Design of Refuse Collection System PDF
Design of Refuse Collection System PDF
Submitted by
Leow Beng Kwang
Session 2004/2005
SUMMARY
Pneumatic refuse collection system is becoming popular in developed countries due to
its advantage. This system has been in place overseas since the 1960s. However,
Singapore has been using the manual method of collecting refuse for more than 40
years. The current method of manual tipping of chute bins to collect refuse are not
very efficient. Open chute bins emit foul stench during conveyance of refuse to bin
centers. Improvements have to be made.
This project is a collaboration between NUS and a local waste management company,
SembWaste. This project did not involve experiments or testing. The purpose of this
dissertation attempts to provide an understanding on the feasibility and operations of
pneumatic refuse collection system. One of the main areas of study is on SembWaste
Enviro-EZ system. Calculations show that sufficient vacuum pressure has to be
created in Enviro-EZ before every suction process begins. The required pressure and
air velocity to convey refuse is estimated by using simple bulk solids pneumatic
conveying system formulas. Pressure losses of free air were calculated using
Bernoullis Equation. BH350T fan was selected as it fits the power and pressure
requirements.
The designs of refuse hopper and refuse container were also discussed. Problems
posed by the current system and design considerations were presented. The designs
aim to provide user-friendly features to users and cleaning operators. To increase
reliability of the system, it is recommended that air flow and prototype experiments be
conducted for successful implementation of Enviro-EZ system.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation and gratitude to his project
supervisor Associate Professor Chew Chye Heng for his kind guidance, patience and
invaluable advice during the course of this project.
The author would also like to show his appreciation to his school mates, Mr Lim Buan
Teck Danny, Mr Lim Sing Wee and fellow research students and staff from the
Dynamics and Vibrations Laboratory who have helped in one way or another in the
progress of this project.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOPICS
PAGE
SUMMARY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
vi
LIST OF SYMBOLS
viii
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objectives
2.1 Introduction
10
2.6 Discussion
10
LITERATURE REVIEW
11
11
iv
11
12
12
13
13
14
3.6 Discussion
4 ENVIRO-EZ SYSTEM CALCULATIONS
14
15
15
15
16
17
18
18
18
19
19
19
19
21
22
23
24
4.7 Discussion
25
26
5.1 Introduction
26
26
26
27
28
28
29
5.6 Discussion
30
32
32
32
33
34
35
36
38
7 CONCLUSION
43
45
RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCES
46
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
A1
APPENDIX B
B1
APPENDIX C
C1
APPENDIX D
D1
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
PAGE
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
2.1
2.2
2.4
2.5
10
3.1
11
3.2
12
4.1
15
4.2
24
5.1
26
5.2
27
5.3
27
5.4
29
5.5
31
6.1
32
6.2
34
vii
6.3
36
6.4
37
6.5
38
6.6
39
6.7
40
6.8
41
41
6.10
42
viii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Vf
solid
fluid
Density of fluid
Nf
Pf
Wetted perimeter = d
air
Density of air
Vair
We
Pipe length
Speed
Ps
Ns
ix
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objectives
This project is a collaboration between NUS and a local waste management company,
SembWaste. SembWaste has experimented a pneumatic refuse collection in St. Georges
housing estate using a refuse transfer vehicle Enviro-EZ. However, the performance of
pneumatic suction of refuse from the chute bin proved to be intermittent. The objectives of
this project are:
1. Analyze current pneumatic refuse collection system to dispose off refuse from
Housing Development Board (HDB) residential estates in Singapore;
2. Study on pneumatic conveying systems in industry;
3. Study and improve on pneumatic conveying capability (e.g. vacuum pressure
required and conveying velocity) of Enviro-EZ;
4. Propose designs for refuse hopper and refuse storage container.
In Singapore, waste management companies are awarded contracts after they have
successfully bid to provide waste collection and disposal services. The efficient
performance in collection and disposal of refuse over the years earned Singapore a
reputation of having one of the most efficiently operated refuse collection services in the
1
region. The various methods of refuse collection in Singapore are shown in Figure 1.1.
The explanation for individual method is elaborated.
Pneumatic Refuse
Collection System
Individual refuse chute system Every block of HDB flats has about six
common chutes. Two adjacent households share a refuse chute where residents
discard refuse into a hopper located in their household. The refuse are collected
in the chute bins at the ground floor. Everyday, two cleaners push a cart to
manually empty the individual bins as shown in Figure 1.2. The collected
refuse is then transported to a central collection point known as a Bin Center.
There may be mechanized compactor to reduce the volume of refuse in the bin
center. This system is found commonly in older HDB estates. Figure 1.3 shows
cleaners manually tipping and clearing bins in Bin Center.
Figure 1.3: Cleaners manually tipping and clearing bins in Bin Center
ii)
Figure 1.5: Direct collection from private residential estate and other buildings [3]
iv)
CHAPTER 2
PNEUMATIC REFUSE COLLECTION SYSTEM
2.1 Introduction
Pneumatic refuse collection system (mentioned in Section 1.2) is an expensive system for
conveyance of refuse. This system either involves conveyance of refuse through concealed
underground pipes into a collection truck or makes use of smaller mobile pneumatic
collection cart to collect refuse. Both methods carry a pneumatic pump on the collection
vehicle. This automatic and efficient enclosed system keeps foul stench, manual contact
with refuse and insect infestation to a minimum.
Figure 2.1: A typical underground pipe pneumatic refuse transport system [4]
Figure 2.2 shows a huge SINGMATIC refuse suction vehicle position itself to suck refuse
from concealed storage tanks through a network of undergrounds pipes in Kim Keat Link
housing estate. The concealed storage tanks were retrofitted into the housing estates
refuse chute chambers of existing buildings. The automatic suction process is carried out
one chute at a time. The setup of pipes in the chute (with some labeled parts) is reflected in
Figure 2.3. Pest and odor problems commonly associated with the manual collection of
refuse from chute bins and bin centers are eliminated.
A
Bypass pipe
Cover to seal
storage tank
Refuse
discharge
outlet
Figure 2.3: Setup of pipes in a Kim Keat Link HDB refuse chute
(A: Overall view; B: Close-up view; C: Control valve for air intake pipe)
During suction process, the top cover (in Figure 2.3A) is activated pneumatically to seal
off the storage tank so that no danger is posed to residents when they open a hopper. Air is
admitted from bypass pipe and air intake pipe to allow smooth flow of refuse through the
pipes. The provision of refuse discharge outlet allows removal of any garbage that is stuck
in the refuse tank. It takes less than 30 seconds to clear every chute.
