Understanding and Eliminating Particle Segregation Problems1

by
J.W. Carson and T.A. Royal, USA
and
D.J. Goodwill, Canada

1. INTRODUCTION ship filled with grain was prevented from

leaving port because the inspector measured a
Mixtures of solid particles can separate or higher than allowed percentage of fines in the
segregate while they are being handled. This loaded vessel. Unfortunately, the only place he
often results in costly quality control problems could easily make his observations was directly
due to the waste of raw materials, lost under the fill point where the fines had become
production, as well as increased maintenance concentrated, but the regulations that he had to
and capital costs required to retrofit existing follow did not allow for such segregation.
facilities.
Another example of the detrimental effects of
Segregation problems occur in a wide range of segregation is the difficulty in developing a gas
industries handling materials as diverse as coal seal in a sloping standpipe or dryer when
and pharmaceutical powders. The cost handling materials containing a wide range of
implications can be great, even when handling particle sizes. In some processes, however,
small quantities of material, as illustrated in the segregation can be beneficial by allowing gas to
batch processing of pharmaceutical tablets. It is escape through coarse particles in a bed.
not unusual for the value of a single batch of
ingredients to be in excess of $100,000. Yet, What is it about particle mixtures that allow
strict U.S. quality control standards dictate that some to segregate while others do not?
some or even the entire batch may have to be
discarded if it is found that the amount of active 2. SEGREGATION MECHANISMS
ingredient or total weight of just five tablets in a
batch varies outside narrow limits. There are five primary mechanisms that have
been identified as being responsible for most
It can be devastating to ignore the mechanisms particle segregation problems. Each of these
of segregation [1]. Several years ago, a cargo

1
Source: Carson, J.W., Royal, T.A., and Goodwill, D.J.: Understanding and Eliminating Particle Segregation Problems.
Bulk Solids Handling, Vol. 6, Feb. 1986, pp 139-144. Used with the permission of the publisher.

One Technology Park Drive Westford, MA 01886-3189 Tel: (978) 392-0300 FAX: (978) 392-9980
Also: San Luis Obispo, CA Toronto, Canada Via del Mar, Chile
www.jenike.com
will be described along with conditions under Fig. 2: Variation of coefficient of segregation in binary
which it occurs and examples. mixtures having various particle diameter ratios and mean
particle diameters [3]
2.1 Sifting 100

90

As the most common mechanism by which 80 ratio = 2.84

particles segregate, sifting can be described

segregation coefficient
70 ratio = 2.38

simply as the movement of smaller particles 60 ratio = 1.42

through a mixture of larger particles. From 50

40
experiments [2] and actual field observations, it
30
has been found that four conditions must be 20
present in order for this mechanism to occur: 10

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
1. A difference in particle size between the mean particle diameter, microns
individual components Experiments [3] on
binary mixtures of spherical particles have the tendency to segregate by sifting
shown that sifting can occur with a particle decreases substantially (Fig. 2). This is
diameter ratio as low as 1.3:1 (Fig. 1). In more than likely due to the attraction
general, the larger the ratio of particle sizes, between finer particles which tends to make
the greater the tendency for particles to them less mobile. However, some sifting can
segregate by sifting. occur down to and below a mean particle
diameter of 200 mm (#70 U.S. mesh) for
2. A sufficiently large mean particle diameter particle diameter ratios as low as 2:1.
Experiments [3] on binary mixtures have
shown that below 500 mm (#35 U.S. mesh) 3. Free-flowing material In order for sifting
to occur, it is essential that no agglomerates
Fig. 1: Variation of coefficient of segregation in binary
mixtures having various particle diameter ratios [3]
are formed, either between particles of a
given size or particles of varying size. This
100 generally requires the mixture to have a low
moisture content and little or no fine
particles.
80
segregation coefficient

4. Interparticle motion If particles are

60 stationary or moving with a uniform
velocity, they are essentially locked together
40 and their tendency to segregate becomes
almost nonexistent, even for highly
20 segregating materials. Thus, a velocity
gradient through the flowing material is
required.
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Sifting is vividly illustrated in Fig. 3, which is a
particle diameter ratio photograph of a formed pile. The darker colored

2
 Fig. 3: Demonstration of sifting mechanism in a slice involved a plant producing tabular alumina
model consisting of a wide range of particle sizes (e.g.,
8 mesh by 0).

