Low Rolling Resistance for Conveyor Belts

Goodyear Conveyor Belt Products

By

David Gallagher
Chief Engineer, Conveyor Belts
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
Marysville, Ohio
USA

Submitted to:
International Rubber Conference
Melbourne, Australia
October, 2000
 CONTENTS

TITLE: Low Rolling Resistance for Conveyor Belts

AUTHOR: David D. Gallagher

Chief Engineer
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

1. INTRODUCTION TO ROLLING RESISTANCE 1

2. SMALL SCALE TESTING 6

3. CASE STUDY 1: OVERLAND COAL CONVEYOR 8

4. CASE STUDY 2: OVERLAND COPPER ORE CONVEYOR 17

5. CASE STUDY 3: REGENERATIVE CONVEYOR 20

6. CONCLUSIONS 22
 1. INTRODUCTION TO ROLLING RESISTANCE

1.1 Background
There has been significant technical progress in the transport of bulk materials in the last
10 years. Conveyors have always moved materials over uneven terrain, through
mountain tunnels, and around horizontal curves, but today the next step to improved
conveyor efficiency is the reduction of power required to operate these high performance
systems.

Just as some tires provide lower rolling resistance depending on their construction and
compounds, a conveyor belt can also be designed to provide lower resistance as it rolls
over the supporting idlers.

Goodyear’s investigation into this work can be categorized into three areas:
a. Theoretical Analysis
b. Laboratory Testing
c. Field Data Collection

1.2 Theoretical Analysis

The sketch in figure 1 demonstrates the components of a typical conveyor system. The
power required to operate a typical conveyor belt has been studied from a theoretical and
dynamic test equipment approach by the University of Hannover[1]. They have
categorized the frictional resistances into six major components.

• Indentation rolling resistance

• Bearing resistance of the idler
• Flexure of the belt
• Acceleration of the load onto the belt
• Flexing of the load between idlers
• Friction due to plows, scraper, and other devices

Material Loading

Loading
chute

B C

A
B
C

Changing
of belt profile Sag between idlers

Figure 1 Typical conveyor

According to this study, the indention of the pulley cover as it passes over the idler
creates the largest loss in power for long horizontal belts. A better understanding of this
mechanism can be made by looking closer at the idler as seen in figure 2.

1
Figure 2 Indention schematic

The rubber passes through a hysteresis cycle that absorbs power. It has been estimated
that on long center horizontal conveyors that the rolling resistance power loss due to the
indention effect can reach 61% of the total system power[1].

Pulley Cover Indentation = 61%

1%
18%

9%

5% 61%
6%

Indentation rolling resistance Bearing resistance of the idler

Flexure resistance of the belt Secondary resistances
Flexure resistance of bulk material Extraordinary resistances

Figure 3 Long horizontal profiles

Goodyear has conducted its own studies into this phenonomen from both a theoretical
and practical approach to determine which parameters significantly contribute to the
rubber hysteresis and which factors can be improved through system design and rubber
compounding.

1.3 Goodyear Theoretical Analysis

The theoretical analysis begins with a mathematical model developed by Goodyear
Research Associates Dr. Alan Gent and Dr. William A. Arnold.

An analysis to estimate energy losses due to indenting a belt cover layer by a roller as the
belt passes over it can be done utilizing a simple model shown in figure 4. Several
simplifying assumptions must be used in the approximate analysis. These assumptions
are:
(i) The cover compound is linearly-elastic, with Young’s modulus E.
(ii) The indentation, d, of the belt is small compared to the cover layer
thickness h.
(iii) The contact length 2a is small compared to the roller diameter D and
small, or at least not much greater than, the cover layer thickness h.
(iv) Energy U loss per unit volume of rubber is proportional to the maximum
energy W stored per unit volume.
(v) The strain is constant along a plane transversing the thickness of the cover
layer (line b in figure 4), i.e, uniform compression of the layer with no

2
 lateral displacements.
(vi) The side of the belt opposite the side that contacts the roller is held fixed.

A relationship can be derived between the applied load and the compressive deflection of
the cover layer. The mean deformation imposed on the rubber is 2d/3 and the loaded
area is 2aw, where w is the belt width. The mean compressive stress t is thus given by:

b
s
E h

2a

x D

Figure 4 Mathematical model

Figure 4 is a simple model used to analyze energy losses of a rubber belt passing over a
roller.

