A coal preparation plant typically has multiple cleaning circuits based on size of coal particles. Each circuit is operated to produce the same product quality so that the blend of clean coal meets the targeted product quality constraints. Though, this approach of producing the clean coal satisfies the product quality constraints as given by the customer, it may suffer from the loss of overall clean coal yield by 1–2%. Numerous studies conducted in the past illustrate that the optimal yield can be obtained by operating each circuit to produce the same incremental product quality. However, this approach is good enough for single product quality constraints but it fails to produce optimal yield with multiple product quality constraints. A newer optimization technique known as particle swarming is developed for the yield optimization of a coal preparation plant while satisfying multiple product quality constraints. The optimization model incorporates two product quality constraints - product ash and sulfur assay. The results indicate that an increment of 2.73% in the yield could be achieved by both equal incremental ash quality approach and particle swarm optimization. The additional yield can generate extra revenue of $5,460,000 per annum without significantly adding to the implementation/operation cost.

1.
Sarkar, G.G., Sakha, S., Lahiri, A., 1960, “A Graphical Method of Determining Optimum Operating Conditions for Washing Mixed Coals,” Journal of the Institute of Fuel, 33(230).
2.
Lyman, G.J., 1993, Computational procedures in optimization of beneficiation circuits based on incremental grade or ash content,” Trans. Inst. Min. Metall., pp. C159–C162.
3.
Salama
A. I. A
,
1998
, “
Coal washability characteristics index utilizing the M-Curve and the CM-Curve
,”
Int. J. of Mineral Processing
,
55
, pp.
139
152
.
4.
Salama
A. I. A
,
1991
,
Graphical techniques for estimating the separation characteristics based on mass distribution
,”
Coal Preparation
,
9
, pp.
51
63
.
5.
Salama, A.I.A, 1986, “Yield maximization in coal blending,” 10th Intl. Coal Preparation Congress, September.
6.
Luttrell, G.H., Honaker, R.Q. and Yoon, R.H., 2004, “Optimization of the coal fuel supply chain: a coal preparation perspective,” 29th International Technical Conference on Coal Utilization, 2, pp. 1356–1364.
7.
Gupta, Vishal, Mohanty, M.K., Mahajan, Ajay and Biswal, S.K., 2004, “Performance Optimization of a Coal Preparation Plant Using Genetic Algorithms,” ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress, November 13–19, Anaheim, California.
8.
Gupta, Vishal, Mohanty, M.K., Mahajan, Ajay and Biswal, S.K., 2005, “Genetic Algorithms - A Novel Technique for Optimization of Coal Preparation Plant,” International Seminar on Mineral Processing Technology, January 6–8, Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India.
9.
Bergh, F.V.D. and Engelbrecht, A.P., 2004, “A Cooperative Approach to Particle Swarm Optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computing, 8 (3).
10.
Kennedy, James and Eberhart, Russell, 1995, “Particle Swarm Optimization,” Proc. IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, IV, pp. 1942–1948.
11.
Fisher
R. A.
,
1936
, “
The use of Multiple Measurements in Taxonomic Problems
,”
Annals of Eugenics
,
7
, pp.
179
188
.
12.
Pomeroy, Paul, 2003, “An Introduction to Particle Swarm Optimization,” http://www.adaptiveview.com.
13.
Mendes
Rui
,
Kennedy
James
and
Neves
Jose
,
2004
, “
The Fully Informed Particle Swarm: Simpler, Maybe Better
,”
IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation
,
8
(
3
), pp.
204
210
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.