An Introduction to Predicting Coal Preparation Plant Performance

Similar documents
TECHNICAL NOTES 6 MANUFACTURED-MEDIA GRAVITY SEPARATORS

COARSE DRY COAL CLEANING

Estimation of Coal-Cleaning Costs: A Spreadsheet-Based Interactive Software for Use in the Estimation of Economically Recoverable Coal

GRADATION OF AGGREGATE FOR CONCRETE BLOCK

Apr 17, 2000 LAB MANUAL PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS AASHTO Designation T 88 (Mn/DOT Modified)

Coal preparation technology in Poland

SIEVE ANALYSIS OF FINE AND COARSE AGGREGATES

Separation magnetism Daniel Norrgran and Jaisen N. Kohmuench, Eriez, US, examine new developments in coal preparation equipment

Coal ash utilisation over the world and in Europe

FCC Catalyst Age Distribution Optimization Leads to Improved Profitability

The Incinerator Ash Company

Is the Python Right for Me? Python Amenability Test Work

PETROLEUM COKE VS STEAM COAL

CONTENTS. ZVU Engineering a.s., Member of ZVU Group, WASTE HEAT BOILERS Page 2

Pearson's Correlation Tests

Microeconomics Sept. 16, 2010 NOTES ON CALCULUS AND UTILITY FUNCTIONS

By K.K.Parthiban / Boiler specialist / Venus Energy Audit System

Name Date Hour. Buoyancy

Chapter 3 Student Reading

Types of Mining - Expert Table

Optimize Your Process

Refinery Equipment of Texas. Mini - Refinery Feasibility Overview

PART I SIEVE ANALYSIS OF MATERIAL RETAINED ON THE 425 M (NO. 40) SIEVE

What Does the Normal Distribution Sound Like?

I N T E L L I G E N T S O L U T I O N S, I N C. DATA MINING IMPLEMENTING THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ANALYSIS & MODELING OF THE OILFIELD

Minerals. GEHO Piston diaphragm pumps. Positive displacement slurry pumps First choice for high efficiency abrasive slurry pumping

Liquid level measurement using hydrostatic pressure and buoyancy

z 3. 4 which is the domain often used in normal tables. We recommend the last of these new formulas.

AFRICAN GOLD GROUP, INC. DEFINITIVE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR KOBADA GOLD PROJECT GENERATES ROBUST ECONOMIC OUTCOME

The Distillation Group, Inc.

How To Run Statistical Tests in Excel

LAB #3: MEASURING SPECIFIC GRAVITY AND DENSITY. Set-up and Materials for Experiment

Petrel TIPS&TRICKS from SCM

Issue. September 2012

HEAVY CONSTRUCTION & MINING


Effective Process Planning and Scheduling

Introduction: Growth analysis and crop dry matter accumulation

Environmental Science: A Global Perspective. All the flowers of all the tomorrows are in the seeds of today. Chinese Proverb

SIEVE ANALYSIS OF FINE AND COARSE AGGREGATES FOP FOR AASHTO T 27 (11)

Optimization Modeling for Mining Engineers

Table 1 DENSITY Density Solids Percent By Volume

UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA LA SAPIENZA DIPARTIMENTO INGEGNERIA CHIMICA MATERIALI AMBIENTE

Standard Test 1. SCOPE Description of Test

Chapter 3, Lesson 4: Density: Sink and Float for Solids

Canada s Oil Sands Overview and Bitumen Blending Primer. US National Academy of Science October 23, 2012

Lecture 12: Exercise on mineral processing. Contents. Problems 1 to 7

PROJECT CONSULTING MAIZE DRYING (CORNCOB) GRAIN DRYING (SEED) SEED PROCESSING SEED SIZING CLEANING COATING PACKING STORAGE AND TRANSPORT SYSTEMS


Pelleting Process. Pelleting Process

WASTEWATER TREATMENT OBJECTIVES

Chapter 19 Operational Amplifiers

Recycling Markets and CRT Glass

Graphical Integration Exercises Part Four: Reverse Graphical Integration

Simple Regression Theory II 2010 Samuel L. Baker

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE RADOS XRF ORE SORTER. RS Fickling Metanza Mineral Processors (Pty) Ltd

Sixth Annual Conference on Carbon Capture & Sequestration

COKE PRODUCTION FOR BLAST FURNACE IRONMAKING

LIFE-CYCLE IMPACTS AND COSTS OF MANGANESE LOSSES AND RECOVERY DURING FERROMANGANESE PRODUCTION

Figure 1. Basic structure of the leaf, with a close up of the leaf surface showing Stomata and Guard cells.

Pressure in Fluids. Introduction

Electricity Sources. Coal Fleet

Benchmarking Multi-Dimensional Large Strain Consolidation Analyses D. Priestley 1, M.D. Fredlund 2 and D. van Zyl 3

How to calibrate an RTD or Platinum Resistance Thermometer (PRT)

Rational Number Project

Application of the Thermo Scientific CQM Online Coal Analyzer in Anjialing Coal Preparation Plant s Rail Loadout

The University of Toledo Soil Mechanics Laboratory

Determination of Thermal Conductivity of Coarse and Fine Sand Soils

GINI-Coefficient and GOZINTO-Graph (Workshop) (Two economic applications of secondary school mathematics)

Lithium-ion battery technology: Getting the most from Smart Batteries

Outotec HIGmills; A Fine Grinding Technology

Slope Density. Appendix F F-1 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE DISCUSSION OF SLOPE

High Flying Factors of Production LESSON 3 HIGH FLYING FACTORS OF PRODUCTION

Performance of the Boiler and To Improving the Boiler Efficiency Using Cfd Modeling

USING THE EQUITY RESIDUAL APPROACH TO VALUATION: AN EXAMPLE

Columbia NUS. Double Professional Degree in Financial Engineering. Guillermo Gallego Columbia University

The Use of Common Business Intelligence and Analytics Tools in the Operation and Optimisation of Iron Ore Process Plants.

SECTION CEMENT-MORTAR LINED AND COATED STEEL PIPE

Experiment 1: Measurement and Density

DENSITY MEASURING SYSTEMS

DryWeight BulkVolume

Gaussian Tail or Long Tail: On Error Characterization of MLC NAND Flash

The Versatile Differential Pressure Transmitter. By David Gunn Honeywell Process Solutions

Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME) for Steel Industry

CSE: LUX XETRA: NGO Frankfurt: NGO. Environmental Reclamation & Trading

TECHNIQUES FOR NATURAL GAS SAMPLING A DISCUSSION OF FIELD METHODS FOR OBTAINING SPOT SAMPLES. Randall Messman SW Regional Sales Manager

Overview of Integrated Coal Gasification Combined-cycle Technology Using Low-rank Coal

Mineral Identification

4S Archimedes Test for Density

Probability analysis of blended coking coals

Pet Coke Consulting, LLC. Phil Fisher Argus Conference, Houston September 19-21, 2012

Fossil Energy Study Guide: Oil

INTRODUCTION AGGREGATE DEMAND MACRO EQUILIBRIUM MACRO EQUILIBRIUM THE DESIRED ADJUSTMENT THE DESIRED ADJUSTMENT

4 th EU Sout Africa Clean Coal Working Group Meeting

DETERMINING THE DENSITY OF LIQUIDS & SOLIDS

New Discoveries in the Relationship Between Macro and Micro Grindability

University of Oulu Oulu Mining School

Transcription:

SMART DOG MINING It takes a smart dog to find hidden treasures An Introduction to Predicting Coal Preparation Plant Performance There are several tools available for modeling coal preparation plant performance. And they all do a good job, but it is helpful to understand the basic principles to understand what the results mean. The following is a brief overview of how I perform process simulation on a coal cleaning circuit. This process was used for performing analysis of coal preparation circuits in Alberta, British Columbia, China, Illinois, India, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Utah, and West Virginia. Several of these were comparing actual plant performance to a predicted performance both past, present, and future. Others were used to model a new circuit during engineering and design. The work is based on the fact that gravity based processes can be simulated mathematically with three pieces of information. Two of the pieces required to predict the clean coal yield and quality are washability or sink-float tests on the coal and partition curves for the various gravity cleaning devices. COAL WASHABILITY The washability of a coal is determined by sink-float testing. The test is performed by placing a sample of coal in progressively heavier specific gravity baths and scooping off the material that floats. This test shows how the quality and yield of the coal varies as the specific gravity changes. The data shows how one coal would separate at various specific gravities. The cumulative float at any float specific gravity is what a "perfect" (theoretical) specific gravity separation would produce in the way of clean coal yield and quality, with the cumulative sink being the refuse from the perfect separation. This test result will be used as the example for this manual. A typical washability data is shown in Table 1. In general the information in the yellow highlighted sections comes from the analysis f the test data. Other analysis information such as volatile matter or fixed carbon can also be used. This is typical of a steam coal analysis from North America.

Table 1 Example Washability Data To use enter the re in the highlighted cells The information below is taken from a feasibility study performed on a potential coal mine in Canada. It has been modified from the original. It is included as reference data. Canadia Coal Project Top Bottom % Wt Ave 100.00 9.50 46.90 30.82 Float Sink Direct % Wt % Ash % S % Wt % Ash % S Sink Float % Wt % Ash % S 16.52 3.65 1.01 100.00 18.44 1.54 1.30 16.52 3.65 1.01 45.77 5.02 1.05 83.48 21.36 1.65 1.30 1.35 29.25 5.80 1.08 64.02 6.41 1.05 54.23 29.76 1.96 1.35 1.40 18.25 9.90 1.04 72.31 7.48 1.09 35.98 39.83 2.42 1.40 1.45 8.29 15.67 1.40 77.13 8.34 1.14 27.69 47.07 2.73 1.45 1.50 4.82 21.32 1.86 80.38 8.99 1.17 22.87 52.49 2.91 1.50 1.55 3.25 24.45 1.98 83.25 9.64 1.21 19.62 57.14 3.07 1.55 1.60 2.87 27.92 2.37 86.99 10.65 1.28 16.75 62.15 3.19 1.60 1.70 3.74 33.08 2.65 89.23 11.40 1.32 13.01 70.50 3.34 1.70 1.80 2.24 40.49 2.99 90.20 11.79 1.34 10.77 76.74 3.41 1.80 1.90 0.97 47.39 3.36 100.00 18.44 1.54 9.80 79.65 3.42 1.90 9.80 79.65 3.42 100.00 Top Bottom % Wt Ave 9.50 0.50 36.20 2.18 Float Sink Direct % Wt % Ash % S % Wt % Ash % S Sink Float % Wt % Ash % S 26.00 2.33 0.94 100.00 22.18 1.28 1.30 26.00 2.33 0.94 48.57 3.81 0.90 74.00 29.15 1.40 1.30 1.35 22.57 5.51 0.86 61.91 4.84 0.90 51.43 39.53 1.64 1.35 1.40 13.34 8.61 0.88 69.83 5.75 0.91 38.09 50.36 1.90 1.40 1.45 7.92 12.86 1.00 73.26 6.31 0.93 30.17 60.20 2.14 1.45 1.50 3.43 17.57 1.29 75.84 6.84 0.94 26.74 65.67 2.24 1.50 1.55 2.58 22.01 1.43 77.45 7.32 0.96 24.16 70.34 2.33 1.55 1.60 1.61 29.93 1.75 79.51 7.99 0.99 22.55 73.22 2.37 1.60 1.70 2.06 33.13 1.96 80.88 8.54 1.01 20.49 77.25 2.41 1.70 1.80 1.37 40.72 2.22 81.94 9.06 1.03 19.12 79.87 2.43 1.80 1.90 1.06 48.85 2.40 100.00 22.18 1.28 18.06 81.69 2.43 1.90 18.06 81.69 2.43 100.00 Top Bottom % Wt Ave 0.50 0.15 7.60 0.27 Float Sink Direct % Wt % Ash % S % Wt % Ash % S Sink Float % Wt % Ash % S 32.30 1.90 0.91 100.00 20.94 1.35 1.30 32.30 1.90 0.91 48.80 2.83 0.90 67.70 30.03 1.56 1.30 1.35 16.50 4.65 0.89 59.78 3.59 0.89 51.20 38.20 1.77 1.35 1.40 10.98 6.98 0.85 66.90 4.26 0.90 40.22 46.73 2.02 1.40 1.45 7.12 9.84 0.97 71.58 4.85 0.90 33.10 54.66 2.25 1.45 1.50 4.68 13.28 0.87 74.75 5.39 0.91 28.42 61.48 2.47 1.50 1.55 3.17 17.59 1.06 76.78 5.83 0.92 25.25 66.98 2.65 1.55 1.60 2.03 22.31 1.26 78.83 6.44 0.93 23.22 70.89 2.77 1.60 1.70 2.05 28.96 1.60 80.28 6.99 0.95 21.17 74.95 2.89 1.70 1.80 1.45 37.28 1.92 81.32 7.52 0.97 19.72 77.72 2.96 1.80 1.90 1.04 48.28 2.18 100.00 20.94 1.35 18.68 79.36 3.00 1.90 18.68 79.36 3.00 100.00 Top Bottom % Wt Ave 0.15 0.00 9.30

With the washability data and information about the preparation plant equipment the performance can be predicted with a fairly good accuracy. The information needed on the equipment is the partition curves. PARTITION CURVE Each type of washing equipment has its own characteristic performance curve, commonly referred to as a partition (distribution) curve. They are also known as Tromp curves from the work of Klaas F. Tromp from the Dutch State Mines Organization. Typical curves are shown in Figure 1. The term "partition" derives from the fact that the equipment separates or "partitions" the coal into two fractions, plus or minus the specific gravity of separation. Each curve is substantially independent of the density distribution of the coal being washed. The curve is dependent upon the size distribution of the feed coal. Figure 1 Typical Partition Curves

There are two basic philosophies in dealing with the effect of different size feeds. One philosophy requires a unique partition curve for each size feed and each separating gravity. This procedure becomes very cumbersome and requires a large file of curves. A new or changed feed size requires the development of a new curve or access to one in storage. This is the procedure first developed by the USBM and continued by the DOE, which have proceeded to sample and test various plants and process equipment, and publish the results. The second philosophy is based upon the work of the Dutch State Mines organization which specifies that each family of curves can be reduced to a single curve that defines the effects at low and high gravities. This curve can then be modified to any feed by adjusting the slope of the center section. This is generally referred to as a normalized curve and is based on +/- X specific gravity units from a separating point, referenced as zero. This second method is the method I and many others in the coal industry use. As such, we have a set of partition curves for different types of processing equipment, and adjustment factors (called Ep's) for the center sections. Ep is an abbreviation for Ecart Probable Error (or sometimes moen) and is a measure of the precision of separation. It is defined as the specific gravity at which 25% of the feed reports to clean coal (D25), minus the specific gravity at which 75% reports to clean coal (D75), all divided by 2, or: Ep = (D25 - D75)/ 2 A low Ep (.02) indicates a very precise separation, and a high Ep (.20) indicates a very inefficient separation. Other factors such as error area, imperfection, and Tromp area are, and have been, used by various preparation engineers. From results experienced in the field, and comparing theoretical to actual plant performance, some adjustments to this method of Ep have been developed and a unique Ep calculation is done for each equipment based on some adjustment factors. Ep =F1*F2*(F3*SG-F4)

Where: F1: Where F1 is calculated from the separating SG and the Ave Size Where Ave Size uses Ave = e ((ln(top)+ln(bot))/2) F2: Prediction or guarantee, 1.0 if predicting performance, 1.25 if guaranteeing performance F3: empirical factors determined by testing and unique for each equipment (generally) F4: empirical factors determined by testing and unique for each equipment (generally) The raw data I use was taken from old notes, then a regression analysis was performed to fit a curve to the data to determine general characteristics. This was then used to calculate curves for each device based on separating gravity and assumed Ep. This curve is then used to calculate a unique curve from the input data. Regression analysis was also performed on the impact of average grain size to refine the F1 value. The following pages present information for major equipment types commonly found in coal preparation plants. The attached spreadsheet ( SDM Process Sim) shows this data in use with the typical washability presented above. Using this information and assuming a dense media vessel for the coarse and a water-only cyclone circuit for the fines the results are Dense Media Vessel Sep.Gr. % Wt % Ash % S 1.55 Predicted 78.70 8.67 1.16 Theoretical 80.38 8.99 1.17 Water-only Cyclone (2 Stage sink reclean) % Wt % Ash % S 1.70 Predicted 69.66 8.77 1.01 Theoretical 81.87 8.39 1.00 Plant % Wt % Ash % S Predicted 67.42 8.71 1.09 Theoretical 73.56 8.69 1.08

