Xianbo Su1,2, Rui Ding1, Xinguo Zhuang3,4. 1. School of Energy Science and Engineering, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo 454000, China. 2. Collaborative Innovation Center of Coalbed Methane and Shale Gas for Central Plains Economic Region, Jiaozuo, Henan 454000, China. 3. Key Laboratory of Tectonics and Petroleum Resources, China University of Geosciences, Ministry of Education, Wuhan 430074, China. 4. Faculty of Earth Resources, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China.
Abstract
The identification of the dust characteristics in coal mine working faces is essential for preventing coal dust explosion and occupational diseases. In this paper, dust samples from the coal mines in southern Shanxi province and Henan province, central North China, were selected as the research objects. The results show that the dust contains primarily organic matter, as well as considerable amounts of minerals. The chemical composition of dust at the working faces is the most complex. According to the proportion of PM10, the dust composition can be divided into three types: symmetrical, fine-dominated, and coarse-dominated. The wettability of dust increases with the increase of the oxygen-carbon ratio on its surface, increase of ash content, decrease of fixed carbon content, and decrease of particle size. In addition, the great variety of harmful elements in dust, some with a high content, can harm the human body. An explosion index is proposed to evaluate the likeliness tendency of coal dust explosion based on several key affecting factors. The surfactant (0.05% AN solution) adopted in this paper can significantly increase the wettability of coal dust and inhibit the generation of dust greatly, showing good ability in preventing coal dust explosion and occupational diseases.
class="Chemical">The ideclass="Chemical">ntificatioclass="Chemical">n of class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the dust characteristics in coal mine working faces is essential for preventing coal dust explosion and occupational diseases. In this paper, dust samples from the coal mines in southern Shanxi province and Henan province, central North China, were selected asthe research objects. The results show that the dust contains primarily organic matter, as well asconsiderable amounts of minerals. The chemical composition of dust at the working faces is the most complex. According to the proportion of PM10, the dust composition can be divided into three types: symmetrical, fine-dominated, and coarse-dominated. The wettability of dust increases withthe increase of the oxygen-carbon ratio on its surface, increase of ash content, decrease of fixed carbon content, and decrease of particle size. In addition, the great variety of harmful elements in dust, some with a high content, can harm the human body. An explosion index is proposed to evaluate the likeliness tendency of coal dust explosion based on several key affecting factors. The surfactant (0.05% AN solution) adopted in this paper can significantly increase the wettability of coal dust and inhibit the generation of dust greatly, showing good ability in preventing coal dust explosion and occupational diseases.
class="Gene">Coal dust is class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the solid fine particle generated during coal mine
production, of which dustfall settles to the ground and flying coal
dust floats in the air. Coal dust plays a significant role in the
gas explosion process.[1−3] Meanwhile, coal dust can also cause explosion itself.[4−6] Coal is an inherently combustible material, and when it is broken
into dust, the contact area between coal and air significantly increases,
leading to a higher explosion potential once an ignition source appears.
The shockwaves generated by earlier explosions will raisesecondary
dust in the roadway, resulting in explosion propagation, which poses
a great threat to miners and the mine. In addition, dust particles,
containing harmful elements (e.g., silica), with an average diameter
of less than 2.5 μm can directly enter the alveoli in the human
body and combine with toxic host cells (especially macrophages) to
cause permanent damage,[7] leading to pneumoconiosis
and other diseases.[8−12] Moreover, dust can also accelerate the mechanical wear of equipment
and reduce the visibility of the working face, thereby increasing
the risk of safety hazards.[13−15] In the past, much concerns have
been concentrated on the prevention of sudden accidents rather than
on the harmful influence of coal dust on the human body.[16,17] In recent years, social and technological progress has led to enhanced
health awareness and an ever-increasing emphasis on dust reduction
in coal mines. The Chinese government issued the Technical Specifications
of Comprehensive Dust Control Measures for Underground Coal Mines,
which requires coal mines to adopt strict dust reduction measures.
Therefore, the systematic study of dust characteristics is related
to personal health, production safety, and environmental air quality,
i.e., the HSE of the underground space of the mine. The working face
generates about 60% of the total amount of dust in a coal mine,[18] which deserves the focus of control efforts.
The study of dust characteristics is an important step toward achieving
the goal of dust control. Historical studies were conducted mainly
by crushing coal in a laboratory to generate dust rather than collecting
dust from the working face,[19−22] which was unrealistic becausethe chemical composition,
particle size, wettability, and harmful elements of real dust are
different depending on individual coal types or the surrounding rock.
After a class="Gene">coal sample wclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">as crushed and screened, the particle size
distribution of the sample was tested using a laser particle size
analyzer. The analysis results generally showed only one single peak,
and the distribution was in the shape of an “A” or occasionally
in the shape of an “M”.[23−26] The chemical composition of coal
dust produced using the above method was identical to that of coal.
Research on dust produced in the actual coal mining process was rare,
and reports on its particle size characteristics and chemical composition
were even rarer. The particle size distribution and surface morphology
of dust generated by crushing varied substantially among different
studies, which were determined by the different chemical compositions
and mechanical properties of coal from different coal mines or coalbeds.[27]
class="Gene">Coal dust wettability class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">constitutes
the theoretical basis for coalbed water injection and the water spraying method for dust reduction.
