Без темы
<<  CNPA B Comic Book Superhero History  >>
CODISPOSAL
CODISPOSAL
DEFINITION
DEFINITION
MINE WASTES -1
MINE WASTES -1
CODISPOSAL WITH MINING PRODUCTS
CODISPOSAL WITH MINING PRODUCTS
POROSITIES
POROSITIES
TYPICAL WASTE
TYPICAL WASTE
CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL
CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL
CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL MODEL
CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL MODEL
IDEAL CODISPOSAL
IDEAL CODISPOSAL
MIXED CODISPOSAL
MIXED CODISPOSAL
CODISPOSAL
CODISPOSAL
CO-MINGLING
CO-MINGLING
CO-PLACEMENT
CO-PLACEMENT
CO-DISPOSAL
CO-DISPOSAL
CO-MINGLING at KIDSTON
CO-MINGLING at KIDSTON
AUTOGENOUS MIXING
AUTOGENOUS MIXING
ACTIVE MIXING
ACTIVE MIXING
WINROWING - 1
WINROWING - 1
WINROWING - 2
WINROWING - 2
TAILINGS CELLS - 1
TAILINGS CELLS - 1
TAILINGS CELLS - 2
TAILINGS CELLS - 2
KIDSTON DETAILS
KIDSTON DETAILS
VIEW OF KIDSTON PIT
VIEW OF KIDSTON PIT
Tarong – Comingled Reject & Tailings
Tarong – Comingled Reject & Tailings
CO-PLACEMENT-ARGYLE
CO-PLACEMENT-ARGYLE
NE USA
NE USA
DEVELOPMENT OF CODISPOSAL
DEVELOPMENT OF CODISPOSAL
SOUTH AFRICA TRIALS
SOUTH AFRICA TRIALS
AUSTRALIAN TRIALS
AUSTRALIAN TRIALS
REJECTS INTO & OVER TAILINGS
REJECTS INTO & OVER TAILINGS
WASTE PLACEMENT OVER 10 m TAILINGS
WASTE PLACEMENT OVER 10 m TAILINGS
CODISPOSAL IN AUSTRALIA
CODISPOSAL IN AUSTRALIA
COAL CODISPOSAL - 1
COAL CODISPOSAL - 1
LIMITATIONS OF CODISPOSAL
LIMITATIONS OF CODISPOSAL
2 STAGE PUMPING
2 STAGE PUMPING
CERAMIC LINED STEEL PIPE
CERAMIC LINED STEEL PIPE
TYPICAL CODISPOSAL BEACH
TYPICAL CODISPOSAL BEACH
COAL CODISPOSAL BEACH
COAL CODISPOSAL BEACH
TAILINGS BEACH
TAILINGS BEACH
EFFECT OF C:F RATIO
EFFECT OF C:F RATIO
ADVANTAGES OF CODISPOSAL
ADVANTAGES OF CODISPOSAL
TRAFFICABLE BEACH
TRAFFICABLE BEACH
STABLE CODISPOSAL – Despite Wall Failure
STABLE CODISPOSAL – Despite Wall Failure
BEARING CAPACITY LIMITATIONS
BEARING CAPACITY LIMITATIONS
WATER RETURN
WATER RETURN
SUMMARY
SUMMARY
47
47
ACKNOLEDGEMENTS
ACKNOLEDGEMENTS
THE END
THE END

Презентация на тему: «CODISPOSAL». Автор: Mike Gowan. Файл: «CODISPOSAL.ppt». Размер zip-архива: 6408 КБ.

CODISPOSAL

содержание презентации «CODISPOSAL.ppt»
СлайдТекст
1 CODISPOSAL

CODISPOSAL

Presented by Mike Gowan Principal

2 DEFINITION

DEFINITION

In mining and mineral processing, materials are separated according to their particle size and mineralogy The wastes produced fall into Coarse-grained (waste/rejects); & Fine-grained (tailings) Conventionally disposed of separately Co-disposal involves the combining of these waste streams

2

3 MINE WASTES -1

MINE WASTES -1

Tailings - rock flour resulting from the crushing and or grinding of mine ore - <1mm Rejects - washery waste resulting from the processing of coal - >1 to 120 mm Spoil/Waste - rock separated in the mining process and not processed - 0 to >1 m

3

4 CODISPOSAL WITH MINING PRODUCTS

CODISPOSAL WITH MINING PRODUCTS

Tailings disposed as a slurry has a high porosity (>40%), with water-filled voids. Rejects/waste has a high porosity (>30%), with largely air-filled voids. Codisposal - some of the tailings can be made to settle in the voids in the coarse waste.

