Comparative analysis on washability indices of anthracite coal by using MCDM methods

• Autorzy: Sokolović Jovica , Stanujkić Dragiša , Štirbanović Zoran , Ilić Ivana

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.37190/ppmp/199985

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper presents the results of the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods for determining the optimal separation density in the gravity separation of anthracite coal, and also suggests an appropriate MCDM model for this purpose. Five separation densities were selected as the output and seven coal washability indices were used as the input based on the washability results of coal. The SAW, TOPSIS, WASPAS, WISP, and CoCoSo methods were used in this study. The evaluation indices of the five methods were averaged as a new index. Finally, alternative A4 (i.e., the optimal separation density is 1650 kg/m3) was selected as the final separation density.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

coal; gravity; separation; density; MCDM

• Wydawca: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej
• Czasopismo: Physicochemical Problems of Mineral Processing
• Rocznik: 2025
• Tom: Vol. 61, iss. 1
• Strony: art. no. 199985
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 66 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Sokolović Jovica

• University of Belgrade, Technical Faculty in Bor, Vojske Jugoslavije 12, 19210, Bor, Serbia

autor

Stanujkić Dragiša

• University of Belgrade, Technical Faculty in Bor, Vojske Jugoslavije 12, 19210, Bor, Serbia

autor

Štirbanović Zoran

• University of Belgrade, Technical Faculty in Bor, Vojske Jugoslavije 12, 19210, Bor, Serbia

autor

Ilić Ivana

• University of Belgrade, Technical Faculty in Bor, Vojske Jugoslavije 12, 19210, Bor, Serbia

Bibliografia

• ATANASSOV, K.T., 1986. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy sets and systems, 20(1), 87–96.
• BAKHTAVAR, E., LOTFIAN, R., 2017. Applying an integrated fuzzy gray MCDM approach: a case study on mineral processing plant site selection. Int. J. Min. Geo-Eng. 51 (2), 177–183.
• BARAL, S.S., SHEKAR, K.R., SHARMA, M., RAO, P.V., 2014. Optimization of leaching parameters for the extraction of rare earth metal using decision making method. Hydrometallurgy. 143, 60–67.
• BIRD, B.M., 1931., Interpretation of Float-and-sink Data, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Bituminous Coal, Pittsburgh.
• BRANS, J.P., 1982. Língénierie de la décision. Elaboration dínstruments dáide à la décision. Méthode PROMETHEE. In L’aide a la Décision: Nature, Instruments et Perspectives D’avenir; Nadeau, R., Landry, M., Eds.; Presses de l’Université Laval: Québec, QC, Canada, 183–214.
• BRAUERS, W.K.M., ZAVADSKAS, E.K., 2010. Project management by MULTIMOORA as an instrument for transition economies. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 16, 5–24.
• CHAKRABORTY, M., CHANDRA, M.K., 2005. Multicriteria decision making for optimal blending for beneficiation of coal: a fuzzy programming approach. Omega, 33(5), 413-418.
• DAS, A., SARKAR, B., 2018. Advanced gravity concentration of fine particles: A review. Miner. Process. Extr. Metall. Rev. 39, 359-394.
• EI, 2023. Energy Institute, 2023 Statistical Review of World Energy, https://www.energyinst.org/statistical-review
• GOVINDARAJAN, B., RAO, T.C., 1994. Indexing the washability characteristics of coal. Int. J. Miner. Process. 42 (3–4), 285–93.
• HOLUSZKO, M.E., GRIEVE, D.A., 1990. Washability characteristics of British Columbia coals. British Columbia Geological Survey 1:371–79.
• HWANG, C.L., YOON, K., 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.
• IEA, 2023. International Energy Agency, Coal 2023, Analysis and forecast to 2026, https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/a72a7ffa-c5f2-4ed8-a2bf-eb035931d95c/Coal_2023.pdf
• IGNJATOVIĆ, R., 1983. Physical methods of concentration. Textbook, Technical Faculty in Bor, Bor.
• ITO, M., 2008. Recent developments in advanced coal cleaning. J. MMIJ. 124 (12), 865-870.
• KESHAVARZ GHORABAEE, M., ZAVADSKAS, E.K., OLFAT, L., TURSKIS, Z. 2015. Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS). Informatica 26, 435–451.
• KOSTOVIC, M., GLIGORIC, Z., 2015. Multi-criteria decision making for collector selection in the flotation of lead–zinc sulfide ore. Miner. Eng. 74, 142–149.
• KURSUNOGLU, S., KURSUNOGLU, N., HUSSAINI, S., KAYA, M., 2021. Selection of an appropriate acid type for the recovery of zinc from a flotation tailing by the analytic hierarchy process. J. Clean. Prod. 283, 124659.
• KURŞUNCU, B., YARAŞ, A., ARSLANOĞLU, H., 2018. Application of multi criteria decision making methods to leaching process of copper from malachite ore. Sigma J. Eng. & Nat. Sci. 36 (3), 783-794.
• LASKOWSKI, J., 2001. Coal flotation and fine coal utilization. Elsevier.
• LIPKA, W., SZWED, C., 2021. Multi-attribute rating method for selecting a clean coal energy generation technology. Energies. 14 (21), 7228.
• LUTTRELL, G.H., HONAKER, R.Q., 2020. Coal preparation. Fossil energy, 357-386.
• MACCRIMON, K.R., 1968. Decision Making among Multiple Attribute Alternatives: A Survey and Consolidated Approach; Memorandum RM-4823-ARPA; Rand Memorandum: Santa Monica, CA, USA.
• MAGDALINOVIĆ, N., ŠTIRBANOVIĆ, Z., STANUJKIĆ, D., SOKOLOVIĆ, J., 2021. Selection of copper-pyrite flotation circuit design by applying the Preference Selection Index Method. Proceedings of XIV International Mineral Processing and Recycling Conference, Belgrade, Serbia, 12-14 May 2021; Sokolović, J., Trumić, M., Eds.; Technical Faculty in Bor: Bor, Serbia, 136-141.
• MAJUMDER, A.K., AND BARNWAL, J.P., 2004. Development of a new coal washability index. Miner. Eng. 17 (1), 93–96.
• MIN, S., WHEELOCK, T., 1977. A comparison of coal beneficiation methods.
• MOHEBALI, S., MAGHSOUDY, S., ARDEJANI, F.D., 2020. Application of data envelopment analysis in environmental impact assessment of a coal washing plant: A new sustainable approach. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 83, 106389.
• OORIAD, F.A., YARI, M., BAGHERPOUR, R., KHOSHOUEI, M., 2018. The development of a novel model for mining method selection in a fuzzy environment; case study: Tazareh Coal Mine, Semnan Province, Iran. Rudarsko-geološkonaftni zbornik. 33 (1), 45-53.
• OPRICOVIC, S., TZENG, G.H., 2004. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 156 (2), 445-455.
• PAWLAK, Z., 1982. Rough sets. International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences, 11, 341-356.
• PHENGSAART, T., SRICHONPHAISAN, P., KERTBUNDIT, C., SOONTHORNWIPHAT, N., SINTHUGOOT, S., PHUMKOKRUX, N., ... & ITO, M., 2023. Conventional and recent advances in gravity separation technologies for coal cleaning: A systematic and critical review. Heliyon.
• POLAT, M., POLAT, H., CHANDER, S., 2003. Physical and chemical interactions in coal flotation. Int. J. Miner. Process. 72 (1-4), 199-213.
• POPOVIĆ, G., STANUJKIĆ, D., KARABAŠEVIĆ, D., ŠTIRBANOVIĆ, Z., 2020. Model for ore deposits selection by using the fuzzy TOPSIS method. J. Min. Metall. A. 56 (1), 59-71.
• RAHIMDEL, M.J., ATAEI, M., 2014. Application of analytical hierarchy process to selection of primary crusher. Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol. 24 (4), 519–523.
• RAO, D.S., GOURICHARAN, T., 2016. Coal processing and utilization. CRC Press.
