Preliminary Design of 200mm and 300mm NB Distribution Pipelines for Phosphate Slurry at the Jorf Lasfar Terminal Facilities in Morocco Dr Nigel Heywood, Phivos Ioannou, BHR Group, Cranfield, UK David Hevia, Javier Garcia, IMASA Ingenieria y Proyectos SA, Oviedo, Spain Dr Neil Alderman, Private Consultant, Peterborough, UK

Phosphate slurry distribution pipelines at Jorf Lasfar, Morocco

Phosphate slurry distribution pipelines at Jorf Lasfar, Morocco

Phosphate slurry distribution pipelines at Jorf Lasfar, Morocco

Two Centrifugal Pumps in Series

Introduction Pipeline layouts involved Ten separate distribution pipelines were designed and constructed at the Moroccan terminal facilities for ore processing/beneficiation Fed by the 187-km phosphate pipeline from the mine to four large slurry storage tanks Pipe lengths: 1.2 to 2.7km Pipe diameters: 0.1825 and 0.281m For pipeline design layouts, TDH calculations required for Two similar centrifugal pumps in series for the 0.1825m diameter pipelines Three pumps in series for the 0.281m diameter pipe Pipeline layouts involved Elevation changes Several wide radius (5D) bends Several expansion loops

Introduction Initial validation study for IMASA designs considered 50% and 58% w/w ore concentrations (later also 60%) 1500 and 1630 kg/m3 Assumed particle porosity of 20% 9.5% and 30% also used later in study Three of the ten pipelines described in paper – two here Dry ore solids throughputs (“normal” and performance guarantee) P5 pipeline (0.1825m diam., 1.56 km) 216 and 240 t/h PMP pipeline (0.1825m diam.) 170 and 216 t/h MP3 pipeline (0.281m diam., 2.46 km) 546 and 580 t/h

Objectives of Study Check turbulent flow conditions occur for all operating conditions Check proposed mean slurry velocity in pipework always exceeds by an adequate margin best estimate of ore deposition velocity Estimate for several operating conditions assuming both “non-settling” and settling slurry Frictional pressure gradient Total dynamic head (TDH) across two or three pumps in series

Approaches for Estimation of Frictional Pressure Loss Non-settling slurry Use of Bingham plastic model with Wilson-Thomas model - allows prediction of the frictional pressure loss in turbulent flow conditions. Supplied viscometric data used (later new measurements made and used) Checks made that turbulent flow prevailed under the operating conditions investigated to ensure that all particles were supported by turbulence. Settling slurry Use of the SRC 2007 Two-Layer Model assuming a heterogeneous flow pattern in horizontal pipeflow. Checks were also made that the operating velocity was always significantly in excess of the predicted deposition velocity.

Particle Size Distribution of Phosphate Ore

Values of Bingham plastic model parameters used in Friction Calculations for Two Ore Slurry Types Sample cw % f ty Pa hp Pa s HT deslimed 50 0.250 1.00 0.0036 58 0.315 2.70 0.0219 TBT flotation 0.82 0.0064 4.00 0.0351

Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h Checking the flow regime when phosphate ore slurries are flowing in the P5 pipe of 0.1825m ID Sample Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h cw % Q m3/h ReB He ReBc HT deslimed 216 50 288.0 233000 3855000 51000 58 228.6 33000 306000 14400 240 320.0 258000 255.6 36900 TBT flotation 131000 979000 25700 20600 173000 10800 145000 23000

Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h Frictional pressure gradients for turbulent flow of phosphate ore slurries in three pipelines assuming pseudohomogeneous flow Pipeline Sample Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h cw % Q m3/h V m/s DP/L Pa/m   P5 HT deslimed 216 50 288.0 3.06 590 58 228.6 2.43 570 240 320.0 3.40 719 255.6 2.71 701 TBT flotation 656 620 796 768 PMP 171 228.0 2.42 379 181.0 1.92 362 253.9 2.70 695 425 390 761 MP3 546 730.0 3.27 399 578.0 2.59 377 580 773.3 3.46 444 613.5 2.75 420 441 410 491 458

Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h Frictional pressure gradients for turbulent flow of phosphate ore slurries in the three pipelines using the SRC Two-Layer Model   Pipeline Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h cw % Q m3/h V m/s DP/L Pa/m P5 216 50 288 3.08 649 58 228.6 2.42 531 240 320 3.42 780 255.6 2.73 654 PMP 171 228 357 181 1.92 427 3.40 253.9 2.70 MP3 546 730 3.27 443 578 2.59 370 580 773.3 3.46 490 613.5 2.75 407

Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h Comparison between Frictional Pressure Losses assuming Pseudohomogeneous and Settling Slurry Flows Pipeline Sample Ore throughput on dry solids basis, t/h cw DP/L Non-settling DP/L Settling Ratio % Pa/m   216 50 590 649 0.91 HT 58 570 531 1.07 deslimed 240 719 780 0.92 P5 701 654 656 1.01 TBT 620 1.17 flotation 796 1.02 768 171 379 357 1.06 HT deslimed 362 427 0.85 PMP 695 425 1.19 TBT flotation 390 761 1.16 546 399 443 0.90 377 370 580 444 490 MP3 420 407 1.03 441 1.00 410 1.11 491 458 1.13

Ore Concentration, % weight Deposition velocity, m/s Comparison between operating and deposition velocities for flow in the 0.1825m ID P5 pipeline Ore Concentration, % weight Dry ore flowrate, t/h Volume flowrate, m3/h Pipeline velocity, m/s Deposition velocity, m/s 50   216 288 3.08 0.92 240 320 3.42 58 228.6 2.42 0.91 255.6 2.73

P5 200mm NB Pipeline Route (Two centrifugal pumps in series)

Total Dynamic Head Requirement for P5 Pipeline

MP3 300mm NB Pipeline Route (Three centrifugal pumps in series)

Total Dynamic Head Requirement for MP3 Pipeline

Conclusions Two methods used for estimating TDH for all ten pipelines (two here), for dry ore throughputs relating to both “normal” operation and for performance guarantees and for two ore concentrations (50% and 58% w/w) Rheological data from ore samples fitted to the Bingham plastic model Check was made that flow is turbulent Wilson-Thomas model used to estimate frictional pressure gradient for turbulent flow for all flow conditions in the three pipelines Approach applied to two different types of phosphate ore slurry Both assumed to be pseudohomogeneous, “non-settling” slurries

Conclusions SRC 2007 Two-Layer Model also used, assuming that the slurry segregates under gravitational forces, particularly in horizontal pipeflow, and a heterogeneous flow pattern occurs Predictions of frictional pressure and total dynamic head (TDH) values obtained using two different approaches compared One approach assuming “non-settling” slurry and one approach assuming settling slurry Excellent agreement found between the two approaches for TDH

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Phivos Ioannou pioannou@bhrgroup.co.uk