3 inch mud pump free sample

The Stanley TP03 Submersible Trash Pump boasts 450 GPM of output flow, this pump is an efficient way to move large volumes of liquid with concentrations of solids up to 25% by volume. The TP03 handles solids up to 3 inches in size and is used for dredging and light cleaning tasks. The urethane bowl and impeller are abrasion-resistant, resilient, and impervious to petrochemical solvents. No priming necessary, just drop it into the material and it’s ready for work.

The urethane bowl is virtually indestructible - tough, lightweight, abrasion-resistant, resilient, and impervious to petrochemical solvents. The Stanley TP03 can pump almost anything without damaging the bowl.

The Stanley TP03 Submersible Trash Pump’s efficient design places the urethane impeller above material flow, reducing blockage, jamming and overall pump wear while keeping liquids moving fast enough to pump high volumes of solids at a much higher head than non-submersible pumps.

For easy maintenance and inspection, simply remove the wing nuts and top plate, clean out the bowl and replace the cover and nuts. You’re back to work in less than 5 minutes. The TP03 can run dry without damaging the motor or impeller, reducing the possibility of downtime.

Features 2-stage, 44 to 1 gear reduction with a large diameter output gear and heavy duty ball bearing construction. Often referred to as Mud pumps or Sludge pumps, diaphragm pumps are designed to pump mud, slurry, sewage, and thick liquids that have the ability to flow. AMT Diaphragm pump Honda GX120 OHV gasoline engines. Built-in molded polyurethane flapper / check valve assures self-priming to 20 feet after initial prime. Each unit includes a 3" NPT steel suction strainer, two 3" NPT nipples, and wheel kit with 10" semi-pneumatic transport wheels for portability. Pumps are designed for use with non-flammable liquids which are compatible with pump component materials. Was 3357-96. Suction and discharge port size cannot be reduced. Due to positive pumping action of diaphragm pumps, by all mfr"s, the discharge is recommended to only be 25FT long unless oversized. Discharge can not be restricted. There is no relief valve. OBS, see other model

[{"id":41452694372529,"title":"Default Title","option1":"Default Title","option2":null,"option3":null,"sku":"XP650WP","requires_shipping":true,"taxable":true,"featured_image":null,"available":true,"name":"208cc 220-Gpm 3-Inch Gasoline Engine Portable Water Pump","public_title":null,"options":["Default Title"],"price":29900,"weight":30391,"compare_at_price":29900,"inventory_management":"shopify","barcode":"891784001051","requires_selling_plan":false,"selling_plan_allocations":[]}]

DuroMax Water Pumps are the ultimate choice when choosing a semi-trash pump for quickly transferring water or de-watering flooded areas. Featuring a powerful DuroMax 208cc engine, this workhorse can power through a tough day’s work. The XP650WP can pump 220 gallons of water per minute and tackle solids or debris up to ¼” in diameter, making easy work of jobsites or farm/agricultural applications. This water pump utilizes professional grade components such as a cast iron impeller, volute and heavy-duty seals, and is backed by a manufacturer’s 3-Year Warranty.

Please try again in a few minutes. If the issue persist, please contact the site owner for further assistance. Reference ID IP Address Date and Time 1ae14a39416563d7fd137514e0bafc1d 63.210.148.230 03/02/2023 05:38 AM UTC

OK, all y’all air drillers just thumb on over to Porky’s column or something. This is for mud drillers. On second thought, I know a lot of you air guys drill about three mud wells a year, and consider it a hassle to rig up mud. So, maybe something I say will be interesting …

The mud pump is the heart of the circulating system, and mud is the blood circulating in the hole. I’ve talked about mud before and will again, but this month, let’s talk about the pump.

