11.07.2015 Views

Dust Control Handbook for Industrial Minerals Mining and Processing

Dust Control Handbook for Industrial Minerals Mining and Processing

Dust Control Handbook for Industrial Minerals Mining and Processing

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 6.5. Open-top bag being loaded with product(normal whole-grain material, which is less dusty).The second <strong>and</strong> most common bag type used in mineral processing operations is the pasted valvebag. The choice of valve type from among different commercially available bag valves can be asignificant factor in the ability to effectively seal 50- to 100-pound bags of product <strong>and</strong> tominimize the amount of dust liberated during the bag filling, conveying, <strong>and</strong> stacking process.From a study per<strong>for</strong>med a number of years ago, five different valves were tested to compare theireffectiveness at sealing the bag <strong>and</strong> minimizing dust liberation. The valves were: st<strong>and</strong>ardpaper, polyethylene, extended polyethylene, double trap, <strong>and</strong> foam [USBM 1986b; Cecala <strong>and</strong>Muldoon 1986]. By far the most effective valve was the extended polyethylene (Figure 6.6).This is simply a plastic valve approximately two inches longer than the st<strong>and</strong>ard paper orpolyethylene valve.In the study, two factors determined the effectiveness of the bag valve: valve length <strong>and</strong> valvematerial. The longer valves were more effective in reducing the amount of product blowback<strong>and</strong> bag-generated dust. However, it is speculated that when the valve length became too muchlonger than the fill nozzle, it began to negatively impact the bag filling per<strong>for</strong>mance. For thesecond factor, which is valve material, foam was the most effective material tested. The foamvalve was the shortest valve tested <strong>for</strong> the evaluation at four inches in length, while the extendedpolyethylene valve was six inches long. The rankings of valve types from the most to leasteffective were as follows: extended polyethylene, foam, st<strong>and</strong>ard paper, polyethylene, <strong>and</strong>double trap. Figure 6.7 shows a comparison of the extended polyethylene <strong>and</strong> the foam valvecompared to the st<strong>and</strong>ard paper valve. Respirable dust levels ranged from approximately 45 to65 percent lower with the extended polyethylene as compared to the st<strong>and</strong>ard paper valve[USBM 1986b; Cecala <strong>and</strong> Muldoon 1986].Bagging 163

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!