Search Documents

By L. E. Shiffman

This paper describes the operation of two kerosine flotation plants in Alabama for cleaning —10 mesh bituminous coal. One plant treats washer sludge, the other raw coal. Data on capacity efficiency and capital and operating costs is given. Methods for increasing cell capacity are discussed. IN cleaning coal it has long been recognized that methods which give excellent results for the coarser sizes may give poor or even no cleaning for the finer sizes. Effective cleaning of the fines, therefore, is usually a separate and distinct problem. For many years the problem of fines was considered of relatively minor importance. Now there is growing interest in methods of cleaning the fine sizes of coal because: 1. There are more fines. Increasing mechanization and the adoption of full seam mining methods have resulted in the production of a greater percentage of smaller particles than were produced by hand loading methods. 2. The fines have deteriorated in quality. The same causes that have led to increased quantity have also operated to decrease quality through greater contamination with slate, rock, and other diluents. 3. The fines have become more valuable. When coal was comparatively cheap, loss of the finer sizes was tolerated but, with the rapid increase in the cost of mining coal, it has become imperative that the maximum amount of clean coal be recovered from the mixture of coal and rock delivered to the tipple. 4. In many cases, the fines have become a stream pollution problem. Increasing governmental activity and legislation to prevent stream pollution often have made it necessary to retain the fine material which formerly was permitted to escape with the washer effluent into flowing streams. The Sloss-Sheffield Steel and Iron Co. operates four coal mines, all within a 20-mile radius of Birmingham, Ala., with a total annual production of 1,-250,000 tons of washed coal. Three of these mines are in the Mary Lee seam and one in the Jefferson seam. Although some steam and domestic coals are produced, the major portion of the coal is used to make coke for blast furnace operation. Fine coal is desirable for coking, and all the coal so used by Sloss is crushed to 1/4 in. Therefore, there is no problem of an outlet for even the finest sizes of coal. Since the coal is used for metallurgical purposes, low ash is of greater importance than would be the case if it were used for steam generation or domestic heating. Based on present blast furnace practice at Sloss, it is calculated that each percentage of ash in the coal carries a penalty of $0.22 per ton of coal. Thus there is a considerable margin for operating costs in a fine coal cleaning method that will result in materially lowering the ash content of the cleaned coal. Development of Fine Coal Cleaning Problem In 1942 Sloss reopened its Bessie mine and constructed at this location a new preparation plant to clean 11/4 in. x 0 coal from the Mary Lee seam.

Jan 1, 1951

By L. E. Shiffman

This paper describes the operation of two kerosine flotation plants in Alabama for cleaning —10 mesh bituminous coal. One plant treats washer sludge, the other raw coal. Data on capacity efficiency and capital and operating costs is given. Methods for increasing cell capacity are discussed. IN cleaning coal it has long been recognized that methods which give excellent results for the coarser sizes may give poor or even no cleaning for the finer sizes. Effective cleaning of the fines, therefore, is usually a separate and distinct problem. For many years the problem of fines was considered of relatively minor importance. Now there is growing interest in methods of cleaning the fine sizes of coal because: 1. There are more fines. Increasing mechanization and the adoption of full seam mining methods have resulted in the production of a greater percentage of smaller particles than were produced by hand loading methods. 2. The fines have deteriorated in quality. The same causes that have led to increased quantity have also operated to decrease quality through greater contamination with slate, rock, and other diluents. 3. The fines have become more valuable. When coal was comparatively cheap, loss of the finer sizes was tolerated but, with the rapid increase in the cost of mining coal, it has become imperative that the maximum amount of clean coal be recovered from the mixture of coal and rock delivered to the tipple. 4. In many cases, the fines have become a stream pollution problem. Increasing governmental activity and legislation to prevent stream pollution often have made it necessary to retain the fine material which formerly was permitted to escape with the washer effluent into flowing streams. The Sloss-Sheffield Steel and Iron Co. operates four coal mines, all within a 20-mile radius of Birmingham, Ala., with a total annual production of 1,-250,000 tons of washed coal. Three of these mines are in the Mary Lee seam and one in the Jefferson seam. Although some steam and domestic coals are produced, the major portion of the coal is used to make coke for blast furnace operation. Fine coal is desirable for coking, and all the coal so used by Sloss is crushed to 1/4 in. Therefore, there is no problem of an outlet for even the finest sizes of coal. Since the coal is used for metallurgical purposes, low ash is of greater importance than would be the case if it were used for steam generation or domestic heating. Based on present blast furnace practice at Sloss, it is calculated that each percentage of ash in the coal carries a penalty of $0.22 per ton of coal. Thus there is a considerable margin for operating costs in a fine coal cleaning method that will result in materially lowering the ash content of the cleaned coal. Development of Fine Coal Cleaning Problem In 1942 Sloss reopened its Bessie mine and constructed at this location a new preparation plant to clean 11/4 in. x 0 coal from the Mary Lee seam.

Jan 1, 1951

By L. E. Shiffman

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.

Jan 1, 1951

By L. E. Shiffman

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.

Jan 1, 1951

By G. H. Matheson, J. M. W. Mackenzie

The flotation rate of coal has been studied using a continuous laboratory flotation cell and a multiple exposure photographic technique. The effects of particle size, reagent additions and cell turbulence on the flotation rate of coal have been investigated. The results have been analyzed in terms of current theories of particle bubble encounter and adhesion. The rupture forces which occur during particle bubble encounter have been shown to have an important effect on the flotation rate of coarse coal particles. The flotation of coal is a time dependent process, and in order to obtain a complete understanding of the operation it is necessary to determine the kinetics of the process. In coal flotation, the flotation rate and the associated values of cell productivity in terms of tons per kilowatt-hour and tons per cubic foot of cell volume are of greater importance than in most other mineral flotation operations. The reasons for this are associated with the low unit value of coal and the relatively high cost of coal flotation compared with other coal cleaning processes. An important aspect of coal flotation kinetics is the design of coal flotation cells. The cells used in many coal cleaning operations are often replicas of those used for the treatment of sulfide ores and are not necessarily suitable for the treatment of coal washing pulps, which usually contain a higher percentage of coarse and floatable material than the sulfide pulps for which the cells were designed. This disadvantage of many coal flotation cells has been recognized by Russian engineers who, by the addition of baffles to their subaeration coal flotation cells have increased the cell capacity by 100%. Investigation of the variables which influence flotation kinetics and cell productivity are, therefore, important to the coal industry where flotation is the only accepted method of cleaning the fine (-1/2mm) coal. The kinetics of the flotation process have been investigated in detail by Schumann10 who developed a continuous flotation cell which permitted the study of flotation under steady state conditions. This technique has been used by Gaudin et a1.,6 Brown and Smith and recently by Jowett and Savfi.7 The latter authors have developed a refined mathematical treatment for interpreting the results of continuous laboratory tests. Attempts have also been made to study flotation kinetics using conventional batch testing techniques. The experimental difficulties, however, and the problems of determining the order of the flotation rate process have made this technique of dubious value. A summary of the proposed rate equations for batch testing and the difficulties associated with this technique is given by Brown and Smith. 2 The experimental techniques described above are concerned with the rate of production of froth product. However, several authors, notably Sutherland, 11 Bogdanov1 and Philippoff, 9 have analyzed flotation

