Evaluation method for coal blending effect of coking single coal

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of coking coal blending in the coking industry, in particular to a method for evaluating the coal blending effect of coking single coal, which comprises the following steps: S1, selecting a coal blending production scheme, preparing blended coal, carrying out a small coke oven experiment, and recording the obtained coke as J0; s2, the single coal to be evaluated is matched with the blended coal according to different mass ratios to form n new blended coals, a small coke oven experiment is carried out, and obtained cokes are recorded as J1, J2,..., Jn; n > = 3; s3, determining a plurality of quality indexes of the obtained coke as comparison indexes to measure the action effect of the single coal in the coal blending scheme in the step S2; s4, detecting the quality indexes of J0, J1... Jn; and S5, comparing detection results, and judging the effect of the single coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in the step S2 according to the results. According to the invention, the effect of the coking single coal in actual production coal blending and coking is really embodied, and the performance evaluation system of the coking single coal is perfected.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of coking coal blending technology in the coking industry, and in particular to an evaluation method for the effect of blending single types of coking coal. Background Technology

[0002] A scientific, comprehensive, and accurate evaluation and understanding of coking coal performance is crucial for coking blending. Currently, the evaluation and understanding of coking coal performance mainly relies on various coal quality indicators, such as ash content, sulfur content, volatile matter, caking properties, and petrographic indicators. Patent application CN116644980A provides a multi-parameter coking coal resource evaluation system that defines the quality performance of coking coal from multiple perspectives, from its properties to its uses, and from its genesis to its characteristic indicators, using intuitive quality score values ​​to characterize coking coal performance indicators. Patent application CN114997595A provides a method for evaluating the quality, value, and efficiency of coking coal. By calculating and ranking the functional coefficients and functional prices of coking coal, it can conveniently and quickly evaluate coking coal. Patent application CN109064061A relates to a multi-dimensional property evaluation method for coking coal based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). It uses coal quality indicators, coke quality indicators, and purchase price as the evaluation basis, and combines AHP to achieve multi-level and multi-dimensional indicator property evaluation of coking coal with an application-oriented goal. Patent application CN112330137A uses the coke thermal performance index of blended coal to evaluate the quality of its strongly caking coal content and simulates the role of strongly caking coal in actual coal blending and coking industrial production.

[0003] However, due to the complex and diverse nature of coking coal, different quality indicators are both interrelated and independent, making it difficult to systematically evaluate the performance of coking coal. Moreover, these quality indicators are based on the characteristics of individual coal types, and their effects vary in different coal blending schemes; currently, there is no effective evaluation method. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of this, the technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to provide an evaluation method for the role of single coking coal blending, which truly reflects the role of single coking coal in different actual production blending schemes, and effectively guides the rational use of single coking coal and the optimization of blending.

[0005] This invention provides a method for evaluating the effect of blending single types of coking coal, comprising the following steps:

[0006] S1. Select a coal blending scheme and prepare blended coal, denoted as M0. Then conduct a small coke oven experiment and denot the resulting coke as J0.

[0007] S2. Blend the single type of coal to be evaluated with blended coal M0 at different mass ratios to form n new blended coals, denoted as M1, M2, ..., Mn. nThen, small coke oven experiments were conducted, and the resulting coke was denoted as J1, J2, ..., J... n n≥3;

[0008] S3. Determine several quality indicators of the obtained coke as comparative indicators to measure the effect of a single type of coal in the coal blending scheme in step S2.

[0009] S4, Detect J0, J1…J n The aforementioned quality indicators;

[0010] S5. Compare the test results and determine the effect of the single type of coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in step S2 based on the results.

[0011] Preferably, in step S3, the quality indicators are post-reaction strength CSR and shatter resistance M40; post-reaction strength CSR represents the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking; shatter resistance M40 represents the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking.

[0012] Preferably, when the coke CSR of the blended coal in step S1 is low, a single coking coal that has a positive effect on the coke CSR of the blended coal is selected according to the evaluation method and results, and the blending ratio is determined according to the improvement requirement.