It is also the main reference factor for the design and development
of chemical inhibitors.[28−31] Surfactant has an effect on the surface properties
of different kinds of coal, and adding the appropriate concentration
of surfactant can obviously reduce the contact angle of coal and improve
the wetting effect.[32−34] The pore structure of coal can be changed when the
coalseam is injected withwater to remove dust, and coal samples
with different metamorphism have different pore structures.[35] Opinions vary on the influence of coal properties on the wettability
of dust. For example, some researchers have found that the wettability
of coal dust has a negative correlation withthe moisture content,[36,37] while others believe that the moisture content does not have a decisive
influence on the hydrophilicity of coal;[38] some have found that the increase of its fixed carbon content will
make coal dust more hydrophobic,[37] while
others have found that the fixed carbon content has no effect on dust
wettability.[36] Neither is there any consensus
on the influence of ash content and volatiles on coal dust wettability.[36−38] As early as in 1982, some scholars found that the wetting characteristics
of dust are affected by particle size,[39] showing that the smaller the particle size and the larger the specific
surface area, the poorer the wettability of coal dust.[6,40,41] Therefore, studying the particle
size of coal dust can also provide useful information for dust reduction
at the working faces of coal mines. Generally, infrared spectroscopy
and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) have been used to study
the wetting mechanism of coal,[42,43] and the results show
that benzene, aromatic hydrocarbons, methyl-containing aliphatic hydrocarbons,
methylene, and other substances with macromolecular carbon structures
are hydrophobic, while organic matters withoxygen-containing functional
groups represented by hydroxyl and carboxyl, as well assilicate and
carbonate minerals, are hydrophilic.[23,28] XPS hasbeen
widely used in chemical structure analysis because it effectively
enables the observation of the elemental composition and functional
group information of the coal surface at a scale of 10 nm.[44−46] Infrared spectroscopy is also a means of analyzing coal dust functional
groups,[47−49] but it is not as accurate as XPS. Notably, the controlling
factors of dust wettability are very complex and related to the organic
matter composition of coal, but also related to chemical composition
and particle size.
Many trace elements can class="Chemical">be eclass="Chemical">nriched duriclass="Chemical">ng
class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the formation of coal,
even to the extent that some elements (Ga, Ge, Li, U, etc.) become
industrially recoverable.[50−54] However, in the process of coal mining or utilization, some elements
can enter the human body and cause harm.[55−58] There are about 25 kinds of harmful
trace elements in coal and coal dust,[59−61] which can be roughly
divided into five categories:[59,62] toxic elements (B,
Ba, Be, Cd, Hg, Pb, Sn, Tl, and V), carcinogenic elements (As, Be,
Cd, Cr, Ni, and Pb), elements that pollute the atmosphere after combustion
and cause further harm to the human body (As, Be, Cd, Co, Cr, f, Hg,
Mn, Ni, Pb, Sb, Se, Th, and U), elements that are beneficial in small
amounts but harmful when excessive (B, Co, Cu, Mn, Mo, Ni, and Zn),
and radioactive elements (Th and U). Some scholars have systematically
summarized the occurrence state of harmful trace elements in coal
and studied the content,[63,64] enrichment, and distribution
of such elements in different regions,[65−74] which is of great significance for protecting human living environments.
The background values of trace elements in coal in China are generally
comparable to those of the world, but some are higher.[75] The main use of coal in China is to generate
electricity and heat through combustion.[76,77] In this process, trace elements, fly ash, and bottom ash are discharged
into the atmosphere through different channels.[78] Although China issued its Ambient Air Quality Standards
(GB3095-2012), which provides the annual average standards for five
heavy metal elements Hg, Pb, As, Cr (VI), and Cd, the pollution status
of other airborne trace elements is so far unclear becausethere hasbeen no routine monitoring or corresponding general survey of pollution
sources.
class="Gene">Coal dust explosioclass="Chemical">n is maiclass="Chemical">nly affected by class="Chemical">n class="Gene">coal rank,[79−81] particle size,[82−84] specific surface area,[85−87] moisture content,[88−90] volatile content,[91−93] and the concentration.[94−96] Given constant dust
concentration and particle size, the explosion pressure increases
withthe increase of organic matter content.[97] The higher the volatile content, the greater the explosion intensity
of the dust, and the explosion pressure increases significantly faster
withthe decrease of particle size becausethe existence of fine particles
greatly increases the total effective surface area and volatilization
rate of dust, accelerating the dust explosion process.[91] When the particle size is constant, the maximum
explosion pressure and flame propagation speed increase withthe dust
concentration.[82,98] In addition, the higher moisture
content of coal dust can not only consume some of the reaction heat
caused by dust explosion but also form capillary bridges among particles,
reducing the interparticle distance, causing the fine dust particles
to gradually agglomerate, which reduces the degree of dispersion.[88]
In class="Chemical">this paper, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the dustfall samples were
collected directly from
the working faces and roadways of coal mines. The surface elements
and functional groups of the dust were quantitatively analyzed, and
combined withthe measured wetting contact angles, the wettability
of the dust was evaluated. In addition, the harm of the coal dust
to human body was determined by testing the harmful trace element
contents. The above research aims to reduce dust and prevent coal
dust explosion and occupational disease, thereby facilitating the
construction of “green mines”.
Results
and Discussion
Chemical and Mineral Compositions
of Coal
Dust
class="Chemical">The proximate aclass="Chemical">nalysis resuclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">lts (Table ) show that the dust in each mine is mainly
composed of organic matter, along with different amounts of minerals.
The ash content varies greatly among the mines within the range of
12.59–77.08% (avg. 28.85%). However, in the same mining area,
the ash content of the dust from the working face dust is always higher
than that of the dust from the air intake roadway and the return air
roadway. In particular, the ash content of JLS-2 reaches 77.08%, while
those of JLS-1 and JLS-3 are only 22.34 and 36.69%, respectively.
The ash content of the dust from the different positions of Hebi no.
6 (HB6) shows low differences, withthe ash content of HB6-2 of 17.83%
and those of HB6-1 and HB6-3 being 17.30 and 14.7%, respectively.
It can beseen that the dust composition is complex.
Table 1
Proximate Analysis of Dust
sample ID
dust source
sampling location
Mad (%)
Aad (%)
Vad (%)
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
class="Chemical">The X-ray diffractioclass="Chemical">n
(XRD) tests show class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">that besides coal, the dust
also contains certain amounts of clay minerals (illite, kaolinite,
and montmorillonite), quartz, calcite, ankerite, halloysite, dickite,
pyrite, galena, brookite, nacrite, and saponite. The mineral compositions
at different sampling locations are different, but they invariably
contain organic matter, quartz, and clay minerals (Figure ). Calcite was found in all
of the dust samples at 29° of 2θ except for Jiulishan (JLS)
(Figure d–j).
Ankerite, halloysite, and dickite were found in two sampling sites.
Ankerite was found in HB6-2 and Lutaishan (LTS) at 31° of 2θ
(Figure e,h), halloysite
was found in JLS-1 and HB6-2 at 25° of 2θ (Figure a,e), and dickite was found
in JLS-2 and HB6-1 at 12, 20, and 25° of 2θ (Figure b,d). Pyrite, galena, brookite,
nacrite, and saponite were only present in one sampling site. Pyrite
was found in many peaks where Pingmei no. 2 (PM2) ranges from 33 to
61° of 2θ (Figure i), galena was found in many peaks where Sihe (SH) ranges
from 31 to 70° of 2θ (Figure j), brookite and nacrite were found in many
peaks where HB6-3 ranges from 12 to 74° of 2θ (Figure f), and saponite
was found in HB6-2 at 6° of 2θ (Figure e). The dust from the working face in JLS
and HB6 hasthe highest mineral (ash) content and the most complex
composition (Figure a–f) compared withthat from the air intake and return air
roadways. However, among the dust samples from the return air roadways
of different mines, the JLS-3 and LTS samples have the highest mineral
(ash) content but a relatively simple composition (Figure c,g); the Dayang (DY) samples
have the lowest mineral (ash) content but the most complex composition
(Figure h); and the
mineral (ash) content and complexity of HB6-3, PM2, and SH are moderate.
Figure 1
X-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.
X-ray
diffraction spectra of class="Chemical">the dust from each miclass="Chemical">ne. (a) JLS-1;
(b) JLS-2; (c) JLS-3; (d) HB6-1; (e) HB6-2; (f) HB6-3; (g) class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">LTS; (h)
DY; (i) PM2; (j) SH.
class="Chemical">The field emissioclass="Chemical">n scaclass="Chemical">nclass="Chemical">niclass="Chemical">ng
electroclass="Chemical">n miclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">croscope (FE-SEM) observation
results show that all samples contain coal and clay minerals, dominated
by kaolinite and illite. The organic matter includes homogeneous vitrinite
(Figure a,b), fusinite
with a cell structure (Figure b,c), etc. Among the clay minerals, illite is generally leaf-shaped
and has a silklike surface (Figure b,d), while kaolinite is accordion-shaped (Figure e). Among the other
minerals, quartzite has a relatively intact hexagonal columnar shape
(Figure f), calcite
has an uneven surface and many intergranular pores (Figure g), and pyrite has a crystal
size of about 5 μm and appears asstrawberry-like aggregates
(Figure h). In addition,
richer clay minerals were also observed in the LTS and JLS-3 dust,
which is consistent withthe higher ash content.
Figure 2
Field emission scanning
electron microscope images of dust. (a,
c) JLS-3; (b, d) HB6-3; (e) SH; (f) DY; (g, h) PM2.
Field emission scanning
electron miclass="Chemical">crosclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">cope images of dust. (a,
c) JLS-3; (b, d) HB6-3; (e) SH; (f) DY; (g, h) PM2.
class="Chemical">The class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">composition of dust from the working faces is more complicated
than that from the air intake and return air roadways becausethe
working face is the foremost source of dust generation, while the
dust in the roadways hasbeen sorted during its flight carried by
wind flow. The composition of return air roadway dust also differs
among the mining areas. The chemical composition is simpler when the
ash content is higher because part of the dust with higher density
and better wettability hassettled after a short distance during its
flight. However, the mineral composition is more complex when the
ash content is lower because minerals and coal can easily form aggregates
in dust with a low ash content, which is not conducive to be sorted
during its flight.
Particle Size Characteristics
of Dust
Particle Size Distribution
Acclass="Chemical">cordiclass="Chemical">ng
to class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the particle size distribution characteristics, the dust is classified
into three types, i.e., “fine type”, “symmetrical
type”, and “coarse type”, referring to the conditions
that particles smaller than 10 μm account for more than 55,
45–55%, and less than 45%, respectively. The test results of
particle size with a laser (Table and Figure ) show that the particle size distribution of the JLS-2 and
SH dust samples is the symmetrical type, in which the proportion of
PM10 is 47.8 and 47.1%, respectively. The minimum and maximum
sizes of JLS-2 are 0.319 and 132 μm, respectively, withthe
high peak appearing at 17.72 μm. The D50 size of it is 11.17
μm, and the specific surface area is 443 m2/kg (Figure a). There is a trough
at 0.602 μm for SH. The particle size distribution of the JLS-3
and LTS dust samples is the fine type, in which the proportions of
PM10 are 58.95 and 60.09%, respectively. The minimum and
maximum sizes of LTS are 0.319 and 86.51 μm, respectively, withthe high peak appearing at 9.404 μm, and there is a trough at
63 μm. The D50 size of it is 8.668 μm, and the specific
surface area is 450.6 m2/kg (Figure b). The particle size distribution of the
JLS-1, HB6-1, HB6-2, HB6-3, DY, and PM2 dust samples is the coarse
type, in which the proportions of PM10 are 19.23, 20.57,
24.78, 36.81, 36.04, and 19.62%, respectively. The minimum and maximum
sizes of PM2 are 0.287 and 146.7 μm, respectively, withthe
high peak appearing at 27.05 μm. The D50 size of it is 24.24
μm, and the specific surface area is 243.2 m2/kg
(Figure c). There
is a trough at 0.669, 0.542, 0.542, and 0.669 μm for JLS-1,
HB6-3, DY, and PM2, respectively.
Table 2
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 3
Particle size distribution of the dust.
(a) symmetrical type (JLS-2);
(b) fine type (LTS); (c) coarse type (PM2).
Particle size distribution of class="Chemical">the dust.
(a) symmetrical type (JLS-2);
(b) ficlass="Chemical">ne type (class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">LTS); (c) coarse type (PM2).
For samples class="Chemical">collected from returclass="Chemical">n air roadways, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the
FE-SEM observation
results showed (Figure ) that the proportions of coarse and fine particles are basically
equal for the SH samples (Figure a); the JLS-3 and LTS samples contain more fine particles
than coarse particles (Figure b,c); and the HB6-3, DY, and PM2 samples contain more coarse
particles than fine particles (Figure d–f). These observations are consistent withthe above XRD test results.
