1 / 43

Neptune Bulk Terminals Coal Terminal Capacity Upgrade

Neptune Bulk Terminals Coal Terminal Capacity Upgrade. Presentation of Findings on Completion of Initial Audit Neptune Terminals, North Vancouver October 19, 2009. NBT – Coal Terminal Capacity Upgrade Introduction. Initial Study Phase focused on:

hidi
Download Presentation

Neptune Bulk Terminals Coal Terminal Capacity Upgrade

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Neptune Bulk Terminals Coal TerminalCapacity Upgrade Presentation of Findings on Completion of Initial AuditNeptune Terminals, North VancouverOctober 19, 2009

  2. NBT – Coal Terminal Capacity Upgrade Introduction • Initial Study Phase focused on: • Capacity upgrade, bottlenecks & solutions – “the Beach” • Elements within NBT control and ability to influence • Staged approach and impact of early stages on later ones • Correlation between higher throughput and reliability / maintenance • Secondary focus on operational and maintenance improvements to existing operation • Excellent cooperation and input from ALL NBT personnelTHANK YOU !

  3. Neptune Bulk Terminals – Coal Terminal Equipment condition FINDINGS: • All equipment is in fair condition • No emergency repairs or immediate remedial steps necessary • Improvements in design, operation and maintenance of equipment were observed and will be presented in interim report

  4. Neptune Bulk Terminals – Coal Terminal Present Situation FINDINGS: • Maximum throughput in 1998 under ‘ideal’ conditions: approx. 7.4 mt/a • Current throughput (annualized): 4.7 - 5.2 mt/a • Very limited operational flexibility (mutually exclusive reclaim & stacking) • Very limited redundancy (reclaim and shiploading only) • Focus on corrective vs. preventive maintenance

  5. Neptune Bulk Terminals – Coal Terminal Bottlenecks

  6. NBT – Coal Terminal Capacity Upgrade Presentation of Initial Audit The presentation focuses on three parts of the coal terminal: • Part 1 - INPUTIncoming trains and rail car dumping • Part 2 - STACKING / RECLAIM / BLENDINGStockyard and materials handling • Part 3 – OUTPUTShiploading operations

  7. Current Bottleneck Present situationIncoming Trains

  8. Present situationInput : Trains Factors • Negotiation with CN / CP • Only one track for coal • Limited length of track / train • Limited storage capacity Facts • Average 2.3 trains per day • Average 118 cars per train • Dumping 5.5 - 8 h per train Possibilities • More trains with current number of cars • Longer trains but same number of incoming trains • Additional track / storage capacity

  9. Present situationThroughput : Rail Car Dumper Facts • Dumping 1 car and indexing : appr. 2.5 min • No dumping before hopper is empty Possibilities • Shortening indexer sequences • Changing liner material • Optimizing hopper geometry • Modification of vibrators • Speed up conveyor C40

  10. Additional rail car storage Installation Stage 1Option 1 New switch 2 New indexer New track 1 A New switch 1

  11. Additional rail car storage Handling Stage 1Option 1 Backup Loco to split train section Train to new rail track 1A Split train Pull in the train and start dumping

  12. Additional rail car storage Dumping Stage 1Option 1 Dump additional cars & hook up empty cars Split train & hook up additional cars Store empty cars Dumping cars by now

  13. Stage 1Option 1 ADVANTAGES: • Longer trains => more input : 37 cars 3,885 t per train capacity increase of 23% • Reasonable investment for capacity gain DISADVANTAGES: • Modification of walkway and / or C41 bridge over rail tracks required • Downtime in dumping during installation of new switches • More switching

  14. New Rail Car Dumper (single) New Rail Loop (if possible) Installation Stage 2Option 1 Location 1 Location 2

  15. Stage 2Option 1 ADVANTAGES: • Increased throughput and capacity • Redundancy DISADVANTAGES: • Possible downtime during installation

