Search Documents

By Kazem Oraee

In underground coal mining, particularly room-and-pillar methods, the coal pillars play a significant role in roof stability. If the pillar dimensions are increased, the pillar bearing capacity also increases, but more coal remains in the pillar and therefore the recovery of mining operation decreases. Therefore, determining the optimum pillar dimension based on technical, economical and performance parameters is important. In this paper, the coal pillar is designed by using the concept of ground reaction curve (GRC). For this purpose, the GRC for coal pillars is drawn and then the elastic and plastic zone of coal pillar behavior is determined. Based on elastic and plastic zone, different equations are presented to draw a pillar reaction curve and the process of coal pillar design based on GRC is explained. As a case study, this new technique is applied to study the coal pillar state in Tabas coal mine of Iran. The results show that the presented new approach is successfully used in the design of the optimum coal pillar dimensions, and also determines the elastic and plastic behavior limit, which is important especially for the logical design of yield pillars.

Jan 1, 2009

By Kazem Oraee

In underground coal mining, particularly room-and-pillar methods, the coal pillars play a significant role in roof stability. If the pillar dimensions are increased, the pillar bearing capacity also increases, but more coal remains in the pillar and therefore the recovery of mining operation decreases. Therefore, determining the optimum pillar dimension based on technical, economical and performance parameters is important. In this paper, the coal pillar is designed by using the concept of ground reaction curve (GRC). For this purpose, the GRC for coal pillars is drawn and then the elastic and plastic zone of coal pillar behavior is determined. Based on elastic and plastic zone, different equations are presented to draw a pillar reaction curve and the process of coal pillar design based on GRC is explained. As a case study, this new technique is applied to study the coal pillar state in Tabas coal mine of Iran. The results show that the presented new approach is successfully used in the design of the optimum coal pillar dimensions, and also determines the elastic and plastic behavior limit, which is important especially for the logical design of yield pillars.

Jan 1, 2009

By B. K. Parekh

Large reserves of coal pond fines are found in the Illinois Basin-over 40 million tons in Western Kentucky, over 65 million tons in Southern Illinois, and over 35 million tons in Southern Indiana. If these fines are used to produce coal-water slurry (CWS), fuel costs, NOx. emissions, and pond closure costs can be reduced. Coal fines from this region that are used to produce CWS for co-fire or re-burn may require processing, however, to attain proper particle size distribution and fuel quality. To evaluate the effectiveness of using coal cleaning technologies to control these CWS quality parameters, a simple flowsheet for recovering and processing coal pond fines was designed and tested. Coal fines processing consisted of using classifying cyclones to size at nominal minus 200 mesh, cleaning the classifying cyclone underflow using spirals, and cleaning the overflow using column froth flotation. Ash content of the dean coal from the spiral was reduced to about 10 percent, which is satisfactory to use for CWS co-firing in a cyclone-fired boiler. The clean coal from column flotation may be used for re-burn in a cyclone-fired boiler or as co-fire fuel in a wall-fired or tangentially-fired boiler. Heating value recovery during laboratory-scale, pilot-scale, and commercial-scale coal cleaning testing was about 80 percent.

Jan 1, 1998

By Robert L. Llewellyn

Preparation of coal begins at the face in underground mines or in the pit with surface mines. Impurities in raw coal can be in the seam itself or in extraneous material taken in mining from the roof or bottom. Raw coal is prepared only to the extent that is necessary to make the product salable. Over 60% of all coal production is processed to some extent in cleaning plants. For underground mines the proportion cleaned is 72% as compared to 42% from surface and 15% from auger mines. Coal supplied for coking purposes is nearly all upgraded by washing, while for the largest market, electric power generation, a high proportion is shipped as a raw product with processing, in whole or in part, only as necessary when excess impurities are mined with the coal. This chapter will deal primarily with plants that process or wash coal to some extent and only incidently with mines shipping raw run-of-mine coal crushed to a top size of, usually, 2 to 4 in., with little, if any, other treatment. ECONOMICS OF COAL PREPARATION During the past decade, major changes have occurred affecting the market, profit, and long-rang planning of the coal industry. Mining companies have become "partners" with consumers at many new and some old mines, both for steam and metallurgical coals. Coal properties have become "assigned" tonnages at mutually agreed upon conditions and prices. Lower unit-train tariffs have been instrumental in helping coal markets to compete against oil and atomic energy. Cod prices for power plants are still on a Btu (British thermal unit) basis but with more emphasis on sulfur content. For metallurgical coal, the lower and medium volatile coals are in demand and the price rises, generally, as the volatile percentage is lower. Moisture affects the Btu value of coal almost the same as ash content, but dusty conditions during loading and unloading are no longer accept-

