Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

A field study of a roof bolter canopy air curtain (2nd generation) for respirable coal mine dust control

Filetype[PDF-611.63 KB]


  • English
    • Details Supporting Files You May Also Like

    Details:

    • Alternative Title:
      Int J Min Sci Technol
    • Personal Author:
    • Description:
      A 2nd generation roof bolter canopy air curtain (CAC) design was tested by National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) at a Midwestern underground coal mine. During the study, the roof bolter never operated downwind of the continuous miner. Using a combination of personal Data Rams (pDR) and gravimetric samplers, the dust control efficiency of the roof bolter CAC was ascertained. Performance evaluation was determined using three methods: (1) comparing roof bolter operator concentrations underneath the CAC to roof bolter concentrations outside the CAC, (2) comparing roof bolter operator concentrations underneath the CAC to the concentrations at the rear of the bolter, and finally, (3) using the gravimetric data directly underneath the CAC to correct roof bolter operator concentrations underneath the CAC and comparing them to the concentrations at the rear of the bolter. Method 1 dust control efficiencies ranged from -53.9% to 60.4%. Method 2 efficiencies ranged from -150.5% to 52.2%, and Method 3 efficiencies ranged from 40.7% to 91%. Reasons for negative and low dust control efficiencies are provided in this paper and include: incorrect sampling locations, large distance between CAC and operator, and contamination of intake air from line curtain. Low dust concentrations encountered during the testing made it difficult to discern whether differences in concentrations were due to the CAC or due to variances inherent in experimental dust measurement. However, the analyses, especially the Method 3 analysis, show that the CAC can be an effective dust control device.
    • Subjects:
    • Source:
      Int J Min Sci Technol. 29(5):711-720
    • Pubmed ID:
      31850153
    • Pubmed Central ID:
      PMC6917209
    • Document Type:
      Journal Article
    • Funding:
      CC999999/Intramural CDC HHS/United States
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • Download URL:
    • File Type:

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov