CA1201223A - Coal flotation reagents - Google Patents
Coal flotation reagentsInfo
- Publication number
- CA1201223A CA1201223A CA000406190A CA406190A CA1201223A CA 1201223 A CA1201223 A CA 1201223A CA 000406190 A CA000406190 A CA 000406190A CA 406190 A CA406190 A CA 406190A CA 1201223 A CA1201223 A CA 1201223A
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- coal
- weight
- fuel oil
- flotation reagent
- coal flotation
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired
Links
Landscapes
- Solid Fuels And Fuel-Associated Substances (AREA)
- Liquid Carbonaceous Fuels (AREA)
Abstract
ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE
There is provided an improved coal flotation reagent comprising a frother, hydrocarbon liquid as a collector and a hydrocarbon liquid dispersant.
There is provided an improved coal flotation reagent comprising a frother, hydrocarbon liquid as a collector and a hydrocarbon liquid dispersant.
Description
rhis invention relates to a coal flotation reagent for use in froth flotation cleaning of coal.
Proth flotation is a process commonly used for cleaning fine coal in which the caal, with the aid of a reagent, becomes attached to alr bubbles in a liquid medium and floats as a froth. When a coal mining slurry in water containing a small amount of certain oils or reagents is agitated, the coal particles are preferentially~wetted ay~the otl or the reagent and attach them-s.elves to fine air bubBles which are introduced into the suspension. The bubbles float the coal particles to the surface and form with them, usually with the help of other reagents, a froth which is skimmed off. The mineral matter, known as "slime", "tailings" or "refuse" is wetted by the water and remains in the slurryD The separation is practlcally independent of the relative speciflc gravltles of the coal and mlneral matter. The efEiclency of removal of mlneral matter depends on such factors as partlcle size, interstratiflcatlon of mineral matter with the coal, concentration of sllme, and proportions of coal, water and oil. Roth flotation is adapted to cleanlng the Eine sizes of coal, par-ticularly minus 48 mesh, although in some cases, coal up to 1/8-inch size has been cleaned by froth flotation.
The process ls carried out ln a serles of water-fllled cells, lnto the first of which are fed the coal and the proper volumes of reagents, usually about 0.1 to 2.5 pounds per ton of coal. Alr is blown into the bottom through a nozzle or dis;tributor which divides it lnto fine bubbles. The froth of coal and oil overflows into a trough at one side, and the refuse from the bottom is pumped to the second cell. Here the operation is repeated and continued in each succeeding cell of the series. The slime from the last cell is discarded The oils and reagents used to collect and wet the coal particles include higher b.oilin~ petroleum fractions, city acids, and soaps. Cresylic acid, pine oil or alcohols are commonly~added to the cells to produce frothing.
It has now Been discovered that an improved coal flotation reagent is provided Br combining one or more fr~thers, such as blends of alcoholsJ
methylisobuty~l carainol or pine oil, with a hydrocarbon liquid such as fuel oil as a collector and one or mqre hydrocarbon liquid disper$ants, i.c., a material which will emulsify the hydrocarbon liquid when the dispersant or the reagent is added to the aqueous slurry of coal. The use of this dispersant results in an increase in coal recovery during the froth flotatian cleaning of coal.
yarious hydrocarbon liquid dispersants may be used in the practice of this invention. These materials are generally water-soluble surface active materials; which have an IILB value greater than 7 and which will form oil-in-water emulsions. materials such as ethoxylated alkylphenols, dialkylsulfosuc-cinates and other ethoxylated alcohols, etc. may be used as the dispersants of this invention. Preferred materials include IGEPAL D~-530*, a dialkylphen-oxypolyethrleneoxy ethanol, ethoxylated nonylphenols and dioct~lsulfosuccinates.