Jan 1, 1963

By J. T. Peters, N. Schapiro, R. J. Gray

Petrographic studies of coal have resulted in a better understanding of the origin and composition of coal and have added to the knowledge of how and why coals differ in their response to various prepamtion and utilization processes. Petrographic methods can now be used in scientific economic exploitation of coals. Because the United States Steel Corp. is one of the largest consumers of coal and coke, there is a continuing interest in the corporation in perfecting a better understanding of coal so that it can be utilized more effectively. Coal is a heterogeneous substance composed principally of plant material that has been altered by a complex geochemical process to form rock. The science of coal is anthracology. The ultimate aim of anthracology is determining the relationships and differences among coals. The fundamental aim is finding out why coals differ. The practical application is determining how the differences in coals affect their utilization properties. Coal, like other sedimentary rocks, consists of more than one material. Fig. 1, a photograph of a natural fracture and a polished surface of a lump of coal, displays heterogeneity in terms of the banded ingredients present. The earliest attempts to describe coal were based on its hardness and appearance. ' Thus, coal has been described as hard or soft, bright or dull, and banded or nonbanded. The variations in the hardness and physical appearance of the coal reflect differences in materials that constitute the coal. The banded nature, lustre, and texture depend upon the relative proportions of the various constituent materials. Even the earliest petrographic investigations of coal produced evidence of of the heterogeneity of the coal substance and shoul have destroyed the concept of the unit coal molecule. Coals (Fig. 2) that appear the same frequently consist of different microscopic materials and may behave differently during mining, pulverization, washing, or coking. In Fig. 3, the upper photograph shows a bright at-trital medium-volatile coal, and the micrograph at the right shows some of the materials that constitute the coal. The lower photograph shows a bright attrital low-volatile coal and the corresponding micrograph shows material of similar origin to those from the medium-volatile coal. Any petrographic description of a coal that has meaning in terms of its utilization begins with a microscopic examination. Numerous attempts have been made to describe coal on the basis of the materials that constitute the coal.2*3 Initial petrographic studies were directed towards the question of the origin of coals without any true basis for studying the metamorphic changes in the

Jan 1, 1962

By Richard A. Mullins, James J. Merle

Systematic sampling and analysis in coal-washing plants results in product control and economical operation. A well-organized laboratory system reduces operating costs and increases sales if the operating and sales companies make full use of information it supplies. The operating cost of a control laboratory is less than 1 pct per ton of coal produced. THE system of laboratory control as practiced by the Ayrshire group of mines was begun with the construction and organization of the first laboratory in conjunction with the completion of its first wash-ery in 1941. The primary purpose of this laboratory was to maintain a check on the quality of the coal produced from the washing plant. The laboratory was equipped to determine proximate analyses, float-and-sink tests, and screen analyses, and was staffed by a chemist. an assistant. and a technician. Members AIME, are Assistant Preparation Manager and Chief Chemist, respectively, Ayrshire Collieries Corp. and Subsidiaries, Danville, Ill. Joint AIME-ASME Fuels Conference. French Lick. October 1949. TP 2855 F. Discussion (2 copies) may be sent to Transactions AIME before June 30, 1950. Manuscript received Aug. 22, 1949. Soon it became apparent (1) that product control could be accomplished, (2) that a substantial reduction in operating costs could be effected by close control of coal losses in the rejects, and (3) that information furnished by the laboratory was of continuous value to the operating and sales companies. Consequently the laboratory function was expanded to supply them with additional data as required. As the parent company expanded and new mines were added, control laboratories were established at each mine equipped with washeries, and a central laboratory was maintained at one of the mines that was located equally convenient to all of them. A well-planned control laboratory assures production of a uniform, high-quality product. Whenever coal of substandard grade is loaded inadvertently, the sales company can be informed and the proper channel of distribution made. Conversely only constant and strict laboratory supervision can insure proper production of the various grades. Knowing the product, the producer can keep out of many customers' arguments that may be both awkward and expensive. Double checking between customers and mine laboratories have solved many disputes' Some nager insist On buying coal On the analysis basis only, with penalties for substandard coal and premiums for coal above normal quality. A substantial percentage of the coal sold by the Ayrshire group is of this nature. The usual procedure is for the customer to sample and analyze the coal as it is unloaded at the plant, and the mine laboratory samples it as it is loaded at the mine for subsequent analysis by the central laboratory. Only the unloaded moisture is considered, rather than the average of mine and plant moisture, and the buyer sends duplicate samples to the central mine laboratory for this determination. The average of the two analyses determines the price of coal at the mine. In this particular case, the laboratory plays an important part in increasing realization for two reasons: (1) every attempt is made to maintain plant efficiency and product quality as high as possible, (2) check on analyses and sampling by the buyer or seller.