This mixture was first placed into a bin of the

geometry shown in Fig. 4. Because of a
horizontal baffle centered under the fill point,
material filled the bin from the sides. The sifting
mechanism resulted in the finer fraction of
material becoming concentrated at the
periphery. The hopper walls were not steep or
fine particles are concentrated in the center smooth enough for material to flow along them,
under the incoming stream. However, as the pile so that a funnel flow (first-in, last out) flow
is formed, the slope stability is such that layers pattern [4] developed during discharge, resulting
of finite thickness intermittently move from the in a segregated mixture as shown on the right of
central feed point, carrying some of the finer Fig. 4.
particles with them. This results in the striations
visible in the photograph. As this material was discharged, it was put in
the same order into a second bin, shown in Fig.
In order for sifting to occur, it is essential that 5, which did not contain a horizontal baffle.
all four of the above conditions be present. If Here the sifting mechanism caused the fines to
any one of the four is absent, the mixture will be concentrated in the center of the bin, but the
not segregate by this mechanism. distribution throughout the bin varied more than
in the first bin because of the segregated mixture
Since sifting is such a common mechanism of being charged into it. This bin also exhibited a
segregation, numerous examples can be found funnel flow pattern, and thus one would expect
in most industrial plants handling bulk solids. a variation in the percentage of coarse particles
One example from the authors experience exiting the bin, as shown at the right in Fig. 5.

Fig. 4: Segregation in Bin 1 due to sifting and funnel flow Fig. 5: Segregation in Bin 2 due to segregated mixture
pattern from Bin 1, sifting and funnel flow pattern

Mixed batch in From bin above

Fines %, in
Baffle
VL = Very low VH
Fines %, out concentration H
VH of fines
VH M
H H H H H L = Low time
L
L M M M = Medium
time L L
L H = High
VL L VL VH = Very high Fines %, out
H H concentration VH
L L of fines H time
L M
L = Low concentration of fines M L
VL
H = High concentration of fines
Out
Out

3
 Fig. 6: Segregation due to sifting in a sloping chute thereby leading to a higher concentration of
fines in the first bin than in the second. Later, as
Mixture of fine sand, coke, and phosphate rock
the second bin became filled and flow was
diverted to the third bin, this process continued,
with some fines being dropped out of the stream
into the first bin, a smaller quantity being
dropped into the second bin, and whatever was
left over going into the third bin.

Sifting can also occur within a bin, for example

Stream Split
Horizontally when fines percolate out of a flow channel into
stagnant or slowly moving material. In funnel
flow bins, this results in s slug of fines being
discharged last. These accumulated fines are
Actual experimental results of sampling of typically less free-flowing than the rest of the
material from this second bin confirmed a mixture, and they can result in intermittent
segregation pattern similar to that shown in this arching or ratholing problems. In multi-tube
figure. Funnel flow bins typically have blenders, this type of segregation can also occur
segregation problems like this. in the flow channels which enter the tubes, even
though the bin is of mass flow type.
A second example involves a mixture of
phosphate rock, coke, and silica, which was A final example [5] occurred in a plant
flowing down an inclined chute into a series of manufacturing a chemical reagent in which
three bins as shown in Fig. 6. Each of these bins serious problems with an electric furnace were
fed a separate region of a furnace that produces experienced as a result of particle segregation.
phosphorus. The plant found that their quality Coke and lime were mixed in a 40:60 ratio and
control problems were the result of the mixture fed to the furnace via a surge bin. Both materials
of ingredients not being uniform from one bin to were dry and free-flowing, with the top size of
another. In particular, they found that the first the lime being 76 mm (3 inch) and that of the
bin in the series had a high percentage of the coke 25 mm (1 inch). The majority of the
fine silica particles, while the last bin in the product less than 6 mm in size had been
series had a low percentage. Upon investigation removed in both cases. Both materials
it was found that this was due to the sifting underwent particle size segregation by sifting
mechanism occurring as the bins were refilled. when centrally charged into a bin. The coarser
The mixture was placed at the top of the sloping particles rolled to the outside of the bin, whereas
chute section by a bucket elevator, and as long the fines sifted to the center. The effect of this
as there was any space left in the first bin or the size segregation on the coke/lime ratio is
vertical pipe above it, all of the material would illustrated in Figs. 7a and 7b. Samples were
enter this bin. As soon as this pipe became taken from the material discharge stream at
filled, the stream was automatically diverted to regular intervals during the emptying of a
the second bin. However, as this process took pyramidal, single outlet funnel flow bin used to
place, some of the fines in the mixture sifted out smooth flow to the furnace. This particle
as it passed over the vertical pipe of the first bin, segregation had two very serious effects on the

4
 Fig. 7a: Size segregation of coke/lime mix during otherwise exhibit mass flow (flow along the
emptying of surge bin walls).

On a chute, a higher drag results in a lower

80 +3/4"
3/4" x 1/4" particle velocity. This effect can be accentuated
-1/4" due to stratification on the chute surface because
60
of the sifting mechanism described above.
40 Concentrations of smaller particles close to the
Size
Distribution chute surface and larger particles at the top of
(%)
20 the bed of material, combined with the typically
higher fictional drag of finer particles, often
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
result in a concentration of fine particles falling
Sample No. close to the end of the chute, with coarse
particles falling further away. This can be
Fig. 7b: Coke/lime segregation during emptying of surge particularly detrimental if portions of the pile go
bin to different processing points, as is often the
case with multiple outlet bins or bins with
80
vertical partitions.

60 An example of particle trajectory effects from a

chute is shown in Fig. 8. Here a mixture of light
Percentage
of Coke or 40 coarse material and dark fine material has been
Lime in
Mix placed on a chute surface. Because the dark fine
20
material has higher frictional drag and lies
Lime nearer to the chute surface, its trajectory is
Coke

0
shorter than that of the light coarse material,
0 1 2 3

Sample No.
4 5 6
resulting in the segregation shown in the sketch.

furnace operation: first, high percentages of An attempt was made a number of years ago by
fines (up to 30%) lead to decreased bed porosity one of the authors to use this phenomenon as a
and increased frequency and severity of
explosions; second, a mix deficient in either Fig. 8: Demonstration of segregation upon discharge from
lime or coke reacts inefficiently and leads to a chute
greatly increased raw material usage.

2.2 Particle Velocity on a Surface

If there are variations in particle size or shape,

the smaller particles and/or those that are more
irregular in shape will typically have a higher
frictional drag on a hopper or chute surface.
This can result in a funnel flow pattern and
increased segregation in a hopper that would

5
method of rough classification of particles. Particles may also be affected by air resistance
However, the technique was found to have as they fall, resulting in finer particles having a
limited usefulness and, to the authors lower free-fall terminal velocity than coarser
knowledge, has not been pursued further. particles and thereby not traveling as far
horizontally when they exit a chute. However, a
2.3 Air Entrainment (Fluidization) stream of particles drags a stream of air with it,
preventing the full drag force from being felt on
Fine particles generally have a lower individual particles. Thus, only particles on the
permeability than coarse particles and, edge of the stream are affected much by air
therefore, tend to retain air longer in their void drag.
spaces. Thus, when a mixture of coarse and fine
particles is charged into a bin, it is common to An example of this mechanism was found in a
find that a vertical segregation pattern has plant manufacturing alumina in which serious
developed, caused by the coarse particles being size segregation occurred during the unloading
driven into the bed as the bin is filled and the of a large silo into railcars. The flat bottomed,
fine particles remaining fluidized near the top 20m diameter by 20m tall silo having capacity
surface. of 2,000 t was centrally filled and then
discharged simultaneously through four
An example of this occurred in a feed bin for a openings to a single railcar. An average of 8%
pharmaceutical tabletting press which was being fines (-45 m m product) was acceptable;
filled by a dense-phase pneumatic conveying however, railcars frequently had fines
system through a vertical downspout in the concentrations as high as 20%, which led to
center of the bin. The mixture consisted of a fine serious problems in the downstream process.
powder (the active ingredient) and a filler This segregation was due to the fine particles
material consisting of larger particles. Because becoming airborne while the silo was being
of the segregation phenomenon of fluidization, filled. They were then carried by secondary air
the fine active ingredient became concentrated currents to the periphery of the silo, where they
in a layer at the top of the bin, causing severe were deposited in a narrow concentrated rim. As
quality control problems when it exited the bin the level of the silo rose and fell, there was a
over a short period of time. continuous accumulation of fines at the
periphery, which, because of the funnel flow
2.4 Entrainment of Particles in an Air Stream pattern, remained in the silo until final
discharge.
The finer the particle size, the longer it may
remain suspended in an air stream, such as upon 2.5 Dynamic Effects
filling of a bin. This effect starts to become
important around 50!mm and is very common Particles often differ in their resilience, inertia,
below 10 mm. Thus, secondary air currents can and other dynamic characteristics which can
carry airborne particles away from a fill point cause them to segregate, particularly when they
into outer areas of a bin, scattering them in a are forming a pile such as when charged into a
way that bears no resemblance to the calculated bin or discharged from a chute. Vibration can
trajectory. cause a single large particle to rise through a

6
container of fines which percolate down by the Table 1: Effect of sampling techniques
sifting mechanism.
Particle Grab Full Stream
An example of this involved the handling of Size Sample Width Sample
plastic pellets having a variety of particle sizes, Mesh % %
shapes and resilience. The finest particles were -14, +20 53.9 42.5
in fact the most resilient, which resulted in an -20, +40 38.7 47.1
unusual segregation pattern when they were -40, +60 4.9 6.9
charged into the center of a blending bin.
Instead of ending up with a concentration of samples from the chute leading from the screen
fines under the fill point, which would be to the surge bin and sent the samples to a lab for
expected if the sifting mechanism were the particle size distribution.
dominant factor, the more resilient fines actually
ended up at the periphery of the bin. This had a He then adjusted the roll pressure and feed
direct effect on the quality of the output from screw speed based in part on the ratio:
this blending bin.
% -14, +20 mesh
3. IMPORTANCE OF CAREFUL % -20, +40 mesh
SAMPLING
If this ratio was less than 1.0, he would
When analyzing particle segregation problems, generally increase the feed screw speed.
it is vitally important to collect representative
and meaningful samples of the mixture so that In observing this operation, it was found that he
valid conclusions can be drawn. For example, it was only taking a portion of the discharge
is common to find plant operators taking stream from the screen. A test was set up in
samples of a mixture in a blender to determine which the operator first took his sample using
proper blend times, but then ignoring the the normal procedure, and then another sample
demixing that occurs upon discharge from the was taken in which the full stream of material
blender. It would be far more meaningful, but was momentarily diverted into a sampler
unfortunately more time-consuming, to sample container. The results are shown in Table 1.
the discharge stream from a blender after
various mixing times to determine what the While the numbers do not appear to be
correct mix time should be. dramatically different, the ratio of the particle
sizes is greater than 1.0 with the grab sample
Another common mistake is to take a sample cut and less than 1.0 with the full stream sample.
across a portion of a stream material, ignoring Thus, with the same material coming from the
the segregation that may be present within the screen, the operators actions would be
stream. One example of this phenomenon was completely different. Only experience would tell
found in a plant producing dry cell batteries. As which action was correct, but, clearly, full
material moved through the manufacturing stream samples are less subject to operator error
process, it was compacted with a feed screw in a than partial stream cuts.
roll press, then granulated, screened, and placed
in a surge bin. The operator occasionally took

7
Another problem that often occurs is using only Another technique that can be used is to change
a small portion of the collected sample for the particle size distribution. For example, if
testing. For example, it is common to find an segregation is occurring by the sifting
operator collecting a sample and then using only mechanism, lowering the particle diameter ratio
a small potion from the top of the sample jar for below 1.3:1 or decreasing the mean particle
testing to determine particle size, moisture, etc. diameter below 100 mm will reduce or eliminate
Obviously, any segregation in the jar will it. Such changes will also minimize segregation
strongly affect the results unless a riffler that might occur due to particle velocity
(sample spitter) is used to reduce the sample differences and, if all of the particles are of a
size. nearly uniform size, differences in fluidization
tendencies will be minimal as well.
A sampling thief is sometimes used to obtain
a sample from below the top surface of a bed of The segregation potential of a mixture can be
material. Not only are the results of such a test readily determined in a laboratory so that the
questionable as to where the sample is actually effect of the above changes can be readily
being taken, but this too ignores any demixing evaluated [6].
or segregation that may occur upon discharge
from the container. As pointed out in the Introduction, segregation
can sometimes be beneficial. An astute lottery
4. HOW TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE player, recognizing the effect of particle size on
SEGREGATION the tendency of particles to segregate, will
crumple up his ticket before dropping it into a
There are three main techniques that can be drum. This increases the probability that his
considered when segregation problems are ticket will be on top after the drum is rotated or
present: change the material, change the vibrated.
process, or change the design of the equipment.
Each of these will be addressed in the following. 4.2 Change the Process

