Search Documents

By Henning E. Soderberg, Robert Brien, O&apos

Coal may be the answer to US energy problems, but it also has its drawbacks. If it is crushed, screened, dumped, or moved, the environmental engineer is faced with a dust problem. To control coal dust, at both minimum initial cost and reasonable operating cost, demands a working knowledge of dust control equipment design, as well as the coal handling operation. Here are some guidelines to reduce air volume requirements and cut overall system costs.

Jan 10, 1981

Reduce worker exposure to respirable dust without interfering with bag-filling operations. Approach A dust control hood was developed which contains and captures dust close to its source and prevents it from entering the bag-filling operator's work place. How It Works A sheet metal hood is placed around the nozzle of the bag filling machine. The hood is connected through ducts to the plant exhaust ventilation system. Air pulled into the front of the hood and around the sides of the bag picks up dust generated inside the hood, and carries it to the dust collector. The size of the hood can be adapted to fit most fluidized valve-type bag-filling machines. The height of the hood depends on the bulk density of the product and weight of the bags being filled. The 14-inch-width of the hood allows it to be used on multi-nozzle baging machines spaced 16 inches on center. Only 2/3 of the bag is actually within the hood, and this allows easy operator access for placing the bags on the nozzle.

Jan 1, 1978

By G. R. Yourt

"Generally speaking the usual approach for controlling dust is three-fold:1. Suppress the formation of dust at the source.2. Confine dust that cannot be suppressed.3. Dilute and remove dust that cannot be confined.This discussion will be concentrated on the second approach, namely, confining and disposing of dusty air.Dust BehaviourBefore delving into actual design principles a brief discussion on behaviour of dust should be helpful. For prevention of silicosis only respirable dust, ranging in size from < 0.5 to 5u needs to be controlled. As particles of this size have insignificant mass and momentum they follow air movements very closely. Consequently if contaminated air around dust sources is confined within enclosures and leakages maintained, strongly indraft dust is automatically controlled and capture velocities are of no concern.Dust SourcesAt metal mining operations ore is prepared for wet concentration by crushing it to mostly <3"" in size. This usually involves a jaw crusher, one or two cone crushers, one or more screens and several conveyors. Dust is actually produced only by the crushing action but it is liberated also when numerous fine particles contained in the ore stream are dispersed by surges and vibration at the discharge of the crushers, screens and headpulleys of conveyors. Furthermore, dust is dis¬persed when the slime adhering to the underside of the return portion of belts becomes dry and is rendered airborne by vibration and by cleaning floors especially where the slime has dropped."

Jan 1, 1971

By J. B. Webster

Health and Safety in the work place is of primary concern to the underground coal industry. Control of dust in the underground environment is of major importance in this concern. Utah Power and Light Mining Division has undertaken extensive studies to determine and control the various sources of respirable dust in underground high production sections. Determination of dust sources has been achieved by real-time aerosol sampling and standard gravimetric sampling on individuals and in various suspect locations. Some sources are diesel roadway dust, outby crushing, and handling equipment, face sloughing, water spray roll-back, and mining equipment. Once identified, the dust sources are suppressed or controlled and/or the workers are directed from areas of greatest potential exposure.

Jan 1, 1990

By L. Xu

Since the establishment of the standard dust concentration of 2 mg/m3, a strong effort has been made by mining engineers and researchers to provide better dust control equipment and procedures for underground coal mines. Particular areas of success have been control of dust generation by better coal-cutting strategy, better design of water sprays for dust suppression and air movement, use of scrubbers, and improved design of face ventilation systems. A drastic improvement occurred over time such that the average dust concentrations for continuous miner operators dropped from 6.5 mg/m3 in 1968 to 1.3 mg/m3 in 1980 and for auger, cutter, longwall, and roof bolter occupations from 2.7 mg/m3 in 1973 to 1.6 mg/m3 in 1980 (Niewiadomsky, 1983).

Jan 1, 1990

By Harry Elkin

Control of coal dust has long been an important aspect in the conventional mining of coal; the main reasons being from a health and disaster standpoint. With the advent, of mechanized longwall mining, the control of dust has required more attention due to the high extraction rate common to most longwall systems. The purpose of this paper will be to describe the dust abatement activities of the longwall operation at Sunnyside. Kaiser-Steel Corporation has three mires located at Sunnyside, Utah, with a total production averaging 6,800 tons of clean coal per day. Of this 6,800 tons, 71 % is mined with continuous miners, the remaining 29% coming from one longwall unit located in No. 3 Mine. Our first longwall panel was started in November, 1961. In October, 1966, we started mining our seventh panel. The present panel is located in the Upper Sunnyside Seam which averages five feet in thickness, but does get as low as 51 inches. The seam pitches 5.5% in this vicinity. The roof is generally good and is comprised of 10 inches of shale cap rocs overlain with sandy shale and sandstone. The floor is sandy shale and is quite undulating in nature. The present panel is 3,800 feet in length with a face of 670 feet. The major equipment employed on our longwall unit is a 125 H.F. Anderton Shearer-Loader, British Jeffrey Diamond armored conveyors and a Dowty self-advancing-roof support system. The Anderton Shearer in use on our longwall unit has a 60" diameter x 27" cutting drum. During the shearing cycle, it traverses the face at 20 feet per minute with a cutting rate of 7.5 tons/minute.

Jan 1, 1967

By Fred N. Kissell, Natesa I. Jayaraman

Introduction This paper describes a recent Bureau of Mines research project that resulted in a simple procedure for reducing the dust exposure of longwall shearer operators. This project involved the development and testing of a water spray and passive shield system to hold dust against the face and away from the shearer operators. This system is known as the Shearer- Clearer.

Jan 1, 1981

The main objectives of this paper are to identify the main sources of coal dust and to investigate measures for minimisation of dust generated at these sources at the Bukit Asam open cut mine, on the island of Sumatera, Indonesia which uses a

Jan 1, 1994

By Y. P. Chugh

Additional field evaluations of a modified continuous miner using a new spray system and modified scrubbers have been conducted by the authors. In this demonstration, a comprehensive package for dust control on a continuous miner which included previously developed modifications to the scrubber, scrubber intakes and the innovative chassis spray system was demonstrated. Side-by-side comparisons of the modified miner and regular miner indicated that the miner operator with the modified miner was exposed to 62% less respirable dust. Ram car operators with the modified miner had 38% less respirable dust exposure and the return air on the modified miner had 19% less respirable dust. The mining conditions during side-by-side testing were very comparable. These results support the findings of the modified spray system studies conducted earlier at different mines in Illinois on four occasions and the modified scrubber system field evaluation studies.

Jan 1, 2009

By Gregory J. Chekan

In This Chapter [Drilling, blasting, and crushers Diesel particulate Enclosed cabs Ventilation with jet fans Stopping construction methods Propeller fans as main fans] This chapter explains how to control dust in large-entry stone mines, including both silica dust and diesel particulate. Most stone mines are limestone mines, but a substantial minority are marble, sandstone, and granite mines. These mines differ from most others in that entry widths are 30 ft or more and entry heights are 25 ft or more. Such mines, developed with room-and-pillar methods, have large open areas that can make ventilation and dust control more difficult. Because of the difficulty of ventilating stone mines, improved ventilation is a major focal point of this chapter. However, the chapter also covers the control of dust from drills, blasting, and crushers. Another part of the chapter covers enclosed cabs, an effective dust control technique for some workers. BACKGROUND The major dust compliance problem in stone mines is caused by silica (quartz) in the rock. Mines in high-silica rock, 8% or more, are far more likely to have a dust problem than those where there is less silica. Geographically, the limestone in the Northeastern and South Central United States has higher silica than the rest of the country. Chekan and Colinet [2002] have analyzed Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) dust sampling results [MSHA 2001] from the stone industry. They have concluded that, on average across the United States, the workers exposed to the highest dust concentrations are rotary drill operators, front-end loader operators, truck drivers, and crusher operators. However, there are many regional differences. Also, occupations that work outside of cabs, such as blasters, roof bolters, and laborers, can be exposed to high dust levels.

Jan 6, 2003

By John W. Brown

"Adequate dust control in and around rock drills is a problem that must be solvedfor the health and safety of workers running the drill as well as those working around thedrilling operation This paper will discuss the designs available from most drill manufacturers todayand the effort ‘nvolved in keeping them effective on a productive basis."

Jan 1, 1999

By L. Muñoz, L. Steffen, W. Vilas

The emission of particulate material is one of the several parameters related to environmental control in mining operations near communities. Blasting is an event that generates and leaves a large amount of dust in suspension, which can cause discomfort to communities, generating complaints that can compromise the operational continuity of the mine. The proper management of these environmental impacts is a key factor to ensure a good relationship with the neighborhoods, making a responsible mining in harmony with the environment, giving sustainability to the mining business in the medium and long term. The main goal of this work is to present different techniques and technologies applied in a large-scale open pit mine in Brazil, with operations close to a community, to minimize the emissions of particulate material into the atmosphere. For this, different technical solutions were implemented. First, a non-conventional blasting technique was introduced that incorporates special charging and timing configurations, generating a first upper layer that serves as a blanket to contain a second, higher-energy lower layer. An optimal stemming was also defined in order to minimize ejections and maximize cratering, using the scaled depth of burial theory as well as video and fragmentation analysis. In addition, changes were made in the timing between decks (to guarantee a minimum time between layers) and between holes (changing the initiation point opposite to the free face). Finally, additional measures such as humidification of the bench, use of a wind vane to identify wind direction and the construction of a physical barrier between the mine and the community were implemented as additional mitigation measures. By applying the above techniques together, in some specific zones of the mine, it was possible to considerably reduce the ejections generated by blasting versus conventional blasting without the above measures, which was demonstrated in the field with dual blasts trials. Additionally, it was possible to achieve a vibration reduction in the community of ~30%. This work demonstrates how, by applying these technical solutions, it was possible to minimize the dust and vibrations generated by blasting allowing this operation to do sustainable mining

Jan 1, 2024

By AIME AIME

THOUGH the dust-control systems in the crushing plants and other buildings at Morenci do not differ materially from similar installations in other large copper reduction works, it is probable that in few other plants has as much attention been paid to the dust problem. Possibly the most striking feature of the Morenci installation is the manner in which the necessary equipment has been built into the various structures, and the absence of unsightly pipes, ducts, and fan houses. That this result has been attained is due, in no small part, to the basic conception that the control of the dust in a milling plant should be an essential part of the process itself and not something to be tacked on later after the plant is in operation. The control systems were designed and developed along with the general plant construction program and when the first car of ore was dumped into the crusher the dust-control equipment was ready.

Jan 1, 1942

In This Chapter [Ventilation: dilution and displacement Water sprays: wetting and airborne capture Water additives: foam and wetting agents Dust collectors: filtration efficiency and inlet capture efficiency Reducing the generation of dust for cutting, drilling, blasting, crushing, and conveying] [This chapter will give you a general perspective on what works or doesn’t work. The chapter will also help if your dust control problem doesn’t fit any of the circumstances described in later chapters. ] This chapter describes the three major control methods used to reduce airborne dust in tunnels and underground mines: ventilation, water, and dust collectors. It also describes methods to reduce the generation of dust, so less has to be removed from the mine air. The ventilation methods provide the best use of air in the vicinity of workers and in the vicinity of dust sources. In this sense, the methods described are local ventilation methods. Most of the emphasis is on so-called displacement ventilation because it is the most effective dust control technique available. The section on water sprays outlines the dual role of sprays—wetting and airborne capture—and describes why wetting is more important. It also corrects some of the misconceptions about spray effectiveness and describes circumstances where sprays can actually increase the dust exposure of workers. The section on dust collectors outlines the circumstances under which dust collectors can be expected to function effectively. It also describes some common design and maintenance problems. The final section describes how to reduce the amount of dust that gets into the air in the first place, since once the dust is airborne it is always harder to control.

Jan 6, 2003

By J. P. Rider

Operating practices and resulting production from longwall faces are continually improving. Consequently, longwall operators are continually seeking to improve the dust control capabilities on longwalls. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has been conducting dust surveys at longwalls throughout the country in an effort to document the types of controls that are being used and to quantify the relative effectiveness of these controls. To date, surveys have been completed at longwalls in Alabama, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Utah, and West Virginia. In addition NIOSH has been reviewing longwall dust parameters provided by mine operators to MSHA to assess the status of dust control technology being used throughout the industry. Results from the underground dust surveys and information obtained from MSHA will be summarized in this paper to provide an update on longwall dust control technology and practices.

By Edward D. Thimons, Jay F. Colinet

Underground coal mining operations in the United States continue to increase productivity as mining equipment and practices are improved. Unfortunately, increased production also results in the potential for increased respirable dust generation and worker exposure. In response, US operations are applying basic controls at elevated levels and looking to emerging technologies in an effort to better control respirable dust levels. Ventilating air and water sprays remain the basis of dust control strategies for both longwall and continuous mining operations, and the level of application for these controls continues to increase. In addition, new technologies are emerging that have the potential to further reduce dust levels. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has been conducting research into methods to optimize existing control technologies and evaluate emerging control technologies. This paper will summarize control technologies routinely being used in underground coal mine operations, as well as provide a review of new controls that are being pursued.

By Jerry C. Tien

China?s remarkable levels of economic growth during the past three decades have lifted almost 300 million people out of poverty. This amazing achievement has placed an increasing demand on energy and minerals, especially coal, which supplies 68.7 percent of China?s energy (June 2011). It is estimated that China mined more than 3 Gt (3.3 billion st) of coal in 2010, three times as much when compared to merely 10 years earlier. Such an impressive achievement does not come without major costs ?? including concerns with mine safety and an increasing number of occupational illnesses due to fast growth. This article reports on one of the major safety concerns in China?s coal mining, dust and dust control practices, and known cases of caol worker?s pneumoconiosis affiliated with prolonged exposure to excessive coal dusts. The exact size of China?s mining industry is not known, but it is estimated the coal industry is at least five-million people strong, and the metal and nonmetals industry probably employs another three million people. To meet increasing energy demand, China mined more than 3.1 Gt (3.4 billion st) of coal in 2010 from its 15,000 plus coal operations1, most of which are small- to medium-sized operations with annual coal productions ranging from a few thousand tons to 300 kt (330,000 st). These small coal operations are typically in remote areas, inadequately engineered, poorly ventilated and still using rudimentary drilling and blasting mining methods employing antiquated mining equipment and, presenting safety concerns, i.e., methane and dust explosions.

Jan 1, 2011

By J. W. Austin

"Introduction The Brenda dust collection system was originally designed to handle air at the 5000 ft. elevation with less than 1 grain of dust per cubic feet of air handled. The temperature variation is from 32°C in the summer to -20°C in the winter.DUST COLLECTIONOriginal Equipment 1. Primary Crusher 2 compartment baghouse, shaker type design capacity - 17,000 cfm2. Primary Screening 3 compartment baghouse, shaker type design capacity - 30,000 cfm3. Secondary Crusher 4 compartment baghouse, shaker type design capacity - 45,000 cfm4. Secondary Screening 4 compartment baghouse, shaker typedesign capacity - 60,000 cfmThe original dust collecting equipment was designed using a napped terylene fabric at an air to cloth ratio of 5:1. The ducting was designed to handle the dust laden air at 3200 ft. per minute with all elbows and blast gate sections rubber lined. The hoods and the pickup velocities were designed to handle the anticipated low dust counts."

Jan 1, 1976

By Welby G. Courtney

The Bureau of Mines conducted an exploratory field survey to determine the amount of airborne coal dust, the size distribution of the dust, and the rate of dust deposition in coal mine airways. The survey was taken at eight underground locations in operating coal mines. The rate of dust deposition in the airways depended upon the concentration of air-borne dust and decreased exponentially with distance from the dust source. The rate was seemingly independent of the size of the airborne dust particles. The rate of deposition, along a return, for the coal dust from a fade being mined with a continuous mining machine closely matched the rate for the rock dust from a trickle duster. A sample rock-dusting schedule for that return is presented; that is, the trickle duster should be operated for 3-112 hours after every five shifts to protect the average deposit of new float coal dust in the return, but operation after every three shifts is preferred, to protect an occasional heavier deposit.

Jan 1, 1982

Reduce respirable dust exposure of workmen operating auger-type continuous mining machines. Approach: An auger miner was fitted with an exhaust system which draws dust laden air through a [scruber] and discharges it behind the line curtain. How It Works: Dusty air is drawn into the space above the coal conveyor and through a scrubber, by two fans mounted side by side above the conveyor. Exhaust from the fans passes through a duct to the side of the auger miner, and into tubing that runs back and into the air return passage formed by the line curtain. See Figure 1. Of the 5,000 cubic feet per minute of air normally entering the working place, 4/5 is drawn out through the dust exhaust system. The system was installed on a Wilcox Mark 20 Miner and tested underground by personnel of the Bureau&apos;s Pittsburgh, Pa., Mining and Safety Research Center, under a cost sharing

Jan 1, 1976