Figure 4
Field emission scanning electron microscope
images of dust. (a)
SH; (b) JLS-3; (c) LTS; (d) HB6-3; (e) DY; (f) PM2.
Field emission scanning electron miclass="Chemical">crosclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">cope
images of dust. (a)
SH; (b) JLS-3; (c) LTS; (d) HB6-3; (e) DY; (f) PM2.
Relationships between Dust Particles
Acclass="Chemical">cordiclass="Chemical">ng to class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the FE-SEM observation results, the relationships between
the dust particles can be divided into the “independent type”,
“agglomeration type”, and “adhesion type”.
The dust particles of DY, HB6-3, and PM2 mainly exist in the form
of agglomeration (Figure f,h), and those of LTS mainly exist in the form of adhesion
(Figure a), while
the proportion of agglomeration and adhesion is basically equal in
the dust particles of JLS-3 and SH (Figure b). The independent type is rare asthere
are always more or less small particles attached to the surfaces of
large particles (Figure e).
Figure 5
Dust scanning electron microscope images. (a) LTS; (b) SH.
Dust scanning electron miclass="Chemical">crosclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">cope images. (a) LTS; (b) SH.
class="Chemical">The above figure shows class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">that the particle size distribution
differs
among the coal mines, but there is a common trend of decrease in particle
sizes from the air intake roadway to the working face and then to
the return air roadway, while the proportion of PM10 increases
in that sequence. Such distribution is related to the sources and
nature of coal dust particles, but the main cause is the flight distance
and the sorting effect during flight. Particles with higher density
and larger size settle easily, resulting in a larger amount of fine
dust in the return air roadway, and the specific surface area of dust
increases withthe proportion of PM10.
Wettability of Dust
Contact Angle Test Results
class="Chemical">The
most straightforward characterizatioclass="Chemical">n meclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">thod of dust surface wettability
is through measuring the contact angle.[99] The smaller the contact angle, the better the hydrophilicity and
wettability. The test results show that (Table , Figures and7) the surface tension of
the distilled water is 74.99 mN/m, and the contact angles between
distilled water and the DY, HB6-3, HB6-1, PM2, and HB6-2 dust samples
are 68.75, 66.51, 65.13, 64.25, and 63.2°, respectively, showing
relatively poor wettability. The wettability of the SH, JLS-1, and
JLS-3 dust samples is moderate, withthe contact angles of 59, 55.37,
and 48.4°, respectively, and the wettability of the LTS and JLS-2
dust samples is the greatest, withcontact angles of 37.25 and 28.7°,
respectively. The surface tension of the 0.05% AN solution is 26.134
mN/m, and the contact angle withthe DY sample is the largest, although
it is only 22.5°, while its contact angles withthe dust from
the other mines are all below 20°. In particular, the contact
angles withthe PM2, SH, HB6-2, LTS, and JLS-1 samples are 18.5, 17.25,
15.79, 14.25, and 12.31°, respectively, and the contact angles
with JLS-3, HB6-1, and HB6-3 are merely 10, 9.8, and 7°, respectively.
Table 3
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 6
Contact
angle between liquid and dust.
Figure 7
Diagrams
showing the measurement of contact angle between liquid
and coal dust. (a) SH; (b) HB6-3.
class="Chemical">Coclass="Chemical">ntact
aclass="Chemical">ngle class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">between liquid and dust.
Diagrams
showing class="Chemical">the meclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">asurement of contact angle between liquid
and coal dust. (a) SH; (b) HB6-3.
XPS Test Results
Surface Element Test Results
class="Chemical">The XPS test resuclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">lts (Table ) show that the relative
content of carbon elements on the
dust surface varies from 53.76 to 81.5%, withthe DY and HB6-3 samples
possessing the highest content, both above 80%. The content of the
LTS sample wasthe lowest at only 53.76%. The relative content of
oxygen on the dust surface varies from 16.4 to 43.75%, withthe LTS
sample having the highest content, reaching 43.75%. Those of PM2,
HB6-3, and DY are the lowest, all below 20%. The atomic ratios of
oxygen and carbon (oxygen–carbon ratio) on the dust surfaces
of the return air roadway samples from the six mines vary significantly,
ranging from 20.12 to 81.38%, among which the oxygen–carbon
ratios of the DY, HB6-3, and PM2 samples are 20.12, 20.76, and 24.49%,
respectively; those of SH and JLS-3 are 45.21 and 49.18%, respectively;
and that of LTS is 81.38%.
Table 4
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
Functional Group Test
Results
class="Chemical">The wettability of class="Chemical">n class="Gene">coal is mainly related to carbon
and oxygen elements
on the coal surface. Oxygencontent can be analyzed based on C 1s
and O 1s in the XPS test, but O 1s spectrograms are likely to have
been interfered with by oxygen absorbed from the air or moisture on
the coal surface.[100] Therefore, only the
C 1s spectrograms of the dust samples in the return air roadways of
the mines were analyzed by peak fitting using XPSPEAK software. There
are four forms of carbon in the surface structure of coal,[101−103] among which the 284.8 eV peak is attributed to aromatic units and
its substituted alkane (C–C, C–H), the 286.3 eV peak
to phenolic carbon or ether carbon (C–O), the 287.5 eV peak
to the carbonyl group (C=O, O–C–O), and the 289.0
eV peak to the carboxyl group (O=C–O). The content of
each functional group was obtained through peak fitting (Table ), which shows that
the carbon elements on the dust surface mainly exist in the form of
aromatic carbon C–C and fatty carbon C–H, withthe relative
content ranging from 78.78 to 94.47%. The oxygen-containing functional
group mainly exists in the form of C–O, withthe relative content
ranging from 4.3 to 15.43%, and those of DY and LTS are the lowest
and the highest, respectively. The relative content of carbonyl varies
slightly within a range of 0.49–4.68%, showing that of PM2
and LTS are the lowest and the highest, respectively. The carboxylcontent is low in all samples with a relative content ranging from
0 to 1.11%, and that of PM2, HB6-3, and DY samples is 0.
