Coal - Kerosine Flotation of Bituminous Coal Fines - Discussion

W. J. Parton—Those operators faced with the problem of treating fine coal whether in bituminous or anthracite will find this paper most timely. I would like to take this opportunity of discussing Mr. Schiffman's paper and at the same time express certain views relating to our Tamaqua plant. I would like to ask the author what type of impeller and diffuser is used in the Denver cells? Screen analysis of products from individual cells indicate that coarser material resists flotation and only floats after greater retention time in the last few cells. Also, the need for a scavenger screen to reclaim non-floated coal particles further stresses this point. I have always felt that more efficient means of cleaning coal between 10-mesh and 28-mesh existed than flotation. Reagent and power costs are high for the flotation process. When floating +28-mesh particles, cell capacity is lowered and some of the particles are lost with the refuse. The Tamaqua plant of the Lehigh Navigation Coal Co. floats —28-mesh coal and capacity of recoverable coal is 40 tph for 1800 cu ft of Denver cells; or 0.05 tons per cu ft of cell. At Kimberly 7.75 tph for 600 cu ft of cell gives 0.013 ton per cu ft of cell. At Bessie 14 tph for 800 cu ft of cell gives 0.017 tons per cu ft of cell. It would be appreciated if the author would comment on what he feels is the upper size limit of particle to attain most efficient utilization of the flotation process. The dewatering screw is a very interesting development since it offers a simple way to prepare coal sludge for more complete clewatering by drainage or mechanical dewatering on screen or filters. In other words it could be used to accomplish the same thing as a thickener tank. I would appreciate having the author's comment on how he thinks such a screw dewaterer would work on a froth.* The process as used in floating coal at the Bessie and Kimberly plants may be referred to as more of a bulk oil float in contrast to a froth flotation process. Experiments on increasing capacity of cells is most interesting since we are going through such an experi- mental period at the present time. Recently a double overflow was installed on our No. 30 Denver cells. So far results are not conclusive. In reviewing this paper the following comments are made pertaining to investigation of methods for increasing capacity: Supercharging: Supercharged air in matte flotation or for that matter the use of the normal amount of air drawn in by the impeller would in all probability cause such an aeration in the cell as to destroy the buoyant effect given to the coal particles by the excessive amount of kerosine used. In other words, air creates an agitation zone throughout the cell, creating a boiling and thereby giving a lower recovery in the cell. It would be interesting to know whether the 7 pct increase in recovery was with no air being admitted to the stand pipe. Changing Impeller Speed: The speed of a receded disc impeller for a No. 30 cell as recommended by the Denver Equipment Co. is, I believe, approximately 250 rpm. At this speed and using supercharged air in excess of 8-oz pressure, we have observed a boiling action in the cells. In our flotation we endeavor to obtain some degree of froth flotation using pine oil as a frother. The boiling action as caused by increasing the amount of air added to the cells is detrimental to recovery in froth flotation. It is our belief that to obtain increased recovery from a cell in froth flotation, additional air must be introduced but at the same time this air must be dispersed throughout the pulp in the form of small bubbles and this can only be done by increasing the speed of the impeller. Therefore, if Mr. Schiffman decreased the speed of the No. 30 impellers and at the same time continued to use supercharged air, the boiling action may have been increased because larger bubbles developed. The lower recovery as reported could be due to this factor. Decreasing the impeller speed will definitely decrease the power consumed but may have other disadvantages. First, we believe it will permit "sanding" in the cell and this in our opinion will increase the wear on the impeller and diffuser, especially so, if there is pyrite and/or sand present in the feed. "Sanding" in the cell when air is used, as in froth flotation, will effect the dispersion of this air and cause boiling.