Liying Sun1, Shaocheng Ge1, Deji Jing2, Shuo Liu1, Xi Chen1. 1. College of Safety Science and Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, China. 2. Institute of Safely Science and Technology, Liaoning Technical University, Fuxin 123000, China.
Abstract
To solve the problem of poor dust wettability during coal mine dust treatment, sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and alkyl glycoside (APG1214) were selected for compounding. An efficient, environmentally friendly, economical wetting agent was prepared. First, through molecular dynamics simulation studies, it was determined that the tail group C of SDS and APG1214 was adsorbed on the surface of bituminous coal, and the head groups S and O were adsorbed on the surface of water. The simulation result is found to be consistent with the surfactant solution dust removal theory, which proves the confidence of simulation. Then, by comparing the interaction of water-SDS and APG1214-bituminous coal and water-bituminous coal systems and the number of hydrogen bonds, the wetting mechanism of the SDS and APG1214 solution on bituminous coal was revealed. Finally, the surface tension, contact angle, and wetting time of different SDS and APG1214 solutions were determined by experiments and they decreased with decreasing mass fraction of SDS at the same concentration. The surface tension of the SDS and APG1214 solution and the number of micelles affected the wettability of bituminous coal. The optimal concentration of the SDS and APG1214 solution was 0.7%, and the optimal ratio was SDS/APG1214 = 1:3.
To solve the problem of poor dust wettability during coal mine dust treatment, sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and alkyl glycoside (APG1214) were selected for compounding. An efficient, environmentally friendly, economical wetting agent was prepared. First, through molecular dynamics simulation studies, it was determined that the tail group C of SDS and APG1214 was adsorbed on the surface of bituminous coal, and the head groups S and O were adsorbed on the surface of water. The simulation result is found to be consistent with the surfactant solution dust removal theory, which proves the confidence of simulation. Then, by comparing the interaction of water-SDS and APG1214-bituminous coal and water-bituminous coal systems and the number of hydrogen bonds, the wetting mechanism of the SDS and APG1214 solution on bituminous coal was revealed. Finally, the surface tension, contact angle, and wetting time of different SDS and APG1214 solutions were determined by experiments and they decreased with decreasing mass fraction of SDS at the same concentration. The surface tension of the SDS and APG1214 solution and the number of micelles affected the wettability of bituminous coal. The optimal concentration of the SDS and APG1214 solution was 0.7%, and the optimal ratio was SDS/APG1214 = 1:3.
China is the largest coal producer and
consumer. According to ⟨⟨BP
Statistical Review of World Energy⟩⟩ in 2021, China’s
total coal production and consumption in 2020 account for 50.7 and
54.3% of the world, respectively.[1] This
scenario would remain unaltered in the short term.[2,3] However,
the inhalation of the fine dust produced in the process of coal mining
causes a number of respiratory diseases[4−6] including chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease, fibrosis associated with diffuse dust, artificial
pneumoconiosis, and emphysema.[7−10] In addition, dust hazards would become more severe
with the continuous improvement in the level of coal mining mechanization.[11]At present, the main method of dust removal
in a coal mine of Lingshi
County, Jinzhong, China, is spray dust suppression. The spray dust
suppression is an inexpensive and convenient method.[12−14] However, water is poor to the wettability of bituminous coal. At
20 °C, the surface tension of pure water is approximately 72.8
mN/m,[15] whereas the critical surface tension
for coal wetting is approximately 45 mN/m.[16] Furthermore, the dust suppression efficiency is low. The addition
of surfactants to water can reduce the surface tension of water and
improve the wettability of coal.[17,18] Therefore,
the dust concentration and the instrument failure rate in the working
environment of coal mine are lowered, the visibility is improved,
and the health of the human body is maintained.Scholars worldwide
have conducted a substantial amount of research
on the wettability of coal dust by different surfactants. Xu et al.[19] experimentally measured the surface tension,
wetting time, and infrared spectrum of coal dust and calculated the
hydrophilic–lipophilic balance value to determine the wettability
of coal dust by different anionic surfactants. Shi et al.[15] studied the synergistic wetting performance
of different nonionic and anionic surfactants on bituminous coal;
measured the surface tension, contact angle, and settling time of
bituminous coal; and formulated the optimal surfactant. Wang et al.[20] analyzed the wetting process and mechanism of
different surfactant solutions on various coal-dust surfaces by experimental
measurements and theoretical calculations. The study provides a theoretical
basis for the surfactant selection of different coal mines. The above
studies were based on the experimental parameters for characterizing
the wettability of coal dust. The wettability of different surfactants
to the coal dust were determined, and the optimum surfactant was preferred
for different coal dusts. However, the mechanism of coal dust wetting
is not clear. In this paper, molecular dynamics simulation was used
to study the wetting mechanism of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and
alkyl glycoside (APG1214) solution on bituminous coal.In this
study, SDS and APG1214 were selected for preparing the
SDS and APG1214 solution, considering the economy, environmental protection,
and secondary dust.[21−23] Materials Studio software was used to reveal the
wetting mechanism of the SDS and APG1214 solution on bituminous coal,
which can explain some phenomena and mechanisms on the atomic structure
and microlevel, which cannot be observed in experiments.[24−28] The distribution of tail group C, head group S, and O in the water—SDS
and APG1214—bituminous coal system, the number of intermolecular
hydrogen bonds, and the interaction energy of the water–SDS
and APG1214–bituminous coal system and the water–bituminous
coal system were obtained. Through experimental research, the surface
tension, contact angle, and wetting time of SDS and APG1214 solutions
at different concentrations and mass ratios were identified. Based
on the above data, the optimal concentration and mass ratio of the
SDS and APG1214 solution were determined.
Simulation and Experiment
Coal Sample
The coal sample is from in a coal mine
of Lingshi County, Jinzhong, China, and its proximate analysis result
is shown in Table . The coal sample belonged to the category of highly volatile 1/3
coking coal according to China’s coal classification,[29] which is a kind of bituminous coal. The density
and porosity of the coal are 1.27 g/cm and 4.87%, respectively.
Materials Studio 2019 software was
used to perform molecular dynamics simulation. Because the coal sample
in the experiment belongs to bituminous coal, the paper selects bituminous
coal model proposed by Wiser.[30,31] Although the model
is inconsistent with the model of bituminous coal in the experiment,
it contains sulfur and nitrogen elements, and the oxygen-containing
functional group related to bituminous coal wettability, such as phenolic
hydroxyl groups, carboxyl groups, carbonyl groups, and so forth. Therefore,
Wiser’s bituminous coal model is used to study the wetting
mechanism of the SDS and APG1214 solution to experimental bituminous
coal, and the simulation results are reliable. The structure is shown
in Figure a. The molecular
structures of SDS and APG1214 are shown in Figure b,c, respectively. Because the COMPASS II
force field applies to organics (coal and the surfactant), small inorganic
molecules (water), and polymers materials, all the calculations of
this paper select the force field.
Figure 1
Molecular model of (a) bituminous coal,
(b) SDS, and (c) APG1214.
The red, gray, white, yellow, and purple balls represent O, C, H,
S, and Na+, respectively.
Molecular model of (a) bituminous coal,
(b) SDS, and (c) APG1214.
The red, gray, white, yellow, and purple balls represent O, C, H,
S, and Na+, respectively.After obtaining the molecular structures of bituminous coal, SDS,
and APG1214, the Forcite module was used for molecule structural optimization.
The related parameters were set as follows: the task was geometry
optimization, the method was smart, and the maximum convergence values
of energy, force, displacement, and Max. iteration were 1.0 ×
10–4 kcal/mol, 5 × 10–3 kcal/mol/Å,
5 × 10–5 Å, and 50 000, respectively.
Second, the Amorphous Cell module was used to build the following
crystal cells: a crystal cell with 20 bituminous coal molecules, a
crystal cell with 1000 water molecules, and the wetting agent crystal
cell consisting of 10 SDS molecules and 10 APG1214 molecules. The
length and width of all crystal cells were 43 Å × 43 Å.
Then, the above cells were optimized using geometry optimization and
anneal approaches.[32] Finally, the Build
layers tool was used to set up the water–bituminous and water–SDS
and APG1214–bituminous systems. The system size was 43 Å
× 43 Å × 140 Å. In addition, a 75 Å vacuum
layer was added above the systems to prevent any influence of the
period boundary conditions, as shown in Figure (a) and (b).
Figure 2
Water–bituminous
coal system (a) and water–SDS and
APG1214–bituminous coal system (b).
Water–bituminous
coal system (a) and water–SDS and
APG1214–bituminous coal system (b).The geometry optimization of water–bituminous coal and water–SDS
and APG1214–bituminous coal systems was performed. Then, the
molecular dynamic simulation was carried out. The molecular dynamics
simulation parameters were set identical to those for geometry optimization.
The other parameters were set as follows: the ensemble was NVT, the temperature was 298 K, the time step was 1.0 fs,
the total simulation time was 1000 ps (the energy and temperature
around 1000 ps are stable, the systems have reached a balance), and
the thermostat was Nosé–Hoover–Langevin.
Experiment
Experimental
Materials
SDS used in the experiment (purity
≥ 90%) was provided by Zhiyuan Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd.,
Tianjin, China. APG1214 (purity ≥ 50%) was produced by Yousuo
Chemical Technology Co., Ltd., Shandong, China.
Experimental
Process and Method
The SDS and APG1214
monomer solutions with mass fractions of 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, and 0.9%
were compounded. The compounding ratios of SDS and APG1214 were 4:0,
3:1, 2:2, 1:3, and 0:4. Tap water was used for spray dust removal
in the field, so tap water was used to prepare the solution. A contact
angle measuring instrument was used to measure the surface tension
and contact angle, and each solution was measured three times to take
the average value. The spreading coefficient was obtained by surface
tension and contact angle.The wetting effect of bituminous
coal was characterized by measuring its wetting time. The operational
process of the test system (as shown in Figure ) was as follows: the surfactant solution
(20 mL) was poured into a Petri dish and placed below a funnel with
a certain height. Then, the balance was used to weigh 50 mg of bituminous
coal samples. These were poured into Petri dishes through a funnel
at a fixed height. The time required for the coal samples to be wetted
completely was recorded. Each group of experiments was measured three
times and averaged.
Figure 3
Equilibrium structures of different systems: (a) water–bituminous
coal system and (b) water–SDS and APG1214–bituminous
coal system.
Equilibrium structures of different systems: (a) water–bituminous
coal system and (b) water–SDS and APG1214–bituminous
coal system.
Results and Discussion
Molecular
Dynamics Simulation Results
Surfactant Adsorption on the Surface of Bituminous
Coal
Figure shows equilibrium
structures of the water–bituminous coal and water–SDS
and APG1214–bituminous coal systems. The hydrophilic group
and hydrophobic group of SDS/APG 1214 surfactants adsorb on the surface
of water and bituminous coal, respectively. Furthermore, the relative
concentrations of water, bituminous coal, surfactant head group S
and O, and tail group C in the direction of (0,0,1) to analyze the
detailed adsorption behavior of two surfactants are presented in Figure . The S and O in
the surfactant head group are close to the water surface, and the
tail group C is close to the bituminous coal surface. The simulation
result is consistent with surfactant solution dust removal theory.
Therefore, the wetting mechanism of the surfactant to bituminous coal
can be qualitatively analyzed by molecular dynamics simulation.
Figure 4
Relative concentration
distribution of water, bituminous coal,
surfactant head group S and O, and tail group C in the z-direction.
Relative concentration
distribution of water, bituminous coal,
surfactant head group S and O, and tail group C in the z-direction.
