Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | REM - International Engineering Journal |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2022000100037 |
Resumo: | Abstract The sizing of vibrating screen machines can be done by various methods, most of them based on the classic method of Allis Chalmers (ACM). Due to the wide diffusion and applicability, the Peter King (PKM) and Karra (KM) methods present great technical relevance as well. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the results of the screen surface areas, calculated by these three methods, and the real areas of the industrial machines. The study was based on data generated in 11 real industrial screening operations, being possible to evaluate the deviations of the areas calculated by the mathematical methods in relation to the real areas of the industrial machines. Results have shown that although all methods have restrictions on their use, PKM has the smallest deviations compared to the real dimensions of the industrial machines for four screening conditions. All these conditions showed screen apertures from 4.76mm to 19mm, moisture from 2.12% to 3.3%, Gneiss as feed material and deviations smaller than 13%. |
id |
FG-1_91b24eda30c4493dd98c86e135d1da4c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2448-167X2022000100037 |
network_acronym_str |
FG-1 |
network_name_str |
REM - International Engineering Journal |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screensvibrating screenscreen sizing methodsAllis ChalmersPeter KingKarraAbstract The sizing of vibrating screen machines can be done by various methods, most of them based on the classic method of Allis Chalmers (ACM). Due to the wide diffusion and applicability, the Peter King (PKM) and Karra (KM) methods present great technical relevance as well. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the results of the screen surface areas, calculated by these three methods, and the real areas of the industrial machines. The study was based on data generated in 11 real industrial screening operations, being possible to evaluate the deviations of the areas calculated by the mathematical methods in relation to the real areas of the industrial machines. Results have shown that although all methods have restrictions on their use, PKM has the smallest deviations compared to the real dimensions of the industrial machines for four screening conditions. All these conditions showed screen apertures from 4.76mm to 19mm, moisture from 2.12% to 3.3%, Gneiss as feed material and deviations smaller than 13%.Fundação Gorceix2022-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2022000100037REM - International Engineering Journal v.75 n.1 2022reponame:REM - International Engineering Journalinstname:Fundação Gorceix (FG)instacron:FG10.1590/0370-44672019750169info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSales,Cristiano GeraldoGalery,Robertoeng2021-12-17T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2448-167X2022000100037Revistahttps://www.rem.com.br/?lang=pt-brPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||editor@rem.com.br2448-167X2448-167Xopendoar:2021-12-17T00:00REM - International Engineering Journal - Fundação Gorceix (FG)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens |
title |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens |
spellingShingle |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens Sales,Cristiano Geraldo vibrating screen screen sizing methods Allis Chalmers Peter King Karra |
title_short |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens |
title_full |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens |
title_fullStr |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens |
title_sort |
Comparative evaluation of three classical sizing methods of vibrating screens |
author |
Sales,Cristiano Geraldo |
author_facet |
Sales,Cristiano Geraldo Galery,Roberto |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Galery,Roberto |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Sales,Cristiano Geraldo Galery,Roberto |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
vibrating screen screen sizing methods Allis Chalmers Peter King Karra |
topic |
vibrating screen screen sizing methods Allis Chalmers Peter King Karra |
description |
Abstract The sizing of vibrating screen machines can be done by various methods, most of them based on the classic method of Allis Chalmers (ACM). Due to the wide diffusion and applicability, the Peter King (PKM) and Karra (KM) methods present great technical relevance as well. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the results of the screen surface areas, calculated by these three methods, and the real areas of the industrial machines. The study was based on data generated in 11 real industrial screening operations, being possible to evaluate the deviations of the areas calculated by the mathematical methods in relation to the real areas of the industrial machines. Results have shown that although all methods have restrictions on their use, PKM has the smallest deviations compared to the real dimensions of the industrial machines for four screening conditions. All these conditions showed screen apertures from 4.76mm to 19mm, moisture from 2.12% to 3.3%, Gneiss as feed material and deviations smaller than 13%. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-03-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2022000100037 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2022000100037 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/0370-44672019750169 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Fundação Gorceix |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Fundação Gorceix |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
REM - International Engineering Journal v.75 n.1 2022 reponame:REM - International Engineering Journal instname:Fundação Gorceix (FG) instacron:FG |
instname_str |
Fundação Gorceix (FG) |
instacron_str |
FG |
institution |
FG |
reponame_str |
REM - International Engineering Journal |
collection |
REM - International Engineering Journal |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
REM - International Engineering Journal - Fundação Gorceix (FG) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||editor@rem.com.br |
_version_ |
1754734691936632832 |