Historically, more wells, of every kind, have been drilled with duplex pumps than any other kind. They are simple and strong, and were designed in the days when things were meant to last. Most water well drillers use them. The drawbacks are size and weight. A pump big enough to do the job might be too big to fit on the rig, so some guys use skid-mounted pumps. They also take a fair amount of horsepower. If you were to break down the horsepower requirements of your rig, you would find out that the pump takes more power than the rotary and hoist combined. This is not a bad thing, since it does a lot of the work drilling. While duplex pumps generally make plenty of volume, one of the limiting factors is pressure. Handling the high pressures demanded by today’s oil well drilling required a pump so big and heavy as to be impractical. Some pretty smart guys came up with the triplex pump. It will pump the same — or more — volume in a smaller package, is easy to work on and will make insane pressure when needed. Some of the modern frack outfits run pumps that will pump all day long at 15,000 psi. Scary. Talk about burning some diesel.

The places that triplex pumps have in the shallow drilling market are in coring and air drilling. The volume needs are not as great. For instance, in hard rock coring, surface returns are not always even seen, and the fluid just keeps the diamonds cool. In air drilling, a small triplex is used to inject foam or other chemicals into the air line. It’s basically a glorified car wash pump. The generic name is Bean pump, but I think this just justifies a higher price. Kinda like getting the same burger at McDonald’s versus in a casino.

One of the reasons water well drillers don’t run triplex pumps, besides not needing insane pressure, is they require a positive suction head. In other words, they will not pick up out of the pit like a duplex. They require a centrifugal charging pump to feed them, and that is just another piece of equipment to haul and maintain.

This brings me to another thought: charging. I know a lot of drillers running duplex pumps that want to improve the efficiency of their pumps. Duplexes with a negative suction head generally run at about 85 percent efficiency. The easy way to improve the efficiency is to charge them, thus assuring a 100 percent efficiency. This works great, but almost every one of them, after doing all that work and rigging up a charging pump, tells me that their pump output doubled. Being the quiet, mild mannered type that I am, I don’t say “Bull,” but it is. A duplex pump is a positive displacement pump. That means that it can deliver no more than the displacement it was designed for. You can only fill the cylinder up until it is full. It won’t take any more. The one exception to this is when you are pumping at very low pressure. Then the charging pump will over run the duplex, float the valves and produce a lot more fluid. Might as well shut off the duplex and drill with the charging pump.

Another common pump used in the water well industry is the centrifugal. You see them mostly on air rigs that don’t use mud too often. They have their place, but are a different breed of cat. They are not positive displacement. Flow is a function of speed and horsepower up to the limits of the pump. After that, they just dead-head. With large diameter drill pipe they make a lot of mud, but after the hole gets deeper, friction losses — both inside and outside the drill pipe — build up. This means that the deeper you go, the less circulation you have. This slows the whole process. Positive displacement pumps don’t do this; they pump the same per stroke regardless of pressure. It just takes more horsepower. Also, displacement calculations like bottoms-up time and cement placement are just about impossible. One way to get around the limited pressure of centrifugal pumps is to run two of them in series. I’ve seen a few of these rig-ups and they work very well for large diameter drilling. They will make almost the same pressure as a big duplex for a lot less money. They are still variable displacement, but they roll so much fluid that it doesn’t seem to matter. And run at pretty reasonable depths, too: 300 to 400 psi at 400 gpm is not uncommon with two 3 x 4 centrifugal pumps in series.

I reckon there are pumps for every type of drilling. It is just a matter of using the right one correctly. I once drilled a 42-inch hole 842 feet deep with a 5½ x 8 duplex. Talk about long bottoms-up time … but we got the casing in with less than two feet of fill on bottom! Took time, but we got-er-done.

NOV 12-P-160 Mud Pump is rated at 1600 input horsepower (1193 kw) at 120 strokes per minute, with a 12-inch (304.8 mm) stroke. Multiple liner sizes allow pressures and volumes to handle circulation requirements in deep drilling applications.

Flexibility: Compact engineering provides higher efficiency in less space. The NOV 12-P-160 Triplex Mud Pump light weight and flexible design make it easily adaptable to a variety of rig configurations. This provides flexibility as drilling requirements and conditions change.

Fluid End Modules: NOV offers a choice of fluid end modules and valve covers for every P Series pump model to select the fluid end module that exactly matches drilling requirements. All pump models can be equipped with either the standard or premium forged, two-piece interchangeable fluid modules

When two (or more) pumps are arranged in serial their resulting pump performance curve is obtained by adding theirheads at the same flow rate as indicated in the figure below.