[0013] When the coke M40 of the blended coal in step S1 is low, based on the evaluation method and results, select a single coking coal that has a positive effect on the coke M40 of the blended coal, and determine the blending ratio according to the required increase.

[0014] Preferably, step S2 is as follows:

[0015] The single type of coal to be evaluated was blended with blended coal M0 at mass ratios of 5:95, 10:90, and 15:85 to form three new blended coals, which were denoted as M1, M2, and M3, respectively. Then, small coke oven experiments were conducted, and the resulting cokes were denoted as J1, J2, and J3, respectively.

[0016] Preferably, step S4 is: detecting the post-reaction strength CSR and shatter resistance M40 of J1, J2 and J3.

[0017] Preferably, in step S5, the CSR indicators are compared to obtain three evaluation results:

[0018] a1) The CSR of J1, J2 and J3 are all higher than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, and will improve the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme in step S2 after coking.

[0019] a2) The CSR of J1, J2 and J3 are all lower than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a negative effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, which will reduce the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step S2.

[0020] a3) The CSR of J1, J2 and J3 first increased and then decreased compared with the CSR of J0, indicating that there is a limit to the positive effect of the single coal type to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme of step S2. The maximum proportion was determined after data processing software.

[0021] Preferably, the data processing software is Origin software;

[0022] The data processing software processes the following:

[0023] The horizontal axis represents the mass ratio of the single coal to the blended coal M0 to be evaluated, and the vertical axis represents CSR. A line graph is plotted, and the analysis, data, or interpolation / extrapolation tools in the software are used to fit a curve to find the maximum value of CSR and the corresponding maximum proportion.

[0024] Preferably, in step S5, comparing the M40 index yields three evaluation results:

[0025] b1) The M40 of J1, J2 and J3 are all higher than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, and will improve the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step S2.

[0026] b2) The M40 of J1, J2 and J3 are all lower than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a negative effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, and will reduce the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step S2.

[0027] b3) The M40 of J1, J2 and J3 first increased and then decreased compared with the M40 of J0, indicating that there is a limit to the positive effect of the single coal type to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme of step S2. The maximum proportion was determined after data processing software.

[0028] Preferably, the data processing software is Origin software;

[0029] The data processing software processes the following:

[0030] The horizontal axis represents the mass ratio of the single coal to the blended coal (M0) to be evaluated, and the vertical axis represents M40. A line graph is plotted, and the analysis, data, or interpolation / extrapolation tools in the software are used to fit a curve to find the maximum value of M40 and the corresponding maximum proportion.

[0031] Preferably, in step S1, the blended coal includes coking coal, fat coal, 1 / 3 coking coal, gas coal, lean coal, and semi-lean coal.

[0032] This invention truly reflects the role of single-type coking coal in actual production and coking blending, makes up for the shortcomings of using one or more indicators of single-type coal to evaluate coal quality, and improves the performance evaluation system of single-type coking coal. Attached Figure Description

[0033] Figure 1 This is an example of an analysis chart in which Origin software was used to determine the maximum scale (limit) in Embodiment 2 of the present invention.

[0034] Figure 2 The maximum scale (limit) analysis chart is obtained by using Origin software in Embodiment 4 of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0035] The technical solution of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0036] This invention provides a method for evaluating the effect of blending single types of coking coal, comprising the following steps:

[0037] S1. Select a coal blending scheme and prepare blended coal, denoted as M0. Then conduct a small coke oven experiment and denot the resulting coke as J0.

[0038] S2. Blend the single type of coal to be evaluated with blended coal M0 at different mass ratios to form n new blended coals, denoted as M1, M2, ..., Mn. n Then, small coke oven experiments were conducted, and the resulting coke was denoted as J1, J2, ..., J... n n≥3;

[0039] S3. Determine several quality indicators of the obtained coke as comparative indicators to measure the effect of a single type of coal in the coal blending scheme in step S2.