The amounts of each ingredient included in the coal flotation reagent may vary widely and will depend to some extent on the type of coal. Thus, the presence of ashable minerals, especially clays and shales, in the coal reduce the natural hydrophobicity of coal. Therefore, the increase in feed ash will increase the collector (fuel oil) demand. The rank of coal may be defined as the extent to which the organic material has matured during geological time in going frQm peat to anthracite The maturing process is known variously as coalif~cation, me*amorphism, or carbonification. one of the changes occuring with the carbonification of the coal is the increase in its hydrophobicitr, * Trade Mark ~2-Examining the relationship between the rank of the coal and the optimum ratio of emulsified fuel awl to the frother it became obvious that the higher the rank of the coal the more rother and the less Euel oil is required. Going down in the rank (more precisely going up in the percent volatiles, as the ~tu content will not directly influence the hydrophobicity), the natural flotability is lower and additional collector is needed. Generally, the flotation reagent will comprise from about 95 to 20% by weight of frother, preferably from about ~0 to 40% by weight; from about 5 to 80% by weight of fuel oil, preferably rom about 5 to 60% by weight; and from about 2 to 20%
by weight of fuel oil dispersant, preferably about 3 to 9% by weight.
The coal flotation reagent of this invention is preferably added to the water filled cells to which the coal is fed in an amount of from about 0.05 to S lbs. per ton of coal feed and more preferably Erom abo~lt 0.2 -to
Proth flotation is a process commonly used for cleaning fine coal in which the caal, with the aid of a reagent, becomes attached to alr bubbles in a liquid medium and floats as a froth. When a coal mining slurry in water containing a small amount of certain oils or reagents is agitated, the coal particles are preferentially~wetted ay~the otl or the reagent and attach them-s.elves to fine air bubBles which are introduced into the suspension. The bubbles float the coal particles to the surface and form with them, usually with the help of other reagents, a froth which is skimmed off. The mineral matter, known as "slime", "tailings" or "refuse" is wetted by the water and remains in the slurryD The separation is practlcally independent of the relative speciflc gravltles of the coal and mlneral matter. The efEiclency of removal of mlneral matter depends on such factors as partlcle size, interstratiflcatlon of mineral matter with the coal, concentration of sllme, and proportions of coal, water and oil. Roth flotation is adapted to cleanlng the Eine sizes of coal, par-ticularly minus 48 mesh, although in some cases, coal up to 1/8-inch size has been cleaned by froth flotation.
The process ls carried out ln a serles of water-fllled cells, lnto the first of which are fed the coal and the proper volumes of reagents, usually about 0.1 to 2.5 pounds per ton of coal. Alr is blown into the bottom through a nozzle or dis;tributor which divides it lnto fine bubbles. The froth of coal and oil overflows into a trough at one side, and the refuse from the bottom is pumped to the second cell. Here the operation is repeated and continued in each succeeding cell of the series. The slime from the last cell is discarded The oils and reagents used to collect and wet the coal particles include higher b.oilin~ petroleum fractions, city acids, and soaps. Cresylic acid, pine oil or alcohols are commonly~added to the cells to produce frothing.
It has now Been discovered that an improved coal flotation reagent is provided Br combining one or more fr~thers, such as blends of alcoholsJ
methylisobuty~l carainol or pine oil, with a hydrocarbon liquid such as fuel oil as a collector and one or mqre hydrocarbon liquid disper$ants, i.c., a material which will emulsify the hydrocarbon liquid when the dispersant or the reagent is added to the aqueous slurry of coal. The use of this dispersant results in an increase in coal recovery during the froth flotatian cleaning of coal.
yarious hydrocarbon liquid dispersants may be used in the practice of this invention. These materials are generally water-soluble surface active materials; which have an IILB value greater than 7 and which will form oil-in-water emulsions. materials such as ethoxylated alkylphenols, dialkylsulfosuc-cinates and other ethoxylated alcohols, etc. may be used as the dispersants of this invention. Preferred materials include IGEPAL D~-530*, a dialkylphen-oxypolyethrleneoxy ethanol, ethoxylated nonylphenols and dioct~lsulfosuccinates.
