PowerPoint Presentation Template

advertisement
Gekko IPJ Coal Separator
Applications in Coal Preparation
Andrew Vince
(Elsa Consulting Group)
Laurie Gibson, Peter Purdon
(ACIRL)
Tim Hughes
(Gekko Systems)
1
Elsa Consulting Group
ACIRL
Gekko Systems
ACARP
Narrative
• Identified Australian circular jigging technology successfully processing
metalliferous ores.
• Confirmed application in coal processing
• For 6 (30) mm x 0.25 mm
• Small modifications necessary for high floats recovery
• Tested out at small lab scale (1 t/h) – good
• Variables – developed DEM/CFD model
• Tested on site at 10 t/h. Not found maximum capacity yet.
• Circular – therefore capacity and efficiency both improve with radius.
• Need to go bigger.
2
Introduction
• Trend to installation of “three circuit” plants.
• This is due to:
• Matching size range to process technology
• Increased plant capacity
• Move to standardised plant design.
• Mid size fraction (eg 1.4 x 0.25mm) is currently
processed less efficiently than others.
• Gekko IPJ Coal Separator is targeting the mid size fraction.
3
Current Processes for Mid-sized Particles
• Spirals
• 1.5 mm top size, low unit capacity, feed rate
sensitive.
• Teetered bed separators
• Cut point varies with particle size.
• Multiple units with split feeds – complicated circuit.
• Reflux classifier
• New technology currently being rolled out in some companies.
• Consumes significant water volumes.
4
Gekko IPJ Coal Separator
• Gekko IPJ Coal Separator represents a competitor technology.
• Unique application possibilities due to high top size capability.
• Successfully deployed in metalliferous industry with more than 100
applications world-wide.
• This project considered application in coal industry.
5
6
Staged Approach
1. Laboratory scale testing.
2. CFD/DEM modelling.
3. Larger scale pilot testing on site.
7
IPJ 600 Unit 1 tph
Slurry Feed
Air bleed
Control box
In Line
Pressure Jig
Product
barometric leg 1
Product
barometric leg 2
Reject
barometric leg
Hutch water
Pulse actuator
Hydraulic pump
8
InLine Pressure Jig Fully Assembled
InLine Pressure Jig Top Removed
Slurry Feed
Pressure
Gauge
In Line
Pressure Jig
Close-up of In Line Pressure Jig With Top Removed
Wedge wire
screen
Feed
distributor
Ragging
9
Bowen Basin Pilot Scale
Bowen Basin 2 x 0.5 mm ww
Partition coefficient to
product
100
75
50
25
0
1.200
1.450
1.700
1.950
2.200
2.450
Relative Density
100
75
50
25
0
1.200
1.450
1.700
1.950
2.200
2.450
Relative Density
Bowen Basin 2 x 0.25 mm ww
Partition coefficient to
product
Partition coefficient to
product
Bowen Basin 6 x 2 mm
100
75
50
25
0
1.200
1.450
1.700
1.950
2.200
2.450
Relative Density
10
Hunter Valley Pilot Scale
Hunter Valley 2 x 0.5 mm ww
Partition coefficient to
product
100
75
50
25
0
1.200
1.450
1.700
1.950
2.200
2.450
Relative Density
100
75
50
25
0
1.200
1.450
1.700
1.950
2.200
2.450
Relative Density
Hunter Valley 2 x 0.25 mm
Partition coefficient to
product
Partition coefficient to
product
Hunter Valley 6 x 2 mm
100
75
50
25
0
1.200
1.450
1.700
1.950
2.200
2.450
Relative Density
11
Laboratory Results Summary
Bowen Basin Coal
6 x 2 mm
2 x 0.5 mm
2 x 0.25 mm
t/h
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
0.76
1.44
0.075
23
1.475
0.200
11
-
-
-
0.55
1.49
0.100
9
1.55
0.213
5
-
-
-
0.94
1.50
0.150
6
-
-
-
2.00
-
-
Hunter Valley Coal
6 x 2 mm
2 x 0.5 mm
2 x 0.25 mm
t/h
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
1.03
1.50
0.098
6
1.58
0.195
2
-
-
-
1.60
1.54
0.105
20
1.66
0.180
6
-
-
-
1.13
1.55
0.129
16
-
-
-
1.94
-
-
1.12
1.55
0.129
17
-
-
-
1.80
0.282
7
12
CFD/DEM Modelling
• 10 adjustable parameters.
• Volumetric feed rate
• Feed pressure
• Feed % solids
• Stroke length
• Stroke frequency
• Stroke shape
• Hutch water flow rate
• Ragging diameter
• Ragging density
• Number of ragging layers
• Too many to investigate experimentally.
• Develop CFD/DEM model to identify initial starting points for site-based
pilot testing.
13
Hunter Valley Test Work
14
15
16
Issues Overcome
• Upward water flows
• Overcome with automation (commercially).
• Provision of back pressure.
• Migration of ragging.
17
Provision of Back Pressure
18
Blind Cyclones
19
Blind Cyclones
20
Ragging Mobility
21
Site Tests
Feed
Hutch
Pressure
m3/h
Dry t/h
% Solids
m3/h
Bias
kPa
Lower
9.32
3.16
20.5
26.0
-13.9
145
Upper
25.8
10.27
26.3
40.2
7.9
185
Near
Gravity
Blind
Cyclone
Orifice
Stroke
Ragging
Cyc/min
Length
RD
Layers
±0.1 RD
mm
Lower
59
10
1.60
2.5
1
42
Upper
100
15
1.80
4.0
22
57
22
Site Test Results
Partition coefficient curves
Coal B
Partition coefficient (%)
100
6 x 2.0 mm
75
Series2
2.0 x 0.25 mm
50
Series4
25
6 x 0.25 mm
Series6
0
1.25
1.45
1.65
1.85
2.05
2.25
100
6 x 2.0 mm
80
Series2
60
2.0 x 0.25 mm
40
Series4
20
6 x 0.25 mm
Series6
0
1.25
2.45
1.45
1.65
1.85
2.05
2.25
2.45
Relative density
Relative density
Partition coefficient curves
Coal C II
Partition coefficient (%)
Partition coefficient (%)
Partition coefficient curves
Coal A
100
6 x 2.0 mm
80
Series2
60
2.0 x 0.25 mm
40
Series4
20
6 x 0.25 mm
Series6
0
1.25
1.45
1.65
1.85
2.05
2.25
2.45
Relative density
23
Site Results Summary
Coal A
Feed
6 x 2 mm
2 x 0.25 mm
Ash (%)
m3/h
% Solids
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
21.3
24.5
24.4
1.89
0.112
1.0
-
-
-
Coal B
Feed
Ash (%)
36.8
6 x 2 mm
2 x 0.25 mm
m3/h
% Solids
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
9.3
22.5
1.70
0.057
1.7
1.91
0.185
5.0
Coal C
Feed
6 x 2 mm
2 x 0.25 mm
Ash (%)
m3/h
% Solids
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
D50
Ep
±0.1RD
53.3
10.0
25.6
1.43
0.069
18.0
1.49
0.172
7.1
47.6
18.0
24.1
1.57
0.081
3.7
1.82
0.223
3.2
24
All Site Test Results
Coal A: 2.0 x 0.25 mm
100
100
90
90
80
80
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
50
Sizing results
Yield (%)
Yield (%)
Coal A: 6.3 x 2.0 mm
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
50
Sizing results
40
40
0
5
10
0
15
5
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Washability data
Operating Pt
Sizing results
20
Ash (db, %)
20
Coal B: 2.0 x 0.25 mm
30
Yield (%)
Yield (%)
Coal B: 6.3 x 2.0 mm
10
15
Ash (db, %)
Ash (db, %)
0
10
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Washability data
Operating Pt
Sizing results
0
10
20
30
40
Ash (db, %)
25
All Site Test Results
Coal C II: 2.0 x 0.25 mm
100
100
90
90
80
80
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
Sizing results
50
Yield (%)
Yield (%)
Coal C II: 6.3 x 2.0 mm
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
50
Sizing results
40
40
0
10
20
Ash (db, %)
30
40
0
10
20
30
40
Ash (db, %)
26
On-site and Lab Test Results
Low Cut Point
Scale
Size
(mm)
D50
Ep
Lab
6x2
1.431.55
0.0750.15
Pilot
6x2
1.43 –
1.57
0.069 –
0.081
Lab
2 x 0.25 1.802.00
0.282
Pilot
2 x 0.25 1.49
0.172
High Cut Point
D50
Ep
1.70 –
1.89
0.0570.112
1.82 –
1.91
0.1850.223
27
Why you expect performance
to improve with scale (diameter)?
• Conventional jig:
• Capacity related to width
• Efficiency related to length.
• Gekko IPJ Coal Separator
• Circular section
• Increasing radius increases
• Capacity
• Efficiency.
• Larger radius leads to increased cleaning.
28
Gekko IPJ Coal Separator
(Extrapolated for coal)
<60 % solids
Ø1.50 m
40 tph
Ø2.40 m
80 tph
Ø3.50 m
200 tph
29
Tentative correlations found
Tentative linear correlations 6 x 2 mm: y = mx + C
y
D50
Ep
x
m
C
R2
m
C
R2
Ragging layers
0.03
0
0.67
0.003
-0.002
0.83
Ragging RD
1.46
-0.8
0.76
-
-
-
Vol feed rate
(m3/h)
-
-
-
0.003
0.03
0.92
Tentative linear correlations 2 x 0.25 mm: y = mx + C
Y
D50
Ep
X
m
C
R2
m
C
R2
Feed % solids
-0.1
5
0.89
-
-
-
Ragging layers
0.003
-0.002
0.67
-
-
-
Ragging RD
1.3
-0.4
0.46
-
-
-
Vol feed rate
(m3/h)
-
-
-
0.006
0
0.90
Hutch bias (m3/h)
-
-
-
0.005
0.13
0.84
Stroke length (mm)
-
-
-
0.3
-0.01
0.93
30
Possible Circuitry
50 x 0 mm
50 x 6 mm
DMC product
DMC circuit
Flotation product
IPJ Product
31
Possible Applications – High NG
Performance
Coal C I: 2.0 x 0.25 mm
100
100
90
90
80
80
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
50
Yield (%)
Yield (%)
Performance
Coal C I: 6 x 2.0 mm
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
50
With scavenger
40
With scavenger
40
0
10
20
30
40
0
10
Ash (db, %)
30
40
50
Ash (db, %)
Performance
Coal C II: 6 x 2.0 mm
Performance
Coal C II: 2.0 x 0.25 mm
100
100
90
90
80
80
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
50
With scavenger
40
Yield (%)
Yield (%)
20
70
Washability data
60
Operating Pt
50
With scavenger
40
0
10
20
Ash (db, %)
30
40
0
10
20
30
40
Ash (db, %)
32
Implications
Plant
Low cost capacity increases
Better matching of incremental ashes
between circuits possible
Screen
6mm rather than 2 mm apertures
Less near size
Easier screening
Reduced screen areas for desliming
AND drain and rinse
Less criticality on apertures
DMC
Less impact of breakaway size
Higher efficiencies
Estimated 25% less feed tonnes
Less medium recirculating
Smaller pumps
Less power consumption
Less maintenance
Much reduced magnetite losses
IPJ
For 1000 t/h ROM plant feed
500 t/h in 6 x 0 mm fraction
Need= 3 x 2 units (rough/scav)
Increased longer term recovery
through rougher/scavenger
configuration.
CC
More units handling 6 mm top size
Flotation
No change
33
Conclusions
Gekko IPJ Coal Separator
• Mature technology for metalliferous processing
• Modified successfully for coal applications
• Lab scale performance very good (600 mm, 1 t/h)
• Site testing better (1000 mm, >10 t/h)
• Strong evidence that can get even better (with size and further
optimisation)
• Possible applications
• Rougher/scavenger configuration
• Treating 6 (30) x 0.25 mm particles
• Very clean product requirements.
34
Recommendation
• Plant testing of rougher scavenger configuration
35
Grateful Acknowledgements
1. Australian Coal Association Research Program and Industrial Monitors.
2. Providers of Hunter Valley and Bowen Basin coals for laboratory
testing.
3. Hunter Valley site management, technical and operations personnel.
4. UNSW for CFD/DEM modelling.
5. Organisers and officials of this conference.
6. You.
36
Elsa Consulting Group
ACIRL
Gekko Systems
ACARP
Related documents
Download