ui uu

Bulletin No. 323 QO f E, Chemistry and Physics, 52 beues \Q, Fuels, 4

DI^PARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

D STA:L\ES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

GEORGE OT1S SMITH, PIRKOTOR

EXPEEIMENTAL WORK

CONDUCTED IN THE

CHEMICAL LABORATORY

OF THE

UNITED STATES FUEL-TESTING PLANT 

AT ST. LOUIS, MO.

JANUARY 1, 1905, TO JULY 31, 1906.

BY

N. W. LORD

WASHINGTON

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1907
5-3

c
CONTENTS.

Page. 

Introduction.............................................................. 1

Accuracy of method of taking car samples.................................... .2

Moisture loss in coarse samples from standing in covered metal pails........... 2

Investigation of moisture losses during sampling.............................. 3

Determination of errors due to abrasion of pebbles used in ball mill........... 4

Comparison of results of air drying in the special oven and by exposure....... 4

Comparison of results for moisture obtained from samples pulverized by various 

methods................................................................. 6

Changes in moisture content of fine samples of coal under modified conditions.. 9 

Comparison of effects of different drying reagents used in the desiccators employed in moisture determinations........................................ 13

Effects of varying amounts of sample and of differences in duration of heating 

on results obtained for moisture.......................................... 14

Alteration of weight of samples of coal when kept in a finely powdered state.... 15

Determinations of specific gravities of the coals.............................. 19

Laboratory methods of determining adaptability of coals to improvement by 

washing.............................................:.................. 24

Volatile matter in coals and lignites......................................... 32

Index.................................................................... 4.1

91400

EXPERIMENTAL WORK CONDUCTED IN THE- CHEMICAL 

LABORATORY OF THE UNITED STATES FUEL-TESTING 

PLANT, ST. LOUIS, JANUARY i, 1905, TO JULY 31, 1906.

By N. W. LORD.

INTRODUCTION.

The experimental work reported upon herein was performed at the 

laboratory of the United States fuel-testing plant on the grounds of 

the Louisiana Purchase Exposition at St. Louis, Mo., between Januaiy 1, 1905, and July 31,1906, and was undertaken for the purpose of 

checking the results obtained in the routine work of the laboratory, 

improving the methods of working, and investigating the chemical and 

physical properties of coal. The laboratory having been designed 

primarily .for the analysis of the coal samples sent to the fuel-testing 

plant, as well as those taken in connection with the regular testing 

operations of the boiler, gas-producer, and other divisions of the plant, 

only a veiy small proportion of the time of the force was available for 

experimental work outside of the regular routine.

From the nature of such work it was not possible to separate the 

results obtained in 1905 from those obtained in 1906, especially as 

many of the experiments, such as those on the alteration of coal, 

involved a long time and were started in 1905 and continued to the 

middle of 1906. This report therefore covers all such work up to 

its completion in July, 1906.

The complete history of the coals used in these experiments is not 

given, the samples being usually referred to by their laboratory numbers onty, as such information is generally not necessary and does not 

affect the interpretation of the results obtained in the experiments. 

Fuller information as to any particular sample may be found in the 

published reports of the fuel-testing plant for 1905 and 1906.

In the following pages the results of each line of experimental 

work are given under a special heading indicating the object of the 

investigation.

5
6 EXPEKIMENTAL WOKK IN FUEL TESTING.

While man}r of the investigations can only be regarded as preliminary, it is believed that the mass of the results will be of value in 

shedding light on some matters of general interest.

ACCURACY OF METHOD OF TAKING CAR SAMPLES.

The regular method of taking car samples has been fully described 

under " Sampling " in Professional Paper No. 48, page 175. To check 

the accuracy of this method, check samples on two cars of coal rather 

high in moisture, ash, and sulphur were taken at the same time that 

the regular sample was taken, by opening a gate in the conveyor runway every four or five minutes, and thereby allowing the contents of 

one or two buckets passing at that time to be emptied into a small bin. 

In this way a sample of 1,200 to 1,500 pounds was taken during the 

unloading of the car. This sample was then-put through a small 

crusher, crushed to £-inch size, and resampled 'at the convey or buckets, 

and a sample was sent to the chemical laboratory for anatysis. In the 

following table the Indiana coal was a run-of-mine coal, and the 

amount sampled was approximately 20 tons; and the Ohio coal was 

a run-of-mine coal, and the amount sampled was approximately 26 

tons.

Moisture, ash, and sulphur determinations from samples of two cars of run-of-mine coal.

Constituent.

Ash ...........................................................

Indiana coal.

Regular 

sample.

10.80 

12.62 

-1.39

Check 

sample.

10.47 

12.92 

4.43

Ohio coal.

Regular 

sample.

9.01 

11.33 

4.02

Check 

sample.

9.43 

11.59 

4.02

For coals containing such high percentages of ash and sulphur the

agreement between these independently taken samples is satisfactory. 

It indicates, so far as the sampling is concerned, that the anatytical 

work may be taken as closely representing the average of the carload.

MOISTURE LOSS IN COARSE SAMPLES FROM STANDING IN COVERED

METAL PAILS.

The large samples from the fuel-testing plant were sent to the laboratoiT in closed metal pails, and.some of them were allowed to stand in 

the pail several hours, or occasionally over night, before sampling. 

To see if any considerable amount of moisture might be lost in this 

way, a portion of the wet sample from the washery (Pennsylvania No. 

9 coal) was taken as the most favorable case, and allowed to stand for 

five days in the closed pail in the laboratory before sampling. The 

average temperature for the five days was 18° C., and the atmospheric 

humidity 60 per cent. The percentages of moisture determined by
MOISTURE LOSSES DURING SAMPLING.

analysis of this sample, and analysis of the portion of the sample 

reduced at once, are as follows:

Per cent.

Portion sampled at once ................................................... 5. 07

Portion sampled after standing five days.................................... 4. 58

Loss by standing .................................................... .49

These coals diy down to about 1 per cent moisture, so that the 

loosely held and surface moisture amounted to about 4 per cent. 

From this experiment the moisture loss which occurs during the short 

time that the sample usually i^ allowed to stand in the laboratory 

before sampling would appear to be unimportant.

INVESTIGATION OF MOISTURE LOSSES DURING SAMPLING.

In preparing the samples for these tests the coarse sample (40 to 50 

pounds in weight), when received at the laboratory, was divided by

quartering. One portion of 500 grams was at once ground without 

air drying in the ball mill. Another portion of about 5 to 10 pounds 

was air dried in the usual way before the final pulverization. The 

results (reduced to sample as received) in moisture and ash for the 

two portions are as follows:

Moisture and ash determinations on air-dried samples and fresh sampl.es of coal.

Designation of sample.

Illinois No. 23 B ...............................................

Illinois No. 23 A. .............................................

Illinois No. 22 A ...............................................

Regular sample 

(air dried).

Moisture.

1 13.54 

t -13.72 

33. 85 

5.19 

10.57

13.47 

13.80 

11.91

Ash.

10.74 

10. 32 

7.30 

14.01 

11.65 

15.59 

11,53 

11.74 

13.01

Fresh sample (not 

air dried).

Moisture.

«936 

H.9'2 

33 00 

3.5S 

9.95 

14.78 

12.43 

12. fib 

11.58

Ash.

11.37 

10.40 

7.65 

14.10 

11.98 

16.11 

11.63 

11.15 

12. 57

"This snmple was ground very tine in ball mill, which probably accounts for the loss being so large.

The results obtained for moisture from the original samples that 

were ground down without preliminary air drying are without exception decidedly lower than the results obtained from the regularly prepared-air-dried samples when calculated to the sample as received, 

the greatest difference being over 4 per cent and the average difference 

over 1| per cent. Furthermore, the fine sample, after being ground 

without previous air drying, as shown by experiments (see pp. 13-17), 

gives up moisture so readily as to indicate that a large additional lossduring the handling and weighing of the sample in the laboratory is 

almost certain. The consequent errors due to moisture losses are 

liable to be so large as to affect very seriously the accuracy of the 

results obtained.
EXPERIMENTAL WOKK IN FUEL TESTING.

DETERMINATION OF ERRORS DUE TO ABRASION OF PEBBLES USED IN

BALL MILL.

During the Louisiana Purchase Exposition the final pulverization of 

the samples was done on a bucking board. In the work done during 

1905 the final grinding of the sample was done in closed jars in the 

ball mill, quartz pebbles being used.

Jn order to determine whether there was danger of materially increasing the ash contents of the samples from chipping and abrasion of the 

pebbles used in grinding, these pebbles were carefully weighed at inter 

vals and the amount of loss determined. The Aveight of the sample 

ground each time in the ball mill is approximately 500 grams, and the 

abrasion of the pebbles (calculated as percentage of the weight of the 

samples ground) w^s also carefully determined. The results on three 

weighed lots of pebbles are as follows:

Losses of weight in three lots of quartz pebbles before and after grinding in the ball mill.

No. 1 (250 samples ground). 

No-. 2 (230 samples ground). 

No. 3 (245 samples ground).

Lot.

nd)..... ............. :.......

nd )...................: ....

Total 

weight of 

samples 

ground.

Grains. 

125, QUO 

1 lf>, 000

Weight of pebbles.

Before 

grinding

Grams. 

4,118.0 

3, 502. 9 

4,273.2

After 

grinding.

Grams. 

4,113 1

3,499.4 

4,203.3

Loss by abrasion.

Actual.

Grams. 

5.5 

3.5 

4.9

Ratio to 

coal 

ground.

Per cent. 

0. 004 

.003 

.(04

These results show that as far as the fine pulverization of the coal is 

concerned, there is little or no danger of increasing the ash content 

of the sample appreciably by using quartz pebbles as the grinding 

.medium. The pebbles used show no tendency to chip, as the loss 

between weighings taken before and after 25 to 50 samples were

ground in no case amounted to over 1 gram, the abrasion being in all 

cases approximately proportional to the weight of samples ground.

COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF AIR DRYING IN THE SPECIAL OVEN AND

BY EXPOSURE,.

The samples as received at the laboratory were dried to approximately an air-dry condition, before their final pulverization, in an 

oven especially designed for this purpose. To find out how nearly this 

method of drying approximates air drying under ordinary conditions, 

the following tests were made:

The loss in weight of samples of different coals allowed to air diy 

under observed conditions of temperature and humidity was determined by allowing portions of the coarse samples spread on trays to 

remain exposed to the air of the laboratory for periods of time ranging from seven to twenty days. The samples were weighed'from time
EESULTS OF AIR .DRYINC4. 9

to time and the drying continued until the weight remained almost 

constant. The air-drying loss of these samples and the loss in weight 

of the corresponding regular samples drie"! in the dryer, with the 

amount of moisture remaining in the dryei' samples, are tabulated 

below. In most of the samples the dryer loss is not widely different 

from the loss on the air-dry sample. Special exceptions are Nos. 1960 

(Indiana No. 9 B) and 1390 (Wyoming No. 6), on which samples the 

dryer-sample loss is decidedly larger than that on the samples dried 

by exposure to the air of the laboratory. The samples dried during 

the summer months were exposed to air of a high average humidity 

(60 per cent), as the temperature and humidity of the laboratory were 

approximately that of the outdoor air for that period. The samples 

dried during the winter months were exposed to air of low average 

humidity (30 per cent), as the temperature of the laboratory was 

decidedly higher than that of the outdoor air, with approximately the

same absolute amount of moisture present in the laboratoiy and in the 

outdoor air. The humidity of the warmer laboratory air is consequently low. The percentage of moisture remaining in the samples 

dried by exposure to the air of the laboratory was determined by 

adding or subtracting (according to whether it was plus or minus) the 

difference between the loss in the dryer and the loss in the exposed 

sample to the moisture remaining in the " dryer sample," as given in 

the table below:

Results of tests for moisture in samples of coal.

Sample of coal.

Laboratory 

number.

3294 

3255 

3308 

3331 

3406 

2626 

3315 

3295 

2332 

2572 

2420 

3307 

2528 

2261 

3280 

3405 

1761 

1876 

3225 

2890 

1960 

2686 

2731 

2803 

3390

 Field number.

Indian Territory No. 2 B.. 

West Virginia No. 20 . . . . 

New Mexico No. 4 B . .. . 

New Mexico No 3 A .... 

West Virginia No. 17 . .. . 

West Virginia No.' 21 . . . .

New Mexico No. 3 B ......

West Virginia No. 16 B....

Indian Territory No. 2 B .. 

Illinois No. 15 ."...........

Illinois No. 22 B...........

Indiana No. 9 B ...........

Illinois No. 23 B. ..........

Wyoming No. 6 ............

Moisture in sample.

As received.

Per ct, 

2.72 

2.72 

2 75 

2.78 

2.81 

2. 89 

3.38 

3.45 

3.46 

3.57 

4.C6 

4.36 

4.36 

5.57 

5.83 

6.27 

9.95 

10.47 

11.44 

13.03 

13. 53 

14.30 

14. 6S 

15. 68 

19.00

Loss on coarse 

sample, as 

dried 

By exposure.

Per-ct. 

1.60 

0.30 

1.40 

0.40 

0 60 

1.98 

1.60 

1.50 

2.07 

2.24 

2.59 

2.20 

1.77 

3.89 

2.30 

4.20 

3.62 

6.02 

4.10 

9.74 

7.13 

8.12 

11.80 

13.98 

. 7. 50

In 

dryer.

Per ct. 

1 40 

1.20 

1.40 

1.40 

1.4D 

1.90 

1.70 

2.00 

2.50 

2.10 

2.40 

3.00 

2.80 

4.40 

2.10 

4.90 

4.2J 

6.30 

3.70 

11.20 

10.70 

9.dO 

12. 40 

13.20 

11.30

After drying 

By exposuie (calculated).

Per ct.. 

1.14 

2 44 

1.37 

2.40 

2. 23 

0.93 

1.81 

1.98 

1.43 

1.36 

1.51 

2.20 

2.63 

1.73 

3.61 

2.14 

6.58 

4.73 

7.64 

3.52 

6.74 

6.68 

3.20 

2.08 

12. 48

In 

dryer.

Per ct. 

1.34 

1.54 

1.37 

1.40 

1.43 

1.01 

1.71 

1.48 

1.00 

1.50 

1.70 

1.40 

1.'60 

1.22 

3.81 

1.44 

6.00 

4.45 

8.04 

2.06 

3.17 

5.20 

2.60 

2.86 

8.68

Time of 

drying 

by exposure.

Days. 

17 

13 

19 

14 

16 

16 

18 

17 

11 

12 

9 

19 

10 

11, 

17 

16 

18 

14 

21 

8 

18 

9 

11 

10 

16

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

0 C. 

25 

25 

25 

24 

26 

21 

25 

25 

21 

19 

25 

25 

24 

18 

25 

26 

27 

27 

25 

23 

27 

22 

23 

24 

27

Humidity.

Per ct. '63 

64 

63 

62 

64 

26 

02 

63 

47 

28 

27 

63 

31 

57 

63 

64 

64 

64 

53 

35 

67 

28 

34 

31. 

C4

6128 Bull. 323 07-
10 EXPERIMENTAL WOKK IN FUEL TESTING.

These values show that on most of the coals tested drying in the 

drier brought the sample to approximately an air-dry condition. No 

effort had been made to do more than this, as the primary object in 

the air drying is to get the sample into such a condition that the fine 

sample will not be subject to large moisture changes during subsequent 

handling in the laboratory. The air drying, therefore, is not to be 

understood as being a rigidly -fixed determination; but it has been 

found that the values obtained as a rule are Avithin a sufficiently definite range to give this determination some importance as showing the 

effect of standing and exposure on the percentage of moisture in the 

coal. This matter is of considerable commercial importance, since, so 

far as the moisture content is concerned, coals having a large airdrying loss are obviously much more affected than coals having a 

small air-drying loss. It further has appeared that the amount of 

residual moisture in the air-dried sample prepared under the described 

conditions usualty lies within a range which is somewhat characteristic 

of different kinds of coal.

The foregoing table shows this residual moisture to be about 1 per 

cent in the West Virginia coals, 3 to 6 per cent in the Illinois and 

Indiana coals, and from 10 to 12 per cent in the Wyoming samples.

COMPARISON OF RESULTS FOR MOISTURE OBTAINED FROM SAMPLES 

PULVERIZED BY VARIOUS METHODS.

The po'ssibilit}^ of moisture loss during grinding on a bucking board 

has already been referred to. In order to obtain more data upon 

different coals and under observed conditions of temperature and 

humidity, duplicate portions of a number of samples were ground 

down upon the bucking board and the moisture determinations made

upon these portions. At the same time portions of the coal which

had only passed the 1; 10-inch mesh sieve in the process of sampling 

were reserved as samples for determining moisture in the coal at this 

sixe. The moisture was determined in these samples by drying 5 

grams for one hour in the air bath, instead of 1 gram as in the regular 

determination. The moisture results on these samples and the results 

upon the regular samples ground down in the ball mill, together with 

the temperature and humidity conditions of the laboratory at the time 

of sampling, are given in the following table:
MOISTURE AS AFFECTED BY PULVERIZATION. 11

Results for moisture from coal samples variously pulverized.

Sample of coal.

Laboratory 

number.

3255 

2689 

2688 

2722 

2744 

2690 

1835 

1680 

1699 

1702 

1780 

1635 

1639 

1638 

1048 

1653 

1654 1717- 

1802 

1786 

1740 

1761 

1820 

1926 

3447 

3448 

3451 

2731 

2852 

2905 

2896 

2803 

2819 

1941 

1844 

1859 

1875 

1881 

2037 

1960 

1979 

2087 

2759 

3405 

3406 

2843 

' 2528 

2592 

2274 

2865 

2904 

2937 

2942 

3295 

3307 

3308 

3315 

3331 

3294 

2071 

2109 

2144 

2083 

2062 

2310 

2311 

2D5 

2068 

2152 

3102 

3127 

3128 

2734 

2717 

3199 

2420

Field number.

Brazil .....................................

Ciiliforniii No 1

Moisture in sample from 

Bucking 

board .

Per cent. 

1.43 

0.89 

0.62 

0.94 0. 75' 

1.22 

5. 40

.....do........,...........................- 1 ..........

Illinois No. 6 B ...........................

Illinois No. 9 B ...........................

.....do.....................................

IllinoisNo.10 ............................

.....do...........----....:.................

Illinois No. 11 C ..........................

Illinois No. 11 D ...........................

Illinois No. 19 C. ..........................

.....do.....................................

Illinois No. 21. ............................

Illinois No. 22 A ..........................

Illinois No. 22 B ..........................

Illinois No. 23. ............................

Illinois No. 23 A ..........................

.....do.....................................

.....do ....................................

.....do ....................................

New Mexico No 4

New Mexico No 4 A

Ohio No. 9 B. ..............................

Tennessee No 6

Tennessee No 8 A

rroYaa"NFr» *%

Utah No. 1 ................................

Virginia No. 1 A. ..........................

6.82 

4.92

2.97 

6.06 

4.22 

5.24 

6.10 

4.74 

6.46 

5.43 

3.98 

4.83 

2.89 

4.42 

4.45 

2.14 

2.47 

2.05 

5.19 

4.04 

5.62 

5.76 

5.60 

3.99 

3.30 

2.98 

7.92 

3.45 

1.70 

1.65 

1.71 

1.66 

2.66 

1.12 

1.59 

1.63 

5.25 

2.54 

1.03 

1.43 

1.33 

1.56

1.54 

1.36 

3.40 

5.60

5.43 

2.56 

2.25 

2.55 

2.78 

1.82 

1.57 

0.77 

1.27 

1.01 

0.92 

9.06 

8.63 

2.23 

1.60

Ball mill.

JJer cent. 

1.54 

0.85 

0.60 

1. 05 

0.83 

1.11 

4.95 

9.05 

8.89 

4.17 

7.60 

4.99 

4.03 

12.34 

2.79 

2.98 

3.11 

2. 42 

6.30 

3.89 

5.19 

6. 00 

4.61 

6.39 

6.01 

3.87 

5.27 

2.60 

5.74 

6.39 

2.06 

2.86 

2.23 

5.12 

3.58 

5.21 

5.91 

5.50 

5.19 

3.17 

2.85 

'8.49 

4.45 

1.44 

1.43 

2.09 

.1.60 

2.99 

0.94 

1.71 

2.49 

7.41 

2.48 

1.48 

1.40 

1.37 

1.71 

1.40 1.34' 

2.96 

5.60 

6.24 

2.16 

1.99 

2.47 

2.65 

1.77 

1.47 

0.64 

1.02 

1.05 

-1.14 

9.88 

9.76 

2.34 

1.70

iVinch 

mesh 

sieve.

Per cent. 

1.43 

0.69 

0.50 

0.87 

0.81. 

1.03 

4.80 

« 1. 28 

 7.42 

4.22 

7.48 

5.36 

3.73 

12. 35 

2.94 

2.59 

2.82 

2.39 

6.01 

3.68 

5.29 

5.84 

4.46 

6.20 

5.57 

3.95 

4.96 

2.57 

5.61 

6.39 

1.86 

2.65 

1.93 

4.93 

3. 42 

5.60 

5.71 

5.46 

5.16 

3.04 

2.62 

8.52 

4.29 

1.34 

1.38 

1.83 

1.34 

2.80 

0.99 

1.55 

2.62 

7.45 

2.28 

1.34 

1.38 

, 1. 33 

1.64 

1. 14 

1.24 

2.65 

5.57 

0.15 

1.94 

1.84 

2.56 

2.37 

1.77 

1.38 

0.87 

1. 02 

0.98 

1.02 

8.48 

8.67 

2.32 

1.60

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

" C. 

29 

23 

23 

23 

28 

23 

30 

29 

22 

27. 

24 

20 

25 

21 

28 

24 

24 

27 

26 

25 

35 

25 

28 

31 

33 

33 

33 

25 

23 

24 

24 

24 

22 

29 

28 

21 

21 

27 

23 

28 

31 

22 

19 

31 

31 

24 

23 

22 

24 

24 

24 

21 

20 

30 

28 

25 

28 

31 

30 

21 

27 

18 

24 

18 

19 

19 

24 

21 

31 

24 

29 

25 

23 '21 

24 

' 24

Humidity.

Per cent. 

66 

30 

30 

30 

37 

30 

67 

60 

61 

52 

70 

59 

39 

60 

37 

55 

55 

64 

64 

63 

53 

77 

72 

56 

49 

49 

49 

39 

30 

20 

20 

31 

28 

60 

72 

 68 

60 

71 

69 

72 

63 

75 

35 

63 

63 

25 

37 

28 

70 

25 

31 

33 

37 

57 

65 

65 

43 

47 

67 

75 

72 

73 

85 

73 

66 

66 

76 

75 

53 

31 

38 

33 

24 

26 

31 

25

"Heated two hours, moisture = 7.86; heated three hours, moisture 8.Do.
12 EXPERIMENTAL WOEK IN FUEL TESTING.

.Results for moisture from coal samples variously pulverized Continued.

Sample of coal.

Laboratory 

number.

2358 

2687 

2686 

2250 

2028 

2004 

2332 

2527 

2549 

2572 

2131 

3213 

3390

Field number.

Moisture in sample from 

Bucking 

board.

Per cent. 

2.35 

5.38 

4.55 

1.45 

1.10 

2.00 

1.15 

.1. 29

0.65 

1.43 

4.57 

5.61 

8.90

Ball mill.

Per cent. 

2.40 

5.98 

5. 20 

J.35 

1.17 

2.05 

1.00 

1.28 

0.68 

1.50 

4.65 

6.00 

8.68

 jfo-inch 

mesh

sieve.

Per cent. 

2.28 

5.85 

4.65 

1.19 

1.15 

2.05 

1.00 

1.13 

0.65 

1.44 

4.48 

6.C4 

8.24

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

«C. 

28 

20 

20 

23 

23 

34 

20 

23 

22 

20 

23 

31 

32

Humidity.

Per cent. 

26 

24 

24 

69 

69 

50 

59 

37 

22 

24 

85 

46 

55

The results for moisture obtained on the 5-gram portion of the 

coarse sample, as a rule, run from 0.1 to 0.2 per cent lower than the 

moisture value as determined upon the sample ground in the ball mill. 

In a few cases the moisture result on the coarse sample is somewhat 

higher than the result on the ball-mill sample, while in a few other 

cases, noticeably the lignite samples from California and Texas, the 

moisture result on the coarse sample is decided^ lower. This result, 

as shown by tests on sample 1680, California No. 1, ma}^ be ascribed 

to the fact that the moisture in a coarse sample of lignite is very 

incompletely expelled by one hour's heating. An additional two hours 

of heating upon this sample resulted in an increased moisture value 

of over 0.7 per cent. As a method applied to any and all coals, the 

determination of the moisture in the fine sample appears to be preferable to the determination in the coarse sample. The results obtained 

for moisture upon the samples ground down on the bucking board, as 

compared with the results obtained on the samples ground down in 

the ball mill, show that the bucking-board samples may either, gain or 

lose moisture, depending on the thoroughness of the preliminary drying of the coarse samples and the humidity of the air in the laboratory 

at the time of sampling. For Illinois coals previously dried down to 

a moisture content dT about 5 or 6 per cent, the bucking-board sample 

took up moisture during grinding when the humidity was high (TO 

percent or more). On the other hand, with low humidity (20 to 30 

per cent), the moisture loss during grinding was considerable, and a 

careful study of the results obtained upon the bucking-board sample, 

as compared with the results on the ball-mill sample, taken in connection with the humidity changes, shows that any success in attempting 

to work the sample down on the bucking board without danger of 

moisture changes is practically impossible-of realization, and that the 

sample ground down on the bucking board can not be in an}^ case 

regarded as entirely satisfactory on account of the danger of moisture 

changes during the sampling. The experiments reported under the
CHANGES IN MOISTURE CONTENT. 13

following heading, showing the rapid changes in moisture in coal 

samples when spread on the watch glass, indicate that there is probably a slight gain or loss of moisture in the ball-mill sample even during the short time that this sample is exposed to air during sampling, 

and that this change may be considerable if the coarse sample be very 

far from an air-dried condition before being ground down. The 

grinding down of samples in the ball mill can not, therefore, be considered as perfectly satisfactory in so far as moisture changes are 

concerned; but this method of grinding, in connection with the preliminary drying of the coarse sample, is much more satisfactoiy and 

reliable than any other practical method that has been devised of 

which the writer has any knowledge. Therefore it appears that the 

handling of samples in this manner, as compared with the practice in 

most general use, is an important step in the direction of securing a 

sample for analysis with a minimum amount of unaccounted-for changes

in moisture.

CHANGES IN MOISTURE CONTENT OF FINE SAMPLES OF COM. UNDER 

MODIFIED CONDITIONS.

That coal in a fine condition changes rapidly in moisture content is 

well known. In order to obtain definite information as to the rate of 

this change a number of tests were made on coals under different conditions. The first selection for testing was a fine sample (No. 1638 C) of 

undried Illinois coal, containing 12.4 per cent moisture. One gram 

of this sample was spread out on a 4-inch watch glass and weighed at 

intervals, a record of the temperature and humidit}7 being taken 

at the time of the different weighings. A second series of tests was 

also made on a 10-gram portion of this sample spread upon a 4-inch 

watch glass. A third series of tests was made upon another' portion 

of this sample (17.2 grams) by allowing it to stand in an open, widemouthed 2-ounce bottle and weighing at intervals. The results for 

these three series of tests are as follows:

Changes in moisture content of sample (No. 1638 C) of undried Illinois coal. 

FIRST SERIES 1 GRAM ON 4-INCH WATCH GLASS.

Time interval between weighings.

42 hours. ..................................................

104 h ours ..................................................

15 clays ....................................................

Total loss in 72 days ................................

Loss or gain in 

weight.

Grams. 

-0. 0202 

- .0075 

- .0090 

- .0110 

- .0350 

- .0120 

+ .0140 

+ .0060 

- .0127 

+ !0007 

- .0175

Per cent. 

- 2. 02 

- .75 

- .90 

- 1.10 

- 3.50 

- 1.20 

+ 1.40 

+ .60 

- 1.27 

+ .07 

- 1.75

10.42

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

0 C. 

22

25 

24 

28 

25 

18 

27 

32 

32

Humidity.

Per cent. 

21

50 

3(1 

36 

63 

64 

35 

41 

55
14 EXPERIMENTAL WORK TN FUEL TESTING.

Change* -in moisture content, of sample (No. JtifiS C) of undried Illinois c»a/ Continued. 

SECOND SERIES -10 GRAMS OX 4-INCH WATCH GLASS.

Time interval between weighings.

Total loss in 72 davs ................................

Loss or gain in - weight.

Grams. 

-0. 0280 

- .0380 

- .0605 

- ,1965 

- .2535 

- .2140 

+ .0575 

+ .0130 

- .0518 

- .0622 

- .0725

Per cent. 

-0.28 

- .38 

- .01 

-1.96 

-2.54 

-2.14 

+ .58 

+ .13 

- .52 

- .62 

_ 72

9.06

Air ofclaboratory.

Temperature.

0 (',. 

25

25 

24 

28 

25 

38 

27 

32 

32

Humidity.

Per cent. 

50

43 

36 

35 

63 

64 

35 

41 

55

THIRD SERIES 17.2 GRAMS IN OPEN, WIDE-MOUTHED 2-OUNCE BOTTLE.

1

........ .......J - .0115

................ j - .0260 i nsfin

................' - .0020

................i - .0855

i ofwn

................! - .0885

................ - .0015

................! - .0625

................I - .0010

................j - .1190

........... ......' - .0005

................! - .3625

................; >- .0000

................; - .0200

................1............

1

- 0. 014

- .067

.15

- .47

- .01

- .50

m

- .51

- .01

- .36

- .005

- .70

- .003

-2.11

- .000

- .116

5. 085

99

24

28

25

18

27

S9

32

Of:

36

po

64

35

41

55

A second sample (No. 1638 E) of undried Illinois coal contained 11.89 

per cent moisture, and being- a duplicate of No. 1638 C, except that it 

was perhaps more finely pulverized, was also tested in a similar way, 

by spreading 1 gram on a 3-inch watch glass and 10 grams on a 3-inch

watch glass, and by placing- 14.5 grams in an open, wide-mouthed 

2-ounce bottle. The changes occurring in these three samples are 

given in the following table:

Changes in moisture content of sample (No. 1688 E} of undried Illinois coal. 

FIRST SERIES 1 GRAM ON 3-INCH WATCH GLASS.

Time interval between weighings. Loss or gain in 

weight.

Grams. 

-0.0215 

- .0160 

- .0110 

- .0290 

- .0055 

- .0063 

+ .0143 

+ .0060 

'- .0142 

+ .0025 

- .0173

Per cent. 

-2. 15 

-1.60 

-1.10 

-2.90 

-0.55 

-0.63 

+1.43 

+ .60 

-1.42 

+ .25 

-1.73

9.80

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

° C.

25

25 

24 

28 

25 

18 

27 

32 

32

Humidity.

Per cent. 

50

43 

36 

36 

63 

64 

35 

41 

55
CHANGES IN MOISTUKE CONTENT. 15

Clianc/es in moisture content of sample (No. 1688 E) ofundried Illinois coal Continued. 

SECOND SERIES 10 GRAMS ON 3-INCH WATCH GLASS.

Time interval between weighings. Loss or gain in 

weight.

Grams. 

-0.0518 

- .0270 

- .0530 

- .2180 

- .2000 

- .1937 

+ .0692 

+ .0095 

- .0550 

- .0590 

- .0870

Per cent.. 

-0. 52 

. - .27 

- .53 

-2.18 

-2. 00 

-1.94 

+ .69 

+ .095 

- .55 

- .59 

- .87

8.67

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

°C.' 

25

25 

24 

28 

25 

18 

27 

32 

32

Humidity.

Per cent. 

50

43 

36 

36 

63 

64 

35 

41 

55

THIRD SKRII^-M.f) GRAMS IN OI'EN, WIDE-MOUTHED 2-OUNCE BOTTLE.

-0. 003

- .0135

- .0340

- .0890

- .0020

- .0995

- .0025

- .0850

- .0015

- .0625

- .0010

- .0875

- .0015

- .2538

- .0010

- .0500

-0.02

- .09

- .23

- .60

- .01

-- .68

- .02

- .56

- .01

- .42

- .01

- .60

- .01

-1.71

- .01

- .35

5.33

22

21

28

25

 18

27

32

32

61

36

36

63

64

35

41

55

Other experiments were likewise performed on a similar sample 

(No. 1639 C) of Illinois coal, which contained 4.12 per cent moisture, 

although the coarse sample had been well air-dried before the preparation of the fine sample. The changes in weight in the 1-gram sample 

spread on a watch glass, in the 10-gram sample spread on a watch 

glass, and in a portion ,(8.3 grams) allowed to stand exposed in an 

open, wide-mouthed 2-ounce bottle were as follows-:

Changes in moisture content of sample (No. 1639 C) of well-dried Illinois coal. 

FIRST SERIES 1 GRAM ON 4-INCH WATCH GLASS.

Time interval between weighings. Loss or gain in 

weight.

Grams. 

-0. 0093 

- .0025 

- .0015 

+ .0045 

+ .0135 

+ .0070 

- .0170 

+ .0050

Per cent. 

-0.93 

- .25 

- .15 

+ .45 

+1.35 

+ .70 

-1.70 

+ .40

0.13

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

0 C. "28

25 

18 

27 

32

Humidity.

Per cent. 

30

63 

64 

35 

41.
16 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Changes in moisture content of sample (No. 1639 C) of well-dried Illinois coal Continued. 

SECOND SERIES 10 GRAMS ON 4-INCH WATCH GLASS.

Time interval between weighings.

23 hours. ..................................................

Loss or gain in 

weight.

Grams. 

-0. 0190 

- .0120 

- .0175

- .0280 

+ .1235 

+ .0195 

- .0580 

- .0280

Per cent 

-0.19 

- .32 

- .175

- .28 

+ 1.24 

+ .20 

- .58 

- .28

0.1S

Air of laboratory.

Temperature.

C. 28 '

25

18 

27 

32

Humidity.

Per cent.. 

36

63 

64 

35 

41

THIRD SERIES 8.3 GRAMS IN OPEN, WIDE-MOUTHED 2-OUNCE BOTTLE.

Stirred ................................................

Total gain in 20 davs ...............................

+0.0015

+ .0010

- .0000

+ .0080

+ .0230

- .0000

+ .0240

- .0175

- .0000

+0.02

+ .01

+ .08

+ .29

+ .29

- .21

- .00

0.48

23

25

18

27

32

69

63

64

35

41

An inspection of these results shows that in samples of fine coal 

prepared from coal not previously air dried the loss may be rapid, 

being in a 1-gram portion of undried sample over 2 per cent in five 

minutes and over 8 per cent in twenty-four hours. That samples kept 

in bottles may lose a considerable amount of moisture unless tightly 

stoppered is also shown by the results obtained from weighing the 

samples in an open bottle, the loss in twenty-four hours being nearly 

0.7 per cent and in seventy-two hours almost 2 per cent. This loss 

continued until the total loss in twenty-four days was about 5 percent. That the danger from losses in handling a fine sample which 

has been well air dried is not nearly so great is shown by the tests 

upon No. 1639 C. Upon the 1-gram portion of this sample the loss in 

five minutes was 0.93 per cent, but the additional loss afterwards was 

small, showing that the sample was not far from air dry under the 

existing conditions. In fact, under the conditions existing on the 

next afternoon the sample as ground was drier than air dry, as is 

shown by an increase of over 1 per cent in weight. That this sample 

was about air dry, under the average conditions existing, is furthermore shown by the results obtained on the sample exposed in an open 

bottle, where the sample at different times shows small losses and 

small gains in weight. The rapidity with which the 1-gram portion 

of this dried sample gave up the little moisture it possessed over and 

above the existing air-dry conditions shows the extreme sensitiveness 

of finely ground coal samples to changes in the moisture content of 

the air.
EFFECTS OF DKYUVC4 REAGENTS. 17

As might be expected, the rapidity of gain or loss is greatest in the 

1-gram sample and least in the sample kept in an open bottle. A comparison of these losses after seventy-two days on the undried-samples 

shows, however, that even in that time the loss on the 1-gram sample 

is decidedly in excess of that on the 10-gram sample, and about twice 

that on the sample in the open bottle. This result would lead to the 

inference that the change in weight is not due entirely to moisture 

losses, but is influenced more or less by oxidation changes. That such 

is the case is shown by the results of tests of the gain or loss in weight, 

from time to time, of fine samples kept in tightly stoppered bottles, 

moisture determinations being made at the same time to find out 

whether the amount of moisture present in the sample varies with 

the change in weight. These tests are described under "Alteration 

of weight of samples of coal when kept in a finely powdered state," 

pages 19-22.

COMPARISON OF EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT DRYING REAGENTS USED IN 

THE DESICCATORS EMPLOYED IN MOISTURE DETERMINATIONS..

In the determinations of moisture made during the Louisiana Furchase Exposition and during the earlier part of 1905 duplicate results 

, often were not as close as was desirable. This lack of agreement was 

found to be due, in part at least, to the use of calcium chloride as a 

drying reagent in the desiccators in which the fine samples of coal 

were allowed to cool after drying at 105° C., as may be seen from 

inspection of the following table giving the values obtained over concentrated sulphuric acid, fused calcium chloride, and granular calcium 

chloride.

Certain values from samples allowed to stand overnight, which are 

marked with a star (*), were on different gram portions of the sample. 

The values given for the other determinations, weighed as soon as 

cooled and weighed after standing in the desiccator overnight, are on 

the same weighed-out portions of the sample, which, as soon as weighed 

the first time, were put back in the desiccator and allowed, to stand 

until the next day and then again weighed. The values over sulphuric 

acid are, as a rule, about one-tenth of 1 per cent lower on the sample 

after standing overnight, but this result can probably'be accounted 

for by the small amount of moisture which might be taken up by the 

sample during the time required for making the first weighing. 

6128 Bull. 323 07 3
EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Moisture determinations obtained by the use of different drying reagents.

Sample of coal.

Laboratory 

number.

1660

1786 

1802 

1801 

1803 

1804 

1794 

1798 

1812 

1817 

1828 

1835 

1837 

1807 

1808 

1836 

1838 

1842 

1843 

1845 

1846 

1855 

1844 

1741 

1743 

1745 

1753

Field number.

IllinoisNo. 13..'................

.....do..........................

. ...do..........................

IllinoisNo. 12 ...................

IllinoisNo. 13 ..................

IllinoisNo. 18..................

IllinoisNo. 7D. ...... ..........

IllinoisNo. 11 D................

IllinoisNo. 7 D. ................

^HtsO1^ CaCl2 , fused. '

, 

3.46

3.92

6.34

2. 74

7.62

4.74

1.38

4.96

3.56

1.12

3.62

4.99 

3.60 

4.94

5.90

2.76

1.06

6.98 

1.24 

3.60

2.''

4.92 

3.60

6.88 

1.14

l.o

/ 3.42 

i 3.38

6.26

7.46

4.80

1.18

3.46

3.46

3.55

i.02

4.12 

6.90

3.32 

2.36 

3.38 

12.09

 2.l>

,

1

3.23

3.46 

6.36

2. 58* 

1.38* 

2.76* 

11.58*

CaClo, granular.

l.o

f 3.38 

\ 3.40 

3.86

2.74

4.80

4.91

4.88

5.82

2.70

5.08

7.98

1.14 

3.56

2 .'<

4.58

7.40

.94

« Wughed as soon as cooled.

b Weighed after standing in desiccator overnight.

The values obtained over both granular and fused calcium chloride, 

where the sample was weighed as soon as cooled, are but little lower 

than the values obtained over sulphuric acid; but the values from the 

samples over calcium chloride when allowed to stand overnight are 

so decidedly lower as to show beyond a doubt the superiority of concentrated sulphuric acid over calcium chloride as a desiccating reagent 

for coal.

EFFECTS OF VARYING AMOUNTS OF SAMPLE AND OF DIFFERENCES IN 

DURATION OF HEATING ON RESULTS OBTAINED FOR MOISTURE. a

The following results were obtained on (1) a very finely ground 

sample of Illinois coal, and (2) a fine sample of Indiana coal. They 

show the loss in weight which occurred when the samples were dried 

for different times, in different amounts, and under different condi 

tions. This change in weight represents not merety the loss of moisture, but includes any changes due to oxidation and other causes. 

These changes undoubtedly vary with the kind of coal and the condition of the sample.

"The official method for the determination of moisture is to heat 1 gram of the flue sample for one 

hour at 105° C. in a drying oven.
RESULTS OBTAINED FOE MOISTURE. 19

Moisture determinations on Illinois coal (percentages).

Details of treatment.

Gain in weight after standing 41 hours and reheating as compared with

1-gram 

sample.

8.42

.84

9. 26

.06

9. 32

3.68

8.86

.46

] -grain 

sample.

6. 65

2.62

9. 27

.16

9.43

3.68

9.20

' 9Q

2-gram 

sample.

5. 24

3.70

8.94

.43

9.37

3. 55

9.27

.30

Moisture determinations on Indiana coal (percentages).

Details of treatment.

Gain in weight by standing uncovered 20 hours. .....

Gain in weight after 20 hours' standing and 1 hour's 

reheating compared with weight after first hour's

Gain in weight by standing uncovered 120 hours. ....

Gain in weight compared with weight after the first

Gain in weight by standing uncovered 24 days. ......

Gain in weight compared with weight after first

£-gram 

sample.

5.50

.04

5 ^(1

3.44 

5.20

.34

3.06 

4.90

.64

3.70 

4.20

1.34

1-gram 

sample.

3. 43 to 3. 35 

5. 45 to 5. 37

. 23 to . 25

3. 12 to 2. 95 

5.14105.10

.54 to .52

3.62 to 3. 58 

4. 60 to 4. 62

1.08 to 1.00

2-gram 

sample.

.07 to .02

3. 41 to 3. 35 

5. 53 to 5. 48

. 16 to . 15

3.15 to 3. 11 

5. 19 to 5. 17

. 50 to . 46

3. 52 to 3. 51 

4. 72 to 4. 70

. 97 to . 93

4-gram 

sample.

5 49

- . 15

5 64

3.34 

5.55

.09

3.] 2 

5.21

.43

3.45

4.77

.87

These results show that practically all of the moisture is expelled 

from coals of these kinds during the first thirty minutes, and, furthermore, that there was an appreciable amount of oxidation in the sample 

during standing or from reheating. For short periods this oxidation 

value in these experiments was apparently a surface reaction, dependent on the surface exposure of the sample and not on the amount. 

The samples were all weighed out in porcelain crucibles ot the same 

size, and the amount of sample directly exposed was practically'the 

same in all. In this case the percentage effect of equal oxidation on 

the Illinois samples would be in the ratio of 4, 2, and 1. The gains 

actually determined at the end of 41 hours were 0.4-6, 0.23, and 0.10 

per cent, respectively, which are very close to this ratio.

On the Indiana sample the gains for oxidation at the end of twenty 

hours were 0.34, 0.24, 0.15, and 0.09 per cent, respectively. At the end 

of twenty-four days the percentages of gain on the different amounts 

are more nearly the same, but the gain is still greatest on the i-gram 

sample and least on the 4-gram sample, the gains on the four amounts 

taken being 1.34, 1.04, 0.95, arid 0.87 per cent, respectively.

ALTERATION OF WEIGHT OF SAMPLES OF COAL WHEN KEPT IN A 

FINELY POWDERED STATE.

In order to investigate the question of the extent of alteration of the 

samples when kept in a finely powdered condition as prepared for 

analysis, portions of a number of such samples were put in weighed
20 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

bottles, which were securely closed with rubber stoppers. These 

bottles were kept in the laboratory and weighed from time to time. 

Moisture determinations were' made on portions of the sample at the 

times of the weighings, allowance being made for the portions removed 

for this purpose. The following table gives the percentage of moisture 

originally present in the sample, the percentage of gain or loss in 

weight at the several weighings, and the time interval between the 

weighings; also the total time covered b\^ the experiment:

Alteration of weight of finely powdered coal. 

[Minus sign denotes loss.]

Laboratory 

number.

1638 C

1639

It-44

Sample of coal.

Field number.

......do...................................................

......do...................................................

Days between 

weighings.

4 

20 

42 

25 

172 

124

387

4 

19

27 

41 

172

263

4 

46 

41 

191

282

23 

42 

34, 

163

127

389

15 

27 

50 

183 

107

382

7 

34 

.183 

107

331

24 

191 

108

323

Change in 

weight.

Per cent.

0.17 

.47 

.46 

.19 

.00 

-.33

.96

.16 

.45 

.22 

.23 .00-

1.06

.17 

1.07 

.40 

,00

1.64

.61 

.47 

.31 

.'27 

-.12

1.54

.40 

.42 

.43 

.10 

.00

1.35

.22 

.48 

.53 

.14

1.37

.24 

.15 

.07

.46

Moisture 

determination.

Per cent. 

5.10

5.13 

5.31 

5.36 

5.29 

4.99 

4.38

-.72

12. 34

12.58 

12.12 

12.03 

11.79 

11.62

-.72

11.89

11.97 

11.80 

11. 64 

11.06

-.83

4.03

4.03 

4.38 

4.53 

4.37 

4.23

.20

3.25

3.26 

3.47 

3.89 

3.60 

3.57

.32

3 58

3.79 

3.90 

3.87 

3.63

.05

1.08

1.16 

1. 21 

1.09

.06
ALTERATION OF WEIGHT OF SAMPLER. . 21

Alteration of weight of finely powdered coal Continued. 

[Minus sign denotes loss.]

Laboratory 

number.

Sample of coal.

Field number.

North Dakota No. X. .....................................

Days between 

weighings.

9

18

149

108

28-1

7

43

28

55 

107

269

<i

43

28

55 

107

247

9

7

43

28

55

135

2

43

28

55 

107

242

9

5

43

28

56

134

0

42

3

51

8

13

3 

103

127

Change in 

weight.

Per Kent.

.22

92

.40 

.13

.97

.04

.06

.18

.10

.09

.00

.06 

.02

.55

.05

.03

.08

.23

.07

.16 -.05

.57

.05

.05

.13

.02

. 06

.31

.09

.68

.15

.38 

.26

1.78

.02

.17

.15

.16

.84

.03

. 56

.07

09

.00 -.72

-.56

Moisture 

determination.

Per cent,. 

1.99

2. 49 

2. 43

.44

4.65

4.55 

4.46

-.19

26.64

25. 91 

25.64

-1.00

6. 37

6.15

-.22

12.59

11.97 

11. 81

-.78

12. 62

12.86

.24

33. 00

32.87

-.13

13.60

13.72 

13.16

- . 44
22 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Without exception these samples all increased in weight upon standing. At the same time the moisture values usually decreased. The 

gain in weight is to be ascribed to oxidation, and the decrease in 

moisture either to actual loss or to fixation of a portion of the moisture present by the oxidation changes. If the moisture loss be considered as an actual escape of moisture from the sample, the total gain 

due to oxidation is equal to the observed gain plus an amount equal to 

this moisture loss. The table below gives the total oxidation changes 

considered on this basis, together with the original and final calorimeter determinations on some of the samples, also the loss in calorific 

value in excess of that due merely to changes in weight of the sample. 

For purposes of comparison the amounts of moisture, ash, and sulphur present in the sample are also given.

Determinations of oxidation, calorific value, moisture, ash, and sulphur. 

[Minus sign denotes loss.J

Sample of coal.

Laboratory 

number.

1635

1638C

1638E

1039

1660

1844

2828

2243

2255

2062

2718

1867

2131

2275

2278

Field number.

Illinois No. 9 B.......

.....do ...............

.....do ...............

lllinoisKo.il B......

Massachusetts pent ..

North Dakota No. 3 ..

.....do ...............

Ohio No. 5...........

Tpvac Mft 4

West Virginia No. 13.

Wyoming No. 2 ......

Wyoming No. 3 ......

Increase

in

weight 

due to 

oxidation.

Per cent.

1.68

1.78

2.47

1.34

1.03

1.32

1.00

1.57

.60

 .53

.69

.40

.74

.53

2.56

Calorific value.

Original.

Calories.

6,426

4.055

4,498

7,501

8,408

5,815

5,108

Final.

Calories.

6, 265

4,049

4,431

7,375

8.359

5,747

4.903

Gain or

loss

above 

that accounted

for by

oxidation.

Calories.

35

3

-86

-17

-26

-75

Moisture.

Per cent.

4.99

12.34

11.89

4.03

3.25

3.58

13.60

26. 64

12.62

1 QQ

QO 1)0

1.03

4.64

6.37

12.59

Ash.

Per cent.

11.80

11.48

12. 38

16.05

20.74

8.88

8.77

7.48

7.66

2.40

21.77

19. 69

17.20

Sulphur.

Per cent.

4.43

4.40

2. 62

2.59

.58

1.32

1.22

1.76

.83

4.22

4.09

6.86

The oxidation changes in every case are sufficiently large to be of 

practical importance, the smallest change that in the Ohio No. 5 sample being 0.53 per cent, while the Illinois No. 9B sample showed a 

change of 2.47 per cent. The Wyoming No. 3 sample showed an 

increase of 2.56 per cent in weight and a decrease of 205 calories in 

heating value. The changes in weight correspond to a decrease in 

heating value of 144 calories, the final calorific value obtained being 

75 calories lower than is accounted for by the changes in weight. 

Further results along these lines are desirable, but the" values already 

obtained show very clearly that old samples of coal can not be regarded 

as representative of the original coal in composition or in calorific 

value.
SPECIFIC GRAVITY.

DETERMINATIONS OF SPECIFIC GRAVITIES OF THE COALS.

23

Two determinations of specific gravity* were made on a number of 

lumps about 1 inch in diameter. The first determination was made 

upon a number of specially selected lumps representing as clean coal 

as could be picked out, carefully avoiding portions contaminated with 

slate or pyrites; the second was made upon a number of lumps 

selected to represent the average quality of the coal as nearly as could 

be expected in pieces of this size. The determinations of each kind 

were made (in duplicate and sometimes in triplicate) with a large 

Nicholson's hydrometer designed for use with the coke samples and 

capable of handling 1,000 grams of coal. The following table gives 

the results on the. two kinds of lumps. For ease of reference and for 

comparison the determinations of ash and sulphur on the car samples 

of each coal are also tabulated

Determinations of ash, sulphur, and specific gravity.

Designation of coal sampled.

Illinois No. 19 B ...............................................

Illinois No. 23 A ...............................................

Illinois No. 25. ................................................

Illinois No. 2G. ...............................................

Kentucky No. I B. ............................................

Ohio No. 1. ....................................................

Ohio No. 2. ....................................................

Ohio No. 3. ...................................................

Ohio No. 9 B ...................................................

Do........................................................

Pennsylvania No. 9 ...........................................

Car sample.

Ash.

14.59 

. 14.36 

12.92 

11.69 

21.93 

9.36 

11.53 

13.40 

12. 09 

13.77 

10.88 

12.62 

9.21 

10.61 

10.30 

10.76 

8.57 

8.14 

11.65 

15.72

3.37 

3.70

2.76 

9.48 

13.13 

11.74 

16.67 

14.57 

14.57 

1 1. 42 

7.75 

11. 95

1 1 3'^

11.58 

9.12 

7.30 

8.52 

6.37 

8.37 

8.29 

11.93 

10.41 

6.02 

6.05 

13.00 

12.52 

12.47 

6.63 

11.33

Sulphur.

1.12 

.55 

1.08 

2.02 

2.72 

.91 

4.41 

4.76 

3.51 

4.05 

4.27 

4.39 

3.74 

3.72 

3.27 

3.15 

3.83 

1.41 

3.87 

3.72 

.88 

.67 

.57 

3.60 

1.49 

5.60 

.73 

.61 

.69 

3.54 

1.15 

4.61 

4.02 

' 1:81 

3.47 

1.72 

3.33 

2.16 

2,84 

3.15 

3.35 

1.26 

1.20 

.88 

1.95 

1.94 

2.08 

.94 

2.04

Specific gravity.

Selected 

lumps.

1.32 

1.30 

1.28 

1.32 

.1.37 

1.31 

1 . 22 

1.26 

1.22 

1,24 

1.28 

1.25 

1.27 

1.29 

1.25 

1.25 

1.24 

1.26 

1.26 

1.23 

1.27 

1.29 

1.27 

1.31 

1.36 

1.21 

1.29 

1.30 

1.31 

1.25 

al 

1.29 

1.31 

1.30 

1.30 

1.29 

1.29 

1.30 

1.30 

1.29 

1.30 

1.30 

1.30 

1.28 

1.30 

1.30 

1.33 

1.31 

1.35

Average 

lumps.

1.37 

1. 38 

1.32 

1.44 

1.40 

1.33 

1.26 

1.30 

1. 31- 

1.28 

1.42 

1.39 

1.40 

1.30 

1.36 

1.33 

1.29 

1. 30 

1.32 

1.34 

1.40 

1.30 

1.28 

1.44 

1.41 

1.36 

1.37 

1. 39 

1.35 

1.4-1 

22 

1.35 

1.36 

1.33 

1.39 

1 . 33 

1.35 

1.34 

1.42 

1. 31 

1. 36 

1.35 

1.31 

1.33 

1.33 

1.38 

1.41. 

1.36 

1.39

"No distinction made between clean or selected lumps and average lumps.
24 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Determinations of ash, sulphur, and specific gravity Continued.

Designation of coal sampled.

Pennsylvania No. 10 ........................ .................

Tennessee No. 2. ..............................................

Tennessee No 4

Tennessee No 8 A

West Virginia No 20

Car sample.

Ash.

6.17 

6.81 

7.05 

9.53 

J4.43 

12.85 

13.42 

59. 14 

7.88 

7.30 

-1.73 

5.01 

5.58 

4.48 

4.33 

11. 37 

12.26 

7.76 

3.91 

3.27 

8.55 

5. 57

8.37 

8.12 

5.83 

5.01 

8.03 

4.85 

20. 79 

36.70 

6.77 

3.41 

3.12

Sulphur

1.26 

.98 

.99 

.98 

.78 

3.26 

4.38 

.21 

.99 

.51 

1.20 

1.11 

.92 

.67 

.79 

.72 

.38 

.81 

 .89 

1.03 

2.54 

1.06 

1.20 

3.45 

.67 

.89 

1.38 

1.32 

4.03 

6.66 

.26 

.81 

.49

Specific gravity.

Selected 

lumps.

1.30 

1.28 

1.29 

1.29 

1.29 

1.34 

1.34 

1.35

"""i.'27" 

1.27 

1.28 

1.27 

1.28 

1.28 

1.32 

1.31 

1.27 

1.27 

1.28 

1.30 

1.28 

1.28 

1.30 

1.26 

1.27 

1.28 

1.31 

1.28 

1.33 

1.26 

1.28

Average 

lumps.

1.36 

1.33 

1.32 

1.37 

1.81 

1.39 

1.37

1.25 

1.26 

1.30 

1.34 

1.37 

1.28 

1.28 

3.33 

3.39 

1.35 

1.30 

1.28 

1.31 

1.37 

1.34 

1.41 

1.34 

1.38 

1.34 

1.34 

. 1.37 

1.40 

1.35 

1.30

It is obvious from the foregoing table that the specific gravity of 

.the lumps of coal is considerably affected by the amount of impurities 

contained. Even the selected lumps were not free from ash and sulphur, so that it is not possible to obtain the true specific gravity of 

the pure coal itself.

In order to further investigate the relation of impurities to specific 

gravity, five of the coals in the foregoing table were selected as representing the great diversity of character. These coals were separated 

first into sizes and then each size, except the dust, was further separated by "float-and-sink" tests upon heavy solutions, of 1.35 specific 

gravity calcium chloride and 1.45 and 1.65 specific gravity zinc chloride. The procedure in detail was as follows:

The coal, after crushing till it all passed a i-inch screen, was sifted 

over a series of sieves 80 mesh, 40 mesh, 10 mesh, and 4 mesh. That 

passing the first two screens was designated "dust;" that passing the 10 

mesh and retained on the 40 mesh was designated " fine;" that passing 

the 4 mesh and retained on the 10 mesh " medium," and that retained 

'on the 4 mesh "coarse." The dust was not separated on the-solution, 

but each of the remaining classes was then stirred in a solution of 1.35 

specific gravity, and the floating coal was removed, washed, and air 

dried. That sinking in this solution was then washed, dried, weighed, 

and stirred in a solution of 1.45 specific gravity, and the floating coal 

treated as before; and the process was again repeated in a solution of
SPECIFIC GRAVITY.

1.65 specific gravity with the coal that sank. Each product waa 

washed, air dried, and analyzed.

The results are given in the following table. Column 1 gives the 

percentage that the amount of coal in each grade of fineness forms of 

the entire sample treated; column 2, the percentage that the amount, 

of coal in each class separated by gravity forms of the amount in its. 

grade of fineness, and column 3, the percentage that the amount'of 

coal in each class forms of the entire sample. Column 4: gives the 

determination of the ash in each class, expressed as a percentage of 

the amount of coal in the class; column 5, this determination of the 

ash expressed as a percentage of the entire sample of coal, and columns. 

6 and 7 give the same percentages for the sulphur. The totals of the 

results for ash and sulphur, in columns 5 and 7, should obviously 

equal the ash and sulphur determinations, respectively, in the original 

coal, which are printed below them for purposes of comparison. The 

differences are due to unavoidable errors in the work and, in soma 

cases, probably in part to the presence of sulphates extracted in. 

washing.

Impurities in coal, as related to different grades of fineness and classes of specific gravity ^

NO. 2023, BRAZIL NO. l.«

Grade and class of coal.

Du8t{loVo4o::::::::::::::::::

Fine, 40 to 10 ..................

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 to 1.45.............

1.45 to 1.65.............

Above 1.65....... ......

Medium, 10 to 4 ...............

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35. ............

1.35 to 1.45.............

1.45 to 1.65. ............

Above 1.65. ...... ......

Coarse, 4 to 2 ..................

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 to 1.45. ............

1. 45 tol.65..... ........

Above 1.65.............

Total.......................... 

Original sample ...............

Mechanical distribution of 

coal.

Per cent 

of entire 

sample 

in each 

grade.

].-

3. 95 

3.05

7.00 

18.10

30.45

44.60

10C. 15

Amount in each 

class.

Per cent 

of its own 

grade.

2.

6.i. 43 

43. 57

100. 00

62. ] 1 

2.23 

17.83 

17.83

100.00

r,£ P.O

 3.64 

28. 01 

12. 82

100.00

3.19 

31.92 

19. 79

100.00

Per cent 

of entire 

sample.

3.

7.00

11.15 

.40 

3.20 

3.20

17.95

17.55 1.1ft' 

8 85 

4 05

31.60

21.20 

1.50 

15.00 

9.30

47.00

103.55

Amount of ash in 

each class.

As per 

cent of 

coal in 

the class.

4.

28. 64 

26. 35

11.64 

15. 33 

30 22 

54.49

13.90 

23. 38 

33. 38 

55 08

17. 33 

26 52 

32.74 

59. 08

As per 

cent of 

entire 

sample 

of coal.

5.

1.131 

.804

1.298 

. 0(11 

.967 

1.744

2.439 

. 269 

2. 954 

2.231

3.674 

.398 

4.911 

5.494

28. 375 

28.18

Amount of sulphurin each class.

As per . 

cent of 

coal in 

the class.

6.

1.90 

1.60

.61 

.84 

.615 

5.41

.60 

.59 

.55 

8. 92

.64 

.50 

.66 

21.24

A.s per 

cent of; 

entire 

sample 

of coal.

7.

0. 075 

.049,

. 068 

.003. 

.020-

.m

.105. 

.007 

.049- 

361.

.13ft 

.007 

.099 

1 . 975,

3.127 

4.28

aSp. gr. of average lumps, 1.40; of selected lumps, 1.37. 

'6128 Bull. 323 07 4
EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Impurities in coal as related to different grades of fineness, etc. Continued. 

NO. 2346, MARYLAND NO. l.o

Grade and class of coal.

n J80.........'...............

Uust\80to40...................

Fine, 40 to 10... ...............

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 to 1.45.............

1.45 tol. 65....... ......

Above 1.65.............

Medium, 10 to 4 ...............

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35tol.45. ............

1.45 to 1.65. ............

Coarse, 4 to 2 ..................

Specific gravity 

Under 1,35.............

1.35 to 1.45.. ...........

1.45 to 1.65.............

Total .......................... 

Original sample ...............

Mechanical distribution of 

coal.

Per cent 

of entire 

sample 

in each 

grade.

1.

5.05 

4.65

9.70 

33.45

41.95

14.70

99*80

Amount in°each 

class.

Per cent 

of its own 

grade.

2.

52. 06 

47. 94

100.00

81.40 

10.07 

3.75 

4.78

100.00

63. 00 

25. 54 

5.85 

5.01

100. 00

39.15 

38.10 

10.84 

11.91

100.00

Per cent 

of entire 

sample.

3.

9.70

27.10 

3.35 

1.25 

1.60

33. 30

26. 65 

10.70 

2.45 

2.10

41.90

5.75 

ft. 60 

1.60 

1.75

14.70

99.60

Amount of ash in 

each class.

As per 

cent of 

coal in 

the class.

4.

15.47 

12.99

6.25 

13.62 

25.02 

61.48

5.57 

13.77 

25. 63 

57.63

6.45 

14.16 

25. 68 

55. 90

As per 

cent of 

entire 

sample 

of coal.

5.

0.781 

.604

1.694 

. 456 

.313

.984

1.484 

1.473 

.628 

1.210

.371 

.793 

.411 

.978

12.180 

12.53

Amount of sulphur 

in each class.

As per 

cent of 

coal in 

the class.

6.

2.00 

1.55

.92 

1.25 

2.21 

9.04

.84 

1.21 

2.36 

8.14

.84 

1.07 

2.48 

7.28

As per 

cent ot 

entire 

sample 

of coal.

7.

0.101 

.072

.249 

.042 

.028 

. 145

.224 

.129 

.058 

.171

.048 

.060 

.040 

.127

1.4!) 

1.51

NO. 2308, PENNSYLVANIA NO. G.&

f80

180 to 40

Sum ........... ...........

iKins, 40 to 10..... ..............

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 to 1.45.. ...........

1.45 tol.65. ...... ......

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 to 1.45.............

1,45 tol. 65. ............

Above 1.66.............

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 tol. 45... ..........

1.45 tol. 65.. ...........

Original sample ...............

5.50

4.35

9.85

20.40

29.75

39.70

99.70

55. 85

44.15

100. 00

88.36

2.97

1 98

6.69

190.00

81.38

9 06

2.68

6.88

100. 00

70. 42

13.86

4.7«

10.94

100. 00

9 85

17.86

.60

.40

1.35

20. 20,

24. 25

2.70

.80

2.05

29 80

27.95

5.50

1.90

4.35

39.70

99. 55

14.74

12. 35

6.44

17.55

28. 26

67. 45

6.15

16.97

. 29.70

63.95

6.21

16 37

29.57

66. 20

0.811

.537

1 149

.105

.113

.911

1.491

.458

.238

1.311

1.736

.900

.562

2.880

13.202

12.61

2.36

2 19

1.10

2.75

4.04

10.20

1.10

2.39

3.42

11.39

1.07

2.33

2.47

7.06

0.130

AQC

196

.016

.016

.138

.267

.065

.027

.233

.299

.128

.047

.307

1.964

1.76

aSp. gr. of average lumps, 1.41; of selected lumps, 1.36. 

&Sp. gr. of average lumps, 1.33; of selected lumps, 1.30.
SPECIFIC GRAVITY. 27

.Impurities 'in coal as related to different grades of fineness, etc. Continued.