Centrifugal pumps in series are used to overcome larger system head loss than one pump can handle alone. for two identical pumps in series the head will be twice the head of a single pump at the same flow rate - as indicated with point 2.

With a constant flowrate the combined head moves from 1 to 2 - BUTin practice the combined head and flow rate moves along the system curve to point 3. point 3 is where the system operates with both pumps running

When two or more pumps are arranged in parallel their resulting performance curve is obtained by adding the pumps flow rates at the same head as indicated in the figure below.

Centrifugal pumps in parallel are used to overcome larger volume flows than one pump can handle alone. for two identical pumps in parallel and the head kept constant - the flow rate doubles compared to a single pump as indicated with point 2

Note! In practice the combined head and volume flow moves along the system curve as indicated from 1 to 3. point 3 is where the system operates with both pumps running

In practice, if one of the pumps in parallel or series stops, the operation point moves along the system resistance curve from point 3 to point 1 - the head and flow rate are decreased.

The “pond” is actually a man made dam which covers an area of about 40ha and has rockfill embankments of up to 53m high along the southern side that forms the impoundment.  It initially constructed in 1959 to act as a tailings pond to take the bauxite residue (red mud) from the Ewarton Plant situated about 5km away and 300m lower.  The red mud was pumped as a slurry comprising about 20% solids to the pond over a period of about 32 years up to 1991 when the pond was replaced by the Charlemount Mud Stacking and Drying Facility.  During this period the pond embankments (referred to as dams), were raised up to 7 times providing a final crest elevation of 472m.  The pond was however never filled to its final design capacity and the mud beach level remained at about 469m and the central area about 458m leaving a concave depression which held about 1.4mil m3 of water with elevated pH and some caustic content.

The remediation plan for the pond includes the removal of the ponded water and then the regrading of the mud surface to be free draining so that it can be stabilised and vegetated.  About 500,000 m3 of mud will need to be moved over a distance of up to 1km in order to create the required profile.  Due to the very soft nature of the surface muds (shear strength of less than 3kPa) its bearing capacity is less than 20kPa hence it is not accessible using even modified earthworks equipment.  In addition, the muds are thyrotrophic and under any vibration or shear loading, rapidly liquefy resulting in significant reduction in shear strength and loss of bearing capacity.  Using conventional earthmoving equipment would therefore require extensive “floating” haul roads with a high risk of machinery getting stuck or entire plant loss and risk to personnel.  It was therefore decided to investigate the possibility of pumping the in-situ red mud.

A mud pumping trial was undertaken to assess the feasibility of using this technique to do the bulk mud moving.  Pumping red mud is not unusual and the muds were initially pumped up to Mt Rosser Pond.  However, the muds are usually pumped at a solids content of 30% or less.  Once deposited, they can take years to reconsolidate and firm up sufficiently to allow access for light earthworks and agricultural plant.

In addition to the mud pumping, the trial included infilling three small scale geotubes to assess their performance as these may be needed as part of the regrading works.

The main aim of the pump trial was to determine if the muds could be pumped in their insitu state, and if not, what amount of water is required and how the variations in water content affect pump rates.

The mud pumping trial was undertaken using a 4” EDDY Pump.  This pump was recommended due to its ability to handle variable solids and robust operating mechanism.  The pump unit incorporated a hydraulic drive and cutter head.  The unit was mounted onto the boom of a JCB 220 excavator which also supplied the hydraulic feed to power the pump for the required range of 30-40 GPM at 3,500 to 4,000 psi (2428MPa).  The cutter head was powered by a standalone hydraulic power unit capable of providing the required 30gpm at 200psi (1.9 l/s at 13.8MPa).  If mounted on a 30-ton excavator with a System 14 hydraulic system and dual auxiliary feeds to the boom, all necessary hydraulic power for the pump and cutter head can be supplied by the excavator.  This equipment was however not available at the time in Jamaica.

In addition to the pump mounted on the excavator a Long Reach excavator (CAT 325) was used to move muds towards the cutter head but also to loosen up the muds and mix in additional water to facilitate pumping.  Water was added by pumping it directly from the pond using a 3” diesel water pump.

Prior to pumping the muds, the mud pump would operate in recirculation mode in order to prime the pump.  When in recirculation (re-circ) mode, the material pumped would be diverted to a short discharge pipe mounted on the pump directed back parallel to the cutter head. This action would help agitate and stir the muds.

A geotechnical soils investigation was undertaken on the muds within Mt Rosser pond in 2004.  It showed the material to be predominantly clayey silt with approximately 13% sand, 29% clay and 58% silt using conventional sieve analysis and hydrometer.  Atterberg limits indicate that the material is an intermediate to high plasticity clay.  The muds do however vary across the lake and also vertically. This is mainly as a consequence of the deposition process and discharge location.  Close to the discharge location the courser materials would settle out first and the finer materials would disperse furthest and to the opposite end of the pond.  The results are presented in figure 4.1.

Earlier this year, additional mud samples were tested as it was evident that standard soil mechanics tests did not provide an accurate assessment of this fine material.  This was particularly evident in tests done with dry sieving which shows the material as well-graded sand (see results for samples 5300, 5301, 5302 on figure 4.2).  When dispersed in water, even with an agent, the ‘yield-pseudo-plastic’ rheology of the muds appeared to affect the hydrometer results with large variations between tests (see results of samples PFT4&5 taken during mud pumping trials on figure 4.2).

The additional testing comprised of undertaking gradings using a Laser Particle Analyzer. The results indicated that the muds are predominantly Silt although the silt % varied from 30% to 80% with the material being either more sandy or more clayey (up to 15% clay). See results of samples ending in “L” on figure 4.2 below.

Moisture content tests on the muds taken from within the mud pond but below the ponded water ranged from 100% to 150% (50% to 40% solids).  The muds at the pump test location were 137% (42% solids).

Shear strength was generally very low ranging from 1kPa to 6kPa increasing with depth.  Dynamic probes previously undertaken indicated that the muds are “very soft” to 5m increasing in strength slightly to “soft” at a depth of 9m after which they increase to firm becoming stiff.

The pH of the muds ranged from 10.3 to 11.7, (ave 11.2).  Previous testing indicated that the surface muds have the lower pH although once through the crust, the pH tends to be higher. When doing the trials, the muds up to a depth of about 2.5m was intermixed, hence any stratification in pH could not be determined.

Initially, pumping was problematic mainly due to the excavator being underpowered. This was diagnosed as a hydraulic pump problem and the excavator was replaced.  The cutter head (which also acts to protect the intake) tended to blind with mud (Photo 5.1) and was also not providing enough agitation to liquefy the muds.  This was partly resolved by adding “stirrers” (2 steel loops welded either side) to the rotating cutter head and also a “comb” (Photo 5.2) to keep the gaps within the cutter head open.

Mud pumping rates varied from 21 l/s to 52 l/s (332 – 824gpm) and it was clearly visible that the more liquid the muds were the higher the pump rate was.  Samples were taken at different discharge rates and moisture content and percent solids determined by laboratory testing.  The results are plotted in Figure 5.1 and although scattered, do give an indication of the effects of solids content on flow rates.  The natural moisture content of the muds (insitu) at the test location was 137%, or 42% solids.  This is shown in Figure 5.1 as a vertical line.  Pumping muds close to the percent solids was achieved although flow rates were low.

As mentioned previously, the long reach excavator was used to loosen up the muds.  Water was pumped from the pond using a 3” pump into the excavation and the long reach would then work the muds to mix the water in.  The mud pump would then be used in recirculation mode to further mix the muds into a more consistent state.  Even with this mixing and agitation, the water tended to concentrate on the surface. This aided the initial process of priming the pump and once primed thicker muds at 1m to 2m below the surface could be pumped.  However, it was found that the deeper muds tended to be lumpy and this would significantly reduce or stop the flow requiring the pump to be lifted into thinner muds or having to go back into re-circ mode or having to fully re-prime.  The pump discharge was therefore very inconsistent as the suction intake position constantly needed adjustment in an attempt to get adequate discharge but also pump the thickest muds possible.

