Large-Scale Dust Explosions: Treated Vs. Non-Treated Rock Dust

Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration
M. L. Harris M. J. Sapko Z. Dyduch K. Cybulski R. Hildebrandt G. V. Goodman
Organization:
Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration
Pages:
4
File Size:
562 KB
Publication Date:
Jan 1, 2019

Abstract

Past research showed that bituminous coal dust remains dry and dispersible in the presence of moisture. Rock dust must disperse with the coal dust to effectively inert a propagating coal dust explosion. Non-treated rock dust readily absorbs moisture, limiting its dispersibility, while anti-caking treated rock dusts can remain dry. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health contracted the Central Mining Institute in Poland to conduct large-scale testing in their Experimental Mine Barbara to determine if a treated rock dust can be as effective as non-treated rock dust in attenuating or quenching coal dust explosions under the same experimental conditions. INTRODUCTION One of the goals of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is to conduct research to reduce the risk of mine disasters and provide workplace solutions to reduce the risks associated with accumulations of combustible and explosible materials; the most common form of which is the generation of coal dust during the mining process and its subsequent distribution downwind. Dispersible rock dust is a primary defense for preventing coal dust explosion propagation in underground coal mines, and its properties are defined in 30 CFR 75.2. “Pulverized limestone, dolomite, gypsum, anhydrite, shale, adobe, or other inert material, preferably light colored, 100 percent of which will pass through a sieve having 20 meshes per linear inch and 70 percent or more of which will pass through a sieve having 200 meshes per linear inch; the particles of which when wetted and dried will not cohere to form a cake which will not be dispersed into separate particles by a light blast of air; and which does not contain more than 5 percent combustible matter or more than a total of 4 percent free and combined silica (SiO2), or, where the Secretary finds that such silica concentrations are not available, which does not contain more than 5 percent of free and combined silica.” An earlier NIOSH investigation of rock dust revealed two significant concerns with the supply of rock dust to U.S. coal mines: 1) insufficient particles <200 mesh (75 μm) and 2) all rock dusts when wetted and dried formed cakes and were not easily dispersed with a light blast of air (1). Past research by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and others showed that bituminous coal dust remains dry and dispersible in the presence of moisture (2). Rock dust must also be dispersible in concert with the coal dust to effectively inert a propagating coal dust explosion (3, 4, 5, 6). Non-treated rock dust, however, readily absorbs moisture, limiting its dispersibility, while a rock dust treated with long-chain fatty acids (such as stearic acid) can remain dry and dispersible. Stearin-treated rock dust has been used in British coal mines (7) and is commonly used in Polish coal mines.
Citation

APA: M. L. Harris M. J. Sapko Z. Dyduch K. Cybulski R. Hildebrandt G. V. Goodman  (2019)  Large-Scale Dust Explosions: Treated Vs. Non-Treated Rock Dust

MLA: M. L. Harris M. J. Sapko Z. Dyduch K. Cybulski R. Hildebrandt G. V. Goodman Large-Scale Dust Explosions: Treated Vs. Non-Treated Rock Dust. Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration, 2019.

Export
Purchase this Article for $25.00

Create a Guest account to purchase this file
- or -
Log in to your existing Guest account