Search Documents

By E. J. Ostrowski

The history of ironmaking dates back to 4000 BC when an open forge was used to produce a sponge iron from a heap of ore and charcoal. Even at this early date, man recognized the need for a fuel and a reducing agent. As time passed, man developed new methods of producing iron; however, these developments were centered on the mechanical aspects, and as a result, a furnace evolved which is now known as a blast furnace. During this period of evolution,' man struggled with the only fuel he knew - charcoal. Some 5600 years passed before any attempt was made to use coal as a fuel for the blast furnace. The use of coal had its beginning in 1619 when Dud Dudley of England first attempted its use in the blast furnace; as a-fuel and as a reducing agent. Coal charged to the top of the blast furnace was not satisfactory. The volatile matter of the coal choked the flues, and also the poor, strength qualities would not support the weight of the ore. Breaking up of the coal compacted the stock column to an impervious mass. One hundred and sixteen. years later in 1735, Abraham Darby of England introduced coke as the fuel and reducing agent in the blast furnace. The acceptance of coke as a fuel for the blast furnace was not spontaneous. As late as 1870, one-half of the pig iron product of the United States was made with anthracite coal, 30 per cent with raw bituminous coal and coke, and 20 per cent with charcoal. However, by 1910, 96.2 per cent of the blast furnace product was made with coke, 2.4 per cent with anthracite and coke admixture, and 1.4 per cent with charcoal. Coke became the standard fuel in the blast furnace. As the art of ironmaking progressed, more pig iron was produced and more coke was consumed. Coke oven capacity was progressively increased. In 1910, there existed approximately 4,000 coke ovens; in 1960 there was approximately 15,000 ovens. This increase in coke oven capacity was necessary to feed the mammoth appetite of modern blast furnaces.

Jan 1, 1962

By H. M. Garrett

Dr. Ft: L. Handy of Iowa State University's Engineering Experiment Station very handily reduced the relatively complex cement making process to ultimate simplicity: "Take two cups of crushed limestone; add one-half cup of clay or pulverized shale (plus perhaps some sandstone or iron ore; depending); mix thoroughly and grind up fine. Bake in white-hot oven at about 2,600 F. Cool. Add a tablespoon of gypsum: and, again, grind very fine. If you can do this for about a penny a pound, you can almost compete.' Before Dr. Handy's time, is the early days of the U. S. Cement Industry, from 1817 when the Erie Canal was started to 1895 when the first rotary kiln was built, this was the recipe, more or less. Dr. Handy's raw materials were deposited in a natural "cement rock" found in the Hudson, New York and Lehigh, Pennsylvania valleys. At first the natural rock was pulverized (not ground fine) and interlayed with wood for "baking" at about 1,800° F in a batch process vertical shaft kiln or beehive oven; then the calcined pozzalonic (lime and silica) product was cooled and ground fine for shipment in wooden barrels. Later, in 1871, true portland cement was made. The same natural rock was ground fine to make briquettes; interlaced with wood or coal in the "Beehives"; and baked at a clinkering temperature of about 2,6000 F to produce clinker (calcium silicates) which was ground fine for sale. In those days, the crude cements dropped in price from over 1 cent to 1/2 cent per pound. In 1895 the rotary kiln introduced-continuous instead of batch processing. The countercurrent process allowed the same raw materials (now finely ground to about 80% minus 200 mesh like face powder) to be fed at one end of the rotary kiln. Heat from a coal burner was introduced with combustion air at the other end to produce the requisite clinkering temperature. The clinker product was discharged for atmospheric cooling, mixed with gypsum, and again ground fine as face powder. The cement was sold primarily in barrels, later in jute or cloth bags, then paper bags, and now primarily in bulk truck and barge carriers. The price dropped to a 1/4 cent per pound by 1910, but with recent inflation it now sells for 2 cents per pound.

Jan 1, 1978

By Arnold E. Lamm

The degree of economic, progress of a nation is measured by its possession and use of energy, sources. The future of coal in the West hinges on its ability to participate and grow in the energy market. A source of energy is, in the long run, only as good as the ability of the industry to develop its reserves economically. The economic development of the tremendous coal reserves, literally hundreds of billions of tons of coal in the States of Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico, and Arizona, poses a very real question in the light of the known mining technology of our day. Basically in America today, coal is mined from the earth either by the strip mine or underground mine method; in the West, the large long-term, contracts now in force with utilities are mostly from coal mines utilizing the strip mine method. However, the preponderance of the known coal reserves of the West are located deep underground and will have to be mined by the various; underground mining processes. The problems encountered in the West with regard to underground mining vary from state to state but, on the whole, do not present what might be considered a miner's bonanza. I do not mean to' infer that the underground coal of the West is unmineable, but I do want to emphasize that the tremendous reserve figures do not present a true picture in the light of present day technology.

Jan 1, 1965

By V. M. Johnston

The most abundant fuel resource in the U.S.A. is also the most under-utilized. Proven reserves of bituminous coal, sub-bituminous and lignite constitute from 60% to 90% of our total fossil fuel reserves -- dependent upon the parameters used by the analyst making the estimate. Despite this ample supply, bituminous coal provided only 20% of U. S. energy consumption in 1967 and 1968, this dropping to 17.57 in 1971 and 1972. By 1978, according to my projections, 16.7% of the Nation's mechanical energy will come from bituminous coal. However, our energy needs are growing at such a rate that the 20.6% provided by bituminous in 1967 equalled 480 million tons while the 16.7% of U. S. consumption visualized for 1978 will require nearly 650 million tons. In order to view coal's position with perspective in this developing energy crunch, it is necessary to examine the total energy situation. To this end, I have prepared a couple of tables which you should have before you. I chose this procedure rather than slides because I would need to utilize an entire wall to make the data visible to an audience. Therefore, I refer you to the long sheet entitled "U. S. Energy Consumption - Trillion Btu - 1967-1978." As you can see from the heading, I am confining my treatment of the problem to the intermediate term. In the long run, if we are willing to pay the cost, we can do a lot of things, including the complete conversion of coal into a sulfur-free fuel.

Jan 1, 1973

By G. A. Weisenfluh

The successful application of factors limiting the? availability of coal in eastern Kentucky depends on ac-curate assessment of the original resources. Examination of several previous coal-resource estimates for the region reveals significant differences among the outcomes. These differences relate to methods of analysis, biases in data and their utilization, and the problem of defining the lateral continuity of mineable beds. Improvements in the methods of estimating the original resources would greatly enhance the reliability of the results of the Coal Availability Program.

Jan 1, 1995

By G. E. Jones, G. K. Hoffman

Through the USGS National Coal Availability pro-gram, two San Juan Basin studies have been completed. The study areas are in the northwest Bisti field, Fruitland Formation and in the eastern Standing Rock field, Menefee Formation. Original resources are 4.66 Gt and 3.46 Gt (5.14 billion stand 3.82 billion st), respectively, in the Bisti and Standing Rock areas. Bisti coal resources are greatly reduced by the Bisti-De-Na-Zin wilderness area (1.13 Gt (1.25 billion st)). Technological restrictions remove 31% from Standing Rock original resource. Available resources are 60% (2.79 Gt(3.07 billion st)) of the Bisti original resource and66% (2.26 Gt (2.49 billion st)) of the original Standing Rock resource.

Jan 1, 2000

By M. D. Carter

The availability of environmentally acceptable and reliable energy sources is an important issue for Federal, State, and local planners. A cooperative program by the U.S. Geological Survey, State geological surveys, and the U.S. Bureau of Mines has developed a national GIS-based systematic effort to collect, analyze, and depict data characterizing the relationship between restrictions to mining and the potential development of the Nation's coal resources. Land use/environmental and technologic/geologic restrictions are identified within selected 1:24,000-scale, 130-to 150-sq-km 7.5-min quadrangles and applied as overlays to maps of coal-bed thickness, depth, and mined-out areas. Tonnages of original, mined and lost-in-mining, remaining, restricted, and available resources are calculated. Resultant data files are transferred to the Bureau of Mines for recoverability and cost analysis.

Jan 1, 1995

By G. E. Jones, G. K. Hoffman

Two Sun Juan Basin studies were completed through the USGS National Coal Availability program. The study areas are in the northwest Bisti field (Fruitland Formation) and in the eastern Standing Rock field (Menefee Formation). In the Bisti and Standing Rock areas, the original coal resource5 are estimated at 4.66 and 3.1 7 Gt (5.14 and 3.49 billion st), respectively. The Bisti coal resources are greatly reduced by the Bisti-De-Nu- Zin wilderness area, which contains an estimated 1.13 Gt (1.25 billion st) of coal. Technological restrictions remove 32.5% from Standing Rock's original resource. Available resources are 60%. 2.79 Gt (3.07 billion st), of the Bisti original resource and 65%, 2.07 Gt (2.28 billion st), of the original Standing Rock resource.

Jan 1, 2002

By K. S. Lackner, T. M. Yegulalp

We present a review of research and development for coal based clean energy systems aiming for zero emissions to the atmosphere. These systems can utilize all kinds of coal or other solid carbon sources such as tar sands as well as liquid hydrocarbons. The chemical energy of carbon is transferred to hydrogen and used in power generation, in fuel cells, or hydrogen combusting turbines. The waste products of these future power-generating systems are ash, sulfur compounds and CO2. We also summarize current and developing technologies for processing of CO2to produce mineral carbonates for permanent disposal, and associated byproducts.

Jan 1, 2003

By Xuchen Fan, Chenyang Zhou, Yuemin Zhao, Liang Dong, Chenlong Duan

A gas–solid fluidized bed using magnetite particles is an effective methodology for coal beneficiation in the field of dry coal cleaning. Broadening the size range of magnetite used in the bed decreases medium preparation cost. In this study, a tapered fluidized bed was used to investigate a magnetite particle size range of −0.5 + 0.074 mm. The results showed that a tapered fluidized bed effectively strengthens mixing of magnetite with a wide size range (−0.5 + 0.074 mm). The results of beneficiation experiments indicated that with increasing tapered angle, separation efficiency increased and then decreased. The highest separation efficiency was obtained at a tapered angle of 10°. The optimal results showed that the ash content of the concentrate decreased from 31.82% to 12.33% with a probable error of 0.11, which indicated that a tapered fluidized bed was efficient to improve fine coal beneficiation performance.

By Xuchen Fan, Chenyang Zhou, Yuemin Zhao, Liang Dong, Chenlong Duan

A gas–solid fluidized bed using magnetite particles is an effective methodology for coal beneficiation in the field of dry coal cleaning. Broadening the size range of magnetite used in the bed decreases medium preparation cost. In this study, a tapered fluidized bed was used to investigate a magnetite particle size range of −0.5 + 0.074 mm. The results showed that a tapered fluidized bed effectively strengthens mixing of magnetite with a wide size range (−0.5 + 0.074 mm). The results of beneficiation experiments indicated that with increasing tapered angle, separation efficiency increased and then decreased. The highest separation efficiency was obtained at a tapered angle of 10°. The optimal results showed that the ash content of the concentrate decreased from 31.82% to 12.33% with a probable error of 0.11, which indicated that a tapered fluidized bed was efficient to improve fine coal beneficiation performance.

By B. J. Arnold

Coal blending inherently means homogenizing a mixture of coals so that, overall, the properties of the blend meet some specifications for maintaining power plant performance and emission requirements. In common practice, however, coal blending is at best coal mixing. If necessary, more sophisticated blending systems can produce a more homogeneous feed by using accurate weighing devices and on-line coal analyzers coupled with sampling systems. Blending can be accomplished at the mine, on stockpiles, and from bins, bunkers, and silos.

Jan 1, 1994

By R. S. Mateer

Linear programming on desktop computers is commonly used to optimize coal blending proportions. The objective function is usually the cost of the blend. The constraints consist of materials and heat balances as expressed as linear functions of the blend. This is illustrated in Example 1. Inclusion of a sulfur compliance constraint is more complex because the maximum permitted sulfur percentage is not a pre-specified constant. Rather, it is a function of the calorific power of the blend itself. The current limit of 1.2 pounds of sulfur dioxide per million Btu may be expressed as: Sulfur Max % = 0.6 • H/10,000 with H in Btu/lb.

Jan 1, 1994

By B. J. Arnold

Coal blending inherently means homogenizing a mixture of coals so that the properties of the blend meet some specifications for maintaining power plant performance and emission requirements. In practice, however, coal blending is, at best, coal mixing. The degree of blending sophistication required depends on the reason for coal blending in the first place. If it is to maintain fuel characteristics that will diminish the chance of slagging and fouling, then some swings in variability may be tolerated at some power stations. However, if emissions limits are the issue, then more sophistication may be needed. Emissions limits are becoming stricter with requirements to meet averages for shorter time frames (hours and days instead of weeks and months). These restrictions require closer control over the quality of the blend being fed into the bunkers at the station. Even scrubbed units should have a consistent quality of fuel as feed so that sorbent additions can be minimized. To meet these challenges, engineers must consider available equipment and control techniques and the properties of the parent coals when evaluating new blending systems.

Jan 1, 1994

By Jeffrey K. Whyatt

The Crandall Canyon accident investigation included an interesting and unexplained observation by rescuers that the ?barrier rib had shifted northward as a unit, as much as 10 feet.? This is not the first mention of such a movement, although such reports are rare. Historical accounts describe unusual movement and displacement of intact coal, cribs and timbers. Two movements of particular interest are the creation of gaps above coal pillars and falling of standing support elements without apparent damage. A dynamic boundary element program was used to explore movements induced by slip on geologic features removed from the affected panel. While the resulting models are much too simple to fully replicate these observations, they do show that the types of phenomena observed are possible. They can also provide insight into the types of motions that ground support elements are subjected to during large bump events. This was demonstrated for the case of a large bump in a Book Cliffs coal mine. Seismic information suggested the source mechanism to be normal slip on a fault. A model of that source showed initial dilation of the panel followed by dynamic compression and rebound ? consistent with underground observations. The initial dilation is important as it may allow slender standing support to shift or fall.

Jan 1, 2009

By Brij M. Moudgil

Flotation of fine and coarse coal after multistage addition of the frother was found to yield coal fractions with significantly lower ash content as compared to the feed. It was observed that the lowest ash content, specific gravity and reactivity of coal was associated with finer size fractions. Ignition and combustion characteristics of different coal fractions were evaluated using a differential thermal analyzer (DTA) with calorimeter attachment. It is suggested that in the ignition stage, the removal of mineral matter affects the reactivity through the physical changes brought about by the ash removal. In the char combustion stage the mineral matter seems to influence the reactivity through the catalytic activity of surface concentrations of metal ions, ratio of combustible/incombustible material, internal pore structure and roughness.

Jan 1, 1984

By John D. Price

The solution to the problem expressed in the title of this paper might well be condensed into one word, AUTOMATON, But if I were to stop there, even though most of you might applaud, I am afraid that a one-word paper might not justify my coming to this meeting, So let?s explore the matter and try to learn if and to what extent the science of automaton can be applied to the problem of coal cleaning. In taking this approach we must, of course, by-pass the fact that plants In this Country and aborad have been automated to a greater or lesser extent. We will explore the matter from the beginning and not merely take the approach that because others have done it we can do it also. First, let us see just what is meant by automaton.

Jan 1, 1959

By B. J. Arnold, B. W. Parker

Rosebud Mining Company added a classifying cyclone/spiral concentrator circuit addition to its McVille Preparation Plant, Freeport, PA, in mid-2002. This paper will describe the plant addition, which was implemented fully by plant staff, and review improvements in cleaning plant performance and economics.

Jan 1, 2003

By D. N. Trerice

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is sponsoring the construction and operation of a coal cleaning test facility at Homer City, Pennsylvania. The facility represents a major investment by the electric utility industry to advance the state of the art of conventional coal cleaning technology. The facility is unique in design and can process large quantities of coal in conventional flowsheet configurations, simulate full size plant conditions, and perform open and closed loop performance testing on conventional and advanced coal cleaning equipment. Computer operation will also be demonstrated. The facility objectives, initial complement, and operating plane are discussed as they relate to other coal cleaning projects at EPRI.

Jan 1, 1981

By J. Y. Hwang

Coal cleaning with traditional magnetic separation usually yields unsatisfactory results because minerals associated with coal, such as quartz, clay, pyrite and calcite, are weak-or non-magnetic. Magnetic reagent technology is a new mineral processing technology with the capability to enhance the magnetic property of minerals selectively. This reagent can be adsorbed selectively on minerals through the control of surface chemistry and, thus, result in selective magnetic enhancement. The application of this technology on coal cleaning has been experimentally demonstrated. Good separation results can be obtained at low to medium magnetic field strength. Comparison with other processing technologies is included.

Jan 1, 1992