Coal - Improvements in Plant and Operations at Pueblo Coal Washery

Making maximum possible use of available equipment and material, CF&I placed a high-efficiency, high-capacity washery unit in the existing buildings to gain simplified operation, reduced manpower requirements, raised efficiency, and boosted production. THE central washing plant of the Colorado Fuel & Iron Corp. was first operated in 1918 to furnish coal for two 60-oven batteries of Koppers design. Prior to that time the coke for the blast furnaces had been secured from a number of beehive operations, some with their own washeries. The original washery had four Elmore jigs, which did not do as well as had been expected. In 1923 the jigs were taken out and replaced by Deister Plat-O tables, with various changes in auxiliary equipment. In 1936 the throughput of the plant was considerably increased by the installation of vibrating filters for recovery and drying of fine coal, thereby reducing a large recirculating load of fine coal which passed through the screens of the Carpenter driers. In the late 1940's it became evident that something would have to be done to keep the washery abreast of progress at Pueblo and other washeries. Coal requirements were nearly two and one-half times the original requirements of the 120 small ovens, as additional ovens had been built in 1930, 1938, and 1945, whereas no additional coal washing capacity had been added since the 1936 modifications. Much of the equipment, moreover, had seen better days. One answer to the problem was to build a new and completely up-to-the-minute plant, with sep- arate sections for coarse, medium fine, fine, and very fine coal. On the other hand, it might be financially more profitable to place a high-efficiency, high-capacity unit in the existing buildings. The washing problem at Pueblo is not unique, but it is approached differently. There are no established specifications for coke ash and sulphur. The plant is operated on the principle that if it is more economical to wash it out than to slag it out, wash it out; otherwise, send it on to the blast furnaces. With coals at the Pueblo plant costing what they do, the benefits of washing at a low gravity are questionable. Hence the primary problem is to eliminate the high-ash components and retain all the low and medium-ash components. Sulphur is no problem at all, averaging 0.6 pct in the coke. Since a good proportion of the free impurity in the coals is as large as the coal or bone or larger, it appeared that it would be safe to go to jig washing and discontinue crushing the coal before washing, as had been the practice with the tables. This would boost the throughput. It might also decrease manpower requirements and washing costs considerably. It was assumed at the start and has been demonstrated in the first year of operation that a jig will do as well on the fines as the tables had been doing. It would not be necessary to discount any gains due to increased efficiency in washing the coarse material because of incapacity to wash the fines. By washing at —2+0 mesh it would be possible to dewater, by screening, a considerable tonnage satisfactorily, for example, at —2 + % or —2 + l/4, and then crush it in a hammer mill. The —?+20 could be dewatered in centrifugal driers and the remain-