Experimental study of surfactants’ performance for suppressing coal dust with respirable size

• Published in: Fuel (Guildford) Vol. 352; p. 129035
• Main Authors: Zhao, Zidong, Chang, Ping, Xu, Guang, Ghosh, Apurna, Morla, Ramakrishna
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 15.11.2023
• Subjects: Coal dust control; Coal dust size; Respirable dust; Suppression efficiency; Surfactant; The wind tunnel test; Coal dust control; Suppression efficiency; Respirable dust; Surfactant; The wind tunnel test; Coal dust size
• ISSN: 0016-2361; 1873-7153
• DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2023.129035

•A factorial experiment was designed to evaluate coal dust suppression efficiency.•The wind tunnel test was conducted to evaluate the impacts of respirable coal dust.•The respirable dust size of less than 10 µm was classified into four categories.•Two surfactants were evaluated with different concentrations and ionicities. Long-term exposure to coal dust can lead to severe health problems in coal workers, including Coal Workers’ Pneumoconiosis, making effective control of coal dust in underground mines essential. Water spraying is a widely used method for controlling coal dust, and adding surfactants can remarkably enhance its effectiveness. While previous studies have examined the influences of different coal particle sizes on surfactant performance, they have primarily focused on inhalable dust with sizes less than 100 µm. The impact of finer particle sizes, such as respirable dust with sizes less than 10 µm, remains inconclusive. This study aims to investigate the effects of respirable dust ranging from 0.1 µm to 10 µm in diameter, on the performance of surfactants. It was found that the surfactants’ performance was weakened significantly with a decrease in the coal dust size. The suppression efficiency for coal dust size between 0.1 µm and 1.0 µm was only half that of size between 4 µm and 10 µm. The primary factors contributing to this result would be the roughness, the specific surface area, the air absorbability, and the number of particles. Furthermore, TX100 surfactant performed slightly better than SDBS in suppressing coal dust. While SDBS performed greater at a concentration of 0.15–0.20%, TX100 had higher suppression efficiency at lower concentrations. This study suggests that future research should focus on improving the suppressing performance of coal dust with finer sizes less than 0.1 µm or 2.5 µm.