STOCK EQUIPMENT COMPANY TECH BRIEF
STOCK Modular
31ULlH
\ Feeders Replace Older
The STOCK modular feeder has been developed to
nllow application of gravimetric feed technology to
%xistingplants currently feeding coal with mechani-
XIvolumetric-type feeders. Generally, five or more
generic volumetric feeder types were used through
:he years for delivery of coal to pulverizer or cy-
:lone. The following describes the performance and
naintenance aspects of the various feeder types.
Drag Feeders
The drag feeder (Figure A) was commonly used by
W e r Lehigh and Babcock & Wilcox Company
juring the 1920s and 1930s. Generally, the chain
Nas about 6' overall width and from 3-0"minimum
o whatever length was required to connect the bun-
cer with the discharge point. Due to the abrasive
Near between chain links and feeder casing, these
eeders required frequent maintenance and replace-
ment of plate steel, suffered from occasional chain
xeakage, and would occasionally cause pluggages
at the feeder inlet due to the rather constrictive
p n i n g size. In an effort to eliminate pluggage con-
i'tions, larger (16' width) feeder sizes were intro-
iuced around 1955; however, they still suffered from
nechanical wear and occasional pluggage with
ramp material. Due to the clumping of coal be-
ween links, feed tended to be erratic and fall to the
Volumetric Feeders
Figure B
'4-"
- Doctor Type Table Feeder
pulverizer/cyclonein clumps, resulting in occasional
furnace pulsation, particularly when used on cy-
clones.
Doctor Blade Table Feeder
Use of a table feeder with scraper blade, known as a
doctor blade table feeder (Figure B), was common
to the ore and rock industry prior to introduction of
the belt feeder to coal handling. Foster Wheeler
typically used the table feeder on double-ended tube
mills with two scraper blades splitting discharge to
either end of the mill. Because the angle of repose
of the coal tended to valy with moisture and fuel
sizing, the delivery rate tended to vary widely for a
fixed table (rotor) speed. The problem of unform
delivery was aggravated as the table polished with
time, and it was not uncommon for sticky coal to be
undercut by the rotating table without actually
feeding fuel to the firing system.
Controlled Discharge Table Feeder
B&W developed a controlled discharge table feeder
(Figure C) about 50 years ago. At that time, com-
bustion control was in its infancy and control of feed
to pulverizers was often adjusted and set by hand.
The B&W table feeder was an improvement over
older table feeder designs which scraped the outer
layer of material from the table, and the angle of
repose greatly affected the amount fed for a given
table speed. The B&W feeder used a fixed area
of discharge through which the coal was ex-
truded. However, slippage of the table (especially
after wearing smooth) reducedthe capacity to the
extent that materialfeed rate had no clear correla-
tion with feeder table speed. The coal rate could not
be controlled by combustion control but, rather.
relied on ratio metering with the control signal
coming fmm measuringthe coal level in the pulver-
izer bv cotmarina the Dressure dron across the
pulvehzer 4 t h t& pr&ure drop across the primary
air orifce. This cancels out the effect of quantity of
primary air and gives level only. This level is con-
trolled by running the feeder at a speed generally
twice maximum pulverizer rate and. when the level
reaches normal operation, the motor is stopped until
the level of coal in the pulverizer decreases. A later
refinement included a two-speed motor with
'Stopped.' 'One-Half Speed' (100% capacity), and
'Full Speed' (200% capacity) to better tune devia-
tions caused by the StarUStop cycle. The cycling
typically resulted in spotty feed which could be seen
as peaks in superheat temperature records. Gener-
ally, problems associated with the feeder had to do
with slippage of the table under the coal without
transfer of motion to the coal.
Stationary Drum Pocket Feeder
The pocket feeder has been used by Combustion
Engineering for over 50 years. It was made in a
number of sizes and is shown in Figure D. Gener-
ally, these feeders have diiiulties in rapid response
to load changes as seen by the boiler. Problems
specifically related to pocket feeders included:
0 The drive unit required considerable mainte-
nance and would occasionally fail, stopping coal
flow to the pulverizers.
0 The pockets (intended to deliver a specific
volume of coal per revolution) were often
partially packed with coal which made it diicult
to determine how much fuel had been trans-
f e d throuah the feeder. This was ~rimarilv
why many &ket feeders had batch& cckl
scales installed immediately upstream in the
pulverizer system to totalize weight of fuel going
0 On occasion, coal or tramped material in the
coal would bind between the rotor and housing,
jamming the feeder and stopping coal Row.
With extremely dry, dusty coal, there had been
occasions where the leveling bars employed on
the pocket feeders had jammed in the UP
position, allowing flooding of the mill with free-
flowing fuels.
Drum-type pocket feeders and apron feeders
whose operation and operational problems closely
relate to the pocket and drag feeders previously dis-
cussed are shown in Figures D, E, F, and G.
lt is important to note that the mechanical vol-
umetric feeder types outlined had no way of re-
sponding to fuel density variations except as trim-
med by the combustion control master following time
lag. The benefits of matching fuel to air flow as
applied to the combustion process are evidenced by
the rapid acceptance of belt-type gravimetric feeders
during the early 1960s. It is safe to say that most of
the new units built since the early '60s have incorpo-
rated gravimetric machines to more closely relate
fuel input to the boiler-to-boiler demand for Btu input.
Due to the limited offset from centerline of bun-
ker discharge to centerline of pulverizer inlet on jobs
employing the various mechanical volumetric feed-
ers outlined, it has been difficult to retrofit grav-
imetric technology to existing boilers without major
changes to the plant's equipment location, and
aeneralhr there was insufficient floor soace available
ibr succ&ful installation and mainter;ance.
Wth the development of the STOCK modular
feeder (shortenedto accommodate these limited
offsets), Stock is now in a position to supply gravi-
metric feeders and their associated benefits to many
existing installations currently running volumetric
style.
This modular feeder is available to accommo-
date any offset from 4'-6' to Om,the smaller offsets
being satisfied by placing a return belt in the bottom
of the gravimetric feeder to return coal to the offset
required.
 Figure D - Stationary Drum
Figure C - Controlled Discharge Pocket Feeder
Area Type Table Feeder

Figure F - Pocket Feeder With Magnetic

Figure E - Self Cleaning Pocket Feeder Belt Pulley. Remote Mounted

Figure G -
Stock Quality, Stock Reliability

KNIFE GATE VALVES COMPACTORS

MPC BATCH SCALES

NFPAFEEDERS

Y?-z3Gm
CONICAL DISTRIBUTORS .. ... . 2 HANDLING EQUIPMENT

A WIDE VARIETY OF COAL

AND BULK MATERIAL VALVES

MPC CONTROLS LOW PRESSURE GRAVIM€lRIC

FEEDERS

For additional information about Stock Equipment Company

or its products, please contad:

Stock Equipment Company

16490 Chillicothe Road
Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023-4398
Telefax 21 6-543-5944