DISCLAIMER This reportwaspreparedas an accountof worksponsoredby un agency of the UnitedStates Government, Neitherthe UnitedStates Government nor any agencythereof,norany of their employ_s, makesany warranty,expressor implied,or assumesany legal liabilityor responsi. MASTER bility for the accuracy,compleleness, or usefulnessof any information,apparatus,product,or processdisclose.d, or representsthat its use wouldnot infringeprivatelyowned rights,Refer-enc¢ hereinto any

more »

... process,or serviceby trade name, trademark, manufacturer,or otherwise,dots not necessarilyconstituteor imply its endorsement, recommendation,or favoringby the United States Governmentor any agency there.of, The views and opinionsof authors expressed herein do not necessarilystate or refle.x:t those of the _i_ UnitedStatesGovernment or anyagency thereof. D[STRtBt.JTICgl OF' THIS DOCUMENT tS UNLIMITED p & i SUMMARYAND FUTURE WORX The fundamental chemistry for selective adsorption of magnetizing reagent on coal-assoclated minerals to enhance the magnetic susceptibilities of minerals have been established in Phase I study. The application of the results on coal cleaning for the Phase II study is completed this quarter. Illinois No. 6, Ohio Lower Kittannlng, and West Virginia Pocahontas coals have been investigated to determine the most effective way of using the magnetizing method for coal cleaning. The results show that the best separation performance is obtained on finely ground coals. Up to 91Z ash reduction (from 22Z to 3.3Z ash content) and 93Z pyritic sulfur reduction at 70Z BTU recovery can be obtained with the magnetizing approach when Illinois No. 6 coal is processed at 90Z passing 500 mesh. Even at a coarser sizes such as 90Z passing 200 mesh, 86Z ash reduction and 87Z pyritic sulfur reduction with 74Z coal BTU recovery can still be obtained. Similar results are obtained for Lower Kittannlng and Pocahontas coal. In the next quarter, the Phase III study will be conducted to examine the separator parameters.