7
The minimum exhaust air flow gauge pressure is 100in H2O (about 0.25 bars) [7]. The
solid waste was swept along in an air stream of about 90 feet per second (about 27m/s).
The maximum distance traveled by the refuse from the chute to the heating plant was
about 1.7 miles (approx. 2736m). The underground pipes range in diameter from 20 to 24
inches (0.5 to 0.61m). At that time, the system handled 23m3 of refuse per day from the 36
chutes [7]. The papers claimed that the system was free from unpleasant odor and no
clogging has occurred in eight years of operations.
2.6 Discussion
These overseas pneumatic refuse conveying applications demand garbage to travel at least
a distance of 100m. Since the minimum exhaust air flow pressure was 0.25 bars in
Sundbyberg system, it can be deduced that the actual vacuum pressure required to convey
refuse could be much higher than this value. This reasoning is supported by the successful
Japanese system which uses 0.34 bars of vacuum pressure for every suction process. The
Japanese model illustrates the necessity to create sufficient vacuum before every suction
process. These reference findings could be useful in later section of this project.
10
CHAPTER 3
LITERATURE REVIEW
3.1 Pneumatic conveying systems
The model of pneumatic refuse collection is similar to pneumatic conveying systems. This
brief introductory chapter is written to provide the reader with an overview and a practical
insight into pneumatic conveying technology. Pneumatic conveying system designs were
based upon past experience or experimental results. Due to commercial interests,
manufacturers of pneumatic conveying systems rarely publish information that could be of
value in system design. A single value of material flow rate, conveying distance, pipeline
bore and air supply pressure is the extent of information normally given. The capability of
a pneumatic conveying system depends essentially on the following three parameters [9]:
1) Diameter of the pipeline used,
2) The distance that the material is to be conveyed, and
3) The conveying line pressure drop available.
Pneumatic conveying system involves transportation of bulk materials through a pipeline
by a positive or a negative pressure system or a combination of both systems.
11
Discharge to several hoppers is done, one at a time, by operating a diverter valve located
at each receiver to shunt the flow from a main piping header into a selected receiver. The
blower is located at the beginning of conveying pipe. This system is generally applied
when material must be delivered to a number of widely separated receivers located at a
considerable distance from the source of supply.
pipeline. It is necessary to ensure that the minimum conveying velocity does not fall below
15m/s so that solids are kept in suspension in the pipeline [11]. This type of flow involves
high velocity gas stream to carry materials by means of lift and drag forces acting on the
individual particles. The mass flow ratio (i.e. the ratio of the mass flow rate of solid to the
mass flow rate of the conveying air) for dilute phase flows is likely to be less than or equal
to 15 [12]. Dilute phase systems are the most common pneumatic conveying systems.
2) Dense-phase flow When the conveying air velocity is less than that required to keep
the bulk solids in suspension in horizontal flow, the bulk solid particles begin to settle to
the bottom of the pipe to form dense-phase flow. The mass flow ratio for dense phase
flows is greater than 15. Its flow patterns can vary from being unstable to stable regimes
depending upon the solid characteristics, gas velocity, pipe roughness, pipe size, etc. The
stable flow situations result in a smooth conveying process while the unstable situation is
characterized by occasional violent pressure surges as the moving layer breaks up [12].
This low-velocity flow is useful to reduce damages when conveying delicate products.
velocity to ensure horizontal suspension flow is known as saltation velocity. If the air
velocity continues to fall, slug occurs and the pipe will get plugged finally.
3.6 Discussion
Experiments conducted on powdered materials revealed that minimum safe saltation
velocity is greater than the choking velocity [12]. The difference between the two
velocities is much smaller for coarser materials. Saltation and choking should be avoided
to ensure that conveyed materials flow smoothly in the conveying gas. In this way, the
conveyed materials will not drag on the pipe wall and cause friction, which induce
unnecessary pressure losses.
For this project, the vacuum pressure system is chosen to take advantage of the fact that
refuse odor flow inwards. In this way, emission of foul odor to the surroundings is
eliminated. The next consideration factor is to select the mode of flow. In pneumatic
refuse collection system, there is no concern whether disposed refuse is damaged. By
applying high velocity dilute-phase flow, refuse can float in air and be conveyed with
minimum head losses. Therefore, sufficient vacuum pressure must be available to achieve
that minimum flow velocity. Both the availability of sufficient pressure and air velocity
are of importance to ensure smooth suction of refuse in Enviro-EZ system.
14
CHAPTER 4
ENVIRO-EZ SYSTEM CALCULATIONS
4.1 Outline of Enviro-EZ system
Enviro-EZ system which was put on trial at St. Georges Lane performed intermittently.
SembWaste provided information that the fan is operating at 0.2 bars of vacuum pressure.
The collection tank measured 2m (l) by 1m (w) by 1m (h). The suction pipe A of EnviroEZ is 2m long. The layout of Enviro-EZ system is shown in Figure 4.1 below.
Air Out
Pipe A
3
Fan / Air
Pump
4
2
Storage tank
1
Air In
Cleaners pull the chute bin out of the chute chamber and insert the suction pipe into the
open chute bin to remove refuse. Surrounding air rushes into the suction pipe to lift bags
of refuse into the suction pipe. However, some refuse cannot be lifted into the pipe
occasionally. This behaviour could be due to insufficient vacuum pressure available in the
Enviro-EZ storage tank. The Enviro-EZ system is not in use currently. The required
pressure and velocity of conveying air shall be estimated using simple pneumatic
conveying system formulas.
this section, the author shall find out the free air pressure losses and the remaining
available vacuum pressure if 0.2 bar of vacuum pressure is not created prior every suction
process. A few formulas which are used to size pneumatic conveying systems is deployed
to find the required air velocity and vacuum pressure to convey a 300kg/m3 solid which
represents refuse. Using the calculated velocity, Bernoulli Equation is applied to find the
free air velocity (i.e. without carrying any load) under assumed volumes of 0.2m3 and
0.1m3 in the collection tank and various friction factors.
4.3 Pressure available in continuous air flow (without lid) (details in Appendix A)
The calculations of air pressure losses in continuous air flow are recorded in Appendix A.
From the calculations, the pressure losses in pipe A accounts for about 64% of the total air
pressure losses when friction factor of 0.5 is used. With reference to Figure 4.1, the
pressure losses at expansion (point 3 to 4) and contraction (point 6 to 5) accounts for
17.75% and 9.5% of total losses respectively. The total air pressure losses amount to 0.04
bars.