NO. 2298, WEST VIRGINIA NO. 15.«

Grade and class of coal.

Diist {8o\o46:::::::::::::::::::

Fine, 40 to 10 ..................

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 to 1.45..... ........

1.45 to 1.65. ............

Above 1.65...... .......

Sum .......................

Medium, 10 to 4. ...............

Specific gravitv 

Under 1.35'. ............

1.35 to 1.45.............

1.45 tol.65.... .........

Sum .......................

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

1.35 to 1.45.............

1.45 tol.65.............

Total ..........................

Mechanical distribution of 

coal.

Per cent 

of entire 

sample 

in each 

grade.

1.

5.35

4.35

9.70 

22. 65

33. 20

34.30

99. 85

1

Amount in each 

cla^s.

Per cent 

of its own 

grade.

2.

55. 15 

44.85

100. 00

92. 68 

1.33 

. .89 

5.10

Per cent 

of entire 

sample.

3.'

5.35 

4.35

9.70

20.90 

.30 

.20 

1.15

100.00 | 22.55

90.65 

3.77 

1.81 

3.77

100.00'

86.30 

6.42 

3.49 

3.79

100. 00

30.05 

1.25 

.60 

1.25

33:15

29. 60 

2.20 

1.20 

1.30

34.30

99.70

Amount of ash in 

each class.

As per 

cent of 

coal in 

the class.

4.

10.35

8.27

4. 39 

13.63 

22. 75

57.78

4.56 

13.40 

22.89 

53.03

5.40 

13.10 

24.88 

66.15

As per 

cent of 

entire 

sample 

of coal.

5.

0.554 

.360

.917 

.041 

. 046 

.671

1.370 

.167 

.137 

.663

1. 597

.288 

.298 

.860

7. 969

7.34

Amount of sulphur 

in each class.

As per 

cent of 

coal in 

the class.

6.

3.42 

3.10

1.62 

6.37 

10. 10 

26. 95

1.59 

6.48 

10. 25 

26.26

1.73 

6.40 

7.40 

13.05

As per 

cent of 

entire 

sample 

of coal.

7.

0.183 

.115

.338 

. 019 

.020 

.310

.478 

.081 

.061 

.328.

.512 

.141 

.089 

.171

2. 846

2. 82

NO. 2278, WYOMING NO. 3.''

fso Msoioio::::::::::::::::::

Sum .......................

Fine, 40 to 10..................

Specific gravitv 

Under 1.35-............

Above 1.35.............

Medium, 10 to 4. ...........'....

Specific gravity 

Under 1.35.............

Above 1.35.............

Specific gravity 

Underl.35.. ...........

Above 1.35....... .......

Total ..........................

1.70

3.75

11.50

29. 85

54. 85

99.95

54. C2

45. 38

100. 00

74.12

25.88

100.00

77.03

22.97

100.00

 

69. 65

30.35

100. 00

3.75

8.30

 >. 90

31.20

22. 65

6.75

 

38. 20

16.65

54.85

99. 20

23.45

19. 43

5. 40

47.51

5. 54

47. 98

6. 53

50.03

0.481

.330

.453

1.378

1.255

3. 239

2. 494

8. 330

17.960

17.96

8.89

8.21

4.91

14.43

4.72

15.54

4.66

18.04

0. 1N2

.139

.407'

.418

1.069

1.049

1.780

3.004.

H.048

S. 36

"Sp.gr. of average lumps, 1.31; of selected lumps, 1.28. 

<*Sp. gr. of average lumps, 1.40; of selected lumps, 1.28.
28 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

An examination of the figures in the foregoing table shows the very 

rapid increase in impurity of the coal with increase in specific gravity. 

The finer the coal is crushed the more complete would be the mechanical separation of the heavy impurities from the coal, but the behavior 

in this respect evidently varies greatly with different coals. In the 

Brazil coal the sulphur is nearly the same in all the coal under i-inch 

size and below 1.65 specific gravit}7 , while the ash increases both with 

size and with the specific gravitj7 . In the Maryland coal both sulphur 

and ash increase with specific gravit}^ and apparently without veiy 

much reference to size of product. Practically the same is true of the 

Pennsjdvania No. 6 coal and of the West Virginia coal. The record 

of the Wyoming coal is not sufficiently complete for comparison. In 

all but the Brazil coal there is a marked tendenc}^ to increase of ash 

and sulphur in the fine dust, suggesting that the impurities are liberated in crushing and are more brittle than the mass of the coal. 

Noticeably different compositions in ash and sulphur of the portions 

of the various coals below 1.35 specific gravity, may indicate either 

actual variations in the specific gravity of the coal proper or variations 

in the nature of the combination of the sulphur and mineral matter.

Further experiments along these lines seem very desirable.

LABORATORY METHODS OF DETERMINING ADAPTABILITY OF COALS TO 

IMPROVEMENT BY WASHING.

The laboratory method of testing consists in floating the sample 

upon solutions of different density and thereby separating the coal 

into portions of different specific gravity, the amounts, of these portions being determined and each portion analyzed separately for ash 

and sulphur, as noted under the last heading. The samples used were 

crushed to one-half inch and finer before testing, and for convenience 

in handling were divided by sifting into two portions, one one-half 

inch to one-fortieth inch, the other one-fortieth inch and finer. On 

some of the earlier samples the division was made at one-twentieth 

inch. The solutions used for washing the samples were a calciumchloride solution of 1.35 specific gravity and a zinc-chloride solution 

of 1.65 specific gravity. Solutions of 1.45 and 1.90 specific gravity 

were also used occasionally. The clean coal, low in ash, floats upon a 

solution of 1.35 specific gravity. Moderately high-ash coal sinks in 

a solution of this gravity, but floats upon a solution of 1.45 specific 

gravity. Coal very high in ash is heavier than 1.45, but floats upon a 

solution of about 1.65 specific gravity, while the slate and p37 rites 

sink in solution of this gravity. The results obtained by washing the 

samples upon these different solutions and the analysis of the resultant 

products, together with the analysis of the original sample and the 

analysis of samples obtained from actual washing tests made at the 

washery connected with the fuel-testing plant upon 5- to 6-ton lots of
ADAPTABILITY TO WASHING. 29

certain of the coals, are given in the table's of results below. As these 

laboratory samples were all crushed to one-half inch and finer before 

testing, these results do not necessarily show what might be done 

with the coal crushed to other sizes. They do, however, give ajv indication of the possible improvements which m&y be expected from 

washing.

The " one-fortieth inch and finer" portion of the sample was tested 

as follows: The sample was stirred up with water, and after settling 

for one minute the liquid was decanted off veiy closely and the remaining portion was dried, weighed, and anatyzed. The loss on decantation indicates in a very general wa}*" the extent to which the coal 

breaks down into a fine powder upon handling or crushing, and is an 

indication of the amount of fine coal lost during washing. The particular crushing machinery used would, however, greatly affect the 

amount of fines produced in crushing. The analytical results on the

portion remaining after decantation are in a general \va,y an index to 

the way the impurities separate from the coal in crushing.

The interpretation of these results may perhaps be understood best 

by a consideration of the results derived from some particular sample, 

as Indiana No. 7 A. In this sample the ash and sulphur contents in 

the unwashed coal are, respectively, 9.03 and 3.75. The sample crushed 

to "iinch to j1 0 inch" was separated b}^ sifting into 91.1 per cent 

coarse and 8.6 per cent fine. Considering the coarse portion: The 

part lighter than 1.35 specific grav.ity amounted to 86.7 per cent of 

the entire sample, and contained 6.69 per cent ash and 3.05 per cent 

sulphur. It is quite probable that in actual washing practice a large 

part of the " ^ inch and finer" would be reduced in ash.and sulphur 

contents to about the same percentage, which would indicate the possibility of improving this coal 2 per cent in ash and 0.7 per cent in 

sulphur, accompanied by a washing loss of about 10 per cent. The 

distribution of the ash and sulphur on "the heavier portion is shown 

by the percentage results on the "1.35 to 1.65" portion and on the 

portion " Heavier than 1.65." The washery tests do not show so great 

an improvement in ash and sulphur as might be expected from the 

analysis of the portion "Lighter than 1.35," and a portion of the "1.35 

to 1.65" specific gravity material evidently remained with the washed 

coal. However,-washery tests upon such small lots of coal can riot 

be expected to give the best results; also the possible improvement at 

1-inch size is apt to be greater than can be obtained at H-inch size, at 

which the sample was worked at the washery. The results of the 

laboratory tests indicate that the high sulphur and the comparatively 

high ash in the washed coal from the washery is not the fault of the 

washing, but is due to the combination in which the ash and sulphur 

occur, showing that a very low ash and sulphur product can not be 

obtained from this coal by washing. The laboratory tests do, how-
30 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

ever, indicate that under the best conditions of washing there would 

be some improvement, but not much, over the results obtained at the 

washery of the fuel-testing plant.

Determinations of ash and sulphur in coal samples variously treated.

ILLINOIS NO. 9 A. 

[Unwashed coal ash. 11.21; sulphur, 4.53.]

First series:

1.35 to 1.65 ..................................

Kemainder .................................

Second series:

Washed at U-inch size:

No. 2 ...................................

Portion.

91.9

75.2 

12.1 

4.2

9.0

2.3

5.6 

91.9

84. 9

7. 7

7.7

2.4 

5.0

Ash.

6. OS 

21.04 

58.34

13.88

8.22 

44. 02

13.88 

8.14

8.20

Sulphur.

3.16 

4.80 

10. 93

4.20

3.32 

14. 12

4.20

3.03 

.3.71

Compared with 

original sample.

Ash.

4.57 

2. 55 

2.45

.26

.78

10.61

0.98 

3.39

.27 

.78

11.42

Sulphur.

2.38 

.58 

.71

.10 

.24.

4.01

2. 82 

1.09

.11 

.24

4.20

ILLINOIS NO. 11 B. 

[Unwashed coal ash, 12.54; sulphur, 2.80.]

1.35 to 1.65 ......................................

Heavier than 1.65 ..............................

5\j inch and finer ....:..............................

80.1

56.5

16.1

5.7

19.5

13.7

5.71

17.49

58 4'}

17.42

1.72

2.48

11 91

3.15

3.22

2.82

 1 Q'3

.73

2.39

12. 49

0.97

.40

.68

.17

.43

2.65

ILLINOIS NO. 19 B. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2044) ash, 10.57; sulphur, 0.49.]

1.35 to 1.65......... ..............................

Very fine, decanted"...... .....................

92.8

80.9

5.6

6.5

0.9

3.5

3.4

27. 03

65.75

16.00

0.63

.52

.29

.GOT

3.88

1.51

4.28

.37

.55

10.59

0.51

.03

.02

.02

.02

.60

a Estimated from results on unwashed coal.
ADAPTABILITY TO WASHING. 31

.Determinations of ash and sulphur in coal samples variously treated Continued.

INDIANA NO. 4. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, NO. 1892) ash, ]5.63; sulphur, 2.74.]

Lighter than 1.35 ...............................

1.35 to 1.65 ......................................

Washed at Ij-inch size:

No. 2 .......... A .......................

Portion.

81. 9

01.8 

11.9

8.9

17.5

5.3 

12.2

Ash.

5.89 

17. 50 

69.29

Sulphur.

1.82 

3.54 

7.01

. 1.......

23.83

8. 26 

7.69

2. 84

2.26 

2. 26

Compared with 

original sample.

Ash.

3.66 2.10- 

6.17

.83 

2.88

15. 64

Sulphur.

1.12 

.42 

..62

.15

.35

2.66

INDIANA NO. C. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 1928) ash, 13.54; sulphur, 4.83.]

Lighter than 1 .35 ...............................

1.35 to 1.65 ......................................

No. 2. ...................................

No. 3...... ..............................

76.1

56. 2

10 a

6.7

23. 2

6.9

 16.3

6.63

19.58

54. 89

17.10

30.34

10.98

10.06

 2. 92

PV ^d

.13.75

5.19

3.67

3.94

3.73

3.73

3.68

.93

2.79

13.79

3.64

.75

.91

.33

.85

' 4.48

INDIANA NO. 7 A. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 1939) ash, 9.03; sulphur, 3.75.]

1.35 to 1.65 ......................................

Heavier than 1.65 .............................

No. 2....................................

91.1

86. 7

3.6

3.4

8.6

3.2

26.23

65. 84

17.13

8.94

8.18

3.05

4 39

23.48

4.48

3.33

3.36

5.80

1.90

49

.55

9.68

2 64

.16

.80

.20

.14

3.94

INDIANA NO. 9 B. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2035) ash, 10.98; sulphur, 3.02.]

1.35 to 1.66. .....................................

No. 2...................................

78.4

64.2

7.3

3.2

21.3

8.8

s 04

25.90

60. 75

19.87

9 22

8.54

4.60

16.70

4. '24

2.91

2.69

5.16

1.89

.97

2.48

12.44

1.48

OO

.52

.26

vi

3.12

"Estimated from results on unwashed coal.
32 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

'Determinations oj ash and sulplmr in coal samples 'furiously treated Continued.

INDIANA NO. ]]. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2421) ash, 8.CO; sulphur, 1.61.]

Lighter than 1.35 ...............................

1 .35 to 1.65 ......................................

. Very fine, decanted «. ..........................

Portion.

80.9

72.4 

4.9 

3.4

18.7

9.7 

9.0

Ash.

6.10 

25.90 

54.34

13.69

Sulphur.

1.22 

2.78 

10.14

2.30

Compared with 

original sample.

Ash.

4.42 

1.27 

1.85

.83 

1.25

9.62

Sulphur.

0.88 

.14 

.34

.16 

.21

1.73

KENTUCKY NO. 6. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test .'.ample, No. 2662) ash, 3.15; sulphur, 0.44.]

1.35 to 1.65 ......................................

89.8

88.4

.6

.6

9 8

6.0

3.9

2.27

27.30

71.61

6.85

0.56

.71

.85

.70

2.01

.15

.43

.19

.27

3.05

0.50

.00

.01

.03

.03

.57'

MISSOURI NO. 5. 

[Unwashed (boiler-test sample, No. 2892) ash, 16.94; sulphur, 5.60.]

1.35 to 1.65 ......................................

Sample No. 1....: ^.. ............................

No. 2 ...................................

91. 5

74.7

8.4

9.4

8'.2

3.3

4.9

...... .

23. 13

55. 85

25. 30

10.28

10.12

"

3.17

6.97

16.28

0. 73

4.10

3.94

5.12

1.94

5.25

.57

1.24

14. 12

2.37

.59

1.53

iq

5.01

MISSOURI NO. 6. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No! 2927) ash, 11.67; sulphur, 5.52.]

1 .35 to 1.65 ......................................

89.2

79 6

7.0

6.1

10.4

2.0

8.4

C.96

21.08

46.89

16.55

3.69

8.33

20.81

6.66

5.54

1.48

2.86

.23

1.39

11.50

2.94

.58

1.27

.11

.56

5.46

o Estimated from results on unwashed coal.
ADAPTABILITY TO WASHING. 33

Determination* of ash. and ml-ph-ar in coal samples rnri<ni.sl.y treated Con tinned.

OHIO NO. :i.

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2130) ash, 16.91; sulphur, 5.34.]

1,35 to 1.65 ......................................

Washed at li-inch size:

Portion.

87.0

57. 5 

16.8

12.1)

7.3

5.7

Ash.

5.97 

18.91 

54. 35

29. 56 

9. 20

Sulphur.

2.91 

5. 87 

15.01

7.04 

3. 08

Compared with 

original sample.

Ash.

,

3.48 

3.18 

3.97

1. 23 

1.09

13.50

Sulphur.

1.67 

.98 

1.10

.39 

.40

4.54

OHIO NO. 5. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2101) ash, 8.02; sulphur, 1.65.]

Lighter than 1.35. ..............................

1.35 to 1.65. .....................................

90. S

78.1

7 ^

3.4

8.9

6.4

2.6

4.77

17. 33

69! 67

12.70

1.39

2.53

3.72

2.74

3.73

1.30

2.37

.51

.33

8.24

1. 09

.19

.13

.io

.07

1.58

PENNSYLVANIA NO. 8. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2440) ash, 0.33; sulphur, 0.89.]

1 .35 to 1 .65 ......................................

71.0

4.8

1.6

21.2

12.6

8.0

5. 02

21.19

51.98

0.58

1.49

8.36

1.10

3.56

1.02

.83

.80

.65

6.86

0.41

.07

.13

.11

.C9

.81

PENNSYLVANIA NOS. 7 A AND 7 B. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2182) ash, 11.36: sulphur, 1.08.]

1 .35 to 1 .65 ......................................

No. 2 ...................................

73.5

9.0

7.4

1.7

8.81'

93 12

12.53

10.62

11.36

1.40

2.03

9.71

3 59

1.03

1.68

6.48

3.38

.48

.84

.21

11.39

1.03

.30

.13

' .0(1

1.63

 Estimated from results on unwashed coal.
34 . EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Determinations of ash and sulphur in coal samples variously treated Continued.

PENNSYLVANIA NO. 10. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2373) ash, G.37; sulphur, 1.35.]

Lighter than 1.35. ..............................

1.35 to 1. 65 ......................................

Portion.

87.0

78.5 

5.6 

1.9

12. 7

7.6

5.0

Ash.

4.50 

13.15 

62.70

9 49

Sulphur.

1.07 

1.84 

8.70

2.27

Compared, with 

original sample.

Ash.

3.53 

.75 

1.19

.48 

.48

6.43

Sulphur.

0.85 

.10 

.17

.11 

.11

1.34

TENNESSEE NO. 6. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 3102) ash, 14.86; sulphur, O.SO.]

1.35 to 1.65... ...................................

93.8

71.5

7.7

14.0

5.9

2.7

3.3

3.42

20. 64

70.99

22. 75

0.67

1.18

2.74

1.08

2.45

1.59

9.94

.40

.75

15.13

0.-7

.3S

.02

.04

1.00

VIRGINIA NO. 4. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sanxple, No. 2533) ash, 4.02; sulphur, 0.45.]

1.35 to 1.65 ......................................

Heavier than 1.65. ..............................

j'5 inch and finer ......:................. ....

92.8

88.3

1.3

2.6

6.8

2.3

1.93

15. 91

72.22

10. 24

0.48

.95

.92

.77

1.70

.20

1.877

.18

.24

4.19

0.41

.01

.02

.02

.02

.48

VIRGINIA NO. 2. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2557) ash, 6.58: sulphur, 0.83.];

]. 35 to 1.65...................... .... ..........

Very fine decanted ^

No. 2......... ..........................

No. 3...................................

82.6

71.2 

9.0 

1.3

17.1

12.6 

4.6

2 74 

16.57 

60. 02

12.33

4.02 

4.55

0.69 

1.35 

9.65

1.23 

92

.95 

.80

1.95 

.1.49

.78

.82 

.57

5. 61

0.49 

.12 

.13

.16 

.06

.90

a Estimated from results on unwashed coal.
ADAPTABILITY TO WASHING. 35

Determinations of ash. and sulphur in coal samples variously treated Continued.

WEST VIRGINIA NO. 13. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2058) ash, 3.93; snlphnr, 0.90.]

1.35 to 1.05 ......................................

Portion.

93.0

89.1 

2.2 

1.7

6.1

3.6

2.5

Ash.

2.41 

20. 72 

70.16

9.04

Sulphur.

..........

0.83 

1.27 

2.59

1.08

Compared with 

original sample.

Ash.

2.15 

.46 

1.39

.1.4 

.24

4.18'

Sulphur.

6.74 

.03 

.04

.04 

.03

.88

WEST VIRGINIA NO. 14. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-testsample, No. 2052) ash, 2.27; snlphnr, 1.07.)

88.0

3.0

1.0

3.3.1

3.4

1.52

14. 52

58. 60

7.10

2.11

13.45

3.89

3.28

.35

.59

.37

.24

2.43

.02

.33

.08

.07

1 . 04

WEST VIRGINIA NO. 18. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2607) ash, 0.2-1: sulphur, 0.67.]

1.35 to 1.65... ...................................

91.0

86.0

3.0

1.0

8.0

2.5

22. 81

62. 55

7 97

0.68

.50

.57

83

4.20

.68

.63

«

.38

.20

0.09

0.59

.02

.01

.02

. OS

WYOMING NO. 2 B. 

[Unwashed coal (boiler-test sample, No. 2164) ash, 21.38; sulphur, 4.43.]

94.0

62. 1

21.4

32. 3

5.9

3.3

2.6

10.85

31.84

64.30

33.45

4.34

3.27

6. 48

4.41

6.77

6.81

7.78

.73

.82

22. 89

2.70

.70

.35

.11

4.44

"Estimated from results on unwashed coal.
36 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

tioHx of ash and xidphur in coal samples variouali/ treated Continued. 

SPECIAL TEST ON .REFUSE FROM"'A WASHING. 

[Origin.il refuse ash, -17.50; sulphur, 1.71.]

Portion.

85.2

15.0 

17.7

51. 4

.14.5

3 ft

11 . 6

'Ash.

12. 23 

28. 13 

04. 88

33.27

Sulphur.

0.88 

.76 

1.79

.1.48

Compared with 

original sample.

Ash.

1.83 

4.98 

33. 35

1.43 

3.83

45. 42

Sulphur.

0.13 

.13

.92

.05 

.17

1.40

"Estimated from results on original refuse. 

VOLATILE MATTER IN COALS AND LIGNITES/'

The official method of determining volatile matter, recommended 

by the committee on coal analysis appointed by the American Chemical Society, is as follows:

Place 1 grain of fresh, undried, powdered coal in a platinum crucible weighing 20 

or 30 grams and having a tightly fitting cover. Heat over the full flame of a Bunsen 

burner for seven minutes. The crucible should be supported on a platinum triangle, 

with the bottom 6 to 8 centimeters above the top of the burner. The flame should 

be fully 20 centimeters high when burning free, and the determination should be 

made in a place free from draughts. The upper surface of the cover should burn 

clear, but the under surface should remain covered with carbon. To find "volatile 

combustible matter," substract the per cent of moisture from the loss found here.

This method has been used regularly in the volatile determinations 

made in the laboratory, the only modification being that the flame is

protected from air currents by inclosing the apparatus in a c}dindrical

asbestos shield 15 centimeters long and 7 centimeters in diameter, the 

platinum triangle being located 3 centimeters below the top of the 

shield. The use of the shield gives more uniformity in the-heat 

treatment, with a corresponding greater unifprmity of results.

In most coals the routine results obtained in the laboratoiy have 

checked to within less than 0.3 or 0.4 per cent; occasionally a sample 

has given trouble, and the variation between duplicates, without any 

apparent reason, was as great as 1 per cent. On some lignites it has 

been found impossible to obtain close duplicates, and on a few samples 

the official method gives very inaccurate determinations as may be 

shown by the following results obtained in the laboratoiy upon two 

different samples, Nos. 2734 and 2764, of Texas No. 3 lignite, which 

differed only in the amount of moisture remaining in the air-dried 

sample, and perhaps in the fineness of grinding:

a By permission of Dr. J. A. Holmes, in charge, and the director of the laboratory, the results of 

this investigation of the volatile matter was published by Prof. E. E. Somermeier as a paper in the 

Journal of the American Chemical Society, August, 1906.
VOLATILE MATTER TN FUELS. 37

Laboratory analyses on samples 8734 and 2764 of Texas No. S lignite.

Constituent.

Ash. . ..........................................................................

2734.

1.

9.88

36.17

43.65

1.30

Samples

27

2.

20.24

68.48

10.85

10. 43

1 fW

64.

3.

20. 24

35/42

33. 91

10. 43

1.03

This great difference in the fixed-carbon results shown in columns 1 

and 2 could not be accidental, as all of the determinations on both 

samples were duplicated. A series of determinations was begun, to 

learn, if possible, the cause of this great variation. The two following causes were suspected, both of which were found to be partly 

responsible for the difference: (1) Mechanical loss due to the throwing 

out of solid particles by the too rapid expulsion of the volatile matter. 

The possibility of loss from this source is mentioned in the report of 

the committee of the American Chemical Society, but the results of 

their experiments are negative. (2) A different breaking down of the 

hydrocarbon compounds when expelled under different conditions and 

in the presence of variable amounts of moisture.

The results of Mr. N. M. Austin's preliminary treatment of tne 

sample with a low heat and then with the application of the full flame 

of the Bunsen burner gives higher results in fixed carbon than where 

the full flame of the Bunsen burner is applied from the beginning. 

The proximate analysis of sample 2764, giving the unusual results, 

which was finally reported by the laboratory, is shown in column 3.

A series of seven results by the official method gave for volatile 

matter on this sample an average of 62.5 per cent, with a variation 

between high and low results of over 12 per cent. Three results of 

volatile matter on this sample made after previous expulsion of the 

moisture at 105° C. gave average volatile matter 39.6 per cent, with a 

variation between high and low results of 5.9 per cent. Preliminary 

treatment by driving off the moisture and most of the volatile matter 

at a low heat was then tried, the flame of the Bunsen burner being 

turned down to 10 centimeters and the crucible gradually heated. The 

application of the heat was regulated by holding the burner in the 

hand and heating in such a w&y as to expel the moisture slowly and 

gradually smoke off most of the volatile matter, the volatile matter 

escaping freely enough during the last minute of this preliminary 

heating to burn with a small flame around the edge of the crucible 

cover. Two results with five minutes of preliminary heating and then 

seven minutes over the full flame of the Bunsen burner gave an 

average in volatile matter of 35.08 per cent, the variation between the 

two results being 0.23 per cent. Two results with three minutes' pre-
38 EXPERIMENTAL WOEK IN FUEL TESTING.

liminary heating and seven minutes over the full flame of the Bunsen 

burner gave an average of 35.6 per cent, with a variation of 0.75 per 

cent between results. A result obtained by four minutes of preliminary heating and then seven minutes over the full flame gave 35.42 

per cent. The difference in results obtained by the three-, four-, and 

five-minute preliminary treatment is small, and in all subsequent 

experimental tests the time of the preliminary heating was four 

minutes. To determine the mechanical losses and difference in volatile compounds given off, a number of ash determinations were made 

after the driving off of the volatile matter by the official method and 

after driving off the volatile matter in connection with the preliminary heating. The results of volatile matter and ash on three determinations by the official method and on two determinations by the 

modified method of four minutes of preliminary heating and then 

seven minutes over the full flame are as follows:

Determinations of volatile matter by two method*.

Constituent.

Ash. ..........................................................

Official method.

1.

06. 72 

4. 30

2.

67. 47 

4.38

3.

54.82 

"7.25

Modified 

method.

4.

36.06 

11.16

5.

36.65 

11.15

a This result is possibly explained by the fact that this sample stood for two hours in the crucible 

after weighing out, and a considerable amount of the moisture content may have escaped before the 

sample was treated for the determination of the volatile matter.

That mechanical losses occurred during the rapid evolution of the 

volatile matter b}*" the official method was also indicated by the shower 

of solid carbon particles driven off as sparks during the first few minutes, while with the preliminaiy heating these sparks were nearly or 

entirely absent. The average volatile matter on the first two determinations Was 6T.1 per cent, the average ash 4.34 per cent. The average volatile matter on the two results by the modified method was 

36.35 per cent, ash 11.15 per cent. The moisture in the sample determined at this time was 19.78, giving fixed carbon 32.72 per cent. The 

difference in the ash results on the two pairs is 6.81 per cent, or the 

part of the ash driven off mechanically by the regular method is 6.81-^- 

11.15, or 61 per cent. Taking this portion of the fixed-carbon result 

by the modified method gives 20 per cent as the amount of fixed carbon expelled mechanically in the first determinations. The results by 

the official method after making this correction, and also after taking 

the correct ash value, are shown in column 1 of the table below.

After making this correction for mechanical losses the difference 

in the fixed carbon by the two processes is still 10.75 per cent, which 

difference must be due to the difference in the breaking down of the 

hydrocarbon compounds by the different heat treatment. The ash
VOLATILE MATTER IN FUELS. 39

from the third result by the official method was 7.25 per cent, or the 

loss of ash 3.9 per cent. Correction for fixed carbon mechanically 

carried off is accordingly 3.9-^-11.15, or 35 per cent. This portion of 

the fixed carbon as shown by the modified method gives 11.4 per cent 

as the amount of fixed carbon expelled mechanically. The result, 

after making the fixed-carbon and ash corrections, is shown in column 

2 of the following table:

Corrected determinations by the official method.

Constituent.

Ash ................................................................................

Corrected results.

1.

19.78 

47.10 

21 97 

11.15

100. 00

2.

19.78 

43. 42 

25. 05 

11.15

100. 00

The difference in this case in fixed carbon, due to the different heat 

treatment, is 7.07 per cent.

This particular sample was veiy finely ground. To find out how 

much the difference in result was due to the fineness of grinding a 

duplicate portion-of the same sample was ground down till it passed a 

40-mesh sieve. The results of duplicates by the official method and 

by the modified method are shown in the next table. The proximate 

analysis of the first sample by the modified method is shown in column 

2. The correction for fixed carbon to be applied to the result of the 

official method is 0.95-^-11.20, or 8.5 per cent of the fixed-carbon 

result of the modified method, which is 2.9 per cent. The results by 

the official method, after correcting for mechanical loss of fixed carbon 

and ash, are shown in column 1. The difference in fixed carbon between the two methods, due to different heat treatment, is 3.45 per 

cent. These results show, at least for lignites, that the fineness of the 

sample has an important effect. Upon a second sample of lignite, 

similar to the first except that it contained more moisture (30.45 per 

cent), the average results by the modified process are as tabulated in 

column 4. A comparison of the results in volatile matter and ash by 

the official method shows that the correction to be applied to the fixed 

carbon and ash for mechanical loss is 2.71-4-10.83. These corrections, 

as applied to the results obtained by the official method, are shown in 

column 3.
40 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Determinations on sample ground to pass a 40-mesh sieve.

Constituent.

Ash ...........................................................

Proximate analysis;

Ash .......................................................

First sample.

Official 

method.

1.

42.07 

10.25 

.95

a 19. 35 

a 39. 17 

a 30. 28 

a 11. 20

100. 00

Modified 

method.

2.

35. 72 

11.20

19.35 

35.72 

33.73 

11.20

100. 00

Second sample.

Official 

method.

3.

44.40 

8.12 

2.71

"30.45 

a. 37. 43 

021.29 

a 10. 83

100. 00

Modified 

method.

4.

30.97 

10.83

30.45 

30.97 

27. 75 

10.83

100.00

« After correcting for mechanical loss of fixed carbon and ash, the difference in the fixed-carbon 

results between the two samples, due to different heat treatment, is 6.46 per cent.

To test the effect of the fineness of grinding upon the determination 

of the volatile matter in ordinary bituminous coal, a sample of coal, 

Kentucky No. 1 C, containing 2 per cent moisture, 5.7 per cent ash, 

and 0.9 per cent sulphur, was still further reduced in ash content by 

floating on a calcium-chloride solution of 1.32 specific gravity. The 

lighter portion was then thoroughly air dried and separated by sifting 

into five sizes, and proximate analyses of the parts were made by the 

official method, with the following results:

Determinations for volatile matter on Kentucky No. 1 C coal.

Sizes of separation by sifting.

Constituent.

Ash.................................................

*tO&

1.15

39.05

58.20

1.60

A to &

1.45

38.80

58.55

1.20

sV to ,\,

1.70

38.55

58.35

1.40

A to gV

1.90

38. 05

58.40

1.65

5* and 

finer.

2.05

35.54

59.66

2.75

By the modified process with four minutes of _ .eliminary heating 

the result in volatile matter on the 'Vo to jV size was 33.75 per cent 

and on the " 81 o and finer," 32.85 per cent.

