MATERIALS HANDLING
occasionally improves the situation, but more often it’s just temporary and the belt will eventually slice through the obstacle. Many operators have realised that
pivoting an idler is a quicker and more effective way to steer a belt. Tis common approach is called “knocking an idler,” striking it with a hammer to move it slightly and realign the belt. Equipment manufacturers have also designed components to help align a belt, and these solutions can be successful in specific applications. Tey include specially shaped rollers, angled idlers and devices that apply pressure to the belt edge to push it back in line. “Although these mechanisms can
Multi-Pivot Tracker for the return run
be caused by a mistracking belt, but one thing I’ve never seen is a belt that runs true right out of the box. All conveyors, no matter how well designed and built, have some belt wander.”
WHAT CAUSES MISTRACKING? A wide variety of circumstances can lead to mistracking, and operators have tried many things to correct the alignment. Some have elected to place an obstacle such as a block of wood in the belt path, so it won’t travel too far out of line. Tis
improve a belt that’s consistently off- centre in one direction, they do not react to dynamic belt movement, meaning that they don’t correct intermittent belt wander,” Marshall says. “To combat such changing conditions, engineers designed the tracking idler. Unlike the edge correction approach, the device senses belt movement in either direction and pivots the idler slightly to steer the belt back into position. It doesn’t apply a great deal of force to the edges, which can damage a belt and splices. When the belt is running true, it remains centred, and when it senses a misaligned condition, it gently corrects the belt.” Unfortunately, to accommodate limited
space availability, tracking idlers typically have short sensing arms. Tis requires a fairly large belt displacement to create a small movement of the idler. Although these designs do tend to improve tracking, there are limits to how much correction they can deliver, and short sensing arms can actually pinch a belt if the idler pivots too far. To combat this, some operators choose to “tie off” a tracking idler to limit its movement. Although the practice can help preserve the belt, it doesn’t address significant mistracking.
Multi-Pivot Tracker for the load- carrying run
A NEW APPROACH To overcome the limitations of existing belt alignment devices, Martin Engineering has developed the Multi- Pivot Belt Tracker, which employs sensors, pivoting idlers and geometry to align a wandering belt. Te sensors avoid pinching the belt, and the engineered geometry amplifies any detected misalignment to create a greater pivot. Multi-Pivot Belt Trackers use longer arms than other designs, positioning the
“Knocking” an idler with a mallet to change its position
guide rolls further from the pivot roller, as well as closer to the belt edge. Te closer proximity allows guide rolls to sense very slight misalignments and make immediate corrections. Rather than waiting for a powerful mistracking force, the longer arms require considerably less pressure to move the pivot roller. Te result is better correction with no pinch points and less wear on conveyor and tracking equipment, for a longer and more efficient service life. Specific designs are available for both the load-carrying belt path and the return run. “Installing trackers is the economical solution, but operators should do a full analysis and consider also addressing other causal issues,” Marshall adds. “By focusing solely on belt alignment, plant personnel may miss other opportunities to increase production and relieve some of the burden on their system.” Keeping the belt centred and moving quickly is the key to high production, controlled operating cost and a safer workplace. “Misalignment causes downtime and costs money,” Marshall concludes. “But nothing causes more downtime and expense than a destructive belt fire or other catastrophe as a result of inattention to mistracking problems.”
Cory Goldbeck is with Martin Engineering.
www.martin-engineering.com
www.engineerlive.com 43
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
