| Literature DB >> 32363275 |
Xianbo Su1,2, Rui Ding1, Xinguo Zhuang3,4.
Abstract
class="Chemical">The identification ofEntities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32363275 PMCID: PMC7191605 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.0c00078
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Proximate Analysis of Dust
| sample ID | dust source | sampling location | FCad (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JLS-1 | Jiulishan coal mine | intake airway | 4.14 | 22.34 | 7.67 | 65.85 |
| JLS-2 | coalface | 4.20 | 77.08 | 7.23 | 11.49 | |
| JLS-3 | return airway | 1.5 | 36.69 | 6.24 | 55.57 | |
| HB6-1 | Hebi no. 6 coal mine | intake airway | 1.93 | 17.30 | 28.21 | 52.56 |
| HB6-2 | coalface | 1.17 | 17.83 | 25.12 | 55.88 | |
| HB6-3 | return airway | 0.67 | 14.7 | 13.18 | 71.45 | |
| DY | Daiyang coal mine | return airway | 12.43 | 12.59 | 8.03 | 66.95 |
| LTS | Lutaishan coal mine | return airway | 2.23 | 42.64 | 10.69 | 44.44 |
| PM2 | Pingmei no. 2 coal mine | return airway | 0.68 | 25.33 | 20.71 | 53.28 |
| SH | Sihe coal mine | return airway | 4.01 | 21.96 | 6.97 | 67.06 |
Figure 1X-ray diffraction spectra of the dust from each mine. (a) JLS-1; (b) JLS-2; (c) JLS-3; (d) HB6-1; (e) HB6-2; (f) HB6-3; (g) LTS; (h) DY; (i) PM2; (j) SH.
Figure 2Field emission scanning electron microscope images of dust. (a, c) JLS-3; (b, d) HB6-3; (e) SH; (f) DY; (g, h) PM2.
Characteristics of Dust Particle Size
| sample ID | distribution pattern | minimum size (μm) | low peak size (μm) | high peak size (μm) | maximum size (μm) | D10 (μm) | D50 (μm) | D90 (μm) | specific surface area (m2/kg) | proportion of PM10 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JLS-2 | symmetrical type | 0.319 | 17.72 | 132 | 2.103 | 11.17 | 37.69 | 443 | 47.8 | |
| SH | 0.319 | 0.602 | 12.91 | 56.69 | 2.88 | 11.05 | 24.26 | 397.5 | 47.1 | |
| JLS-3 | fine type | 0.355 | 9.404 | 45.89 | 3.036 | 8.957 | 19.48 | 391.7 | 58.95 | |
| LTS | 0.319 | 63 | 9.404 | 86.51 | 2.545 | 8.668 | 20.23 | 450.6 | 60.09 | |
| JLS-1 | coarse type | 0.355 | 0.669 | 27.05 | 201.4 | 5.645 | 25.54 | 66.64 | 196.1 | 19.23 |
| HB6-1 | 0.355 | 27.05 | 146.7 | 5.628 | 22.27 | 53.26 | 207.2 | 20.57 | ||
| HB6-2 | 0.355 | 17.72 | 163 | 5.372 | 18.78 | 53.82 | 219.3 | 24.78 | ||
| HB6-3 | 0.258 | 0.542 | 15.95 | 118.7 | 3.213 | 13.99 | 34.27 | 353.7 | 36.81 | |
| DY | 0.319 | 0.542 | 14.35 | 106.8 | 4.389 | 13.43 | 29.97 | 287.6 | 36.04 | |
| PM2 | 0.287 | 0.669 | 27.05 | 146.7 | 5.297 | 24.24 | 59.61 | 243.2 | 19.62 |
Figure 3Particle size distribution of the dust. (a) symmetrical type (JLS-2); (b) fine type (LTS); (c) coarse type (PM2).
Figure 4Field emission scanning electron microscope images of dust. (a) SH; (b) JLS-3; (c) LTS; (d) HB6-3; (e) DY; (f) PM2.
Figure 5Dust scanning electron microscope images. (a) LTS; (b) SH.
Contact Angle between Liquid and Dust
| contact
angle (deg) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| liquid type | surface tension (mN/m) | JLS-2 | LTS | JLS-3 | JLS-1 | SH | HB6-2 | PM2 | HB6-1 | HB6-3 | DY |
| distilled water | 74.99 | 28.7 | 37.25 | 48.4 | 55.37 | 59 | 63.2 | 64.25 | 65.13 | 66.51 | 68.75 |
| 0.05% AN solution | 26.134 | 7.6 | 14.25 | 10 | 12.31 | 17.25 | 15.79 | 18.5 | 9.8 | 7 | 22.5 |
Figure 6Contact angle between liquid and dust.
Figure 7Diagrams showing the measurement of contact angle between liquid and coal dust. (a) SH; (b) HB6-3.
Values of Oxygen and Carbon of Dust through the XPS Test
| sample ID | relative content of carbon (%) | relative content of oxygen (%) | O/C (atom %) |
|---|---|---|---|
| LTS | 53.76 | 43.75 | 81.38 |
| JLS-3 | 65.66 | 32.29 | 49.18 |
| SH | 67.58 | 30.55 | 45.21 |
| PM2 | 77.68 | 19.02 | 24.49 |
| HB6-3 | 80.64 | 16.74 | 20.76 |
| DY | 81.5 | 16.4 | 20.12 |
XPS C 1s Analysis Results of Dust
| relative
content (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| carbon binding form | LTS | JLS-3 | SH | PM2 | HB6-3 | DY |
| C–C, C–H | 78.78 | 89.88 | 89.28 | 88.01 | 84.07 | 94.47 |
| C–O | 15.43 | 6.37 | 7.19 | 11.5 | 15.14 | 4.3 |
| C=O, O–C–O | 4.68 | 2.83 | 2.98 | 0.49 | 0.79 | 1.23 |
| O=C–O | 1.11 | 0.92 | 0.55 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Figure 8Relation between dust surface elements and contact angle. a, Relative content of carbon; b, relative content of oxygen; c, oxygen–carbon ratio.
Figure 9Relation between functional group content and contact angle. (a) Relative contents of C=O and O–C–O; (b) relative content of O=C–O.
Figure 10Relation of proximate analysis and the contact angle. (a) Ash; (b) fixed carbon.
Figure 11Relation of particle size and contact angle.
Figure 12Dust particle liquid bridge.
Contents of Harmful Trace Elements in Coal and Dust
| content (μg/g) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LTS | JLS-3 | SH | PM2 | HB6-3 | DY | ||||||||
| hazard | element | dust | coal | dust | coal | dust | coal | dust | coal | dust | coal | dust | coal |
| three | Be | 2.0 | 0.7 | 1.9 | 6.5 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| Cd | 0.15 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.1 | 0.59 | 0.1 | 0.23 | 0.1 | 0.09 | 0.1 | |
| Pb | 30.7 | 3.6 | 23.1 | 14.2 | 23.5 | 16.2 | 11.4 | 7.2 | 11.4 | 8.5 | 13.0 | 24.8 | |
| Ni | 12.3 | 12.1 | 20.0 | 21.0 | 6.6 | 1.9 | 25.8 | 26.5 | 2.5 | 23.9 | 4.1 | 1.7 | |
| two | As | 47.93 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 3.16 | 2.79 | 2.9 | 10.44 | 0.9 | 10.31 | 0.9 | 8.41 | 1.4 |
| Cr | 60.8 | 7.7 | 48.2 | 24.2 | 42.7 | 14.1 | 61.3 | 12.6 | 33.3 | 9.1 | 32.9 | 8.0 | |
| Co | 7.2 | 2.3 | 11.2 | 32.9 | 6.6 | 0.1 | 4.0 | 6.7 | 2.8 | 9.8 | 3.0 | 0.5 | |
| Mn | 153.6 | 3.0 | 98.9 | 39.9 | 118.6 | 28.0 | 91.9 | 29.7 | 100.8 | 5.0 | 38.6 | 19.5 | |
| Th | 2.80 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 5.62 | 2.72 | 0.3 | 2.77 | 0.5 | 2.56 | 0.6 | 2.92 | 0.3 | |
| U | 1.71 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 1.63 | 0.78 | 1.2 | 1.70 | 1.1 | 0.57 | 0.3 | 0.76 | 0.3 | |
| B | 5.5 | 2.1 | 59.3 | 1.9 | 6.3 | 49.5 | 7.4 | 1.6 | 8.9 | 50.0 | 8.7 | 29.9 | |
| Hg | 0.14 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 0.07 | 0.24 | 0.8 | 0.11 | 0.5 | 0.17 | 1.0 | 0.12 | 1.6 | |
| one | Ba | 225.3 | 32.8 | 535.7 | 43.6 | 147.7 | 86.9 | 43.6 | 10.6 | 136.4 | 86.3 | 77.8 | 48.7 |
| Sn | 9.2 | 9.6 | 0.5 | 5.0 | 8.6 | 4.8 | 9.7 | 7.2 | 7.0 | 4.7 | 10.4 | 4.6 | |
| Tl | 5.8 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 2.7 | 6.3 | 0.6 | 3.0 | 0.4 | 2.7 | 0.4 | 3.1 | 0.6 | |
| V | 54.0 | 5.0 | 65.6 | 23.0 | 16.4 | 8.1 | 42.8 | 7.9 | 14.4 | 9.5 | 17.1 | 10.1 | |
| Sb | 3.4 | 2.9 | 4.3 | 0.2 | 5.1 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 0.0 | 1.7 | 0.0 | 3.5 | 1.9 | |
| Se | 0.34 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 4.68 | 1.89 | 6.2 | 1.30 | 5.9 | 0.56 | 5.9 | 5.69 | 6.3 | |
| Cu | 21.0 | 8.5 | 21.5 | 11.3 | 15.4 | 9.8 | 17.6 | 15.8 | 14.6 | 12.5 | 11.7 | 7.7 | |
| Mo | 1.7 | 4.0 | 2.6 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 2.3 | 16.7 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 2.4 | 3.6 | 3.5 | |
| Zn | 642.7 | 2.4 | 53.2 | 6.7 | 60.7 | 2.9 | 50.5 | 11.4 | 443.6 | 3.9 | 61.1 | 2.9 | |
| Ag | 1.8 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 0.7 | |
| P | 316.2 | 127.4 | 134.4 | 29.5 | 706.4 | 62.3 | 82.3 | 39.9 | 362.8 | 19.5 | 327.3 | 51.3 | |
Explosion Index of Dust
| sample ID | HB6-3 | SH | DY | JLS-3 | HB6-2 | HB6-1 | LTS | PM2 | JLS-1 | JLS-2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| explosion index | 61.878 | 60.252 | 58.158 | 57.984 | 54.952 | 53.562 | 53.538 | 50.294 | 48.174 | 32.348 |
Figure 13Coal dust explosion evaluation.
Figure 14Location of samples.