Colijn and Hyer fo r
troughed-belt conveyor scales, 18 can be added to the calibration. Belt perturbation alternatel y
raises and lowers the belt tension. The weighing idler elevation is adjusted after each tensio n
change until the ideal location is reached where the belt tension has no effect on the weig h
system.

10
How to prove accuracy in Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders

Material Test

NIST Handbook 44 (formerly National Bureau of Standards, NBS Handbook 44) states that “An
official test of a belt-conveyor scale system sh all be a materials test.” 19 Simulated load tests may
be used to monitor the system’s performance between tests, but shall not be used for officia l
certification. A material test requires diverting the material discharged from the feeder into a
portable receiver and weighing the material on a certified scale. Handbook 44 gives important
guidelines for properly conducting a material test. Implicit in the description of a material test,
but not explicitly stated, is the fact that the test must be started and finished with the belt empty.
Most coal feeder applications, though, make a material test extremely difficult and costly, if not
impossible, to perform. In most cases, when a material test is performed on a coal feeder, the test
itself is flawed and the error attributed to the coal feeder.

Chain Test

How, then, can the owner of a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder verify the accuracy of his feeders?
We first examine the reasons why, historically, test chains have not been accepted as a means
of verifying accuracy:

1. Test chains are not repeatable, because longitudinal positioning error produces different
scale readings.

2. Test chains have an inherent bias, because the chains do not create the same tension in the
belt as a full load of material does (an exception would be a horizontal conveyor where
the chains extend all the way from the loading point through the discharge point).

3. Test chains are not homogeneous and the pound per foot rating is not easily determined.
Therefore, longitudinal positioning affects scale loading and calibration of the chains is
difficult.

4. Test chains can affect belt tracking.

5. Test chains are made up of many unbalanced rollers that spin at high speed and bounce
over imperfections in the belt or the splice. This causes “noise” on the weigh system that
may be integrated as a bias error.

6. Wear and corrosion, in extreme cases, can noticeably decrease the pound per foot rating
of the chains.

7. Test chains can be very expensive, especially in large troughed-belt conveyo r

applications.

11
Colijn and Hyer identified these potential problems with test chains and provided the key to
solving them for a short-centered Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder. They note: “The significance
of chain position depends on both the pitch and uniformity of the chain, and on the design and
length of the scale suspension system. Ideally, the pitch [of the chain] should be as small a s
possible, and it should divide into the idler spacing exactly.” 20 The significance of this has been
unappreciated for many years.

We have been able to prove that, on a properly designed short-centered Flat Belt Bulk Material
Feeder, a precision chain whose pitch divides evenly into the idler spacing of the weigh system
can repeatably represent a material load on the belt independent of chain position (for example,
chains with a 3-inch pitch are used on a feeder with an idler spacing of 18 inches). Further, if the
chains are applied properly, a chain test can accu rately simulate the results of a material test with
less than a 0.2 percent bias. Hundreds of tests, under laboratory and field conditions, confir m
this.

What does this mean to the owner of a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder trying to verify th e
accuracy of his feeders? A chain test can be used for calibration and verification of Flat Bel t
Bulk Material Feeder accuracy, because:

1. Test chains are repeatable if the weigh system and chains are both designed to have an
integral pitch, and thus be independent of longitudinal position.

2. The chains can be designed to fit the feeder exactly. Short-centered Flat Belt Bul k
Material Feeders are typically horizontal and the chains can easily e xtend all the way from
the loading point through the discharge point.

3. The chains can be designed to be extremely homogeneous over the short weigh system
in a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder.

4. Test chains do not adversely affect belt tracking in a properly designed Flat Belt Bul k
Material Feeder.

5. The chains can be designed to reduce “noise” on the weigh system of a Flat Belt Bul k
Material Feeder. This is especially easy if the belt and splice are designed to minimize
impact on the weighing system (as suggested above).

6. The chains can be designed to be extremely resistant to wear and corrosion, especially in
Flat Belt Feeder Applications, where calibration of the feeder is infrequent.

7. The short chains required for Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders are relatively inexpensive
when compared with typical troughed-belt conveyor applications.

12
Conclusions

There are many factors that affect the accuracy of gravimetric Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders.
This study focuses on our work with a typical coal fee der, but much of the information is general
in nature and can be applied to any flat belt feeder handling almost any bulk material. It i s
important to realize that while a flat belt feeder is similar to a troughed-belt conveyor scale i n
some respects, there are many unique considerations created by the operational requirements for
most applications and by the constraints in the envelope for most installations. Design of a n
accurate Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder (no bias, high precision) must be a pproached from a body
of knowledge specific to short-centered flat belt feeders, and n ot as a scaled-down, self-contained
belt conveyor scale.

All of the factors presented must be attended to in some degree in order to meet an error budget
of ±1/2 percent or less, and to maintain that accuracy for extended periods of continuou s
operation without calibration. We have found that one of the most trivialized components of a
flat belt feeder, the belt, is one of the most critical factors in Flat Belt Bulk Material accuracy.
A highly flexible belt is not required for most bulk material conveying applications. However,
belt flexibility is critical to the accuracy of gravimetric flat belt feeders. The stiffness of the belt
in bending causes a bias in the weight sensed by the weigh system. This bias can not b e
calibrated away using the conventional method of calibrating with a test weight. Using a single-
ply belt can reduce the effect of the belt on weighing the material by up to 75 percent versus a
two-ply belt. Both the belting material and the splice must be designed for minimum impact on
the weighing elements.

Environmental factors, including changes in temperature, corrosion, dust build-up, foreig n

materials, and vibration, affect the accuracy of Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeders by introducing
random error. They can greatly affect the feedrate over time and can not be calibrated out of the
total error. To combat these factors, all of the linkage points in the weighing system must b e
designed to resist corrosion and dust build-up. A free-hanging load cell that is not constrained
in any direction, except in the direction the force i s applied to the scale, is critical to the accuracy
of gravimetric flat belt feeders.

The conventional method of calibrating a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder with a test weight can
leave a considerable component of the bias error in the system -- the belt factors. Adding a
perturbation procedure can greatly improve the calibration. However, the calibration is stil l
subject to operator error. To prove that a bulk material feeder is accurate, it must be compared
with a measurement standard. The only commonly accep ted standard for verifying the accuracy
of a Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder has been to run a material test. Simulating material loa d
using chains has been used with varying results as a way to check calibration data betwee n
material tests. But, when the test chains and the feeder are designed together, it is possible t o
obtain results with chain comparable to a material test, at a fraction of the cost.

The checklist on the following page sumarizes the specific aspects of feeder design which allow
one to achieve accurate control of material flow, sustain it for extended periods, and prove i t
easily.

13
 Checklist for Flat Belt Bulk Material Feeder Accuracy

The weigh system is symetrical. That is the approach angle of the belt into the weig h
system is the same as the retreat angle of the belt out of the weigh system.

The feeder inlet is designed to have no influence on the weighing system and to provide
a consistent flow of material onto the belt.

The belt is single-ply, mechanically fastened, and specifically designed for gravimetric
feeder applications to minimize impact on the weighing system.

Load cells are applied such that the full range of material loading causes a deflection of
less that 0.002 inches.

Idler rolls have a total runout of less than 0.010 inch.

Idler bearings and seals are designed to minimize friction on the weighing idler.

A long drag link is used to counterbalance moments on the weighing idler, and the drag
link anchor point is located directly in line with the top of the weighing idler roll.

The weigh system linkage is designed to be impervious to outside forces.

All of the linkage points in the weighing system are designed to be resistant to corrosion
and dust build-up.

Load cell excitation voltage and nominal output rating are selected to maximize the full
scale output signal.

The analog-to-digital converter is linear within ±0.05 percent over a temperature range
of 0oC to 65oC.

The analog-to-digital converter reference voltage is frequently calibrated to the load cell
exitation voltage to eliminate voltage variation error.

The belt speed signal is accurate to within ±0.10 percent of true speed.