This set of calculations only involves the flow of free air. If continuous air flow is allowed
and 0.2 bar vacuum pressure is not created before every suction process, there is only
about 0.16 bar remaining vacuum pressure for refuse suction after deducting free air
pressure losses. This calculated vacuum pressure is quite optimistic. In practical
applications, the remaining vacuum pressure may not work effectively as there are other
variables that have yet to be considered. Other variables such as:
1. Size of refuse,
2. Density of refuse,
3. Leakage of vacuum pressure, and
4. Decreasing tank volume due to incoming refuse
16
are not taken into consideration. If these variables are taken into consideration, the
remaining vacuum suction pressure will definitely be less than 0.16 bar. At less than 0.16
bar, the refuse may not be pneumatically conveyed into the tank successfully.
These findings may help to explain why the vacuum truck at St. Georges Lane housing
estate performed intermittently. It is recommended to install a lid at point 3 (joining Pipe
A and the tank) to seal off the tank and create sufficient vacuum pressure before every
suction process.
The details of the full set of calculations for this section 4.4 are reflected in Appendix B.
solid fluid
solids is V f = 4 d
fluid
conveyed solid = density of refuse = 300 kg/m3, fluid = density of air = 1.2 kg/m3. The
required air transportation velocity is calculated to be 35m/s. The most ideal situation is to
have both the refuse and the air flow to travel at the calculated speed of 35m/s.
flP air
(Vair )2 . An equivalent length l is used to represent the actual length
A
2
of pipe and other pipe bends or fittings. The equivalent length for bends is 6d and for
elbows to be 60d generally. By assuming a friction factor f = 0.5 and substituting
equivalent length l = 4.6m, air = density of air = 1.2 kg/m3, wetted perimeter P = 0.3,
velocity of air Vair = 35m/s and cross-sectional area A = 0.0707m2, a Pf of 22536 Pa (0.225
bar) is obtained. The bend in pipe A causes the highest loss among the pressure losses.
18
)].
Symbols section. Assuming that the refuse have to travel a maximum height of 1m, the
potential energy increase pressure losses Pp is 41 Pa.
)2 [ air
+ c ( solid air
for pneumatic transport. Additional allowances of Pk are required for each bend. The
amount of energy lost at a bend is often about 50 to 75% of the total kinetic energy. With
an air velocity of 35m/s, the value of Pk is found to be 4489 Pa.
to flow from pipe inlet to fan outlet is short and no heat is transferred. Thus, air velocities
are calculated by assuming negligible change in air density (i.e. U 0) and adiabatic
flow. In summary, the following assumptions were made for the free air calculations.
1. Air is assumed to be an ideal gas.
2. Negligible air density changes (U 0).
3. Adiabatic air flow.
4. Negligible change in temperature across the flow.
5. Negligible potential difference for flow of compressible fluids.
The critical point here is to find out the free air velocity that is produced by various
vacuum pressures. From Graphs 1 and 2, an air velocity of 45m/s is produced by vacuum
pressure of 0.1 bars. Higher speeds are produced by higher vacuum pressures. This set of
calculations attempt to find if there is any pressure loss difference in 0.2m3 and 0.1m3
storage volumes.
Figure 4.1 shows the layout of current Enviro-EZ system. The fan is said to produce a
vacuum pressure of 0.2 bars. Table 1 shows the various variables for the various parts of
the system. The storage tank measured 2m (l) by 1m (w) by 1m (h). The flow of free air
from points 1 to 4 shall be analyzed.
Density (kg/m )
Pressure (bar)
Temperature (K)
Velocity (m/s)
Portion 1
1.2
1
301
0
TABLE 1
Portion 2
2
P2
301
V2
Portion 3
3
P3
301
V3
Portion 4
4
P4
301
V4
The following values were assumed for calculations: P1 = Patmosphere = 1 bar; T = constant
atmospheric temperature = 28C = 301K; length of Pipe A = 2m.
20
P V 2
+ + gz = constant where = density of fluid, P = pressure of fluid, V = velocity of
2
fluid, g = gravitational acceleration and z = increase in height. This means that if velocity
increases, pressure must decrease as long as the air density remains unchanged.
Bernoullis work was concerned with incompressible liquids.
Bernoullis Equation proves to be very accurate for flow in all kinds of gases provided that
the speed of flow is not too great [14]. If the velocity approaches the speed of sound, the
equation has to be modified to allow for the compressibility and change in density of
gases. Therefore, the author applied Bernoullis Equation to find the free air pressure
losses in Enviro-EZ system and the available vacuum pressures P2, P3 and P4.
In real airflow, head losses have to be accounted for. The author neglects the terms gzA
and gzB because the difference in height at ground level results in low air pressure
changes. By neglecting gz terms and including a head loss term, ghL, in Bernoullis
2
PA VA PB
=
+
Equation,
2
VB 2
+ ghL is obtained where A and B are two different points
+
2
in a pipe.
21
Pressure equations
gh2 = 0.25V22
Losses in Pipe A
gh3 = 7.67fV22
Losses in expansion
(points 3 to 4)
P2 = 1 10 5 0.9V 2
Different values of friction factors f were input into the above equations. The results in
Appendix C were plotted on the graph of pressure losses (P1 P4) versus velocity V2 in
Graph 1 below.
2
0.4
f=0.3
0.3
f=0.5
0.2
f=0.7
0.071
0.1
0.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Velocity V2 (m/s)
The summary of pressure losses and pressure equations for Enviro-EZ system when A4 =
0.1m2 are listed below.
Parts of Enviro-EZ system
Pressure equations
gh2 = 0.25V22
Losses in Pipe A
gh3 = 7.67fV22
Losses in expansion
(points 3 to 4)
P2 = 1 10 5 0.9V2
Different values of friction factors f were input into the above equations. The results in
Appendix C were plotted on the graph of pressure losses (P1 P4) versus velocity V2 in
Graph 2 below.
2
f=0.1
0.3
f=0.3
0.2
f=0.5
0.1
f=0.7
0.064
0.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Velocity V2 (m/s)
From the above two graphs, it can be seen that the difference in the two pressure
losses from point 1 to 4 is about the same for both A4 = 0.2m2 and A4 = 0.1m2 at
23
If the free air velocity is at 35m/s (from air velocity required to convey 0.3m
diameter solids in Appendix B), the total (gauge) free air pressure loss for each
graph is about 0.07 bars at friction factor of 0.5.
