北露天煤矿卡车道路保湿型抑尘剂研发及工业试验

赵晓亮; 杜婧; 夏诗杨; 宋子岭; 杨国华; 王闯; 郭猛; 马志敏

doi:10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20230355

北露天煤矿卡车道路保湿型抑尘剂研发及工业试验

doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20230355

1.
辽宁工程技术大学环境科学与工程学院
2.
辽宁工程技术大学矿业学院
3.
内蒙古电投能源股份有限公司北露天煤矿

基金项目: 国家重点研发计划项目（2019YFC180380103）；辽宁省教育厅科技项目（LJ2020JCL031）

详细信息

作者简介:
赵晓亮（1981—），男，副教授，主要研究方向为大气污染控制工程、粉尘污染控制、矿山环境工程，zhaoxiaoliang2008@126.com

通讯作者:
夏诗杨（1996—），女，博士研究生，主要研究方向为矿山环境工程，1194150360@qq.com

中图分类号: X511
计量
- 文章访问数: 215
- HTML全文浏览量: 70
- PDF下载量: 42
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-05-10
- 录用日期: 2023-11-08
- 修回日期: 2023-10-09

Research and industrial testing of truck road moisturizing dust suppressant for North Open-pit Coal Mine

1.
College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Liaoning Technical University
2.
College of Mining, Liaoning Technical University
3.
North Open Pit Coal Mine of Inner Mongolia Power Investment Energy Co., Ltd.

摘要

摘要:
卡车道路运输是露天煤矿最大粉尘源之一，尤其在夏季高温环境下路面水分蒸发量极大、卡车扰动强度极高。以霍林河北露天煤矿卡车路面为研究对象，分析NET200自卸卡车轮胎黏结粉尘受力状态及产尘机理；采集并测试道路岩土含水率、化学官能团及粒径分布，确定研发抑尘剂保湿、润湿及凝并的功能定位。单体优选试验确定保湿剂丙三醇、润湿剂十二烷基苯磺酸钠、凝并剂聚丙烯酰胺作为正交试验材料，以蒸发量作为主控指标，采用极差法确定保湿型抑尘剂最佳配方为3.0%丙三醇、0.25%十二烷基苯磺酸钠、0.05%聚丙烯酰胺；通过观测不同喷洒量下粉尘表面成膜状态和含水率变化，确定单位路面最佳喷洒量为1.6~2.0 L/m²。北露天煤矿12 d抑尘工业试验结果表明：单次试验周期内所有路段全尘、呼尘浓度均呈逐渐增高趋势，3次试验期间喷洒抑尘剂承重、非承重路段的全尘、呼尘浓度均显著低于常规洒水路段，且均分别低于全尘（4 mg/m³）、呼尘（2 mg/m³）规定限值，表明自主研发保湿型抑尘剂单次喷洒有效抑尘时间为3~4 d；喷洒抑尘剂能够有效提高粉尘中大颗粒占比，凝并团聚效果显著；喷洒抑尘剂承重、非承重路段土壤平均含水率分别为14%、12%，均为常规洒水路段2倍以上。保湿型抑尘剂能够大幅度延长单次喷洒有效抑尘时间，对矿区道路等动态工况抑尘具有显著适用性。
- 道路粉尘 /
- 露天煤矿 /
- 保湿型 /
- 抑尘剂 /
- 工业试验
Abstract:
Truck road transport is one of the largest sources of dust in open-pit coal mines, especially in the high-temperature environment in summer where road moisture evaporation is extremely high and truck disturbance intensity is extremely high. Taking truck pavement of Horin River North Open-pit Coal Mine as the research background, the stress state and dust production mechanism of NET200 dump truck tire adhesion dust were analyzed; the moisture content, chemical functional groups and particle size distribution of the road soil were collected and tested, and the functional positioning of moisture, wetting and coagulation of the developed dust suppressant was determined. Monomer preference experiments were carried out to determine the humectant glycerol (B), wetting agent sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate (T) and coagulant polyacrylamide (N) as the orthogonal test materials, with evaporation as the main control index. The range method was used to determine the best formulation of humectant dust suppressant as 3.0% glycerol, 0.25% sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate and 0.05% polyacrylamide. Through the observation of the dust surface film-forming state and water content changes under different spraying volumes, the best spraying volume was determined to be 1.6-2.0 L/m² per unit of road surface. The results of the 12 d dust suppression industrial test in North Open-pit Coal Mine showed that the concentrations of total dust and respirable dust in all sections of the single test cycle were gradually increasing, and the concentrations of total dust and repairable dust in the dust suppressant sprayed load-bearing and non-load-bearing sections during the three tests were significantly lower than the corresponding sections of conventional water sprinkling, and they were lower than the specified limits of 4 mg/m³ of total dust and 2 mg/m³ of respirable dust, respectively, indicating that the independently developed moisturizing type dust suppressant spraying effective dust suppression time of single time was 3-4 d. Spraying dust suppressant could effectively increase the proportion of large particles in the dust, and condensation and agglomeration effect was significant. The average water content of the soil in spraying dust suppressant load-bearing and non-load-bearing section was 14% and 12%, respectively, more than 2 times the conventional sprinkling section. The research shows that the moisturizing dust suppressant can significantly extend the effective dust suppression time of a single spraying, and has significant applicability to dynamic working conditions such as mining roads.
- road dust /
- open-pit coal mine /
- moisturizing type /
- dust suppressant /
- industrial test

