Search Documents

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

By Elmer H. Citron

The Monterey Coal Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Carter Oil Company of Houston, Texas, recently awarded a contract to build the Monterey No. 1 Preparation Plant, which will be located near Carlinville, Illinois, to the McNally Pittsburg Manufacturing Corporation. The preparation plant will be one of the most modern jig preparation plants in the State of Illinois. Illinois No. 6 coal will be delivered by a 48" slope belt having 35-degree carrying idlers, operating at 650 FPM and operating on an incline of nearly 17 degrees. The slope belt is driven by two 450 BP motors and will deliver the mined coal at the rate of 1800 TPH to a stationary step-type ' screen having six-inch openings. The overproduct from the stationary screen will discharge into a 10' x 24' McNally Rotary Breaker and the underproduct will bypass the rotary breaker. The rotary breaker is equipped with heavy manganese screens with 6 ½" diameter openings. The sized 6" x 0 coal from the stationary step screen and the rotary breaker will be discharged by gravity to a 4%" raw coal incline storage belt. The 48" raw coal storage belt will deliver the 6" x 0 sized coal at the rate of 1800 T?H to an 8000 ton concrete raw coal silo, 70 feet in diameter and 1x7 feet high. The 6" x 0 sized coal will be drawn from the concrete storage silo by seven (7) 36" wide reciprocating plate feeders. Five feeders are to have constant speed drives at a rated capacity of 145 TPH each. Two (2) feeders will have remote con- trolled variable speed drives, to provide a varying feed.

Jan 1, 1970

By Stanley G. Butcher

"Introduction Many operators in western Canada, with a background in the minerals industry, talk of ""coal beneficiation"", whereas the coal industry generally uses the term ""coal preparation"" . The sophisticated cleaning circuits and thermal drying units found in western Canada makes the term beneficiation particularly appropriate. This chapter uses standard coal preparation terminology(l,2J and assumes general knowledge of coal preparation unit processes and equipment(3,4,5). The geologic setting and mining methods of western Canada, described elsewhere in this volume, present for preparation run-of-mine coals which have particular problems. As a result the cost of preparation is a higher proportion of the total minesite production costs than in other coal fields . Preparation requirements are determined by the types of coals being produced and the markets in which they are sold. Western Canadian coals have a low sulphur content and do not require cleaning on this account. Prepared coal from western Canada has to be shipped vast distances -to the Pacific Rim countries and Ontario in particular -and the savings in transport costs justify the high costs of preparation. Factors which dictate selection and operation of the preparation processes are: i) Market specifications and coal rank. ii) Size distribution of particles and particularly the liability of coal and refuse particles to degrade during handling and processing. iii) Quantity and characteristics of the associated refuse. iv) Washability characteristics (the distribution of particles by specific gravity within each size fraction). v) Surface characteristics of the fines. vi) Variability of the raw coal. Where the product (coal or discard) has a high fines content special consideration must be given to dewatering, the removal of surface moisture, to give acceptable handle ability characteristics. In the severe winter climate of the western foothills and mountains thermal drying is necessary to prevent freezing of washed coal in stockpiles and railcars."

Jan 1, 1985

By M. Kaya

The main purpose of this study was to design a modular/mobile coal preparation plant with a capacity of 300 t/h for Seyitömer B3 vein (almost 70% of the whole SLI deposit). Firstly, coal washing properties and washability curves were determined by sink and float tests. Then, equipment sizing, selection, flow sheet development, economic evaluation, investment and operating costs were determined for coarse (-150+18mm), fine (-18+0.5mm) and slime (-0.5+0.1mm) coals. Economic evaluation of the proposed flow sheet showed the feasibility and profitability of the investment.

Jan 1, 2006

By J. W. MacDonald

PROPERTY AND PRODUCTION: Around 100 Million Tons of Recoverable Coal are available from the approximate 10,000 acres allocated to the mine. Over 1300 acres of surface land holdings extend well beyond the limits required for plant site, storage tracks, water supply reservoir, settling ponds and waste disposal. COAL: Extensive core drilled testing confirmed the early indicated high quality of the #6 Seam Washability data show less than four percent of the' coal seam required removal to provide a superior product for the available market. PREPARATION PANT DESIGN: The limited needs enabled Preparation Plant Design to meet the requirements without inclusion of novel equipment. The simplified needs afforded ample opportunity for considering increased automation where advantage or economy was antioipated. Plant design included protection of opportunity for pre-drying in advance of air cleaning the fine coal and accommodations for addition of Dense Media separating equipment in event warranted or required by future market changes. Protection is also afforded for addition of Raw Coal Storage accommodations in event warranted. Figure I shows the Preparation Plant Flow Sheet.

