Sie sind auf Seite 1von 7

Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897

Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Energy Conversion and

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

hom ep ag e: www. el s e vi e r. com/lo c a t e/

Coal flotation optimization using modified flotation parameters and combustible recovery in a Jameson cell

Hüseyin Vapur a , Oktay Bayat a , Metin Uçurum b, *

a Çukurova University, Mining Engineering Department, Balcali, 01330 Adana, Turkey Nig˘ de University, Mining Engineering Department, 51100 Nig˘ de, Turkey

b

a r t

i

c l e

i n f o

Article history:

Received 13 November 2008 Received in revised form 7 July 2009 Accepted 18 February 2010 Available online 20 March 2010

Keywords:

Coal flotation

Flotation kinetics

Combustible recovery

Optimization

a b s t r a c t

This study discusses a new coal flotation optimization approach. It is conducted using modified flotation parameters and combustible recovery. The experimental work was evaluated in two stages. In the first stage, recoveries (1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 min of flotation times) of Jameson flotation operating parameters were fitted to first-order kinetic model, R = R 1 [1 exp ( kt )] where R was recovery at t time, R 1 was ultimate recovery and k was the first-order rate constant to draw the time recovery curves in the experimental study. Two parameters, the ultimate recovery ( R 1 ) and first-order rate constant ( k ), were then obtained from the model to fit an experimental time recovery curve. A modified flotation rate constant ( K m ) defined as product of R 1 and k , i.e., K m = R 1 k , and selectivity index ( SI) defined as the ratio of the mod- ified rate constant of coal to the modified rate constant of ash ( SI )= K m of Coal/ K m of Ash), which could be collectively called ‘‘modified flotation parameters”. It was used to determine of the sub and upper values of operation variables. In the second one, combustible recovery (%) and ash content (%) were used to opti- mization of the Jameson flotation variables and it was found that d 80 = 0.250 mm particle size, 1/1 veg- etable oil acids/kerosene ratio, 20% solids pulp density, 0.600 L/min wash water rate and 40 cm downcomer immersion dept could be used to separate efficiently coal from ash. Final concentrate was obtained with 94.83% combustible recovery and 17.86% ash content at optimum conditions after 8 min flotation time.

2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Flotation is one of the most complex mineral processing opera- tions as it is affected by a very large number of variables. Many of these are beyond the control of the minerals engineer, and some cannot be even measured quantitatively with the available instru- ments. The relations between measured and controlled variables are intricately related. Sometimes, simultaneously changing vari- ous component settings will reinforce a particular attribute. In addition, various component settings can cancel or counteract each other if changes are not chosen wisely. For coal fines (<0.5 mm), froth flotation is the most effective method of separating ash form- ing mineral matter from the carbonaceous material [1] . The Jameson cell is a co-current flotation device, in which a feed slurry-frother mixture is pumped through a fixed diameter orifice. Feed injection through the orifice under pressure draws in air due to a venture effect. Ultra fine bubbles are produced in the down- comer because of the high shearing provided by the jet action of the feed slurry [2] . It has major advantages over conventional flo-

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 388 225 23 50; fax: +90 388 225 01 12. E-mail address: cevher@nigde.edu.tr (M. Uçurum).

0196-8904/$ - see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2010.02.019

tation technologies, including a more compact design and lower capital cost, a minimum amount of maintenance and the ability to operate at elevated temperatures [3] . Flotation kinetics brings together the influence of all the factors that take place during a flotation process [4] , some of the most important factors required to achieve a good separation are ore characteristics, machines and equipment involved, hydrodynam- ics, particle size, pulp density and chemical reagents. Kinetic mod- els can be used to analyze batch flotation results. Two parameters which are R 1 (ultimate recovery) and k (first-order rate constant) are obtained from the model fit to an experimental recovery-time curve. They can be effectively used to evaluate variables affecting flotation process [5] . Among the many flotation models, the classi- cal first-order flotation model (Eq. (1)) is widely used and can be utilized to optimize the design of flotation circuits [5–7] .

R ¼ R 1 ½ 1 expð kt Þ

ð 1Þ

where R is the recovery of component at time t, R 1 is the ultimate recovery of component and k is the first-order rate constant for the component. Optimization of flotation parameters using rate models is not a new concept. The kinetic model based on time recovery data,

1892

H. Vapur et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897

which uses the extra dimension of rate, has been in vogue since time immemorial for scaling up of laboratory data. Often, interpre- tation on the performance of a flotation circuit, based only on R 1 (the ultimate recovery) and k (the first-order rate constant of the

component) may lead to wrong conclusions. In such cases, a mod- ified flotation rate constant K m defined as the product of R 1 and k , i.e., K m = R 1 k and selectivity index ( SI ), defined as the ratio of the modified rate constant of valuables to the modified rate constant of gangue, can be used [8] . Sripriya et al. [8] has been made an attempt to optimize the batch laboratory froth flotation parameters of fine coal using the above two concepts, i.e., K m and SI and statistical techniques. A flo- tation bank containing four Outukumpu cells was optimized using the results obtained from the laboratory study. The airflow number and the froth number were used as a basis for scale up. To gauge the performance of the froth flotation circuit, an efficiency param- eter called the coefficient of separation (CS) was used. The yield from the flotation circuit improved, the froth ash reduced and the rejects ash went up. Xu [5] and Uçurum and Bayat [9] remarks modified flotation rate constant and selectivity index are useful parameters in the flotation studies.