Jan 1, 1951

By Richard A. Mullins, James J. Merle

Systematic sampling and analysis in coal-washing plants results in product control and economical operation. A well-organized laboratory system reduces operating costs and increases sales if the operating and sales companies make full use of information it supplies. The operating cost of a control laboratory is less than 1 pct per ton of coal produced. THE system of laboratory control as practiced by the Ayrshire group of mines was begun with the construction and organization of the first laboratory in conjunction with the completion of its first wash-ery in 1941. The primary purpose of this laboratory was to maintain a check on the quality of the coal produced from the washing plant. The laboratory was equipped to determine proximate analyses, float-and-sink tests, and screen analyses, and was staffed by a chemist. an assistant. and a technician. Members AIME, are Assistant Preparation Manager and Chief Chemist, respectively, Ayrshire Collieries Corp. and Subsidiaries, Danville, Ill. Joint AIME-ASME Fuels Conference. French Lick. October 1949. TP 2855 F. Discussion (2 copies) may be sent to Transactions AIME before June 30, 1950. Manuscript received Aug. 22, 1949. Soon it became apparent (1) that product control could be accomplished, (2) that a substantial reduction in operating costs could be effected by close control of coal losses in the rejects, and (3) that information furnished by the laboratory was of continuous value to the operating and sales companies. Consequently the laboratory function was expanded to supply them with additional data as required. As the parent company expanded and new mines were added, control laboratories were established at each mine equipped with washeries, and a central laboratory was maintained at one of the mines that was located equally convenient to all of them. A well-planned control laboratory assures production of a uniform, high-quality product. Whenever coal of substandard grade is loaded inadvertently, the sales company can be informed and the proper channel of distribution made. Conversely only constant and strict laboratory supervision can insure proper production of the various grades. Knowing the product, the producer can keep out of many customers' arguments that may be both awkward and expensive. Double checking between customers and mine laboratories have solved many disputes' Some nager insist On buying coal On the analysis basis only, with penalties for substandard coal and premiums for coal above normal quality. A substantial percentage of the coal sold by the Ayrshire group is of this nature. The usual procedure is for the customer to sample and analyze the coal as it is unloaded at the plant, and the mine laboratory samples it as it is loaded at the mine for subsequent analysis by the central laboratory. Only the unloaded moisture is considered, rather than the average of mine and plant moisture, and the buyer sends duplicate samples to the central mine laboratory for this determination. The average of the two analyses determines the price of coal at the mine. In this particular case, the laboratory plays an important part in increasing realization for two reasons: (1) every attempt is made to maintain plant efficiency and product quality as high as possible, (2) check on analyses and sampling by the buyer or seller.

Jan 1, 1951

By M. R. Geer, H. F. Yancey, P. S. Jacobsen

Two growing problems confront the preparation engineer—still further restrictions on stream pollution and a greater proportion of fine coal as more and more continuous miners come into use. The de-watering screens, centrifuges, and settling ponds that sufficed a few years ago must often be supplemented by more effective equipment, and in some instances the finest solids are now being recovered by vacuum filtration, once considered too costly in many coal washeries. Unfortunately not all slurries can be readily filtered. Some are virtually unfilter-able, and others do not permit the high cake rates needed to hold costs within reason. Often, however, these difficult slurries can be rendered filterable by flocculation. Starch and lime have long increased settling rate in thickeners and can also aid filtration. More recently there have been other flocculants, primarily synthetic polymers or gums. Reports of their great effectiveness prompted the U. S. Bureau of Mines to test their use in filtration as part of its program on recovering and cleaning fine coal. The object of the present work was to compare some of the newer flocculants with starch and lime and to test the reaction of different types of slurries to flocculation. Three natural slurries, three synthetic coal-clay mixtures, and five flocculants were tested, all with a laboratory filter leaf. Slurries and Flocculants Tested: First of the slurries was the thickener feed from the washed coal section of the Michel colliery of Crow's Nest Pass Co. Ltd., Michel, B.C. As shown by the screen and ash analyses in Table I, practically all this slurry was finer than 28 mesh, and about half the solids were finer than 200. Substantially all material coarser than 200 mesh was clean coal, but the ash content of 20.7 pct in the finest size indicates a moderate amount of impurity. This coal is medium-volatile bituminous in rank. Slurry was also obtained from the Black Diamond washery of Palmer Coking Coal Co., King County, Wash. This underflow of a 1/2-mm vibrating slurry screen is a waste product discharged to a settling pond. As shown by the data in Table I it contained about 20 pct material finer than 200 mesh, which analyzed 77.5 pct ash, indicating a high proportion of clay. The coarser sizes were also high in ash content because of the presence of bone and shale. Black Diamond coal is on the dividing line between bituminous and subbituminous rank. The third slurry, from the washery of Roslyn-Cascade Coal Co. in Kittitas County, Wash., was the underflow of a battery of 8-in. cyclones that is wasted with the coarser refuse from the plant. In both size and ash content this slurry was similar to the Black Diamond, but since it was a cyclone-underflow product, the fraction finer than 200 mesh undoubtedly contained a much smaller proportion of finely divided clay than was present in the Black Diamond slurry. The Roslyn-Cascade coal is high-volatile A bituminous in rank. Initially the slurry samples were stored in the laboratory at a concentration of 40 pct solids. A progressive change in filtration and flocculation characteristics during storage was noted, however, presumably because of progressive disintegration of the clay. After careful testing demonstrated that the slurry solids could be dried and then repulped without changing the original filtration characteristics, this procedure was adopted. The flocculants used were Separan 2610, Kylo 27, Jaguar MD-A, Idaho potato starch, and lime. The lime was used as a slurry, the Separan 2610 as a 0.10 pct aqueous solution, and the other flocculants as 0.50 pct aqueous solutions. The starch was causti-cized with sodium hydroxide before use. As some of the flocculants are reported to deteriorate on storage, new batches of flocculants were prepared every two days. Test Procedure: Fig. 1 diagrams the filter leaf apparatus employed. This consists of a test leaf having an effective area of 0.10 sq ft., a 60°, 8 1/2-in. diam cone to hold the slurry sample, a variable-speed electric stirrer, vacuum gage, bleed line for controlling vacuum, filtrate flask, moisture trap, and vacuum pump. Two filter cloths were selected—Saran SA 603, a monofilament, coarse-weave cloth, and polyethylene PO-801 HF, a monofilament, fine-weave cloth. The Saran was selected to provide maximum cake rate without regard to clarity of filtrate and the polyethylene to provide the best quality of filtrate without regard to cake rate. The test charge for the filtering vessel consisted of 800 g of solids (previously soaked for 24 hr) and