From the two graphs above, a gauge pressure loss of 0.1 bars between points 1 and
4 requires free air to travel at more than 40m/s at friction factor of 0.5. The friction
factor between bags of refuse and the corrugated suction pipe could be lower if
refuse were to be floating in air flow. At lower friction factor, the pressure loss is
lower for the same velocity.
150 m3/min
85 kW
-28
Section 4.3 and 4.5 only show calculations of pressure based on free air flow. The
inclusion of refuse flow is not considered. However, the calculation results from Section
4.4 show that a gauge vacuum pressure of 0.28 bars is required to convey 300kg/m3 solids
of 0.3m diameter at 35m/s. The power requirement of the fan is about 69.29 kW. For an
internal pipe diameter of 0.3m, the required air flowrate at a speed of 35m/s is about
148m3/min. When the required values are read off from Figure 4.2, BH350T is able to
provide 0.28 bars of vacuum pressure at 150m3/min flowrate and power rating of 85 kW.
4.7 Discussion
The calculations attached in Appendix A shows that there is a need to pre-create sufficient
vacuum pressure before every suction process. By considering the free air losses, the
amount of remaining vacuum pressure is lower than the actual pressure which the fan can
produce. If the cost of installing a lid, to pre-create vacuum pressure before every suction
process, is expensive, an alternative is to purchase a bigger fan to offset the free air losses.
The set of calculations in Appendix B (by using pneumatic conveying system formulas)
shows that 300kg/m3 of solids have to be conveyed at air velocity of 35m/s. Summing up
these friction and energy requirements, the fan has to operate at 0.28 bars of vacuum
pressure and power requirement of 69.29kW. Based on these findings, BH350T roots
blower (Anlet Co.) should be selected as it fits the flowrate, power and pressure
requirements.
The velocity of 35m/s is further used in free air calculations. The set of calculations in
Appendix C made use of Bernoullis Equation to calculate the free air pressure losses
when air travels at 35m/s. The total pressure losses for free air traveling at 35m/s with
friction factor of 0.5 are 0.07 bars. There is not much difference of pressure losses when
A4 is 0.2m2 or 0.1m2.
25
CHAPTER 5
DESIGN OF REFUSE HOPPER
5.1 Introduction
Besides airflow calculations, hoppers play a critical role in refuse collection in HDB
estates. Residents usually open refuse hopper to discard rubbish into refuse chutes. The
successful operation of a pneumatic refuse collection system is closely related to the refuse
hopper. For instance, Enviro-EZ vehicle consists of a suction pipe with an internal
diameter of 0.3m which limits the size of refuse that the pipe can convey. It is, therefore,
necessary to control the size of refuse hopper inlet to ensure that bulky refuse or long
sticks are not thrown into the chute and cause problems during the suction process. This
chapter hopes to introduce some changes to the current hopper design.
As a matter of fact, we cannot totally prevent residents from throwing small but high
density objects into the chute. Provisions have to be made at the foot of the chute to allow
cleaners to remove heavy refuse manually and this is discussed in the next chapter.
Bag of refuse
Figure 5.1: A hand-operated refuse hopper for refuse disposal in every residence
26
This type of hopper takes up a protruded length of about 13cm. The kitchen space area
near to the hopper is usually not utilized and wasted. Figure 5.2 shows a 0.25m3 chute bin
located in a chute chamber. This chute bin measured 0.7m (l) by 0.7m (w) by 0.76m (h).
Chute
chamber
Foot
pedal
Figure 5.3:
Hopper
inlet
foot-pedal
Enlarged view of
refuse hopper
foot pedal
installed near
lift lobby
27
(C.G. of
cover
near the
hinge)
When a resident want to dispose off his refuse, he steps on the foot pedal to open the
hopper. After depositing the refuse, the resident releases the foot pedal to close the hopper.
29
The garbage slides down the 120 wide hopper, push open the hopper cover and travels
down the chute by gravity.
5.6 Discussion
1. Material used Stainless steel or aluminium alloys could be used as the main
corrosion resistant material for refuse hopper. In this hopper design, aluminium
alloy 5052 [15] is used. Since the material is lighter than stainless steel, the
required foot pedal force to open hopper is small. The force required to be applied
at the foot pedal to open the hopper for refuse disposal is only about 180N. There
is not much problem for teenagers to dispose refuse on behalf of adults. The
calculations of the force required to open the hopper is attached in the Appendix D.
2. Size of hopper inlet - The 0.25m by 0.25m hopper inlet is sufficient for majority
of household refuse to be disposed off. This is because the size of current HDB
kitchen hopper has an opening of about 0.26m by 0.28m. By restricting the size of
refuse, this will ensure smooth pneumatic conveying of refuse.
3. Prevent entry of long sticks The hopper cover (with circumferential length of
0.26m) is attached to the hopper and can rotate freely. If the center of gravity
(C.G.) of the cover is near to the hinge, it will be easier for the cover to rotate
easily. This cover opens to release refuse under the weight of refuse. After the
release of garbage, the cover returns to its normal closed position. When the
hopper is slightly open, the internal curved sheet and hopper cover prevent
exposure of internal chute to the residents. Residents will be unable to throw long
objects, e.g. bamboo sticks, into the chute with this feature.
4. Foot pedal The use of foot-pedaled hoppers prevents users from dirtying their
hands. By shifting the pedal to the right side of hopper, the tendency for people to
accidentally kick it and get injured is reduced greatly. The stench from refuse is
30
contained within the chute as there is no gap opening at the foot pedal. The
inclusion of bellow is akin to a spring pushing the pedal back to original position.
5. Maintenance door Since there is continual movement of linkages, there is a
possibility that the hopper may need servicing. A maintenance door (secured by a
lock) is incorporated into the design for servicing linkages. Maintenance officer
could check for faults by unlocking the door with a key. This door provides an
added convenience for maintenance of hopper.
6. Reduction in floor area of hopper The hopper in Figure 5.3 has its foot pedal
protruding 0.17m from the front of the hopper. By shifting the foot pedal to the
right of the hopper, the base area occupied by hopper is reduced. The original legpedaled hopper occupies 0.52m of protruded length. When the improvised hopper
is mounted onto the wall, the hopper occupies a protruded base length of 0.3m
from the wall. This improved design saves 0.22m of floor space infront of the
hopper. Figure 5.5 shows the dimensions of the hopper after installation onto wall.