In the optimization of flotation, the statistical design of experi-

ments [10,11] has several advantages over the classical method of treating one variable at a time. The full factorial experiment is method of design of experiments in which a statistical analysis is

performed to evaluate the significance of the main and interaction effects as evaluated from the experimental results. In particular, they are used when several factors have to be studied in order to determine their main effects and interaction. The experiments can be conducted in an organized manner and can be analyzed sys- tematically to obtain much needed information. The information can be utilized for optimization purpose. A valid optimization strategy would permit the adjustment of those manipulable vari- ables, which influence the objective. The statistical techniques have been used to study the flotation of minerals [12–14] and coal

[15,16].

A review of coal processing literature indicates a lack of statis-

tically based studies on application and/or interaction of reagents with coals [17] . Naik et al. [18] carried out a 2 5 factorial design to study the effect of diesel oil, pH, MIBC, particle size and sodium silicate on flotation of a low-rank non-coking coal. They found that the influence of particle size was relatively more significant than those of various reagents among which the collector had the high- est influence. Under optimum conditions, the combustible recov- ery was 88% at 25.4% ash. They also carried out 2 3 factorial design experiments [19] on the influence of sodium meta silicate, kerosene and MIBC with a higher rank coal. They obtained a prod- uct with 91.11% combustible grade with 95.58% combustible recovery. In this study, optimization of coal flotation was made in two stages. In the first stage, classical first-order flotation model was used in order to investigate the modified flotation parameters ( K m , SI ) of five important Jameson flotation variables, in the second stage, combustible recovery (%) and ash content (%) were utilized. This experimental design is a new methodology in the field and this work can potentially produce a significant contribution to the literature of the subject.

2. Materials and method

2.1. Coal washing plant intermediate sample

The sample of coal washing plant intermediate product used in the experiments was collected from Ömerler coal washing plant in Kütahya, Turkey. The chemical analysis of the sample was given

Table 1 . The XRD study of the sample showed that it contained the following minerals: quartz, serpentine–kaolin group minerals, illite, smectite group clay minerals and amorphous matter. The cal- orific value of the sample was 3935 kcal/kg. The volatile matter of sample was determined as 29.30%. Besides, the ash content and the moisture content of sample were determined as 33.41% and 8.70%, respectively.

2.2. Slurry preparation

For a standard flotation test, a sub-sample (0.5 kg) was ground in a stainless steel mill under dry medium. The ball mill had the dimensions, 200 200 mm, and was charged with 10 kg of stain- less steel balls. The grinding times were 10, 15 and 20 min, giving particle size distributions of d 80 = 0.355, 0.250 and 0.106 mm, respectively. The size analyses of the feed and three individual fractions are shown in Fig. 1 . Kerosene oil (0.8 gr/cm 3 ) and vegeta- ble oil acids (0.9 gr/cm 3 ) supplied by MarSA-Adana, Turkey were used as reagents. At different weight ratios of vegetable oil acids and kerosene were mixed with tap water to obtain stable emul- sions in condition tank of the Jameson flotation cell for 5 min. Veg- etable oil acids + kerosene dosage was 10% of the dry solids by weight. For the preparation of slurry feed for the Jameson cell, ground fine coal was added in solution and conditioned for 5 min. All flotation experiments were conducted at normal pH (7.0–7.5) where no flocculation of gangue on the sample was thought to be observed due to high surface of both at this pH. The pulp was then floated for 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 min adding wash water.

