Open-air sprays for capturing and controlling airborne float coal dust on longwall faces.

Float dust deposits in coal mine return airways pose a risk in the event of a methane ignition. Controlling airborne dust prior to deposition in the return would make current rock dusting practices more effective and reduce the risk of coal-dust-fueled explosions. The goal of this U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health study is to determine the potential of open-air water sprays to reduce concentrations of airborne float coal dust, smaller than 75 µm in diameter, in longwall face airstreams. This study evaluated unconfined water sprays in a featureless tunnel ventilated at a typical longwall face velocity of 3.6 m/s (700 fpm). Experiments were conducted for two nozzle orientations and two water pressures for hollow cone, full cone, flat fan, air atomizing and hydraulic atomizing spray nozzles. Gravimetric samples show that airborne float dust removal efficiencies averaged 19.6 percent for all sprays under all conditions. The results indicate that the preferred spray nozzle should be operated at high fluid pressures to produce smaller droplets and move more air. These findings agree with past respirable dust control research, providing guidance on spray selection and spray array design in ongoing efforts to control airborne float dust over the entire longwall ventilated opening.

Characterization of airborne float coal dust emitted during continuous mining, longwall mining and belt transport.

Float coal dust is produced by various mining methods, carried by ventilating air and deposited on the floor, roof and ribs of mine airways. If deposited, float dust is re-entrained during a methane explosion. Without sufficient inert rock dust quantities, this float coal dust can propagate an explosion throughout mining entries. Consequently, controlling float coal dust is of critical interest to mining operations. Rock dusting, which is the adding of inert material to airway surfaces, is the main control technique currently used by the coal mining industry to reduce the float coal dust explosion hazard. To assist the industry in reducing this hazard, the Pittsburgh Mining Research Division of the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health initiated a project to investigate methods and technologies to reduce float coal dust in underground coal mines through prevention, capture and suppression prior to deposition. Field characterization studies were performed to determine quantitatively the sources, types and amounts of dust produced during various coal mining processes. The operations chosen for study were a continuous miner section, a longwall section and a coal-handling facility. For each of these operations, the primary dust sources were confirmed to be the continuous mining machine, longwall shearer and conveyor belt transfer points, respectively. Respirable and total airborne float dust samples were collected and analyzed for each operation, and the ratio of total airborne float coal dust to respirable dust was calculated. During the continuous mining process, the ratio of total airborne float coal dust to respirable dust ranged from 10.3 to 13.8. The ratios measured on the longwall face were between 18.5 and 21.5. The total airborne float coal dust to respirable dust ratio observed during belt transport ranged between 7.5 and 21.8.

Experimental study on foam coverage on simulated longwall roof.

Testing was conducted to determine the ability of foam to maintain roof coverage in a simulated longwall mining environment. Approximately 27 percent of respirable coal mine dust can be attributed to longwall shield movement, and developing controls for this dust source has been difficult. The application of foam is a possible dust control method for this source. Laboratory testing of two foam agents was conducted to determine the ability of the foam to adhere to a simulated longwall face roof surface. Two different foam generation methods were used: compressed air and blower air. Using a new imaging technology, image processing and analysis utilizing ImageJ software produced quantifiable results of foam roof coverage. For compressed air foam in 3.3 m/s (650 fpm) ventilation, 98 percent of agent A was intact while 95 percent of agent B was intact on the roof at three minutes after application. At 30 minutes after application, 94 percent of agent A was intact while only 20 percent of agent B remained. For blower air in 3.3 m/s (650 fpm) ventilation, the results were dependent upon nozzle type. Three different nozzles were tested. At 30 min after application, 74 to 92 percent of foam agent A remained, while 3 to 50 percent of foam agent B remained. Compressed air foam seems to remain intact for longer durations and is easier to apply than blower air foam. However, more water drained from the foam when using compressed air foam, which demonstrates that blower air foam retains more water at the roof surface. Agent A seemed to be the better performer as far as roof application is concerned. This testing demonstrates that roof application of foam is feasible and is able to withstand a typical face ventilation velocity, establishing this technique's potential for longwall shield dust control.

Lack of utility of a Limulus amoebocyte lysate assay in the diagnosis of urethral discharges in men.

We evaluated a Limulus amoebocyte lysate assay (LALA) test kit for the diagnosis of gonorrhea in 883 unselected men with urethral discharge. Results were compared with those of Gram-stained smears and Martin-Lewis cultures. Of 331 men with gonococcal urethritis and 552 men with nongonoccal urethritis, 125 (37.8%) and 503 (91.1%), respectively, could not be evaluated by LALA owing either to insufficient discharge specimen to perform the test (569 or 64.4%) or to other exclusion criteria (59 or 6.7%). Of 255 LALA-evaluable discharges, LALA correctly diagnosed 252 (98.8%), compared with 244 (95.7%) for the Gram-stained smear. However, the Gram-stained smear also correctly diagnosed 96.5% of 456 men with insufficient discharge for LALA testing. The clinical utility of the LALA test kit is severely limited by performance criteria that exclude the majority of unselected men with urethritis. In addition, it is more technically cumbersome, time consuming, and costly than Gram-stained smears. Further test modifications are unlikely to overcome these inherent disadvantages of LALA.