Wall
31
CHAPTER 6
DESIGN OF INDIVIDUAL REFUSE CHUTE
6.1 Current situation
Majority of HDB estates in Singapore consist of many individual chutes in a block of flats.
Every chute contains a refuse chute bin at the foot of HDB flat. All the refuse that
residents discard are collected in the chute bin and manually emptied by cleaners.
Modifications must be made to the design of the chutes if pneumatic refuse collection
system were to be implemented in these HDB estates. This section introduces a different
design of refuse storage container that can be retrofitted into individual chutes. Figure 6.1
shows the current refuse chute bin used for refuse collection.
32
33
Refuse
outlet
cover
Design 1
Design 2
Design 3
Figure 6.2: Three various designs of refuse container
34
The author came out with three designs of refuse container as shown in Figure 6.2. The
main features of three designs are similar. However, the main difference among the
designs lies in the changes made to air admission pipe and air bypass pipe. In Design 1, air
admission pipe and air bypass pipe caps are used to conceal the holes when the pipes are
not in use. However, the caps may get lost after removal as the caps are not connected to
the container. Improvements are made to this feature by incorporating sliding pipe covers
in Design 2. However, it is inconvenient for workers to connect the pipe of Enviro-EZ
vehicle to the refuse conveying pipe at the refuse container. Furthermore, if the air
admission pipe and conveying pipe covers are not removed at the same time, there is a
possibility that the cleaner may forget to open the air admission pipe during suction
process. The air admission pipe must be opened during suction process to ensure proper
flow of refuse out of the container.
Further improvements were made to Design 2 after discussion with the project supervisor.
Design 3 is the final proposed design for the refuse container. Both air admission pipe and
refuse conveying pipe are concealed via one sliding pipe cover. When a cleaner slides the
pipe cover, both air admission pipe and refuse conveying pipe are exposed. In this way,
there is no possibility of forgetting to open the air admission pipe. The design of the mouth
of conveying pipe in Design 1 is employed in finalized Design 3 where cleaners can easily
secure the suction pipe of Enviro-EZ system to the conveying pipe by a quarter turn.
35
36
conveying pipe. When suction begins, the suction force pulls the refuse that is stored in the
refuse container and congregates at the outlet of refuse container. When the refuse
concentrates at the tapered outlet of refuse container and gets stuck, atmospheric air which
enters through the admission pipe pushes the congregated refuse and loosens them. The
released bags of refuse can then be smoothly transferred out of the refuse conveying pipe.
The bypass pipe facilitates the flow of air from air admission pipe to the conveying pipe.
The operational flow of air and refuse removal in refuse container is shown in Figure 6.4
[16].
Refuse container
Bags of
refuse
Bypass pipe
Air Flow
Flow of refuse
Refuse conveying pipe
37
6.6 Discussion
Figure 6.5 illustrates a few dimensions of the proposed refuse container. This section
highlights the rationale behind the design of the proposed refuse container.
1) Storage capacity The refuse container has a storage capacity of 0.392m3 (or 392
litres). This capacity is about 1.5 times the capacity of the current chute bin which
has a storage capacity of 0.25m3. The increase in size eliminates the problem of
refuse overspilling.
2) Material used Polypropylene could be used to manufacture the refuse container.
This plastic material is resistant to heat distortion and relatively inexpensive. It has
high fatigue strength. Its melting point is about 175C and density is 905 kg/m3
[17]. This material is used in packaging films, luggage, etc. Since the container is
38
installed in a concrete column, the lifespan of the container is not affected greatly
as it is protected from the suns UV rays.
3) Shape of refuse container The cross-section of the refuse container is square in
shape to fit into the internal contour of the current HDB individual chutes which is
shown in Figure 6.6. This container can be installed onto the chute easily without
much modification to the chute structure.
40
Figure 6.8: Spring-loaded hemispherical ball locking mechanism for refuse outlet cover
10) Cover for air admission pipe and refuse conveying pipe The cover for these
two pipes slide along designated slots (as shown in Figure 6.9) to conceal their
openings when the pipes are not in use. The cover will not be misplaced at all.
11) Mating refuse conveying pipe to collection vehicle The mouth of refuse
conveying pipe is designed to mate with Enviro-EZs pipe easily. A cleaner only
needs to slot the suction pipe of Enviro-EZ vehicle into the designated slot on
conveying pipe. Then the cleaner makes a quarter turn to temporarily secure the
two pipes. After clearing of refuse, the mating process is reversed to remove
suction pipe from conveying pipe. Figure 6.10 shows the mating process of suction
pipe of Enviro-EZ vehicle and the refuse conveying pipe of refuse container.
41
Suction pipe
Refuse conveying
pipe
Figure 6.10: Mating process of suction pipe and refuse conveying pipe
12) Washing and fogging of chutes Water pipes can be installed at the top of the
chute to for cleaning purpose. This chute container design can be retrofitted onto
the chute at ground floor without affecting the current washing, drainage and
fogging facilities. The proposed refuse container is enclosed which should contain
fogging smoke within the chute.
42
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION
This research highlights various refuse collection methods in Singapore and looks at local
and overseas pneumatic refuse collection systems. Overseas pneumatic refuse collection
systems mostly involve building networks underground pipes to convey refuse. Their
systems made use of 0.25 to 0.34 bars of vacuum pressure to convey refuse. The
manufacturers of these systems proclaimed that the systems worked well under such
pressure. From calculations attached in Appendix B, the required vacuum pressure is
about 0.28 bars. This helps to confirm the requirements of pneumatic refuse collection
system.
It is necessary to create sufficient vacuum pressure before every suction process. The lack
of such facility in Enviro-EZ system could be the cause of intermittent performance. If it is
uneconomical to install a lid to create the required pressure, a bigger pump can be used to
offset the losses. By using pneumatic conveying system design formulas, the air velocity
required to transport 300kg/m3 of solids is 35m/s. The required vacuum pressure is
calculated to be 0.28bars. These values gave an estimated requirement of a refuse
collection system. Based on these findings, BH350T roots blower (Anlet Co.) should be
selected as it fits the flowrate, power and pressure requirements as shown in Figure 4.2.
43
With reference to this value, there could be a need to change the fan of Enviro-EZ system
to a bigger capacity fan. Bernoullis Equation is deployed to calculate total free air
pressure losses (at friction factor of 0.5 and A4 = 0.2m2) and the losses amount to 0.071
bars.
