Screening Equipment Handbook, Second Edition

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Screening Equipment

FUNDAMENTALS OF THE LUMP CRUSHING THEORY. WORKING PROCESSES OF CRUSHING AND SCREENING EQUIPMENT. LECTURE 8

2021 ◽  
pp. 25-32
Author(s):  
A. I. Nizhegorodov
Keyword(s):  
Technological Process ◽  
Rock Properties ◽  
Road Vehicles ◽  
Roll Crusher ◽  
Screening Equipment ◽  
Hydraulic Classification ◽  
Working Processes

The article presents materials of Lecture 8 in Theory of carrying and lifting, construction and road vehicles and equipment, which describes the following issues: the rock properties, the rock crushing degree, the basics of the lump crushing theory and types of crushing machines. The technological process of crushing with a roll crusher is described; the values of forces acting in roll crushers are calculated.Along with the process of crushing, the article deals with the processes of segregation and concentration, the basic of the screening (fractionation) theory and features of the hydraulic classification of nonmetallic materials.

scholarly journals Design and implementation of multi-grooved simultaneous separation and screening equipment

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 3425-3431
Author(s):  
Shizhou Lu ◽  
Yuankai Ren ◽  
Xiran Wang ◽  
Xuguang Dong
Keyword(s):  
Design And Implementation ◽  
Simultaneous Separation ◽  
Screening Equipment

Economic Feasibility of Screening Farmer Stock Peanuts Prior to Marketing

1999 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-61
Author(s):  
M. C. Lamb ◽  
P. D. Blankenship
Keyword(s):  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
High Capacity ◽  
Economic Feasibility ◽  
Fixed Cost ◽  
Foreign Material ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Average Value ◽  
Mechanical Separation ◽  
Screening Equipment

Abstract Screening farmer stock peanuts prior to marketing provides a method to increase the per-ton value of peanuts. The mechanical separation of larger, higher value pods (overs) from smaller, lower value pods—which includes foreign material (FM) and loose shelled kernels (LSK) (thrus)—results in significant changes in farmer stock grade. Based on data from 394 runner lots in the Southeast, the percentage of sound mature kernels and sound splits (SMKSS), LSK, FM, and other kernels (OK) was changed by +0.61, −4.31, −2.32, and −0.3 between overs and unscreened lots, respectively. The average value of farmer stock peanuts was $29.15/ Mg higher in the screened lots (overs) compared to the unscreened lots. Although the average per-ton value of screened peanuts is increased, economic feasibility of screening is dependent upon several factors. Two specific marketing scenarios for farmers are analyzed including production of quota poundage only and production in excess of quota poundage where additional peanuts are used to replace peanuts removed during the screening process. Thus, opportunity cost must be included. Typical investment in high capacity (minimum 18 Mg/hr) screening equipment is approximately $150,000. Amortized at 10% rate of interest over a 6-yr period with depreciation allowances and labor and energy cost included, a minimum of 4536 Mg/yr must be screened to effectively ldquo;spread” fixed cost, thus indicating that only exceptionally large farmers, groups of farmers, or buying points have sufficient volume for screening. Further, the quality of peanuts prior to screening also impacts economic feasibility. These factors will be incorporated to estimate probability decision thresholds to determine if individual lots can be profitably screened prior to marketing.

scholarly journals Preparing for a “dirty bomb” attack: the optimum mix of medical countermeasure resources

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexis Rump ◽  
Patrick Ostheim ◽  
Stefan Eder ◽  
Cornelius Hermann ◽  
Michael Abend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Dirty Bomb ◽  
Efficient Resource ◽  
Cesium 137 ◽  
Optimal Resource ◽  
Bomb Attack ◽  
Screening Equipment

Abstract Background In radiological emergencies with radionuclide incorporation, decorporation treatment is particularly effective if started early. Treating all people potentially contaminated (“urgent treatment”) may require large antidote stockpiles. An efficacious way to reduce antidote requirements is by using radioactivity screening equipment. We analyzed the suitability of such equipment for triage purposes and determined the most efficient mix of screening units and antidote daily doses. Methods The committed effective doses corresponding to activities within the detection limits of monitoring portals and mobile whole-body counters were used to assess their usefulness as triage tools. To determine the optimal resource mix, we departed from a large-scale scenario (60,000 victims) and based on purchase prices of antidotes and screening equipment in Germany, we calculated efficiencies of different combinations of medical countermeasure resources by data envelopment analysis. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as the costs per life year saved and compared to risk reduction opportunities in other sectors of society as well as the values of a statistical life. Results Monitoring portals are adequate instruments for a sensitive triage after cesium-137 exposure with a high screening throughput. For the detection of americium-241 whole-body counters with a lower daily screening capacity per unit are needed. Assuming that 1% of the potentially contaminated patients actually need decorporation treatment, an efficient resource mix includes 6 monitoring portals and 25 mobile whole-body counters. The optimum mix depends on price discounts and in particular the fraction of victims actually needing treatment. The cost-effectiveness of preparedness for a “dirty bomb” attack is less than for common health care, but costs for a life year saved are less than for many risk-reduction interventions in the environmental sector. Conclusion To achieve economic efficiency a high daily screening capacity is of major importance to substantially decrease the required amount of antidote doses. Among the determinants of the number of equipment units needed, the fraction of the potentially contaminated victims that actually needs treatment is the most difficult to assess. Judging cost-effectiveness of the preparedness for “dirty bomb” attacks is an issue of principle that must be dealt with by political leaders.

Quantitative Target Sizes for Breast Tumor Detection Prior to Metastasis: A Prerequisite to Rational Design of 4D Scanners for Breast Screening

2005 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Vinh-Hung ◽  
Richard Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Rational Design ◽  
Molecular Detection ◽  
Target Size ◽  
Tumor Target ◽  
Lognormal Model ◽  
Cancer Tumor ◽  
Linearity Test ◽  
Screening Equipment

It is important to determine a breast cancer tumor target size for new screening equipment and molecular detection. Records of women aged 40–69 years diagnosed in 1988–1997 with a nonmetastasized, node-negative, or node-positive T1-stage breast cancer were abstracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) public-use database. The linear, Gompertzian, lognormal, and power-exponential models of the effect of tumor size on breast cancer specific mortality were compared using corresponding transforms of size in multivariate Cox proportional hazard models. Criteria for comparison were the linearization of the size transforms and the Nagelkerke R2 N index for the Cox models. Our results show that the assumption of a linear effect of tumor size was rejected by the linearity test ( P=0.05). The Gompertzian, lognormal, and power-exponential transforms satisfied the test with P-values of 0.08, 0.29, and 0.14, respectively. The corresponding R2 N were 0.08410, 0.08420, and 0.08414, respectively, showing a marginally best fit with the lognormal model, which was selected as a model for small tumors. The lognormal function with unadjusted crude death rates gave a lognormal-location parameter of 25 and shape parameter of 1.7, while the corresponding values in multivariate models were 18 and 2, respectively. The derivation of the lognormal model indicates tumor growth acceleration starting at 3 mm (unadjusted crude data) or 2 mm (multivariate model). The breast cancer tumor target size for screening equipment, whether by imaging or molecular detection, is therefore 2 mm.

scholarly journals PROTEUS – a fully automated crystallization screening equipment at AstraZeneca

2011 ◽  
Vol 67 (a1) ◽  
pp. C124-C125
Author(s):  
I. Ymén ◽  
M. Ahlqvist ◽  
M. Arinder ◽  
S. Cosgrove ◽  
A. Erikson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Screening Equipment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document