  16. New Stacker (or reconditioned aux. Reclaimer & tripper car) on existing rail track & C41 conveyor Stage 1Option 1

  17. Stage 1Option 1 ADVANTAGES: • Low budget, low installation cost • Limited redundancy in Stacking • Quick installation • No production disturbances • Slightly increased flexibility • Blending different grades • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, ship loading DISADVANTAGES: • Limited flexibility • No redundancy in Reclaim • Reduced storage capacity due to additional Stacker incl. tripper car • Limited simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, ship loading • Reclaiming depends on Stacker position, as machines cannot pass

  18. New feeding conveyor New yard conveyor Single travelling stacker & tripper car on new rail track Stage 1Option 2

  19. Stage 1Option 2 ADVANTAGES: • Relatively low budget, low installation cost • Limited redundancy in Stacking • Quick installation • Minor production disturbances • Increased flexibility • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, shiploading • Multiple product piles possible • Blending different grades • Less support by dozers required DISADVANTAGES • Limited flexibility • No redundancy in Reclaim • Stockyard area ‘B’ can only be serviced by the existing Stacker/Reclaimer

  20. Two new feeding conveyors Two new yard conveyors Two new travelling stackers on new rail tracks Existing SR modified to Reclaimer only Stage 1Option 3

  21. Stage 1Option 3 ADVANTAGES: • Reasonable budget • Total redundancy in Stacking • Quick installation • Minor production disturbances • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, shiploading • High flexibility in building multiple product piles • Blending different grades • Less support by dozers required • Reduced demand on ageing Stacker/Reclaimer (reclaiming only, approx. 50% usage reduction) DISADVANTAGES • No redundancy in Reclaim

  22. New Stacker/Reclaimer & tripper car on existing rail track & C41 conveyor Stage 2Option 1

  23. Stage 2Option 1 ADVANTAGES: • Relatively reasonable budget, low installation cost • Limited redundancy in Stacking and Reclaim • Quick installation • Minor production disturbances • Increased flexibility • Blending different grades • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, shiploading • Less support by dozers required DISADVANTAGES: • Limited flexibility • Reduced stockyard capacity due to additional SR incl. tripper car • Stacking/Reclaiming depends on other SR position, as machines cannot pass

  24. New Stacker/Reclaimer & tripper car on existing rail track and additional yard conveyor Stage 2Option 2

  25. Stage 2Option 2 ADVANTAGES: • Minor production disturbances • Improved redundancy and independent Stacking and Reclaim • Short outage, short integration period, short commissioning • Increased flexibility • Blending different grades • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, shiploading • Less support by dozers required DISADVANTAGES: • Increased budget and installation costs • Reduced stockyard capacity due to additional SR incl. tripper car • Stacking/Reclaiming depends on other SR position, as machines cannot pass

  26. New feeding conveyor Two new yard conveyors New Stacker & tripper car New Reclaimer on new rail track Stage 2Option 3

  27. Stage 2Option 3 ADVANTAGES: • Minor production disturbances • Improved redundancy in Stacking and Reclaim • Short outage, short integration period, short commissioning • Increased flexibility • Blending different grades • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, shiploading • Less handling by dozer DISADVANTAGES: • Increased budget and installation costs • Slightly reduced stockyard capacity due to additional Reclaimer • Reclaiming depends on other SR position, as machines cannot pass

  28. New feeding conveyors Three new yard conveyors Two new Stackers & tripper cars New Reclaimer on new rail track Stage 3Option 1

  29. Stage 3Option 1 ADVANTAGES: • Maximum flexibility • Excellent redundancy in Stacking and Reclaim • Blending different grades • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, shiploading • No handling by dozers DISADVANTAGES: • Highest budget and installation costs

  30. New feeding conveyors Four new yard conveyors Two new Stackers & tripper cars Two new Reclaimers on new rail track Stage 3Option 2

  31. Stage 3Option 2 ADVANTAGES: • Ultimate flexibility • Excellent redundancy in Stacking and Reclaim • Blending different grades • Simultaneous dumping, stacking, reclaiming, shiploading • No handling by dozers DISADVANTAGES: • Highest budget and installation costs