Jan 1, 1973

By G. A. Vissac

METHODS of coal preparation have been greatly developed and improved during the past few years. Under the pressing competition from substitutes that have been displacing coal as a source of heat or power, the coal industry has been able, in many cases, not only to hold its own but to regain much of the lost ground, by offering better products of a higher value. The purpose of this paper is to present, in a brief and simple form, the principles of the latest methods and machinery used in coal preparation, in order to enable the coal operator t0 select methods and equipment capable of solving his own problems in the most efficient and economical way. The paper will deal, in the main, .with coal cleaning. It must be emphasized, however, that a complete coal preparation study covers many other operations, such as handling, screening, de-dusting, dust-proofing, and ash-conditioning. Handling Coal From the producing face to the railway car, coal must be handled with great care, t0 prevent degradation, because the coarser sizes are not only easier to clean than fines but, for our markets, they are often the more valuable. Generally speaking, such care is less important or is unnecessary in the Old Country, where conditions are different. The best way to minimize breakage is to avoid gravity methods in coal transportation. All chutes in a preparation plant should be shaken mechanically, and cleaning processes requiring large surge bins must be avoided. De-Dusting De-dusting of coal is accomplished by the use of vibrating screens, fans, or classifiers, or by a combination of these. Fines below 1/32-in. (or coarser than this, with some coals) can very seldom be cleaned efficiently. Common practice is to discard them immediately, if the moisture content of the coal allows this to be done. Otherwise, they are liable to give unnecessary trouble, either in the form of dust or sludge, which are difficult to collect or to settle. Flotation is the only process which will effectively clean fines.

Jan 1, 1937

By Harry L. Washburn, Robert L. Llewellyn, W. J. Halvorsen

Many of the problems that occur in the preparation plant originate from practices in the mine. Impurities in raw coal can be in the seam itself or from extraneous material taken in mining from the roof or bottom. In the case of underground mines, the choice of mining equipment will affect the size consist and the amount of extraneous material included with the coal. Also, governmental regulations concerning the degree of rock dusting, gobbing underground, and cleanup have increased the dirt in raw coal. Sulfur dioxide emission standards, on the other hand, are pressuring the coal industry to clean coal more thoroughly. Coal supplied for coking purposes is nearly all upgraded by washing, while for the largest market, electric power generation, a high proportion is shipped as a raw product with processing, in whole or in part, only necessary when excess impurities are mined with the coal. This chapter will deal primarily with plants that process or wash coal to some extent (Fig. 1) and only incidentally with mines shipping raw run-of-mine coal crushed to a top size of, usually, 51 to 102 mm (2 to 4 in.), with little, if any, other treatment. JUSTIFICATION FOR COAL PREPARATION During the past decade, major changes have occurred affecting the market, profit, and long-range planning of the coal industry. Mining companies have become "partners" with consumers at many new and some old mines, both for steam and metallurgical coals. Coal properties have become "assigned" tonnages at mutually agreed upon conditions and prices. Lower unit-train tariffs have been instrumental in helping coal markets to compete against oil and nuclear energy. Coal prices for power plants are still on a Btu (British thermal unit)

Jan 1, 1981

By Harry L. Washburn, Robert L. Llewellyn, W. J. Halvorsen

Many of the problems that occur in the preparation plant originate from practices in the mine. Impurities in raw coal can be in the seam itself or from extraneous material taken in mining from the roof or bottom. In the case of underground mines, the choice of mining equipment will affect the size consist and the amount of extraneous material included with the coal. Also, governmental regulations concerning the degree of rock dusting, gobbing underground, and cleanup have increased the dirt in raw coal. Sulfur dioxide emission standards, on the other hand, are pressuring the coal industry to clean coal more thoroughly. Coal supplied for coking purposes is nearly all upgraded by washing, while for the largest market, electric power generation, a high proportion is shipped as a raw product with processing, in whole or in part, only necessary when excess impurities are mined with the coal. This chapter will deal primarily with plants that process or wash coal to some extent (Fig. 1) and only incidentally with mines shipping raw run-of-mine coal crushed to a top size of, usually, 51 to 102 mm (2 to 4 in.), with little, if any, other treatment. JUSTIFICATION FOR COAL PREPARATION During the past decade, major changes have occurred affecting the market, profit, and long-range planning of the coal industry. Mining companies have become "partners" with consumers at many new and some old mines, both for steam and metallurgical coals. Coal properties have become "assigned" tonnages at mutually agreed upon conditions and prices. Lower unit-train tariffs have been instrumental in helping coal markets to compete against oil and nuclear energy. Coal prices for power plants are still on a Btu (British thermal unit)