2.3. Jameson flotation cell set up and its operating characteristics

Laboratory batch flotation tests were made in a Jameson flota- tion cell which was constructed in stainless steel. The Jameson flo- tation cell can be divided into two main zones. These are downcomer (2.0 cm in diameter and 100 cm in length) and separa- tion tank (10 cm in diameter and 75 cm in length). Pulp is condi- tioned in the 30 L tank and pumped into the downcomer, which is the primary contacting zone of particles swarmed with bubbles. There is a nozzle at a relatively high level of the downcomer to pro- vide a high pressure jetting action. When the slurry passes the noz- zle, atmospheric air is sucked into the downcomer due to the venturi effect. The jetting impact of slurry pool in the downcomer and the air sucked plunge into the separation tank (plunging jet). In the mixing zone, i.e., top part of the slurry pool in the downcom- er, the hydrophobic particles have opportunity to collide with and adhere to fine air bubbles (e.g., 400–700 l m) generated within the water jet shearing action [20] . The Jameson cell is an effective de- vice for gas–liquid contacting. Small bubbles are formed in a high- shear region surrounding the plunging jet, leading to high interfa- cial area per unit volume of gas [21] . Flotation recovery of Jameson cells is an important issue and can be variable depending on oper-

Table 1 Chemical compositions and physical properties of the sample (as received) used in the study.

Property

 

C

(%)

42.56

H

(%)

3.13

N

(%)

1.65

O

(%)

8.13

S

(%)

2.42

Moisture (%) Ash (%) Volatile matter (%) Calorific values (Kcal/kg)

8.70

33.41

29.30

3935

H. Vapur et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897

1893

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 Feed 20 10 min. Grinding 10 15
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
Feed
20
10
min. Grinding
10
15
min. Grinding
20
min. Grinding
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Cumulative Passing (%)

Size Distribution (mm)

Fig. 1. Particle size distribution of sample after three different grinding times.

ating parameters and particle size. To assess the flotation recovery in the Jameson cell, the operation within the downcomer and oper- ation within the separation tank should be evaluated separately. The recovery that occurs within the downcomer is an area that is still under active investigation [22] . Experimental details of the flo- tation tests are summarized in Table 2 .

2.4. Analysis

The hydrophobic particles and tailings were collected, filtered and dried in an oven at 90 ± 5 C to constant weight and assayed. Their ash levels were determined at 875 C. General guidelines out- lined in the ASTM standards were followed. In this study, the frac- tional recoveries after 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 min of flotation time were fitted to the models. A proprietary curve-fitting program (Curve Expert 1.3, a shareware from http://www.ebicom.net/~dhyams/ cvxpt.htm [23] ) was used to determine k , R 1 and R 2 . In the second stage the study, the results of the flotation test re- sults were evaluated by percentage of combustible recovery. The combustible recovery was calculated using Eq. (2)

Combustible recovery ð %Þ ¼

M c ð 100

A c Þ

M f ð 100 A f Þ

100

ð 2Þ

where A c ash content of clean coal, A f ash content of feed, M c mass of clean coal, M f mass of feed.

3. Results and discussion

Although the effect of particle size on flotation performance has been widely studied to date and many important physico-chemical

Table 2 Jameson flotation column design and operating specifications.

Column variable

Diameter (mm) Height (mm) Downcomer diameter (mm) Downcomer height (mm) Froth height (mm) d 80 (mm) pH Vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratios Pulp density (%) Wash water rate (L/min) Downcomer immersion depth (cm) Conditions time (min) Flotation time (min)

100

750

20

1000

Variable 0.355, 0.250, 0.106

7.0-7.5

2/3, 1/1, 3/2 5, 10, 20 0, 0.600, 1.0 30, 40, 50, 60

10

1, 2, 3, 5, 8

factors related to particle size have been identified, the net effect of these factors is very difficult to predict. For instance, in particle– bubble interaction, particle size is known to play a critical role in the probability of particles colliding with bubbles, attachment of particles to bubbles after collision, as well as remaining attached in the pulp phase [24] . This study examined the effects of particle size distribution (i.e., d 80 = 0.250 and d 80 = 0.106 mm) on the flota- tion behavior of coal in the Jameson cell. Table 3 gives ultimative recovery ( R 1 ) , first-order rate constant ( k ), modified rate constant ( K m ), selectivity index ( SI ) and coefficient ( R 2 ) for studied particle

sizes. d 80 = 0.250 mm gives better results for k and K m for coal. Fur-

thermore, d 80 = 0.250 mm had higher SI (3.63) than d 80 = 0.106 mm

(2.77). Kinetics analysis of experimental data indicated that the best feed size for the coal should be d 80 = 0.250 mm. In the labora- tory tests, the size particles were also observed to form smaller and more stable bubbles, resulting in more efficient flotation. In addi- tion, the first-order kinetic model gave the best fit for particle sizes experimental data ( Fig. 2 ). Solids concentration is expected to influence solids suspension due to its effects on hindered settling, turbulence dampening, and (possibly) viscosity effects [25] . Using different solids concen- trations, the effect of solids concentration on the modified flotation parameters was determined for the coal. In order to examine the effect of pulp density on the flotation, 5% and 20% by weight of pulp densities were used. Table 4 presents ultimate recovery ( R 1 ), first-order rate constant ( k ) and coefficient ( R 2 ) obtained from fitting, including the modified rate constant ( K m ) and selectivity in- dex ( SI ). Five percent by weight of pulp density gives higher results for k and K m for the coal. Furthermore, 20% solids is strongly lower than 5% solids in terms of rate constant ( k = 0.0676) and modified rate constant ( K m = 0.0730) for ash. The selectivity in flotation be- tween coal and ash wasn’t observed when the pulp density is en- hanced from 5% to 20% by weight and the selectivity index of the pulp densities are almost the same with 3.63 and 3.85. The first-or- der flotation model fits the pulp densities experimental data very well ( Fig. 3 ) for coal and ash. Water-insoluble hydrocarbons are widely used as collectors to increase the affinity of coal particles towards the air bubbles. These collectors are basically non-polar oils such as kerosene, crude petroleum, fuel-oil and certain coal-tar distillates [26] . Kerosene, the zpc of most of the coals are below 5.5 and bears negative charge in neutral pH [27] . The kerosene droplets also bear negative charge at neutral pH. Therefore, the interaction of coal and kerosene is possibly due to hydrophobic interaction [28] . The floatability of coal increases with the adsorption of kerosene and there is increase in recovery. Klimpel and Hansen [29] reported the similar results but they also observed decrease in flotation rate constant at high collector dosage. With the increase in hydrophobicity of coal parti- cles, inter-particle attraction will increase and agglomeration is likely to take place. The decrease in grade is due to flotation of pro- gressively higher mineral matter particles with the increase in recovery. The increase in collector dosage also causes high recov- ery of finer coal particles with very poor selectivity of coal over other mineral matter in the finer particle range. The use of oil im- proves flotation rate of particles of all sizes and specific gravities but the effect is more for the locked or mineral particles [30]. Veg- etable oil are also light compounds (0.9 g/cm 3 ), less expensive than hydrocarbons and even more important, unlike mineral oils, they are renewable and non-polluting energy resources [31] . It is well known that the collector dosage of coal flotation is an important variable. The aim of this work is to obtain high calorific value prod- ucts from coal fines cleaning wastes by flotation with kerosene and vegetable oil acids mixing. The effect of vegetable oil acids/kero- sene ratio on modified flotation parameters was investigated using 2/3 and 3/2. Table 5 gives ultimative recovery ( R 1 ), first-order rate constant ( k ), modified rate constant ( K m ), selectivity index ( SI ) and

1894

H. Vapur et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897

Table 3 Parameters obtained from model (R = R 1 [1 exp ( kt )]) fit to data set for coal and ash.

Size distribution, d 80 (mm)

Coal

Ash

SI

R 1

k

K m

R 2

R 1

k

K m

R 2

0.250

0.9322

1.0484

0.9700

0.9994

0.6040

0.4430

0.2675

0.9992

3.63

0.106

0.9328

0.7280

0.6790

0.9996

0.7909

0.3099

0.2451

0.9981

2.77

100 90 80 70 60 50 0.250 mm Exp. Coal 40 0.250 mm Model Coal
100
90
80
70
60
50
0.250
mm Exp. Coal
40
0.250
mm Model Coal
0.250
mm Exp. Ash
30
0.250
mm Model Ash
0.106
mm Exp. Coal
20
0.106
mm Model Coal
0.106
mm Exp. Ash
10
0.106
mm Model Ash
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
Recovery (%)

Flotation Time (min.)

Fig. 2. Fitted to data set for size distribution on coal and ash recovery.

coefficient ( R 2 ). Modified flotation rate ( K m ) of 3/2 vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio was higher (0.6892) than lower vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio (0.4452) for coal. In the mean time, K m values of ash have the same characteristic trend with coal. As for selectiv- ity index ( SI ), 2/3 and 3/2 vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio gave almost the same results with 1.98 and 2.07, respectively. The mod- el could present the time recovery curves of flotation tests for both collector dosages quite well for coal and ash ( Fig. 4 ). The froth phase of the flotation system, to a great extent, deter- mines the separation performance, as the grade (ratio of desired to total solids recovered) of the product (concentrate) depends pri- marily on its structure and stability. The froth also contributes to the recovery (fraction of valuable solids recovered from the pulp to the concentrate) achieved, since the amount of desired material drop-back from the froth, together with the kinetics of the pulp phase, determines the recovery. Wash water is traditionally added to column flotation cells, but it has found some, though more lim- ited, use in the operation of more conventional flotation cells. The froth phase is extremely important in the operation of a flotation cell, seeing that, it is critical in determining the amount of un- wanted gangue collected to the concentrate and thus the purity of product. The role of the wash water is to prevent pulp entrain- ment into the concentrate. In this sense, the minimum wash water should just supply the water the concentrate. However, an excess of wash water increases froth mixing and short circuiting, thus decreasing froth cleaning, particularly for shallow froth depths. It is also important to verify the circuit water balance, because an ex- cess of water will cause problems downstream [32] . Fig. 5 shows

Table 4 Parameters obtained from model (R = R 1 [1 exp ( kt )]) fit to data set for coal and ash.