Jan 1, 1960

By H. F. Yancey, M. R. Geer, C. L. Allyn, R. H. Eckhouse

Four coals were treated in the Humphreys spiral concentrator, and the products were examined by float-and-sink and screen-sizing tests to determine fundamental performance characteristics. The efficiency of the separation between coal and impurity was shown to be influenced greatly by particle size. FOUR coals exhibiting different washability characteristics were washed in the Humphreys spiral concentrator and the products examined by float-and-sink and screen-sizing tests to determine the mechanics of the separation between coal and impurity. With one coal, each 1/2-in. increment of the full width of the stream in the spiral was examined separately to determine where each size and specific-gravity fraction of the feed was stratified. The basic performance characteristics of the spiral were found to be the same for all of these coals. The coarsest fraction of heavy impurity stratified so far out in the stream that it could not be removed through the refuse ports and thus either entered a middling product or contaminated the washed coal in the case of a two-product separation. Impurity particles finer than about 100-mesh also were carried out in the main body of the stream and therefore were not removed in the refuse product. Little loss of clean coal in the refuse occurred in sizes coarser than 28-mesh or finer than 100-mesh, but considerable coal of intermediate size stratified in the stream that was drawn off through the refuse ports. Because of this modifying influence of particle size, the spiral is unable to make an efficient two-product separation between coal and impurity without some retreatment. Recirculation of a middling product through the same spiral as a means of obtaining more efficient operation was not attempted in this investigation. The size and specific-gravity composition of the middling product are, however, such as to render it amenable to simple hydraulic classification for recovery of coal. Retreatment of a middling product would improve the efficiency of the spiral, but even when making a substantial amount of middling, considerable clean coal enters the refuse product. Consequently, retreatment of a combined refuse-middling product would appear to offer greater promise for providing maximum efficiency. Because of the sizing characteristics of the spiral, a classified feed can be treated with higher efficiency than is possible on a natural raw coal. For this reason, semiclassified feeds, such as silt-bank or classifier-underflow materials, can doubtless be treated with higher efficiencies than those shown for raw coals in this report. Performance is, of course, only one of many factors that enter into the choice of cleaning equipment. The fact that the one company now using the spiral for cleaning coal has built a second spiral plant is ample evidence that the inherently low efficiency of this unit may be overshadowed by the low operating costs afforded by its extreme simplicity. Introduction A number of factors enter into the selection of coal-cleaning equipment, and most of them bear directly on the final cost of prepared coal. One of these factors is performance of the cleaning unit in terms of the efficiency of the separation it effects between clean coal and refuse. The importance of performance in the selection of a coal-cleaning unit varies with the difficulty of the cleaning problem. Obviously, if the character of the coal is such that only certain types of cleaning units are capable of yielding a clean product meeting market requirements, performance is of prime importance. If, on the other hand, the cleaning problem is so simple that any type of cleaner will provide coal of suitable quality, performance is important only insofar as it affects costs by determining the amount of salable coal lost in the washery refuse. With the objective of providing the coal industry with information that is helpful in the selection of

Jan 1, 1951

By R. H. Eckhouse, M. R. Geer, H. F. Yancey, C. L. Allyn

Four coals were treated in the Humphreys spiral concentrator, and the products were examined by float-and-sink and screen-sizing tests to determine fundamental performance characteristics. The efficiency of the separation between coal and impurity was shown to be influenced greatly by particle size. FOUR coals exhibiting different washability characteristics were washed in the Humphreys spiral concentrator and the products examined by float-and-sink and screen-sizing tests to determine the mechanics of the separation between coal and impurity. With one coal, each 1/2-in. increment of the full width of the stream in the spiral was examined separately to determine where each size and specific-gravity fraction of the feed was stratified. The basic performance characteristics of the spiral were found to be the same for all of these coals. The coarsest fraction of heavy impurity stratified so far out in the stream that it could not be removed through the refuse ports and thus either entered a middling product or contaminated the washed coal in the case of a two-product separation. Impurity particles finer than about 100-mesh also were carried out in the main body of the stream and therefore were not removed in the refuse product. Little loss of clean coal in the refuse occurred in sizes coarser than 28-mesh or finer than 100-mesh, but considerable coal of intermediate size stratified in the stream that was drawn off through the refuse ports. Because of this modifying influence of particle size, the spiral is unable to make an efficient two-product separation between coal and impurity without some retreatment. Recirculation of a middling product through the same spiral as a means of obtaining more efficient operation was not attempted in this investigation. The size and specific-gravity composition of the middling product are, however, such as to render it amenable to simple hydraulic classification for recovery of coal. Retreatment of a middling product would improve the efficiency of the spiral, but even when making a substantial amount of middling, considerable clean coal enters the refuse product. Consequently, retreatment of a combined refuse-middling product would appear to offer greater promise for providing maximum efficiency. Because of the sizing characteristics of the spiral, a classified feed can be treated with higher efficiency than is possible on a natural raw coal. For this reason, semiclassified feeds, such as silt-bank or classifier-underflow materials, can doubtless be treated with higher efficiencies than those shown for raw coals in this report. Performance is, of course, only one of many factors that enter into the choice of cleaning equipment. The fact that the one company now using the spiral for cleaning coal has built a second spiral plant is ample evidence that the inherently low efficiency of this unit may be overshadowed by the low operating costs afforded by its extreme simplicity. Introduction A number of factors enter into the selection of coal-cleaning equipment, and most of them bear directly on the final cost of prepared coal. One of these factors is performance of the cleaning unit in terms of the efficiency of the separation it effects between clean coal and refuse. The importance of performance in the selection of a coal-cleaning unit varies with the difficulty of the cleaning problem. Obviously, if the character of the coal is such that only certain types of cleaning units are capable of yielding a clean product meeting market requirements, performance is of prime importance. If, on the other hand, the cleaning problem is so simple that any type of cleaner will provide coal of suitable quality, performance is important only insofar as it affects costs by determining the amount of salable coal lost in the washery refuse. With the objective of providing the coal industry with information that is helpful in the selection of

