Search Documents

By D. S. Kingery, D. W. Mitchell

The authors attended the 11th International Conference of Directors of Safety in Mines Research held in France, July 1963. In addition to Conference discussions pertaining to control of coal dust they had the added assignment to study present European practices for neutralizing the coal-dust explosion hazard. Information was obtained through discussions with the Research Directors, by visits to testing stations and observations of operating mines in various countries. This paper tells what the current practice in this field is in Europe, and how effectively coal dust explosions are controlled. The method is rock dust barriers. CONTROL OF COAL DUST DISSEMINATION Experience in Europe indicates that the control of dust production and dissemination by water or foam systems is not successful except during undercutting. Cybulski, Dawes, and DeBraaf - respectively Director, Mines Research Establishment "Barbara", Katowice, Poland; Principal Scientific Officer, Safety in Mines Research Establishment, Sheffield, England; and Chief, Central Mines Research Establishment, Hoensbroek, Treebeek, The Netherlands - believe that wetted dust becomes readily dispersible and abatement measures should be considered only as a temporary means for reducing the health hazard. In an effort to reduce the health hazard, calcium chloride is used on the floor of main haulageways in Dutch mines and water infusion is practiced in Germany in mines where the coal is relatively porous. With respect to wet coal dust, the Belgians, British, Dutch, French, and Russians reportedly have accepted the results of research from the Polish and American experimental mines on the effectiveness of water as an inert in arresting explosion propagation. The Polish use the two test methods proposed by the U.S. Bureau of Mines1 for evaluation of the adequacy of wetness of mine dust; they require that water be added to the wet dust to maintain a minimum of 50% moisture by weight if dependence is placed on water alone. GENERALIZED ROCK DUSTING The general attitude with regard to protection against coal dust explosions throughout Europe is that generalized rock dusting is a vital primary step to inhibit initial ignitions but definite emphasis is also placed upon the efficiency of rock dust barriers. Those exceptions to generalized rock dusting are Germany and Austria where some rock dusting is done but principal reliance is placed upon rock dust barriers. The rock dust used in Belgium, Holland, Russia, and Poland is coarser than that used in the U. S.; 50% of the dust is through a No. 200 sieve (75 microns). Recent research by the Polish indicates that the portion finer than 20 microns is ineffective in arresting explosion propagation, and that the rock

Jan 1, 1964

By T. Fraser, F. F. Giese, R. L. Sutherland

Under a cooperative agreement between United States Bureau of Mines and the Truax-Traer Coal Company, some operating-scale experiments have been made with the cyclone thickener in the preparation plant of the Shamrock No. 1 mine at Kayford, West Virginia. These tests were made with a 14-in. cyclone of the type developed by the Dutch State Mines in Limburg. It was applied experimentally to the thickening of solids in washery water to obtain performance data to show the range of sizes that may be recovered and other operating characteristics that would indicate the field of usefulness of this device in coal preparation practice. This is a progress report only. It covers results obtained in a series of 17 tests of the operation of what has been considered a unit of commercial size operating on suspensions of fine coal mixed with a relatively small amount of free impurities. The underflow material, after further dewatering in centrifuges, is a marketable grade of coal. The coal at Shamrock No. 1 is mined from the No. 2 Gas seam. It is made up essentially of a low ash coal suitable for byproduct use with one or more bands of splint coal of higher ash content suitable for industrial fuel. The washing plant was installed for the two-fold purpose of removing the free impurities incident to mechanized mining and to separate the run of mine coal into the two types. To accomplish these results it is necessary to make a separation at a specific gravity of about 1.4 to recover the byproduct coal and to separate the splint coal from refuse at a higher gravity. The coarse coal section of the washing plant was put into service about 10 months before the fine coal section was completed. Inadequate screening capacity in the raw coal preparation plant resulted in a portion of the fine coal being fed to the jigs. No provision for preliminary dedusting of the raw coal feed was incorporated in the design. Under the conditions in the initial operating period, separation at the desired lower gravity was not realized, apparently because of the presence of an excessive amount of fine solids in suspension in the wash water. Difficulty in wetting the fine coal may also have been a contributing factor. Additional facilities for the removal of the fine solids from the wash water was indicated. Information then available on the Driessen cone for this purpose was studied and a cooperative agreement with the Bureau of Mines for experimental work with a unit of standard size as developed by the Dutch State Mines was arranged. During the time required for construction of the cone it was found the addition of a small amount of wetting

Jan 1, 1950

By I. C. White, G. H. Ashley, J. A. Bownocker

Among the rich mineral deposits of the great Appalachian field, the Pittsburgh coal bed stands pre-eminent. Other coal beds may cover a wider area, or extend with greater persistence, but none surpasses the Pittsburgh seam in economic importance and value. It was well named by Rogers, and his able assistants of the First Geological Survey of Pennsylvania, in honor of the city to whose industrial growth and supremacy it has contributed so much. Whether or not the prophetic eye of that able geologist ever comprehended fully the part which this coal bed was to play in the future history of the city that gave it a name we do not know; but certain it is that the 7 ft. of fossil fuel, which, in Rogers' time, circled in a long black band around the hills and, overlooking the site of Pittsburgh from an elevation of 400 ft. above the water of the Allegheny and Monongahela, extended up the latter stream in an unbroken sheet for a distance of 200 miles, has been the most potent factor in that wonderful modern growth that has made the Pittsburgh district the manufacturing center of America, and that bids fair to continue until it shall surpass every other district in the world, even if it does not now hold such primacy.' The Pittsburgh coal bed stands today as probably the largest contributor of wealth of any single mineral deposit in the world. If it is not, what other deposit is? It has contributed to Pennsylvania alone more than 2,500,000,000 tons of high-grade coal worth nearly $4,000,000,000; since 1910, it has added more than $2,500,000,000 to the value of Pennsylvania's mineral output. In 1920, this bed2 contributed 127,227,000 tons of coal as follows: Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh district........................ 38,245,000 Connellsville district................................. 34,095,000 Weatmoreland-Ligonier district........................ 16,107,000 88,447,000 West Virginia, Fairmont district........................ 15,571,000 West Virginia-Ohio, Panhandle No. 8 district............. 21,128,000 Maryland-Potomac (Est. one-third of production)......... 2,081,000 38,780,000 Total........................................... 127,227,000

Jan 1, 1927

By T. V. Falkie, D. R. Mitchell

Many operational problems in mine haulage cannot be solved economically by conventional analytic or trial and error methods. However, a method of probabilistic simulation, which is based on the fundamental assumption that many of the variables governing any physical system are probabilistic, has been adapted to certain areas of operations research in coal mine haulage. This paper attempts to illustrate how simulation can be used in basic haulage research and what kind of results can be expected. Optimization in this case is performed in terms of locomotive and car movement, as well as best utilization of men and equipment, and is approached primarily from the standpoint of scheduling of the main haulage. Many operational problems in mine haulage cannot be solved economically by conventional analytic or trial-error methods. However, a method of probabilistic simulation, which is based on the fundamental assumption that many of the variables governing any physical system are probabilistic, has been adapted to certain areas of operations research in mine haulage. In many physical cases several probability distributions interact with each other in special ways, and it is not possible to solve for their combined effect in a mathematical equation. This is often true in the case of mine haulage, where such variables as number of empties or loads per trip, travel times, and number of cars or tons produced in a given time are probabilistic. By using a simple example of one secondary haulage segment of a large underground haulage system, this paper attempts to illustrate how simulation can be used in basic haulage research and what kind of results can be expected. Optimization in this case is performed in terms of locomotive and car movement, as well as best utilization of men and equipment. This is the type of preliminary research that will be needed as a first phase in any major haulage study, whether it be a relatively simple economic analysis or a plan for complete automation. The problem of optimization has been approached primarily from the standpoint of scheduling of the main haulage. It is evident that the method of proba-

Jan 1, 1963

By W. W. Anderson

John Griffen—The author has called attention to an important phase of coal cleaning since there has been considerable loose thinking regarding efficiency formulae and particularly inaccurate application of ones that have been advanced. The unanimous acceptance of an efficiency formula has been prevented because the issue has been beclouded by the fact that the objective of cleaning—-the control of chemical characteristics of the coal such as ash or sulphur content—is attained by an indirect rather than a direct method. The indirect method is usually to effect separation according to differences in specific gravity. Such separation relies on the fact that the desired chemical qualities are roughly inversely proportional to the specific gravity of the particles being separated. However, the sulphur content of the materials found in raw coal usually exhibit a far from straight line relationship with their specific gravities. Mr. Anderson meets this issue squarely by basing his formula on the efficiency of separation according to specific gravity only. It is true that machines that effect primarily a specific gravity separation are in no way directly influenced by the chemical analysis of the materials being handled and it can be argued that it is illogical to measure their efficiency by any criterion other than that of separation according to specific gravity. For the moment, let us accept this basis and analyze the application of the efficiency conception and formula proposed by Mr. Anderson under conditions which he has not considered but that will readily be found. Let us take the separation shown in his table III as an example. He terms this an example of a high order of quantitative efficiency. We will show the weight distribution of the various gravity fractions as between clean coal and refuse in table XV. Only in the gravity range of 1.50 to 1.70 has material been misplaced and, on the assumption that the cleaned coal and refuse are equal in weight, Anderson shows a quantitative efficiency of 99 pet. The gravity of separation is 1.60 and one third of the 1.50 to 1.60 sp gr fraction is misplaced in the refuse while one third of the 1.60 to 1.70 sp gr fraction is misplaced in the cleaned coal. Let us now see what effect the gravity distribution of the total products has on the quantitative efficiency calculated by his formula. Still using the data in table

Jan 1, 1951

By W. W. Anderson

John Griffen—The author has called attention to an important phase of coal cleaning since there has been considerable loose thinking regarding efficiency formulae and particularly inaccurate application of ones that have been advanced. The unanimous acceptance of an efficiency formula has been prevented because the issue has been beclouded by the fact that the objective of cleaning—-the control of chemical characteristics of the coal such as ash or sulphur content—is attained by an indirect rather than a direct method. The indirect method is usually to effect separation according to differences in specific gravity. Such separation relies on the fact that the desired chemical qualities are roughly inversely proportional to the specific gravity of the particles being separated. However, the sulphur content of the materials found in raw coal usually exhibit a far from straight line relationship with their specific gravities. Mr. Anderson meets this issue squarely by basing his formula on the efficiency of separation according to specific gravity only. It is true that machines that effect primarily a specific gravity separation are in no way directly influenced by the chemical analysis of the materials being handled and it can be argued that it is illogical to measure their efficiency by any criterion other than that of separation according to specific gravity. For the moment, let us accept this basis and analyze the application of the efficiency conception and formula proposed by Mr. Anderson under conditions which he has not considered but that will readily be found. Let us take the separation shown in his table III as an example. He terms this an example of a high order of quantitative efficiency. We will show the weight distribution of the various gravity fractions as between clean coal and refuse in table XV. Only in the gravity range of 1.50 to 1.70 has material been misplaced and, on the assumption that the cleaned coal and refuse are equal in weight, Anderson shows a quantitative efficiency of 99 pet. The gravity of separation is 1.60 and one third of the 1.50 to 1.60 sp gr fraction is misplaced in the refuse while one third of the 1.60 to 1.70 sp gr fraction is misplaced in the cleaned coal. Let us now see what effect the gravity distribution of the total products has on the quantitative efficiency calculated by his formula. Still using the data in table

Jan 1, 1951

By R. Q. Shotts

This paper is a review of recoverable reserves of bituminous coal in the Southern Appalachian area, according to the latest published estimates. A few comparisons are made, some apparent trends are discussed, and some comments are made regarding the limitations of present estimates. The definition of Southern Appalachian area used in this report is somewhat arbitrary. It includes all the bituminous coal deposits of Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee. All of West Virginia has been excluded. The East Kentucky and Virginia counties included were selected in connection with a literature study the writer made in 1959 of possible coal supply areas for the Tennessee Valley Authority. The selected counties were considered to be the only ones from which TVA might expect to obtain coal. The availability of coal from some of these counties is doubtful, but no other East Kentucky counties were considered more than remote possibilities. With these limitations, the Appalachian area covered is that from which producers of electric power and steel and commercial coal users, located in the Southeastern U. S., may expect to obtain their supplies of coal. Of course, it is recognized that coal from the eastern interior fields is also available to many of these same organizations. RANK AND QUALITY OF THE COALS Practically all the coals in the Southern Appalachian region are of high volatile A bituminous rank. An occasional sample indicates a slightly lower rank, but such samples may be oxidized or otherwise not representative. Some thin beds in Lookout Mountain and Sand Mountain in Alabama and Georgia, are low volatile bituminous coals, but they have not been mined extensively in modern times. There is a possibility that some of the deeper beds along the southeastern edge of the Warrior field of Alabama are near the Low-medium volatile bituminous dividing line. The Sewanee bed and some other minor ones of the Southern Tennessee field, some of the lower beds in Virginia, many beds in Sand and Lookout Mountains in Georgia and Alabama, one or more beds in the Coosa field, possibly some lower beds in the Cahaba field, and most of the beds along the southeastern edge of the Warrior field and the southern end of the Sequatchie anticline of Alabama, are of medium volatile bituminous rank. The quality of the Southern Appalachian coals is highly variable. Some of them, particularly such prevailingly thin ones as the Black Creek bed of Alabama and the Straight Creek bed of Kentucky, are unusually low in mineral matter— probably the lowest in the U. S. With the exception of certain beds and local areas, Alabama and East Kentucky coals probably have as low average ash and sulfur content as can be found in any sizeable coal area in the country. The sulfur content of Southern Appalachian coals is also variable, but few beds are consistently high in sulfur. In Alabama, sulfur generally increases from southeast to northwest across the Warrior field, but this trend is not quite as clear in the other states. A few beds in Northern Tennessee are prevailingly high in sulfur. All Southern Appalachian coals are potential coking coals if they can be prepared to meet chemical requirements. Only a comparatively small part of the medium volatile A bituminous coal, but most of the medium volatile bituminous coal mined is actually used for coking purposes. An estimate of reserves of coking coal under the requirements of present practice, could be compiled comparatively easily, but this probably has never been done. The reserve of coal that can be coked as an ingredient of a suitable blend is probably many times the size of the reserves of coal that will yield suitable blast furnace and foundary coke without blending. WHAT CONSTITUTES ECONOMICALLY RECOVERABLE COAL RESERVES? When one first realizes the vast extent of the coal-bearing rocks in the Southern Appalachian area, (see Fig. 1) the thought is likely to occur that the supply of coal is inexhaustible. This is particularly true on realizing that in some of the basins of thicker coal-

Jan 1, 1962

By A. L. Bailey, B. A. Landry

W. W. ANDERSON and G. E. KELLER*—We want to compliment the authors on this very thorough paper. It gives information which the coal industry has needed for some time. We hope that the additional information which the authors are collecting will he available shortly. The mixing and riffling procedure that was followed for experimental purposes is obviously not practical in routine float-and-sink testing because of the particle size degradation which would result in handling the sample so many times. It is important to obtain our tloat-and-sink fractions with a minimum amount of handling of material. A statement is made in the paper (p. 80) that "the variable most likely to affect the size of sample required to meet a given preassigned accuracy would be the state or degree of mixing of the coal." We agree that this is a large factor, but do not believe it is the most important factor. Our own opinion is that the most important single factor governing the total gross weight of sample that must be collected is the percentage of the weight of material in the smallest fraction that results from the screening and float-and-\ink operations. In other words, size of sample is governed by the total number of fractionations that must he made, and the distribution of material within the fractions. We can imagine a coal with perfect mixing, but with such a small amount of material in some float-and-sink fraction in one of the coarse sizes that a much larger sample would have to be taken than would be the case with very poorly mixed material, but with a large percentage of coarse material more evenly distributed in all float-and-sink fractions. Our own observation of many float-and-sink tests that we have run in our own organization on many types of coal is that the size of sample that must be used on fine size float and sink is governed more by the requirements for weight of material to be used for analysis in the laboratory than by weight of material necessary to obtain accurate float and sink percentage of weight values. In other words, it is our opinion that very small samples can be used for float-and-sink fractionation in the fine sizes, but that accurate analysis of the fractions will depend on a larger weight of sample being pulverized for the laboratory than is necessary to establish the float-and-sink distribution with respect to weight. A. L. BAILEY and B. A. LANDRY (authors' reply)—The authors thank Messrs. Anderson and Keller for their comments based on long experience. It is agreed that the involved mixing and riming technique used may be disadvantageous from the standpoint of degradation. Fortunately, the paper does point out that the extended riming was unrewarding in causing further mixing. Two large unknowns remain, however: (1) how much of the mixing from the presumed highly unmixed state in the bed was achieved toward the random state during blasting, loading, transportation, screening, and further transportation to the point where the gross sample was taken, and (2) how much of the mixing took place during the preparation described preceding riming. As has been pointed out by one of the authors.6 the degree of mixing has a very large effect on the size of sample required and there are still too few experimental data to show at what stage of coal handling most of the mixing occurs. The discussion states that the weight of material in a screened fraction, or in a float-and-sink fraction, is more important than the mixing factor. We do not believe that these factors are comparable in this instance inasmuch as our purpose was to give minimum sampling requirements to achieve a preassigned accuracy in the percentages of float, middlings, or sink, and nothing more. The gross sample had already been screened and no further division by screening was made or contemplated; also, it was not intended that the middlings and sink fractions would necessarily be adequate for percentage ash or other determination. In other words, the sample obtained by the method outlined is not intended for washability studies but only for preparation plant control. Further experimental work has been done, since the paper was prepared, to investigate the effect of increasingly larger top and bottom sizes on the variability of float, etc., of a double-screened coal from Western Pennsylvania. Results will be published and eventually attention is to be given to the preparation of sampling specifications. E. H. M. BADGER*—I should like the authors to explain more fully the fundamental assumptions on which their Eq 4 is based. The equation is of the form s2 = p(l - p) which is the usual expression for the (standard deviation)2 when the chance of finding a particular kind of particle in the sample is proportional to the number fraetion, p. But instead of the number fraction, the authors have used the weight fraction, WF/W. The chance of finding a particular kind of particle in the sample can only be proportional to the weight fraction, if the average ?eig?ts of all kinds of particles, that is, float, midlings, or sink, are the same. Surely a much more justifiable assumption would be that the average volumes of the particles are the same, and, if this is so, Eq 4 would not be true. This may be demonstrated as follows: Let be the weight fraction of float, middlings, or sink, dl the density of this fraction, and d2 the density of the rest of the coal. Then assuming that the average volumes of the pieces in the three classes are the same, the number fraction, p, is given by ? P = d1/l-?/d2 + ?/d1 = ?d2/d1 + ?(d2-d1) The weight fraction, w, in terms of p is given by ? = pd1/(l-p)d2 + pd1 = pd1/d2 + p(d1-d2) _____ [61

Jan 1, 1950

By E. F. Koppe

The Upper Freeport coal in the Freeport and New Kensington quadrangles, Pennsylvania, varies from a bony streak to a thick coal deposit often exceeding ninety inches, the "Double" or "Thick Freeport". Distinctive basal partings, a central bone layer, and a canneloid top bench may be present. The appearance of a sandstone roof, sandstone rolls, and bony coal at the top of the main coal bench can be anticipated in thin Freeport areas when basal partings are absent. When the two basal partings are present, a shale roof is normal. These effects are correlated with the original topography upon which the coal was deposited. The original depositional high areas tend to coincide with present structural highs. Preliminary data indicate that coal quality, in part, is affected by the deposi-tional setting. In "high" areas, a tendency exists for the main coal bench to contain higher percentages of fusain and mineral matter. Within limits, some-what higher ash fusion temperatures appear to correlate with paleotopographic highs. As a result of these findings, critical examination of the paleotopography and related sediments is indicated in other areas and other coals. The Upper Freeport coal is quite variable both in thickness and composition in the Freeport and New Kensington quadrangles of Pennsylvania (Figure 1). The coal horizon in these quadrangles is marked either by a thin carbonaceous shale bed or by a single bed containing a variable number of partings (binders). The complex coal zone known locally as the "Double" or "Thick Freeport" contains the Upper Freeport Coal Bed at the base; but in addition, it has an overlying bone layer and an upper coal bed occasionally capped with a canneloid layer. The "Thick Freeport" often exceeds 90 inches in thickness, whereas the normal Upper Freeport coal usually varies between 34 and 50 inches.

Jan 1, 1961

By S. A. Falconer

D. A. Dahlstrom—Mr. Falconer has done an admirable job of proving the adaptability of the cyclone to the beneficiation of a very difficult size range in the preparation of coal. The addition of the cyclone to other coarser size methods makes it economically feasible for the coal operator to rigorously control his marketed products at a high and uniform quality level down to the 48 and 100-mesh size. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that by utilizing the cyclone as a deslimer or classifier the —3 200-mesh fraction, usually containing large percentages of undesirable material, can also be quickly and cheaply removed from the clean coal. Advantages of such a step are several: (1) Reduction of ash content, especially where clays and slimes are serious. (2) lower moisture content of the final coal. (3) easier mechanical and thermal de-watering of the fine coal due to higher cake and bed permeabilities. The author has indicated that adjustable control means should be installed on the cyclone operating on a heavy-media slurry. This also holds true for the cyclone acting as classifier, deslimer or preliminary dewatering agent and is worthy of special emphasis. Such controls, while not necessarily automatic, must be simple, rapidly adjustable, and require a minimum of attention. Three methods available to the operator are (1) throttling valve on the feed line, (2) back pressure valve on the overflow, and (3) adjustable diameter underflow nozzles. The first two, while fulfilling the specifications, suffer the disadvantage of restricting capacity if severe throttling is necessary. The third method has little effect on capacity and easily maintains an underflow of correct moisture content. Several designs are possible, but two find the widest application. The first was developed by Robert Piros of The Truax-Traer Coal Co. and uses a simple casting containing two holders for underflow nozzles which can be rotated about an axis parallel to the cyclone centerline. These holders retain the underflow nozzle flush with the conical section walls. When a change in nozzle diameter is required, the new size is placed in the spare holder and rotated into place. A second design utilizes a soft rubber cylindrical tube which is compressed or released from three sides, causing the inner diameter of the tube to decrease or increase. This is achieved by using a machine-threaded,

Jan 1, 1951

By S. A. Falconer

D. A. Dahlstrom—Mr. Falconer has done an admirable job of proving the adaptability of the cyclone to the beneficiation of a very difficult size range in the preparation of coal. The addition of the cyclone to other coarser size methods makes it economically feasible for the coal operator to rigorously control his marketed products at a high and uniform quality level down to the 48 and 100-mesh size. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that by utilizing the cyclone as a deslimer or classifier the —3 200-mesh fraction, usually containing large percentages of undesirable material, can also be quickly and cheaply removed from the clean coal. Advantages of such a step are several: (1) Reduction of ash content, especially where clays and slimes are serious. (2) lower moisture content of the final coal. (3) easier mechanical and thermal de-watering of the fine coal due to higher cake and bed permeabilities. The author has indicated that adjustable control means should be installed on the cyclone operating on a heavy-media slurry. This also holds true for the cyclone acting as classifier, deslimer or preliminary dewatering agent and is worthy of special emphasis. Such controls, while not necessarily automatic, must be simple, rapidly adjustable, and require a minimum of attention. Three methods available to the operator are (1) throttling valve on the feed line, (2) back pressure valve on the overflow, and (3) adjustable diameter underflow nozzles. The first two, while fulfilling the specifications, suffer the disadvantage of restricting capacity if severe throttling is necessary. The third method has little effect on capacity and easily maintains an underflow of correct moisture content. Several designs are possible, but two find the widest application. The first was developed by Robert Piros of The Truax-Traer Coal Co. and uses a simple casting containing two holders for underflow nozzles which can be rotated about an axis parallel to the cyclone centerline. These holders retain the underflow nozzle flush with the conical section walls. When a change in nozzle diameter is required, the new size is placed in the spare holder and rotated into place. A second design utilizes a soft rubber cylindrical tube which is compressed or released from three sides, causing the inner diameter of the tube to decrease or increase. This is achieved by using a machine-threaded,

Jan 1, 1951

By Robert Stefanko

With passage of the Clean Streams Act of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and its impact on the coal industry, considerable research has been conducted to explore various approaches to the problem, including deep-well disposal. Available drillhole data from gas and oil wells were used to develop cross -sectional maps for various portions of the state and potential disposal zones were evaluated. Bethlehem Mines Corp., faced with a severe water problem at its Marianna operation in Washington County, cooperated with the Dept. of Mining at The Pennsylvania State University in establishing a 1500-ft well into the Salt Sands for the purpose of determining the feasibility of mine water disposal. The thickness, porosity, and permeability of the formation at the well site proved to be below what had been anticipated from drillhole data. Further, subsequent hydraulic fracturing did not improve the flow characteristics of the well; pumping pressures remained in the range of 1800-2000 psig for disposing of water at the rate of 150 gpm. The legal problems of disposal at the site were very formidable. When the Salt Sands proved to be less than satisfactory, permission could not be obtained to dispose in other promising formations. The paper details many of the problems associated with the experimental well and makes an assessment of the potential for deep-well disposal of mine water. The concept of disposing of liquid industrial wastes by deep-well injection is not a new one. Brines associated with crude oil long have been disposed of in this manner, with the additional benefit of aiding secondary oil recovery. More recently, with the expansion of nuclear energy, the lethal, highly radioactive wastes which are by-products of the fission process have created severe disposal problems. During the past ten years, a variety of industries have resorted to subsurface disposal, some of the details of which are given e1sewhere.l,2 The list reveals wide variations in injection rate, pumping pressure, cost, and waste disposition. Included are successful installations in Western Pennsylvania. Enactment of more restrictive clean-water legislation in Pennsylvania recently had a great impact on the coal industry. Among its provisions was the reclassifica-tion of most mine water as industrial waste whose dis-posal is prohibited in any stream of the Commonwealth. This had the effect of accelerating research in a variety of areas, although treatment methods still retained primary interest. When a feasibility study of deep-well disposal was proposed to the Pennsylvania Dept. of Mines and Mineral Industries, the Coal Research Board (CRB) approved it. This paper summarizes the efforts on this project. Acid mine water is a chemically complex liquid. having no definite quantitative relationship among its constituents. However, it is the iron disulfide (FeS2) associated with practically all coal seams that produces the objectionable products present in acid mine water when combined with air and water. The principal contaminants are sulfuric acid (H2SO,) and ferric hydroxide (Fe(OH)2. Ferric hydroxide is a rust-colored gelatinous precipitate that coats stream bottoms and destroys aquatic life. However, other ions and bacteria are present in acid mine water in varying amounts.

Jan 1, 1971

By T. S. Spice, H. L. Lovell, R. W. Utley

With the increased demand for lightweight aggregate, such materials have been manufactured from slags, clays, slates and, to a minor extent, the refuse of coal preparation processes. The latter source is attractive due to current interest in eliminating air pollution and improving the unsightly appearance of refuse piles as well as potential economic advantages, if a satisfactory product can be manufactured. A study has been made relating the composition of coal refuse, expressed as washability data, and the properties of a resulting aggregate. Three different refuse samples (bituminous and anthracite) were separated at gravities ranging from 1.4 to 2.96. Their chemical composition was determined. Aggregates were prepared in the laboratory from these fractions before and after ashing, at temperatures between 1250' and 1350°C. The specific gravity, expansion and compressive strength of the products were measured. The response of the refuse to bloat is related to the chemical composition of the ash to yield a glass of desirable viscosity and to the presence of a material which will form a gas in the appropriate temperature range. Carbonaceous material within the particle is a negative factor since after the glassy phase forms, oxygen cannot enter the mass thus inhibiting bloating. Precombustion of the refuse is also detrimental since it removes substances of gas-forming capability. The fraction sinking at 2.60 yielded an aggregate which had the lowest specific gravity, greatest expansion and greatest compressive strength. The purpose of this study was to seek and evaluate possible relationships between the composition of coal refuse, as expressed by washability data and factors affecting the production of a lightweight aggregate from refuse by bloating. The study was related to an intense program in the Department of Mineral Preparation at the Pennsyl- vania State University to study the possible elimination of air pollution from coal refuse fires by producing a low-carbon secondary refuse. Another phase of this program is considering possible uses of such a secondary refuse. Thus one study was to determine if a lightweight aggregate could be produced from this new refuse material and what effect the nature of refuse beneficiation would have upon the characteristics of a commercial aggregate product. It was hoped that these studies would assist in the design of a process and in establishing the optimum specific gravities at which refuse separation could be made in respect to the production of a low grade fuel from the float product and a raw material for lightweight aggregate from the sink product. The combination of producing a saleable low grade fuel and a lightweight aggregate, while at the same time minimizing disposal costs and air pollution contributions would be attractive to the coal mining industry. MECHANISM OF BLOATING Austin, Nunes and Sullivan,1 Ehlers,3 Everhart, 4 Riley7 and others, have stated that bloating is an expansion process in which two essential conditions exist simultaneously. These are: the development of a glassy phase over a relatively wide temperature range (the viscosity of this glassy phase plays a major role in the retention of the evolved gases) and the evolution of gases (SO2, SO3, CO2 and O2) from mineral decomposition in sufficient quantities at appropriate temperatures to form a cellular structure in the mass. Unless these two "type" reactions take place at the same time or in overlapping ranges of time and temperature, cellulation will not occur. In this event, the gas will escape or the melt will be too fluid to retain it; or if retained, the cells may be too large or the walls too thin for good strength in the product. The stages that occur when clays and shales are heated in an oxidizing atmosphere may be summarized as follows: 1) Drying and removal of free water to 200°C. 2) Absorbed water dehydration period (200 to 480°C). 3) Chemically-combined water dehydration period (480 to 700°C).

Jan 1, 1965

By J. D. Price, W. M. Bertholf

One of the chief difficulties with which the operator of a coal washing plant has been forced to contend is the handling of the very fine coal. First he has the problem of separating the fine coal from washery water. This is usually accomplished by the use of settling cones or Dorr thickeners: in either event the separated fine coal contains a high amount (40 to 80 pct) of water and, somewhat loosely, dependent upon the size of the coal particles present, may be known as sludge or slurry. His second problem is the satisfactory further dewatering of such separated sludge and/or slurry. At the coal washing plant of the Colorado Fuel and Iron Corp., washed coal from the Deister Plat-O tables is sluiced to a stationary inclined de-watering screen provided with 3/16 by 1-in. slots, and the coarse coal passing over this screen is conveyed by a Baum-type elevator and a flight-type distributing conveyor to a battery of Carpenter centrifugal driers. The fine coal and water passing through the openings of the primary dewatering screens, plus the fine coal passing through the screens of the centrifugal driers (and no small portion of which is the result of the disintegrating action of these driers) is pumped to two 30-ft Link Belt settling cones. The sludge recovered as underflow from these cones was formerly dewatered on stationary screens having 1/16 by 1-in. slots and discharged on top of the coarse washed coal in the Baum drainage conveyor; but after a relatively few hours of op eration the circulating load of fine coal on this conveyor built up to a point where it became necessary to reduce the quantity of feed to the washing tables. The original arrangement of our coal washing and dewatering equipment is shown in Fig 1. In order to regain the loss in active throughput which had been caused by this circulating load, an installation of six vibrating filters was made during the year of 1936. This resulted in an increase in normal tonnage of washed coal from 1430 to 1750 tons per 8-hr shift, a gain of slightly over 22 pct. This increase in throughput has made a very substantial decrease in the " conversion cost" per ton of washed coal. Since the vibrators were installed, we have gained about 2,000,000 tons in production, compared to what would have been produced in the same number of shifts at the former rate. Putting it in slightly different form, we have saved in the past 12 yr the cost of 1400 operating shifts in the washery. Fig 2 shows the location of the vibrating filters as applied to the original flowsheet. It will be noted that the sludge from the bottom of the settling cones is passed through a distributing box and thence to the filters. The de-watered coal from the filters is de-livered to the conveyor receiving the dried coal from the Carpenter driers.

Jan 1, 1950

By J. D. Price, W. M. Bertholf

W. J. PARTON*—I have not had the opportunity to read this paper, and I do not have a written discussion. However, I thought it might be interesting for me to relate some of the experiences we had with equipment similar to the vibrating filter as described by the' authors. At the Tamaqua flotation plant of the Lebigh Navigation Coal Co. approximately 40 tons per hour of froth concentrate carrying 60 pct by weight moisture are produced. The major problem encountered at this plant is the dewatering of this coal froth so that a satisfactory product can be sent to market. In the original design of the plant a centrifuge of solid bowl type was included for de-watering this material. The centrifuge did not work out as well as we had hoped. High maintenance costs and moisture content in the cake were obtained. A Robbins dewatering screen was installed at a later date with the idea of using it in conjunction with the centrifuge. The froth concentrate from the flotation cells was fed directly to the Robbins dewatering screen. The cake from the screen carried approximately 55 pct of the feed solids. Moisture in the cake was approximately 24 pct by weight. The underflow from the screen carried 45 pct of the feed tonnage at about 80 pct moisture by weight. The underflow product was then pumped into the centrifuge with the idea of using the cen-trifuge for recovering the tonnage lost through the screen. This circuit did not operate as satisfactorily as we expected. The only benefit derived was in the reduction in the power consumed by the centrifuge. The maintenance on the centrifuge was approximately the same as previously. The next step in our experiments was to pump the underflow from the screen into a cyclone thickener which was mounted directly over the vibrating screen. This thickener increased the concentration of the solids to approximately 60 pct by weight and dropped the mate- rial back 011 the filter cake which had formed toward the discharge end of the screen. Unfortunately, the screen was not capable of handling this additional tonnage, and our experiments stopped at that point. We have been considering installing a second screen to make possible the complete mechanical dewatering of this product by the use of the dewatering screen and the cyclone thickener. Another possibility under study is to pump the underflow from this screen to a thickener which is available in the flotation plant, and to combine this thickeued underflow with the original feed going to the screen. Again, however, a second dewatering screen will be required to handle the total tonnage. 0. R. LYONS*—I had an opportunity to read this paper ahead of the meeting, and I did a little pencil engineering on it. As Mr. Bertholf said, it is very difficult to make a comparison and to carry the results of work at one plant over to what might be expected at another. What I did was to find information on filtering operations more or less comparable to the type of operation that Mr. Bertholf has with his vibrating filter. The only information that I was able to find was for drum type filters, and I found the operating characteristics of the vibrating filter and the drum type filters were very similar. The moisture contents of the cakes were almost identical. The output per square foot was about the only way that I could compare their capacities— using square foot of screen area against square foot of filter area—and I found the capacity of the vibrating filter to be slightly greater per unit area than the capacity of the drum-type filters. W. H. NEWTON†—Do I understand that the only escape for the solids is by overflowing the thickener? That is, does the filter have a chance to recover all the solids except that lost in the thickener overflow ? W. M. BERTHOLF (authors' reply)— Actually, the only escapc from that part of the circuit is over the top of the thickener. There are other places the fines could be lost in the washery. but once they get into that part of the circuit, they must go over the top to escape. W. H. NEWTON—I would like to ask Mr. Lyons if, in the study of rotary filters, he has any basis for comparison of operating costs? 0. R. LYONS—No, I had no information on costs. The only information I was able to find was on screen size, moisture content, and tonnage output per unit area. W. L. McMORRIS*—Are you wasting that overflow water or re-using it? W. M. BERTHOLF—Right now, we are not re-using it. D. R. MITCHELL† —What is the approximate per capita cost of one of these units? W. M. BERTHOLF—It appears to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $200, for the screen. W. H. NEWTON—The cost would be about $2500 for the complete unit including the vibrating power unit. G. A. VISSAC‡—I do not like to come on the floor after I have been talking so long, but I thought you might be interested in our experience in dewatering, as well as drying our very fine coals. We have used both centrifuge and vibrating screens. The type of vibrating screens we have used in Canada are called the Zimmer. That is a screen of German construction, and I guess it is along the same lines as the dewatering screens you are using now. We use wedge wires, and the minimum size opening is a quarter of a millimeter. In our experience, the cheapest way is still a dewatering bin. A dewatering bin takes 48 hr to do work that takes 20 min in a dewatering screen. We use old wedge wire from our driers which we cover with brattice cloth, and

Jan 1, 1950

By H. L. Washburn, G. L. Judy

DURING recent years thermal drying of fine coal has increased at a tremendous rate, but very little discussion of the several excellent units has found its way into print. This is particularly true for operating and maintenance costs, and the operator who is faced with his first fine coal drying installation must depend chiefly on hearsay when trying to determine what his drying costs will be. This article presents the maintenance and operating costs for the seven drying units now installed in preparation plants of Pittsburgh Consolidation Coal Co. and lists other cost information that should be obtained before any particular drying unit is selected. Plant Description: The fine coal drying section of Plant A consists of four Flash driers operating on two furnaces equipped with spreader stokers. Plant B has one Flash drier operating (together with a screen-type coarse coal drier) on one furnace equipped with a spreader stoker. Plant C has two Cascade-type driers operating on a single furnace with a spreader stoker. Plant Costs: Tables I, 11, and III present the cost of operating these units as reported by the individ- ual plants. As can be seen, the labor rates vary, depending on the amount of overtime paid and the time interval the cost figures cover. There is considerable variation in thermal units used and in the value given to the thermal units at the particular mine. There is some difference in power costs at a given location and, finally, the power costs of conveyors leading to the drying plants were included in some cases. Maintenance supply costs are simply a tabulation of the cost of all supplies used on the driers, furnaces, and stokers. Depreciation is not included, and the tables omit items such as supervision, plant cleanup, oiling, general maintenance, taxes, and insurance. These tables in themselves do not offer a true comparison of costs. This information must be reduced to some common basis. But what is this common basis to be? A mine operator must calculate his overall mine and preparation plant costs in terms of tons of clean coal sold. Unit costs on pieces of equipment within a given plant are correctly calculated on the same basis. However, when unit costs are compared between one plant and another, some thought must be given to unit design. This reasoning is similar to the old argument concerning i solid bowl vs basket-type centrifuges—the units themselves are not directly comparable without their supporting equipment. So it is with thermal driers. Except in rare cases of low entering moisture i content, driers are sized on the basis of water that must be evaporated, while the wear each unit gets de-

Jan 1, 1958

By C. W. Thompson

Paul D. Suloff (Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., Inc., Akron, Ohio)—I would like first to comment on problems of the conveyor belt discussed in Mr. Thompson's excellent paper, since that is what we hope we know most about. Twists in relatively wide conveyor belt unavoidably produce a lateral maldistribution of tension, raising tension at belt edges and reducing it at the center. They also produce a lateral collapsing force on the belt at the center of the twist owing to the inherent tendency of all the longitudinal elements of the belt to try to pass through a point at the twist center. Calculation of the twist geometry by the methods shown in Mr. Thompson's paper keeps these extraordinary forces within limits which the belt designer can tolerate. No reduction in belt life due to twisting need be contemplated when this geometry is maintained. There is a minor exception that belts of extreme lateral flexibility will tend to curl laterally at the center of the twist. However, any ordinary fabric construction will perform satisfactorily in this respect. These twists are always made in regions of low tension in the conveyor so that even in the edges of the twist, belt tension does not exceed the average tension found in highly stressed regions of the conveyor. Offsetting these out-of-ordinary belt stresses is the advantage that Mr. Thompson has brought out of getting the return run up out of the dirt where it can be seen. This not only makes it easier to train, but also, in the event that it is not properly trained, frees it of the normal return run edge wear hazard. It is well known that return run edge wear is a prominent cause of belt mortality underground. An interesting aspect of this two-way conveyor is that the belt may be made what is known as a Mobius Strip. A Mobius Strip is obtained by splicing a belt after turning one end of it 180" about its longitudinal axis. In other words, one end is turned upside down before splicing. A belt spliced in this fashion turns itself upside down every time it comes around, but the twist which has been put in the splicing, of course, stays at one location on the conveyor, in this case one of the twist sections at the end. Turning the belt over every revolution might have advantages in some cases. Belts could be made with equal covers and the two sides worn equally and simultaneously. In this case there would be no problem of getting belts on upside down by mistake. However, the two-way conveyor does not have to be a Mobius Strip. It can be twisted in such fashion that the same side is up on both runs. It is simply a question of which way the final 90" twist is made before joining the ends. Another interesting aspect of the two-way conveyor is the problem of operating two-way conveyors in series. Here the sequencing of starting brings up some new problems. It will be recognized, although not always at first glance, that if the starting sequence is planned for one run of the conveyor the reverse will result on the other run. With the two runs carrying bulk material in both directions a reverse sequence on one run would be intolerable. In this situation the only solution appears to be a simultaneous starting of all conveyors in the series. However, with the coal in one direction and intermittent supplies in the other it would be entirely practical to sequence the conveyors for the coal run and accept a reverse sequence on the supply run. The two-way conveyor also lends itself to new driving possibilities. First, it is quite possible to drive at the head end of each run, which of course, means a drive at each end of the two-way conveyor. Driving in this way a given belt can be extended to substantially greater lengths than a conventional conveyor with drive at one end only. In addition to this, under certain conditions the conveyor can be extended to extreme length by driving at one end and at some intermediate point on the most heavily loaded run. As a particular case, a belt carrying coal downgrade and supplies back upgrade could be extended to extreme lengths by driving at the head of the coal run and at an intermediate point of the supply run. Mr. Thompson has been a pioneer in belt conveyor transportation underground and his accomplishment here with the first two-way conveyor of any consequence is another notable addition to the art.