The electronics are configured and packaged to maintain a high degree of isolation from
external electrical noise.

Calibration procedure allows for the weighing idler to be aligned to the fixed idlers within
±0.001 inch.

Feeder design allows for a perturbation procedure during calibration to eliminate the belt
factors.

The weighing idler, ideally, is centered between the fixed idlers within ±0.005 inch.
References:

1. Colijn, Hendrik. Weighing and Proportioning of Bulk Solids, 1st ed. (Clausthal,
Germany: Trans Tech Publications, 1975), pp. 266 - 270.

2. Bennett, A. and Hardgrove, R. “Coal Flow From Bunker to Pulverizer or Cyclone,”

Paper presented at the South Eastern Electrical Exchange, Production Section
Meeting, Hot Springs, Arkansas, 1970.

3. Colijn, Hendrik. Weighing and Proportioning of Bulk Solids, 1st ed. (Clausthal,
Germany: Trans Tech Publications, 1975), pp. 157 - 158, 185, 227 - 229.

4. Colijn, Hendrik. "Effect of Belt Conveyor Parameters on Belt Scale Accuracy," Paper
presented at the 18th Annual ISA Conference, Chicago, 1963.

5. Abbott, J. A. et al. "Belt Weighing Test Facility at Warren Spring Laboratory," Bulk
Solids Handling, Volume 1, Number 2, May 1981, pp. 239 - 243.

6. Abbott, J. A. "The effect of Idler Misalignment and Belt Stiffness on Belt Weighing
Errors," Bulk Solids Handling, Volume 6, Number 1, February 1986, pp. 121 - 128.

7. Fristedt, K. "Belt Weighing Errors -- From Where Do They Origin?" Bulk Solids
Handling, Volume 6, Number 5, October 1986, pp. 963 - 968.

8. Abbott, J. A. "The Effect of Conveyor Belt Mistracking on Beltweighing Errors,"

Bulk Solids Handling, Volume 9, Number 1, February 1989, pp. 107 - 117.

9. Bateson, R. N. and Grader, J. E. "Controlling the Flow Rate of Dry Solids,"

Control Engineering, March 1968, pp. 60 - 64.

10. Rebucci, Gene. "Gravimetric Feeder Technology Designed to 'Pour On The Coal',"
Combustion, April 1978, pp. 14 - 17.

11. Jones, R. J. and Laws, K. G. "Speed Sensing in Belt Weighing," Warren Spring
Laboratory Report No. LR 267 (MH), 1979.

12. Hyer, F. S. "A Scientific Approach to Conveyor Weighing," Masters Thesis,

University of Wisconsin, 1967.

13. Stock, Arthur J. "The Use of Endless Belts and Spliced Belts in Stock Feeders,"
1975.

14. Homer, J. C. "Drag Link Analysis," Stock Equipment Company Feeder

Accuracy Program, notes to file dated March 31, 1994.

15. Homer, J. C. "Weigh Roll Misalignment Error," Stock Equipment Company

Feeder Accuracy Program, notes to file dated July 12, 1994.

16. Homer, J. C. "Study the Effect of Vertical Misalignment of Weigh Linkage,"

Stock Equipment Company Feeder Accuracy Program, notes to file dated
 September 12, 1996.

17. Norden, K. Elis. Electronic Weighing in Industrial Processes, 1st ed. (Granada
Publishing, London, 1984), pp. 86 - 88.

18. Colijn, H. and Hyer, F. S. “Belt Scale Calibration - Test Weight or Test Chain,”
Paper presented at the ISA Conference, Chicago, October 4 - 7, 1971, p. 5.

19. “Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing

and Measuring Devices,” NIST Handbook 44, 1996 ed. (National Institute of
Standards and Technology, Office of Weights & Measures, Gaithersburg, MD,
January 1996), Sec. 2.21, Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems, par. N.1.1, p. 2-36.

20. Colijn, H. and Hyer, F. S. “Belt Scale Calibration - Test Weight or Test Chain,”
Paper presented at the ISA Conference, Chicago, October 4 - 7, 1971.