PROCESS EQUIPMNENT Baum Jig Figure 2 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 2: Normaized Baum Jig Partition Curve Head: y = 0.0118x 3 + 0.1364x 2 + 0.5221x + 0.6656 Middle: y = 0.2455x + 0.5032 Tail: y = 0.0043x 3-0.0606x 2 + 0.2896x + 0.5174 Using these functions and the following unique values for Baum jigs: F1: y = 0.0002x 2-0.0243x + 1.2129 F3: 0.11 F4: 0.01

Fine Coal (Batac) Jig Figure 3 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 3: Normaized Baum Jig Partition Curve Head: y = 0.0007x 3 + 0.015x 2 + 0.1185x + 0.3482 Middle: y = 0.25x + 0.5 Tail: y = 0.0051x 3-0.064x 2 + 0.2935x + 0.512 Using these functions and the following unique values for Fine Coal (Batac) jigs: F1: y = 0.0013x 2-0.063x + 1.513 F3: 0.114 F4: 0.1

Mineral (Diaphragm) Jig Figure 4 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 4: Normaized Baum Jig Partition Curve Head: y = 0.0118x 3 + 0.1364x 2 + 0.5221x + 0.6656 Middle: y = 0.2455x + 0.5032 Tail: y = 0.0043x 3-0.0606x 2 + 0.2896x + 0.5174 Using these functions and the following unique values for Mineral (Diaphragm) jigs: F1: y = 0.0013x 2-0.063x + 1.513 F3: 0.11 F4: 0.1

Dense Medium Vessels Figure 5 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 5 Normalized Dense Media Vessel Partition curve Head: y = 0.0002x 5 + 0.0042x 4 + 0.0436x 3 + 0.2231x 2 + 0.5784x + 0.645 Middle: y = 0.25x + 0.5 Tail: y = -0.002x 5 + 0.0236x 4-0.0779x 3-0.0265x 2 + 0.5319x + 0.2983 Using these functions and the following unique values for dense media vessels: F1: y = 3.7425x -0.4676 F3: 0.047 F4: 0.05

Dense Medium Cyclones Figure 6 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 6 Normalized Dense Media Cyclone Partition curve Head: y = 1E-05x 6 + 0.0005x 5 + 0.0082x 4 + 0.0685x 3 + 0.3092x 2 + 0.7224x + 0.7231 Middle: y = 0.25x + 0.5 Tail: y = 0.0004x 5-0.0091x 4 + 0.0882x 3-0.4074x 2 + 0.9152x + 0.1633 Using these functions and the following unique values for dense media cyclones: F1: y = -0.0028x 3 + 0.0598x 2-0.3723x + 1.5081 F3: 0.37 F4: 0.15

Water-only Cyclone Figure 7 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 7 Normalized Water-only Cyclone Partition curve Head: y = 0.0051x 3 + 0.0645x 2 + 0.2954x + 0.5026 Middle: y = -0.0068x 3 + 0.0265x 2 + 0.2646x + 0.4971 Tail: y = 0.0062x 3-0.0745x 2 + 0.3301x + 0.5125 Using these functions and the following unique values for water-only cyclones: F1: y = -0.142Ln(x) + 0.8912 F3: 0.33 F4: 0.31

Tables Figure 6 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 6 Normalized Dense Media Cyclone Partition curve Head: y = 3E-06x 6 + 0.0001x 5 + 0.0018x 4 + 0.0147x 3 + 0.0651x 2 + 0.1498x + 0.347 Middle: y = 0.25x + 0.5 Tail: y = 0.0004x 3-0.0109x 2 + 0 0.095x + 0.6813 Using these functions and the following unique values for concentrating tables: F1: y = -0.0983Ln(x) + 1.1566 F3: 0.25 F4: 0.08

Spirals Figure 6 shows normalized partition curves for a heavy media vessel at increasing separating Figure 6 Normalized Spiral Concentrator Partition curve Head: y = 3E-06x 6 + 0.0001x 5 + 0.0018x 4 + 0.0147x 3 + 0.0651x 2 + 0.1498x + 0.347 Middle: y = 0.25x + 0.5 Tail: y = 0.0004x 3-0.0109x 2 + 0.095x + 0.6813 Using these functions and the following unique values for dense media vessels: F1: y = -0.0983Ln(x) + 1.1566 F3: 0.25 F4: 0.08