Besides considering chute design, a different design of refuse hopper is also proposed to
ensure that bulky refuse are denied entry into the chute. By restricting the size of refuse
that can enter the hopper and then discarded into refuse chute, smooth transport of refuse
can be carried out easily. The problems of current refuse hoppers and various design
considerations for hopper are discussed for the improvised foot-pedaled hopper.
44
CHAPTER 8
RECOMMENDATIONS
For Enviro-EZ pneumatic refuse collection system to operate smoothly, the following
recommendations are made for future development of this project.
45
REFERENCES
[1] Ministry of Environment Annual Report 2000
[2]
Singapore
Solid
Waste
Management,
National
Environment
Agency
http://www.nea.gov.sg/interactive
[3] SembCorp Environmental Management website http://www.sembcorp.com.sg
[4] Refuse vacuum sealed conveyance system from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
(MHI) http://www.mhi.co.jp
[5] I.M.E. Aitken and W.H.G. Hamilton. Piped refuse collection at Lisson Green,
Pneumotransport 3, 1976, Paper A8, pp A8-95 to 113.
[6] Zandi I and Hayden J.A., Are pipelines the answer to the solid waste collection
dilemma?, Environmental Science and Technology, 1969, Vol 3 No. 9, pp 812 to 819.
[7] Frank Flintof and Ronald Millard, Public Cleansing, 1969, pg 55 to 61.
[8] Principle of motorized vacuum refuse collection system http://www.shinmaywa.co.jp
[9] David Mills, Pneumatic Conveying Design Guide, 1991
[10] David Mills, Mark G Jones & Vijay K. Agarwa, Handbook of Pneumatic Conveying
Engineering, 2004
[11] C.R. Woodcock and J.S. Mason, Bulk Solids Handling, Thames Polytechnic,
Chapters 3 & 12, 1987.
[12] Marcus R.D., Klinzing G.E., Rizk F. and L.S. Leung, Pneumatic Conveying of
Solids A theoretical and practical approach, 1997.
[13] Norman Brook, Mechanics of Bulk Materials Handling, 1971
[14] Martin Simons, Airflow, 1984.
[15] Yong Tai Loong Pte Ltd http://www.yongtailoong.com/refuse%20hoppers.htm
[16] European Patent Application Publication Number: 0 596 750 A1. Figure 3.
[17] William D. Callister Jr, Materials Science and Engineering, An Introduction, 2003.
46
[18] Philip M. Gerhart and Richard j. Gross, Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 1985
[19] Ferdinand P. Beer and E. Russell Johnston Jr, Vector Mechanics for Engineers:
Dynamics, 2004
47
Appendix A
APPENDIX A: PRESSURE AVAILABLE IN CONTINUOUS AIR FLOW
1. Introduction
Air Out
Pipe A
3
Fan / Air
Pump
4
2
Storage tank
1
Air In
Enviro-EZ system shown in the figure above performed intermittently. The problem could
be the continuous flow of air from atmosphere to the tank result in insufficient vacuum
pressure to suck refuse efficiently. That means that there is no pre-created vacuum
pressure before every suction process. Since this system claims that the fan is producing a
vacuum pressure of 0.2 bars, we shall find out the value of available pressure that is left
for conveying refuse.
The pneumatic refuse removal system in Sundbyberg, Sweden [5, 6, 7], required about
27m/s to move refuse at 0.25 bars. The same velocity shall be used to find out pressure
losses of free air in negotiating the pipe. Constant density is assumed because air flows
through a short distance of 2 meters in pipe A. The density change is assumed to be
negligible. Density of air is assumed to be 1.2 kg/m3.
0.3 2 = 0.0707 m 2
A1
Appendix A
Take the air velocity to be 27m/s, the flow rate through pipe A is:
QA = A V =
D 2V =
(0.3) 2 40 = 1.91m 3 / s
= 114.51m3/min
5
6
Pipe A
It is assumed that the pump inlet has a diameter of 0.3m (same diameter as point 3). Cross
section area of empty tank = 2m2.
5A5V5 = 6A6V6
A5V5 = A6V6
V5 = 1.26m/s
A2
Appendix A
A3V3 = A4V4
0.0707V3 = 2 x 1.26
V3 = 35.64m/s
= 0.5(V5)2 / 2g
= 0.5 (35.65)2 / (2 x 9.81)
= 32.39m
= air g H56
= 1.2 x 9.81 x 32.39
= 381.3 Pa = 0.0038 bar
V
= 3
2g
A
1 3
A4
35.64 2 0.0707
=
1
= 60.24m
2 9.81
2
A3
Appendix A
A4
Appendix B
solid
fluid
Density of fluid
Nf
Pf
Wetted perimeter = d
air
Density of air
Vair
We
Pipe length
Speed
Ps
Ns
2. Introduction
Pneumatic conveying system design may be based upon past experience or test results.
Due to commercial interests, pneumatic conveying systems manufacturers usually give a
single value of material flow rate, conveying distance, pipeline bore and air supply
pressure without showing the designing steps. Our research locates many experimental
B1
Appendix B
formulas which contain many unknown experimental variables. If we use basic calculation
formulas which are used to size a bulk solids pneumatic conveying system to convey
solids of 0.3m diameter, the pressure and velocity results might be used and relate to our
pneumatic refuse collection system.
solid fluid
transportation velocity to move bulk solids is V f = 4 d
fluid
where d = pipe
diameter in m, solid = density of conveyed solids, fluid = density of fluid (e.g. air). The
pressure difference between the inlet and outlet of pneumatic systems must be overcome
and could be attributed to:
1. Fluid friction on the pipe walls,
2. Sliding friction of the solids on the pipe walls,
3. Increase in potential energy of both fluid and solids,
4. Increase in kinetic energy of fluid and solids and
5. Other conditions at inlet and outlet.
The main calculations in this paper deploy the formulas used in bulk solids pneumatic
conveying systems and hope to provide a relation to some of the fluid pressure losses
when we convey refuse in air stream.
B2
Appendix B
The fluid friction force has been found by experiment to depend on the kinetic energy of
the fluid and a coefficient of friction f. Therefore, the friction force can be written as
N f = flP
air
2
(Vair )2
The equation of Pf =
flP air
(Vair )2 is formed after equating the two above-mentioned
2
A
equations. This formula is more useful when dealing with solids transport by fluids. An
equivalent length l is used to represent the actual length of pipe and other pipe bends or
fittings. The equivalent length for bends is 6d and for elbows to be 60d generally.