The amounts of each ingredient included in the coal flotation reagent may vary widely and will depend to some extent on the type of coal. Thus, the presence of ashable minerals, especially clays and shales, in the coal reduce the natural hydrophobicity of coal. Therefore, the increase in feed ash will increase the collector (fuel oil) demand. The rank of coal may be defined as the extent to which the organic material has matured during geological time in going frQm peat to anthracite The maturing process is known variously as coalif~cation, me*amorphism, or carbonification. one of the changes occuring with the carbonification of the coal is the increase in its hydrophobicitr, * Trade Mark ~2-Examining the relationship between the rank of the coal and the optimum ratio of emulsified fuel awl to the frother it became obvious that the higher the rank of the coal the more rother and the less Euel oil is required. Going down in the rank (more precisely going up in the percent volatiles, as the ~tu content will not directly influence the hydrophobicity), the natural flotability is lower and additional collector is needed. Generally, the flotation reagent will comprise from about 95 to 20% by weight of frother, preferably from about ~0 to 40% by weight; from about 5 to 80% by weight of fuel oil, preferably rom about 5 to 60% by weight; and from about 2 to 20%
by weight of fuel oil dispersant, preferably about 3 to 9% by weight.
The coal flotation reagent of this invention is preferably added to the water filled cells to which the coal is fed in an amount of from about 0.05 to S lbs. per ton of coal feed and more preferably Erom abo~lt 0.2 -to
2 lb. per ton of feed. Air is blown into the cell and the froth of coal recovered in a conventional manner.
The following examples illustrate this invention:
Example 1 A coal flotation reagent was prepared by admixing 65% by weight of fuel ail #l, 30% by weight of a commercially available frother which is a blend of C6 to C8 alcohols, and 5% by weight of dioctylsulfosuccinate. The resultant composition is referred to hereinafter as Product 1.
Exa A coal flotation reagent was prepared by mlxing together 51% by weight of #2 fuel oil, 36% by weight of a commercially available frother which is a blend of C6 to C8 alcohols, ~.0% by welght of I~EPAL DM-530* and ~.0% by weight of pine oil. This material is hereinafter referred to as Product 2.
* Trade Mark -3-2~
Example 3 Another coal flotation reagent was prepared by-mixing together 46.8% by weight of #2 fuel oil, 3804% by weight of a blend of C6 to C8 alcohols, ~.6% by weight of pine oil, 20G% by weight of IGEPAL D~-530 and 2.6% by weight of IGEPAL DM-710*. This product is hereinafter referred to as Product 3.
xample 4 A coal flotation reagent useful in the flotation of low to medium volatile type coals was prepared by mixing together the following ingredients:
80% by weight ox C6 - C8 alcohols, 3.0% by weight of dioctylsulfosuccinate, and 17.~% by weight of #2 fuel oil. This material is hereinafter referred to as Product 4.
Example 5 About 0.9 :I.bs. of the coal flotation reagent obta:in~d in example 1, Product 1, per ton of coal feed was added to a coal flotat.ion cell. The characteristics of the feed and the amount and characteristics of the recovered product are set forth in Table I. For purposes of comparison, another run was conducted with conventional flotation reagents added separately comprising 0.3 lb. per ton of coal feed of methylisobutylcarbinol (MIBC) and 1.3 lbs. per ton of coal feed of fuel oil #2. The results for this run are also set forth in Table I. It will be seen that the coal recovery increased from 49.05% for the conventional flotation reagent to 76.41% with Product l. The yield of the float product increased from 34.83% to 57.75%. This means that out of every 100 tons of coal processed, there would be obtained 22.92 more tons of coal of the same quality using Product lu In spite of dewatering 22D92% more coal, the moisture of the clean coal filter cake obtained with Product l dropped to 35.4% H20 from the value of ~0.1% H20 average of two samples) obtained with the * Trade Mark -4~
~2~Z23 conventional Elotation reagent. Part o:E the reason for the improved filtrationis the increased amount of +65 mesh particles floatlng when Product l was fed to the flotation circuit. With the conventional flotation agent, the ~65 mesh fraction was 10.2% and with Product 1, the +65 mesh fraction rose to 19.1%.