F  4 E  2d 
t= =   (1)
2aw  3  3h 

where F is the vertical force acting on the roller, and 4E/3 is the effective compression
modulus of a wide thin layer that is constrained from expanding along its width. Hence:

F  16 E  ad 
=   (2)
w  9  h 

From simple geometrical considerations with D>>d, the contact half-width a is related to
the indentation depth d by:

a 2 ≅ dD (3)

Thus, the expected relation between applied load F and the indentation d is:

3
 F  16 E  d 3 / 2 D 1 / 2 
=   (4)
w  9  h 

As the cover layer passes over the roller, energy W is stored in the rubber, per unit
volume, given by:

 4 E  em 
2
W =  (5)
 3  2 

where em denotes the maximum compressive strain d/h. Solving for d in equation (4)
gives:

2/3 −2 / 3
F  16 
d =    E − 2 / 3 D −1 / 3 h 2 / 3 (6)
 w 9

Using equations (5) and (6), the energy stored per unit volume is given by:

−5 / 3 4/3
1  4 −1 / 3 F
W=   E   (hD) − 2 / 3 (7)
2 3  w

If assume that a fraction (1 - R) of this energy is lost, where R is the resilience of the
rubber compound. Thus, the energy lost per unit volume is:

−5 / 3 4/3
(1 − R )  4  F
U=   E −1 / 3   (hD) − 2 / 3 (8)
2  3  w

In terms of the whole cover layer, the energy consumed in passing over the roller per unit
width and per unit distance traveled is:

−5 / 3 4/3
(1 − R)  4  F
hU =   E −1 / 3   h1 / 3 D − 2 / 3 (9)
2  3  w

Although the relation in equation 9 is based on simple approximations, it is of the same

general form as that given by Hager & Hintz [1], with reference to prior work by others.

1.4 FEA Model and Methods

To test the accuracy of the approximate analytical work outlined in the previous section, a
two-dimensional FEA model was prepared. A typical 2D mesh used in the analyses is
shown in figure 5. The top of the belt was held fixed as depicted in figure 4. The model
was made very long in comparison with the thickness so that the ends of the belt were
unaffected by the indentation. The ends of the belt had to remain free to move for
numerical reasons, i.e., the model was otherwise over-constrained. The spacial resolution
on the meshes were 4213 nodes.

4
Figure 5. Stress field perpendicular to the belt surface (S22 in figure 1) in a
rubber belt indented by a solid roller

Typical values used in the models were 0.2 m long, h = 8 mm, D = 13.3 cm, with an
applied load per unit width, F/w, of 5 kN/m. Linear elasticity was employed in the
analyses using a typical value for rubber of E = 10 MPa. The modulus was varied about
this value. Hyperelasticity was also used to test the validity of the assumption of linear
elasticity used in the analytical analysis.

Based on the theoretical analysis and FEA model, the following general conclusions have
been drawn:

1. Reductions in load have a disproportionately large effect on energy consumption.

2. A larger idler diameter will also reduce the energy consumption.

3. Rubber thickness and modulus parameters have secondary effects on the energy.

4. Pulley cover resilience or hysteresis is the predominate factor in energy consumption.

The system designer generally determines the belt width, speed, tonnage, and idler
spacing with a keen eye on capital expenses. Therefore the only item that is solely
under the belt manufacturers control is the pulley cover characteristics.

5
 2. SMALL SCALE TESTING
2.1 Tan Delta Testing
When making laboratory comparisons, Goodyear has used the tan delta test to screen
rubber compounds for hysteresis. Tan delta is defined as the ratio of the rubber
hysteresis to the elastic modulus or stated in another way as the delay between the
stress applied and the resultant strain. A lower tan delta value is expected to provide
lower rolling losses on a field conveyor and therefore less horsepower consumed.
Tan delta results can be gathered from tension, compression, or shear methods (see
figure 6).

Figure 6 Tan delta test models

At this time there are differences of opinion in the professional circles as to the best
sample size and exact test procedure for predicting field results.

Figure 7 demonstrates the relative tan delta values of several different SBR and natural
rubber compounds. It is interesting to note the last curve which represents a pure
natural rubber, which Goodyear believes would be the optimum resilient compound.

0.7

0.6 A
B
0.5
C
TAN DELTA

0.4
D
0.3 E

0.2 ` OPTIMIZED

0.1

0
-75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75
TEMPERATURE (DEG C)

Figure 7 Tan delta results at 10 Hz – 2% strain

6
Unfortunately pure gum is not a practical option for conveyor belt covers since the
addition of carbon black and other processing agents will increase the tan delta value.

2.2 DYNAMIC TESTING

In addition to the small-scale laboratory tests used to quantify resistance properties of
compounds, Goodyear has tested a number of belt constructions on a 38’ x 14” endless
dynamic test machine at the University of Hannover.

This test measures the indention of a single roller indented into the belt cover as the force
per idler per unit width by isolating the pulley cover hysteresis. The data is then plotted
with respect to time and temperature. The results of three Goodyear test belts at varying
temperatures can be seen in Figure 8.

The results correlate with the tan delta trends and confirm lower tan delta values provide
lower power reduction under dynamic conditions.

100
FORCE PER IDLER (N/M)

90
80
70
60 A
B
50
D
40
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
TEMPERATURE (DEG C)

Figure 8 Dynamic roller indention test results

7
 3. CASE STUDY 1: OVERLAND COAL CONVEYOR
3.1 Requirements
As with all laboratory investigations, the final analysis is in the field. However data
collection in the field is far more difficult than in the laboratory. For example each motor
must be monitored while varying the tonnages across the belts. Long center belts are
expensive investments for the user and are generally only replaced every 5 to 15 years.
Timing and good fortune are necessary to enable data collection on the same system
with two identical belts except with different pulley cover compounds and still be able to
gather data at approximately the same temperatures.

3.2 Case Study 1: Goodyear Measurements

Goodyear was able to locate several of these opportunities. One customer permitted an
extensive 1 ½ year study on a 23,000’ x 54” ST 2500 coal handling steel cord belt with ¼”
x ¼” covers (Figure 9). The study involved recording power reading on the original belt
with compound A pulley cover and a follow-up study with a replacement belt of the same
construction except with the bottom cover being specially formulated with a low rolling
resistance pulley cover. Since all parameters except the pulley cover would be identical
any difference in motor performance could be attributed to the pulley cover.

CASE STUDY 1 : OVERLAND COAL CONVEYOR

Centers: 23,000 Ft
Belt: 54” Flexsteel 2100

CONVEYOR PROFILE

1500
ELEVATION (FT)

1000 HEAD
TAIL

500
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ------------->

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
LENGTH (FT)

Figure 9 System parameters

Goodyear initiated the study by installing four data loggers into the conveyor electrical
control panel for continuous recording of:

• Ambient temperature
• Belt Speed
• Tonnage at the weigh scale
• Wattmeter readings on each of (4) motor

8
This data was accumulated and analyzed for five months. Goodyear then contracted
Conveyor Dynamics Incorporated (CDI) to conduct strain gauge measurements on the
drive shafts. The propose was to validate the wattmeter approach to studying power
consumption.

3.3 Strain Gauge Measurements: CDI

Under CDI direction we returned to site and installed the following additional field
measurements (figure 10) over a 3-day period to support their investigation:

• Belt velocity on the carry side of the conveyor at the head.

• Belt velocity on the return side of the conveyor at the tail.
• Torque measurements at each of the four head drives.
• Torque measurements at the tail drive.

Figure 10 Installing tachometer on carrying side of belt

The four drives are labeled A-E as shown in figure #11. Only one of the secondary drives
(C or E) was in operation at any one time.

Drive
B
HEAD Tail

Drive Drive
A E
Drive
D

Drive
C
Figure #11 – Drive arrangement & identification.

9
3.3.1 Torque Measurements By CDI

3.3.1.1 Head Drives

Four strain gauges were applied to each of the five drive shafts at the head and tail of the
conveyor system. The strain gauges were applied in such a fashion as to negate all
bending and compressive forces. This allows only the true torsion forces to be
measured. The signals from the strain gauges were then amplified and converted into a
FM frequency. This allows the data to be transmitted from a transmitting antenna
mounted on the shaft to an externally mounted receiving antenna. The external antenna
then transmits the FM signal to a receiving unit and this in turn relays the data to the data
acquisition unit. A typical strain gauge arrangement is shown in Figure #12.

Transmitting Antenna
Receiving Antenna
Transmitter

Drive Pulley
Pillow Block
Rigid Coupling
Gearbox

Strain-gauge bridges
Figure 12 – A typical strain gauge measurement setup.

Preparation of the shaft for strain gauge installation is critical to assure reliable
measurements. Figure 13 demonstrates the removal of grease from the shaft before
sanding, polishing, cleaning with acetone and finally cementing the strain gauge in place.
The process, including telemetry installation required 5-6 man-hours per shaft.

Figure 13 Cleaning shaft in preparation for strain gauge

10
Each of the strain gauge sets were wired together to form a Wheatstone bridge. This
system is calibrated by shunting one leg of the Wheatstone bridge with a known
resistance. This is in-turn converted to a resulting torque. The total power can then
simply be calculated using:

2 ∗ π ∗ f ∗ Torque
P=
GB

Where:

P = Total Power
F = Shaft Frequency
T = Shaft Torque
GB = Gearbox Ratio

Each of the four head drives had previously been installed with Goodyear wattmeters.
Each wattmeter produces a 4-20 mA output. Both the CDI data acquisition system and
the long-term Goodyear data loggers recorded this output. The Goodyear system
sampled at a constant 10-second interval where as the CDI system sampled at various
rates from 25 milli-seconds to 2.0 seconds deepening on the individual test.

Again the conveyor was monitored at different tonnages and comparison made between
the wattmeter output and the torque measurements. Figure 14 is a plot of Drive A power
with both measurements.

Motor Power - A
Operational Start - Empty
1000

900 TQ - Pwr A

800 GY - Pwr - A

700

600
Motor Power (HP)

500

400

300

200

100

-100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Ti ( )

Figure 14 – Power vs Time (Sec) Drive-A empty belt.

The correlation between strain gauge and wattmeters is very close.

The conveyor was then run at a steady load of 2040 TPH and again comparison made
with the data collected. Results are shown in Figure 15 Examination of the graph
indicates a very close correlation in the curve profile except with an approximate 6%
lower value for the strain gauge. This difference is explained by understanding the

11
wattmeters measure total motor power including coupling, gearbox, and drive losses,
while the strain gauge only measure power to the drive pulley. Also the drive losses
increase with increased tonnage.

Motor Power - A
Steady State - 2040 T/H
1000

900 TQ - Pwr A

GY - Pwr - A
800

700

600
Motor Power (HP)

500

400

300 Approximately 30 (6%) HP Differential

200

100

-100
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

( )

Figure 15 – Power vs Time (Sec) Drive-A at 2040 T/H.

3.3.2 Conclusion of Strain Gauge Analysis

The same technique was used to monitor the other three drives at different tonnages.
The data from each motor compared favorably between the two systems of data
collection. It was concluded that the strain gauge field measurements successfully
verified the functionality of the wattmeters as a means for determining conveyor power.

3.4 INSTRUMENTION OF REPLACEMENT BELT

Approximately 1 month after verification of the Goodyear wattmeters the entire belt was
changed out and replaced (figure 16) with an identical belt except with the Goodyear
rolling resistant pulley cover. Ten months after the installation of the new belt the motor
shafts were again instrumented with strain gauges. Similar results were recorded which
again verified the wattmeter concept.

12
 Stringing rolls onto system

Splicing rolls together

Figure 16 Installation of new belt

The use of continuous monitoring data collecting units on the overland conveyor
permitted a view of all the parameters over time and with the fluctuation of temperature.
For example, figure 17 depicts a range of data during a 1-month period.

MOTOR POWER TONNAGE

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE BELT SPEED

Figure 17 Sample of data collection for 1-month period

Figure 18 is expanded from the same data and shows a 1-shift period, which is used to
calculate the power consumed.

13
 MOTOR POWER TONNAGE

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE BELT SPEED

Figure 18 Sample of data collection for 1-shift period

Using this technique we were able to make a number of important observations between
the old and new belts.

1. A new belt has a certain amount of stiffness and requires time to break-in and before
stable power reading could be measured. Figures 19 and 20 demonstrate this effect
over a period of 30 days with empty and loaded belt.