B3
Appendix B
m solid air
W e = gl
, where g = acceleration due to gravity, l = horizontal pipe length,
v
solid
m = mass flow rate of solids = csolidAv, v = speed, air = density of air, solid = density of
solids, c = volumetric concentration of solids.
If the pipe is inclined at an angle to the horizontal, the l term becomes lh = lcos . For
vertical pipes, length of pipe l is zero. When we consider the friction of solids on the wall,
m solid air
the friction force is given as N s = gl
where = coefficient of friction
v
solid
between solids and pipe wall. If Ps is the pressure required to overcome friction of solids
and A is the area of the pipe in cross section, its driving force to move solids is Ns = Ps A.
Equate
the
two
above-mentioned
force
Ns
equations,
the
equation
of
)] .
The required
rate of work on pressure Pp to give the mixture added potential energy is given as
W p = Pp Av .
After
equating
the
two
Wp
equations,
we
obtain
B4
Appendix B
refuse traveled, air = density of air, solid = density of solids, c = volumetric concentration
of solids.
)] (V air )
)2 [ air
+ c ( solid air
)] is
obtained where Vair = Velocity of air flow, air = density of air, solid = density of solids, c
= volumetric concentration of solids. At pipe bends, some kinetic energy may be lost for
pneumatic transport. Additional allowances of Pk are required for each bend. The amount
of energy lost at a bend is often about 50 to 75% of the total kinetic energy.
B5
Appendix B
4. Pressure Calculations
The above-mentioned researched formulas under steady flow directions might provide a
relationship to help and find pressure losses to convey refuse in air stream. These formulas
would be used to find floating velocity of refuse and various pressure losses in this
section.
According to SembWaste company website, every refuse chute bin at the foot of the HDB
block has a storage capacity of 0.25m3 [3]. The density of refuse and air is taken to be
300kg/m3 and 1.2 kg/m3 respectively. The diameter of suction pipe is 0.3m.
z
Assume that the bin is fully filled with refuse and that volume of refuse is removed from
the bin within 30 seconds,
z
0.25
= 0.0083m 3 / s
30
solid fluid
Air velocity required V f = 4 d
fluid
300 1 .2
= 4 0 .3
35 m/s
1 .2
Assume that the velocity of air is the same as the required velocity (Vf),
z
Qair =
( D pipe ) 2 Vair =
Qr
0.0083
= 0.0034 0.01
=
Qair
2.47
B6
Appendix B
Since cleaners need to bend the suction pipe to suck refuse, there would be some
pressure losses when the flow of air is negotiating the bend of pipe A.
Air Out
Pipe A
Fan / Air
Pump
The bend of pipe A may account for substantial pressure drop. The equivalent length of a
bend is generally considered to be 6d (reference last line Section 3.1, pg B3). Assume that
the 1m length of pipe A is bent and the remaining 1m is vertical, the equivalent length l of
pipe is:
= 1 + (2 x 6 x 0.3) = 4.6m
z
( D pipe ) 2 =
(0.3) 2 = 0.0707 m 2
After finding the floating velocity of refuse, we need to find the various pressure losses.
B7
Appendix B
Assume that coefficient of friction f = 0.5 (between fluid and pipe wall),
z
flP air
(Vair )2
A
2
0.0707
2
= 22536 Pa
Assume that coefficient of friction = 0.5 (between solids and pipe wall),
z
Assume that the bend in pipe A result in additional loss of 75% of kinetic energy
(mentioned in page B5),
z
)2 [ air
+ c ( solid air )]
= 1 . 75 0 .5 (35 ) [1 .2 + 0 . 01 (300 1 .2 )]
2
= 4489 Pa
B8
Appendix B
0.28bar (gauge)
z Power required from the fan = Pressure x Flow rate
= 0.28 x 105 Pa x 0.0707 m2 x 35 m/s
= 69.29 kW
The above calculations show that a vacuum pressure of 0.28 bars is required to convey a
0.3m diameter solid at 35m/s. From the calculated findings, friction between fluid and
pipe contribute a significant vacuum pressure loss. The air pressure and velocity that are
calculated using pneumatic conveying system formulas could be deployed in free air
calculations and provide a relationship to the design of pneumatic refuse collection
system.
B9
Appendix C
The pipe used in Enviro-EZ system is short (2m). Therefore, to simplify calculations, air flow
density changes are assumed to be negligible. The time taken for air to flow from pipe inlet to
fan outlet is short and no heat is transferred. Thus, air velocities are calculated by assuming
negligible change in air density (i.e. U 0) and adiabatic flow. In summary, for this set of
calculations, the following assumptions were made for the following calculations.
1. Air is assumed to be an ideal gas.
2. Negligible air density changes (U 0).
3. Adiabatic air flow.
4. Negligible change in temperature across the flow.
5.
The critical point here is to find out the free air velocity that is produced by various vacuum
pressures. This set of calculations shall attempt to find if there is any pressure loss difference
in 0.2m3 and 0.1m3 storage volumes.
C1
Appendix C
Pipe A
3
Fan / Air
Pump
5
6
4
2
Storage tank
1
Air In
The diagram above shows the layout of Enviro-EZ system. The flow of free air from
points 1 to 4 shall be analyzed. Table 1 shows the various variables for the various parts of the
system. The storage tank measured 2m (l) by 1m (w) by 1m (h).
Portion 1
1.2
1
301
0
Density (kg/m3)
Pressure (bar)
Temperature (K)
Velocity (m/s)
TABLE 1
Portion 2
2
P2
301
V2
Portion 3
3
P3
301
V3
Portion 4
4
P4
301
V4
P1 = Patm = 1 bar;
T = constant = 28C = 301K
Length of Pipe A = 2m
3.1
When A4 = 0.2m2
3.1.1
Dimension Calculations
Area of pipe A2 =
0.3 2 = 0.0707 m 2
C2
Appendix C
L = 1
3.1.2
L=
r=
L 1 1
= = 0.159m
2 2
r 0.159
=
= 0.53
0.3
D
V
gh2= K 2
2
Substitute K = 0.5,
2
V2 2
V2
gh2 = K
= 0.5
2
2
= 0.25V2 2
gh2 = 0.25V22
(3.1)
When air flows from one point to another point, we need to consider the relations
between energy loss, flow rate and velocity changes. Air is assumed to be
incompressible fluid with constant density. Bernoulli Equation used to find the air
pressure losses is:
V 2
+ A
PA
P V
+ gz A = B + B + gz B + ghL
C3
Appendix C
z At ground floor, the potential height difference has little air pressure difference.