TABLE I
MIBC PLUS
ITEM PUEL OIL ~2 PRODUCT 1 .. ..
Ash Analysis Feed 34.57% Ash 30.72% Ash Float 7.85% Ash 8.33% Ash Tails 48O85% Ash 61.32% Ash C/C Filter* A - 8.09% Ash 9.30% Ash C - 8.98% Ash C/C Filter Cake* A - 38.7% H O 35.4% H O
moisture C - 41.5% H O
Float Yield 34.83% 57.75%
Coal Recovery 49.05% 76.41%
~2a~2,~
SCREEN ANALYSIS_OF FLOUT PRODUCTS
SIZE DISTRIBUTlON ASH CONTENTASH DISTRIBUTION
Particle SizeMIBC * Product MI~C ~roductMIBC Product Fuel Oil 1 Fuel Oil 1 Fuel Oil + 65 Mesh 10.2 l9.1 4.69 4.89 6.0 11.6 * 425-65 Mesh35.6 39O6 5.69 6.99 25.6 34.3 325 Mesh 5402 41.3 9.~8 10.56 68.4 54.1 Float Product100.0 100.0 7.91 80 06 100.0 100.0 * Sample A waken before Product l treatment. Sample C
was cut after Product 1 treatment was discontinued.
Example 6 The process of Example 5 was repeated at another coal plant. For purposes of comparison, another run was conducted using an equivalent amount of a conventional coal flotation reagent, CENTFROTII-R* which comprises a mixture of fuel oll and alkoxypropylene glycol available in the United States from Century ilulburt Co. The results are set forth in Table Il. It will be seen that the coal recovery with CENTFROTH-R* reagent was only 16.09% whereas with an equivalent amount of Product 1, the recovery increased more than five times to 89.40%. The yield of the clean coal product increased from 9.40% with CENTFROTH-R* to 54.07% with Product 1. This means that the plant would realize an additional 44.67 tons of saleable coal from every 100 tons processed. Even though the clean coal dewatering gird centrifuges were handling more than five times the amount of coal as with the CENTFROTH-R* reagent, the moisture of the final product decreased from 25.5% H2O with CENTFROTH-R to 22.2% moisture with Product 1. The amount of ~65 mesh particles floated increased from 12.8%
with CENTFROTH-R* to 42,3% with Product 1.
.
* Trade Mark -6-TABLE. I
ITEM CENTPROT~I R ;PRODUCT 1 Ash analysis Feed 49.2Q% Ash 47.55% Ash Float 13~06% Ash 13.28% Ash Tails 52.~5% Ash 37.8~% Ash Bird 9.90% Ash 11.85% Ash Pond 56014% Ash 61.99% Ash Dewatering Centri- 25.5% H2O 22.2% H O
fuge Cake Moisture 2 Float Yield 9.40% 54O07%
Coal Recovery 16.09% 89.40%
SCREEN ANALYSIS OF FLOAT PRODUCTS
SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASII CONTENT AS~II)ISTRIBUIION
Particle SizeCentri- Product Centri- Product Centri- Product froth 1 froth 1 froth 65 Mesh 12.8 4203 5.09 7.20 5.0 23.6 325-65 Mesh42~5 3203 7.69 10.97 25.1 27.4 - 325 Mesh 44.7 25.5 20.40 24D80 69.1 49.0 Float Product100.0 100.0 13.04 12.91100.0 100.0 In the abo-ve table, the term "bird" refers to a bird or dewatering centrifuge "feed" is the orig.inal material going through the flotation cell, "float" is the clean coal recovered from the process, "tails" are the waste materials recovered and:"p~nd" refers to a settling pond of tailings.
2~3 The material of Example 2 product 2) when tested at a level of a pound per ton of coal gave a 79O5% by weight clean coal recovery in laboratory studies. At a level of 0.8 pound per ton, an 84% by weight recovery was obtained.
In contrast, a frother material consisting of 0.3 pounds per ton of MIBC and one pound per ton of #2 fuel oil gave only a 78% recovery.
Example 8 Rroduct 3 when tested on a coal feed at a level of 0.6 pound per ton yielded an 84.7% by weight recovery. In contrast, 0.5 pound per ton of ~IBC along with 1.5 pounds per ton of #2 fuel oil gave the same recovery level.
Three tenths pound per ton of MIBC and 1.5 pounds per ton of #2 fuel oil gave a recovery of only 81.2% by weight on the coal tested.
Example 9 Product 4 was tested at a feed rate of 4~ cc per minute to a coal flotation cell. A recovery of 85.5% by weight was obtained. Using a com-mercially available material as the frother, Aerofroth 76*, a material available from the American Cyanimid Company and believed to be a C4 - C8 alcohol mixture, in combination with an equal weight percent of #l fuel oil at the same feed rate, only 74.6% by weight recovery was obtained.
Although the invention has been described in considerable detail with specific reference to certain advantageous embodiments thereof, variations and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention as described in the specification and defined in the appended claims.
* Trade Mark -8-
The following examples illustrate this invention:
Example 1 A coal flotation reagent was prepared by admixing 65% by weight of fuel ail #l, 30% by weight of a commercially available frother which is a blend of C6 to C8 alcohols, and 5% by weight of dioctylsulfosuccinate. The resultant composition is referred to hereinafter as Product 1.
Exa A coal flotation reagent was prepared by mlxing together 51% by weight of #2 fuel oil, 36% by weight of a commercially available frother which is a blend of C6 to C8 alcohols, ~.0% by welght of I~EPAL DM-530* and ~.0% by weight of pine oil. This material is hereinafter referred to as Product 2.
* Trade Mark -3-2~
Example 3 Another coal flotation reagent was prepared by-mixing together 46.8% by weight of #2 fuel oil, 3804% by weight of a blend of C6 to C8 alcohols, ~.6% by weight of pine oil, 20G% by weight of IGEPAL D~-530 and 2.6% by weight of IGEPAL DM-710*. This product is hereinafter referred to as Product 3.
xample 4 A coal flotation reagent useful in the flotation of low to medium volatile type coals was prepared by mixing together the following ingredients:
80% by weight ox C6 - C8 alcohols, 3.0% by weight of dioctylsulfosuccinate, and 17.~% by weight of #2 fuel oil. This material is hereinafter referred to as Product 4.
Example 5 About 0.9 :I.bs. of the coal flotation reagent obta:in~d in example 1, Product 1, per ton of coal feed was added to a coal flotat.ion cell. The characteristics of the feed and the amount and characteristics of the recovered product are set forth in Table I. For purposes of comparison, another run was conducted with conventional flotation reagents added separately comprising 0.3 lb. per ton of coal feed of methylisobutylcarbinol (MIBC) and 1.3 lbs. per ton of coal feed of fuel oil #2. The results for this run are also set forth in Table I. It will be seen that the coal recovery increased from 49.05% for the conventional flotation reagent to 76.41% with Product l. The yield of the float product increased from 34.83% to 57.75%. This means that out of every 100 tons of coal processed, there would be obtained 22.92 more tons of coal of the same quality using Product lu In spite of dewatering 22D92% more coal, the moisture of the clean coal filter cake obtained with Product l dropped to 35.4% H20 from the value of ~0.1% H20 average of two samples) obtained with the * Trade Mark -4~
~2~Z23 conventional Elotation reagent. Part o:E the reason for the improved filtrationis the increased amount of +65 mesh particles floatlng when Product l was fed to the flotation circuit. With the conventional flotation agent, the ~65 mesh fraction was 10.2% and with Product 1, the +65 mesh fraction rose to 19.1%.