Jan 1, 1954

By W. A. White

UNDERCLAY squeeze is the plastic flowing of underclay below coal pillars into mined-out entries and rooms. Squeezes may be caused either by wet mine conditions where the moisture is taken up by the clay—making it more plastic—or by the presence of certain clay minerals, such as mont-morillonite, which are plastic when there is enough natural moisture. Under either condition, sufficient stress will cause the underclay to flow. Squeezes may fill an entry or room within several hours, or it may be several months before movement stops. Squeeze areas commonly cover hundreds or thousands of square yards. The Coal Div. of the Illinois State Geological Survey has collected samples of underclays from various mines and from cores drilled by coal companies in the state. From these samples natural moisture content, particle size and particle size distribution, and clay mineralogy are determined. Data from samples collected from the underclay below Herrin (No. 6) coal in the Lumaghi Coal Co. mine near Collinsville, Ill., are used in this report to clarify points in the discussion. Data from samples taken from other mines lead to the same conclusions. A generalized geological section for the area is given in Table I. The underclay below coal No. 6 ranges from a few inches to 3 or 4 ft thick. The upper 6 to 18 in. are noncalcareous; the lower part becomes more calcareous with depth. Limestone nodules become larger with depth, almost grading into the limestone below. In areas where the clay is nearly absent the limestone may thicken to take its place; thus they may complement each other in thickness. There are two types of squeeze areas in a mine. In one type up to 3 or 4 ft of underclay lie in what appears to be a depression in the limestone underneath. This is suggested by a rim surrounding the squeeze area where the underclay is thin and the limestone lies within a few inches of the coal. In the second type the underclay of the squeeze area is surrounded by underclay of similar thicknesses which does not squeeze. Test Methods: Natural moisture content, particle size and particle size distribution, and clay mineralogy were determined by the following methods: Natural moisture is the moisture content a clay contains in its natural environment, expressed in percentage of the weight of ovendried clay (110°C or 230°F). To obtain the natural moisture content, given in Table 11, the clay samples were sealed in containers as soon as the samples were taken in the mines. Particle size and particle size distribution were determined by the pipette method,' and the data were plotted as cumulative curves, Fig. 1, on semi-logarithmic paper. Particle size was plotted on the logarithmic scale and percentage on the arithmetic scale. The quartiles (diameters that correspond to frequencies of 25 and 75 pct) and medians (diameters that correspond to the frequency of 50 pct) of the samples were determined from these curves. The clay minerals were identified from the data obtained by differential thermal' and X-ray powder" techniques. The differential thermal analyses were made on the whole samples, whereas the X-ray analyses were made on fractions of less than 2p. Data and Discussion Moisture Content: After the sealed jars had stood for 24 hr, those that contained squeeze samples had perspired, so that droplets of water had accumulated on the insides of the jars. Table II shows the moisture in the clay after it had perspired for 24 hr. (This perspiring was not noted in samples from nonsqueeze areas.) After perspiration one of the squeeze samples still had a higher moisture content than the samples that did not squeeze. Clay Mineralogy: The thermal analysis, Figs. 2 and 3, indicates that the clay minerals are chiefly micaceous in type; the low-temperature endothermal

Jan 1, 1957

By Percy Gillie

THE Tralee preparation plant, owned and operated by the Semet-Solvay division of Allied Chemical and Dye Corp., is located on the Virginian railway, near Mullens, Wyoming County, W. Va., and the mine, which is in the Winding Gulf district, produces coal exclusively from Pocahontas No. 3 seam. The property, comprising 4900 acres, is leased from the Pocahontas Land Corp. Prior to 1930 four separate mines were operated in this tract, some having been started about 1916. Plans for the preparation plant were formulated soon after World War 11. Construction began in the spring of 1948, operation early in 1950. The plant was designed to be operated with minimum labor. It was equipped for production of first quality graded sizes of coal for house heating and 3/8x0-in. slack suitable for high-standard metallurgical coke. In the beginning, a thorough investigation was made of the property by means of core drilling, prospect openings, and sections from shallow mines on the property, as well as sections and analyses from mines in the immediate vicinity. After the extent of desirable coal had been established and the average seam section and nature of overlying and underlying strata had been determined, it was decided to install a system of mining which would load the full seam and would clean the product mechanically. Pocahontas No. 3 seam is characterized by draw slate and bone and rock partings. It was not known what the washing difficulties and cleaning plant requirements would be for processing the raw product of full mechanical mining. Arrangements were made, therefore, through the courtesy of the property owner, to obtain a large sample from a section of the mine along the adjoining property line. The

Jan 1, 1954

By A. G. Gilbert

Paradoxical is the word. The coal industry, despite reach- ing a 22-year high in production (590 million tons), has been tagged as having its back to the wall vis-a-vis its valiant attempts to quench the nation's still unabated craving for coal. What must be even more reassuring to the industry, infected once with rumors of a uranium takeover, is a nation's almost insatiable appetite for electricity. Between 1967 and the summer of 1970, utility stockpiles were being gobbled up, diminishing to 79% of the January 1968 level.

Jan 1, 1971