Table 5
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
Analysis of Factors Affecting
Dust Wettability
class="Chemical">The wettability of class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the dust surface is mainly
affected by the following
four factors: dust surface elements, surface functional groups, ash
and fixed carbon contents, and dust particle size.
Surface Elements
class="Chemical">As showclass="Chemical">n iclass="Chemical">n Figure , class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the dust wettability
increases withthe decrease of carbon content on the dust surface
(Figure a), the increase
of the surface oxygencontent (Figure b), and the surface oxygen–carbon ratio (Figure c), indicating that
the hydrophilicity of dust increases withthe increase of oxygen elements.
Figure 8
Relation
between dust surface elements and contact angle. a, Relative
content of carbon; b, relative content of oxygen; c, oxygen–carbon
ratio.
Relationclass="Chemical">betweeclass="Chemical">n dust surface elemeclass="Chemical">nts aclass="Chemical">nd class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">contact angle. a, Relative
content of carbon; b, relative content of oxygen; c, oxygen–carbon
ratio.
Surface
Functional Groups
Figure shows class="Chemical">that class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the dust
wettability increases withthe relative contents of C=O (O–C–O)
and O=C–O on the dust surface (Figure a,b). This is becausethese polar oxygen-containing
functional groups are associated withhydrogen in water molecules
by hydrogen bonds under the action of dipole force, thereby exhibiting
strong activity and promoting the wetting property of water to dust.
Figure 9
Relation
between functional group content and contact angle. (a)
Relative contents of C=O and O–C–O; (b) relative
content of O=C–O.
Relationclass="Chemical">betweeclass="Chemical">n fuclass="Chemical">nctioclass="Chemical">nal group class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">content and contact angle. (a)
Relative contents of C=O and O–C–O; (b) relative
content of O=C–O.
Proximate Analysis Parameters
Figure indicates
class="Chemical">that class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the dust wettability increases withthe ash content (Figure a) and decreases
withthe increase of fixed carbon content (Figure b). Asash is the residue obtained from
the complete combustion of the minerals in dust under certain conditions,
its content mainly depends on the amount of original minerals in the
dust, mostly mudstone composed of clay minerals. Asthe hydrophilicity
of mudstone is stronger than that of coal,[104] the higher ash content and the lower fixed carbon content generally
lead to better wettability.
Figure 10
Relation of proximate analysis and the contact
angle. (a) Ash;
(b) fixed carbon.
Relation of proximate analysis and class="Chemical">the class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">contact
angle. (a) Ash;
(b) fixed carbon.
Particle
Size
class="Chemical">As showclass="Chemical">n iclass="Chemical">n Figure , class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the dust wettability
increases withthe PM10content (Figure ), and this is becausethe smaller the particle
size, the smaller the contact area of the capillary bridges between
particles, and the smaller the cohesive force (details to follow).
Figure 11
Relation
of particle size and contact angle.
Relation
of particle size and nclass="Chemical">coclass="Chemical">ntact aclass="Chemical">ngle.
Dust Reduction
Relationship
between Wettability and Dust
Occurrence Form
class="Chemical">The wettability of dust determiclass="Chemical">nes its occlass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">currence
form. When wettability is poor, dust mostly exists in the form of
agglomeration withthe small-size particles filling in the pores of
large-size particles. It is because, when the contact angle (θ)
between the dust and the solution is large, and the particle size
(r) is small, the area of capillary bridges between
the particles and the cohesive force will be low (Figure ) and the cohesive force will
be small.[105] As a result, capillary bridges
with a sufficient contact area can only form between large-size particles,
which encapsulate the small particles to settle as agglomerations,
e.g., the case in the PM2, HB6-3, and DY samples. When the wettability
is high, the contact angle between the dust and the solution is small,
and capillary bridges with a large contact area can form even between
smaller particles, which adhere to larger particles for settlement,
e.g., the case in the LTS sample. With moderate wettability, both
agglomerative and adherent types are possible, e.g., the case of JLS-3
and SH.
Figure 12
Dust particle liquid bridge.
Dust particle liquid bridge.
Dust Reduction Using Surfactant
class="Chemical">Compared
wiclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">th distilled water, the 0.05% AN solution can significantly
reduce the contact angle with dust (Table and Figure ), by 59.51° for HB6-3 and 21.1° for JLS-2,
as well as moderate degrees for the samples from other mines. Although
the reduction of the contact angle varies, the wettability of dust
is significantly enhanced for all samples, increasing the areas of
capillary bridges between the dust particles, which in turn increases
the cohesion force, enables the dust to settle to the ground in the
form of agglomeration or adhesion, and achieves the dust reduction
effect.
class="Chemical">Therefore, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the key to dust prevention and control is
to reduce the contact angle between dust and water to induce agglomeration
or adhesion-type settlements.
Harmful
Elements in Dust
Acclass="Chemical">cordiclass="Chemical">ng
to class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the results of the inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry
(ICP-MS) test (Table ), the content of harmful trace elements in the dust is generally
higher than that of the coal. In particular, the contents of As, Cr,
Mn, Ba, V, Zn, and P in the dust are much higher than in the coal
in all mining areas.
Table 6
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
class="Chemical">Be, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">Cd, Pb, and Ni elements belong
to three hazardous categories.
