## 3 Results and Discussion  
The analytical test results are presented in Table 2 with consideration of conveyor belt length (1m, 2 m, 3 m, 4 m, 5 m), conveyor belt inclination angle (\(10^{\circ},20^{\circ},30^{\circ},40^{\circ},50^{\circ}\)), and belt velocity (1 m/s, 2 m/s, 3 m/s, 4 m/s, 5 m/s). The analytical model does not provide for the aerodynamic resistance of wood chips; therefore, with such an assumption, each type of wood chips was ejected at the same distance. For the needs of comparing the results of analytical and numerical (simulation) tests from CAD (Computer Aided Design) 3D model of the stand, the conveyor belt end height was determined from the hopper bottom for all five lengths and the inclination angle of the conveyor belt (Table 3). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Type of Wood Chips** & **Quantity of Wood Chips** & **Surface Area (_Faces_) for One** \\
**according to Figure 6** & **Particle (Wood Chips)** \\ \hline A & 29 & 116 \\ B & 15 & 148 \\ C & 13 & 156 \\ D & 7 & 276 \\ E & 12 & 276 \\ F & 20 & 276 \\ G & 14 & 276 \\ \hline Total & 110 & 1524 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Quantity of wood chips used in the simulation. Figure 7: The values coefficient of friction and restitution for correlation: (a) rubber–wood, (b) rubber–steel. In order to preserve the complete comparability of the analytical and numerical (simulation)test results, the conveyor belt end height was identical. The simulation test results concerning distance intervals at which wood chips were ejected are presented in Tables 4 and 5. There are also average values (AVG), minimum values (Min), maximum values (Max), and standard deviation (SD) for three repetition samples. The accepted variables: conveyor belt length (A), conveyor belt inclination angle (B) and belt speeds are the same as for the analytical model. The simulation of correct wood chip transport and outlet from the conveyor belt is presented in Figure 8a, whereas, with higher velocity of the conveyor belt, wood chips are susceptible to the higher probability of wood chips rotation and not reaching the set velocity at the belt conveyor outlet. This contributes to the premature unpredictable dislocation of particles downward the conveyor belt or their uncontrolled side ejection (Figure 8b). Therefore, for the conveyor belt inclination angle of 50\({}^{\circ}\) in Tables 4 and 5, there are no results of the wood chip ejection distance (wood chips fell beyond the conveyor belt and hopper, and it was not possible to determine the ejection distance). This phenomenon occurs for the belt velocity exceeding 3 m/s. Apart from the analysis of the wood chips ejection distance, there was also a trial conducted concerning the verification of their segregation possibilities. On account of the varied velocity of wood chips ejection \(v\) depending on the belt velocity and the geometry of the wood chips being ejected, it was assumed initially that their ejection at various distances is possible, at the same time, the implementation of the wood chips segregation process into various fractions is possible, as well. Nonetheless, as the simulation tests demonstrated, the separation (segregation) of sample wood chips is not possible (Figure 9). The reason for such a state are mutual clashes of particles during ejection (flight) and the clashes and overturns of wood chips in the air, as well as their bumping onto the  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Conveyor Belt** \\ **Length (m)** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multirow{3}{*}{\ \begin{tabular}{c} **Height of Conveyor** \\ **Bell End (m)** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multirow{3}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Conveyor Belt** \\ **Inclination Angle (\({}^{\circ}\))** \\ \end{tabular}