HTML全文

图 1 黏结在轮胎上的粉尘的受力状态

注：T_s为轮胎与粉尘的黏结力，与轮胎磨损度、车载重量、粉尘性质等有关；F_c为空气浮力；T_f为粉尘受轮胎摩擦力；F_w为空气阻力；F_b为离心力，与车速、粉尘质量有关；W为粉尘受到的重力作用。

Figure 1. Stress state of the dust bonded on the tire

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 卡车诱导气流下空气压强梯度变化

注：P_h为卡车尾部附近空气压强；P₀为轮胎底部路面附近空气压强。

Figure 2. Variation of air pressure gradient under truck-induced airflow

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 北露天煤矿卡车道路粉尘红外光谱与接触角测试结果

Figure 3. Test results of trunk road dust infrared spectroscopy and contact angle in North Open-pit Coal Mine

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 喷洒保湿剂后粉尘水分蒸发量变化

Figure 4. Variation of dust moisture evaporation after moisturizer spraying

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 喷洒润湿剂后粉尘渗透速率变化

Figure 5. Variation of dust infiltration rate after wetting agent spraying

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 不同体积分数凝并剂溶液黏度变化

Figure 6. Changes in viscosity of coagulant solutions of different concentrations

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 5种不同抑尘剂喷洒量下粉尘表面成膜状态

Figure 7. Five dust surface film forming states under different spraying amounts

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 不同抑尘剂喷洒量下粉尘含水率的变化趋势

Figure 8. Variation trend of dust moisture content under different spraying amounts

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 北露天煤矿夏季抑尘试验现场路段

注：蓝色线、黄色线分别为非承重、承重路段。

Figure 9. Road section of summer dust suppression test site of North Open-pit Coal Mine

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 北露天煤矿夏季抑尘试验现场路面粉尘浓度

注：a1、a2为抑尘承重路段；b1、b2为洒水承重路段；c1、c2为抑尘非承重路段；d1、d2为洒水非承重路段。

Figure 10. Pavement dust concentration of dust suppression test site of North Open-pit Coal Mine

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 北露天煤矿夏季抑尘试验现场路面土壤含水率

Figure 11. Soil moisture content of pavement dust of suppression test site of North Open-pit Coal Mine

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 试验所用试剂

Table 1. Materials used in the experiment

材料种类	材料名称	级别	原料来源
保湿剂	聚丙烯酸钠	分析纯	天津市福晨化学试剂厂
	三乙醇胺	分析纯	济南贝亚特化工科技有限公司
	丙三醇	分析纯	济南贝亚特化工科技有限公司
润湿剂	十二烷基苯磺酸钠	分析纯	天津市福晨化学试剂厂
	椰油酰胺丙基甜菜碱	分析纯	天津市福晨化学试剂厂
	十二烷基硫酸钠	分析纯	天津市福晨化学试剂厂
	十六烷基三甲基溴化铵	分析纯	山东优索华工科技有限公司
凝并剂	聚丙烯酰胺	分析纯	山东优索华工科技有限公司
	羧甲基纤维素	分析纯	江阴海融环保科技有限公司
	羧甲基纤维素钠	分析纯	江阴海融环保科技有限公司
	可溶性淀粉	分析纯	济南贝亚特化工科技有限公司