TABLE I
MIBC PLUS
ITEM PUEL OIL ~2 PRODUCT 1 .. ..
Ash Analysis Feed 34.57% Ash 30.72% Ash Float 7.85% Ash 8.33% Ash Tails 48O85% Ash 61.32% Ash C/C Filter* A - 8.09% Ash 9.30% Ash C - 8.98% Ash C/C Filter Cake* A - 38.7% H O 35.4% H O
moisture C - 41.5% H O
Float Yield 34.83% 57.75%
Coal Recovery 49.05% 76.41%
~2a~2,~
SCREEN ANALYSIS_OF FLOUT PRODUCTS
SIZE DISTRIBUTlON ASH CONTENTASH DISTRIBUTION
Particle SizeMIBC * Product MI~C ~roductMIBC Product Fuel Oil 1 Fuel Oil 1 Fuel Oil + 65 Mesh 10.2 l9.1 4.69 4.89 6.0 11.6 * 425-65 Mesh35.6 39O6 5.69 6.99 25.6 34.3 325 Mesh 5402 41.3 9.~8 10.56 68.4 54.1 Float Product100.0 100.0 7.91 80 06 100.0 100.0 * Sample A waken before Product l treatment. Sample C
was cut after Product 1 treatment was discontinued.
Example 6 The process of Example 5 was repeated at another coal plant. For purposes of comparison, another run was conducted using an equivalent amount of a conventional coal flotation reagent, CENTFROTII-R* which comprises a mixture of fuel oll and alkoxypropylene glycol available in the United States from Century ilulburt Co. The results are set forth in Table Il. It will be seen that the coal recovery with CENTFROTH-R* reagent was only 16.09% whereas with an equivalent amount of Product 1, the recovery increased more than five times to 89.40%. The yield of the clean coal product increased from 9.40% with CENTFROTH-R* to 54.07% with Product 1. This means that the plant would realize an additional 44.67 tons of saleable coal from every 100 tons processed. Even though the clean coal dewatering gird centrifuges were handling more than five times the amount of coal as with the CENTFROTH-R* reagent, the moisture of the final product decreased from 25.5% H2O with CENTFROTH-R to 22.2% moisture with Product 1. The amount of ~65 mesh particles floated increased from 12.8%
with CENTFROTH-R* to 42,3% with Product 1.
.
* Trade Mark -6-TABLE. I
ITEM CENTPROT~I R ;PRODUCT 1 Ash analysis Feed 49.2Q% Ash 47.55% Ash Float 13~06% Ash 13.28% Ash Tails 52.~5% Ash 37.8~% Ash Bird 9.90% Ash 11.85% Ash Pond 56014% Ash 61.99% Ash Dewatering Centri- 25.5% H2O 22.2% H O
fuge Cake Moisture 2 Float Yield 9.40% 54O07%
Coal Recovery 16.09% 89.40%
SCREEN ANALYSIS OF FLOAT PRODUCTS
SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASII CONTENT AS~II)ISTRIBUIION
Particle SizeCentri- Product Centri- Product Centri- Product froth 1 froth 1 froth 65 Mesh 12.8 4203 5.09 7.20 5.0 23.6 325-65 Mesh42~5 3203 7.69 10.97 25.1 27.4 - 325 Mesh 44.7 25.5 20.40 24D80 69.1 49.0 Float Product100.0 100.0 13.04 12.91100.0 100.0 In the abo-ve table, the term "bird" refers to a bird or dewatering centrifuge "feed" is the orig.inal material going through the flotation cell, "float" is the clean coal recovered from the process, "tails" are the waste materials recovered and:"p~nd" refers to a settling pond of tailings.
2~3 The material of Example 2 product 2) when tested at a level of a pound per ton of coal gave a 79O5% by weight clean coal recovery in laboratory studies. At a level of 0.8 pound per ton, an 84% by weight recovery was obtained.