Jan 1, 1951

By H. F. Yancey, M. R. Geer, C. L. Allyn, R. H. Eckhouse

W. M. Bertholf—This is an excellent report of a well-conducted investigation, of sufficient scope to provide generally useful information. Some years ago we had occasion to test the Humphreys spiral on the middling from our table plant. The conclusions reached in this investigation come as no surprise to us. In certain applications it is virtually impossible to improve on the spiral from the monetary returns point of view even though its "efficiency" may be low. We have noted that in all successful applications of the spiral the feed is "classified," hence we were somewhat disappointed in the showing the spiral made on the Poplar Ridge coal, the only one of the four which could really be considered the equivalent of a classified feed. As was noted in the paper, however, this coal contained a considerable amount of middle and high-gravity material, apparently more than enough to make up for the theoretical advantage of small particles in these categories. A comparison of particle size in the various specific gravity classes of the four coals is given in table XXV. Table XXV. Comparison of Particle Size in Various Specific Gravity Classes. (Unit size, 150 m to 0.105 mm) Black Eagle Clements Poplar Ridge Rosly,n 1.3 Float 7.47 10.60 8.68 9.66 1.3 x 1.4 7.89 7.96 7.58 8.20 1.4x1.6 7.24 8.36 5.58 6.85 1.6 x 1.8 7.98 8.31 3.42 7.33 Sink 1.8 7.85 7.13 5.09 7.41 Avg 7.69 10.08 7.15 8.38 This tabulation indicates that there was very little difference in the size of the various gravity fractions for three of the coals, Poplar Ridge varying the most. Examination of figs. 3, 6, 7, and 8 reveals a general similarity of behavior for all coals except Black Eagle. Would the authors care to speculate on the reasons for the difference in the distribution curve for the sink 1.60 material in the washed coal of fig. 3 as compared to the others? This difference is particularly noticeable in the 8xl4-mesh size. Was there a "shape effect"? J. D. Price and W. M. Bertholf—The performance data on three of the coals studied appear to be typical, but there are certain departures from the general pattern in the case of the Poplar Ridge coal which are large enough to deserve special consideration. For example: 1. Despite the high proportion of sink 1.60 material in the feed, it was not possible to make a corresponding proportion of high-ash reject. (See table XVI.) 2. Even though approximately 70 pct of the feed was 1.40 float with an ash content of 6.6 pct, and this

Jan 1, 1951

By R. H. Eckhouse, M. R. Geer, H. F. Yancey, C. L. Allyn

W. M. Bertholf—This is an excellent report of a well-conducted investigation, of sufficient scope to provide generally useful information. Some years ago we had occasion to test the Humphreys spiral on the middling from our table plant. The conclusions reached in this investigation come as no surprise to us. In certain applications it is virtually impossible to improve on the spiral from the monetary returns point of view even though its "efficiency" may be low. We have noted that in all successful applications of the spiral the feed is "classified," hence we were somewhat disappointed in the showing the spiral made on the Poplar Ridge coal, the only one of the four which could really be considered the equivalent of a classified feed. As was noted in the paper, however, this coal contained a considerable amount of middle and high-gravity material, apparently more than enough to make up for the theoretical advantage of small particles in these categories. A comparison of particle size in the various specific gravity classes of the four coals is given in table XXV. Table XXV. Comparison of Particle Size in Various Specific Gravity Classes. (Unit size, 150 m to 0.105 mm) Black Eagle Clements Poplar Ridge Rosly,n 1.3 Float 7.47 10.60 8.68 9.66 1.3 x 1.4 7.89 7.96 7.58 8.20 1.4x1.6 7.24 8.36 5.58 6.85 1.6 x 1.8 7.98 8.31 3.42 7.33 Sink 1.8 7.85 7.13 5.09 7.41 Avg 7.69 10.08 7.15 8.38 This tabulation indicates that there was very little difference in the size of the various gravity fractions for three of the coals, Poplar Ridge varying the most. Examination of figs. 3, 6, 7, and 8 reveals a general similarity of behavior for all coals except Black Eagle. Would the authors care to speculate on the reasons for the difference in the distribution curve for the sink 1.60 material in the washed coal of fig. 3 as compared to the others? This difference is particularly noticeable in the 8xl4-mesh size. Was there a "shape effect"? J. D. Price and W. M. Bertholf—The performance data on three of the coals studied appear to be typical, but there are certain departures from the general pattern in the case of the Poplar Ridge coal which are large enough to deserve special consideration. For example: 1. Despite the high proportion of sink 1.60 material in the feed, it was not possible to make a corresponding proportion of high-ash reject. (See table XVI.) 2. Even though approximately 70 pct of the feed was 1.40 float with an ash content of 6.6 pct, and this

Jan 1, 1951

By Frank Doxey

AT Dominion Steel & Coal Corp. it has long been recognized that continued mechanization of mine operations is necessary in the Pictou, Cumberland, and Sidney coal fields of Nova Scotia. The varied physical conditions in these fields call for special consideration of individual cases before planning is finalized. Because standard equipment cannot be procured which would operate successfully, many experiments have been necessary over the years to keep pace with the progress made in other countries. There are two mines, producing 2000 tpd, located in the Pictou coal field. The field is badly distorted and crossed by many faults. Seams are highly inclined and irregular and vary in thickness from 5 to 40 ft. Entries are difficult to maintain because of squeezing of the coal. ribs and movement of the roof and pavement. Output from the three operating mines in the Cumberland field is 3000 tpd. The field is highly inclined, inclination varying from 12° to 32°. Overlying beds consist of shales and massive sandstone lenses of extreme toughness and are responsible for bumps when the stresses are relieved by extraction. At greatest depth these are among the deepest coal workings in the world. Depth of cover ranges from 2300 to 4000 ft. This prohibits room-and-pillar working and necessitates longwall operation. Working of contiguous seams concurrently to maintain output increases the already difficult conditions. The Sydney field, with a frontage of about 30 miles, is the most important of the Nova Scotia coal fields. With the exception of one small area it is now wholly submarine. Output is approximately 21,000 tpd. Seams are 21/2 to 8 ft thick, and cover in the areas varies from 600 to 2300 ft, with an average of 1500 ft from sea bottom to the top of the seam. The seams dip in a seaward direction, pitches ranging from 6" to 4.0". The shoreline is the last place of entry to the seams and distance from the bank to the working faces is generally over 3½ miles, in some cases as much as 6½ miles. Ventilation is a problem and requires the construction of large permanent airways. Getting and Loading Coal: In 1925, in view of heavy pressures exerted by thickness of cover overlying the seams, roadways and pillars of the room-and-pillar system being worked began to break up and coal was lost. It was decided that a change in the method of extraction in areas with heavy cover was necessary, and experiments were made with many short walls and longwalls varying between 90 and 250 ft. Trial and error proved that the best operating length was between 400 and 500 ft, delivering all coal to the dip, with roadways to the face following a level course. The change-over was gradual, and the technique of roof control developed with the system, so that falls to the face are now very infrequent. An advantage of longwall mining is that it yields 95 pct extraction, especially important in coal seams of high quality or in seams where faults or disturbances restrict the workable areas. This percentage of extraction is based on the fact that the longwall advancing system takes development faces where pitch permits instead of driving headings and leaving roadway pillars. This system yields high tonnage during development and limits loss in extraction to duff left during operations. Accompanying disadvantages, on the other hand, are the heavy construction cost of main roadways and the necessity of driving all new flank face roadways through the gob. If the main roadways are driven through the solid, and large enough pillars are left on each side for protection against flank face weights, then the width of solid coal is approximately 1700 ft. This represents 10.6 pct of the coal available, or 89.4 pct extraction of the whole. These pillars, however, are of such size that they provide a useful pillar drawing area as a final operation of the mine. It may be that although the seam cannot be generally mined by the room-and-pillar method, it can be adapted to