Interaction energy
The molecular interaction energy
can represent the strength of the intermolecular interaction. The
value is negative, which indicates that the intermolecules are more
prone to interactions. The higher the negative magnitude of the energy,
the stronger is the interaction between molecules. When the value
is positive, it is difficult to interact between the molecules.[33]Table shows the interaction energy of different systems, in which
the electrostatic interaction is dominant. The SDS and APG1214 surfactants
are added in water, and the potential energy reduction between water
molecules results in its cohesiveness decreased and activity increased.
In addition, SDS and APG1214 are more easily adsorbed to the surface
of the bituminous coal compared to water. Therefore, the addition
of surfactants in water increased the wettability of bituminous coal.
Table 2
Interaction Energy of Different Systems
(Epot is the Potential Energy, Enon is the Nonbonded Interaction Energy, EvdW is the van der Waals Energy, and Eelec is the Electrostatic Energy)
systems
Epot (kcal/mol)
Enon (kcal/mol)
EvdW (kcal/mol)
Eelec (kcal/mol)
H2O (system a)
–7472.76
–9048.18
2450
–11498.18
H2O (system b)
–6793.28
–8341.19
2477.57
–10818.19
H2O–bituminous
coal
–698.03
–666.01
–131.12
–534.89
SDS &APG1214–bituminous
coal
–1389.91
–1381.75
–364.35
–1017.4
H2O–SDS &; APG1214–bituminous coal
–3819.68
–3799.09
–375.87
–3423.22
Hydrogen Bonding
Water molecules contain a large number
of hydrogen bonds. The number of hydrogen bonds changes when water
molecules come into contact with surfactants and bituminous coal.
The hydrogen bonding is a strong electrostatic interaction between
atoms manifested at the macrolevel as a stronger interaction. The
larger the number of hydrogen bonds between molecules, the stronger
is the electrostatic interaction. To obtain the number of hydrogen
bonds of among water, SDS and APG1214, and bituminous coal molecules,
the hydrogen bonds in same molecules should be subtracted. The parameters
of hydrogen bond calculations are as follows: the distance between
the molecular hydrogen and receptor is less than 2.5 Å, and the
angle among the donor, hydrogen, and the receptor is greater than
135°.[24] After adding SDS and APG 1214
in water, the number of hydrogen bonds between water molecules was
reduced by 37. This indicates that the cohesion between water molecules
is reduced, and the activity is enhanced. The number of hydrogen bonds
in water–bituminous coal and water–SDS and APG1214–bituminous
coal systems is 58 and 127, respectively. The addition of SDS and
APG1214 surfactants increases the intermolecular hydrogen bonding
and enhances the intermolecular interaction. These, in turn, improve
the wettability of bituminous coal.
Experimental Results
The wetting mechanism of bituminous
coal by adding a surfactant comprising SDS and APG1214 in water was
identified through molecular dynamics simulation. The optimal concentration
and mass ratio of SDS and APG1214 solutions were determined by experimental
means.
Surface Tension
Figure shows the surface tension of SDS and APG1214 solutions
with different concentrations and ratios. The surface tension of the
SDS and APG1214 solutions decreases with decreasing mass fraction
of SDS. The surface tension is minimum when the mass ratio is 1:3.
SDS is an anionic surfactant, and the overall charge is −1
after being dissociated in water. APG1214 is a nonionic surfactant
that cannot be dissociated in water, and the whole is electrically
neutral. Therefore, SDS molecules repel each other at the air–water
interface,[15,34,35] and the distance between the SDS molecules is larger than the APG1214
molecules. When SDS is compounded with APG1214, the gap of SDS is
filled with APG1214. This results in an increase in the adsorption
density of the surfactant on the water surface and a decrease in the
surface tension.
Figure 5
Surface tension of SDS and APG1214 solutions at different
concentrations
and mass ratios.
Surface tension of SDS and APG1214 solutions at different
concentrations
and mass ratios.
Contact Angle
Figure shows the
contact angle of bituminous coal in the
SDS and APG1214 solution at different concentrations and ratios. The
smaller the contact angle, the better the wetting effect of bituminous
coal. As shown in Figure , the contact angle of the bituminous coal increases with
decreasing mass fraction of SDS in the SDS and APG1214 solutions.
The minimum contact angle of the bituminous coal in the monomer surfactant
is 30.65°. However, when the concentration of the SDS and APG1214
solution is 0.7%, the mass ratio is SDS/APG1214 = 1:3, and the contact
angle decreases to 22.445°. For the single surfactant, the compound
solutions can improve the hydrophobicity of the bituminous coal.
Figure 6
Contact
angle of bituminous coal at different concentrations and
mass ratios.
Contact
angle of bituminous coal at different concentrations and
mass ratios.
Wetting Time
To
visually analyze the wetting performance
of different SDS and APG1214 solutions, the wetting time of bituminous
coal was measured in addition to the above two parameters of surface
tension and contact angle. Figure shows the wetting time of bituminous coal in different
SDS and APG1214 solutions. The optimal mass concentration is 0.7%,
and the optimal ratio is SDS/APG1214 = 1:3, which is consistent with
the measurement result of contact angle. The surface tension and the
number of micelles determine the wettability of the composite solution.
The lower the surface tension, the more easy it is that the droplet
would deform and break and the better the wetting effect. With the
increase in concentration, the surfactant self-polymerizes to form
micelles (as shown in Figure ). The solubilization of micelles causes insoluble bituminous
coal particles to enter these, and the wetting improves (as shown
in Figure ).
Figure 7
Wetting time
of bituminous coal at different concentrations and
mass ratios.
Figure 8
Surfactant forms micelles in solution.
Figure 9
Dynamic soaking process of bituminous coal from the gas–liquid
surface into surfactant micelles.
Wetting time
of bituminous coal at different concentrations and
mass ratios.Surfactant forms micelles in solution.Dynamic soaking process of bituminous coal from the gas–liquid
surface into surfactant micelles.
Conclusions
Through molecular dynamics simulation,
the wetting mechanism of
the SDS and APG1214 solution to bituminous coal was revealed: SDS
and APG1214 are more easily adsorbed onto the surface of the bituminous
coal compared to water; the cohesion between water molecules is reduced,
and the activity is enhanced; the van der Waals force, electrostatic
force, and the number of hydrogen bonds are increased in the water–SDS
and APG1214–bituminous coal system.The optimal concentration
and mass ratio of the SDS and APG1214
solution for wetting bituminous coal were determined by surface, contact
angle, and wetting time experiments. For various SDS and APG1214 solutions,
the lower the surface tension and the SDS mass fraction, the more
the number of micelles and the better the wettability of bituminous
coal. The optimal concentration of the final SDS and APG1214 solution
is 0.7%, and the optimal ratio is SDS/APG1214 = 1:3.
Authors: Brent C Doney; David Blackley; Janet M Hale; Cara Halldin; Laura Kurth; Girija Syamlal; A Scott Laney Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2019-04-29 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Jennifer L Perret; Brian Plush; Philippe Lachapelle; Timothy S C Hinks; Clare Walter; Philip Clarke; Louis Irving; Pat Brady; Shyamali C Dharmage; Alastair Stewart Journal: Respirology Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 6.424
Authors: Sithembile L Mabila; Kirsten S Almberg; Lee Friedman; Robert Cohen; Ntombizodwa Ndlovu; Naseema Vorajee; Jill Murray Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2018-07-16 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: K Bridbord; J Costello; J Gamble; D Groce; M Hutchison; W Jones; J Merchant; C Ortmeyer; R Reger; W L Wagner Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 1979-12 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Kai Cui; Fuhai Shen; Bing Han; Juxiang Yuan; Xia Suo; Tianbang Qin; Hongbo Liu; Jie Chen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-06-30 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Michael Hendryx; Mohammad Saidul Islam; Guang-Hui Dong; Gunther Paul Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-29 Impact factor: 3.390