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5% Exp. Coal 5% Model
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5% Exp. Coal
5% Model Coal
5% Ash Exp.
5% Model Ash
20% Exp. Coal
20% Model Coal
20% Exp. Ash
20%Model Ash
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
Recovery (%)

Flotation Time (min.)

Fig. 3. Fitted to data set for pulp densities on coal and ash recovery.

the recovery of coal and ash as a function of flotation time and model fits which shows the model fits the experimental data quite well for coal and ash at the two different wash water rates. Table 6 presents ultimative recovery ( R 1 ), first-order rate constant ( k ), modified rate constant ( K m ), selectivity index ( SI ) and coefficient ( R 2 ) from the fittings for coal and ash. In the laboratory Jameson flotation tests with the studied wash water rates, 0 L/min gave bet- ter result for k and K m as 0.9510 and 0.8090, respectively. When in- creased wash water rate from 0 L/min to 1.0 L/min, k and K m values of ash decreased from 0.6310 to 0.1185 and from 0.3800 to 0.1134, respectively. By way of addition, increasing wash water rate from 0 L/min to 1.0 L/min did not increased coal/ash selectivity (2.13 for 0 L/min, 2.45 for 1.0 L/min). Compared to mechanical cells, the functions of producing bubbles and particle–bubble collision/ attachment in a Jameson cell are done separately inside the down- comer. The following steps occur within the downcomer: (1) the jet created by the slurry passing through the orifice and promotes the inducement of air into the downcomer; (2) the shearing action of the jet generates fine bubbles and transports them through the mixing zone; (3) the particles and the bubbles collide and attach to each other and subsequently travel down the downcomer; through the pipe flow zone; (4) bubbles are removed by hydrostatic pres- sure from the downcomer creating a vacuum for further air entrainment [33] . The immersion depth of the downcomer is also an important parameter, which determines froth depth and froth residence time [34] . In this study, 30 cm downcomer immersion depth was compared with 50 cm downcomer immersion depth

Pulp Density (wt.%)

Coal

Ash

SI

R 1

k

K m

R 2

R 1

k

K m

R 2

5

0.9322

1.0484

0.9700

0.9989

0.6040

0.4430

0.2675

0.9959

3.63

20

1.1005

0.2554

0.2811

0.9888

1.0840

0.0676

0.0730

0.9896

3.85

H. Vapur et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897

Table 5 Parameters obtained from model (R = R 1 [1 exp ( kt )]) fit to data set for coal and ash.

1895

Vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratios

Coal

Ash

SI

R 1

k

K m

R 2

R 1

k

K m

R 2

2/3

0.8777

0.5072

0.4452

0.9994

0.6300

0.3563

0.2245

0.9994

1.98

3/2

0.8900

0.7743

0.6892

0.9998

0.6165

0.5384

0.3322

0.9978

2.07

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 2/3 Exp. Coal 2/3 Model
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
2/3 Exp. Coal
2/3 Model Coal
2/3 Exp. Ash
2/3 Model Ash
3/2 Exp. Coal
3/2 Model Coal
3/2 Exp. Ash
3/2 Model Ash
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Recovery (%)

Flotation Time (min.)

Fig. 4. Fitted to data set for vegetable oil acids acids/kerosene ratio on coal and ash recovery.

100 90 80 70 60 50 0 L/min. Exp. Coal 40 0 L/min.Model Coal 0
100
90
80
70
60
50
0
L/min. Exp. Coal
40
0
L/min.Model Coal
0
L/min. Exp. Ash
30
0
L/min. Model Ash
1
L/min. Exp. Coal
20
1
L/min. Model Cola
1
L/min. Exp. Ash
10
1
L/min. Model Ash
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Recovery (%)

Flotation Time (min.)

Fig. 5. Fitted to data set for wash water rate on coal and ash recovery.

on the separation of coal from ash using modified flotation param- eters. Table 7 presents ( R 1 ), first-order rate constant ( k ), modified

Table 6 Parameters obtained from model (R = R 1 [1 exp ( kt )]) fit to data set for coal and ash.

rate constant ( K m ), selectivity index ( SI ) and coefficient ( R 2 ). 30 cm appear to have a higher modified rate constant (0.3799) while 50 cm has lowered a value (0.2811) for coal. In the mean time, K m of 30 cm was higher (0.1620) than 50 cm (0.0730) for ash. In terms of coal/ash selectivity index, 50 cm immersion depth gave a much better result than 30 cm with a value of 3.85. Results in Fig. 6 confirm that the model fits the experimental data very well for both collectors.