Discharge of the pumped muds was through 30m of flexible hose then 60m of 4” HDPE pipe which had an internal diameter of about 87mm (3.5”).    The muds were discharged onto the original mud beach which lies at a gradient of about 9%. On deposition the muds slowly flowed down gradient.  At times the flow would stop and the muds would build up then flow again in a wave motion.  The natural angle of repose would therefore be a few degrees less than this – probably 5% to 6%.

Although the muds have very low shear strength, and on agitation liquefy, the sides of the excavation had sufficient strength to stand about 2m near vertical.  Even overnight, there was limited slumping and the bank could be undermined by about 0.5m with the cutter head/agitator before collapsing.

On termination of pumping, in order to flush the pipeline, thin watery muds were pumped until the line was clear. A “T” valve system was then used to connect the 3” water pump line and this was then used to flush the pipe with water.

Three geotubes (1m x 6m) were filled with red muds pumped using the 4” Eddy pump. Fill rates were about 30 to 40l/s although it was difficult to assess as the flow and mud consistence was not visible.

Tube 1 was filled initially with more runny mud and then thicker muds as the pump operator got a better feel for conditions.  The tube was filled until firm.  The second tube was filled with thicker muds and filling continued until the tube was taut.  These two tubes were positioned on the sloping beach in order to form a small “U” impoundment area that would later be filled with pumped muds.  Although the area was prepared, the sloping ground caused the first tube to rotate through about 20 degrees. The tube was staked and the downslope side backfilled.  A more defined bed was created for the second tube and the same rotational issue was limited.  The two filled tubes with the ponded mud are shown in Photos 5.7 and 5.8.  Other than a small leak at the contact between the two geotubes, the ponding of the muds was successful.

The third tube was positioned on level ground. It was filled with medium runny (but consistent thickness) muds and was filled until the tube was taut.

In all three cases, there was very little mud loss or seepage from the tubes.  When stood on, some red water would squeeze out around the pressure area.  Once filled taut, the entire bag would have small red water droplets form on the outside (visible in Photo 5.11) , but the seepage was in general nominal.

The tubes have been monitored and the most recent photo’s taken on 10 October 2011 (6 weeks after filling) show how the tubes have reduced in volume due to the dewatering of the contained muds.  Volume loss is estimated to be around 30%.  The anticipated moisture content would therefore be about 90% and the solids around 53%.

The muds pumped into the trial pond behind the geotubes were medium thick to thick, probably in the order of 37 – 40% solids.  After 6 weeks the mud has not only firmed-up but had dried out significantly with wide and deep surface cracks as are evident in Photo 5.14 and 5.15.

The muds can be pumped at close to their insitu moisture content and most likely at their in-situ moisture content if they were agitated more and the pipeline system was designed to reduce friction losses.

Be able to access the mud surface and move around efficiently and safely. The suggestion is to have the pump mounted on a pontoon that is positioned using high strength rope (dynema) or steel cable.  The pump system should be remotely controlled as this would limit regular movement of personnel on the muds.

Have sufficient power and volume capacity to pump the muds at close to or at in-situ moisture content and discharge them about 1000m through a flexible pipeline.

It was also evident from the trials that the muds do not slump and flow readily.  It will therefore be necessary to have an amphibious excavator to loosen up the muds in the area around the pump head.  This weakened and more liquid mud would also aid the movement of the pump pontoon.  To also limit the amount of movement the pontoon will need to do, the amphibious excavator could also move muds towards the pump location.

Using the capacity of the 4” mud pump, mud moving would take about 1.5 to 2 years, the pump will however need to be more suited to the task.  A target period of 1 year however seems reasonable.  However, prior to this, equipment will need to be procured and imported into Jamaica. The 6 and 10 inch Excavator Dredge Pump Attachments are also being considered as an option for higher GMP and a more aggressive completion timeline.  A preliminary programme is as follows: