1

CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Coal is a combustible sedimentary rock that is mostly made up of carbon
and hydrocarbons. It is a non-renewable source of energy and is known as
the most widely available fossil fuel in the world. It is commonly used for
generating electricity; about 55 percent of electricity produced in the world
is generated from coal (Biswal, 2012). Although it is very beneficial in
terms of energy generation, its usage releases high amounts of waste
materials, which can be detrimental to the environment. This is because the
run-of-mine coal consists of many impurities such as sulfur, shale, clay etc.
Coal cleaning, therefore, is required to remove excessive impurities for
efficient and environmentally safe utilization of coal as the society expects
cleaner energy with less pollution and an increasing emphasis on
environmental sustainability.
To meet the challenge of environmental sustainability and thus remain a
part of a sustainable energy future, the coal industry is working on
developing coal-based power plants that will reduce its greenhouse gas
emissions. These plants are part of what is known as clean coal technology
in the coal industry and are expected to be at least 90 percent emission
free. In the design of the new technology coal-based power plants, coal
2

washing techniques are incorporated to remove the impurities that cause
the negative effects of coal use on the environment. However, for proper
selection of coal washing devices, the knowledge of the difficulty or ease of
cleaning coals is required. This can be achieved by using coal washability
curves. Correct interpretation of these curves supplies a basis for
reasonably accurate prediction of the behaviour of a raw coal or of a sized
fraction thereof on gravity-concentration machines and froth flotation cells.
Nigeria is blessed with an extensive coal resource. According to a report
written by the Nigerian Coal Corporation (2004), the inferred coal reserves
of Nigeria have been estimated at a range of 1.5 billion metric tonnes to
2.75 billion metric tonnes. The proven reserves of coal in Nigeria are about
639 million tonnes (Ogunsola, 1990; Nigerian Coal Corporation, 2004).
Despite the extensive and long history of coal resources in the country, they
are not being fully explored or even marginally developed. This is because
of the oil and gas boom in the country, which has overshadowed the solid
minerals sector. The problem of inadequate power supply in Nigeria has
however made the country to have a second thought on its coal resources.
Inadequate power supply has been a major problem facing the country. The
Nigerian electric power sector operates well below its 5.9 gigawatts (GW)
estimated capacity, and thus power outages frequently occur in the country
(CPE, 2009). About 40 percent of Nigerian populace has access to grid
3

electricity supply, which is generally unreliable (World Bank, 2005). All
sectors (residential, commercial, and industrial) are increasingly in the
habit of using privately operated diesel generators to supply electricity
whenever there is power outages, which is very frequent. Worse still, the
demand for electricity continues to increase as the population and
economy grow. The country's electricity consumption is projected to
increase from 7 GW in 2010 to about 15 GW in 2025 (CPE, 2009). Nigeria
thus is looking for ways to meet to the power demand in the country.
According to Oji et al (2012), recent years have seen governments desire to
increase electricity generation through the utilization of its abundant coal
deposits. This implies building clean technology coal-based power plants.
For proper design of clean technology coal-based power plants that will
help increase power supply in Nigeria, cleanability studies is required to
determine the ease or difficult of cleaning Nigerian coals. Data collected
from such studies will help in the design and construction of washing
plants that will be attached to the coal-based power plants to remove
impurities that cause the negative effects of coal use on the environment.
Enugu coal being one of the coal resources in Nigeria has been studied in
this work to determine its cleanability and use for electricity generation.

4

1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The main aim of this work is to evaluate the washability of Enugu coal for
use in electricity generation in Nigeria. The specific objectives of the work
are to:
obtain the washability curves of Enugu coal by conducting sink-and-
float analysis and froth flotation release tree analysis on the coal
samples;
establish the ease or difficulty of cleaning a Enugu from the
generated washability curves;
establish the organic efficiency of a hypothetical washing plant.
1.3 PROJECT OUTLINE
The outline of this project work is summarized as follows:
1. Chapter 1 Introduction, comprising statement of problem, aim and
objectives of the study.
2. Chapter 2 Literature review, comprising discussions of related
research and existing knowledge on coal, various methods used for
washing coal, a brief history of Nigerian coal reserve, and geology of
Enugu coal.
3. Chapter 3 Materials and methodology.
4. Chapter 4 Results and discussion.
5

5. Chapter 5 Conclusion of the project work and recommendations.



















6

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 DEFINITION
Coal is a combustible black or brownish-black sedimentary rock that
usually occurs in rock strata in layers or veins called coal beds or coal
seams. The harder forms, such as anthracite coal, can be regarded as
metamorphic rock because of later exposure to elevated temperature and
pressure. Coal is composed primarily of carbon along with variable
quantities of other elements, chiefly hydrogen, sulfur, oxygen, and nitrogen
(Blander, 2011).
Throughout history, coal has been a useful resource for human
consumption. It is primarily burned as a fossil fuel for the production of
electricity and/or heat, and is also used for industrial purposes such as
refining metals. Coal forms when dead plant matter is converted into peat,
which in turn is converted into lignite, then anthracite. This involves
biological and geological processes that take place over a long period of
time.
Coal, a fossil fuel, is the largest source of energy for the generation of
electricity worldwide (see Fig. 2.1), as well as one of the largest worldwide
anthropogenic sources of carbon dioxide releases. Gross carbon dioxide
emissions from coal usage are slightly more than those from petroleum and
about double the amount from natural gas (Energy Information
Administration, 2005). Coal is extracted from the ground by mining, either
underground by shaft mining through the seams or in open pits.

7

2.1 COAL FORMATION
Coal has been identified as a combustible rock which had its origin in
accumulation and partial decomposition of vegetation. Coal originates in
continental basins with swampy edges where there is very dense
vegetation. It originates as partly decomposed and macerated vegetable
matter mainly as vascular land plants. The following parts can be easily
recognized, resin, gums, waxes, pigments, oils and fats.
Under suitable conditions for the accumulation and preservation of their
remains, plants have contributed the essential ingredients to coal since
their first appearance in the geological record. Not much is known about
the plant life which existed during the early period of geological history,
but microscopic examination of recognizable plant remains from the
Carboniferous and succeeding periods has confirmed the presence of
organs and tissues comparable with those of present day vegetation.
About 300 million years ago, the earth had dense forests in low-lying
wetland areas. Due to natural processes, like flooding, these forests got
buried under the soil. As more and more soil deposited over them, they
were compressed. The temperature also rose as they sank deeper and
deeper. For the process to continue, the plant matter was protected from
biodegradation and oxidization, usually by mud or acidic water. This
trapped the carbon in immense peat bogs that are eventually covered and
deeply buried by sediments. Under high pressure and high temperature
dead vegetation got slowly converted to coal (Fig. 2.1). As coal contains
mainly carbon, the conversion of dead vegetation into coal is called
carbonization, (Taylor et al, 2009).
8

Fig. 2.1 Diagrammatic representation of how coal was formed (The NEED
project, 2011)
In terms of geological age, ideal conditions for coal formation were
provided by the wide shallow seas of the carboniferous period. However,
coal formation is also known from most of the geological periods. The
exception is the coal gap in the Lower Triassic, where coal is rare:
presumably a result of the mass extinction which prefaced this era.

Fig. 2.2 Approximate position of the proto-continents toward the end of the
Carboniferous period
9

Fig 2.2, it shows the approximate position of the proto-continents toward
the end of the carboniferous period; the light blue portion representing
shallow seas where many of todays coal deposits are found.
2.2 Classification of coals
It is considered that all ordinary coals are of plant, non-marine origin, and
that the common banded coals were formed insitu. There is some diversity
of opinion as to whether the different kinds of coals originate because of
different kinds of vegetation or because of different degrees or stages of
coalification. The generally accepted view is that all coals originated from
swamps and went through the Peat to Antracite.
There are many classifications of coals, but the most widely accepted all
over the world as geological processes apply pressure to dead biotic
material over time, under suitable conditions it is transformed successively
into:
Peat, considered to be a precursor of coal, has industrial importance
as a fuel in some regions, for example, Ireland and Finland. In its
dehydrated form, peat is a highly effective absorbent for fuel and oil
spills on land and water. It is also used as a conditioner for soil to
make it more able to retain and slow release water.
Lignite or brown coal is the lowest rank of coal and used almost
exclusively as fuel for electric power generation. Jet is a compact
form of lignite that is sometimes polished and has been used as an
ornamental stone since the Upper Paleolithic.
Sub-bituminous coal, having properties that range from those of
lignite to those of bituminous coal, is used primarily as fuel for
10

steam-electric power generation and is an important source of light
aromatic hydrocarbons for the chemical synthesis industry.
Bituminous coal is dense sedimentary rock, black but sometimes
dark brown often with well-defined bands of bright and dull material,
used primarily as fuel in steam-electric power generation, with
substantial quantities used for heat and power applications in
manufacturing and to make coke
Steam coal is a grade between bituminous coal and anthracite, once
widely used as a fuel for steam locomotives. In this specialized use it
is sometimes known as sea-coal in the U.S, (Funk and Wagnalls,
1989). Small steam coal (dry small steam nuts or DSSN) was used as
a fuel for domestic water heating
Anthracite, the highest rank of coal is a harder, glossy, black coal used
primarily for residential and commercial space heating. It may be
divided further into metamorphically altered bituminous coal and
petrified oil, as from the deposits in Pennsylvania
Graphite, technically the highest rank is difficult to ignite and is not
commonly used as fuel: it is mostly used in pencils and, when
powdered, as a lubricant.
The classification of coal is generally based on the content of volatiles.
However, the exact classification varies between countries.




11

2.3 USES OF COAL
The recent increase in the price of crude and natural gas as sources of fuel
for industrial heating has lead to a high demand for coal. Coal as an
exhaustible energy source has been estimated to meet its future demand if
used at present rate. The preference for coal is due to its very high linkage
effect with thermal power, railways locomotive, fertilizers industry,
cement, steel, electric power and a number of other industries (Gupta,
1990). The diverse usage of coal is majorly due to the presence of coal
combustion products and a high calorific value of its organic constituents.
These uses are discussed below.
2.3.1 Coal Combustion Products
Coal combustion products (CCPs) can play an important role in concrete
production. CCPs are the by-products generated from burning coal in coal-
fired power plants. These by-products include:
fly ash
bottom ash
boiler slag
flue gas desulphurisation gypsum
others types of material such as fluidised bed combustion ash,
cenospheres, and scrubber residues
Fly ash can be used to replace or supplement cement in concrete. In the
USA, for example, more than half of the concrete produced is blended with
fly ash.
Among the most significant environmental benefits of using fly ash over
conventional cement is that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can be
12

significantly reduced. For every tonne of fly ash used for a tonne of
portland cement (the most common type of cement in general use around
the world) approximately one tonne of carbon dioxide is prevented from
entering the earths atmosphere. Fly ash does not require the energy-
intensive kilning process required by portland cement.
Using CCPs reduces GHG emissions, reduces the need for landfill space, and
eliminates the need to use primary raw materials. Fly ash produces a
concrete that is strong and durable, with resistance to corrosion, alkali-
aggregate expansion, sulphate and other forms of chemical attack.
Coal combustion products are expected to continue to play a major role in
the concrete market. Their use in other building products is also expected
to grow as sustainable construction becomes more prominent, and more
architects and building owners understand the benefits of using CCPs.
2.3.2 Coal For Electricity Generation
Modern life is unimaginable without electricity. It lights houses, buildings,
streets, provides domestic and industrial heat, and powers most equipment
used in homes, offices and machinery in factories. Improving access to
electricity worldwide is critical to alleviating poverty.
Coal plays a vital role in electricity generation worldwide. Coal-fired power
plants currently fuel 41% of global electricity (Fig. 2.3).
13


Fig. 2.3 Total World Electricity Generation by Fuel (2006), IEA 2008
Other includes solar, wind, combustible renewables, geothermal & waste.
In some countries, coal fuels a higher percentage of electricity (Table 2.2).
Table 2.1: Percentage electricity generated from coal (IEA 2010)
South Africa 93% Poland 92% China 79%
Australia 77% Kazakhstan 70% India 69%
Israel 63% Czech Rep 60% Morocco 55%
Greece 52% USA 49% Germany 46%
Conversion of Coal to Electricity
Steam coal, also known as thermal coal, is used in power stations to
generate electricity.
Coal is first milled to a fine powder, which increases the surface area and
allows it to burn more quickly. In these pulverized coal combustion (PCC)
systems, the powdered coal is blown into the combustion chamber of a
boiler where it is burnt at high temperature (Fig 2.4). The hot gases and
14

heat energy produced converts water in tubes lining the boiler into
steam.


Fig. 2.4 The use of coal in a boiler for generating electricity
The high pressure steam is passed into a turbine containing thousands of
propeller-like blades. The steam pushes these blades causing the turbine
shaft to rotate at high speed. A generator is mounted at one end of the
turbine shaft and consists of carefully wound wire coils. Electricity is
generated when these are rapidly rotated in a strong magnetic field. After
passing through the turbine, the steam is condensed and returned to the
boiler to be heated once again.
The electricity generated is transformed into the higher voltages (up to
400,000 volts) used for economic, efficient transmission via power line
grids. When it nears the point of consumption, such as our homes, the
electricity is transformed down to the safer 100-250 voltage systems used
in the domestic market.

15

2.3.3 COAL & STEEL
Steel is an essential material for modern life. The manufacture of steels
delivers the goods and services that our societies need healthcare,
telecommunications, improved agricultural practices, better transport
networks, clean water and access to reliable and affordable energy.
Global steel production is dependent on coal. 70% of the steel produced
today uses coal. Metallurgical coal or coking coal is a vital ingredient in
the steel making process.
Steel Production
Steel is an alloy of iron and carbon. Steel is produced via two main routes
Integrated smelting involving blast furnace (BF) iron-making
followed by basic oxygen furnace (BOF)
Electric arc furnaces (EAF).
Raw Materials
Steel is an alloy based primarily on iron. As iron occurs only as iron oxides
in the earths crust, the ores must be converted, or reduced, using carbon.
The primary source of this carbon is coking coal. This can be summed up as
shown below;
Iron Ore e.g. haematite ore (Iron(III)oxide), Fe3O2
or Magnetite ore, Fe3O4
Coke (carbon, C)
Hot air (for the oxygen in it), O2
Limestone (calcium carbonate), CaCO3
16

Coke Making
Coking coal is converted to coke by driving off impurities to leave almost
pure carbon. The physical properties of coking coal cause the coal to soften,
liquefy and then resolidify into hard but porous lumps when heated in the
absence of air. Coking coal must also have low sulphur and phosphorous
contents. Almost all metallurgical coal is used in coke ovens.
The coking process consists of heating coking coal to around 1000-1100C
in the absence of oxygen to drive off the volatile compounds (pyrolysis).
This process results in a hard porous material - coke. Coke is produced in a
coke battery which is composed of many coke ovens stacked in rows into
which coal is loaded.
The coking process takes place over long periods of time between 12-36
hours in the coke ovens. Once pushed out of the vessel the hot coke is then
quenched with either water or air to cool it before storage or is transferred
directly to the blast furnace for use in iron making.
Iron Making
Iron ore is mined in around 50 countries the largest producers are
Australia, Brazil and China. Around 98% of iron ore is used in steel-
making. During the iron-making process, a blast furnace (Fig. 2.5) is fed
with the iron ore, coke and small quantities of fluxes (minerals, such as
limestone, which are used to collect impurities). Air which is heated to
about 1200C is blown into the furnace through nozzles in the lower
section. The air causes the coke to burn, producing carbon monoxide which
reacts with the iron ore, as well as heat to melt the iron. Finally, the tap
17

hole at the bottom of the furnace is opened and molten iron and slag
(impurities) are drained off. The Blast furnace reaction is shown below;
the coke functions as
as a fuel
C(S) + O2(g) CO2(g)
as a reducing agent
CO2(g) + C 2CO(g)
The above reaction frees the iron, which is molten at the high blast
furnace temperature, and trickles down to the base of the blast furnace
and run off. The main reduction is shown as;
for haematite: Fe2O3(s) +3C(s) 2Fe(l) + 3CO(g)
or 2Fe2O3(s) +3C(s) 4Fe(l) +3CO2(g)
for magnetite: Fe3O4(s) + 4C(s) 3Fe(l) + 4CO(g)
or Fe3O4(s) + 2C(s) 3Fe(l) + 2CO2(g).
the limestone react with acidic mineral impurities, such as silicon
dioxide, contained in the ore to form slag, as the reaction shows below;
CaCO3 + SiO2 CaSiO3 + CO2



18

Basic Oxygen Furnace
The most commonly applied process for steel-making is the integrated
steel-making process via the Blast Furnace Basic Oxygen Furnace. In the
basic oxygen furnace, the iron is combined with varying amounts of steel
scrap (less than 30%) and small amounts of flux (Fig 2.5). A lance is
introduced in the vessel and blows 99% pure oxygen causing a
temperature rise to 1700C. The scrap melts, impurities are oxidized, and
the carbon content is reduced by 90%, resulting in liquid steel.
Fig. 2.5: Use of coal in steel-making
Other processes can follow secondary steel-making processes where
the properties of steel are determined by the addition of other elements,
such as boron, chromium and molybdenum, amongst others, ensuring the
exact specification can be met.
19

Optimal operation of the blast furnace demands the highest quality of raw
materials the carbon content of coke therefore plays a crucial role in
terms of its effect in the furnace and on the hot metal quality. A blast
furnace fed with high quality coke requires less coke input, results in
higher quality hot metal and better productivity. Overall costs may be
lower, as fewer impurities in the coke mean smaller amounts of flux must
be used.
Basic Oxygen Furnaces currently produce about 70% of the worlds steel. A
further 29% of steel is produced in Electric Arc Furnaces.

Electric Arc Furnace
The Electric Arc Furnace process, or mini-mill, does not involve iron-
making. It reuses existing steel, avoiding the need for raw materials and
their processing. The furnace is charged with steel scrap, it can also include
some direct reduced iron (DRI) or pig iron for chemical balance.
The EAF operates on the basis of an electrical charge between two
electrodes providing the heat for the process. The power is supplied
through the electrodes placed in the furnace, which produce an arc of
electricity through the scrap steel (around 35 million watts), which raises
the temperature to 1600C, melting the scrap. Any impurities may be
removed through the use of fluxes and draining off slag through the
taphole.
Electric Arc Furnaces do not use coal as a raw material, but many are
reliant on the electricity generated by coal-fired power plant elsewhere in
the grid.
20

2.4 COAL PREPARATION
Coal preparation is a series of unit operations interconnected by a material
handling system. The main unit operations are: comminution, sizing,
concentrating, and dewatering. Comminution, or size reduction (crushing
and grinding) is the reduction of coal from run-of-mine size to a plant feed
size or sized for use. Sizing (screening or classification) is the separation
into various size fractions for processing. Concentrating (cleaning,
preparation, or beneficiation) is the separating of a raw coal into clean coal
and refuse. Dewatering or drying is the removal of excess water from the
clean coal and/or refuse (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982). A typical coal
preparation plant is made up of several circuits as shown in Fig. 2.6. The
coal clean devices that form part of a coal preparation plant are
summarized below.
Fig. 2.6 A typical coal preparation flow sheet (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)

21

Jigs
The first coal jigs were direct copies of ore jigs, in which a basket loaded
with mixed particles was moved up and down in a tank of water. Thus
agitated, the particles became rearranged in layers of increasing density
from bottom to top. The same principle is used in modern coal jigs to
stratify and separate the coal and refuse products. Fig 2.7 below shows a
Baum Jig.

Fig. 2.7 A Baum Jig (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)
Heavy Medium Vessels
Coal is slurried in a medium with a specific gravity close to that of the
desired separation. The lighter coal floats and the heavier refuse sinks. The
two fractions are then mechanically separated. While other media have
been used, most coal cleaned by the heavy media process is separated in
suspensions of magnetite in water. This suspension is achieved using very
finely ground magnetite. By varying the amount of magnetite in the
22

suspension, the specific gravity of the medium is changed, which changes
the gravity of the separation. The process is versatile, offering easy changes
in specific gravity to meet varying market requirements. Heavy medium
separation provides more accurate separation and higher recovery of
salable coal than jigging. A typical heavy medium vessel is shown in Fig 2.8.

Fig. 2.8 Heavy medium vessel (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)
Heavy Medium Cyclones
In its operation, slurry of coal and medium (magnetite dispersed in water)
is admitted at a tangent near the top of a cylindrical section that is affixed
to a cone-shaped lower section. The slurry forms a strong vertical flow; and
under gravimetric forces, the refuse with its higher specific gravity moves
along the wall of the cone and is discharged at the apex as shown in Fig 2.9
below. The coal particles of lesser specific gravity move toward the
longitudinal axis of the cyclone and finally through the centrally positioned
vortex finder to the discharged outlet as clean coal. The heavy medium
cyclone functions efficiently even with large amounts of near gravity
material in the feed.
23


Fig. 2.9 Heavy medium cyclone (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)
Water-only Cyclone
The water-only cyclone performs a specific gravity separation employing
only water and inertia. Its design feature which permits the use of water-
only is the wide angle or angles in its conical bottom. This promotes the
formation of a hindered settling bed, as the dense particles move down the
side wall. Less dense particles cannot penetrate this heavy bed and move
back into the main hydraulic current to be discharged out the top of the
unit through the vortex finder. Applied in easier cleaning situations than
heavy medium devices, water-only cyclones have been used to wash coals
with a top size range of 1-3/4 inch to 28 mesh. A water only cyclone is
portrayed in Fig 2.10.

24


Fig. 2.10 A Water-only cyclone (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)
Tables
Tables (Fig. 2.10) have been in use for over 60 years in treating 1-1/2 inch
x 28 mesh coal. The most generally accepted explanation of the action of a
concentrating table is that as the material to be treated is fanned out over
the table deck by the differential motion and gravitational flow, the
particles become stratified in layers behind the rifles. This stratification is
followed by the removal of successive layers from the top downward by
cross-flowing water as the stratified bed travels toward the outer end of
the table.
The cross-flowing water in made-up partly of water introduced with the
feed and partly of wash water fed separately through troughs along the
upper side of the table. The progressive removal of material from the top
toward the bottom of the bed is the result of the taper of the table riffles,
which allows successively deeper layer of material to be carried away by
the cross-flowing water as the outer end of the table is approached. By the
time the end of the table is reached, only a thin layer, probably not thicker
25

than one or two particles, remains in the surface of the deck, this being
finally discharged at the end of the table.

Fig. 2.10 Concentrating table (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)
Froth Flotation
Froth flotation is a physicochemical method of concentrating fine coal. Coal
is hydrophobic in nature, its gangue materials are hydrophilic; by the
addition of chemicals in water these properties can be enhanced. The
process involves chemical treatment of a raw coal pulp to create conditions
favourable for the attachment of coal particles to air bubbles. Air bubbles
are created by the rapid motion of the agitator mechanism which draws air
down the hollow shaft and disperses the air into the pulp. The air bubbles
carry the coal to the surface of the pulp and form a stabilized froth which is
skimmed off while the ash containing particles remain submerged in the
pulp. Flotation cells used for coal separation are shown in Fig. 2.11.

26


Fig. 2.11 Flotation cells (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)
2.5 COAL WASHABILITY
Washability is a coal-cleaning jargon to designate amenability of a coal to
gravity concentration. It is determined by sink-float testing as shown in Fig.
2.12. 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 weight of the coal varies as the specific
gravity changes. Washability test results are summarized in tabular and
graphical form. The graphs obtained are known as "washability curves"
(Fig. 2.13). The cumulative float at any float specific gravity is what a
"perfect" separation would produce in the way of clean coal yield and
quality, with the cumulative sink being the refuse from the perfect
separation.
27


Fig. 2.12 Sink-float analysis (Albrecht and Matoney, 1982)

Fig. 2.13 Washability curve
28

2.6 COAL FLOATABILITY
Coal washability process works for only coarse coal particles. For fine coal
particles, froth flotation based cleanability processes are applied. It is
worth noting in coal floatability, a single batch flotation experiment
provides only concentrate yield and concentrate ash content and no
indication as to whether concentrates of different quality could be
obtained. A yield/ash curve could be constructed be running a number of
batch tests varying the reagent dosage conditions.
Various floatability tests which include, test-tube floatability, film flotation,
frothless flotation, contact angle measurements, and Hallimond tube
flotation are already known, which use properties such as critical surface
tension and contact angle to test the floatability of a mineral. These tests
are good procedures for finding a minerals general flotation behavior but
they do not necessarily predict how a mineral will behave in an industrial
flotation circuit. Tests such as release analysis, tree analysis, locked-cycle
tests, and the dissolved-air flotation microcell test are generally considered
better for characterizing a minerals flotation behavior in an industrial
environment. These floatability methods will be discussed below.
The locked-cycle Flotation Test
The locked-cycle flotation test is one of the better procedures available
since it is capable of providing a lot of information about a continuous
29

flotation circuit (Nishimura, et. al, 1989). The test consists of a series of
batch tests conducted with a small scale laboratory apparatus, where the
products generated in one test (nth cycle) are added to the next test ((n+1)
th cycle). A flowsheet of the test is shown in Fig. 2.14. Note that the test
consists of five batch tests or stages which include a rougher, 2 scavenger,
and 2-6 cleaner stages.
The test can be arranged in any circuit configuration, but Fig. 2.14 shows
the ideal 2 stage Rougher-Cleaner-Scavenger circuit as presented by Meloy
(1983). In order to obtain acceptable information from a locked-cycle test,
steady-state must be reached. Unfortunately, this leads to the major
disadvantage of this procedure which is the fact that it is very time
consuming. It has been shown that the test normally requires at least five
cycles to reach steady-state, even in a simple circuit, and the time to reach
steady-state increases as the amount of recycle material increases
(Nishimura et al., 1989).
The procedures main advantage is that the results provide good agreement
with tests conducted on continuous flotation circuits. In other words the
locked-cycle test is a good simulation of a plant circuit because it accurately
reproduces the conditions of an industrial flotation circuit (Agar, 1985).
Therefore, the locked-cycle test is as good a characterizing procedure as
any found within the literature.
30

Release Analysis
The first release analysis procedure was developed by C. C. Dell in 1953
and is known as timed release analysis (Dell, 1953). In this procedure time
is used to separate a sample into fractions of varying floatability. The
flotation procedure is carried out in a laboratory batch cell and an excess of
reagent is used throughout.

Fig. 2.14 A Locked- Cycle Flotation Test
A serious drawback of this method is that water has to be decanted off the
collection pan before a concentrate can be reintroduced to the cell in
subsequent flotation stages to avoid pulp overflow and entrainment of
gangue material. In the case of coal flotation, decantation is not very
practical since low-density coal tends to remain in suspension and is often
removed when water is decanted.
31

In 1965, the decantation problem was partially solved by adjusting the
flotation times associated with the procedure (Cavallaro and Deurbrouck,
1965). The procedure was additionally modified to allow for varying
mechanical flotation conditions. Instead of only varying the flotation time
for each concentrate, the impeller speed was also varied. This supposedly
improved the separation because the fractionation was not just based on
time but also on the physical flotation conditions.
The only major problem associated with timed release analysis is that it is
time consuming and rather tedious. However, it has been found to be
reproducible, independent of cell type, reagent dosage, pulp density, and
operator interaction. A flow sheet of the procedure is shown in Fig. 2.15
below.

Fig. 2.15 Schematic diagram of a Timed Release analysis procedure
32

In 1964, Dell outlined an experimentally simpler version of the original
timed release analysis procedure referred to here as simplified release
analysis (Dell, 1964). In the simplified release analysis procedure, the
sample is fractionated by operating conditions as opposed to time used in
the original procedure. Again the experiment is carried out in a standard
laboratory flotation cell which allows for independent control of impeller
speed and aeration rate. Excess of reagent is also used in this version just
like the original procedure.
The simplified release analysis procedure consists of two stages. The first
stage objective is to completely separate the floatable material from the
non-floatable material by repeated flotation of the concentrate under
intense flotation conditions (i.e., high aeration rate and impeller speed).
The second stage objective is to separate the floatable material from the
first stage into fractions beginning with the low-recovery, high-grade
material and proceeding to the high-recovery, low-grade fraction. The
concentrate from the first stage is floated at several impeller speeds and
aeration rates of steadily increasing intensity. Under these flotation
conditions, concentrates of decreasing quality are collected and a release
curve is generated. Therefore, the fractionation is dependent on the
flotation intensity and not the timing of the concentrate collection. A flow
sheet of this procedure is shown in Fig. 2.16.
33

Although the simplified procedure is generally considered simpler than the
timed release analysis technique, it may be more sensitive to operator bias.
An example of this is found in the first stage of the experiment when the
floatable material is separated from the non-floatable material. The
number of floats used and the way in which the froth is removed can
greatly affect this separation. If any floatable material is lost during this
part of the experiment, the release curve can be impacted significantly.
During the second stage, it is often difficult to control the rate of flotation
by simply adjusting aeration rate and impeller speed. In the case of a highly
floatable coal, for example, the valuable material may tend to float within
the first two fractions leaving very little material for the latter fractions.
This results in the data being grouped at either the highyield end or low-
yield end of the release curve, depending on the floatability of the material.

34


Fig. 2.16 Schematic diagram of a Simplified Release analysis procedure
Although the simplified procedure is generally considered simpler than the
timed release analysis technique, it may be more sensitive to operator bias.
An example of this is found in the first stage of the experiment when the
floatable material is separated from the non-floatable material. The
number of floats used and the way in which the froth is removed can
greatly affect this separation. If any floatable material is lost during this
part of the experiment, the release curve can be impacted significantly.
During the second stage, it is often difficult to control the rate of flotation
by simply adjusting aeration rate and impeller speed. In the case of a highly
floatable coal, for example, the valuable material may tend to float within
the first two fractions leaving very little material for the latter fractions.
35

This results in the data being grouped at either the highyield end or low-
yield end of the release curve, depending on the floatability of the material.
The problem may be avoided by using flotation time to fractionate the
sample in the second half of the test (Pratten et al, 1989); however, this
procedure deviates from Dells original approach, and there is some
question as to how the release curve is impacted by time fractionation in
the second stage.
Tree Analysis
As a result of the possible experimental biases associated with release
analysis, an alternative technique, known as tree analysis, was developed in
1983 (Nicol et al., 1983). The procedure was based on the concept of
fractionating a sample by progressively refloating the concentrate and
tailings such that the test branches out in the form of a tree.
According to the tree analysis procedure, a sample is initially floated at
some arbitrary set of flotation conditions (i.e. impeller speed, aeration rate,
and flotation time) and is split into a concentrate and a tailings fraction.
These fractions are then refloated under the same flotation conditions, and
their subsequent concentrate and tailings fractions are refloated. This
procedure is continued until the final products contain less than 2% of the
initial feed mass or until the desired flotation level is reached. The final
36

products are then analyzed and sorted in order of decreasing grade. These
results are then used to construct a release curve. In order to produce data
points in the high-grade region of the curve, collector dosages are generally
kept low. A flow sheet of this procedure is shown in Fig. 2.17.

Fig. 2.17 Flow sheet of a Tree analysis
Tree analysis is probably the simplest of the release analysis procedures in
concept but it is also the most tedious since it may require anywhere from
16-32 fractions (i.e. 4-5 levels) to span the appropriate grade-recovery
range. In theory, the tree procedure should provide the best separation
since both the tailings and concentrate are refloated numerous times to
ensure that all of the material is properly fractionated according to grade.
37

One of the most recent forms of release analysis is a column-based
procedure described by McClintock, Walsh and Rao (1995) which uses a
flotation column in conjunction with a slightly modified version of Dells
simplified release analysis procedure.
The procedure uses a laboratory column with feed rates, wash water flow
rates, and aeration rates appropriate for the size of the column being used.
In the specific application presented, a glass column with an inside
diameter of 25 mm and a height of 2.4 m was used. The aeration rate
ranged from 50-250 ml/min, wash water rate from 15- 20 ml/min, and
feed rate from 40-50 g/min. The column was operated in a continuous
mode and feed was passed through the column to produce a concentrate
and tailings fraction. After the initial concentrate was set aside, the tailings
were pumped back through the column to produce a second concentrate.
The procedure was repeated until the froth was barren. After this first
stage of separation in which the floatable material was separated from the
non-floatable material, the final tailings were set aside for analysis and the
concentrates were combined for separation in the second stage of the
experiment.
To begin the second stage, the combined concentrates were pumped
through the column and a low aeration rate was used to produce a high-
grade fraction. Again the concentrate was saved for analysis and the
38

tailings were pumped back through the column at a slightly higher aeration
rate. The procedure was repeated at higher and higher aeration rates until
the froth was barren. All of the resulting concentrates and the final tailings
were then analyzed and the results used to construct the release curve.
The main difference between column-based release analysis and Dells
simplified release analysis technique is that the column-based procedure
uses repeated flotation of the tailings in the first stage rather than the
concentrate. This is possible because the wash water used in a flotation
column prevents entrainment, so additional cleaning of the froth product is
not necessary. Repeated flotation of the tailings also ensures that all
floatable material reports to the second stage for fractionation.
In spite of the work that has been conducted to define and develop the
various release analysis procedures, these techniques are by no means
considered standards for characterizing flotation. In fact, it is still unclear
as to which technique comes closest to representing the ideal flotation
separation. It is also unclear as to whether the separation obtained by
release analysis can be surpassed using a novel cell design. In a recent
comparison of column flotation technologies, Honaker, Mohanty and Ho
(1995) reported that on several occasions, the separation performance of
the flotation columns exceeded the separation results obtained using Dells
simplified release analysis procedure.
39

Furthermore, the Packed Column was found to give consistently better
results under high-grade, low-recovery conditions than would be indicated
by simplified release analysis. Clearly, additional work is needed in the
effort to define a method of characterizing flotation performance that is
comparable to float-sink analysis in gravity separation.
2.6 ASH CONTENT
Ash is the residue remaining after the combustion of coal under specified
conditions (ASTM D-3174, ISO 1171) and is composed primarily of oxides
and sulfates. Thus, ash is formed as the result of chemical changes that take
place in the mineral matter during the ashing process. The quantity of ash
depends on the nature of the mineral matter and the chemical changes that
take place in the ashing.
A fundamental practice in the coal preparation process is the analysis of the
ash content of coal. And the knowledge of the composition of ash is useful
in predicting the behavior of ashes and slags in combustion chambers. The
amount and composition of ash is important in determining the best
cleaning methods for coals, in selecting coals to be used in the production
of coke, and in the utilization of the ash by-products of coal combustion.
The release of certain trace elements into the environment as combustion
products or in the disposal of ash is a concern for coal-burning facilities.
40

2.7 NIGERIAN COAL RESERVE
2.7.1 Coal Reserves and Brief History
Coal was the first fossil fuel to be discovered and used in Nigeria. The
Federal Government of Nigeria owns the coal resources. Around 1919, the
Geological Survey of Nigeria (GSN) was established to take over coal
exploration activities. The Minerals Ordinance of 1946 and the Coal
Ordinance No. 29 of 1950 provided the initial legal framework for the
development of solid minerals in Nigeria (Behre Dolbear, 2008). Also in
1950, the Nigerian Government, through the Coal Ordinance No. 29,
created the Nigerian Coal Corporation (NCC). Under this Ordinance, the
NCC had the exclusive rights to mine coal in Nigeria until 1999, when a new
mineral exploration and exploitation policy and legislation were
established by the FGN. This policy opened up the sector to private
industry participation and joint ventures.
Nigeria has extensive coal resource with inferred reserves estimated at
ranging from 1.5 billion metric tonnes to 2.75 billion metric tonnes
(Nigerian Coal Corporation, 2004; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
2007) and proven reserves of 639 million tonnes, (Ogunsola, 1990;
Nigerian Coal Corporation, 2004). Studies conducted Behre Dolbear (2005,
2008) for the Nigerian Ministry of Solid Minerals Development (MSMD)
indicates that the Nigerian coal resources are far larger than previously
41

reported. There are over 13 coal mines and more than 21 coal blocks
located across Nigeria (Nigerian Coal Corporation, 2004). Table 2.2 shows
the name, location, reserve, coal type, and mining method of thirteen
existing coal mines in Nigeria with potential.
Table 2.2 Existing potential coal mine sites with reserves in Nigeria

Nigerias coal resources are not being fully explored or even marginal ly
developed despite its long history. Nigerian coals are of cretaceous or early
tertiary age and are mostly located in the eastern part of the country, as
shown on the map in Fig. 2.18. They are mostly lignite and sub-bituminous,
with some deposits of high volatile bituminous (Ogunsola, 1990). Nigeria
42

has more than 1.5 billion metric tons of sub - bituminous to bituminous
coals and unquantifiable lignite deposits (NCC, 2007).
Coal occurs in several areas in Nigeria and ranges from bituminous to
lignite. The coal deposits of the Anambra Basin, located in southeastern
Nigeria, appear to contain the largest and most economically viable coal
resources. This basin covers an area of approximately 1.5 million hectares
and is constrained by the Niger River on the west, the Benue River on the
north and the Enugu Escarpment on the east. The coal is predominantly in
one seam that outcrops along the eastern side of the basin at the base of the
Enugu Escarpment and dips gently toward the center of the basin as we can
see in Fig. 2.19 and Fig. 2.20.
2.7.2 Enugu District
The Enugu Coal District, covering 270,000 hectares of the coal basin, is
centered around Enugu City, south of the Benue District. It has supported
the largest amount of commercial mining in the past as Fig 2.21 shows. In
addition to two underground mines, there are a total of 36 drill holes
drilled in the area. Previous studies have estimated the demonstrated coal
resource to be 49 million tones averaging 2.2 meters thick. An additional
111 million non- reportable tonnes of in-place coal are inferred to exist
west of the old mine workings.
43


Fig. 2.19 Map of Nigeria showing coal and lignite areas
Enugu is situated on the western edge of the Cross river plain and is
dominated by the Enugu escarpment just west of the town. For the first
(122 152) m, the escarpment is steep, but it then rises more gently to
about 427 m above sea level and about 4 27 m above sea level and about
183 m above Enugu. Further west, several large but low hills attain an
elevation of nearly 518 m. The plain on which Enugu stands is underlain by
the Enugu shales. The lower coal measures outcrop on the lower and
middle slopes of the escarpment, while the less resistant false bedded
sandstones form the gentle upper slopes and crest (De Swardt and Casey,
1961). The estimated reserve off Onyeama mine is 150 million tonnes.
44


Fig. 2.20 Generalized geological Map of Nigeria


Fig. 2.21 Sketch Map of the Anambra coal basin showing explored areas
(Drilled holes in orange colour).
45

CHAPTER THREE
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 MATERIALS
The coal used for this study was procured from Onyeama coal mine in Enugu
state. There are five coal fields in Enugu; Onyeama, Okpara, Inyi, Ezinmo, and
Amansiodo. According to Engr. Amanoh (2012), these coal fields have the same
geology and chemical composition. Coal sample from any of the fields can be
used as a representative sample for studies on Enugu coal. Onyeama coal was
chosen for this study because of ease of accessibility of the coal field. The
chemical composition of Enugu coal is given in Table 3.1. The raw coal
collected from Onyeama mine was manually crushed to reduce the size for the
sink-and-float analysis and the tree analysis. The particle size distribution of
the reduced coal is shown in Fig. 3.1 and the d
50
of the coal samples is 5950
m.
3.2 CHEMICAL REAGENTS
The chemical reagents required for the washability study of the coal samples
are:
Distilled water
Zinc chloride
Kerosene

46

TABLE 3.1 Chemical Composition of Coal in Onyeama Mine
QUALITY PARAMETER ONYEAMA MINE
Moisture (%a.r.) 7.5
Ash (%a.r.) 8.4
Volatile Matter (%a.r.) 38.26
Gross Calorific Value Kcal/Kg (a.r.) 6.628
Fixed Carbon (%a.r.) 45.38
Hydrogen (%a.r.) 4.11
Total Sulphur (%a.r.) 0.54
Nitrogen (%d b) 1.44
Sulphate Sulphur (%b) 0.01
Pyrite Sulphur (%b) 0.05
Organic Sulphur (%b) 0.69
Swelling No (FSI) 1.00
Hard Groe Index(HGI) 37.8
Dilatometer Test: Softening Point (
o
C) 356
Reconsolidation Point (
o
C) 477

47


Fig. 3.1 Particle size distribution of the reduced coal
3.3 SPECIAL APPARATUS
The special apparatuses used in carrying out this study are:
Hammer
Beaker
Hydrometer
Desiccators
Ball mill
Denver Lab floatation cell and
Muffle furnace


48

3.4 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
3.4.1 Sample Preparation
The samples collected were manually crushed to obtain different size fractions
suitable for the sink-float analysis and the froth flotation release tree analysis.
Particle sizing analysis was carried out on the crushed coal product to obtain
the size distribution curve. Shown in Fig. 3.2 and 3.3 are sieves and mechanical
shaker used in carrying out the particle size analysis. For the sink-float analysis,
coal samples in the size range of 13300 5600 m were used for the analysis.
Reduced coal in the size range of 4000 600 m were further reduced and the
150 m coal samples used for the release tree analysis.

Fig. 3.2 Vertical arrangements of sieves
49


Fig. 3.3 Sieves mounted on mechanical shaker
3.4.2 Sink and Float Analysis
Coal sample of 5.6mm to 9.5mm size range weighing 157g was used in the sink
and float test. Solutions of different specific gravity ranging from 1.2 to 1.7
were prepared using ZnCl
2
solution. The five solutions were put into five
beakers respectively and arranged in the order of increasing specific gravities
(1.3, 1.4,,1.7). The sample was first placed in the lowest specific gravity
liquid. The coal particles with specific gravity lesser than that of the solution
floated, while the ones greater than the specific gravity of solution sank (Fig.
3.4). The float from solution of S.G = 1.2 was collected, dried and weighed
while the sink was immersed in the solution of S.G = 1.3, the coal particles with
S.G less than 1.3 floated while the particles with greater S.G sank. The float
from solution of S.G = 1.3 was collected, dried and weighed while the sink was
50

immersed in the solution of S.G = 1.4. This process was repeated until we got
to the solution with S.G of 1.7. The floats from different specific gravities were
collected, dried and also weighed. These analysis were done making sure that
we minimized the quantity of coal particles lost in the process of collecting the
floats and sinks. The ash content of coal particles of the floats and sinks were
determined and washability curves were plotted.

Fig. 3.4 Sink-float test
3.4.3 Froth Floatation (Tree) Analysis
A three-level tree analysis was selected to characterize the coals being studied
in this investigation. The analysis was done using a Denver laboratory flotation
cell (Fig. 3.5). The impeller rate was set at 1500 rpm and the aeration rate at
50% of maximum, while the collection time was selected to be 2 minutes per
51

float. These mechanical flotation conditions were held constant throughout
the test. The collector used was kerosene.

Fig. 3.5 Denver lab flotation cell used for the tree analysis
The initial feed was then floated and its product and tailings fractions were
then refloated separately. This procedure was repeated as needed to produce
a three-level tree. A total of 8 products (four concentrates and four tailings)
were obtained, and they were subsequently filtered, dried, weighed, and
assayed. Fig. 3.6 shows the diagrammatic procedure of carrying out a three (3)
level tree analysis. Data obtained from the analysis were used in plotting the
coals floatability curve.

52


Figure 3.6 Schematic diagram of the 3-level tree analysis procedure
3.4.4 Ash Content Analysis
Ash is the non-combustible residue that remains after the complete
combustion of coal. It is the mineral constituent of coal that remains after
carbon, oxygen, sulphur and water has been removed during combustion. The
analysis is fairly straightforward with the coal thoroughly burnt and the ash
materials expressed as a percentage of the original weight (sawtell, 1906).
According to the ASTM method D3174 (3), the coal sample is placed in a cold
furnace and heated gradually so that the temperature reaches 450
o
C to 500
o
C
in one hour and 700
o
C to 750
o
C at the end of the second hour.
53

In this project, the sample (yield) from both analysis (i.e. tree analysis and sink
& float analysis) were dried and weighed after which it was placed in a crucible
and heated in muffle furnace to a temperature of 730
o
C for two hours. After
heating, the samples in the crucible were allowed to cool in the furnace and
stored in desiccators to avoid any moisture content in the samples after which
the samples in the crucible was weighed. The weight of the empty crucibles
was determined before heating the samples in the muffle furnace. The
following calculations were made to get the ash content of the samples (yield).
X Weight of empty crucible.
Y Weight of crucible + weight of sample (before heating)
Z Weight of crucible + weight of sample (after heating)
%Ash Content of sample = (Z X)/(Y X) * 100
Note: a) Z X = weight of ash (ash).
b) Y X = weight of sample (yield).
Therefore;
%Ash Content of sample = (ash)/ (yield) * 100

54

CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 RESULTS OF SINK-FLOAT ANALYSIS
The results obtained from the sink-and-float analysis of Enugu coal are
presented in Tables 4.1 and 4.2.
Table 4.1 Sink -Float test Data 1: S.G = Specific gravity; Weight = Yield
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
Cumulative
8
Cumulative
0.1 Density
distribution
S. G Range S.G Weight (g)
Weight
(%) Ash(%)
Ash as
% total Weight(%) Ash(%)
9
S.G
10
Cum
weight %
Float on 1.3 1.3 91 58.41 43.96 25.68 58.41 25.68
1.3 - 1.4 1.4 26.803 17.2 51.19 10.18 75.61 35.86 1.3 75.61
1.4 - 1.5 1.5 4.78 3.07 64.08 1.97 78.68 37.83 1.4 20.27
1.5 - 1.6 1.6 6.833 4.38 62.23 2.73 83.06 40.56 1.5 7.45
1.6 - 1.7 1.7 1.2 0.77 49.33 0.38 83.83 40.94 1.6 5.15
Sink in 1.7 Sink 25.204 16.17 87.03 14.07 100 55.01
Total 155.82 100

Table 4.2 Sink-Float test Data 2
1 2 3
4
Ash
5
Distribution
6
Cumulative
7
Coal
8
Distribution
9
Cumulative
S.G
Mass
(%)
Assay (Ash
%)
(Mass in
g) (%) (%) (Mass in g) (%) (%)
1.3 58.41 43.96 25.68 46.68 46.68 32.73 72.75 72.75
1.4 17.2 59.19 10.18 18.51 65.19 7.02 15.6 83.35
1.5 3.07 64.08 1.97 3.58 68.77 1.1 2.44 90.79
1.6 4.38 62.23 2.73 4.96 73.73 1.65 3.67 94.46
1.7 0.77 49.33 0.38 0.69 74.42 0.39 0.87 95.33
Sink 16.17 87.03 14.07 25.58 100 2.1 4.87 100
Total 100 85.707 55.01 100 44.99 100

Shown in Fig. 4.1 and Fig. 4.2 are the washability curves of Enugu coal
generated from data obtained from Tables 4.1 and 4.2. The interpretations
of these curves are given below.
55


Fig 4.1 Washability curves obtained from Table 4.1

Fig 4.2 Washability curves obtained from Table 4.2




0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8
Ash
Coal
56

4.1.1 INTERPRETATION OF SINK-FLOAT ANALYSIS RESULTS
Ease of Cleaning Enugu Coal
The ease or difficulty of cleaning a coal can be determined by using either
the cumulative float curve, elementary curve, or distribution curve of
the analyzed coal. For the cumulative float curve and elementary curve, the
shape of the curves are compared to that of an ideal separation curve (Fig.
4.3-a), which is L in shape. If the curves approximate to the L shape of the
ideal curve, it implies that the coal is an easy to clean coal (Fig. 4.3-b). If the
curves do not approximate to the L shape, then the coal is difficult to clean.
If the curves are vertical, it means that it is impossible to clean the coal (Fig.
4.3-c).
As can be seen from Fig. 4.1, the cumulative float curve of Enugu coal does
not approximate to the L shape of an ideal separation curve, this shows that
Enugu coal is difficult to clean.
To use the distribution curve to determine the ease or difficulty of
cleaning a coal, the distribution curve of the coal must show a well-
defined or horizontal plateau for the coal to be easy to clean. If no plateau is
reached, the coal is not easy to clean. As can be seen from Fig. 4.1, plateau is
not reached in the distribution curve of Enugu coal. This also helps to
confirm that Enugu coal is difficult to clean.
57


Fig. 4.2 Primary washability curves for (a) ideal separation, (b) easy-
to-clean coal, (c) difficult-to-clean, and (d) impossible separation
(Laskowski,2001)
Another method of determining the ease or difficulty of washing of coals is
to estimate the difference between the recovery range obtained for a given
range of specific gravities (say 1.4 1.6) from the washability curve, and
comparing it with the standard range given in Table 4.3 below.
From the Graph of Fig.4.1, the recovery at S.G of 1.4 is 73% and the
recovery at S.G of 1.6 is 84%. The difference between the recoveries is 11
which falls under the category of Difficult as obtained from near gravity
material table above. This also helps to confirm that Enugu coal is difficult
to clean.
58

Table 4.3 Near gravity material as measure of degree of coal cleaning
difficulty
Percentage of near gravity
material
Degree of difficulty
0 5
6 10
11 20
20 or more
Easy
Moderate
Difficult
Extremely difficult
The difficulty of cleaning Enugu coal is as a result of the presence of near
gravity materials (NGMs) in Enugu coal. NGMs are materials that have a
relative density that is close to that of the separating liquid or dense
medium used to separate coal and impurities contained in raw coal. They
make the separation more difficult because they settle very slowly in the
dense-medium due to the fact that their density is close to that of the
medium. This increases the probability that material that should have
reported to floats wrongly reports to sinks and misplaced material.
With the difficulty in cleaning of Enugu coal, to use the coal for power
generation, a low NGM coal should be blended with Enugu. This will help
increase the ease of washing the coal for use in power generation. The
distribution curve can also be used to design the washing plant that will be
attached to the coal-based power plant that will utilize Enugu coal. The
curve should be used to determine the specific gravity range at which the
59

difference in % recovery will fall within the 0 7% range (easy to wash
range). As shown in Fig. 4.1, this should be at specific gravity values greater
than 1.5. Fig. 4.2 shows that if a dense-medium of specific gravity 1.5 is
used, a recovery of about 80% will be obtained.
Yield and Ash at Any Given Specific Gravity
From Fig. 4.1 and Fig. 4.2, we can directly find out the yield and ash of
Enugu coal at a certain specific gravity of washing. This will help an
operator to know the right specific gravity of the dense-medium to be used
in the design of the washing plant required to achieve the given yield. For
instance, using Fig. 4.1, at a specific gravity of 1.5, the coal yield that will be
recovered will be about 80%, containing about 39% of ash (Fig. 4.4).
Efficiency of a Washing Plant
The efficiency of a washing plant can be determined by using the
washability curves plotted in Fig 4.1 and Fig. 4.2. This will help an operator
to know if the washing plant is performing or not. For example, the
washability curve from Fig 4.1 has a recovery of 80% coal yield at S.G of
1.5; assuming a separating equipment recovers 75% yield at the same
specific gravity (1.5), it means that the separating efficiency () of the
equipment is;
60

= (actual yield) * 100 / (theoretical yield)
= (75 * 100) / 80 = 93.75%
This efficiency is also known as organic efficiency of the washing plant.

Fig. 4.4 Enugu coal washability curves showing the yield and ash content at
specific gravity of 1.5.




4.2 FROTH FLOTATION ANALYSIS
The result obtained in the froth flotation (tree) analysis is given in the
Table 4.4.
61

Table 4.4 Tree Analysis Data
Test Data Calculated Data

1
Sample
2
Mass
3
Assay
4
Mass
5
Recovery
6
Recovery Mass of Concentrate per 100
Units of Ash
(gms) Ash(%) Ash (%) Cum (%)
7
%
8
Cum (%)
Concentrate
1 9.74 51.14 4.98 30.53 30.53 59.72 59.72
Concentrate
3 4.21 46.64 1.96 12.02 42.55 23.81 83.53
Tailing 4 5.26 46.61 2.45 15.02 57.57 32.25 115.78
Concentrate
2 3.1 45.5 1.41 8.65 66.22 19.01 134.79
Concentrate
4 2.48 42.11 1.04 6.37 72.59 15.21 150
Tailing 1 4.86 36.95 1.8 11.04 83.63 29.8 179.8
Tailing 2 6.06 34.89 2.11 12.94 96.57 37.16 216.96
Tailing 3 2.12 26.55 0.56 3.43 100 13 229.96
Total 37.83 330.39 16.31 100


Fig.4.4 Release tree analysis curve
62

Shown in Fig. 4.4 is the release tree analysis curve of Enugu coal. This curve
is like the grade-recovery curve and can be used to determine the
combustible recovery that will be obtained from Enugu coal at any given
ash content. This curve can be used to analyze the cleanability of fine coal
particles.
Since Enugu coal is difficult to clean, instead of using the physical gravity
separation process to separate the coal from ash, froth flotation technique
can be adopted. This is because the separation technique is based on the
surface properties of coal and its impurities. However, the size of coal
concentrate can be a limiting factor when considering coal-based power
plants as froth flotation works well only when the coal particles are fine,
while the coal-based power plants may require large lumps of coal to
operate. Therefore the fine coal particles are agglomerated or sintered for
the coal base plant.







63


CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 CONCLUSION
Based on the findings of this study, the following conclusions have been
drawn:
1) The washability characteristic curves of Enugu coal show that Enugu
coal is difficult to clean.
2) The difficulty in the washability of Enugu coal is as a result of the
high ash content of the coal and the presence of large amount of near
gravity materials (NGMs) in the coal.
3) To use Enugu coal for power generation, coals having low NGM
should be blended with the coal. This will help increase the ease of
washing the coal.
4) The distribution curve of the coal can also be used to design the
washing plant that will be attached to the coal-based power plant
that will utilize Enugu coal. The curve should be used to determine
the specific gravity range at which the difference in % recovery will
fall within the 0 7% range (easy to wash range).
5) Froth flotation technique has been recommended as the best
technique for washing Enugu coal. This is because the separation
64

technique is based on the surface properties of coal and its
impurities, and not on the physical gravity properties of the coal.
However, the size of coal concentrate can be a limiting factor when
considering coal-based power plants as froth flotation works well
only when the coal particles are fine, while the coal-based power
plants may require large lumps of coal to operate.
5.2 RECCOMMENDATION
For further work, the authors recommend the following:
1) Washability studies of other coal deposits in Nigeria should be done.
This will help determine the easy to wash coals in Nigeria that can be
blended with Enugu coal.
2) Washability studies of Enugu coal, blended with other low NGM coals
should be done to determine if the difficulty in washing Enugu coal
will be reduced.
3) The sink-float analysis of the present study was carried out at a
specific gravity range of 1.3 1.7. This gave fewer readings. We
recommend a specific gravity range of 1.3 2.0 for further studies.



65

REFERENCES
Aboyade, A, 2004, Potential for Climate Change Mitigation in Nigeria Solid
Waste Disposal Sector: A Case Study from Lagos.
Behre Dolbear, Feasibility of Nigerian Coal Resources Development 2006.
Nigeria (2005-2009), Report No. 32412-NG.
Biswal, A., (2012). Effect of Key Variables on Coal Cleaning by Froth
Flotation Technique. B. Tech Thesis, National Institute of
Technology, Rourkela.
C.C. Dell, Release Analysis - A New Tool for Ore Dressing Research, Recent
Developments in Mineral Dressing, Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, London, 1953, pp. 75-84.
C.C. Dell, An Improved Release Analysis Procedure for Determining Coal
Washability, Journal of the Institute of Fuel, 37, 149 (1964).
C.C. Dell, M.J. Bunyard, W.A. Rickelton and P.A. Young, Release Analysis: A
Comparison of Techniques, Transactions, Institution of Mining and
Metallurgy, (Section C: Mineral Processing and Extractive
Metallurgy), 81, C89 (1972).
CMM Global Overview, 2006, Report by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Coalbed Methane Outreach Program.
CPE, (2009). Pre-feasibility Study of Electricity Generation from Nigerian
Coal Mine Methane, Final Report Prepared for EPA.
D.W. Fuerstenau and M.C. Williams, Characterization of the Lyophobicity of
Particles by Film Flotation, Colloids and Surfaces, 22, pp. 87-91,
(1987).
D.T. Hornsby and J. Leja, A Technique of Evaluating Floatability of Coal
Fines, Using Methanol Solutions, Coal Preparation, 1, pp. 1-19,(1984).
G.E. Agar, 1985, The Optimization of Flotation Circuit Design from
66

Laboratory Rate Data, XV International Mineral Processing Congress,
Cannes II: pp. 100-111.
J. A. Cavallaro and A.W. Deurbrouck, Froth Flotation Washability Data of
Various Appalachian Coals Using the Timed Release Analysis
Technique, USBM Report of Investigation No. 6652, (1965).
Klassen, V.I. and Makrousov, V.A., in An Introduction to the Theory of
Flotation, p.428, Butterworth, London (1963).
K.A. Matis, P. Mavros and C.A. Kydros, A Dissolved-Air Microcell for
Floatability Tests with Particulate Systems, Separations Technology,
1, pp. 255-258, (1991).
Laskowski, J. S. (2001). Coal Flotation and Fine Coal Utilization, Vol 14 in
Developments in Mineral Processing. Elsevier Science Publishing,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 350 pp.
Manafa, M.N, 1979, Electricity in Nigeria (1896 -1972) Yaba, Nigeria:
Reheem Publication.
Michael C. Albrecht and Joseph P. Matoney (1986), Introduction To Coal
Preparation, Coal Division, Kaiser Engineers Inc.
M.W. Chudacek, A New Quantitative Test-Tube Flotability Test, Minerals
Engineering, 3 (5), pp. 461-472, (1990).
Mpadi, M.C., 1985. The Impact of the Nigerian Oil and Gas on Her Coal
Industry: Proceedings of International Conference on Energy. Port
Harcourt, Nigeria.
Nigerian Coal Corporation Summary Report on Privatization,
(2004).Nigeria, Energy Sources 12, pp. 181-198
Ogunsola, O.I., 1990, History of Energy Sources and Their Utilization in
Nigeria, Energy Sources 12, pp. 181 -198.
67

Oji, J. O., Idusuyi, N., Aliu, T. O., Petinrin, M. O., Odejobi, O. A. and Adetunji, A.
R., (2012). Utilization of Solar Energy for Power Generation in
Nigeria, International Journal of Energy Engineering, 2(2):54-59
R.Q. Honaker, M.K. Mohanty, K.Ho, Comparison of Column Flotation Cells,
Coal Prep 95 - 12th International Coal Preparation Exhibition and
Conference, Lexington, Kentucky, 1995, pp. 175-190.
R.-H. Yoon, G.H. Luttrell and G.T. Adel, Advances in Fine Particle Flotation,
In K.V.S. Sastry and M.C. Fuerstenaueds, Challenges in Mineral
Processing, New York: SME/AIME, 1989, p. 487.
R.D. Macdonald and R.J. Brison, Paper 12, in Froth Flotation 50th
Anniversary Volume p. 298, AIME, New York (1962).
S.K. Nicol, C.N. Bensley, K.C. The and B.A. Firth, The Estimation of Coal
Flotation Response, Proceedings, Congress for Improving Froth
Flotation of Coal, (W. Membrey, ed.), Australian Coal Industry
Research Laboratories, 1983, pp. 116-134.
S.J. Pratten, C.N. Bensley and S.K. Nicol, An Evaluation of the Flotation
Response of Coals, International Journal of Mineral Processing, 27,
243 (1989).
S. Nishimura, H. Hirosue, K. Shobu and K. Jinnai, Analytical Evaluation of
Locked Cycle Flotation Tests, International Journal of Mineral
Processing, 27, pp. 39-50 (1989).
T.P. Meloy, Analysis and Optimization of Mineral Processing and Coal-
Cleaning Circuits - Circuit Analysis, International Journal of Mineral
Processing, 10, pp. 61-80 (1983).
W.R. Forrest, G.T. Adel, and R.-H. Yoon, Characterizing Coal Flotation
Performance Using Release Analysis, Coal Preparation, 14, 13 (1994).
68

W.W. McClintock, D.E. Walsh and P.D. Rao, Release Analysis of a Stratiform
Copper Sulfide Ore Using Column Flotation, Minerals and
Metallurgical Processing, 12 (2), 112 (1995).