3.1. Optimization

According to kinetics results, 0.250 mm was determined as the best particle size fraction. In the second study of optimization, 0.355 mm, upper-size of 0.250 mm, and 0.106 mm, sub-size of 0.250 mm, were used. The experimental conditions were kept constant between tests and the best results were obtained with 0.250 mm particle size in terms of combustible recovery and ash content for 8 min flotation time. As it can be seen from the re- sults, illustrated Fig. 7 , which combustible recovery (%) and ash content (%) were 94.97%, 24.55%, respectively. For determination of optimum solids ratio of pulp, three ratios, 5 wt.%, 10 wt.% and 20 wt.%, used in the tests. The selectivity index ( SI ) values of 5 wt.% and 20 wt.% were very close (3.65 and 3.85). Thus, 10 wt.% was tested as a middle value of solid ratios. The cal- culated results of combustible recovery and ash content (%) for the three solid ratios were given in Fig. 8 . The combustible recovery

and ash content were 94.97% and 24.55% respectively for 5 wt.%.

For 10 wt.% as a middle value, the combustible recovery was

85.00% and ash content was 20.94%. The best results was obtained

at 20% pulp density with 15.30% ash content and 92.01% combus-

tible recovery. Hence, 20 wt.% was selected as an optimum solid ratio. In order to establish the individual effect of vegetable oil acids/ kerosene ratio, 2/3, 1/1 and 3/2 vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratios were used. 2/3 and 3/2 vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratios had close selectivity index ( SI ) values (1.98 and 2.04). Because of this, 1/1 was tested as a middle value of vegetable oil acids/kerosene ra- tio. In the second phase of experimental studies flotation tests were carried out to obtain optimum vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio and the results were given in Fig. 9 . As seen in Fig. 9 , the best

Wash water rate (L/min)

Coal

Ash

SI

R 1

k

K m

R 2

R 1

k

K m

R 2

0

0.8504

0.9510

0.8090

0.9967

0.6030

0.6310

0.3800

0.9972

2.13

1.0

0.8752

0.3176

0.2780

0.9918

0.9565

0.1185

0.1134

0.9893

2.45

Table 7 Parameters obtained from model (R = R 1 [1 exp ( kt )]) fit to data set for coal and ash.

 

Downcomer immersion depth (cm)

Coal

Ash

SI

R 1

k

K m

R 2

 

R 1

k

K m

R 2

30

0.9764

0.3890

0.3799

0.9989

 

0.8617

0.1890

0.1620

0.9959

2.34

50

1.1005

0.2554

0.2811

0.9888

1.0840

0.0676

0.0730

0.9896

3.85

1896

H. Vapur et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 cm Exp. Coal 30 30 cm Model
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
cm Exp. Coal
30
30
cm Model Coal
30
cm Exp. Ash
20
30
cm Model Ash
50
cm Exp. Coal
50
cm Model Coal
10
50
cm Exp. Ash
50
cm Model Ash
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Recovery (%)

Flotation Time (min.)

Fig. 6. Fitted to data set for downcomer immersion depth on coal and ash recovery.

100 90 80 70 Combustible Recovery, % 60 Ash Content, % 50 40 30 20
100
90
80
70
Combustible Recovery, %
60
Ash Content, %
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
Combustible Recovery/Ash Content, %

Particle size (mm)

Fig. 7. The effect of particle size on recovery, ash rejection and efficiency index (froth height: variable; pH 7–7.5; pulp density: 5%; vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio: 1/1; wash water rate: 0.600 L/min; downcomer immersion depth: 50 cm; flotation time: 8 min).

100 90 80 70 60 50 Combustible Recovery, % Ash Content, % 40 30 20
100
90
80
70
60
50
Combustible Recovery, %
Ash Content, %
40
30
20
10
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
Combustible Recovery/Ash Content, %

Pulp density (%)

Fig. 8. The effect of pulp density on recovery, ash rejection and efficiency index (froth height: variable; pH 7–7.5; particle size: 0.250 mm; vegetable oil acids/ kerosene ratio: 1/1; wash water rate: 0.600 L/min; downcomer immersion depth:

50 cm; flotation time: 8 min).

vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio was 1/1 with 93.60% as combus- tible recovery and 14.06% ash content for 8 min flotation time. For determination of optimum wash water rate firstly, kinetic studies were carried out. The water rates of 0 L/min and 1.0 L/

min had almost the same selectivity index ( SI ) values (2.12 and 2.45) and, selected as the limit values. 0.6 L/min was used as a mid- dle wash water rate. The test results of combustible recovery and ash content for the three water rates of froth washing were given in Fig. 10 . The best results obtained at 0.600 L/min wash water rate. As it can be seen from the results, illustrated in the figure, which ash content was decreasing from 33.41% to 13.68% giving a 90.17% combustible recovery.