Empty Belt

100
POWER - kW

98
96
94
92
90
09/26/1999 10/03/1999 10/10/1999 10/17/1999 10/24/1999

Figure 19 Start up break-in power for empty belt

14
 FULLY LOADED BELT

1900

1850

POWER KW
1800

1750

1700

1650
9

99
99

99

99

99

99

99

19
1

1
3/

4/
0/

7/

4/

1/

8/
/2

/0

/1

/2

/0
/3

/2
09

09

10

10

10

10

11
Figure 20 Break-in power vs. time on loaded belt

2. After the belt power requirement stabilized data was taken to compare the older belt
with the newer belt. Figure 21 shows the comparison of the original belt vs. the
replacement belt supplied with the rolling resistance pulley cover. An approximate 6%
reduction in rolling resistance is achieved with the replacement compound.

OVERLAND CONVEYOR
16% REDUCTION FROM DEFAULT CEMA : 55 - 60 F
2500
HORSEPOWER (HP)

2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
TONNAGE (TPH)
CEMA COMP A COMP D

Figure 21 Power comparison: original vs. rolling resistant compound

Using the continuous monitoring of the ambient temperature, a comparison of the power
reading was assembled at -5 deg. F and 55 deg. F with identical loading. It can be seen
in figure 22 that over 15% more power is required for running both the empty and loaded
belt in cold temperatures.

15
 WARM VS COLD TEMPERATURE

POWER - KW
3000
1913 1657
2000 1178 1000
1000
0
Empty Full

-5 F 55 F

Figure 22 Power data demonstrating 15% increase in cold temperature

16
 4. CASE STUDY 2

4.1 Overland Conveyor – Copper Ore

Goodyear was also able to conduct another field test with similar although not as
extensive instrumentation. On this conveyor the data was collected over a period of days
and not continuously over a period of months.

Goodyear instrumented the conveyor seen in figure 23 and 24 for power consumption

with compound B pulley cover[2].

• Centers: 6810 Ft
• Belt: ST 3500 72” x 5/8” x1/4”
• Primary Drive: 2 x 1000 kW
• Secondary Drive: 1 x 1000 kW
• Tail Drive: 1 x 1000 kW
• Material: Copper Ore

Figure 23 Case 2 System Data

CONVEYOR INSTRUMENTATION SCHEMATIC

VERTICAL : FT

400
200
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE :FT

1 Tail Motor 1 Secondary Motor

2 Primary Motors

BELT SPEED Weigh Scale

Data Logger

Figure 24 Case 2 Instrumentation Schematic

17
4.2 Replacement Belt

Six months after the original data was collected a new belt was installed on this system
with the identical belt construction except with compound B was replaced with compound
A pulley cover (figure 25).

Figure 25 Belt changeout

The replacement belt was allowed to break in for several months before the power
readings were gathered. The data for all 4 motors were correlated with the corresponding
time period for tonnage and averaged over a period of several minutes to provide the
most accurate results.

The tonnage was collected by connecting into the weigh scale. The ambient temperature
was 35 degree F. The customer was very cooperative by allowing the trucks to
accumulate behind the crusher while empty tonnage readings were taken. This allowed a
sufficient material inventory to build up permitting a constant tonnage reading at half and
full loading.

5000 TPH 10000 TPH

Figure 26 Tonnage comparison

18
A comparison of 5000 TPH vs. 10000 TPH on a 72” belt is shown in figure 26.

The difference in power between compound A and compound B pulley covers was
measured at 200 kW (12.6%) at half loading and 310 kW (10.3%) at full loading (figure
27).

10.3% DIFFERENCE
310 kW
3500
POWER (KW)

2500

1500
12.6% Difference
500 200 kW

0 5000 10000
TONNAGE (TPH)
COMP A COMP B COMP A Repeat

Figure 27 Power vs. compound comparison

These power trends are reasonable and consistent with theoretical assumptions for
several reasons:

As a verification of this technique the conveyor was instrumented a second time after an
additional two years operation. The results were plotted together and are nearly identical
to the original values as seen in figure 27. The only difference was the lack of a data
point at the 5000 TPH loading. During the repeat study, the mining operation was
running at full capacity and could not reduce the tonnage. The shape of the power curve
therefore is somewhat “flatter” at the 5000 TPH due to the missing data point. However
the position of the curve at empty and fully loaded are almost identical. From this we
conclude the slope of the power vs. tonnage is not a straight line but is concave upward.