4

5 POROSITIES

POROSITIES

Tailings

Rejects

Waste

SG

1.8

2.2

2.7

Dry Density

0.9

1.2

1.8

Void Ratio

1.000

0.833

0.500

Porosity

50%

45%

33%

5

6 TYPICAL WASTE

TYPICAL WASTE

6

7 CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL

CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL

Aggregate, sand, cement & water mixed together No air voids Coarse aggregate suspended in fines mixture

Aggregate

Sand/Cement

7

8 CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL MODEL

CONCRETE - IDEAL CODISPOSAL MODEL

Using concrete as the model: Products need to be: Nearly dry Well mixed before placement Minimum water added Coarse:fine ratio not critical Low energy placement to reduce risk of segregation

8

9 IDEAL CODISPOSAL

IDEAL CODISPOSAL

Tailings needs to be dewatered to paste or cake Tailings and rejects need to be mixed together Mixture then pumped, trucked or conveyed to disposal Expensive operations, dictated by circumstances

9

10 MIXED CODISPOSAL

MIXED CODISPOSAL

Used successfully: Wollongong by BHP Westcliff coal mine Trialled at Dartbrook

10

11 CODISPOSAL

CODISPOSAL

Co-mingling Co-placement Co-disposal

11

12 CO-MINGLING

CO-MINGLING

The coarse and fine products are transported separately and allowed to mix together within the disposal site after deposition. An example of this the dumping of rock and the deposition of tailings at Kidston Gold Mine.

12

13 CO-PLACEMENT

CO-PLACEMENT

The coarse and fine products are transported separately and mixed together just prior to or on placement in the disposal site. An example of this is the mixing of slimes and tailings used at the Argyle Diamond Mine.

13

14 CO-DISPOSAL

CO-DISPOSAL

Coarse and fine waste products are mixed together before they are transported to the disposal site. An example of this is the pumped codisposal practice carried out in Australian coal mines.

14

15 CO-MINGLING at KIDSTON

CO-MINGLING at KIDSTON

AIM – to fill a pit and produce a stable landform at closure Materials available tailings and waste rock Reviewed many codisposal systems: Autogenous mixing Active mixing Winrowing Tailings cells Selected co-mingling Other systems too costly

15

16 AUTOGENOUS MIXING

AUTOGENOUS MIXING

Tailings Discharge

16

17 ACTIVE MIXING

ACTIVE MIXING

Tailings Discharge

17

18 WINROWING - 1

WINROWING - 1

18

Tailings Deposition

19 WINROWING - 2

WINROWING - 2

Tailings filling between Windrows

Tailings Spigot Pipeline

Tailings/Waste Windrows

19

20 TAILINGS CELLS - 1

TAILINGS CELLS - 1

Waste cells

Tailings deposition

20

21 TAILINGS CELLS - 2

TAILINGS CELLS - 2

Waste Cell

Tailings

Waste cover/mixture

Mixed Tailings/Waste

21

22 KIDSTON DETAILS

KIDSTON DETAILS

Thickened tailings deposited into pit pond

Waste rock end-dumped into pit

22

23 VIEW OF KIDSTON PIT

VIEW OF KIDSTON PIT

Thickened tailings

Waste

Eventually Waste extended over Tailings to produce a Closure Cover

23

24 Tarong – Comingled Reject & Tailings

Tarong – Comingled Reject & Tailings

24

25 CO-PLACEMENT-ARGYLE

CO-PLACEMENT-ARGYLE

Problem – very fine slimes that would not settle Solution – mix the two materials Slimes & Tailings mixed at disposal area Slimes pumped Tailings conveyed

25

26 NE USA

NE USA

Mixing Rejects & Dewatered Tailings

Placing and Spreading

26

27 DEVELOPMENT OF CODISPOSAL

DEVELOPMENT OF CODISPOSAL

Tried in The UK in 1960’s South Africa in 1980’s Tailings slurry spread over layer of rejects Penetration up to 300 mm Costly to operate Thin layers of rejects Moving tailings pipeline Spreading tailings

