Bayer Hungaria Corn Seed Powder Conveying Case Study

The operating problem was vertical transfer, product loss and manual handling

Bayer Hungaria’s corn-seed treatment plant had been moving 25 kg bags of fine coating powder with a mechanical elevator to a coating machine on the fourth floor.

Piab’s published project account describes a 20 m vertical lift and identifies time, product loss and ergonomics as the reasons for replacing the old transfer method.

Material basis: The reported powder bulk density was 0.54 kg/L. That value matters because receiver volume, batch mass, pickup behaviour and line pressure loss all depend on the state of the powder, not just its product name.

Two vacuum-conveying routes were installed

Tech-Con Hungaria integrated two piFLOW f conveyors with a big-bag frame, rotary dosing equipment, conveying pipework and an emptying unit.

One route was reported as 17 m horizontal plus 20 m vertical. The second used 20 m horizontal and 20 m vertical pipework.

Bayer’s PLC managed the conveyor controls, so the project boundary included material release, conveying sequence and destination demand rather than a stand-alone receiver.

Why the complete route matters

A vacuum conveyor has to overcome pickup losses, straight-pipe friction, bends, vertical lift, receiver resistance and filter pressure drop while maintaining enough gas velocity to transport the powder.

Those duties differ between the two routes. Matching equipment names does not make the pressure budget identical.

The published capacity result is supplier-attributed

Bayer initially requested 350 kg/h. Piab reports that the commissioned settings reached a maximum of 440 kg/h.

That figure is useful because it supplies a baseline, unit and operating outcome. It should still be read as Piab’s account of this installation, not as a transferable capacity rating for another powder or route.

The same equipment family can deliver a different rate when bulk density, air permeability, moisture, pickup geometry, pipe bore, filter condition or receiver cycle changes.

Throughput comes from a repeating conveying cycle

A vacuum receiver does not move powder continuously through every second of operation. It alternates between filling, filter cleaning, discharge and preparation for the next cycle.

The reported hourly rate is therefore the result of useful batch mass divided by the complete cycle time.

A longer fill does not always improve output. Overfilling can load the filter, reduce available airflow and delay complete receiver discharge.

For the two Bayer routes, the commissioning record should distinguish the settings used on each line. The longer horizontal run and its bend arrangement can change the pressure budget even though both routes rise by 20 m.

Pickup conditions deserve the same attention as the receiver

The big-bag emptying and rotary dosing equipment establish how steadily powder reaches the suction point.

Starved pickup reduces batch mass. Excessive feed can choke the line or carry a dense plug into a system configured for another conveying state.

A useful test therefore records dosing speed, vacuum level, fill time, discharged mass and filter differential pressure together. Looking at the final kilograms per hour alone hides the cause of a weak cycle.

Engineering controls extend beyond conveying capacity

The closed transfer arrangement was selected to reduce spillage and manual intervention, but a project review should also cover dust exposure, cleaning, electrostatic control and combustible-dust hazards for the actual coating formulation.

OSHA treats combustible-dust control as a system issue involving dust generation, ignition sources, confinement and housekeeping. A closed conveyor helps at transfer points; it does not replace the site hazard assessment.

Changeover and maintenance can reopen the powder path

The route may be closed during production, yet filters, seals, dosing equipment and big-bag interfaces still require inspection and cleaning.

Maintenance access should allow retained coating powder to be recovered without releasing it from overhead pipework or the receiver.

If different formulations use the same equipment, the site also needs a documented line-clearance and cross-contamination basis. The published case establishes the transfer architecture, not a universal cleaning method.

What can be transferred to another project

• Measure representative bulk density and flow behaviour before sizing the receiver and cycle.
• Calculate each physical route separately, including vertical lift and filter pressure drop.
• Include upstream dosing, destination demand and PLC permissives in the functional specification.
• Test the minimum and required rates with the real powder, then document the achieved rate and filter condition.
• Verify cleaning, exposure and combustible-dust controls for the complete installation.

For the underlying system design, see the vacuum conveying technology guide and the vacuum conveying selection workflow.