Therefore, potential height difference can be neglected (gzA = gzB), we get
V 2
+ A
2
PA
PB V B 2
=
+ 2
+ ghL
(3.2)
2
P2
+ 0.25V2 2
P1
P2 = 1 10 5 0.9V2
(3.3)
2 A2V2 = 3 A3V3 is applicable. Since air density and pipe cross-sectional area are
assumed to be the same, V2 = V3.
fL V
gh3 =
D 2
(3.4)
V + V3
where V is the mean fluid velocity in a pipe (i.e. V = 2
= V2 = V3 ). L
2
2
gh3 = 7.67fV22
(3.5)
C4
Appendix C
PA
PB V B 2
=
+ 2 + ghL
P
P2
2
2
2
+ 0.5V2 = 3 + 0.5V3 + 7.67 fV2
1.2
1.2
(3.6)
A3V3 = A4V4
0.0707V3 = 0.2V4
V4 = 0.354V3
(3.7)
A (V ) 2
gh4 = 1 3 3
A4 2
(3.8)
C5
Appendix C
P3
P4 V4 2
=
+ 2 + gh4
P3
+ 0.5V3 =
2
P4
+ 0.5(0.354V3 ) 2 + 0.21V3
(3.9)
(3.7)
gh2 = 0.25V22
(3.1)
gh3 = 7.67fV22
(3.5)
(3.8)
P2 = 1 10 5 0.9V2
(3.3)
(3.6)
(3.9)
Basically, the head losses and pressure formulas for points 1 to 3 of storage tank remains
unaffected. Only gh4 and P4 formulas are different.
gh2 = 0.25V22
(3.1)
gh3 = 7.67fV22
(3.5)
C6
Appendix C
P2 = 1 10 5 0.9V2
(3.3)
(3.6)
A3V3 = A4V4
0.0707V3 = 0.1V4
V4 = 0.707V3
(3.10)
A3 (V3 ) 2
gh4 = 1
A4 2
(3.11)
P3
P4 V4 2
=
+ 2
+ gh4
P3
+ 0.5V3 =
2
P4
+ 0.5(0.707V3 ) 2 + 0.043V3
(3.12)
C7
Appendix C
(3.1)
2
(3.5)
P2 = 1 10 5 0.9V2
(3.3)
(3.6)
(3.11)
2
(3.12)
All the formulas for the two cross-sectional areas A4 are plotted in the two graphs below.
2
0.4
f=0.3
0.3
f=0.5
0.2
f=0.7
0.071
0.1
0.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Velocity V2 (m/s)
f=0.1
0.3
f=0.3
0.2
f=0.5
0.1
f=0.7
0.064
0.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Velocity V2 (m/s)
C8
Appendix D
D1
Appendix D
2. Design Calculations
2.1
D2
Appendix D
FBD of rod A
0.177m
Rod A
MA1
RA1
135o
MA2
RA2
= 67 N
4
75o
= 0.38 MPa
The shear stress on rod A is low.
MA1 = 0
-MA1 + 67 (0.177) RA2(0.354) + MA2 = 0
Rod A is static and therefore the 2 momoents
cancel each other.
RA2 = 33.5N
+ Fy = 0
RA1 + RA2 = 67
RA1 = 67 33.5 = 33.5N
Since rod A is subjected to some bending, the maximum tensile and compressive stresses
are calculated.
D3
Appendix D
d 4 0.0154
=
= 2.485 109 m4
Moment of inertia of rod A = I =
64
64
C = 0.005m
Cross section
of rod A
Mc 11.86 0.005
Using max =
= 24 MPa
=
9
I 2.485 10
At mid span of rod A, a maximum tensile stress of 24 MPa occurs at the bottom fiber and
a maximum compressive stress of -24MPa occurs at top fiber.
The yield strength of aluminium alloy is about 195MPa [17].
Design safety factor =
YieldStrength
max
195MPa
= 8 .1
24 MPa
Rod A has a safety factor of 8.1. Continual cycles of usage may damage the hopper easily.
In addition, the hopper may also be subjected to abuse. The calculated safety factor should
sufficiently provide for excessive load and force.
3
3
= 0.138m
Resolve XG horizontally,
XG(horizontal) = 0.138 cos 15o
= 0.133m
XG
B
D4
Appendix D
Since the distance moved by linkage is short and velocity of linkage movement is small,
velocity and acceleration of linkages is not taken into account.
LAB = 0.205m,
LBC = 0.52m,
LCD = 0.24m,
LDE = 0.075m
0.133m
A
FAx
17N
B
FAy
135o
+ Fy = 0
FAy + FDy = 17 ------------- (1)
+
Fx = 0
FAx = FDx = 0
------------- (2)
(no horizontal forces)
y
x
75
C
MA = 0
-17 (0.133) FDy [(LCDsin75o) (LABcos45o)] = 0
FDy = -26.6N
FDx
FDy
26.6
(0.005)
= 1.35 MPa
2
1.03
(0.005)
= 0.053MPa
1.03
(0.005)2
= 0.053MPa
D5
Appendix D
The shear stresses on the 3 pins are quite low when linkages are at rest.
B
135o
MD = 0
x
FE (LDEcos15o) 17[(LCDsin75o)
(LABcos45o) + 0.133] = 0
FE
FE (0.075cos15o) 17[(0.24sin75o)
(0.205cos45o) + 0.133] = 0
75
FE = 51.92N
C
When linkage CE is horizontal, point E displaces downwards by 2cm. This design is made
in such a way that point E must displace downwards by 7cm to open the hopper by
26.25cm. Assume that the pedal force is proportional to the distance traveled, we need to
find the pedal force required to displace point E down by 7cm.
Therefore,
51.92
7 182 N is required.
2
When the hopper is fully open, a user needs to exert a force of 182N (about 18.6kgf).
Work done by user = Force x distance traveled
= 182 x 0.07 = 12.74J
D6
Appendix D
3. Conclusion
The above-mentioned calculations are proposed for the design of aluminium alloy chute
hopper. The design of chute hopper aims to reduce the problems faced when using
pneumatic refuse conveying system. The force required to open the hopper by 26.25cm is
about 182N. However, when the hopper is fully opened, more space is taken up. The
hopper may not close back automatically after release of force from the foot pedal as the
center of gravity of refuse and hopper lies outside the hopper. Further improvements could
be made to ensure smooth functioning of the system.
D7