Search Documents

By W. A. McCurdy, Joseph W. Leonard, T. S. Spicer

INTRODUCTION by T. S. SPICER and J. W. LEONARD Utilization from the Point of View of the Preparation Engineer The primary interest of the coal preparation engineer is process design, operation and maintenance to produce an acceptable product which can be sold at the greatest possible profit. Because of these interests, attention to the unrealized potential value of coal is sometimes neglected. The intent of this chapter is to alert the preparation engineer to the utilization possibilities of both the product as well as the tributary coal flow moving through a modem coal preparation plant. Thus, coal types having similar physical and chemical properties tend to become increasingly concentrated according to size, specific gravity and/or surface chemistry. The basis for any unrealized potential derives directly from the coal seam itself. Most coal seams consist of coal bands and benches which are sandwiched together in layers and which visually differ from each other by physical structure and luster. Randomly selected physical and chemical ranges determined from layers of coal in a single seam can easily differ by as much as 30 Hardgrove grindability indices, 0.30 of a specific gravity point, 20 percentage points of ash, six percentage points of dry volatile matter and 10 percentage points of total sulfur.1 Similar wide variations exist for calorific value, seam moisture content and undoubtedly, for any other conceivable coal test parameter which might be used for comparative purposes. These observations all point to the long established fact that coal is not homogeneous as conventional analytical methods might tend to indicate, but is instead a highly heterogeneous substance. Since both coal and associated minerals entering a preparation plant are highly heterogeneous, a multi-product potential beginning with certain flotation cell concentrates and ending with plant refuse may exist. Such a potential can and to a limited extent is achieved at some operations by drawing off coal according to size, specific gravity and/or surface chemistry differences from individual coal cleaning processes. Such a sequenced draw-off of coal of increasing ash increments could yield, among other products, chemical coals, coking coals, coals for pulverized fuel boilers, cyclone boiler coals, coals for cement plants, limestone, shale and clay. Basis for Coal Evaluation and Selection Despite the known heterogeneity of coal, the final analysis of a given coal product is customarily reported as a single average since coal has always

Jan 1, 1968

By W. A. McCurdy, Joseph W. Leonard, William F. Lawrence

INTRODUCTION Utilization from the Point of View of the Preparation Engineer The primary interest of the coal preparation engineer is in process design, operation, and maintenance to produce an acceptable product that can be sold at the greatest possible profit. Because of emphasis upon these interests, attention to other potential values of coal is sometimes neglected. The intent of this chapter is to alert the preparation engineer to the utilization possibilities of the product as well as the tributary coal flow moving through a modern coal preparation plant. The basis for any unrealized potential derives directly from the coal seam itself. Most coal seams consist of coal bands and benches sandwiched together in layers that differ visually from each other in physical structure and luster. Randomly selected physical and chemical ranges determined from layers of coal in a single seam can easily differ by as much as 30 Hardgrove grindability indices, 0.30 of a specific gravity point, 20 percentage points of ash, 6 percentage points of dry volatile matter, and 10 percentage points of total su1fur.l Similar wide variations exist for calorific value, seam moisture content, and, undoubtedly, for any other conceivable coal test parameter that might be used for comparative purposes. These observations all point to the long-established fact that coal is not homogeneous, as conventional analytical methods might tend to indicate, but is instead a highly heterogeneous substance.

Jan 1, 1979

By Frederick J. Rich

INTRODUCTION Coal characterization involves a variety of analyses which are designed to yield as much information as possible about the properties of coal. The types of analyses which are now regarded as necessary for any truly quantitative assessment of coal include the following: 1. proximate analysis 2. ultimate analysis 3. petrographic analysis The two traditional forms of analyses are the proximate and ultimate types. A proximate determination reveals the amount of moisture, volatile matter, fixed carbon, and ash which are present in the coal. Nowadays, a sulfur determination is usually included in the proximate analysis. The ultimate analysis, in contrast, includes a major alkaline oxide determination, which tells how much sodium, calcium, and potassium are found in a sample. Sulfur forms, i.e. sulfide and sulfate vs organic sulfur, are also identified as well as carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and trace element concentrations. Proximate and ultimate analyses have been used for many years. The petrographic analysis, one which identifies and quantifies organic microcomponents of coal, is a comparatively new technique of coal characterization. Petrography adds great detail to a coal analysis and, to be sure, is a necessary component of any complete analysis. Coal is not at all uniform in its composition. Material from different mines within one coal-producing region will display varia-