[0040] S4, Detect J0, J1…J n The aforementioned quality indicators;

[0041] S5. Compare the test results and determine the effect of the single type of coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in step S2 based on the results.

[0042] Regarding step S1:

[0043] Select a coal blending scheme and prepare blended coal, denoted as M0. Then conduct a small coke oven experiment and denot the resulting coke as J0.

[0044] In some embodiments of the present invention, the blended coal includes coking coal, fat coal, 1 / 3 coking coal, gas coal, lean coal, and semi-lean coal.

[0045] In some embodiments of the present invention, the blended coal comprises: 25 wt% to 28 wt% coking coal, 15 wt% to 18 wt% fat coal, 22 wt% to 23 wt% 1 / 3 coking coal, 18 wt% to 20 wt% gas coal, 8 wt% to 10 wt% lean coal and 6 wt% to 7 wt% semi-alloy coal; the sum of the amounts of the components is 100%.

[0046] In some embodiments of the present invention, the composition of the blended coal includes: 25 wt% coking coal, 18 wt% fat coal, 22 wt% 1 / 3 coking coal, 18 wt% gas coal, 10 wt% lean coal and 7 wt% semi-alloy coal.

[0047] or

[0048] The blended coal comprises: 28 wt% coking coal, 15 wt% fat coal, 23 wt% 1 / 3 coking coal, 20 wt% gas coal, 8 wt% lean coal and 6 wt% semi-alloy coal.

[0049] Regarding step S2:

[0050] In some embodiments of the present invention, the single type of coal to be evaluated is blended with blended coal M0 at different mass ratios to form three new blended coals, which are denoted as M1, M2 and M3 respectively. Then, a small coke oven experiment is conducted, and the resulting coke is denoted as J1, J2 and J3 respectively.

[0051] In some embodiments of the present invention, the single type of coal to be evaluated is blended with blended coal M0 at mass ratios of 5:95, 10:90, and 15:85 to form three new blended coals, which are denoted as M1, M2, and M3, respectively. Then, a small coke oven experiment is conducted, and the resulting coke is denoted as J1, J2, and J3, respectively.

[0052] In some embodiments of the present invention, when the coke CSR of the blended coal in step S1 is low, a single coking coal that has a positive effect on the coke CSR of the blended coal is selected according to the evaluation method and results, and the blending ratio is determined according to the improvement requirement.

[0053] In some embodiments of the present invention, when the coke M40 of the blended coal in step S1 is low, a single coking coal that has a positive effect on the coke M40 of the blended coal is selected according to the evaluation method and results, and the blending ratio is determined according to the improvement requirements.

[0054] Regarding step S3:

[0055] Several quality indicators of the obtained coke are determined as comparative indicators to measure the effect of a single type of coal in the coal blending scheme in step S2.

[0056] In some embodiments of the present invention, the quality indicators are post-reaction strength (CSR) and shatter resistance (M40); post-reaction strength (CSR) represents the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking; shatter resistance (M40) represents the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking.

[0057] Regarding step S4:

[0058] Detect J0, J1...J n The aforementioned quality indicators.

[0059] In some embodiments of the present invention, J0, J1...J are detected. n The quality indicators specifically include:

[0060] Detect J0, J1...J n The post-reaction strength CSR and shatter resistance M40.

[0061] More specifically, including:

[0062] The post-reaction strength (CSR) and shatter resistance (M40) of J1, J2, and J3 were tested.

[0063] Regarding step S5:

[0064] By comparing the test results, the effect of the single type of coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in step S2 is determined.

[0065] In some embodiments of the present invention, three evaluation results are obtained by comparing the CSR index:

[0066] a1) The CSR of J1, J2 and J3 are all higher than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, and will improve the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme in step S2 after coking.

[0067] a2) The CSR of J1, J2 and J3 are all lower than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a negative effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, which will reduce the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step S2.