19
 5. CASE STUDY 3: REGENERATIVE CONVEYOR
5.1 Downhill Coal System
Goodyear also had the opportunity to conduct power measurements on a downhill
conveyor that required power when empty but becomes regenerative when loaded. The
system details are listed in figure 28.

• Centers: 7400 ft
• Decline: 305 ft
• Belt: 42” Flexsteel 1500 5/16” x 1/4”
• Drives: Tail 500 Hp
• Material: Clean Coal
CONVEYOR PROFILE : DOWNHILL
HEIGHT (FT)

400
300
200
100
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
LENGTH (FT)

Figure 28 Case 3 system data

This conveyor was originally installed with a compound A pulley cover. The replacement
belt was made to the exact same specification except the pulley cover was replaced with
a rolling resistant compound for direct field comparison.

Again data was gathered on site with the cooperation of site personnel to accurately
measure the tonnage over the weigh scale and correlate it with the power required for the
belt. Figure 29 depicts these results[2] which can be summarized as follows:

• Both belts require the same amount of power when running empty.
• Increasing the tonnage reduces the power required until it eventually becomes
regenerative.
• Compound D becomes regenerative at a lesser tonnage due to its superior rolling
resistance properties.
• The greater the tonnage the more significant the difference between the power
required between the compounds.

20
 COMP A COMP D

POWER (HP) 100

50
28% DIFFERENCE
0

-50
0 500 1000 1500 2000
TONNAGE (TPH)

Figure 29 Power comparisons on regenerative belt

21
 6. CONCLUSION
6.1 Summary of Results
The data accumulated from the three field conveyor correlate very well with the Goodyear
theoretical analysis and can be summarized as follows:

1. The tan delta component of energy loss is a valuable tool for correlating rolling
resistance of rubber compounds.
2. Wattmeter data is a valid technique for power comparison on field conveyors.
3. Rolling resistance increases with:
a. Increase in material density
b. Increase in tonnage
c. Increase in belt width
4. Increased tonnage vs. increased power consumption is not linearly dependent.
5. The belt pulley cover compound has little effect on the power consumption of an
empty belt due to the small amount of indention into the idler.
6. New belts require several weeks to several months break-in time depending on
system length and the number of pulleys before power readings stabilize.
7. Low tan delta compounds increase power requirements on regenerative systems.
8. Power requirements increase significantly as temperature decreases.
9. Operating costs of long center horizontal conveyors can be reduced with a more
efficient rolling resistant belt pulley cover.

6.2 Recommendations
The cost of the rolling resistant compound is a premium over other compounds.
However, on those installations where the benefits can be fully utilized, the compound
more than compensates for its additional expense through reduction in power costs and
more importantly capital costs by permitting the design of smaller motors, pulleys, gear
boxes, shafts, bearings, idlers, and steel structure.

The benefits of a superior rolling resistant compound can best be realized on long
horizontal systems utilizing wide, fully loaded belts, carrying high density material.

POTENTIAL COST SAVINGS

ANNUAL SAVINGS ON 4000 kW

$80,000
$70,000
$60,000
$50,000
$40,000 5%
$30,000 10%

$20,000
$10,000
$0
$0.035 $0.055

Figure 30 Cost analysis for energy savings

22
Figure 30 demonstrates four possible savings scenarios that might be achieved on the
conveyor discussed in Case Study 2. Using electrical costs of $0.035 and $0.055 per
kW-hour. The graphs also demonstrates the savings to the mine operation with two
different pulley covers that would reduce the overall power consumption by 5% and 10%.

Depending on the cost per kW-hour and conveyor profile, it is possible to achieve savings
in excess of US $ 50,000 annually on long horizontal conveyors where the full benefits of
the improved rolling resistant compounds are optimized.

REFERENCES

[1] Hager & Hintz, “The Energy-Saving Design of Belts for Long Conveyor Systems,”
Bulk Solids Handling, Vol. 13, No 4, Nov. 1993

[2] Gallagher, David “Reduced Power Consumption for Conveyor Belts”, SME Bulk
Material Handling by Conveyor Belt III, Feb. 2000

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Dr. Alan Gent, Research Associate, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
Dr. William A Arnold, Research Associate, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

David Kruse, Project Engineer, Conveyor Dynamics Inc.

Ryan Lemmon, Project Engineer, Conveyor Dynamics Inc.

John Gartland, Project Engineer, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
Kevin Xie, Development Compounder, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

23