4.1 Change the Material Several techniques can be used when handling
highly segregating materials to minimize their
A common characteristic of most highly tendency to segregate. First, if the mixture being
segregating materials is that they are free- handled consists of several discrete products
flowing and, therefore, the particles easily which are more or less uniform in themselves
separate from each other. Thus, one obvious but vary distinctly from one to another, it is
change to decrease the segregation tendencies of always beneficial to handle each of these
a material is to increase its cohesiveness by, for materials separately up to the final processing
example, adding water or oil. It must be step and then proportion and mix them just
recognized that this can be overdone since, if before this step.
the cohesiveness is increased too much, other
flow problems such as arching or ratholing may Material on a conveyor belt may be segregated
replace that of segregation and result in greater either from side to side due to a 90 transfer
disruption to the process. chute upstream or segregated vertically due to
sifting on the belt while going over idlers. If this

8
 Fig. 9: Plan view of multiple outlet bins cylinder section of a mass flow bin above 1.0
usually results in a uniform velocity pattern
a) nonsymmetric central hopper sees segregated material across the top surface. This lessens the tendency
if bin is center-filled for segregation compared to using a short
b) symmetric all four hoppers see the same material if cylinder section or no cylinder at all.
bin is center-filled
If multiple outlet bins are used, it is important
that the hoppers and outlets be located
symmetrically with respect to the fill point to
avoid concentrations of fines in one hopper
section, which could cause pluggage or
downstream quality control problems [7].
Examples of proper and improper multiple
outlet designs are shown in Fig. 9.
a b

happens, the stream coming off the conveyor An alternative to traditional mass flow bin
belt should not be split for obvious reasons. design is to use a patented BINSERT [8],
which consists of a hopper within a hopper, in
When pneumatically conveying fine fluidizable which the velocity pattern is controlled by the
powders into a bin, it is preferable to use a position of the bottom hopper. It is possible to
tangential entry into the side of a bin rather than design such a system to provide a completely
going in at 90 either to the side wall or the top. uniform velocity profile and thereby an absolute
Another technique which has been used with minimum level of segregation. Alternatively, by
success is to carry the pneumatic line into the changing the geometry at the bottom of the
center of the bin and then direct it upward to a hopper, a velocity profile can be developed in
deflector plate which will decrease its velocity which the center section moves faster than the
and allow a symmetric pattern when particles outside, thus providing in-bin blending of the
fall from this surface. materials [9].

Finally, free-fall chutes should not be used to 5. CONCLUSIONS

transfer segregating materials unless there is a
mixing device downstream of the chute. Particles in a mixture can segregate by one of
five primary mechanisms: sifting, particle
4.3 Change the Design of the Equipment velocity on a surface, air entrainment
(fluidization), entrainment of particles in an air
Mass flow bins have a first-in, first-out flow stream, and dynamic effects. Of these, the most
pattern, whereas funnel flow bins have a first-in, common mechanism for segregation is sifting of
last-out pattern of flow. Thus, if materials have fines through a matrix of coarse particles. For
segregated from side to side while filling the this to occur, there must be at least a minimum
bin, a mass flow pattern will tend to minimize ratio of particle sizes and a minimum mean
segregation upon discharge, whereas a funnel particle size, the bulk solid must be free-
flow bin will make the segregation worse. flowing, and there must be relative motion
Increasing the height-to-diameter ratio of the between particles.

9
Once the mechanisms of segregation are
understood, they can be used to analyze particle
segregation problems and to determine ways to
eliminate such problems.

REFERENCES

[1] Johanson, J.R.: Particle Segregation and

What to Do about It; Chem. Eng. (1978)
May, pp. 183-188.

[2] Williams, J.C.: The Segregation of

Particulate Materials: A Review; Powder
Technology Vol. 15 (1976); pp. 245-251.

[3]Williams, J.C., and M.I. Kahn: The Mixing

and Segregation of Particulate Solids of
Different Particle Size; Chem. Eng.,
London, Vol. 19 (1973); p.269.

[4] Carson, J.W., and J.R. Farris: The

importance of Material Flow Characteristics
in Storage Tank Selection; Powder/Bulk
Solids (1984) Apr.

[5] Goodwill, D.J.: Solving Particle Segregation

Problems in Bins; Engineering Digest
(1985).

[6] Jenike & Johanson, Inc., Flow-of-Solids

Newsletter Vol. 4, No. 2.

[7] Johanson, J.R.: Know Your Material How

to Predict and Use the Properties of Bulk
Solids; Chem. Eng. (1978) Oct. 30, pp. 9-17.

[8] Blending Apparatus for Bulk Solids. U.S.

Patent 4,286,883, Sep. 1, 1981.

[9] Jenike & Johanson, Inc., Flow-of-Solids

Newsletter Vol. 3, No. 1.

10