The results in volatile matter on these different sizes are somewhat 

higher on the coarse samples. However, the different ash contents of 

the different sizes indicate that the sizing had to a degree separated 

the coal into somewhat different varieties, as the higher ash content 

of the finer sample would not in itself be sufficient to account for the 

lower volatile results. In order to see whether the difference was due 

to the fineness of grinding or difference in the coals, a portion of the 

1 Vo to 3y sample was ground down in an agate mortar and the volatile 

matter determined on this tine portion. The average of several results 

was 37.6 per cent, as against 38.55 per cent on the coarse sample.

From this series of results it appears, at least in low-moisture bituminous coals, that the finer ground samples give somewhat lower
VOLATILE MATTER IN FUELS. 41

volatile matter than the coarser samples, probably due to the more 

complete sintering together of the fine samples upon heating, with 

the consequent effect upon the giving off of the volatile matter.

In order to find out how much effect different heat treatment has on 

different fuels, a series of samples was selected ranging from anthracite to peat, most of the samples used in the tests having been previously more or less completely air dried so as to permit of better 

handling in the laboratory. Determinations for volatile matter were 

made in duplicate by the regular official method and by the modified 

method with four minutes' preliminary heating. The proximate 

analyses of the samples with the volatile matter determined by the 

official method are shown in columns 1 to 5 of the next table; the 

results for volatile matter by the preliminary heating are given in 

column 6; and the differences in volatile matter by the two methods 

are given in column 7. The determinations for moisture were all

o 

made in accordance with the official method, by weighing out a separate sample. The same is true of the determinations for ash, with the 

exception that upon two or three of the lignite samples and one of the 

Pennsylvania samples the results for ash are those obtained after the 

determination of the volatile matter by the modified process. These 

particular samples and results are all specifically mentioned elsewhere 

(p. 42).

Effect of different heat treatment on determination of volatile matter.

Fuel treated.

Do.........................

Texas lignite (40-mesh dupliTexas lignite (not air dried)..

Proximate analysis (official method).

Moisture.

1.

2.80 

.83 

.90 

1.05 

2.99 

4.20 

6.65 

8.40 

11.65 

12.40 

19.78

19.35 

30.45 

13.25

Volatile 

matter.

2.

5.05 

12.47 

17.35 

33.10 

37. 51 

37.70 

35.87 

34.40 

45.58 

32.18 

62.50

42.07 

44.40 

49.80

Fixed 

carbon.

3.

77.55 

72.05 

74.92 

53.30 

56. 68 

45. 65 

44.57 

48.72 

32.97 

42. 82 

6.57

27.38 

15.42 

16.21

Ash.

4.

14. 60 

14.65 

6.83 

12. 55 

2.82 

12.45 

12. 91 

8.48 

9.80 

12. 60 

11.15

11.20 

9.73 

20.74

Sulphur.

5.

0.60 

2.14 

.97 

1.76 

.58 

4.13 

.68 

1.47 

1.04 

1.30 

1.03

.58

Volatile 

matter 

(modified 

method.)

6.

4.90 

12. 37 

:16.07 

30.35 

34.78 

34. 67 

34. 25 

32.00 

40.17 

30.12 

« 35. 42

35. 72 

30.97 

47. 92

Difference.

7.

0. 15 

.10 

1 . 28 

2. 75 

2.73 

3.03 

1.62 

2.40 

5.41 

2.06 

27.08

6.35 

13. 43 

1.88

"Two determinations upon the fine sample of Texas lignite made by heating for four minutes over 

a flame 5 centimeters high and then seven minutes over the full flame ('2b cm.) gave 35.47 per cent 

volatile matter almost-an exact check upon the result obtained by the four-minute preliminary 

heating with a 10-centimeter flame regulated by holding burner in the hand.

With the exception of the anthracite and semianthracite samplesy 

the results by the preliminary heating, as compared with those by the 

official method, all show a considerably less amount of volatile matter 

and a correspondingly greater amount of fixed carbon. In the case 

of the lignites, the greater volatile matter by the official method, as 

has been shown, is partly due to mechanical losses.
42 EXPERIMENTAL WORK IN FUEL TESTING.

Jn order to see if mechanical losses might account for the differences 

on the bituminous coals, determinations for the ash after the determination of the volatile matter were made on one of the Pennsylvania 

samples. The average results for ash on the samples by the two 

methods are: Official method, 12.56; preliminary heating, 12.53. 

These results indicate no mechanical loss whatever, and in none of the 

samples except the lignites were visible solid carbon particles driven 

off in the form of sparks, and the differences must be ascribed to the 

different breaking down of the hydrocarbon, compounds by the difference in heat treatment. . Comparisons of .the results of volatile matter on a great number of 

samples differing from one another in moisture content indicate that 

the presence of loosely held moisture in the sample causes a higher 

volatile result. In order to obtain more definite data on this question, 

three samples low in moisture and representing widely different kinds 

of coal were selected for a series of determinations. The effect of 

loosely held moisture upon the determinations for volatile matter in 

each of these. samples was determined by adding definite amounts of 

water to the sample after weighing 'out. The water was thoroughly 

mixed with the sample by means of a fine platinum wire and the volatile determination then made in the usual manner according to the 

official method. The first sample selected was a sample of Pennsylvania coal. The proximate analysis of the air-dried sample and the 

results -for volatile matter determined in the presence of additional 

moisture are shown in the next table. Air-dried samples of Illinois 

coal and Arkansas lignite were treated in the same way, with the results 

also shown in the table.

"Determinations"of volatile matter (percentages) showing effect of loosely held moisture.

Fuel treated.

Illinois coal ........... 

A rkansas 1 igni te .......

Proximate analysis (official 

method).

Moisture.

1.05

2.35 

10. 85

Volatile 

matter.

33.00

39.35 

38. 50

Fixed 

carbon.

53.30

44.65 

31.40

Ash.

 12.55

13.65 

19. 25

'Sulphur.

.1.75

".'83'

Volatile -matter determinations in the 

presence of stated amounts of added 

moisture.

0.03 

gram.

39. 60

0.05 

gram.

33.60 

39.30 

40.35

0.1 

gram.

33.70 

40.00 

41.20

0.15 

gram.

33. 80 

40.05 

40.90

0.2 

gram.

34.10 

39.75 

44.90

0.3 

gram.

33.90

Without exception these results show that the presence of loosely 

held moisture in the sample increases the value obtained for the volatile combustible matter. The average increase for the Pennsylvania 

sample is about 0.7 per cent. On the Illinois sample the increase for 

volatile matter is 0.4 per cent. On the Arkansas lignite the increase 

is 3.3 per cent.

To see what effect this loosely held moisture might have on the volatile determinations where the sample was first subjected to four
VOLATILE MATTEB IN FUELS. 43

minutes' preliminary heating over a low flame, determinations were 

made upon these samples with and without additional moisture, with 

the following results:

Determinations of volatile matter (percentages) after four minutes' preliminary heating, 

showing effect of loosely held moisture.

Fuel treated.

Illinois coal ...................................................

Volatile -matter determinations (by 

modified method) in the presence of 

stated amounts of added moisture.

No moisture 

added.

30.35

34. 85 

3(1. 90

0.15 

gram.

30. 10

0.2 

gram.

87. 40

0.3 

gram.

31. 65

These results show that even with a gradual preliminary heating 

the presence of loosely held moisture increases the value of the volatile determinations, the difference in some of the samples being as 

great as the difference by the official method; from which it appears 

that the rapid application of heat sufficient to drive off this moisture 

results in a reaction between the water vapor and the carbon or hydrocarbons in the coal.

The results of the foregoing experiments and tests show that the 

value obtained for volatile matter in coal is affected to an important 

degree: (1) By the method of heating the sample, (2) by the fineness 

of pulverization, and (3) by the amount of loosely held moisture 

present. In bituminous coals these differences do not exceed 3 or 4 

per cent, and appear to be entirely due to a different breaking up of 

the hydrocarbon compounds under the different conditions of heat 

treatment, fineness of sample, and amount of moisture present. In 

the case of lignites, where the difference may be as high as 25 per 

cent, this difference is largely due to the mechanical loss in the sample 

during the rapid expulsion of the volatile matter.

In the routine work of the laboratory in making the determinations 

of volatile matter the official method is at present used for ordinary 

bituminous coals, while lignites or other coals with more than 10 percent moisture are heated for four minutes at a low temperature and 

then for seven minutes over the full flame of the Bunsen burner.

INDEX.

Page.

Air drying. See Drying, air. 

Alabama coal, ashes in..................... 23

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 2, ash in.............................. 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No.3,ashin.............................. 23

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 4, ash in...........:.................. 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in............................... 23

Arkansas lignite, ash in ........ I...... 7,23,41.42

carbon in............................... 41,42

moisture in..'...................... 7,11,41,42

specific gravity of...................... 23,41

sulphur in........................... 23,41,42

volatile matter in.................... 41,42,43

No. 1 B, moisture in...................... 11

No. 7 A, ash in........................... 23

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 7 B, moisture in....................... 11

No. 8, ash in.............................. 7

moisture in............................. 7,11

No. 9, moisture in........................ 11

Ash, determination of................ 0,7,8,23-28

determination of, check on............. G

increase of, by abrasion in mill ......... 8

Ball mills, grinding in, increase in ash due to 8 

loss of moisture in...................... 11-12

Brazil coal, ash in.......................... 23,25

moisture in............................. 11,18

specific gravity of...................... 23,25

sulphur in.............................. 23,25

Bucking board, grinding on, loss of moisture

in............................... 10-13

California, No. 1, moisture in............... 11,12

Coal samples, amount of, effect of, on moisture............................. 18-19

history of............................... 5

method of taking, checking of.......... 4-G

Colorado coal, ash in....................... 41

 carbon in............................... 41

moisture in............................. 18

sulphur in............................... 41

volatile matter in....................... 4L

Drying, air, relative effects of furnace drying and......................... 8-9

Drying reagents, comparative effects of.... 17-18

Page. 

0 rinding, increase in ash due to............ 8

loss of moisture in...................... 10-13

Heating, duration of, effect of, on moisture. 18-19 

effect of, on volatile matter, determinations. ........................... 41

Illinois coal, ash in.............. 7,-22,23,30,41,42

carbon in............................... 41,42

moisture in....... 7,9,10-10,18,19,20,22,41,42

specific gravity of..... .:.... ........... 23

sulphur in..................... 22,23,30,41.42

volatile matter in.................... 41,42,43

washing tests of........................ 30

No. 6 B, moisture in...................... 11

No. 7 D, moisture in...................... 11,18

No. 9 A, ash in........................... 22,30

moisture in.......................... 11,20,22

sulphur in.............................. 22,30

washing tests of........................ 30

No. 9 B, ash in........................... 22

moisture in.......................... 11,20,22

sulphur in.............................. 22

No. 10, moisture in ....................... 11

No. 11 A, moisture in..................... 11.

No. 11 B, ash in........................... 22,30

moisture in.......................... 18,20,22

sulphur in...........:.................. 22,30

washing tests of........................ 30

No. 11 C, moisture in.. . .................. 11

No. 11 D, moisture in..................... 11,18

No. 12, moisture in ....................... 18

No. 13, moisture in ....................... 11,18

No 14, moisture in ....................... 11,18

 No. 15, moisture in ....................... 9,11

No. 16, moisture in ....................... 11

No. 18, moisture in....................... 18

No. 19 A, moisture in ..................... 11

No. 19 B, ash in........................... 23,30

specific gravity of....................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23,30

washing tests of........................ 30

No. 19 C, moisture in ..................... 11

No. 19 D, moisture in..................... 11.

No. 20, moisture in ....................... 9,11

No. 21. moisture in ....................... 11

No. 22 A, ash in........................... 7

moisture in ............................. 7, a

No. 22 B, moisture in ..................... 9, H

No. 23, moisture in....................... H

No. 23 A, ash in........................... 7

moisture in............................. 7,11

specific gravity of....................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 23 B, ash in........................... 7

moisture in ............................. 7,9

 45
46 INDEX.

Illinois coal Continued. Page.

No. 25, specific gravity of................. 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

 No. 26, specific gravity of................. . 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 27, specific gravity of................. 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

Impurities, relation of, to specific gravity.. 24-28 

Indiana coal, ash in........... (i, 7,22,23,31.32,41

carbon in............................... 41

moisture in .......... 7,9,10,11,18,19,20.22,41

specific gravity of....................../ 23

' sulphur in ..................... 22,23,31,32,41

volatile matter in....................... 41

washing tests of.................. 29,31,32,41

No. 3, moisture in ........................ 11

No. 4, ash in.............................. 22,31

moisture in....................... 11.18,20,22

sulphur in .............................. 22,31

washing tests of........................ 31

No. 5, ash in .............................. 23

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of....................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 6, ash in.............................'. 23,31

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of....................... 23

sulphur in .............................. 23,31

washing tests of........................ 31

No. 7 A, ash in........................... 23,31

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23,31

washing test of......................... 29,31

No. 8, ash in.............................. 23

moisture in............................. 11,18

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 9 A, ash in........................... 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 9 B, ash in........................... 23,31

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphurin.............................. 23,31

washing tests of........................ 31

No. 10, ash in............................. 23

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of........ ?............. 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 11, ash in.............................. 23,32

moisture in............................ 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in............................... 23,32

washing tests of........................ 32

No. 12, ash in............................. 7,23

moisture in............................ 7,11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in....................... ..... 23

Indian Territory coal, moisture in.......9,11,18

No. 2 B, moisture in....................... 9,11

Kansas No. 6, ash in....................... 23

moisture in.............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

Page. 

Kentucky coal, ash in................ 23,32,40,41

carbon in............................... 40,41

moisture in........................ 9.11,40,41

specific gravity of...................... 23,32

sulphurin.............................. 23,41

volatile matter in....................... 40,41

washing tests of........................ 32

No. 1, ash in.............................. 40

carbon in............................... 40

.moisture in............................. 40

No. 1 B, ash in............................ 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 1 C, volatile matter in................. 40

No. 5, ash in.............................. 23

moisture in............................. 9.11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 6, ash in.............................. 23,32

moisture in............................. 11.

specific gravity of...................... 23,32

sulphur in.............................. 23

washing tests of........................ 32

No. 7, ash in.............................. 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphurin.........'..................... 23

Laboratory tests of washing............... 28-3fi

Lignites, volatile matter in. See Volatile

matter. 

Maryland No. 1, ash in..................... 23.25

moisture in............................: 11

specific gravity of...................... 23,25

' sulphur in.............................. 23,25

Massachusetts peat, ash in ................. 22. 41

carbon in............................... 41

moisture in.......................... 21,22,41

sulphurin.............................. 22,41

volatile matter in.........:....-......... 41

Mechanical loss in volatilization, amount of. 42 

Metal pails, loss of moisture in............. ti-7

Mills, ball, grinding in, increase in ash due to. 8 

Missouri coals, ash in..................... 8,23,32

. moisture in............................. 8.11

specific gravity of.'.T................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23.32

washing tests of. 

No. 5, ash in.......

moisture in......

sulphur in.......

washing tests of.

................. 32

................. 32

................. 11

................. ' 32

..;.............. 32

No. 6, ash in............................ 8,23,32

moisture in.............................. 8,11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23,32

washing tests of........................ 32

No. 7, moisture in........................ 11

Moisture, determination of................. <>. 7

check on................................ 0

effect of, on volatile-matter determinations............................ 42-43

loss and gain of......................... 6-22

See also Drying. 

New Mexico lignites, ash in.................. 23

moisture in............................. 9,11
INDEX. 4.7

New Mexico lignites Continued. Page, 

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in............................... 23

No. 3, ash in.............................. 23

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 3 A, moisture in....................... 9

No. 3 B, moisture in...................... 9,11

No. 4, moisture in........................ 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 4 A, ash in........................... 23

moisture in............................. 9,11

No. 4 B, mpisture in...................... 9

No. 5, ash in.............................. 23

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of..................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

North Dakota lignite, ash in............ 22,23,41

carbon in................................ 41

moisture in.......................... 21,22,41

specific-gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in............................... 23,41

volatile matter in....................... 41

No. 1 B, ash in........................... 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in......................'........ 23

No. 3, ash i n.............................. 22,23

moisture in............................. 21,22

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 22,23

Ohio coal, ash in...... .......... ...^... 6,22,23,33

moisture in.......................... 11,21,22

specific gravity of....................... 23

sulphur in........................... 22,23,33

washing tests of ......................... 33

No. 1, ash of........................'....... 23,33

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in............................... 23,33

washing tests of........................ 33

No. 2, ash in.............................. 23

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in............................. 23

No. 3, ash in.............................. 23

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No.-4, ash in.............................. 23

moisture in.............................. 1.1

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 5, ash in........................... 22,23,33

moisture in.......................... 11,21,22

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in........................... 22,23,33

washing tests of........................ 33

Ohio coal Continued. Page. 