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 正交试验因素水平

Table 2. Orthogonal test factor levels %　

水平	B	N	T
1	2.5	0.03	0.25
2	3.0	0.04	0.35
3	3.5	0.05	0.45

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 正交试验结果

Table 3. Orthogonal test results

项目	因素			蒸发量/（g/m²）
项目	B	N	T	蒸发量/（g/m²）
1	1	1	3	213.30
2	1	2	1	159.26
3	1	3	2	115.08
4	2	1	1	90.10
5	2	2	2	140.96
6	2	3	3	116.69
7	3	1	2	147.08
8	3	2	3	110.23
9	3	3	1	93.81
K₁	487.64	450.48	343.17
K₂	347.75	410.45	403.12
K₃	351.12	325.58	440.22
R	139.89	117.9	97.05

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 北露天煤矿夏季抑尘试验现场路面粉尘粒径分布

Table 4. Analysis of particle size of pavement dust of dust suppression test site of North Open-pit Coal Mine

喷洒时间/d		粒径分布占比/%
喷洒时间/d		>0.50 mm	0.25~0.50 mm	<0.25 mm
未喷洒抑尘剂		34.07	20.74	45.19
第1次喷洒	２	66.66	14.77	18.58
	３	52.29	18.21	29.50
	４	44.87	17.60	37.53
第2次喷洒	1	58.04	16.31	25.65
	2	56.26	19.14	24.60
	3	49.70	18.09	32.21
	4	38.89	15.51	45.60
第3次喷洒	1	68.02	14.09	17.89
	2	46.78	15.39	37.83
	3	42.02	15.09	42.89
	4	36.27	17.30	46.43

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(23)