Jan 1, 1955

By Frank Doxey

Louis A. Turnbull (U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D. C.)—This paper is a well-organized concise discussion of progress in mechanization at coal mines in Nova Scotia during the last 50 years. It shows the perseverance and resourcefulness of those responsible for the production of high-quality coal essential to steel production in the area. The development of the Dosco miner and its use in longwall mining at the Sydney

Jan 1, 1955

By C. E. Lesher

THIS paper reports a study of the reactivity of 950°F and 1650°F cokes as measured by relative rates of reduction of iron oxides at temperatures up to 2200°F. Previous work cited shows general acceptance of the theory that reduction by carbon is a gaseous reaction, and that kind and character of carbon as well as particle size have measurable effect on the velocity of reaction. As will be shown, the data obtained in this study confirm those conclusions. The work was not designed to examine iron oxide reduction equilibrium, but if reaction velocity be defined as the speed with which "a reaction tends to approach conditions of equilibrium," the data here presented may be considered as a study of reaction rates, and the relative degree of reduction to metallic iron as the measure of reactivity. Three standardized combinations of Lake Superior brown iron ore with carbon were tested by similar procedures. One combination was a mechanical mixture of carefully sized high-temperature coke (1650°F) with the ore. The second was a mechanical mixture of the ore with Disco* obtained by carbonizing the identical coal at 950 °F. The third was an agglomerate prepared by carbonizing the coal and ore at 950°F, premixed in proportions to give as nearly as possible the same relative amounts of carbon and ore as the mechanical mixtures. This agglomerate, obtained by heating the finely divided ore (through 30 mesh) with coking coal through the plastic temperature range so as to form solid aggregates, gives a product in which the oxide particles are impregnated with, and intimately bound together with low-temperature coke. The agglomerate-—ore-Disco—was most active in oxide reduction; the mechanical mixtures of Disco and ore next in order, with coke the least reactive. General Discussion: Carbon exists in many forms and it is well known that the form or nature of the carbon used in reduction of oxides is related to the critical temperature of reduction. Sugar carbon, charcoal, and lampblack are forms of carbon that will reduce oxides at lower temperatures than high-temperature coke, and coke will, in turn, give a lower critical reduction temperature than graphite. There have been many investigations of this characteristic of carbons. Johnson' reported a difference of 130°F (70°C) in the critical reduction temperature of zinc oxide as between charcoal 1891 °F (1033°C) and Acheson graphite turnings 2021°F (1105°C) with zinc oxide. Bodenstein2 using charcoal and coke, found a difference of 138°F (77°C) comparing an experimental figure of 2066°F (1130°C) for coke and 1928°F (1053°C) for charcoal, in the reduction of zinc oxide. He concluded that this is very marked and observed that the "type of carbon merely raises or lowers the temperature at which rapid reaction takes place." Comparing the effectiveness of types of carbon in reduction of zinc oxide, it was found that a "brown coal coke" gave 97 pct zinc elimination at 1832°F (1000°C), as compared with 48 pct with "hard coal coke."' A wide range of metallic oxides was studied by Tammann and Sworykin,4 who found that the temperature at which decomposition of oxides begins depends on the nature of the carbon used. Carbon in the form of graphite, lampblack, and sugar carbon was investigated. Sugar charcoal will reduce Fe2O3 to Fe3O4 at 842°F (450°C) as compared with 1112°F (600°C) for coke, according to Meyer." Direct reduction of iron oxides by charcoal begins at 1382°F (750°C), but "first becomes intense" at 1652°F (900°C), whereas with coke, direct reduction begins at 1742°F (950°C), and "first becomes appreciable" at 2012°F (1100°C).6 he total reduction of the sample under certain conditions when heated in a current of CO with charcoal was about 100 pct for limonite and about 77 pct for magnetite. Using coke under the same conditions, the respective percentages were 75 and 47. In a study of processes for sponge iron7 by the Bureau of Mines, the conclusion was reached that a low-temperature char from noncoking subbituminous coal is the most satisfactory solid reducing agent. In a critical study of zinc smelting from a theoretical viewpoint Maier8 concluded that the reduction is by CO, that the reaction between ZnO and CO is intrinsically more rapid than the subsequent reduction of CO2 by C, which is limited by diffusion rates, which in part effectively limits the smelting process. Maier said that the operation is improved with the activity of the reducing carbon. An active carbon, he said, is one maintaining a low CO, content in the retort. Reactivity of Carbon: One form of carbon is more potent in reducing oxides than another. A carbon that reacts faster than another at a given temperature is said to be more reactive. Reactivity is measured by several methods, using carbon dioxide, air, or steam as reactants.9 ebastian and Mayers" have developed a method for the determination of absolute reaction rates between coke and oxygen by a study of ignition points under certain conditions. These and other investigators have established the relative reactivity of types of carbon. Lignite, charcoal, bituminous coal, cokes in the ascending order

Jan 1, 1951

By C. E. Lesher

THIS paper reports a study of the reactivity of 950°F and 1650°F cokes as measured by relative rates of reduction of iron oxides at temperatures up to 2200°F. Previous work cited shows general acceptance of the theory that reduction by carbon is a gaseous reaction, and that kind and character of carbon as well as particle size have measurable effect on the velocity of reaction. As will be shown, the data obtained in this study confirm those conclusions. The work was not designed to examine iron oxide reduction equilibrium, but if reaction velocity be defined as the speed with which "a reaction tends to approach conditions of equilibrium," the data here presented may be considered as a study of reaction rates, and the relative degree of reduction to metallic iron as the measure of reactivity. Three standardized combinations of Lake Superior brown iron ore with carbon were tested by similar procedures. One combination was a mechanical mixture of carefully sized high-temperature coke (1650°F) with the ore. The second was a mechanical mixture of the ore with Disco* obtained by carbonizing the identical coal at 950 °F. The third was an agglomerate prepared by carbonizing the coal and ore at 950°F, premixed in proportions to give as nearly as possible the same relative amounts of carbon and ore as the mechanical mixtures. This agglomerate, obtained by heating the finely divided ore (through 30 mesh) with coking coal through the plastic temperature range so as to form solid aggregates, gives a product in which the oxide particles are impregnated with, and intimately bound together with low-temperature coke. The agglomerate-—ore-Disco—was most active in oxide reduction; the mechanical mixtures of Disco and ore next in order, with coke the least reactive. General Discussion: Carbon exists in many forms and it is well known that the form or nature of the carbon used in reduction of oxides is related to the critical temperature of reduction. Sugar carbon, charcoal, and lampblack are forms of carbon that will reduce oxides at lower temperatures than high-temperature coke, and coke will, in turn, give a lower critical reduction temperature than graphite. There have been many investigations of this characteristic of carbons. Johnson' reported a difference of 130°F (70°C) in the critical reduction temperature of zinc oxide as between charcoal 1891 °F (1033°C) and Acheson graphite turnings 2021°F (1105°C) with zinc oxide. Bodenstein2 using charcoal and coke, found a difference of 138°F (77°C) comparing an experimental figure of 2066°F (1130°C) for coke and 1928°F (1053°C) for charcoal, in the reduction of zinc oxide. He concluded that this is very marked and observed that the "type of carbon merely raises or lowers the temperature at which rapid reaction takes place." Comparing the effectiveness of types of carbon in reduction of zinc oxide, it was found that a "brown coal coke" gave 97 pct zinc elimination at 1832°F (1000°C), as compared with 48 pct with "hard coal coke."' A wide range of metallic oxides was studied by Tammann and Sworykin,4 who found that the temperature at which decomposition of oxides begins depends on the nature of the carbon used. Carbon in the form of graphite, lampblack, and sugar carbon was investigated. Sugar charcoal will reduce Fe2O3 to Fe3O4 at 842°F (450°C) as compared with 1112°F (600°C) for coke, according to Meyer." Direct reduction of iron oxides by charcoal begins at 1382°F (750°C), but "first becomes intense" at 1652°F (900°C), whereas with coke, direct reduction begins at 1742°F (950°C), and "first becomes appreciable" at 2012°F (1100°C).6 he total reduction of the sample under certain conditions when heated in a current of CO with charcoal was about 100 pct for limonite and about 77 pct for magnetite. Using coke under the same conditions, the respective percentages were 75 and 47. In a study of processes for sponge iron7 by the Bureau of Mines, the conclusion was reached that a low-temperature char from noncoking subbituminous coal is the most satisfactory solid reducing agent. In a critical study of zinc smelting from a theoretical viewpoint Maier8 concluded that the reduction is by CO, that the reaction between ZnO and CO is intrinsically more rapid than the subsequent reduction of CO2 by C, which is limited by diffusion rates, which in part effectively limits the smelting process. Maier said that the operation is improved with the activity of the reducing carbon. An active carbon, he said, is one maintaining a low CO, content in the retort. Reactivity of Carbon: One form of carbon is more potent in reducing oxides than another. A carbon that reacts faster than another at a given temperature is said to be more reactive. Reactivity is measured by several methods, using carbon dioxide, air, or steam as reactants.9 ebastian and Mayers" have developed a method for the determination of absolute reaction rates between coke and oxygen by a study of ignition points under certain conditions. These and other investigators have established the relative reactivity of types of carbon. Lignite, charcoal, bituminous coal, cokes in the ascending order

Jan 1, 1951

By F. D. Wright

Production of a coal preparation plant is governed by many restrictions, such as the tonnage of different products and blends that can be sold within a given period, capacities and output proportions of the cleaning and sizing units, blending proportions, quality specifications, and costs and prices for the various products. Determination of the tonnage of each product and blend that should be made in order to obtain the maximum profit can be difficult unless a systematic method such as linear programming is used. In this paper the basic method of linear programming is described briefly. The Old Ben No. 9 preparation plant is used as an example to illustrate in detail how eqwations can be written to form a linear programming model of a coal preparation plant. Three sample problems, each requiring 56 or more equations and 63 structural variables, were solved with an IBM 650 computer. Linear programming is one of several mathematical tools used for operations research. It has been applied to many fields and has been used by a number of industries either to maximize the profits of certain operations or to minimize costs. P. B. Nalle and L. W. weeks' have described the use of the method by the Riverside Cement Co. to minimize the cost of blending raw materials to make portland cement. Their problem is to obtain at minimum cost a mix with certain specifications from a number of possible materials which have various costs and various amounts of CaO, SiO2, Fe2O3, and other constituents. In a paper on the use of linear programming by the National Coal Board in England, K. B. Williams and K. B. Halley2 describe how the transportation method, a variation of linear programming, is used to minimize the cost of sending 37 grades of coal from 28 mines to seven central washing plants which produce coal for furnace coke and foundry coke. The various coals have different percentages of volatile matter, moisture, sulfur, ash, and phosphorous, so there is considerable choice in how they can be blended to meet the specifications of the two products. The purpose of this paper is to show how linear programming can be used to maximize the profits of a coal washing plant which produces individual final products as well as blends. The Old Ben Corp. furnished assumed sample data from their Old Ben Mine No. 9 preparation plant for this investigation. However, the data that have been used are entirely the author's responsibility. METHOD OF LINEAR PROGRAMMING Numerous articles and books have been written on the theory and applications of linear programming.3-5 However, since the method has not been widely applied by the mining industry, a brief, nontheo-retical discussion of its basic method seems to be in order. Linear programming (Table I) is used to determine the best possible solution to a number of interdependent activities. It is essentially a method for making systematic selections from a number of possible solutions to determine positively the optimum solution. There may be other equally good solutions but no better ones. Each activity must have linear coefficients and there must be a criterion to judge how good the solution actually is. Linear programming is different from the solution