27

28 SOUTH AFRICA TRIALS

SOUTH AFRICA TRIALS

28

29 AUSTRALIAN TRIALS

AUSTRALIAN TRIALS

Tested placing rejects over tailings Some penetration of rejects Problems: Development of Bow-wave Slow advancement rate

29

30 REJECTS INTO & OVER TAILINGS

REJECTS INTO & OVER TAILINGS

Bow-wave

30

31 WASTE PLACEMENT OVER 10 m TAILINGS

WASTE PLACEMENT OVER 10 m TAILINGS

31

32 CODISPOSAL IN AUSTRALIA

CODISPOSAL IN AUSTRALIA

Confined to Coal Mines Idea developed at Jeepropilly Now used at: Hail Creek Kestrel North Goonyella Mooranbah Coppabella Moorevale Stratford Others???

32

33 COAL CODISPOSAL - 1

COAL CODISPOSAL - 1

Tailings & Reject mixed at CHPP Pumped to disposal site Slurry solids 27 to 35% Flow velocities 2.7 to +4 m/sec Single point full pipe discharge Clean water recovery

33

34 LIMITATIONS OF CODISPOSAL

LIMITATIONS OF CODISPOSAL

3 Stage pumping reaches ~2 km Steel pipe for high heads High pipe wear Limited tailings encapsulation

34

35 2 STAGE PUMPING

2 STAGE PUMPING

35

36 CERAMIC LINED STEEL PIPE

CERAMIC LINED STEEL PIPE

36

37 TYPICAL CODISPOSAL BEACH

TYPICAL CODISPOSAL BEACH

Rejects only Beach

Well Mixed Codisposal & Encapsulated Tailings

37

38 COAL CODISPOSAL BEACH

COAL CODISPOSAL BEACH

38

Codisposal beach

Tailings beach

Decant Pond

39 TAILINGS BEACH

TAILINGS BEACH

39

TOTAL

Coarse

Fine

Waste

tph

500

357

143

SG

2.2

1.8

C:F Ratio

2.5

1

Split

71%

29%

Slurry

solids

27%

Water

tph

1,352

Mean Density

t/cum

1.4

0.8

Void Ratio

0.57

1.25

Porosity

36%

56%

Total

Coarse

Fine

Beach

Pond

TOTAL

Total

500

100%

Beach

86%

Tailings

48%

Waste

tph

357

143

431

69

500

Dry density

t/cum

1.40

0.80

1.69

0.80

1.47

Total Volume

cum

255

179

255

86

341

Void Ratio

0.57

1.25

Solids volume

cum

162

79

Void volume

cum

93

99

Moisture Content

26%

69%

11.9%

69%

19.8%

Water contained

cum

1,352

93

99

52

48

99

Return water

cum

1,253

93%

40 EFFECT OF C:F RATIO

EFFECT OF C:F RATIO

40

41 ADVANTAGES OF CODISPOSAL

ADVANTAGES OF CODISPOSAL

Pumping lower cost than trucking No transport fleet required Stable landform made by beach Tailings contained by beach High water return

41

42 TRAFFICABLE BEACH

TRAFFICABLE BEACH

Generally cannot drive easily over rejects, but can over upper codisposal beach

42

43 STABLE CODISPOSAL – Despite Wall Failure

STABLE CODISPOSAL – Despite Wall Failure

Stable Codisposal Wall

Clay starter- wall failure

43

44 BEARING CAPACITY LIMITATIONS

BEARING CAPACITY LIMITATIONS

Codisposal beach

Tailings

44

45 WATER RETURN

WATER RETURN

Tails

143

tph

SG

1.8

Slurry

35%

Water

551

cum/hr

Dry Density

0.8

t/cum

MC

69%

Retained

99

cum/hr

Return water

82%

Rejects

8%

Retained

29

cum/hr

TOTAL

128

cum/hr

Codisposal

99

cum/hr

45

46 SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Codisposal difficult but not impossible in metalliferous mines Codisposal works for coal mines There is a tailings pond that needs to be managed Water losses are no higher than for separate reject:tailings disposal systems

46

47 47

47

48 ACKNOLEDGEMENTS

ACKNOLEDGEMENTS

The many mines mentioned Assoc. Prof. David Williams of The U of Q

48

49 THE END

THE END

49

«CODISPOSAL»
http://900igr.net/prezentacija/anglijskij-jazyk/codisposal-86877.html
cсылка на страницу

Без темы

661 презентация
Урок

Английский язык

29 тем
Слайды