[0068] a3) The CSR of J1, J2 and J3 first increased and then decreased compared with the CSR of J0, indicating that there is a limit to the positive effect of the single coal type to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme of step S2. The maximum proportion (limit) was determined after data processing software.

[0069] In some embodiments of the present invention, comparing the M40 index, three evaluation results are also obtained:

[0070] b1) The M40 of J1, J2 and J3 are all higher than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, and will improve the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step S2.

[0071] b2) The M40 of J1, J2 and J3 are all lower than that of J0, indicating that the single coal to be evaluated has a negative effect on the coal blending scheme in step S2, and will reduce the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step S2.

[0072] b3) The M40 of J1, J2 and J3 first increased and then decreased compared with the M40 index of J0, indicating that there is a limit to the positive effect of the single coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme of step S2. The maximum proportion (limit) was determined after data processing software.

[0073] In some embodiments of the present invention, the data processing software is Origin software.

[0074] In some embodiments of the present invention, the data processing software processes including:

[0075] The horizontal axis represents the mass ratio of the single coal to be evaluated to the blended coal M0 (e.g., 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%), and the vertical axis represents CSR or M40. A line graph is plotted, and the analysis, data, or (interpolation / extrapolation) tools in the software are used to fit a curve to find the maximum value of CSR or M40 and the corresponding maximum proportion.

[0076] In some embodiments of the present invention, the small coke oven experiment is carried out in accordance with the standard YB / T 4526-2016 "Technical Specification for Small Coke Ovens for Coking Tests", the coke CSR test is carried out in accordance with GBT 4000-2017 "Test Method for Reactivity and Post-Reaction Strength of Coke", and the coke M40 test is carried out in accordance with GBT 2006-2008 "Determination Method for Mechanical Strength of Coke".

[0077] Beneficial effects

[0078] This invention truly reflects the role of single-type coking coal in actual coking blending, overcoming the shortcomings of evaluating coal quality using only one or multiple indicators for a single type of coal, and improving the performance evaluation system for single-type coking coal. Compared with existing technologies, the beneficial effects of this invention also include:

[0079] 1. When coke quality is abnormal, it is difficult to accurately analyze which single type of coal in the coal blending scheme has a quality problem. Focusing on the suspected single type of coal, and referring to the method of this invention, the problematic single type of coal can be identified more accurately.

[0080] 2. When it is necessary to introduce a new type of coal, and it is not possible to determine whether the new coal type will be useful to the original coal blending scheme, the method of this invention can accurately determine the effect and guide the introduction.

[0081] To further illustrate the present invention, the following detailed description of an evaluation method for the effect of single-type coking coal blending provided by the present invention is provided in conjunction with embodiments, but it should not be construed as a limitation on the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0082] The small coke oven test was conducted in accordance with standard YB / T 4526-2016 "Technical Specification for Small Coke Ovens for Coking Tests", the coke CSR test was conducted in accordance with GBT 4000-2017 "Test Method for Reactivity and Post-Reaction Strength of Coke", and the coke M40 test was conducted in accordance with GBT 2006-2008 "Determination Method for Mechanical Strength of Coke".

[0083] Example 1

[0084] 1) Select a production coal blending scheme, prepare the blended coal according to Table 1, and denot it as M0. Then conduct a small coke oven experiment and denot the resulting coke as J0.

[0085] Table 1. Composition of M0 in blended coal

[0086]

[0087] 2) The single coal A to be evaluated (coal type and quality indicators are shown in Table 2) is blended with blended coal M0 at mass ratios of 5:95, 10:90, and 15:85 to form 3 new blended coals (quality indicators are shown in Table 3), which are denoted as M1, M2, and M3 respectively. Then, a small coke oven experiment is carried out, and the resulting coke is denoted as J1, J2, and J3 respectively.

[0088] Table 2. Coal type and quality indicators of single coal type A to be evaluated

[0089]

[0090] Table 3 Quality Indicators of Blended Coal

[0091]

[0092] 3) Determine several quality indicators of the obtained coke as comparative indicators to measure the effect of a single type of coal in the coal blending scheme in step S2; the quality indicators are post-reaction strength CSR and crush resistance M40; post-reaction strength CSR represents the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking; crush resistance M40 represents the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking.

[0093] 4) The post-reaction strength (CSR) and shatter resistance (M40) of J1, J2, and J3 were tested. The results are shown in Table 4.

[0094] Table 4 Quality Indicators of Coke

[0095]

[0096] 5) Compare the test results and determine the effect of the single type of coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in step S2 based on the results:

[0097] Comparing the CSR and M40 of J0, J1, J2 and J3, it can be found that the CSR and M40 of J1, J2 and J3 are all improved compared with J0, indicating that single coal A has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme in step 2), and can improve the hot strength performance and cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step 2).

[0098] Example 2

[0099] 1) Select a production coal blending scheme, prepare the blended coal according to Table 1, and denot it as M0. Then conduct a small coke oven experiment and denot the resulting coke as J0.

[0100] 2) The single coal B to be evaluated (coal type and quality indicators are shown in Table 5) is blended with blended coal M0 at mass ratios of 5:95, 10:90, and 15:85 to form 3 new blended coals (quality indicators are shown in Table 6), which are denoted as M1, M2, and M3 respectively. Then, a small coke oven experiment is carried out, and the resulting coke is denoted as J1, J2, and J3 respectively.

[0101] Table 5. Coal type and quality indicators of the single coal type B to be evaluated.

[0102]

[0103] Table 6 Quality Indicators of Blended Coal

[0104]

[0105] 3) Determine several quality indicators of the obtained coke as comparative indicators to measure the effect of a single type of coal in the coal blending scheme in step S2; the quality indicators are post-reaction strength CSR and crush resistance M40; post-reaction strength CSR represents the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking; crush resistance M40 represents the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking.

[0106] 4) The post-reaction strength (CSR) and shatter resistance (M40) of J1, J2, and J3 were tested. The results are shown in Table 7.

[0107] Table 7 Quality Indicators of Coke

[0108]

[0109] 5) Compare the test results and determine the effect of the single type of coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in step S2 based on the results:

[0110] Comparing the CSR of J0, J1, J2 and J3, it can be found that the CSR of J1, J2 and J3 are all improved compared with J0, indicating that the single coal B has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme in step 2) and can improve the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step 2).

[0111] Comparing the M40 values ​​of J0, J1, J2, and J3 reveals that the M40 values ​​of J1, J2, and J3 initially increase and then decrease compared to J0, indicating that the positive effect of single-type coal B on the coal blending scheme in step 2) has a limit. Using Origin software for interpolation fitting, the horizontal axis represents the mass ratio of the single-type coal to the blended coal M0 (e.g., 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%), and the vertical axis represents M40. The analysis shows that the maximum ratio is approximately 9.5%, corresponding to a maximum M40 value of 86.5%. Figure 1 As shown. Figure 1 The maximum scale (limit) analysis chart is obtained by using Origin software in Embodiment 2 of the present invention.

[0112] Example 3

[0113] 1) Select a production coal blending scheme, prepare the blended coal according to Table 1, and denot it as M0. Then conduct a small coke oven experiment and denot the resulting coke as J0.

[0114] 2) The single coal C to be evaluated (coal type and quality indicators are shown in Table 8) is blended with blended coal M0 at mass ratios of 5:95, 10:90, and 15:85 to form 3 new blended coals (quality indicators are shown in Table 9), which are denoted as M1, M2, and M3 respectively. Then, a small coke oven experiment is carried out, and the resulting coke is denoted as J1, J2, and J3 respectively.

[0115] Table 8. Coal type and quality indicators of the single coal type C to be evaluated

[0116]

[0117] Table 9 Quality Indicators of Blended Coal

[0118]

[0119] 3) Determine several quality indicators of the obtained coke as comparative indicators to measure the effect of a single type of coal in the coal blending scheme in step S2; the quality indicators are post-reaction strength CSR and crush resistance M40; post-reaction strength CSR represents the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking; crush resistance M40 represents the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking.

[0120] 4) The post-reaction strength (CSR) and shatter resistance (M40) of J1, J2, and J3 were tested. The results are shown in Table 10.

[0121] Table 10 Quality Indicators of Coke

[0122]

[0123] 5) Compare the test results and determine the effect of the single type of coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in step S2 based on the results:

[0124] Comparing the CSR and M40 of J0, J1, J2 and J3, it can be found that the CSR and M40 of J1, J2 and J3 are all lower than those of J0, indicating that the single coal C has a negative effect on the coal blending scheme in step 2), which will reduce the hot strength performance and cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step 2).

[0125] Example 4

[0126] 1) Select a production coal blending scheme, prepare the blended coal according to Table 11, and denot it as M0. Then conduct a small coke oven experiment and denot the resulting coke as J0.

[0127] 2) The single coal C to be evaluated (coal type and quality indicators are shown in Table 8) is blended with blended coal M0 at mass ratios of 5:95, 10:90, and 15:85 to form 3 new blended coals (quality indicators are shown in Table 12), which are denoted as M1, M2, and M3 respectively. Then, a small coke oven experiment is carried out, and the resulting coke is denoted as J1, J2, and J3 respectively.

[0128] Table 11 Components of M0 in blended coal

[0129]

[0130] Table 12 Quality Indicators of Blended Coal

[0131]

[0132] 3) Determine several quality indicators of the obtained coke as comparative indicators to measure the effect of a single type of coal in the coal blending scheme in step S2; the quality indicators are post-reaction strength CSR and crush resistance M40; post-reaction strength CSR represents the hot strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking; crush resistance M40 represents the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking.

[0133] 4) The post-reaction strength (CSR) and shatter resistance (M40) of J1, J2, and J3 were tested. The results are shown in Table 13.

[0134] Table 13 Quality Indicators of Coke

[0135]

[0136] 5) Compare the test results and determine the effect of the single type of coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme in step S2 based on the results:

[0137] Comparing the CSRs of J0, J1, J2, and J3 reveals that the CSRs of J1, J2, and J3 initially increase and then decrease compared to J0, indicating that the positive effect of a single coal type (C) on the coal blending scheme in step 2) has a limit. Using Origin software for interpolation fitting, the horizontal axis represents the mass ratio of the single coal type to the blended coal M0 (e.g., 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%), and the vertical axis represents CSR. The analysis shows that the maximum ratio is approximately 7.9%, corresponding to a maximum CSR of 64.91%. Figure 2 As shown. Figure 2 The maximum scale (limit) analysis chart is obtained by using Origin software in Embodiment 4 of the present invention.

[0138] Comparing the M40 values ​​of J0, J1, J2, and J3, it can be found that the M40 values ​​of J1, J2, and J3 are all improved compared to J0. This indicates that the single type of coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme in step 2), and will improve the cold strength performance of the coal blending scheme after coking in step 2).

[0139] The above description of the disclosed embodiments enables those skilled in the art to make or use the invention. Various modifications to these embodiments will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art, and the general principles defined herein may be implemented in other embodiments without departing from the spirit or scope of the invention. Therefore, the invention is not to be limited to the embodiments shown herein, but is to be accorded the widest scope consistent with the principles and novel features disclosed herein.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the role of a single coal in coking, comprising the following steps: S1, selecting a production coal blending scheme and preparing a blended coal, denoted as M0, and then performing a small coke oven experiment, and the obtained coke is denoted as J0; S2, the single coal to be evaluated is respectively mixed with the mixed coal M0 according to different mass ratios to form n new mixed coals, which are respectively denoted as M1, M2, …, Mn. n Then, a small coke oven experiment is performed, and the obtained coals are respectively denoted as J1, J2, …, Jn. n n≥3; S3, determining a plurality of quality indexes of the obtained coke as comparison indexes to measure the role of the single coal in the coal blending scheme of step S2; S4, detecting J0, J1...J n the quality indicator; S5, comparing the detection results, and determining the role of the single coal to be evaluated in the coal blending scheme of step S2 according to the results.