• ROY, B., 1968. Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples. Rev. Franiaise D’informatique Rech. Opérationnelle, 2, 57–75.
• SAATY, T.L., 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psychol. 15, 234–281.
• SAFARI, M., ATAEI, M., KHALOKAKAIE, R., KARAMOZIAN, M., 2010. Mineral processing plant location using the analytic hierarchy process—a case study: the Sangan iron ore mine (phase 1). Min. Sci. Technol. 20 (5), 691–695.
• SARKAR, G.G., AND DAS, H.P., 1974. A world pattern of the optimum ash levels of cleans from the washability data of typical coal seams. Fuel. 53 (2), 74–84.
• SARKAR, G.G., DAS, H.P., AND GHOSE, A., 1977. Sedimentation patterns: Do they offer clues to coal quality? World Coal. 3 (8), 10–13.
• SHAMSUZZAMAN, M., SHARIF ULLAH, A.M.M., DWEIRI, F.T., 2013. A fuzzy decision model for the selection of coals for industrial use. Int. J. Ind. Syst. Eng. 14 (2), 230-244.
• SMARANDACHE, F., 1998. Neutrosophy Probability Set and Logic. American Research Press, Rehoboth.
• SITORUS, F., BRITO-PARADA, P.R., 2020. Equipment selection in mineral processing - A sensitivity analysis approach for a fuzzy multiple criteria decision making model. Miner. Eng. 150, 106261.
• SITORUS, F., CILLIERS, J.J., BRITO-PARADA, P.R., 2019. Multi-criteria decision making for the choice problem in mining and mineral processing: Applications and trends. Expert Syst. Appl. 121, 393–417.
• SIVAGEERTHI, T., BATHRINATH, S., UTHAYAKUMAR, M., BHALAJI, R.K.A., 2022. A SWAR method to analyze the risks in coal supply chain management. Materials Today: Proceedings. 50, 935-940.
• STANUJKIC, D., 2022. Development of the Simple WISP method and its ehtensions. International May Conference on Strategic Management – IMCSM22, May 28, 2022, Bor, Serbia. 15-24.
• STANUJKIC, D., MAGDALINOVIC, N., MILANOVIC, D., MAGDALINOVIC, S., POPOVIC, G., 2014. An efficient and simple multiple criteria model for a grinding circuit selection based on MOORA method. Informatica. 25 (1), 73–93.
• STANUJKIC, D., POPOVIC, G., KARABASEVIC, D., MEIDUTE-KAVALIAUSKIENE, I., ULUTAŞ, A., 2023. An Integrated Simple Weighted Sum Product Method - WISP. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(5), 1933-1944.
• STANUJKIC, D., ZAVADSKAS, E.K., KARABASEVIC, D., MILANOVIC, D., MAKSIMOVIC, M., 2019. An approach to solving complex decision-making problems based on IVIFNs: A case of comminution circuit design selection. Miner. Eng. 138, 70-78.
• SOKOLOVIĆ, J.M., & MISKOVIC, S., 2018. The effect of particle size on coal flotation kinetics: A review. Physicochem. Probl. Miner. Process. 54 (4), 1172-1190.
• SOKOLOVIĆ, J., STANUJKIĆ, D., ŠTIRBANOVIĆ, Z., 2021. Selection of process for aluminium separation from waste cables by TOPSIS and WASPAS methods. Miner. Eng. 173, 107186.
• SOKOLOVIĆ, J., ILIĆ, I., TRUMIĆ, M., BOGDANOVIĆ, G., & ŠTIRBANOVIĆ, Z., 2023. Determination of washability characteristics of anthracite coal by index of washability and near gravity material index–a case study. Int. J. Coal Prep. Util. 44(5), 503–518.
• STIRBANOVIC, Z., MILJANOVIC, I., MARKOVIC, Z., 2013. Application of rough set theory for choosing optimal location for flotation tailings dump. Arch. Min. Sci. 58 (3), 893–900.
• ŠTIRBANOVIĆ, Z., STANOJLOVIĆ, R., SOKOLOVIĆ, J., STANUJKIĆ, D., ĆIRIĆ, N., MILJANOVIĆ, I., POPOVIĆ, G., 2023. Application of VIKOR method for selection of collector in porphyry copper ore flotation. Proceedings of XV International Mineral Processing and Recycling Conference, Belgrade, Serbia, 17-19 May 2023; Sokolović, J., Trumić, M. Eds.; Technical Faculty in Bor: Bor, Serbia, 391-397.
• ŠTIRBANOVIĆ, Z., GARDIĆ, V., STANUJKIĆ, D., MARKOVIĆ, R., SOKOLOVIĆ, J., STEVANOVIĆ, Z., 2021. Comparative MCDM Analysis for AMD Treatment Method Selection. Water Resour. Manag. 35 (11), 3737–3753.
• ŠTIRBANOVIC, Z., STANUJKIC, D., MILJANOVIC, D., MILANOVIC, I., 2019. Application of MCDM methods for flotation machine selection. Miner. Eng. 137, 140-146.
• VASUMATHI, N., VIJAYA-KUMAR, T.V., PRASAD, K., SUBBA-RAO, S., PRABHAKAR, S., & BHASKAR-RAJU, G., 2018. Fine coal beneficiation by pilot column flotation. J. Min. Metall. A. 54 (1), 25-33.
• WEN, Z., YU, Y., YAN, J., 2016. Best available techniques assessment for coal gasification to promote cleaner production based on the ELECTRE-II method. J. Clean. Prod. 129, 12-22.
• XIA, W., HE, W., SOKOLOVIĆ, J., 2021. Effect of pyrolysis temperature on desulfurization performance of high organic sulfur low rank coal. J. Min. Metall. A. 57 (1), 27-32.
• XU, D., DONG, L., 2019. Strategic diagnosis of China’s modern coal-to-chemical industry using an integrated SWOTMCDM framework. Clean Techn. Environ. Policy 21, 517–532.
• YAZDANI, M., ZARATE, P., ZAVADSKAS, E.K., TURSKIS, Z., 2018. A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Manag. Decis. 57, 2501–2519.
• ZADEH, L.A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Inform. Control, 8(3), 338–353.
• ZAVADSKAS, E.K., KAKLAUSKAS, A., SARKA, V., 1988. The new method of multicriteria complex proportional assessment of projects. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 1994, 1, 131–139.
• ZAVADSKAS, E.K., BAUŠYS, R., STANUJKIC, D., MAGDALINOVIC-KALINOVIC, M., 2016. Selection of lead-zinc flotation circuit design by applying WASPAS method with single-valued neutrosophic set. Acta Montan. Slovaca. 21 (2), 85–92.
• ZAVADSKAS, E.K., TURSKIS, Z., ANTUCHEVICIENE, J., ZAKAREVICIUS, A., 2012. Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektron. Ir Elektrotechnika 122, 3–6.
• ZAVADSKAS, E.K., TURSKIS, Z., 2010. A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision making. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 16, 159–172.