  32. OutputExisting shiploading operation • Dual Quadrant Shiploader at 2,200 tph design capacity each (4,400 tph total), recorded at 3,200 tph each (peak capacity)equipped with loading chute with bypass and trimming facility • 80% of loading time in bypass mode at 2,200 tph (3,000 tph, peak), each20% of loading time in trimming mode at max 1,200 tph, each • Recorded months / Basis for 6.5M mt/aJune 2009: 302 flow hrs 1,880 flow tph 569,106 mt shipped August 2009: 277 flow hrs 1,969 flow tph 545,943 mt shippedEfficiency: approx. 50% - 60% of total design capacity at 4,400 tph,including hatch changing and downtime

  33. OutputExisting shiploading operation • Ship CapacitiesRecorded months / Basis for 6.5M mt/aJune 2009: 9 ships in total -> 569,106 mt shipped 2 vessels < 50,000DWT, 6 vessels >50,000DWT, 1 vessel of 100,000DWTAugust 2009: 10 ships in total -> 545,943 mt shipped 2 barges < 5,000DWT, 2 vessels < 50,000DWT, 6 vessels < 80,000DWT

  34. Outputexisting shiploading operation Disadvantages of existing loading system ‘bypass chute c/w trimmer‘ • > 50% reduced capacity at 20% loading time • no vertical mass flow possible to build ‘regular piles’ • more shuttle movements • high power consumption by using trimmer • high maintenance costs (e.g. trimmer belt) • heavier in weight vs. ‘standard facility’ that limits potential upgrade

  35. Stage 1Option 1 Modifications to loading device • Replacement of existing loading chute system • Installation of a NEW chute system with - multiple adjustable discharge / ‘lobster’ chute- fixed stainless steel pipe and - ‘soft’ loading spout, adjustable and turntable

  36. Stage 1Option 1 Advantages of NEW loading system ‘lobbster chute c/w soft loading spout’ • no capacity ‘shortage’ • constant mass flow at 2,500 tph average, each • shorter loading sequences • vertical mass flow possible to build ‘regular piles’ • lighter in weight that eases potential upgrade • less wear / less maintenance costs • less power consumption

  37. extension of boom structure extension of bridge front part Stage 1Option 1 Modifications to bridge / boom structure • Increase Shiploader outreach by- extension of bridge front part- extension of boom length

  38. Stage 1Option 1 Advantages of Shiploader modification ‘bridge / boom extension’ • bigger outreach to ease loading of vessels > 100,000 DWT • increases shuttle travel length • more flexibility in hatch movements at vessels > 7 hatches • eliminates ‘ship movements’ at vessels > 140,000 DWT • allows new dock face to adopt to draft > 15 meters,e.g. by means of moving dock face (fenders) further out Disadvantages • increased dead weight of Shiploader • increased load transfer to RTD to be compensated by additional wheels

  39. NBT – Coal Terminal ExpansionReliability and Maintenance • Definition for reliability of equipment: Availability = Total Time – Scheduled Maintenance Downtime Reliability = Available Time – Breakdown Downtime • Assumed reliability of new equipment is 93%, less for aged equipment • Overall system reliability takes into account compounded reliability of each piece of equipment in the stream – redundancy becomes key ! • Current equipment utilization is 50-60% of capacity • Higher throughput will demand >80% utilization • Preventive maintenance becomes extremely important • Two keys to maximizing throughput: REDUNDANCY & MAINTENANCE

  40. NBT – Coal Terminal Capacity Upgrade Beyond Stage 3 (Stage 4 – 25 mt/a ?) Anticipated situation at the end of Stage 3: • New (2nd) rail car dumper operating with existing handling 5-7 trains per day at combined theoretical throughput of 20 – 25 mt/a • Stockyard upgraded / reconfigured to include redundant stacking and reclaim with possible simultaneous stacking and reclaim and theoretical throughput of 25 mt/a Remaining Bottlenecks / Possible Solutions: • Shiploading - existing limited to max. 16 mt/a, new Shiploaders required for higher throughput (e.g. 8,000-10,000 t/h combined) • Remove Surge Bin – not needed • Install stockpile management system

  41. Thank you very much for your attention!

More Related