Jan 1, 1961

By R. R. Estill

THE rank of the Ruhr coal ranges from a high volatile bituminous coal to an anthracite, depending to some extent on the original depth of the seam. The average Ruhr coal corresponds to a soft bituminous American coal of a coking quality. The average thicknesses of individual coal seams being mined are also comparable (59 in. against 65 in. in the United States). However, consideration of seam conditions and mining conditions other than those just mentioned emphasizes differences rather than similarities with United States soft coal. In general, the Ruhr seams now being mined are much more folded and inclined than American seams. Dips of 20' and 30" are common in seams now being worked, and 30 pct of the coal reserves in the district are in seams dipping more than 35". Only on the tops and bottoms of folds do we find rather flat coal seams. In addition to the folding there is extensive displacement by cross faulting plus a certain amount of strike faulting of an overthrust nature, which results locally in doubling or omission of seams. Because of the long history of mining in the Ruhr, nearly all coal lying near the surface has long since been mined out, and we find that the average depth of mining is at present about 2300 ft below the surface. Deep mining, folding, and faulting result in seam conditions requiring a great deal more roof support than one finds in American soft coal mines. In fact only in the anthracite district and the Rocky Mountain and Pacific coal fields do we find somewhat similar conditions. It is easy to say, therefore, that the problem of mechanization of coal cutting and loading in the German mines is quite different from that which we have so effectively met in America with our mobile cutters and loaders, duck bill loaders, and a room and pillar system of mining our drift and slope mines. Partly because of more limited coal reserves, the traditional German mining system is largely the longwall method, which gives an almost complete coal recovery. Backfilling must be extensively practiced to protect the longwall faces, the over and underlying seams and workings, and especially the surface industrialized areas and barge canals. The German engineers have accordingly concentrated their efforts on the design of cutters, loaders, and conveyors suitable to longwall methods rather than room and pillar methods. Undercutters with cutter bars like American models have been in use in the Ruhr since well before World War 11. In 1941 they accounted for 8.5 pct of the production. This percentage, of course, includes coal which was undercut but nevertheless had to be broken down with air hammers or with explosives. The most common of these cutters is the Eickhoff Standard cutter (see fig. 1). This machine does about 95 pct of the undercutting in the Ruhr today, and is available with either compressed air or electrical power and in at least four different sizes. A variation of the cutter is this one with two cutter bars (fig. 2). At the end of 1947 about 200 of these machines and similar cutters were accounting for 13.2 pct of the total production, a production which was, however, only 60 pct of the 1941 production rate, so that the actual cutter tonnage was only up to a small amount over 1941. In 1941 about 3 pct of the production was accounted for by shearing machines making their cut perpendicular to the longwall face. They were similar to those used in the States. These machines are today considered obsolete and now account for only 0.7 pct of the total production. They are located at only a few mines and at present do not seem to have much of a future in the Ruhr. For the future, the Ruhr miner is looking forward to rather extensive mechanization of face work, with two major types of equipment being developed almost simultaneously. On one hand there is the development of cutter loaders for use in relatively hard coal. They represent the further extension of ideas developed after relatively long experience with the Eickhoff cutter. On the other hand there has been since 1942 an intense interest in the Ruhr in the development of face-stripping methods, particularly by the Kohlenhobel (coal plow) and its modification. At the end of 1947 these cutter loaders, Kohlen-hobels and scrapers together were actually accounting for only about 1.4 pct of total production while air hammers still broke 77.1 pct and as much as 1.2 pct was actually broken by hand picks. However,

Jan 1, 1951

By R. R. Estill

THE rank of the Ruhr coal ranges from a high volatile bituminous coal to an anthracite, depending to some extent on the original depth of the seam. The average Ruhr coal corresponds to a soft bituminous American coal of a coking quality. The average thicknesses of individual coal seams being mined are also comparable (59 in. against 65 in. in the United States). However, consideration of seam conditions and mining conditions other than those just mentioned emphasizes differences rather than similarities with United States soft coal. In general, the Ruhr seams now being mined are much more folded and inclined than American seams. Dips of 20' and 30" are common in seams now being worked, and 30 pct of the coal reserves in the district are in seams dipping more than 35". Only on the tops and bottoms of folds do we find rather flat coal seams. In addition to the folding there is extensive displacement by cross faulting plus a certain amount of strike faulting of an overthrust nature, which results locally in doubling or omission of seams. Because of the long history of mining in the Ruhr, nearly all coal lying near the surface has long since been mined out, and we find that the average depth of mining is at present about 2300 ft below the surface. Deep mining, folding, and faulting result in seam conditions requiring a great deal more roof support than one finds in American soft coal mines. In fact only in the anthracite district and the Rocky Mountain and Pacific coal fields do we find somewhat similar conditions. It is easy to say, therefore, that the problem of mechanization of coal cutting and loading in the German mines is quite different from that which we have so effectively met in America with our mobile cutters and loaders, duck bill loaders, and a room and pillar system of mining our drift and slope mines. Partly because of more limited coal reserves, the traditional German mining system is largely the longwall method, which gives an almost complete coal recovery. Backfilling must be extensively practiced to protect the longwall faces, the over and underlying seams and workings, and especially the surface industrialized areas and barge canals. The German engineers have accordingly concentrated their efforts on the design of cutters, loaders, and conveyors suitable to longwall methods rather than room and pillar methods. Undercutters with cutter bars like American models have been in use in the Ruhr since well before World War 11. In 1941 they accounted for 8.5 pct of the production. This percentage, of course, includes coal which was undercut but nevertheless had to be broken down with air hammers or with explosives. The most common of these cutters is the Eickhoff Standard cutter (see fig. 1). This machine does about 95 pct of the undercutting in the Ruhr today, and is available with either compressed air or electrical power and in at least four different sizes. A variation of the cutter is this one with two cutter bars (fig. 2). At the end of 1947 about 200 of these machines and similar cutters were accounting for 13.2 pct of the total production, a production which was, however, only 60 pct of the 1941 production rate, so that the actual cutter tonnage was only up to a small amount over 1941. In 1941 about 3 pct of the production was accounted for by shearing machines making their cut perpendicular to the longwall face. They were similar to those used in the States. These machines are today considered obsolete and now account for only 0.7 pct of the total production. They are located at only a few mines and at present do not seem to have much of a future in the Ruhr. For the future, the Ruhr miner is looking forward to rather extensive mechanization of face work, with two major types of equipment being developed almost simultaneously. On one hand there is the development of cutter loaders for use in relatively hard coal. They represent the further extension of ideas developed after relatively long experience with the Eickhoff cutter. On the other hand there has been since 1942 an intense interest in the Ruhr in the development of face-stripping methods, particularly by the Kohlenhobel (coal plow) and its modification. At the end of 1947 these cutter loaders, Kohlen-hobels and scrapers together were actually accounting for only about 1.4 pct of total production while air hammers still broke 77.1 pct and as much as 1.2 pct was actually broken by hand picks. However,

Jan 1, 1951