Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
and Benefits
May 29, 2013
By Chuck Renner
Full stream mechanical coal sampling is the method used to collect samples to be analyzed for
shipment quality in most cases. From these samples quality adjustments specified in coal supply
agreements between coal companies and buyers can be made. If a sample is not collected
according to ASTM methodology, accepted practices and proper manufacturer recommended
maintenance of sampling equipment, there is no chance to obtain a correct laboratory analysis.
The basic unit of ASTM sample collection is the increment. Each increment (operation of the
sampling cutter) is collected using guidelines recommended in the ASTM D7430–Standard
Practice for Mechanical Sampling of Coal. This practice was first published in 2008. The
purpose of this practice being published was to consolidate mechanical sampling guidelines and
therefore provide one place in ASTM where information specific to mechanical sampling can be
found. Coal supply agreements should reference this method for correct operation of mechanical
samplers, auger samplers, total quality management of sampling systems and bias testing.
Each step in this process is important. Multiple units of sampling, sample preparation and
laboratory analysis are used. Several persons contact the sample from removal from the sampling
system, sample handling, processing and analysis to go from 10,000 tons of coal (or more) to 1
gram (1/28 of an ounce) for analysis. A thorough quality assurance plan and audit plan must be
in place to ensure that the process outlined above, going from 10,000 tons (or more) to 1 gram
for analysis, is conducted correctly. It is also very important that the procedures are understood
by site personnel to ensure consistent operation and sample handling. Training is needed on a
regular basis.
Mechanical Sampling
Some have characterized the modern sampling system as “automatic” sampling, particularly with
the use of programmable logic controllers used to control the system operating parameters.
Personnel who are charged with the task of maintenance of a sampling system understand that
the systems are mechanical devices and require routine preventive maintenance (PM). To ensure
that the system availability is as close to 100% as possible, a proactive PM program is observed
in systems operated by the most successful sampling system owners. Both the sampling system
manufacturer and a testing company should be involved in the operation and correct maintenance
of a sampling system. Hopefully the system owner will contact these professionals when issues
arise instead of taking action that is not appropriate.
Operators of sampling systems who don’t have a comprehensive operating and maintenance
program risk bias, availability issues and failure of audits by inspectors, which can show that the
contractual sample is not taken correctly. When observers see issues it calls attention to the
system operation and results in more frequent and detailed inspection and audit evaluation.
In the other case, in Table 1, the statistical estimate of moisture bias was 1%. In the case of a 1%
moisture bias, the economic consequence was much larger for a contract that had nearly 5
million tons committed.
An additional consequence for the utility is that the opportunity for suspension or rejection may
not be possible if the observed analysis and contract specification are borderline. One possible
resolution for a bias is to just add or subtract as appropriate the estimate of bias to the contract
specification. The flaw with that option is the assumption that a bias is linear i.e., the same
amount consistently. When a known bias exists it is prudent to resolve the issue and then take
away any potential problem. A moisture bias is relatively easy to resolve as the cause of a
moisture bias is almost always related to the feed rate to the sampling system crusher.
The element of “surprise” is a risk to the operator of a sampling system. The system operator is
put in conflict with the buyer or seller if an inspection results in a finding of equipment or
operational issues and the issue was unknown to the system operator. During conduct of
sampling system inspections for utilities and mining companies, the following were observations
from three cases:
1. The upstream cutter edge of a primary cross-belt cutter became bent due to repeated
contact with the coal flow on a loadout conveyor. The cutter opening was reduced from 6
in. to 2.8 in. When the smaller final sample mass was noticed by site personnel, the
secondary sample timer interval was reduced to “get more sample” versus conducting an
inspection and repairing or replacing the cutter. (See Figure 1)
o It is likely in this case, the reduced cutter opening rejects coarse particles. Coarse
particles are typically the lower ash, higher Btu particles. This situation likely
causes a bias toward higher ash and lower Btu, hurting the system operator of the
mining company and causing lost opportunity to collect premiums and may cause
a penalty or suspension due to lower than contracted quality.
2. In the case of two loadout inspections on behalf of utilities, observations were made
regarding the final sample containers not being airtight or protected and resulting in the
potential for unaccounted for moisture loss and a likely bias.
o In Figure 2, the final sample falls into the “milk can” container, is unprotected and
open to contamination and moisture loss.
o In Figure 3, the final sample bag was found open after the first half of the train
was loaded. Site personnel seemed to be unaware of the possible problem with
leaving the bag standing open. More training is needed.
3. An inspection of a sampling system and related processes was made on behalf of a utility.
An observation was made that the system’s bias test was conducted differently from the
routine sample handling method.
The recent bias test report was reviewed. The secondary sampler of this two-stage system has the
capability to deliver the increments to two final sample containers located on opposite sides, A
and B of the secondary sample belt feeder. During the bias test, the A and B sample was
combined for analysis. The routine operational procedure of the system was to take one side—
the A sample for the “in-house” analysis and the other side—the B sample was sent to the
independent laboratory for the utility’s analysis. If the two sides are to be used independently,
the system operating parameters must be set to provide the minimum number of increments per
ASTM for each side and the system must be tested during the bias test to verify that this practice,
i.e., each side is “unbiased.”
Specific analysis methods may or may not be specified. More specificity in coal supply
agreements is recommended to ensure that the preferred quality assurance parameters will not be
ignored. The process to ensure the correct sample is collected and analyzed is not solely to use a
bias test as the ultimate authority. The bias test is only part of the process. After the bias test,
what happens in the intervening period between bias tests?
A program of sampling system quality assurance can provide confidence to the contract parties
to ensure that a good faith effort is made. An agreed upon program can outline processes for
contract samples to be collected in the proper manner and the processes from sample collection
to laboratory analysis be known i.e., no surprises. A competent program contains the following
elements:
Extraction Tables
To properly understand the operation of a sampling system an extraction table is essential to
verify sampling system operating parameters and system flow rates. By using an extraction table,
the system operation can be mathematically evaluated. Also, one can exercise “what ifs” such as
the impact of increased or decreased tons per hour flow rate to the primary sampler.
By using the extraction table, as preparation plant personnel use the plant flow sheet to evaluate
flow rates and equipment capacities, the sampling system inspector can formulate mathematical
recommendations versus estimates, which can cost time and money if not correct. The extraction
table also results in total sample mass and design sampling ratio values. This evaluation and
planning tool is very useful, but is not discussed in ASTM D7430. Table 2 displays an as-found
extraction versus a recommended extraction.
Table 2: Barge Unloading Two-stage Sampling System
Coal sampling systems are mechanical devices that operate in a predictable way to extract and
accumulate increments from coal streams. The risks presented and mathematical methods for
evaluation of mechanical sampling systems presented above can provide the confidence of
correct system operation. These methods enable evidence to be provided to inspectors,
management and others who may question or just need assurance of the system’s correct
operation.
Using these methods we raise the level of what constitutes a “good” sampling system from
“doesn’t plug up and puts coal in the bag.” to one evaluated using mathematical methods. This
prevents issues being presented by auditors or inspectors which can surprise and embarrass
operation and management personnel.
Renner is the manager of inspection and performance testing for SGS Minerals Services. This
article was adapted from a presenation he gave at Coal Prep 2012. He can be reached at:
chuck.renner@sgs.com.