In contrast, a frother material consisting of 0.3 pounds per ton of MIBC and one pound per ton of #2 fuel oil gave only a 78% recovery.
Example 8 Rroduct 3 when tested on a coal feed at a level of 0.6 pound per ton yielded an 84.7% by weight recovery. In contrast, 0.5 pound per ton of ~IBC along with 1.5 pounds per ton of #2 fuel oil gave the same recovery level.
Three tenths pound per ton of MIBC and 1.5 pounds per ton of #2 fuel oil gave a recovery of only 81.2% by weight on the coal tested.
Example 9 Product 4 was tested at a feed rate of 4~ cc per minute to a coal flotation cell. A recovery of 85.5% by weight was obtained. Using a com-mercially available material as the frother, Aerofroth 76*, a material available from the American Cyanimid Company and believed to be a C4 - C8 alcohol mixture, in combination with an equal weight percent of #l fuel oil at the same feed rate, only 74.6% by weight recovery was obtained.
Although the invention has been described in considerable detail with specific reference to certain advantageous embodiments thereof, variations and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention as described in the specification and defined in the appended claims.
* Trade Mark -8-
Claims (10)
PROPERTY OR PRIVILEGE IS CLAIMED ARE DEFINED AS FOLLOWS:
1. A coal flotation reagent comprising a frother, hydrocarbon liquid as a collector and a hydrocarbon liquid dispersant, wherein the hydrocarbon dispersant is a material which will emulsify the hydrocarbon liquid when the flotation reagent is added to an aqueous coal slurry.
2. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 1 wherein said frother is a member selected from the group consisting of a blend of alcohols, methylisobutylcarbinol and pine oil.
3. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 1 wherein said hydrocarbon liquid dispersant is selected from the group con-sisting of dialkylphenoxypolyethyleneoxyethanol, ethyleneoxy-alkylphenol, ethyleneoxy adduct of a fatty alcohol and dioctyl-sulfosuccinate.
4. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 2 wherein said hydrocarbon liquid dispersant is selected from the group con-sisting of dialkylphenoxypolyethyleneoxyethanol, ethyleneoxy-alkylphenol, ethyleneoxy adduct of a fatty alcohol and dioctyl-sulfosuccinate.
5. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 1, 2 or 3 wherein said hydrocarbon liquid is fuel oil.
6. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 4 wherein said hydrocarbon liquid is fuel oil.
7. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 1 comprising from about 95 to 20% by weight of frother, from about 5 to 80% by weight of fuel oil and from about 2 to 20% by weight of fuel oil dispersant.
8. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 1 comprising from about 90 to 40% by weight of frother, from about 5 to 60% by weight of fuel oil and from about 3 to 9% by weight of fuel oil dispersant.
9. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 6 comprising from about 95 to 20% by weight of frother, from about 5 to 80% by weight of fuel oil and from about 2 to 20% by weight of fuel oil dispersant.
10. A coal flotation reagent as defined in claim 6 comprising from about 90 to 40% by weight of frother, from about 5 to 60% by weight of fuel oil and from about 3 to 9% by weight of fuel oil dispersant.