Jan 1, 1983

The saying that a "prophet" is without honor in his own country does not always hold true, as is shown by the following from one of the local papers, which appeared under the above heading: "Edwin Ludlow, for more than seven-years vice-president of the Le-high Coal.& Navigation Co., with headquarters in Lansford, has resigned, to take effect July 1, when he will take up his residence in New York and engage as a consulting engineer. Mr. Ludlow, during the incumbency of his present position, has demonstrated his efficiency as an engineer and general manager in many directions, notable among which are the almost perfect methods in practice in the inside workings of the several operations under his charge and the erection of the most complete, most practical and most commodious breakers for the preparation of the mine product for market. In addition, his relations with organized labor have been cordial and his dealings with its representatives have been invariably based upon the principle of fair play."

Jan 7, 1919

By Noel F. Boyd

Coal can be liquefied and gasified by several methods, all of which are being investigated and evaluated because each has its own advantages and disadvantages in terms of capital costs, end-products, and extent of required gas clean-up. Since coal conversion requires coal preheating to some extent, all these schemes begin with a coal-preparation step in a pressurized and heated reactor vessel where, in most cases, some additive or catalyst is usually injected. Extracting hydrogenated fuels from coal is not really a new science. Many people still recall the old "coal oil" that fired the lamps of stoves of rural America until the 1920's; the coal oil was produced by a basic Fischer- Tropsch method which has since been further developed to synthesize liquid fuels in the form of 86 to 90-octane gasoline and diesel fuel.

Jan 9, 1974

COAL DIVISION Established as a Division September 20, 1929 A. Lee Barrett, Chairman Ralph E. Kirk, Chairman-elect David R. Mitchell, Secretary-Treasurer Professor of Mining The Pennsylvania State College State College, Pa.

Jan 1, 1952

Regulation of the Coal Industry. BY HOWARD N EAVENSON (Tech Pub 711, also Trans, vol 119 3400 words) A review of conditions in the bituminous coal industry during the last 15 years and of the attempts to remedy them through Appa¬lachian Coals, Inc, and through the NRA The lack of any provision in the so-called "Guffey" law for conservation of our coal supplies is pointed out and the efforts at regulation of the English coal industry are described Assuming that some regulation of the industry is necessary to maintain reasonable working and living conditions and that Federal control by compulsion will not be possible, the requirements for regulation

Jan 1, 1937

By AIME AIME

MORE than thirty members of the Coal Division attended the Coal Land Valuations Round Table on Monday morning. Chairman Dilworth stated that the Committee had been appointed to take up the question and, after reading the list of members of the Committee, pointed out that the object of the meeting was to formulate a plan of action rather than to discuss any phases of valuation, per se. To this end he presented a tentative outline of points to be considered in the future by the Committee. After a lively discussion on the desirability of inclusion of some questions in the agenda of the Committee, the following outline was adopted :

Jan 1, 1931

By C. C. Whittier

PLANS are well matured for the joint meeting of the Coal Division and the Ohio Section of the Institute at Columbus, Ohio, Oct. 27 and 28, at which a large attendance is expected. The proceedings for a day and a half will be devoted largely to the uses of coal, the program providing for two technical sessions in the auditorium of Battelle Memorial Institute (505 King Ave.) on Friday, and various plant inspec¬tions on Saturday morning. By way of diversion on Saturday afternoon arrangements have been made for attendance en bloc at the football game between Ohio State and Northwestern, 100 seats having been reserved for the game at $2.40 each-as long as they last. An inventory of the high lights of the meeting would be incomplete without reference to the informal banquet at the Deshler-Wallick hotel on Friday evening, for which Eli T. Conner, Chairman of the Coal Division, is down for a talk, and Howard N. Eavenson, Vice-president of the Institute, will be the principal speaker. The program in detail is as follows:

Jan 1, 1933

By AIME AIME

THE Hazleton district of the Pennsylvania Anthracite Region will be the scene Oct. 14 and 15 of the fall meeting of the Coal Division and the Pennsylvania Anthracite Section. Here, coal mining has been active for more than 100 years and hereabouts industrial necessity inspired the numerous inventions of the Pardees, Eckley B. Coxe, a former A.I.M.E. president, and the Marltles, who contributed much to the success of the Institute in its early days, as well as to the upbuilding of modern methods in the anthracite and bituminous industries. Headquarters will be the Altamont Hotel, Hazleton, Pa. There will be two technical sessions Friday, registration preceding the first which is scheduled for 11 a.m. to 1 p. m. The second will be called at 2:30 p.m. Saturday is reserved for mine and plant visits, with golf and tennis after luncheon for those so inclined. The ladies are cordially invited to the meeting and arrangements have been made for their participation in much of the program. The chairmen of the committees preparing for the meeting are: Donald Markle, president, Jeddo-Highland Coal Co., General Committee; R. E. Hobart, mechanical superintendent, Lehigh Navigation Coal. Co., Committee on Visits and Inspections; H. D. Kynor, general manager, Northumberland Mining Co., Committee on Programs and Papers; B. H. Stockett, general manager, Weston; Dodson, Inc., Reception Committee.

Jan 1, 1932

By AIME AIME

THANKS to the excellent preliminary work of: the Division officers and the local committee the fall meeting of the Coal Division at Bluefields was a brilliant success. West Virginia was at its best with its beautiful mountains, good roads and foliage, just beginning to turn to autumn colors. The meeting began on time and was kept on time throughout. The papers were-well prepared and, being on subjects of live interest, provoked 'lively discussion. One factor in bringing this about was that they were not too numerous and that with one exception copies had been submitted in advance a sufficient time to permit of them having been studied. The Friday morning session was presided over by John .J. Lincoln of the Crozier Coal and Coke Co. and president of the Pocahontas Coal Operators Association. After brief announcements by Thomas H. Clagett, chairman of the local committee, regarding plans for the two day's involved, and by Howard N. Eavenson, chairman of the Division, the reading of papers was taken up.

Jan 1, 1931

By C. M. Smith

PILOTED by Cadwallader, Evans, Jr., as chairman, the Coal Division got under way Monday morning for the first of three consecutive sessions. N. F. Patton started the ball rolling with a paper on the economics of anthracite distribution, which was ably discussed by H. J. Rose, W. S. Blauvelt, and others. Mr. Patton pointed out many incongruities in freight rates, dealers' margins, and other factors which are disturbing the distribution of anthracite, one result being that trucks are hauling at least six million tons of anthracite annually, half of which is stolen. In the discussion of the papers the desirability of greater uniformity in the production and shipment of coal from month to month was urged; with larger summer price concessions as a means toward this end. "Performance Expectancy of Domestic Underfeed Stokers for Anthracite," by Allen J. Johnson, brought this important platter down to date by showing the range in capacities and efficiencies to be expected from well-made stokers, and by detailing other of their operating characteristics. One of his most interesting points is that the efficiency of domestic stokers is practically equal to that of handfiring for good installations and operations of both

Jan 1, 1935

By AIME AIME

A LUSTY baby of the Institute, the Coal Division, showed that it had acquired a full set of teeth and was capable of man's work at the Division meeting at Fairmont, W. Va., on March 26 and 27. At this second of a series of field meetings, the first of which was held in Pittsburgh last fall, the industry in the East was represented from top to bottom and good humor and enthusiasm were the predominant notes. West Virginians are always good hosts and this meeting would have proved the statement to any inclined to doubt it. The spacious auditorium of the Fairmont Hotel was arranged for the technical sessions, the hotel being headquarters for the meeting. About a hundred and twenty-five representatives were registered and in attendance when Thomas G. Fear, chairman, opened the morning session at 10 o'clock Mr. Fear first introduced Howard Eavenson, vice-chairman of the morning program, who, as chairman of the Coal Division, had labored long and cheerfully to make the meeting successful. Mr. Eavenson talked briefly on what the organization was doing, pointing out that these field meetings were designed to bring the members into closer touch with the parent Institute and give the younger engineers in the field a better opportunity to participate in the work the Institute is doing. He congratulated the various committees for their work in promoting the meeting.

Jan 1, 1931

Jan 1, 1940

Jan 1, 1936

Jan 1, 1938

Jan 1, 1942

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1932

Jan 1, 1934