2. The evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized by In step S3, the quality indexes are the strength after reaction CSR and the crushing strength M40; the strength after reaction CSR represents the hot strength performance after coking of the coal blending scheme; and the crushing strength M40 represents the cold strength performance after coking of the coal blending scheme.

3. The evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized by, When the coke CSR of the blended coal of step S1 is low, a single coal for coking that has a positive effect on the coke CSR of the blended coal is selected according to the evaluation method and results, and the proportion of the single coal to be added is determined according to the requirement of the improvement range. When the coke M40 of the blended coal of step S1 is low, a single coal for coking that has a positive effect on the coke M40 of the blended coal is selected according to the evaluation method and results, and the proportion of the single coal to be added is determined according to the requirement of the improvement range.

4. The evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized by Step S2 is: The single coal to be evaluated is blended with the blended coal M0 at a mass ratio of 5:95, 10:90 and 15:85 respectively to form three new blended coals, denoted as M1, M2 and M3 respectively, and then a small coke oven experiment is performed, and the obtained coke is denoted as J1, J2 and J3 respectively.

5. The evaluation method according to claim 4, characterized by Step S4 is:

6. The evaluation method according to claim 5, characterized by The strength after reaction CSR and the crushing strength M40 of J1, J2 and J3 are detected. In step S5, the CSR indexes are compared, and three evaluation results are obtained: a1) the CSR of J1, J2 and J3 is improved compared with the CSR index of J0, which indicates that the single coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme of step S2, and the hot strength performance after coking of the coal blending scheme of step S2 is improved; a2) the CSR of J1, J2 and J3 is decreased compared with the CSR index of J0, which indicates that the single coal to be evaluated has a negative effect on the coal blending scheme of step S2, and the hot strength performance after coking of the coal blending scheme of step S2 is decreased; 7. The evaluation method according to claim 6, characterized by a3) the CSR of J1, J2 and J3 appears to be first increased and then decreased compared with the CSR index of J0, which indicates that there is a limit to the positive effect of the single coal to be evaluated on the coal blending scheme of step S2, and the maximum proportion is determined after processing by a data processing software. The data processing software is origin software. The data processing software processing includes:

8. The evaluation method according to claim 5, characterized by the abscissa is the mass ratio of the single coal to be evaluated to the blended coal M0, the ordinate is the CSR, a broken line graph is drawn, and a curve is fitted by using the analysis, data or interpolation / extrapolation tool in the software to obtain the maximum value of the CSR and the corresponding maximum proportion. In step S5, the M40 indexes are compared, and three evaluation results are obtained: b1) the M40 of J1, J2 and J3 is improved compared with the M40 index of J0, which indicates that the single coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the coal blending scheme of step S2, and the cold strength performance after coking of the coal blending scheme of step S2 is improved; b2) M40 of J1, J2 and J3 is lower than M40 of J0, which indicates that the single coal to be evaluated has a negative effect on the blending scheme of step S2, and will reduce the cold strength performance of the blended coal after coking in step S2; b3) M40 of J1, J2 and J3 increases first and then decreases compared with M40 of J0, which indicates that the single coal to be evaluated has a positive effect on the blending scheme of step S2, and there is a limit, and the maximum proportion is determined after processing by the data processing software.

9. The evaluation method according to claim 8, characterized by, The data processing software is origin software. The data processing software processing includes: The abscissa is the mass ratio of the single coal to be evaluated to the blended coal M0, and the ordinate is M40, and a broken line graph is drawn; and a curve is fitted by using the analysis, data or interpolation / extrapolation tool in the software, and the maximum value of M40 and the corresponding maximum proportion are obtained.

10. The evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized by, In step S1, the blended coal includes coking coal, fat coal, 1 / 3 coking coal, gas coal, lean coal and lean coal.

Images