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US28376081A | 1981-07-16 | 1981-07-16 | |
| US283,760 | 1981-07-16 |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA1201223A true CA1201223A (en) | 1986-02-25 |
Family
ID=23087439
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA000406190A Expired CA1201223A (en) | 1981-07-16 | 1982-06-29 | Coal flotation reagents |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CA (1) | CA1201223A (en) |
Cited By (7)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US4770767A (en) * | 1987-05-06 | 1988-09-13 | The Dow Chemical Company | Method for the froth flotation of coal |
| US4820406A (en) * | 1987-05-06 | 1989-04-11 | The Dow Chemical Company | Method for the froth flotation of coal |
| US4857221A (en) * | 1986-05-14 | 1989-08-15 | Fospur Limited | Recovering coal fines |
| US4859318A (en) * | 1987-10-16 | 1989-08-22 | Fospur Limited | Recovering coal fines |
| US4956077A (en) * | 1987-11-17 | 1990-09-11 | Fospur Limited | Froth flotation of mineral fines |
| US5122290A (en) * | 1989-07-29 | 1992-06-16 | Fospur Limited | Froth flotation of calcium borate minerals |
| US5379902A (en) * | 1993-11-09 | 1995-01-10 | The United States Of America As Represented By The United States Department Of Energy | Method for simultaneous use of a single additive for coal flotation, dewatering, and reconstitution |
-
1982
- 1982-06-29 CA CA000406190A patent/CA1201223A/en not_active Expired
Cited By (8)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US4857221A (en) * | 1986-05-14 | 1989-08-15 | Fospur Limited | Recovering coal fines |
| US4770767A (en) * | 1987-05-06 | 1988-09-13 | The Dow Chemical Company | Method for the froth flotation of coal |
| US4820406A (en) * | 1987-05-06 | 1989-04-11 | The Dow Chemical Company | Method for the froth flotation of coal |
| US4859318A (en) * | 1987-10-16 | 1989-08-22 | Fospur Limited | Recovering coal fines |
| US4956077A (en) * | 1987-11-17 | 1990-09-11 | Fospur Limited | Froth flotation of mineral fines |
| US5051199A (en) * | 1987-11-17 | 1991-09-24 | Fospur Limited | Froth flotation of mineral fines |
| US5122290A (en) * | 1989-07-29 | 1992-06-16 | Fospur Limited | Froth flotation of calcium borate minerals |
| US5379902A (en) * | 1993-11-09 | 1995-01-10 | The United States Of America As Represented By The United States Department Of Energy | Method for simultaneous use of a single additive for coal flotation, dewatering, and reconstitution |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| AU2017254943B2 (en) | Depressants for mineral ore flotation | |
| EP3052242B1 (en) | Method of enhancing collector performance in mineral flotation | |
| Cebeci | The investigation of the floatability improvement of Yozgat Ayrıdam lignite using various collectors | |
| US10384958B2 (en) | Glycerides and fatty acid mixtures and methods of using same | |
| EP3052243B1 (en) | Method and use of frother microemulsion for mineral flotation | |
| AU2008265790B2 (en) | Methyl isobutyl carbinol mixture and methods of using the same | |
| US8257608B2 (en) | Process and composition for froth flotation | |
| US4309282A (en) | Process of phosphate ore beneficiation in the presence of residual organic polymeric flocculants | |
| US20130284642A1 (en) | Method of beneficiation of phosphate | |
| US4756823A (en) | Particle separation | |
| US8469197B2 (en) | Blended frother for producing low ash content clean coal through flotation | |
| CA1201223A (en) | Coal flotation reagents | |
| US4526680A (en) | Silicone glycol collectors in the beneficiation of fine coal by froth flotation | |
| US4915825A (en) | Process for coal flotation using 4-methyl cyclohexane methanol frothers | |
| US2231265A (en) | Process of ore concentration | |
| US4330398A (en) | Flotation of phosphate ores with anionic agents | |
| EP0270018B1 (en) | Use of n-alkyl and n-alkenyl-aspartic acids as co-collectors for the flotation of non-sulfidic minerals | |
| GB2143155A (en) | A method of separating fine coal particles from refuse | |
| GB2093735A (en) | Froth flotation | |
| US4867868A (en) | Selective flotation of inorganic sulfides from coal | |
| Ga̧siorek | Waste pyritic coal as a raw material for energetic industry | |
| CN109201341A (en) | Compound the low-order coal coal slime flotation collector and its preparation method and application of sour aldehyde ether | |
| US4372844A (en) | Aromatic and benzothiophene extender oil composition for ore floatation | |
| US4904373A (en) | Fossil resin flotation from coal by selective coagulation and depression of coal | |
| US5318185A (en) | Surface chemistry control for selective fossil resin flotation |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| MKEX | Expiry |