A new shock tube configuration for studying dust-lifting during the initiation of a coal dust explosion

Abstract The traditional defence against propagating coal dust explosions is the application of dry stone dust. This proven and effective safety measure is strictly regulated based on extensive international experience. While new products, such as foamed stone dust, offer significant practical benefits, no benchmark tests currently exist to certify their dust lifting performance in comparison to dry stone dust. This paper reviews the coal dust explosion mechanism, and argues that benchmark testing should focus on dust lifting during the initial development of the explosion, prior to arrival of the flame. In a practical context, this requires the generation of shock waves with Mach numbers ranging from 1.05 to 1.4, and test times of the order of 10's to 100's of milliseconds. These proposed test times are significantly longer than previous laboratory studies, however, for certification purposes, it is argued that the dust lifting behaviour should be examined over the full timescales of an actual explosion scenario. These conditions can be accurately targeted using a shock tube at length scales of approximately 50 m. It is further proposed that useful test time can be maximised if an appropriately sized orifice plate is fitted to the tube exit, an arrangement which also offers practical advantages for testing. The paper demonstrates this operating capability with proof-of-concept experiments using The University of Queensland's X3 impulse facility.

[1]  Greg Collecutt,et al.  CFD SIMULATION OF UNDERGROUND COAL DUST EXPLOSIONS AND ACTIVE EXPLOSION BARRIERS , 2010 .

[2]  M. L. Harris,et al.  Rock dusting considerations in underground coal mines , 2010 .

[3]  C. W. Kauffman,et al.  Transition from deflagration to detonation in layered dust explosions , 1995 .

[4]  C. Man,et al.  How does limestone rock dust prevent coal dust explosions in coal mines , 2009 .

[5]  J. Anderson,et al.  Modern Compressible Flow: With Historical Perspective , 1982 .

[6]  J. Anderson Modern compressible flow, with historical perspective - 2nd Edition , 1990 .

[7]  Kenneth L. Cashdollar,et al.  Recommendations for a New Rock Dusting Standard to Prevent Coal Dust Explosions in Intake Airways , 2010 .

[8]  Takashi Adachi,et al.  Shock tube study of particles' motion behind a planar shock wave , 2005 .

[9]  R. Klemens,et al.  Dynamics of dust dispersion from the layer behind the propagating shock wave , 2006 .

[10]  Tasneem Abbasi,et al.  Dust explosions-cases, causes, consequences, and control. , 2007, Journal of hazardous materials.

[11]  Hsin Wei Wu,et al.  Australian Sealing Practice and Use of Risk Assessment Criteria - ACARP Project C17015 , 2009 .

[12]  Jw Oberholzer Assessment of refuge bay designs in collieries , 1997 .

[13]  Peter A. Jacobs Shock Tube Modelling With L1d , 1998 .

[14]  Wacław Cybulski,et al.  Coal dust explosions and their suppression , 1975 .

[15]  Eric L. Petersen,et al.  A New Facility for Studying Shock-Wave Passage Over Dust Layers , 2013 .

[16]  Fedir Woskoboenko Explosibility of Victorian brown coal dust , 1987 .

[17]  I Liebman,et al.  Sensor-trigger device for explosion barrier. , 1979, The Review of scientific instruments.

[18]  M. J. Sapko,et al.  Experimental mine and laboratory dust explosion research at NIOSH , 2000 .

[19]  M. Pegg,et al.  Factors influencing the suppression of coal dust explosions , 1997 .

[20]  CLETE R. STEPHAN,et al.  1 COAL DUST EXPLOSION HAZARDS by , .

[21]  J. Gerrard,et al.  An experimental investigation of the initial stages of the dispersion of dust by shock waves , 1963 .