Specifically, Be, Cd, and Pb are toxic and carcinogenic elements harmful
to the human body after combustion; their average contents are 1.3,
0.25, and 18.8 μg/g in dust, respectively, and 2, 0.1, and 12.4
μg/g in coal, respectively. The content of Be and Cd is less
than that of Pb. The content of Pb in the dust is higher than that
of the coal for all samples except for DY. The content of Pb in the
dust hasthe highest value of 30.7 μg/g in LTS and the lowest
value of 11.4 μg/g in PM2 and HB6-3. The content of Pb in the
coal hasthe highest value of 24.8 μg/g in DY and the lowest
value of 3.6 μg/g in LTS. Ni is a carcinogenic element, harmful
to the human body after combustion, and beneficial in small amounts
but harmful when excessive. Its contents in the dust and coal in LTS,
JLS-3, and PM2 show little difference. The Ni content in the dust
is higher than that of the coal in SH and DY, while that in the coal
is much higher than that of the dust for HB6-3. The average contents
of Ni in the dust and coal are 11.9 and 14.5 μg/g, respectively.
class="Chemical">As, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">Cr, Co, Mn, Th, U, B, and Hg elements belong to two hazardous
categories. As and Cr are bothcarcinogenic and harmful to the human
body after combustion; their average contents are 13.41 and 46.5 μg/g
in the dust, respectively, and 1.6 and 12.6 μg/g in the coal,
respectively. Co and Mn are elements that are both harmful to the
human body after combustion and beneficial in small amounts but harmful
when excessive; their average contents are 5.8 and 100.4 μg/g
in the dust, respectively, and 8.7 and 20.8 μg/g in the coal,
respectively. The average content of Mn in the dust is five times
that in the coal, and the content of Mn in the dust hasthe highest
value of 153.6 μg/g in LTS and the lowest value of 38.6 μg/g
in DY. However, the content of Mn in the coal hasthe highest value
of only 39.9 μg/g in JLS-3. Th and U are elements that are both
harmful to the human body after combustion and radioactive; their
average contents are 2.49 and 0.98 μg/g in the dust, respectively,
and 1.3 and 1 μg/g in the coal, respectively. B is both a toxic
element and an element beneficial in small amounts but harmful when
excessive, and its average contents in the dust and coal are 16 and
22.5 μg/g, respectively. Hg is both a toxic element and an element
harmful to the human body after combustion, and its average contents
in the dust and coal are 0.28 and 0.9 μg/g, respectively.
class="Chemical">Ba, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">Sn, Tl, V, Sb, Se, Cu, Mo, Zn, Ag, and P elements belong to
a single hazardous category. Ba, Sn, Tl, and V are all toxic elements;
their average contents are 194.4, 7.5, 3.6, and 35 μg/g in the
dust, respectively, and 51.5, 6, 0.8, and 10.6 μg/g in the coal,
respectively. The average content of Ba in the dust is nearly four
times than in the coal, and the content of Ba in the dust hasthe
highest value of 535.7 μg/g in JLS-3 and the lowest value of
43.6 μg/g in PM2. However, the content of Ba in the coal hasthe highest value of only 86.9 μg/g in SH. Sb, Se, and Cu are
all elements harmful to the human body after combustion; their average
contents are 3.2, 1.88, and 17 μg/g in the dust, respectively,
and 1.1, 4.8, and 10.9 μg/g in the coal, respectively. Mo and
Zn are elements that are bothbeneficial in small amounts and harmful
when excessive; their average contents are 4.7 and 218.6 μg/g
in the dust, respectively, and 2.8 and 5 μg/g in the coal, respectively.
The average content of Zn in the dust differs greatly from that in
the coal, and the content of Zn in the dust hasthe highest value
of 642.7 μg/g in LTS and the lowest value of 50.5 μg/g
in PM2. However, the content of Zn in the coal hasthe highest value
of only 11.4 μg/g in SH. Although Ag and P are harmful elements,
they rarely affect the human body; their average contents are 1.2
and 321.6 μg/g in the dust, respectively, and 0.6 and 55 μg/g
in the coal, respectively. The average content of P in the dust is
nearly six times than in the coal, and the content of P in the dust
hasthe highest value of 706.4 μg/g in SH and the lowest value
of 82.3 μg/g in PM2. However, the content of P in the coal hasthe highest value of 127.4 μg/g in LTS.
class="Chemical">The above ficlass="Chemical">ndiclass="Chemical">ngs
iclass="Chemical">ndicate class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">that the sources of harmful elements
in dust are complex and not all originated from coal. Some come from
the surrounding rocks. These elements may have been enriched in the
process of flight, and the content of the dust might have changed
in the process of migration with wind flow.
Research Significance
Coal Dust Explosion Evaluation
class="Gene">Coal
dust explosioclass="Chemical">n is affected by multiple factors. Geclass="Chemical">nerally, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the higher
the organic matter content, the lower the ash content, the finer the
particle size, the larger the specific surface area of the particles,
and the worsethe wettability, the greater the explosion risk.
class="Chemical">The material class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">composition of coal is one of the key indicators for
determining the explosion possibility. Volatile matter, fixed carbon,
and ash contents reflect the material composition of dust, among which
the volatile matter and fixed carbon reflect the organic quality.
The organic content of HB6-3, HB6-2, and HB6-1 samples is above 80%,
indicating the highest explosion tendency among all of the samples;
the DY, SH, PM2, and JLS-1 samples contain 70–80% organic matter,
indicating a moderate explosion tendency; and the content of organic
matter in JLS-3, LTS, and JLS-2 is less than 70%, indicating a low
explosion tendency. The ash content mostly comes from minerals. The
ash content of DY, HB6-3, HB6-1, and HB6-2 is below 20%, indicating
a high explosion tendency; the ash content in SH, JLS-1, and PM2 ranges
from 20 to 30%, indicating a moderate explosion tendency; and the
ash content in JLS-3, LTS, and JLS-2 is above 30%, indicating a low
explosion tendency. Particle size is another key indicator for determining
the dust explosion possibility. The proportion of PM10 in
JLS-3 and LTS is above 55%, indicating a high explosion tendency;
the proportion of PM10 in JLS-2 and SH ranges from 45 to
55%, indicating a moderate explosion tendency; and the proportion
of PM10 in JLS-1, HB6-1, HB6-2, HB6-3, DY, and PM2 is below
45%, indicating the lowest explosion tendency. The specific surface
area of the LTS and JLS-2 coal dust samples was above 400 m2/kg, indicating a high explosion tendency; the specific surface areas
of the SH, JLS-3, and HB6-3 coal dust samples are between 300 and
400 m2/kg, indicating a moderate explosion tendency; and
the DY, PM2, HB6-2, HB6-1, and JLS-1 coal dust samples have specific
surface areasbelow 300 m2/kg, indicating a relatively
low explosion tendency. The better the wettability, the more easily
capillary bridges can form between the coal dust particles, and the
easier it is for the dust to agglomerate and settle. The dust in DY,
HB6-3, HB6-1, PM2, and HB6-2 hasthe poorest wettability and the highest
explosion tendency, followed by SH, JLS-1, and JLS-3; LTS and JLS-2
have the best wettability and so the lowest explosion tendency.
