The effect of coal properties on the viscosity of coalwater slurries

q
G. Atesok, F. Boylu, A.A. Sirkeci
*
, H. Dincer
Coal and Mineral Processing Section, Department of Mineral Engineering, Mining Faculty, Istanbul Technical University, Ayazaga, Istanbul 80626, Turkey
Received 15 October 2001; revised 4 April 2002; accepted 5 April 2002; available online 29 April 2002
Abstract
Studies on coalwater slurries (CWSs) have been conducted for many years to replace fuel oil. In this research project, the effect of coal
properties on CWSs have been investigated using two Turkish coals of different ranks and a Siberian bituminous coal. Physical, chemical and
surface properties of coal samples were determined. Furthermore, adsorption tests were carried out in order to put forward the effect of
additive adsorption on the viscosity of CWSs. Viscosity measurements were realized for CWSs of various solid ratios by weight that were
prepared using coal samples having mean particle sizes of 19, 35 and 50 mm. q 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Keywords: Coalwater slurries; Viscosity; Surface properties
1. Introduction
Coalwater slurries (CWSs) with advantages such as the
production of high solids concentration, savings from
transport, storage and dewatering costs are regarded as an
alternative to fuel oil. The technology for the combustion of
CWSs has developed over the years.
Viscosity is one of the most important rhelogical proper-
ties of CWSs and it is desired to be as low as possible.
Viscosity that affects the uidity of the CWS primarily
depends on the coal properties [1,2] and there is a delicate
balance between the viscosity, uidity and the settlement
rate of particles.
Coal type is not an important parameter when preparing
CWSs, however, the effect of coal properties on the viscos-
ity of the CWS should be determined in advance. It was
reported that the water adsorption capacity of the coal
plays an important role in the rheologic properties of
CWSs [3,4]. Van Krevelen [5] concluded that the porosity
of the coal is a function of the inherent moisture.
Al Taweel and Fadaly [6] concluded that as O/C and H/C
ratios of the coal increase so does the surface activity and
thus the coal can readily adsorb chemical additives. On the
other hand, bituminous coals with lower O/C ratios cause
better uidity compared to younger coals with higher O/C
ratios [7]. Boger et al. [8] proposed that as the coal rank
decreased substantial increases in the apparent viscosity
were observed. In order to prepare CWSs with high solids
content using low rank coals, the coal should have low
porosity and highly be hydrophobic [9,10].
The degree of coal wettability plays an important role in
the preparation of CWSs since only the wettable portions of
the coal surface can acquire a surface charge [11]. Funk [12]
found that high values of zeta potential led to minimum
viscosity and good dispersion. As for the maceral structure
of the coal, it was observed that fusinite increased the
viscosity of the CWS [7] because of the porous structure
and higher specic surface area.
The signicance of the particle size and distribution
of the coal used in CWSs was put forward by Round
and Hessari [13] and Yavuz [14]. According to Elliot
and Gliddon [15], CWSs with the best rheologic proper-
ties are obtained with particle size distributions to give
the maximum bulk density. Keller and Keller [16] suggested
that when the particle size range increased, viscosity values
drop at low shear rates because of the decrease in Brownian
movements. However, at high shear rates a decrease in the
viscosity is observed depending on the increasing bulk
density.
In the scope of this investigation possible use of Turkish
brown coals in CWSs was studied. In this respect the
physical and chemical properties of coal samples were
determined, furthermore, the surface characteristics were
analyzed and adsorption tests for the chemical additives
were performed. Two Turkish brown coal samples of differ-
ent ranks from Soma and IstanbulAgacli districts were
employed in the experimental work. In addition to the
Fuel 81 (2002) 18551858
0016-2361/02/$ - see front matter q 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
PII: S0016-2361(02)00107-2
www.fuelrst.com
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 190-212-285-3011; fax: 190-212-285-
6128.
E-mail address: sirkecia@itu.edu.tr (A.A. Sirkeci).
q
Published rst on the web via Fuelrst.comhttp://www.fuelrst.com
Turkish coals a bituminous coal sample from Siberia was
also used as a reference sample.
2. Experimental
2.1. Materials
The coal samples were ground with a laboratory size ball
mill and classied into 2210 1106, 2106 174,
274 153, 253 135 and 238 mm size fractions. Those
size fractions were used to obtain experimental samples
with mean particle size of 50, 36 and 19 mm, respectively.
Some physical properties of experimental samples are
presented in Table 1. Table 2 shows the results of standard
and elemental analysis of coal samples on dry basis.
Chemical additives in CWSs are used for various reasons.
Those include dispersant agents, grinding aids in ball mills
and suspension stabilizers to prevent particle settlement
[1,17]. In this investigation PSS (sodium polystyrene
sulphonate), a product of Japanese COM and Lion Corpora-
tion, was used as the dispersant agent. The molecular weight
of PSS is 14,000 and it has 95% of sulphonation degree.
CMCNa (sodium salt of carboxymethyl cellulose), which
is a water-soluble polymer, was the stabilizer used in the
tests for the preparation of CWSs. Its molecular weight is
8000. Based on the results of previous investigations, the
amount of chemical agents used was chosen as 1% by
weight of the solids of which 90% was PSS and 10% was
CMCNa [1].
2.2. Methods
The porosity of coal samples was calculated using
apparent and true densities. Specic surface area of coal
samples was measured employing BET method. Grind-
ability was determined using `Hardgrove index' method.
A Zeta Meter 3.0 type device was used to perform zeta
potential measurements. A coal sample of 0.1 g was condi-
tioned in 100 ml of solution for 10 min during which the pH
was maintained at the desired value by acid (HCl) or base
(NaOH).
Viscosity measurements were performed employing a
RVD2-Brookeld rotating type viscosimeter. Coalwater
G. Atesok et al. / Fuel 81 (2002) 18551858 1856
Table 1
Physical properties of coal samples
Coal type Average particle size (mm) Specic surface area (m
2
/g) Porosity (%) Volume fraction Hardgrove index
Siberia 19 0.355 9 0.60 86.5
35 0.325 9.2 0.63
50 0.263 8.7 0.64
Soma 19 0.418 12.7 0.58 57.5
35 0.382 11.8 0.63
50 0.343 12.2 0.64
IstanbulAgacli 19 0.638 19.1 0.56 41.7
35 0.560 18.3 0.62
50 0.483 20.5 0.63
Table 2
Proximate and ultimate analyses of coal samples on dry base
Component Coal type
Siberia Soma Agacli
Proximate analyses Ash (%) 6.53 7.58 14.43
Total sulfur (%) 0.42 0.89 0.93
Volatile matter (%) 22.35 41.1 37.5
Fixed carbon (%) 71.12 51.32 48
Inherent moisture (%) 4.1 12.6 18.9
Upper caloric value (kcal/kg) 7600 6334 5120
Ultimate analyses C (%) 76.5 56.45 52.3
H (%) 4.73 4.95 5.1
O (%) 10.5 11.8 15.53
N (%) 1.48 1.4 1.3
S (%) 0.4 0.9 0.95
Pyritic sulfur (%) 0.24 0.45 0.38
Degree of oxidation
a
0.0125 0.0202 0.0303
O/C 0.137 0.209 0.297
a
Degree of oxidation (%O 1%N 1%S 2%H)/(8 %C).
slurries were prepared by dispersing the coal in distilled
water with a mechanical mixer operating at 1200 rpm
for 20 min then the mixture was allowed to stand for
24 h. Prior to each measurement the sample was agitated at
1200 rpm for 5 min and the measurements were taken in the
rst 15 s employing a rotational speed of 100 rpm. In all
tests the pH value of the slurry varied between 7.05 and
7.25 and the temperature was kept constant within 25 ^
2 8C:
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Zeta potential measurements
Zeta potential measurements were realized using samples
in the absence and presence of chemical additives. The
results for all coal samples are presented in Fig. 1.
It is seen in Fig. 1 that the addition of chemical additives
(dispersant 1stabilizer) dramatically lowers zeta potentials
of the coal samples. All coal samples acquire 260 mV zeta
potential values around pH 10 in the presence of chemical
additives. This nding is important since above an absolute
value of 60 mV zeta potential adequate dispersion can be
sustained [1].
3.2. Viscosity tests
The viscosity of the CWS was measured using coal
samples having mean particle sizes of 19, 35 and 50 mm
for various solid ratios by weight. The results are presented
in Fig. 2. Tests conducted with 19 mm mean particle size
G. Atesok et al. / Fuel 81 (2002) 18551858 1857
Fig. 1. The results of zeta potential measurements of coal samples.
Fig. 2. Viscosity measurement of coal samples having different mean particle sizes.
show that CWSs with viscosity values below 1000 cp could
only be prepared at solid ratios less than 50% that is not
practical.
The effect of coal type on the viscosity is more
pronounced at 35 mm mean particle size. Slurry viscosity
for Siberian coal is less sensitive to changes in the solids
load such that it remains below 1000 cp up to 60% solids
ratio by weight. However, in the case of Turkish coals
viscosity reaches 1000 cp around 5055% solids ratio and
it sharply increases at solid ratios above 50% especially for
Istanbul coal sample that has higher porosity and specic
surface area.
The rank of the coal, hence its porosity, volatile matter, C
and O contents are the factors causing different slurry visc-
osities. In Table 3, solid ratios for which 1000 cp viscosity is
attained are seen for three different mean particle sizes. The
higher the rank of the coal the more solids the slurry can be
fed. This becomes especially obvious at coarser mean
particle sizes.
Investigations on CWSs have mostly been conducted
with bituminous or semi-bituminous coals. The O/C ratios
of these coals vary between 0.1 and 0.3 and their inherent
moisture values are low depending on the porosity. Turkish
coal samples used in this investigation are lignitic brown
coal samples. They have lower Hargrove index, higher
porosity and inherent moisture values compared to Siberian
coal samples. Furthermore, they have exceptionally high O/
C ratios and their oxidation degrees are 23 times higher
than Siberian coal sample.
CWSs prepared using Turkish brown coal samples were
found to have similar properties to those prepared with
bituminous coals by other investigators [35,7,8]. However,
depending on the properties of the brown coal samples, the
limitations on the viscosity values forced to be worked with
lower solid ratios compared to bituminous coals.
4. Conclusions
1. The addition of chemical additives is necessary to
increase the absolute value of zeta potentials of experi-
mental coal samples to sustain stability.
2. The adsorption density of PSS decreases in the order of
decreasing coal rank, i.e. Agacli, Soma and Siberian
coals. This is because the coal surface is more hydrophobic
for higher rank coals and thus adsorption enhances
through hydrophobic bonding between the surface and
the hydrocarbon chain of the chemical additive.
3. Low rank Turkish coals used in this investigation permit
less solids loading capacity compared to the Siberian coal
for the same slurry viscosity. This is a function of
porosity, moisture absorption capacity, volatile matter,
C, O and H contents. When water is added to the coal
it lls the pores and consequently less water remains
available between particles in the case of higher porosity.
Therefore, particle movement is hindered and viscosity
increases.
References
[1] NEDO (New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Orga-
nisation). CWM in Japan; 1997.
[2] Boylu F, Atesok G. Coalwater mixtures and their technologies. Fifth
Coal Utilisation and Technology Symposium, Ankara, Turkey; 2000.
p. 195212.
[3] Cassasa EZ, Partt GD, Toor EW, Rao SA, Sommer HT, Mitra A,
Padmanabhan J, Matsuzaki Y, Marnicio R, Pleskow M. A program of
basic research on the utilisation of CWM fuels. Final report to the US
Department of Energy. Pittsburgh, PA: Pittsburgh Energy Technol-
ogy Center; 1984.
[4] Kaji R, Muranaka Y, Otsuka K, Hishinuma Y. Water absorption by
coals: effects of pore structure and surface oxygen. Fuel
1986;65:28891.
[5] Van Krevelen DW. Coal. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1961 p. 127.
[6] Al Taweel AM, Fadaly O. Technical report No. 0.07 (TR-007). Hali-
fax, Canada: Technical University of Nova Scotia; 1985. p. 162.
[7] Wu J, Song Y, Zhang C, Li X, Wang Z. The surface properties of coal
and their effects on behaviour of CWS. Eighth International Sympo-
sium on Coal Slurry Fuels Preparation and Utilisation, Orlando,
Florida, May 2730 1961; p. 108.
[8] Boger DV, Leong YK, Mainwaring DE, Christie GB. Victorian brown
coalwater suspensions as liquid fuels. III. European conference on
coal liquid mixtures, International chemical engineering symposium
series, No. 107, Malmo 1415 October 1987 p. 112.
[9] Leong YK, Boger DV, Christie GB, Mainwarin DE. Rheol Acta
1993;32:27785.
[10] Skolnik EG, Scheffee RS. Suitability of coals for CWM. Fifth Inter-
national Workshop on CoalLiquid Fuels Technology, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, Canada; October 1418 1985. p. 26576.
[11] Siffert B, Hamieh T. The effect of mineral impurities on the charge
and surface potential of coal: application to obtaining concentrated
suspensions of coal in water. Colloids Surf 1989;35:2740.
[12] Funk JE. US Patent 4,282,006; 1981.
[13] Round GF, Hessari AR. The effect of size distribution and pH on the
rheology of coal slurries. Particular Multiphase Process 1985;3:32940.
[14] Yavuz R. Investigation of lignitewater mixtures. PhD Thesis. Istan-
bul: Istanbul Technical University; 1996.
[15] Elliot DE. Gliddon BJ. Hydrotransport 1, Paper G2; 1970.
[16] Keller DS, Keller Jr. DV. The effect of particle size distribution on the
antithixotropic and shear thickening properties of coalwater disper-
sions. J Rheol 1991;35(8):1583607.
[17] Bognolo G. Coal water slurries. Spec Publ R Soc Chem 1987;59:235
49.
G. Atesok et al. / Fuel 81 (2002) 18551858 1858
Table 3
Results of solids ratio by weight of coals (1000 cp viscosity at 100 rpm)
Mean particle size (mm) Siberia solids ratio (%) Soma solids ratio (%) IstanbulAgacli solids ratio (%)
19 48 48 46
35 56 54 49
50 63 58 53