The last study for optimization of coal flotation was conducted

on determination of optimum downcomer immersion depth. The

former results of kinetic studies showed that the best value of

depth was 50 cm. The middle value of depth, therefore, was se-

lected 50 cm. The depth values of 40 cm and 60 cm were deter- mined to be used as the limit values of the downcomer depth. The test results of combustible recovery and ash content for the four downcomer depths (30, 40, 50 and 60 cm) of the Jameson col- umn were given in Fig. 11 . It was showed that 40 cm as optimum downcomer depth with 17.86% ash content and 94.83% combusti- ble recovery was obtained at 8 min flotation time.

100 90 80 70 60 Combustible Recovery, % 50 Ash Content, % 40 30 20
100
90
80
70
60
Combustible Recovery, %
50
Ash Content, %
40
30
20
10
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
Combustible Recovery/Ash Content, %

Vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio

Fig. 9. The effect of vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio on recovery, ash rejection and efficiency index (froth height: variable; pH 7–7.5; particle size: 0.250 mm; pulp density: 20%; wash water rate: 0.600 L/min; downcomer immersion depth: 50 cm; flotation time: 8 min).

100 90 80 70 60 50 Combustible Recovery, % Ash Content, % 40 30 20
100
90
80
70
60
50
Combustible Recovery, %
Ash Content, %
40
30
20
10
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Combustible Recovery/Ash Content, %

Wash water rate (L/min.)

Fig. 10. The effect of wash water ratio on recovery, ash rejection and efficiency index (froth height: variable; pH 7–7.5; particle size: 0.250 mm; pulp density:

20%; vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio: 1/1; downcomer immersion depth: 50 cm; flotation time: 8 min).

H. Vapur et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 1891–1897

1897

100 90 80 70 60 Combustible Recovery, % 50 Ash Content, % 40 30 20
100
90
80
70
60
Combustible Recovery, %
50
Ash Content, %
40
30
20
10
0
20
30
40
50
60
70
Combustible Recovery/Ash Content, %

Downcomer immersion depth (cm)

Fig. 11. The effect of downcomer immersion depth on recovery, ash rejection and efficiency index (froth height: variable; pH 7–7.5; particle size: 0.250 mm; pulp density: 20%; vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio: 1/1; wash water rate: 0.600 L/min; flotation time: 8 min).

4. Conclusion

The results of this study are as follows:

The results of the kinetic studies are in good agreement with the first-order rate equation of the form R = R 1 [1 exp ( kt )] for coal and ash. The use of kinetic analysis for the evaluation of the effect of variables on flotation separation has been demon- strated. Firstly, modified rate constant and selectivity index were all used to study coal flotation optimization in the Jameson cell. Then the combustible recovery (%) and ash content (%) were successfully utilized in developing new approach coal flotation optimization. A product with 17.86% ash content and 94.83% combustible recovery could be obtained after 8 min concentration time from this type of coal flotation study at d 80 = 0.250 mm particle size, 1/1 vegetable oil acids/kerosene ratio, 20% solids pulp density, 0.6 L/min wash water rate and 40 cm downcomer immersion depts. It is expected that the coal flotation optimization work will pro- vide a significant contribution to the field, i.e., that the work either will provide something new to the field or will improve some existing knowledge or methodology in the field.

References

[1] Aplan FF. The historical development of coal flotation in the United States. In:

Parekh BK, Miller JD, editors. Advances in flotation technology. SME; 1999. p.

269–87.

[2] Jameson GJ. A new concept in flotation machine design. Miner Metall Process

1988:44–7.

[3] Yan Y, Jameson GJ. Application of the Jameson cell technology for algae and phosphorus removal from maturation ponds. Int J Miner Process

2004;73:23–8.

[4] Lazic P, Calic N, Boltzman S. Model of flotation kinetics. In: Proceedings of the XXI international mineral processing congress 2000; B8a. p. 87–93.

[5] Xu M. Modified flotation rate constant and selectivity index. Miner Eng

1998;11(3):271–8.

[6] Agar GE, Chia J, Requisc L. Flotation rate measurements to optimize an operating circuits. Miner Eng 1998;11(4):347–60. [7] Oliveira JF, Saraiva SM, Pimenta JS, Oliveira APA. Kinetics of pyrochlore flotation from Araxa mineral deposits. Miner Eng 2001;14(1):99–105.

[8] Sripriya R, Rao PVT, Choudhury RB. Optimization of operating variables of fine coal flotation using a combination of modified flotation parameters and statistical techniques. Int J Miner Process 2003;68:109–27. [9] Uçurum M, Bayat O. Effects of operating variables on modified flotation parameters in the mineral separation. Sep Purif Technol 2007;55:173–81. [10] Box GEP, Hunter WG, Hunter JS. Statistics for experiments. New York: Wiley;

1978.