Jan 1, 1961

By Maria I. De Rosa

Table 28 and figure 10 show the number of fires and fire injuries for coal preparation plants by state during 1990-1999. Table 28 also shows the risk rates, employees' working hours, and lost workdays by state. For coal preparation plants, 91 fires occurred in 1 1 states during 1990- 1999. Twenty-three of those fires caused 25 injuries (the yearly average was 9.1 fires and 2.5 injuries). Ten fires and eight injuries involved contractors. The Ewhr value was 24 1 x 10' hr (Irr = 0.02 l), and the LWD value was 198. Pennsylvania had the most fires (24 fires and 4 injuries), whereas West Virginia (22 fires and 7 injuries) and Kentucky (22 fires and 7 injuries) had the most fire injuries. Among these states, Kentucky had the highest injury risk rate value (Irr = 0.025). Table 29, partly illustrated in figure 11, shows the number of fires, fire injuries, risk rates, employees' working hours, and lost workdays by time period. The number of fires decreased during most of the periods (an increase is seen only during the last period). The number of fire injuries show a decrease followed by an increase during the periods, accompanied by a decline in employees' working hours throughout the periods. The Irr values follow patterns similar to those shown by the injury values (see table 29 and figure 11). Tables 30-35 show the number of fires by ignition source, method of detection and suppression, equipment involved, location, and burning material by time period. Figure 12 shows the major variables during 1990-1999. Table 36 shows the fire injuries per number of fires causing injuries and total fires by year, ignition source, equipment involved, and location.

Jan 1, 2004

By J. A. Russell

"UNTIL the last few years, the collieries of the Dominion Coal Company, Limited, while highly mechanized as to the cutting and transportation of the coal, still relied on the hand-loading of coal from the seam onto face conveyors. In these circumstances it was possible to assure that no large proportion of extraneous materials would be loaded with the coal, and the product could be quite well cleaned for the market by screening and hand-picking.Within the past few years, however, the Company has introduced an intensive programme of mechanization which will result in the virtual elimination of hand-loading .of coal. It has been the experience of other producers that mechanical loading inevitably leads to a very large increase in the amount of impurities in the product. This is occasioned by the fact that, at least up to the present, all types of loading machines have relied on the coal being broken from the seam by under-cutting and shooting. In this operation, a certain amount of roof and pavement material inevitably becomes mixed with the coal and, since selective loading is impossible with a loading machine, all this foreign material is loaded out with the product."

Jan 1, 1952

By A. I. A. Salama, M. W. Mikhail, R. J. Mikula

"The Coal Research Laboratory (CRL) of CANMET along with other research organizations in coal-producing countries envisage major benefits from computer applications in coal preparation, Some of these benefits are greater system flexibility, improved coal preparation plant performance efficiency and efficient utilization of manpower, all of which result in economic benefits. Computers can be applied for both on-line and off-line purposes; this paper focuses on the on-line applications from the process control point of view.A critical discussion of the different analog and digital process control systems is presented. Recent developments in Great Britain, West Germany, Poland and Australia on automation and instrumentation using on-line measurements of coal ash and moisture contents are identified.The CRL research and development strategy aimed at achieving on-line computer control of an automated coal preparation plant is presented.IntroductionIn the past twenty years an enormous progress in the area of computer technology has been noticed. Computer applications in industrial processes offer greater system flexibility, improved plant performance efficiency and efficient utilization of manpower. Significant computer control development in mineral processing has already been achieved. Although progress has been made in the area of computer applications in coal preparation, more effort is needed to utilize the full potential.The computer applications in coal preparation can be viewed as off-line and on-line. Considerable progress has been reported in the area of off-line computer applications, especially in the areas of modelling, performance evaluation/prediction and statistical analysis. However, only modest progress in on-line applications has been reported(1-7). This paper will focus on: online instrumentation and process control applications, different analog and/or digital control systems, on-line automation and instrumentation in other countries and CRL strategy toward pilot plant automation."

Jan 1, 1985

Up to thirty years ago, coal preparation in western Canada, except at four plants, had not included actual coal washing. The exceptions were at Nanaimo and Royston, B.C., where tub washers and wet tables were in use; at Hosmer, B.C., using. Robinson cones; and at Leitch Collieries, Passburg, Alta., using a feldspar jig. The two last named collieries had a short life and were not operating in 1920. The industry was divided, as at the present day, into two sections, steam (bituminous) coal and domestic (largely sub-bituminous) coal, the first generally supplying industrial needs and the second householcl and other heating requirements. The two sections overlap to some small degree today as prepared sizes, chiefly stoker, and briquettes, from steam coal are shipped for house-hold use, and domestic slacks are used in certain industrial plants. The .domestic operator, for reasons shown later, was not primarily concerned with actual coal washing as a phase of coal preparation, and bent his efforts to improvement of screening and loading plants, with hand-picking of coarse sizes. The bituminous operator, on the other hand, felt it necessary by 1920 to consider coal washing. When the mines were comparatively young, coal quality could be controlled to a considerable degree by selective mining, by leaving behind some of the seam or by-passing districts in a mine where the coal was of inferior quality to that in other districts. This obviously had its limitations, and so the next step was coal washing.

Jan 1, 1952