Jan 1, 1981

By M. E. Prunty

Activity in coal preparation in 1967 was on the up-swing and all indications are that demands will be greater in the future. Feed tonnages to plants are increasing and a significant factor is that the top size being fed to plants is decreasing. This has been brought about by market demands, better cokability in some cases and emphasis on sulfur reduction in others. New plants are being built and some are in operation in the coal fields of southern Illinois. These plants are producing metallurgical coal in circuits that contain heavy medium cyclones and froth flotation on the - ½ mm x 0.

Jan 2, 1968

By Robert L. (Original by) Llewellyn

Many of the problems that occur in the preparation plant originate from practices in the mine. Impurities in raw coal can be in the seam itself or from extraneous material taken in mining from the roof or bottom. In the case of underground mines, the choice of mining equipment will affect the size consist and the amount of extraneous material included with the coal. Also, governmental regulations concerning the degree of rock dusting, gobbing underground, and cleanup have increased the dirt in raw coal. Sulfur dioxide emission standards, on the other hand, are pressuring the coal industry to clean coal more thoroughly. Coal supplied for coking purposes is nearly all upgraded by washing, while for the largest market, electric power generation, a high proportion is shipped as a raw product with processing, in whole or in part, only necessary when excess impurities are mined with the coal. This chapter will deal primarily with plants that process or wash coal to some extent (Fig. 1) and only incidentally with mines shipping raw run-of-mine coal crushed to a top size of, usually, 51 to 102 mm (2 to 4 in.), with little, if any, other treatment.

Jan 1, 1981

By B. W. Clyburn

"Coals from the Corporation's Lingan and No. 26 mines are classified as high-volatile A bituminous, with a very low inherent ash and containing a/l essential properties to provide metallurgical coal, with the exception of a high sulphur content. Only through proper cleaning at low specific gravity can the pyritic sulphur fraction of the coal be liberated to an extent where final sulphur meets coking standards. This first section of the paper deals with the operation of a Dutch State Mines heavy-media cyclone circuit to achieve an actual separation in the region of 1.30 specific gravity. A discussion of the parameter of control which must be applied along with an appraisal of the results obtained is included in the paper.IntroductionVery high fluidity and unusually low ash are the outstanding characteristics of coal from Devco's mines in the Harbour seam of the Sydney coal field.However, sulphur content, mainly pyritic, ranges from 1 to 2.5070. To obtain the low and consistent sulphur level required in metallurgical coking coals, preparation at low specific gravity is required .Metallurgical coke is used as the fuel in an iron blast furnace. Its sulphur content largely determines the quantity of slag required to remove it and therefore influences furnace productivity and unit costs.Typical data on the various coal properties of importance in the production of coke are included in Table I. Necessity of Low-Gravity SeparationThe design of any coal preparation plant requires the study of washability properties of the coal to be treated to determine the quantity and quality of coal produced at a given specific gravity along with the difficulty in accomplishing that separation.Their low ash content allows the important washability aspects of Harbour seam coals to be represented by sulphur! specific gravity curves (Fig. I). This particular example indicates that a yield of 54.5% is attained, at a sulphur content of 1.20%, for a perfect separating device operating with a 1.29 S.G. cut point.Material rejected from this separation still contains usable coal, which is recovered as middlings by separating at a higher gravity."

Jan 1, 1980

By Vas Choudhry

The eighties are likely to witness the first commercial-size coal-to-gasoline plant(s) in the U.S., although uncertainty regarding crude prices and cautious involvement of the Federal Government in the synfuels development are evident. The formation of The U.S. Synthetic Fuels Corporation with passage of the Energy Security Act is projected to pave the way for some of the projects on a moderate scale. The corporate objectives (1) are to provide funds for supporting a number of feasibility studies and loan guarantees for the construction of at least some commercial-size plants and the possibility of product price supports or purchase commitments. There are a number of coal conversion processes (2) currently under evaluation for producing either gaseous or liquid plus gaseous fuels, the other processes such as SRC I are for producing desulfurized deashed clean solid fuel for commercial use.

Jan 1, 1982

By E. L. Horner

"Srnoky River Coal is capable ofprocessing 3 million tonnes per year ofrun-of-mine coal at the Smoky River Coal preparation facilities to produce 2.1 million tonnes of high quality, low volatile coking coal for export markets. Multi-seam surface and underground mining operations are scheduled to maintain raw coal feed to the plant. Two beneficiating circuits wash the coal. A heavy medium cyclone circuit cleans the plus 0.5 mm coal and a froth flotation circuit cleans the minus 0.5 mm coal. Clean coal is thermally dried, loaded into unit trains, treated for dust suppression, and transported to west coast port facilitiesf or export. Plant by-products are used as thermal fuel Jn an adjacent power station. Quality control procedures ensure efficient resource recovery for a yield of uniform specification product, at a 7% ash level. Introduction Smoky River Coal operates surface and underground mines in the Smoky River coalfield. Approximately 3 million tonnes per year (mt/ a) of run-of-mine (ROM) coal can be processed at the coal preparation plant to provide 2.1 mt/ a of clean, high quality, low volatile bituminous coking coal. Coal is processed by heavy media and froth flotation cleaning circuits and is thermally dried.Raw Coal Characteristics The characteristics of the ROM coal, both in terms of quality and size consistency, vary with intrinsic seam qualities and mining methods employed. The two seams mined (No. 4 and No. 10) show distinctly different washability characteristics. Seam No. 4 contains relatively few middlings and can be readily cleaned by dense-medium cyclones and froth flotation to give a clean coal at specification ash content. Seam No. JO is more difficult to wash, and the ash content of the clean coal is higher than No. 4 seam at the same operating conditions. However, when the upper I m is excluded from the plant feed, the remaining lower section has washability characteristics similar to No. 4 seam. Coal mined by underground means sometimes contains caprock and consequently tends to be dirtier than similar coal mined by surface means."

Jan 1, 1985

By Victor Phillips

The Humphrey Preparation Plant of Christopher Coal Company, located in Monongalia County, West Virginia, was built to process the combined production of the Pursglove No. 15 and the Humphrey No. 7 Mines. Both Mines operate in the Pittsburgh Seam, primarily producing Metallurgical Fuel destined for by-product ovens in the Pittsburgh District. The results of an extensive core-drilling program have established sufficient reserves of low-sulfur coal to justify a 20,000 ton-per-day preparation plant, This is the story of the preparation phase of this combined operation. Christopher Coal Company operated the Pursglove No. 15 Mine to produce steam coal, which was prepared in a conven-

Jan 1, 1958

By J. R. Dawson, J. A. Glunt

Vesta No. 4 and 5 mines supply most of the high volatile coal required for Jones & Laughlin's by-product coke plants. Until 1944 all coal produced in these mines was loaded by hand. Pressure to mechanize at Vesta was brought on by the manpower shortage in World War II, and in 1943 a decision was made to change to mechanical loading. It was the opinion of those concerned that by use of selective mining the coal would be clean enough to be processed by the existing preparation plants. At that time coal cleaning at Jones & Laughlin consisted of hand picking the larger sizes at the mine tipples and wet washing at plants located at the Pittsburgh and Aliquippa Works. A typical section of the Pittsburgh seam as it occurs at Vesta is shown in Fig. 1. The 14 to 16 in. of drawslate immediately over the coal is too soft to be used for roof and must be taken down, leaving the rooster coal just above for roof. In selective mining an attempt is made to mine the coal under the drawslate first and then load out the drawslate separately as refuse. In full seam mining slate and coal are shot down at the same time and loaded out.

Dec 1, 1956

By J. N. Cox

Coal preparation is based on the properties of noncombustable materials (impurities) in coal being different from the organic constituents. The most commonly used property difference is density, via its affect on settling rates; and either gravitational or centrifugal forces can be used to remove impurities. However, examination of various particles settling rate correlations shows that at smaller sizes, particle drag becomes a very important factor. Classification, based on differential settling rates, becomes impractical and some property other than density must provide the basis for fine coal cleaning. Froth flotation and agglomeration employ differences in surface properties to clean coal. These methods are very successful except that the oxidized surface of a pyrite particle is somewhat hydrophobic and will tend to be collected with the organic portion of the coal. Surface property cleaning techniques have not been very effective in rejecting sulfur, except for two-stage flotation.

Jan 1, 1984

By A. I. A. Salama, M. W. Mikhail

"A comprehensive software package has been developed at the Western Research Centre to meet many of the coal preparation requirements in the Canadian coal industry. This package performs three main functions: (1) data handling and manipulation; (2) data analysis, including the generation of washability data, performance evaluation and prediction, density and size modelling, evaluation of density and size partition characteristics, and attrition curves; and (3) graphics output.The software described in this paper is potentially a valuable tool for coal preparation plant engineers and operators for evaluating process performance and adjusting plant density separator cutpoints. Moreover, the analytical laboratory technician could find this package very useful in manipulating and presenting laboratory results."

Jan 1, 1997

By E. E. Donath, W. L. Crentz, J. D. Doherty

The principal washing problems in preparing coal for the synthetic fuel industry may be stated as: (1) ash removal for the Bergius process; and (2) sulphur removal for the Fischer-Tropsch process. A study is made of the effect of ash on oil losses during the elimination of the nonliquefiable portions of the coal in the hydrogenation process. The oil loss increases with ash content and results in increased consumption of coal, hydrogen, and power.

Jan 4, 1950

By Eugene R. Palowitch

From the late 1880s to the present, the Appalachian region continues to be a dominant supplier of premium-quality coals. The region contains an estimated 93.4 Gt (102.7 billion st) of demonstrated reserves in Alabama, eastern Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia. Therefore, Appalachia will remain a source of quality coals for the metallurgical, export and utility markets. Figure 1 shows the annual production of coal in Appalachia and nationally from 1970 through 1993 (Energy Information Administration, 1994). During that 23-year period, annual domestic coal production almost doubled. Coal production from Appalachia increased at an average annual rate of only 0.7%. Coal production remained essentially constant at about 409 Mt/a (450 million stpy). Thus, Appalachia's market share decreased from 69.8% in 1970 to 47.2% in 1993 - a drop of almost one-third (Energy Information Administration, 1994).

Jan 1, 1995

By John Griffen

Methods of coal preparation in England, including usage of American units such as the Chance sand flotation process and Denver flotation cells, are compared with methods used in the United States. Problems of the coal industry in Holland are summarized.

Jan 2, 1951

By Thomas Fraser, H. F. Yancey

PRIOR to the war just ended, Germany was the greatest coal producer in continental Europe. In 1943 the production of coal, bituminous and higher in rank, together with brown coal calculated to the equivalent amount of bituminous coal, is estimated to have been about 240 million metric tons, according to the War Department. Before the war production in Germany exceeded consumption. No other country in continental Europe except Poland had a large surplus. However, England's surplus was the largest in Europe as a whole. Before World War II the Ruhr Basin normally supplied about 70 pct of the total production of high-rank coal, the Saar and Aachen about 6 pct each, Upper Silesia about 14 pct, and Silesia and Saxony the remainder. Nearly one third of the brown coal was produced in the Rhineland, a little less than one half in central Germany west of the Elbe River, and about one fourth east of the Elbe. Bituminous coal and brown coal together constituted by far the most important energy resources of the old German Reich. Bituminous coal furnished nearly 70 pct of the total energy requirement, brown coal supplied about 25 pct, and water power, wood, petroleum and alcohol together aggregated only 7 pct. Because it was the most important single mineral resource of Germany, an excess of coal enabled the Reich to import nearly all the other mineral products that she lacked, such as iron ore from Lorraine. The area adjacent to the coal fields was supplied with gas from an interconnected grid. Similar electric grids are based on brown coal with the power stations at the mines. Coal tar provided the foundation for the development of the extensive German chemical industries as exemplified by the I. G. Farbenindustrie. For almost a century, German scientists have been adequately supported both by the State and by industry in studying improved methods of utilizing coal. In Germany the mineral rights were reserved by the State and ordered extraction of coal was enforced. Each lease comprised a relatively extensive area, which accounts for the generally large size of the mines and mining companies. In 1938 there were 160 mines in the Ruhr, with a total output of 125 million tons but go pct of the production was controlled by 20 companies. By far the largest single coal-mining company in Germany was the Gelsenkirchener Bergwerke A. G., which produced nearly 27 million tons in the Ruhr in 1937. Second was Saargruben A. G., a State-owned company operating in the Saar, which produced more than 13 million tons. Third was Bergwerksgesellschaft Hibernia A. G., with 10 million tons, also in the Ruhr. Briquettes are made from both bituminous coal and brown coal, but in 1938

Jan 1, 1946