[11] Akhanazarova S, Kafarov V. Experiment optimization in chemistry and chemical engineering. Moscow: Mir Publishers; 1982. [12] Rao GV, Mohanty S. Optimization of flotation parameters for enhancement of grade and recovery of phosphate from lowgrade dolomitic rock phosphate ore from Jhamarkota, India. Miner Metall Process 2002;19(3):154–60. [13] Cilek EC, Yilmazer BZ. Effect of hydrodynamic parameters on entrainment and flotation performance. Miner Eng 2003;6:745–56. [14] Martinez LA, Uribe SA, Carrillo PFR, Coreno AJ, Ortiz JC. Study of celestite flotation efficiency using sodium dodecyl sulfonate collector: factorial experiment and statistical analysis of data. Int J Miner Process 2003;70(1–

4):83–97.

[15] Rao TC, Pillai KJ, Vanangamudi M. Statistical analysis of coal flotation—a prelude to process optimization. IX International coal preparation congress, New Delhi; 1982. p. c2-1–12. [16] Mohanty MK, Honakar HQ. Performance optimization of Jameson flotation technology for fine coal recovery. Miner Eng 1999;12(4):367–81. [17] Kelebek S, Demir U, Sahbaz O, Acar A, Cinar M, et al. The effects of dodecylamine, kerosene, and pH on batch flotation of Turkey’s Tuncbilek coal. Int J Miner Process 2008;88:65–71. [18] Naik PK, Reddy PSR, Misra VN. Optimization of coal flotation using statistical technique. Fuel Process Technol 2004;85:1473–85. [19] Naik PK, Reddy PSR, Misra VN. Interpretation of interaction effects and optimization of reagent dosages for fine coal flotation. Int J Miner Process

2005;75:83–90.

[20] Evans GM, Atkinson BW, Jameson GJ. The Jameson cell. In: Matis G, editor. Flotation science and engineering. Marcel Dekker; 1995. [21] Evans GM, Bin AK, Machniewski PM. Performance of confined plunging liquid jet bubble column as a gas–liquid reactor. Chem Eng Sci 2001;56:1151–7. [22] Harbort GJ, Cowburn JA, Manlapig EV. Recovery interactions between the froth zone, pulp zone and downcomer within a Jameson cell. In: Membrey W, editor. Proceedings of the 10th Australian coal preparation conference, Pokolbini; 2004. p. 91–101. [23] http://www.ebicom.net/~dhyams/cvxpt.htm . [24] Spedden HR, Hannan WS. Attachment of mineral particles to air bubbles in flotation. Miner Technol 1984;12:TP 2354. [25] Westhuizen AP, Deglon DA. Solids suspension in a pilot-scale mechanical flotation cell: a critical impeller speed correlation. Miner Eng 2008:21621–9. [26] Wojcik W, Janczuk B, Bialopiotrowicz T. The influence of an apolar collector on the contact angle, detachment force and work of adhesion to the coal surface in agglomeration flotation of low rank coal. Fuel 1990;69:207–10. [27] Aplan FF. Coal flotation. In: Fuerstenau MC, editor. Flotation—AM gaudin memorial volume, vol. 2. SME; 1976. p. 1235–64 [chapter 45]. [28] Mishra SK. Improved recovery of fine coal by flotation process. In: Mishra SK, Klimpel RR, editors. Fine coal processing. USA: Noyes Publications; 1987. p.

110–35.

[29] Klimpel RR, Hansen RD. Chemistry of fine coal flotation. In: Mishra SK, Klimpel RR, editors. Fine coal processing. Park Ridge (New Jersey, USA): Noyes Publications; 1987. p. 78–109. [30] Olson TJ, Aplan FF. The flotability of locked particles in a coal flotation system. In: Proc 2nd int congr appl mineralogy in min industry; 1984. p. 367. [31] Alonso MI, Valdes AF, Tarazona RMM, Garcia AB. Coal recovery from coal fines cleaning wastes by agglomeration with vegetable oil acids effects of oil type and concentration. Fuel 1999;78:753–9. [32] Neethling SJ, Cilliers JJ. Simulation of the effect of froth washing on flotation performance. Chem Eng Sci 2001;56:6303–11. [33] Cowburn J, Harbort G, Manlapig E, Pokrajcic Z. Improving the recovery of coarse coal particles in a Jameson cell. Miner Eng 2006;19:609–18. [34] Tas demir A, Tas demir T, Öteyaka B. The effect of particle size and some operating parameters in the separation tank and the downcomer on the Jameson cell recovery. Miner Eng 2007;20:1331–6.