Inclass="Chemical">this paper, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the organic matter content (or ash content) and
particle size (or specific surface area) of dust are taken asthe
highest weight indicators, with a weight of 40% for each, followed
by wettability with a weight of 20%. The reason for this solution
is that the organic matter content and ash content are opposite to
each other, as are particle size and specific surface area. Particle
size is more accurately reflected by the dust content below PM10. Accordingly, the explosion index is calculated by the following
equation:where E is the explosion
index (dimensionless), O is the organic matter content
(%), P is the particle size (PM10content)
(%), and W is the contact angle, degrees (°).
class="Chemical">The resuclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">lts (Table and Figure ) show
that the explosion indexes of HB6-3 and SH are above 60, indicating
a high explosion tendency; those of DY, JLS-3, HB6-2, HB6-1, LTS,
and PM2 range from 50 to 60, indicating a moderate explosion tendency;
and those of JLS-1 and JLS-2 are below 50, indicating the lowest explosion
tendency.
Table 7
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 13
Coal dust explosion evaluation.
nclass="Gene">Coal dust explosioclass="Chemical">n evaluatioclass="Chemical">n.
It should class="Chemical">be poiclass="Chemical">nted
out class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">that due to the differences in the geological
background of the mining area where the dust is located and the complexity
of the explosion, the application of the explosion index is limited
and still in the exploratory stage. Applying the index to other mining
areas requires further research.
Evaluation
of Occupational Disease Risks
class="Chemical">The reclass="Chemical">n class="Chemical">search in this paper
shows that organic matter is the dominant
content in coal mine dust, but the dust generally contains a certain
amount of silica (quartzite). However, the inhalation of silica can
directly lead to silicosis. Coal dust particles with size lower than
10 μm can directly enter the respiratory tract and alveoli,
causing permanent injury to the human body. The proportions of PM10 in the LTS and JLS-3 samples are the highest, both above
55%, indicating the most harm to the human body through long-term
inhalation. The proportions of PM10 in the JLS-2, SH, HB6-3,
and DY dust samples range between 35 and 50%, indicating moderate
harm to the human body. The proportions of PM10 in HB6-2,
HB6-1, PM2, and JLS-1 are below 25%, indicating relatively lower harm
to the human body. In addition, the amount of fine dust is the highest
in the return air roadways, followed by the working faces, and the
air intake roadways, correlating to the long-term injury degree to
the human body, which indicates that underground workers should try
to avoid staying in return air roadways for long periods of time.
During long-term underground work, class="Species">miners will iclass="Chemical">nhale a large amouclass="Chemical">nt
of dust, which geclass="Chemical">nerally class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">contains higher harmful contents than that
of coal. Be, Cd, Pb, and Ni are the elements withthree types of hazardous
effects at the same time. The content of Be and Cd in the dust is
relatively low, withthe content lower than 2 and 0.59 μg/g,
respectively. The dust in LTS hasthe highest content of Pb at 30.7
μg/g, making it the most harmful to the human body, and long-term
inhalation would causepoisoning and cancer. Meanwhile, the PM2 and
HB6-3 samples have the lowest Pbcontent at 11.4 μg/g, indicating
the least harmful to the human body. The PM2 sample hasthe highest
content of Ni at 25.8 μg/g, and long-term inhalation of excessive
Ni would causecancer and other hazards to the human body. The HB6-3
sample hasthe lowest content of Ni at only 2.5 μg/g. The results
of the other mines fall within this range, indicating different degrees
of harm to the human body through long-term inhalation.
Each
of class="Chemical">the elemeclass="Chemical">nts class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">As, Cr, Co, Mn, Th, U, B, and Hg has two types
of hazardous effects. The contents of Co, Th, U, and Hg are relatively
low withthe contents lower than 11.2, 2.92, 1.71, and 0.9 μg/g,
respectively, in all mines, showing little differences among different
mines. The content of As in LTS dust is the highest at 47.93 μg/g,
making it the most likely to causecancer, followed by that in PM2,
which is only 10.44 μg/g. The content of As in JLS-3 is the
lowest at only 0.6 μg/g, indicating relatively little harm to
the human body. The content of Cr in the dust of each mine is above
30 μg/g, withthe highest values of 60.8 and 61.3 μg/g
found in LTS and PM2, respectively. The lowest values are found in
HB6-3 and DY but are still as high as 33.3 and 32.9 μg/g, indicating
a high risk of causing cancer. As an essential element of the human
body, Mn is beneficial to the human body in small amounts but harmful
when excessive. The Mn content in the dust of all mines is higher
than 90 μg/g in LTS, SH, HB6-3, JLS-3, and PM2, which is very
harmful to the human body after long-term inhalation. The content
of Mn in the dust of DY is the lowest at only 38.6 μg/g, which
is the least harmful to the human body. The content of B in JLS-3
is as high as 59.3 μg/g, indicating that long-term inhalation
is very likely to causepoisoning and other hazards. However, the
content of B in the other mines ranges between 5.5 and 8.9 μg/g.
class="Chemical">Ba, class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">Sn, Tl, V, Sb, Se, Cu, Mo, Zn, Ag, and P are elements with
only one type of hazardous effect. The contents of Sn, Tl, Sb, Se,
Mo, and Ag are relatively low, withthe contents lower than 10.4,
6.3, 5.1, 5.69, 16.7, and 2.1 μg/g, respectively, and would
cause relatively low harm to the human body. The content of Ba in
JLS-3 reaches 535.7 μg/g, which is the most likely to causepoisoningthrough long-term inhalation. The content of Ba in LTS,
SH, and HB6-3 ranges between 100 and 250 μg/g and that of DY
and PM2 is below 100 μg/g, indicating relatively low harm. The
content of V in LTS, JLS-3, and PM2 is above 40 μg/g, while
that in DY, SH, and HB6-3 is below 20 μg/g. However, V is a
toxic element that may causepoisoningthrough long-term inhalation.
The content of Cuas a heavy metal element in the dust shows low differences
among all mines, ranging from 11.7 to 21.5 μg/g. Zn is an essential
element for the human body. The content of Zn in LTS and HB6-3 is
above 400 μg/g, indicating harm to the human body if inhaled
excessively, while that in JLS-3, SH, PM2, and DY is below 61.1 μg/g.
Although P rarely causes harm to the human body, the content of P
in each mine ranges between 82.3 and 706.4 μg/g, which is relatively
high and would cause harm to the human body in the case of long-term
inhalation.
To sum up, special attention should class="Chemical">be paid to class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the
elements that
are more harmful to the human body and possess relatively high contents,
such asAsPb, Ni, As, Cr, Mn, B, Hg, Ba, V, Cu, Zn, P, etc. In addition,
most of the harmful elements in LTS and JLS-3 have the highest content,
indicating the highest harm to the human body, followed by SH, PM2,
and HB6-3. DY has a relatively small content of harmful elements,
posing relatively light harm to the human body.
Conclusions
class="Chemical">The iclass="Chemical">nvestigatioclass="Chemical">n of dust characteristics is
class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the basis for dust
removal and the prevention of coal dust explosions and occupational
diseases. In this paper, the dustfall collected from the working faces
and roadways of six coal mines was systematically studied. The main
conclusions are as follows.
class="Chemical">The miclass="Chemical">neral class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">composition differs at
different sampling locations. The material composition of dust at
working faces is the most complex and that in air intake and return
air roadways is relatively simple. In addition, the higher the ash
content in the return airway, the simpler the mineral composition.
class="Chemical">The iclass="Chemical">nterval distributioclass="Chemical">n
of dust
particle size geclass="Chemical">nerally exhibits a partial class="Chemical">normal patterclass="Chemical">n, aclass="Chemical">nd class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">there
is a trough in the fine or coarsesection in some cases. According
to the proportion of PM10, the dust can be divided into symmetrical,
fine, and coarse types. There is a decreasing trend of PM10 proportion
from the air intake roadway to the working face, to the return air
roadway. The specific surface area and proportion of PM10 are positively
correlated to each other. Moreover, dust mainly exists in the form
of particle agglomeration and small particles adhering to large particles.
Dust wettability is mainly
affected
by class="Chemical">the class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">carbon and oxygencontents on the dust surface, the oxygen–carbon
ratio, oxygen-containing functional groups, ash content, fixed carbon,
and particle size of the dust. The surfactant (0.05% AN solution)
used in this paper can enhance the wetting effect on dust and achieve
the dust removal effect.
Acclass="Chemical">cordiclass="Chemical">ng to class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">the influence degree
of various factors on coal dust explosion, this paper explored the
use of an explosion index to evaluate the coal dust explosion tendency,
but further research is needed for its wide application. The harmful
elements such asCr, Mn, Ba, V, Zn, and P in the dust are far higher
than those in the coal. The long-term inhalation of dust containing
a higher content of harmful elements would undoubtedly cause harm
to the human body, but the degree of such harm is still unknown. To
protect the health of millions of coal mine workers, it is imperative
to carry out the research and evaluation of air quality in coal mines.
Experimental Section
Experimental Materials
class="Gene">Coal dust
samples were class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">collected from the coal mines in southern Shanxi Province
and Henan Province in central North China where coal mining activities
are concentrated, including Dayang Mine (DY), Lutaishan Mine (LTS),
and Sihe Mine (SH) in Shanxi and Jiulishan Mine (JLS), Pingmei No.
2 Mine (PM2), and Hebi No. 6 Mine (HB6) in Henan (Figure ). Detailed sampling was carried
out in JLS and HB6, where dustfall wascollected from the air intake
roadways, working faces, and the return air roadways. For the other
four mines, dust wascollected in the return air roadways near the
mined-out line. When collecting, using a clean brush gently sweeps
the dustfall on the pipelines and supports in the roadways and working
faces into the sealed bags, and using a hammer knocks down about 20
g of unpolluted fresh coal samples in the coal wall of the return
airway to seal it into bags for later use. All of the coalbeds in
the above mines are located in the Lower Permian Shanxi Formation.
The surfactant used in this paper is 0.05% AN solution.[106]
Figure 14
Location of samples.
Location of samples.
Experimental Methods
class="Chemical">The class="Chemical">n class="Chemical">collected
dust samples were subjected to proximate analysis according to the
Chinese national standard GB/T212-2001. A D8 series X-ray diffractometer
(XRD) produced by the German company Bruker AXS was used for qualitative
analyzing of the mineral composition of the coal dust. Particle size
distribution was tested using a BT-9300S laser particle size analyzer
according to the international standard ISO13320-2009 and the Chinese
national standard GB/T19077.1-2008. FE-SEM wasthen used to observe
the composition, particle size, and occurrence mode of dust, followed
by the XPS quantitative analysis of elements and functional groups
on the coal surface using a Thermo Fisher Scientific-Escalab 250Xi
photoelectron spectrometer. The contents of trace elements in the
dust and coal were determined by means of ICP-MS. Furthermore, the
dust was pressed into tablets with a diameter of 10 mm and a thickness
of 2 mm using a powder tableting machine, and its contact angle with
distilled water and surfactant (0.05% AN solution) and the surface
tension of distilled water and surfactant were measured using a JC2000D
contact angle measuring instrument.
Authors: Isaac A Zlochower; Michael J Sapko; Inoka E Perera; Connor B Brown; Marcia L Harris; Naseem S Rayyan Journal: J Loss Prev Process Ind Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 3.660
Authors: Marcia L Harris; Michael J Sapko; Isaac A Zlochower; Inoka E Perera; Eric S Weiss Journal: J Loss Prev Process Ind Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 3.660