[1]	袁亮. 煤矿粉尘防控与职业安全健康科学构想[J]. 煤炭学报,2020,45(1):1-7. YUAN L. Scientific conception of coal mine dust control and occupational safety[J]. Journal of China Coal Society,2020,45(1):1-7.
[2]	付恩三, 白润才, 刘光伟, 等. “双碳”视角下我国露天煤矿的绿色可持续发展[J]. 科技导报,2022,40(19):25-35. FU E S, BAI R C, LIU G W, et al. Countermeasures and thinking of green and sustainable development of open-pit coal mines in the future from the perspective of "double carbon"[J]. Science & Technology Review,2022,40(19):25-35.
[3]	郑向军, 李晋生, 薛峰, 等. 新型环保道路抑尘剂在城市道路的应用[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2014,4(2):169-172. ZHENG X J, LI J S, XUE F, et al. The applied research of new environment-friendly dust suppressant in city road[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2014,4(2):169-172.
[4]	NIE W, MA X, CHENG W M, et al. A novel spraying/negative-pressure secondary dust suppression device used in fully mechanized mining face: a case study[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection,2016,103:126-135. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2016.07.003
[5]	XU C H, WANG D M, WANG H T, et al. Experimental investigation of coal dust wetting ability of anionic surfactants with different structures[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection,2019,121:69-76. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2018.10.010
[6]	NAEIMI M, CHU J. Comparison of conventional and bio-treated methods as dust suppressants[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research,2017,24(29):23341-23350. doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-9889-1
[7]	金龙哲, 朱吉茂, 任志刚, 等. 露天矿公路防冻抑尘剂的研究[J]. 北京科技大学学报,2004,26(1):4-6. JIN L Z, ZHU J M, REN Z G, et al. Research on an antifreezing dust depressor used to the road in open-pit mines[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing,2004,26(1):4-6.
[8]	杜翠凤, 崔蒙蒙, 常宝盂, 等. 露天矿路面抑尘剂工业试验及效果分析[C]//中国金属学会2019年冶金安全与健康年会. 北京: 中国金属学会, 2019: 108-118.
[9]	张平, 李绍臣, 苏金生. 露天矿山汽车运输路面扬尘的防治方法[J]. 露天采煤技术,2000(3):44-46.
[10]	王和堂, 贺胜, 章琦, 等. 微生物发酵法合成生物抑尘剂的试验研究[J]. 煤炭学报,2021,46(2):477-488.
[11]	程卫民, 周刚, 陈连军, 等. 我国煤矿粉尘防治理论与技术20年研究进展及展望[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2020,48(2):1-20.
[12]	赵星光, 谭卓英. 露天矿山运输路面扬尘影响因素及机理分析[J]. 有色金属(矿山部分),2005,57(3):43-45. ZHAO X G, TAN Z Y. Influencing factors and mechanism analysis of dust on transportation pavement in open-pit mines[J]. Nonferrous Metals (Mine Section),2005,57(3):43-45.
[13]	刘子亮, 谭卓英, 李华, 等. 司家营铁矿露天运输道路粉尘发生机理及控制[J]. 矿业研究与开发,2021,41(7):93-97. LIU Z L, TAN Z Y, LI H, et al. Dust occurrence mechanism and its control on open-pit transportation road in Sijiaying Iron mine[J]. Mining Research and Development,2021,41(7):93-97.
[14]	鲁文岐, 周伟, 丁小华, 等. 露天矿卡车运输起尘时PM_2.5和PM₁₀变化规律研究[J]. 中国煤炭,2019,45(11):89-93. LU W Q, ZHOU W, DING X H, et al. Change law of PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ in open-pit coal mine truck transportation[J]. China Coal,2019,45(11):89-93.
[15]	杜翠凤, 蔡嗣经, 蒋仲安. YCH抑尘剂抑制露天矿路面扬尘的实验研究[J]. 北京科技大学学报,2007,14(增刊2):45-48. DU C F, CAI S J, JIANG Z A. Experimental study on controlling road dust raising in the open mine with the YCH dust suppressant[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing,2007,14(Suppl 2):45-48.
[16]	韩超, 刘传犇, 于继图, 等. 润湿剂对低阶弱黏煤表面改性的研究[J]. 选煤技术,2021(2):14-18. HAN C, LIU C B, YU J T, et al. Study on surface modification of low-rank weakly-caking coal with wetting agent[J]. Goal Preparation Technology,2021(2):14-18.
[17]	邹佳霖. 新型复配润湿剂对煤尘的润湿效果研究[D]. 阜新: 辽宁工程技术大学, 2019.
[18]	张月帆, 陈建华, 李冬, 等. 道路扬尘控制措施及其效率评估研究进展[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2021,11(5):845-854. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20200280 ZHANG Y F, CHEN J H, LI D, et al. Research progress of road dust control measures and their efficiency evaluation[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2021,11(5):845-854. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20200280
[19]	张建国, 李红梅, 刘依婷, 等. 煤尘微细观润湿特性及抑尘剂研发初探: 以平顶山矿区为例[J]. 煤炭学报,2021,46(3):812-825. ZHANG J G, LI H M, LIU Y T, et al. Micro-wetting characteristics of coal dust and preliminary study on the development of dust suppressant in Pingdingshan mining area[J]. Journal of China Coal Society,2021,46(3):812-825.
[20]	许中坚, 陈津瑞. 表面活性剂对土壤粘粒絮凝-分散的影响[J]. 环境科学研究,2003,16(3):62-64. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-6929.2003.03.018 XU Z J, CHEN J R. Effect of surfactants on flocculation and dispersion of soil clay[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences,2003,16(3):62-64. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-6929.2003.03.018
[21]	杜翠凤, 王远, 卢俊杰, 等. 吸湿型路面抑尘剂配方研制及工业试验[J]. 东北大学学报(自然科学版),2015,36(6):876-881. DU C F, WANG Y, LU J J, et al. Formula development and industrial testing of a hygroscopic road dust-depressor[J]. Journal of Northeastern University (Natural Science),2015,36(6):876-881.
[22]	黄志胜. 露天矿山运输路面新型泡沫抑尘剂的配制及性能试验研究[D]. 赣州: 江西理工大学, 2021.
[23]	HUANG Z A, HUANG Y, YANG Z J, et al. Study on the physicochemical characteristics and dust suppression performance of new type chemical dust suppressant for copper mine pavement[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research,2021,28(42):59640-59651. □ doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-14917-z