Search Documents

Kaolin deposits in Georgia lie in a belt that stretches across the central part of the state from Alabama to South Carolina. In 1977 the state's kaolin production was an estimated 4.58 million tons (5.05 million st) or 77% of US production. While mining methods vary, stripping contractor W. F. (Billy) Jackson of Wrightsville, Ga., depends on a fleet of 18 twin-engine elevating scrapers to move the hulk of overburden and clay. Owner Billy Jackson explains that the soil in this part of the state is perfect for scraper operation; overburden ranges from Georgia red clay to a sandy gumbo material. Apart from some shale, very little rock is encountered, thus eliminating any blasting re¬quirement. Most of the material can be removed with cutting edge teeth or with drop center blades.

Jan 6, 1978

By Cushwa, C. C.

AT the Park Utah Mine, labor costs of stoping A have been reduced from 30 to 40 per cent. by the use of double-drum hoists and scrapers. The application of scrapers varies with the methods of timbering. In stopes, which must be timbered with square-sets or stringer sets, one method is used; another is used in wide orebodies that can be held open until filling is introduced; and still another in narrow flat veins. Nearly all the oreshoots at the Park Utah lie at less than 50" from the horizontal, and most of the ore is difficult to handle through flat chutes. Proper care is probably the most important requisite for successful scraping, as serviceable equipment can be obtained from several manufacturers. One capable mechanic, therefore, was put in charge of the scraper hoists. He visits every stope daily, oiling hoists and tail1 blocks, inspects all equipment, splices cables and changes "set-ups" when necessary; his pay has been a good investment. The Park Utah now has in use ten double-drum Turbinair hoists, and one Sullivan double-drum a. c. hoist of the same capacity and outside design as the air hoists. The electric hoist is slower than the air hoists and does not pass large boulders easily; it is, however, a very effective machine. The air hoists are fast, powerful and

Jan 1, 1925

By M. F. Fogler

An attempt to duplicate Rawdon and Mutchler's experiments showing a reversal of hardness with continued rolling gave negative results, indicating that the phenomenon is not general but depends, probably, on local conditions of rolling. IN A recent paper, Rawdon and Mutchler1 gave some exceptionally interesting results on the Brinell and scratch hardness of severely cold-worked metals. In their work, they found that, on continued cold rolling, the metal hardened up to a particular point and then reversed and became softer; this was true for both Brinell and scratch hardness values. The generally reported behavior2 of metals, with respect to Brinell tests on cold-worked material, is that the metals harden up to a certain point and then, on further cold rolling, no change in Brinell hardness occurs. Jeffries and Archer3 state that there is little difference between the scratch hardness of annealed and cold-worked metals; the work of Faust and Tammann4 also indicated no difference between-the hardness of annealed and cold-worked copper. Rawdon and Mutchler found, when they plotted the reduction ratio (initial thickness divided by thickness after rolling) against the hardness value for the cold-rolled material, that the hardness number increased up to a reduction ratio of about 3 and then decreased and became even smaller than that for the annealed metal. This behavior was reported for both scratch and Brinell hardness; Figs. 1 and 2 show their results for Brinell hardness on the metals for which they published data. This is an exceptionally interesting phenomenon, if it occurs under all conditions of rolling, and would have an important bearing on the practice of cold

Jan 1, 1925

By M. K. Mohanty

Over the years, screen bowl centrifuges have been widely used for dewatering fine coal in coal preparation plants in the United States and elsewhere. Its popularity is attributed to its relatively low cost, its high capacity of providing low moisture content product and its relative ease of operation and maintenance. It is generally recognized in the engineering and scientific communities that screen bowl centrifuges provide some degree of particle size separation while dewatering fine coal in a common application. However, the extent of differential partitioning of coarse and fine particles achievable by a screen bowl centrifuge has not been systematically studied in the past. The present investigation was aimed at conducting a parametric study using a statistically designed experimental program to better understand and optimize the size classification performance of a screen bowl centrifuge. A continuously operating screen bowl centrifuge having a bowl diameter of 0.5 m was used for this study at the Illinois Coal Development Park. Three key operating parameters, i.e., feed flow rate, feed solid content and pool depth, were varied to conduct a total of 17 experiments using a three-level factorial test matrix. Some of the best size separation performances achieved in this study may be described as having an imperfection value of 0.13 at an effective separation size (d50c) of 38 µm and an imperfection value of 0.27 at an effective separation size (d50c) of 2.8 µm. Due to an effective separation of ultrafine high ash materials, the ash content of the screen bowl feed was reduced from 22.3% to a minimum of 8.84% with a combustible recovery of 84.1% and an ash rejection of 71.6%. A higher combustible recovery of 92.1% was achieved at a product ash content of 12.5% with a d50c of 2.8 µm and imperfection of 0.27.

Jan 1, 2008

By Paul M. Lévesque

The Dome Mine has been in production for nearly 100 years and throughout the years many different mining methods were used to extract the ore. An exploration program late in the 1990s outlines new resources requiring the mine to extract the rock and some previously placed backfill (alluvial sand and/or classified tailings). It is therefore imperative to separate the backfill from the rock to reduce the negative impacts of handling the backfill on the ore pass, crushers and mill processes. Separating the backfill from the ore at the source would also reduce and/or eliminate the cost of handling this waste stream. The paper will touch on the backfill removal criteria, the risks, the alternatives and the selected method, screen decks, for backfill removal at the Dome Mine. The 155549 bulk zone case study will illustrate how the screen decks are in use at the mine. The paper will also illustrate how the lessons learned and conclusions of the work done for the 155549 bulk zone were applied to the second screen deck installation for the 257260 bulk zone.

May 1, 2009

By H. C. Lautenschlaeger

Let's start with a bit of History. Before the advent of woven wire screen cloth or perforated plate as we know it today, screens or sieves, as they were called, were probably made by the Greeks or Romans around the year 150 B.C. Coarse openings were made from bamboo or other woven reeds or with holes punched in leather hides, while fine openings may have been made using hair from the long tails of horses woven with small openings. The first metallic woven wire screens were probably produced by the Germans in the 15th Century. All of these screening devices were, of course, hand operated. The first records of mechanically driven shaking screens are found in "John Smeathon's Diary of His Journey to the Low-Country" in 1775. He was the English Civil Engineer who built the famous Eddystone Light House and discovered the formula for making hydraulic cements. He described a screen the Dutch were using as a wooden frame on which woven wire was mounted. This box was inclined at an angle and hinged on the lower end. The upper or feed end was equipped with a pulley so they could raise it up, say 5" or 6", and then let it drop abruptly onto a sill or stop plate, thus jarring the material deposited on the woven wire through the openings. Material that was passed over the deck was scooped up and redeposited on the woven wire for rescreening. This was an early form of what is today known as a recirculating load.

Jan 1, 1983

By G van Niekerk, M Wortley

Screening is a critical part of many mineral processing circuits and keeping the aperture of the screening media within specification is vital to ensure efficient performance of the processing plant. Typical ways of estimating and/or measuring the wear of the screening media vary from very subjective methods (for instance, using the human eye) to manually checking the width of a few of the more severely worn gaps with a measurement device. Subjective methods can be flawed by human error while manual checking can distort the polyurethane or rubber materials that are used in several types of screening media. All of these errors can cause either premature replacement of panels or, even worse, poor screening of the material.Metso Process Technology and Innovation (PTI) and Metso Screening Media Solutions (SMS) have developed an innovative method that measures screen aperture using advanced image processing techniques. Field trials of the device are presented in this paper, which shows the comparison between the different methods of measuring apertures. Case studies demonstrate how the system, when combined with ScreenTrack, MetsoÆs industry leading maintenance system, and screening media, is providing users with the best possible screening solutions.

Sep 26, 2011

By E. A. Holbrook

The data in this bulletin were obtained during an investigation of screening practice by the University of Illinois engineering experiment station and the United States Bureau of Mines under a cooperative agreement between them and the State of Illinois Geological Survey Division. Earlier work on this subject includes a study of the general practice of coal preparation in Illinois, made in 1914 and published in 1916,1 and an investigation of Illinois coal-washing methods, results of which were published in 1912 in a bulletin 2 that contained complete information on the methods then in use for sizing washed coal. OBJECTS OF THE INVESTIGATION The present investigation was limited to a study of screening as applied in preparing mineral products with the expectation of obtaining more comprehensive information on screening machinery.

Jan 1, 1925

By Bunting S. Crocker

PEBBLE grinding at Lake Shore is not a temporary wartime substitute. The tube milling plant, with a 1000 ton per day capacity, grinds a hard siliceous ore to 90 pct - 325 mesh. The plant, prior to using pebbles, was consuming 4.3 lb of 1 1/4-in. grinding balls per ton of ore, which amounted to 785 tons of balls per year. At September 1951 prices, $132.60 per ton, this steel cost amounted to, $104,400 per year, or $0.285 per ton milled. By the Lake Shore method of substituting screened rock for this steel, all of this cost is saved. This is one of the major economies in Lake Shore mill practice. Regardless of the ultimate price of grinding balls, a change, back to steel balls is not considered. The present pebble plant is more flexible than a steel ball plant and equally efficient. For example, if it is desired to change the size of grinding media, the pebble charge in any mill can be changed completely in 4 to 5 days, as against 76 days to change completely a 1 1/4-in. steel ball charge. To change pebble size it is necessary only to change two sets-of screens and clean out the rock feed storage bin. This will take 8 to 10 days as against 3 to 4 months to clean. out the customary supply of grinding balls kept on hand. Also it has not always been ' possible to purchase all desired sizes of balls at any price. In an analysis of savings effected by the use of the pebble mills, the flexibility of the Lake Shore grinding plant should be discussed, as it has a direct bearing on these savings. The plant has always used several units to handle tonnage rather than sending all the tonnage through a single unit. This principle may result in using small diameter mills, but no objection to that is seen. At no time has any advantage been found in cost per ton ground in large diameter mills. Both the capacity and the power of any mill varies as the diameter raised to the 2.6th power. Consequently large or small mills are equally efficient, and a plant should be designed to use as many units-or combination of units as is consistent with reasonable operating practice. Mills under 5 ft diam are harder to reline, etc. To define the case at Lake Shore, .2600 tons per day formerly were milled in seven 7x6-ft ball mills and twelve 5x16-ft (and two 6x16-ft) tube mills.* This gave an excellent test plant. and an extremely efficient-one. In this plant the ratio of ball mills to tube mills was 1: 2. When the much cheaper pebble mills were substituted for the tube mills, this. ratio -was changed to one ball mill to four pebble mills to take the greatest possible advantage of the cheaper operating mill, i.e., the pebble mill. This flexibility without loss in efficiency has been an important item in the cost savings. It is interesting to note that the use of pebbles for fine grinding was. proved first in the laboratory in a 12-in. ball mill. In fact, since 1934 all testing on -.8 mesh material has been done in this 12-in. mill. Scope of the Tests A paper on fine grinding at Lake Shore Mines was published in July 1940.1 This paper covered 7 years of intensive research on fine grinding as well as sizing methods and equipment, plant scale grinding tests on 5x16-ft tube mills with and without .grate discharges-both with 1 1/4-in. and 3/4-in. balls, the use of laboratory mills to evaluate plant changes, and several reports on classifiers and classification. In the following July the addendum report' was added in which the idea of series-circuit grinding was introduced, and the results of running five stages of tube mills and bowl classifiers were shown. Since 1940, the ball milling end of the plant has been altered extensively as a result of tests on the use of 3 1/2-in. rods in 7x6-ft mills and the use of the Tyler repulping screen with from 7 to 14 mesh screens. These tests are, lengthy and may be covered in a separate 'report later. The scope of this report is confined to ore ground by rod milling and ball milling until it passed through an 8 mesh Tyler Ty-rod screen. The -8 mesh screen undersize then was pumped to a primary bowl classifier in open circuit and the sands .from the bowl sent to the primary pebble mills, see Fig: 1. In the pebble mill circuit the ore is ground to 90 pct -325 mesh (24 pct + 28 microns) In studying the flowsheet, attention should be paid to the efficiency of the classification equipment used. The Tyler repulping screen is an efficient machine on the 8 to 10 mesh separation, and the bowl classifier is equally efficient at the 325 mesh separation. Efficient classification is a necessity for series-circuit stage grinding. The ore is hard siliceous porphyry, 60 pct SiO2, 80 pct insoluble. Its grindability at different. meshes has been shown near the top of 'the list in F. C. Bond's grindability tests' Lake Shore is not shown, but an adjacent-mine with identical ore, Wright-Hargreaves, is. Reasons for the-Changeover Since 1936 grinding balls have been rising steadily in price with no sign of stopping. For a mill that used 4.5 to 5.2 lb of grinding balls for every ton of ore ground this rise represented an alarming increase in grinding costs. In many cases the quality of the grinding balls fell off as the scrap steel became more difficult to obtain. The ratio of tube mills to ball mills increased with the use of the Tyler repulping screen in the ball mill circuit. Originally only 3.0 lb of balls per ton were used in the tube mills, and this

Jan 1, 1952

By John S. Johnson, Thomas Fraser

SIZING is the process of separating mixed particles into groups of particles all of the same size, or into groups in which all particles L range between certain definite maximum and minimum sizes. In coal preparation, sizing is generally accomplished by passing the coal over screens. Separation by differential settling in air or water currents has been adapted to the special field of separating very fine sizes, and these processes are in commercial use to a relatively small extent in the coal industry. Separation with screens is a very old industrial practice. Agricola 1 described the use of screens for ore treatment in the middle ages. In the literature of the British coal industry references were made to the screening of coal as early as 1589, but the practice of extensive sizing for the market did not become general until the last half of the nineteenth century. In America, the practice of sizing developed first in the Pennsylvania anthracite region, beginning with the use of rakes2 in the mine working places to recover coarse coal. This mining procedure left the fines in the mine. Preparation outside the mine started with the installation of stationary cast-iron plates with 4 to 6-in. square holes. The run-of-mine coal was dumped upon the platforms, the large pieces of rock were picked out by hand, and the large lumps of coal were broken with hammers. The term "breaker," which still applies to the anthracite-preparation plant, originated with this practice, but the term is no longer descriptive of the entire function of the plant. In 1884, the first power-operated anthracite coal breaker3 was erected by Gideon Bart at his colliery at Wolf Creek near Minersville, Pa. This plant utilized a system of rolls for breaking the coal and revolving screens for sizing. The plant was driven by a steam engine. It could handle

Jan 1, 1943

By W. E. Foreman, James A. Redding

INTRODUCTION Screening is a mechanical process that separates particles by size. Modern coal preparation is made possible by efficient sizing. Sizing of coal is defined in terms of the opening through which an individual particle will or will not pass, or as two openings, the larger of which passes the particle and the smaller of which retains the particle. Screening accomplishes sizing by passing coal of a wide range of sizes through a series of screens, each of a decreasing size. The individual screen discharges are then directed into different screen products for subsequent sale or processing. Screening in modern preparation plants is done for the following reasons: 1 ) Removal of fine coal before a size reduction step. 2) Size separation of the coal into a coarse and fine fraction for sized products or processing in coarse and fine coal circuits. 3) Recovery of heavy media from heavy media coal cleaning circuits. 4) Dewatering. 5) Rock and trash removal by handpicking on a screen. Fig. 8-1 is a generalized flowsheet of a plant showing the use of screens in the coal preparation process. Table 8-1 shows the vibrating screen equipment utilized in Fig. 8-1

Jan 1, 1979

By John S. Johnson, Thomas Fraser

SIZING is the process of separating mixed particles into groups of particles all of the same size, or into groups in which all particles range between certain definite maximum and minimum sizes. In coal preparation, sizing is generally accomplished by passing the coal over screens. Separation by differential settling in air or water currents has been adapted to the special field of separating very fine sizes, and these processes are in commercial use to a relatively small extent in the coal industry. Separation with screens is a very old industrial practice. Agricola described the use of screens for ore treatment in the middle ages. In the literature of the British coal industry references were made to the screening of coal as early as 1589, but the practice of extensive sizing for the market did not become general until the last half of the nineteenth century. In America, the practice of sizing developed first in the Pennsylvania anthracite region, beginning with the use of rakes in the mine working places to recover coarse coal. This mining procedure left the fines in the mine. Preparation outside the mine started with the installation of stationary cast-iron plates with 4 to 6-in. square holes. The run-of-mine coal was dumped upon the platforms, the large pieces of rock were picked out by hand, and the large lumps of coal were broken with hammers. The term "breaker," which still applies to the anthracite-preparation plant, originated with this practice, but the term is no longer descriptive of the entire function of the plant. In 1884, the first power-operated anthracite coal breaker was erected by Gideon Bart at his colliery at Wolf Creek near Minersville, Pa. This plant utilized a system of rolls for breaking the coal and revolving screens for sizing. The plant was driven by a steam engine. It could handle coal at the rate of 200 tons a day. By 1860, revolving screens were in wide use in the Pennsylvania anthracite field. Shaking screens were introduced in the Pennsylvania anthracite region in the 90's and they rapidly displaced the lower-capacity revolving screens.

Jan 1, 1950

By R. H. Landshof, Reynold Q. Shotts, James A. Redding

GENERAL INTRODUCTION by R. Q. Shotts The sizing of coal particles is one of the most important beneficiation operations performed from the time coal is broken at the face until it is delivered to the customer. Indeed, in many cases it may be virtually the only such operation performed in that interval, although it is most often accompanied by some comminution. Sizing, as the term implies, is a separation of the broken coal particles into arbitrary groups, each group containing particles within restricted mass, volume or size limits. Size itself is not a rigidly defined property, but is actually determined more by the operating principles of the sizing device than by unique properties of the particles themselves. Particle size cannot be uniquely defined independently of particle shape. Taggart l says, "In fact, it is not possible to state the size of a single irregular body by means of a single dimension; such possibility exists only for regular polyhedra and their limit, the sphere." In view of the scarcity of regular polyhedra among coal particles, even though most appear to approximate a cube, we actually define size in terms of a surface opening through which the particle barely will or will not pass, or of two openings, the smaller of which retains all particles of the group under study and the larger of which passes all of them. Alternatively, size is expressed in terms of rate of settling of particles in a fluid under closely controlled conditions. Historical Sketch2-Taken from Coal Preparation, 2nd Ed. "Sizing is the process of separating mixed particles into groups of particles all of the same size or into groups in which all particles range between certain definite maximum and minimum sizes. In coal preparation, sizing is generally accomplished by passing the coal over screens. Separation by differential settling in air or water currents has been adapted to the special field of separating very fine sizes, and these processes are in commercial use to a relatively small extent in the coal industry. Separation with screens is a very old industrial practice. Agricola described the use of screens for ore treatment in the middle ages. In the literature of the British coal industry references were made to the screening of coal as early as 1589, but the practice of extensive sizing for the market did not become general until the last half of the nineteenth century. "In America, the practice of sizing developed first in the Pennsylvania anthracite region, beginning with the use of rakes in the mine working places to recover coarse coal. The mining procedure left the fines in the mine.

Jan 1, 1968

Contents

Jan 1, 1985

By John S. Johnson, Thomas Fraser

SIZING is the process of separating mixed particles into groups of particles all of the same size, or into groups in which all particles range between certain definite maximum and minimum sizes. In coal preparation, sizing is generally accomplished by passing the coal over screens. Separation by differential settling in air or water currents has been adapted to the special field of separating very fine sizes, and these processes are in commercial use to a relatively small extent in the coal industry. Separation with screens is a very old industrial practice. Agricola described the use of screens for ore treatment in the middle ages. In the literature of the British coal industry references were made to the screening of coal as early as 1589, but the practice of extensive sizing for the market did not become general until the last half of the nineteenth century. In America, the practice of sizing developed first in the Pennsylvania anthracite region, beginning with the use of rakes' in the mine working places to recover coarse coal. This mining procedure left the fines in the mine. Preparation outside the mine started with the installation of station¬ary cast-iron plates with 4 to 6-in. square holes. The run-of-mine coal was dumped upon the platforms, the large pieces of rock were picked out by hand, and the large lumps of coal were broken with hammers. The term "breaker," which still applies to the anthracite-preparation plant, originated with this practice, but the term is no longer descriptive of the entire function of the plant. In 1884, the first power-operated anthracite coal breaker' was erected by Gideon Bart at his colliery at Wolf Creek near Minersville, Pa. This plant utilized a system of rolls for breaking the coal and revolving screens for sizing. The plant was driven by a steam engine. It 'could handle

Jan 1, 1943

By Benedict Shubart

The subject of this paper may seem threadbare to, many of you, but even if I repeat what you already know, just smile to yourself and think how much wiser you are than your neighbor, for it is startling what a number of tipples are erected that violate the elementary fundamentals not only of good design but of practical operation. Possibly a coal screening plant is a simple plant. If so, we treat it like we do a great many other simple things. We treat it entirely too lightly and fail to take into consideration, not only the changes that may occur later, the conditions we may be compelled to meet as competition changes, but even the elementary physical conditions that exist right at the tipple site. If I get too positive over some particular point, don't blame me, but remember some of the heart-breaking experiences we have had correcting these omissions, trying to make a tipple do merely what it was designed to do, when the builder tied everything up in such a constricted space, that no room was left to get the results he must have. Perhaps some of the things will look too expensive. Don't say that you can't afford them. Many of them you can't afford to do without, and when you figure that a tipple is put up for possibly twenty years of operation, you can't afford to omit any reasonable precaution not only in taking care of the present, but in foreseeing the future. We will consider a tripple screening plant, suitable for Western conditions, capable of handling approximately 2,500 tons per eight hours. The largest screen sizes must be loaded into either open cars or box cars, and arrangement provided for screening and loading not less than five sizes of coal: lump, egg, nut, slack, dust, or any reasonable combination of these. As we are considering only the preparation of the coal, we will omit all consideration of the method of haulage, pit cars, methods of dumping, and will take the coal after it is in the dump hopper. The track arrangement will frequently be determined by the ground layout. Our sizes and tonnage can be loaded on three tracks, but four tracks are better. The two outer tracks should be left for loading lump coal, No. 3 track should be left for egg coal, and No. 4 track for loading nut, slack and dust. Where a fifth track can be provided, No. 5 track should be held open only for run-of-mine coal, to act as a storage where emergency coal can, be run, should there be any delay in the screening equipment or in changing cars. Track No. I should be used for loading lump coal into box cars only. Track No. 2 should be used for loading lump coal into open cars only, and may or may not be provided with picking table, loading boom, or both. Where picking is necessary, a picking table can frequently be put between the two "lump tracks, heading down track, pivoted at one end, so it may be raised or lowered to feed either open or box cars; with

Jan 1, 1921

By J. D. Grace

[Screening by centrifugal force is an unique, subject, for with the exception of only one vibrating screen presently on the market, all vibrating screens depend upon, gravity to pass material through a sizing mesh or screen cloth. This one screen that sizes by centrifugal force and utilizes gravity only to convey materiel along the screen, is the SYMONS V-Screen. This screen was designed by Loren Symons, a member of the family that has contributed so much to the metallic and non-metallic mineral processing industries. Among Symons' other outstanding contribution to these industries are the original Cone Crusher which revolutionized reduction crushing practice, the first high-speed horizontal vibrating screen, the original Rod Deck Screen, and one of the earliest vibrating Bar Grizzlies.]

Jan 1, 1965

By Ben Gumpertz

THE important factors in any study of the screening of sand with a gravel enve-lope, as applied to use in oil wells, are: (r) sand size and shape, (2) gravel size and shape, (3) ratio of gravel size to sand size, (4) flow velocity, (5) viscosity of the fluid. Perhaps the first extensive investigation of the function of gravel in screening sand was performed by Coberly and Wagner,1 from which the following conclusion was drawn: "The diameter of the largest grains in a single classified sand suitable for gravel packing is approximately 23 times the grain size at the ten-percentile analysis of the formation sample." This applies to sands classified by Tyler screens and is for gravel grains of the maximum size that could be used to form a stable bridge. Field practice has shown that the screening effect of a given gravel for a given sand apparently varies with the flow velocity.2 Also, it has been assumed by some opera-tors that the thickness of the walls of the gravel envelope surrounding the well has little effect upon the screening process. It is thought by others that a narrow envelope of gravel might form an ineffec-tive screen. Thus the purposes of this work are: I. To investigate the effect of gravel-sand size ratio upon screening action under the condition of varying flow velocities. 2. To investigate the effect upon screen-ing action of varying the thickness of the gravel screen.

Jan 1, 1940

As partition curves are widely employed to characterize screening efficiency which, by definition, should include a time parameter, it is shown, perhaps for the first time, that time is already included in the partition curves and how. Laboratory and plant results are used to show how screening efficiency depends on feed composition, near-mesh and oversize material and screen motion, and how these factors may combine to give an erroneous result that two identically efficient screens are different and two screens of different efficiency are identical. Reasons are given which show why a renewed interest in screening would benefit not only screen engineers and operators but also those concerned in formulating standard specifications of screen analysis methods.

Jan 1, 1984

The screening of iron ores, sinter and coke, and investigations undertaken to improve screening efficiency and cloth life are discussed. The major modifications to coke screening proposed with the construction of No. 7 coke ovens battery are briefly described. The major problem areas were identified as screen cloth blinding and pegging, feed presentation and screen overloading. Blinding and pegging have had a significant effect upon screening efficiency with the screening of sinter, coke breeze and wet iron ores in particular. Pegging can be reduced or eliminated by the correct selection of aperture size and shape, screen excitation and slope, and screening medium. Blinding encountered with wet coke breeze was a particular problem in which no significant progress was made.

Jan 1, 1984