No. 8 A, ash in.......................'.... » 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 9 A, ash in........................... 23

moisture in............................. .11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 9 B, ash in............................ 23

moisture in.............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

Pails, metal, loss of moisture in............ C-7

Pennsylvania coal, ash in....... 23,25,33,34,41,42

carbon in............................... 41,42

moisture in........................ 0,11,41,42

specific gravity of................... 23,24,25

sulphur in.................. 23,24,25,33,41,42

volatile matter in.................... 41,42,43

washing tests of........................ 33,34

No. 4, ash in.............................. 23

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in............................

No. 5 A, ash in.........................

moisture in...........................

specific gravity of....................

sulphur in... v .......................

No. 5 B, ash in..........................

moisture in...........................

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23

No. 6, ash in.............................. 23,25

specific gravity of...................... 23,25

sulphur in.............................. 23,25

No. 7 A, ash in........................... 23,33

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23,33

. washing tests of........................ 33

No. 7 B, ash in........................... 23,33

specific gravity of...................... 23

sulphur in.............................. 23,33

washing tests of........................ 33

No. 8, shin.............................. 23,33

No. 6 A, ash in......

specific gravity of.

sulphur in........

No. 6 B, ash in......

specific gravity of.

sulphur in........

No. 7, ash in........

specific gravity of.

sulphur in........

moisture in.............................

specific gravity of......................

sulphur in ..............................

washing tests of........................

. No. 9, ash in..............................

moisture in.............................

No. 10, ash in.............................

specific gravity of......................

sulphur in..............................

washing tests of........................

Powdering, effect of, on persistency of 

moisture........................

effect of, on volatile-matter determination .............................

Kefuse from washing, ash in...............

sulphur in..............................

Samples, coal. Sec Coal samples. 

Sampling, loss of moisture during..........

Specific gravity, determinations of.........

relation of, to impurities...............

Sulphur, determination of................ 6

determination of, check on.............

Tennessee coal, ash in.......................

moisture in.............................

specific gravity of......................

11

23

23,33

33

23

G-7

24,34

24

24,34

34

19-23

40-41 

30 

30

7

23-28

24-28

23-28

* C

24,34

11

24
48 INDEX.

Tennessee coal Continued. Page, 

sulphur in.............................. 24,34

washing tests of........................ 34

No. 2, ash in.............................. 24

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 3, ash in.............................. 24

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 4, ash in.............................. 24

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 6, ash in.............................. 24,34

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24,34

washing tests of........................ 34

No. 7 A, ash in........................... 24

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 8 A, ash in........................... 24

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 8 B, moisture in..................... 11

No. 10, ash in............................. 24

specific gravity of.........^............ 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

Texas lignite, ash in................ 7,22,24,37,41

carbon in............................... 37,41

moisture in.................. 7,11,21,22,37,41

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 22,24

volatile matter in...................... 36-37

No. 3, ash in.............................. 24,37

carbon in............................... 37

moisture in............................. 11,37

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24,37

volatile matter in....................... 36-37

No. 4, ash in............................ 7,22,24

moisture in........................ 7,11,21,22

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 22,24

Utah No. 1, moisture in.................... 11

Virginia coal, ash in........................ 24,34

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of...................... 24,34

sulphur in.............................. 24,34

washing tests of.. 

No. 1, moisture in.. 

No. 1 A, ash in.....

moisture in.......

specific gravity of.

sulphur in........

No. 1 B, ash in.....

specific gravity of.

sulphur in........

No. 2,- ash in........

sulphur in........

washing tests of.. 

No. 2 B, ash in.....

specific gravity of.

sulphur in........

lio. 3, ash in........

specific gravity of.

sulphur in........

Virginia coal Continued. Page.

No. 4, ash in.............................. 24,34

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 2-1

sulphur in.............................. 24,34

washing tests of........................ 34

Volatile matter, determination of.......... 36-43

Volatilization, mechanical loss of........... 42

Washing, laboratory tests of............... 28-36

refuse from, ash in...................... 36

sulphur in.......................... 36

Washington coals, ash in.........:......... 24,41

carbon in............................... 41

moisture in........................... 0,11,41

specific gravity of................'...... 24

sulp'hur in.............................. 24,41

volatile matter in. ......'................ 41

No. 1 A, moisture in...................... H

No. 1 B, ash in............................ 24

moisture in.......................'...... 9,11

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in..........:................... 24

No. 2, ash in.............................. 24

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

Weight, gain or loss of..................... 19-22

West Virginia coal, ash in............ 22,24,25,35

moisture in..................... 9,10,11,20,22

specific gravity of.'..................... 24,25

sulphur in......................... 22,24,25,35

washing tests of........................ 35

No. 4 B, ash in............................ 24

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of ....................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 13, ash in...........:.............. '22,24,35

moisture in.......................... 11,20,22

specific gravity of....................... 24

sulphur in..........................7 22,24,35

washing tests of........................ 35

No. 14, ash in............................. 24,35

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity, of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24,35

washing tests of........................ 35

No. 15, ash in............................. 24,25

specific gravity of...................... 24,25

sulphur in.............................. 24,25

No. 16 A, ash in........................... 24

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in............................... . 24

No. 16 B, ash in........................... 24

moisture in............................. 9

specific gravity of....................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 17, ash in............................. 24

moisture in........................ .^... 9,11

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 18, ash in............................. 24,35

moisture in............................. 11

specific gravity of...................... 24

sulphur in.........................:.... 24,35

washing tests of........................ 35

No. 19, moisture in...................:... 11

No. 20, ash in............................. 24

moisture in............................. 9
INDEX.

West Virginia coal Continued. Page.

No. 20, specific gravity of................ 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 21, ash in........'..................... 24

moisture in............................. 9,11

specific gravity of....................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

Wyoming coal, ash in................... 22,24,35

moisture in..................... 9,11,12,21,22

specific gravity of....................... 24,25

sulphur in........................... 22,24,35

washing tests of........................ 35

No. 2, ash in.............................. 22

moisture in............................. 21,22

sulphur in.............................. 22

No. 2 B, ash in.......... I.............. 22,24,35

moisture in.......................... 11,21,22

specific gravity in....................... 24

Wyoming coal Continued. Page.

No. 2 B, sulphur in.................... 22,24,35

washing tests of........................ 35

No.3, ash in....................... .... 22,24,25

moisture in............................. 21

specific gravity, in....................... 24,25

sulphur in........................... 22,24,25

No. 4, ash in.............................. 24

specific gravity of....................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

No. 5, ash in.............................. 24

moisture in............................. ' 12

specific gravity of....................... 24

sulphur in....................... 1...... 24

No. 6, ash in.............................. 24

moisture in............................. 0,11

specific gravity of....................... 24

sulphur in.............................. 24

CLASSIFICATION OF THE PUBLICATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL

SURVEY.

[Bulletin No. 323.1

The publications of the United States Geological Survey consist of (1) Annual 

Reports, (2) Monographs, (3) Professional Papers, (4) Bulletins, (5) Mineral 

Eesources, (6) Water-Supply and Irrigation Papers, (7) Topographic Atlas of United 

States folios and separate sheets thereof, (8) Geologic Atlas of United Statesfolios thereof. The classes numbered 2, 7, and 8 are sold at cost of publication; the 

others are distributed free. A circular giving complete lists can be had on application.

Most of the above publications can be obtained or consulted in the following ways:

1. A limited number are delivered to the Director of the Survey, from whom they 

can be obtained, free of charge (except classes 2, 7, and 8), Oil application.

2. A certain number are delivered to Senators and Representatives in Congress 

for distribution.

3. Other copies are deposited with the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, 

D. C., from whom they can be had at prices slightly above cost.

4. Copies of all Government publications are furnished to the principal- public 

libraries in the large cities throughout the United States, where they can be consulted 

by those interested.

The Professional Papers, Bulletins, and Water-Supply Papers treat of a variety of 

subjects, and the total number issued is large. They have therefore been classified 

into the following series: A, Economic geology; B, Descriptive geology; C, System-: 

atic geology and paleontology; D, Petrography and mineralogy; E, Chemistry and 

physics; F, Geography; G, Miscellaneous; H, Forestry; 1, Irrigation; J, Water storage; K, Pumping water; L, Quality of water; M, General hydrographic investigations; N, Water power; 0, Underground waters; P, Hydrographic progress reports, 

Q, Fuels; R, Structural materials. This paper is the fifty-second in Series E, and 

the fourth in Series Q., the complete lists of which follow (PP=Professional Paper; 

B=Bulletin): . ' 

SERIES E, CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS.

B 9. Report, of work clone in the Washington laboratory during the fiscal year 1883-84, by F. W. Clarke

and T. M. Chatard. 1884. 40pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 14. Electrical and magnetic properties of the iron carburets, by Carl Barns and Vincent Strouhal.

1885. 238pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 27. Report of work done in the Division of Chemistry and Physics, mainly during the year 1884-85'.-

1886. 80 pp. : B 32. Lists and analyses of the mineral springs of the United States (a preliminary study), by Albert

C. Peale. 1886. 235pp. (Out of stock.)

B 35. Physical properties of the iron carburets, by Carl Barus and Vencent Strouhal. 1880. 62 pp. 

B 30. Subsidence of fine solid particlesin liquids, by Carl Barus. 1886. 58pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 42. Report of work done in the Division of Chemistry and Physics, mainly during the fiscal year

1885-86, by F. W. Clarke. 1887. 152 pp., 1 pi. (Out of stock.) 

B'I7. Analyses of waters of the Yellowstone National Park, with an account of the methods of

analyses employed, by F. A. Gooch and J. E. Whitfiekl. 1888. 84 pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 52. Subaerial decay of rocks and origin of the red color of certain formations, by 1. C. Russell.

1889. 65 pp., 5 pis. (Out of stock.) 

B 54. On the thermoelectric measurement of high temperatures, by Carl Barns. 18S.9. 313 pp., 11

pis. (Out of stock.) ! 

B 65. Report of work done in the'Division of Chemistry and Physio, mainly during the fiscal year

3886-87, by F. W. Clarke. 18S9. 96 pp. (Out of stock.)

I '
II . SERIES LIST.

B 60. Report of work done in the Division of Chemistry and Physics, mainly during the fiscal year

1887-88. 1890. 174pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 64. Report of work done in the Division of Chemistry and Physics, mainly during the fiscal year

1888-89, by F. \V Clarke. 1890. 60 pp.

B 68. Earthquakes in California in 1889, by J. E. Keeler. 1890. '25 pp. 

B73. The viscosity of solids, by Carl Barns. 1891. xii, 139 pp., 6 pis. 

B 78. Report of work done in the Division of Chemistry and Physics, mainly during the fiscal year

1889-90, by F. W. Clarke. 3891. 131 pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 90. Report of work done in the Division of Chemistry and Physics, mainly during the fiscal year

1890-91, by F. W. Clarke. 1892. 77 pp.

B 92. The compressibility 01 liquids, by Carl Barus. 1892. 96 pp., 29 pis: 

B 94. The mechanism of solid viscosity,by Carl Barus. 1892. 138 pp. 

B 95. Earthquakes in California in 1890 and 1891, by E. S. Holden. 1892. 31 pp. 

B 96. The volume thermodynamics of liquids, by Carl Barus. 1892. 100 pp. 

B 103. High temperature work in igneous fusion and ebullition, chiefly in relation to pressure, by

Carl Barus. 1893. 57 pp. ,9 pis.

B 112. Earthquakes in California in 1892, by C. D. Perrine, 1893. 57 pp. 

B 113. Report of work done in the Division of Chemistry and Physics during the fiscal years 1891-92

and 1892-93, by F. W. Clarke. 1893. 115 pp.

B 114. Earthquakes in California in 1893, by C. D. Perrine. 1894. 23 pp. 

B 125. The constitution of the silicates, by F. W. Clarke. 1895. 100 pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 129. Earthquakes in California in 1894,'by C. D. Perrine. 1895. 25 pp. 

B 147. Earthquakes in California in 1895, by C. D. Perrine. 1896. 23 pp. 

B 148. Analyses of rocks, with a chapter on analytical methods, laboratory of the United States

Geological Survey, 1880 to 1896, by F. W. Clarke and W.F. Hillebrand. 1897. 306pp. (Out

of stock.)

B 155. Earthquakes in California in 1890 and 1897, by C. D. Perrine. 1898. 47 pp. 

B 161. Earthquakes in California in 1898, by C. D. Perrine. 1899. 31pp., 1 pi.

B 167. Contributions to chemistry and mineralogy from the laboratory of the United States Geological .Survey; F. W, Clarke, Chief Chemist. 1900. 166pp. 

B168. Analyses of rocks, laboratory of the United States Geological Survey, 1880 to 1899, tabulated by

F. W. Clarke. 1900. 308pp. (Out of stock.) 

B 176. Some principles and methods of rock analysis, by W. F. Hillebrand. 1900. 114 pp. (Out of

stock.)

B 186. On pyrite and marcasite, by H. N. Stokes. 1900. 50 pp. 

B 207. The action of ammonium chloride upon silicates, by F. W. Clarke and George Steiger 1902

57pp. (Out of stock.) 

PP 14. Chemical analyses of igneous rocks published from 1884'to 1900, with a critical discussion of

the character and use of analyses, by H. S. Washington. 1903. 495 pp. 

PP 18. Chemical composition of igneous rocks expressed by means of diagrams, with reference to

rock classification on a quantitative chemico-mineralogical basis, by J. P. Iddings. 1903.

98 pp., 8 pis. 

B220. Mineral analyses from the laboratories of the United States Geological Survey, 1880 to 1903,

tabulated by F. W. Clarke, Chief Chemist. 1903. 119 pp. 

B228 Analyses of rocks from the laboratory of the United States Geological Survey, 1880 to 1903,

tabulated by F. W. Clarke, Chief Chemist. 1904. 375 pp. 

PP 28. The superior analyses of igneous rocks from Roth's tabellen, 1869 to 1881 arranged according to

the quantitative system of classification, by H. S. Washington. 1904. 68 pp. 

B 239. Rock cleavage, by C. K. Leith. 1904. 216 pp., 27 pis.

B 241. Experiments on schistosity and slaty cleavage, by G. F. Becker. 1901. 34 pp., 7 pis. 

B 253. Comparison of a wet and crucible-fire method for the assay of gold telluride ores, with notes

on the errors occurring in the operations of fire assay and parting, by W. F. Hillebrand and

E. T. Alien. 1905. 33 pp. 

B 261. Preliminary report of the operations of the coal-testing plant of the United States Geological

Survey at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, St. Louis, Mo., 1904; E. W. Parker, J. A. Holmes,

M. R. Campbell, committee in charge. 1905. 172 pp. 

B 262. Contributions to mineralogy from the United States Geological Survey, by F. W. Clarke, W. F.

Hillebrand, F. G. Ransome, S. L. Penfield, Waldemar Lindgren, George Steiger, and W. T.

Schaller. 1905. 147pp. 

PP 48. Report on the operations of the coal-testing plant of the United States Geological Survey at the

Louisiana Purchase Exposition, St. Louis, Mo., 1904; E. W. Parker, ,1. A. Holmes, M. R. Campbell, committee in charge. 1906. 3 parts. 1,492 pp., 13 pis. 

B 290. Preliminary report on the operations of the fuel-testing plant of the United States Geological

Survey at St. Louis, Mo., 1905, by J. A. Holmes. 1906. 210 pp.

B 305. The analysis of silicate and carbonate rocks, by W. F. Hillebrand. 1906. 200 pp. 

B 312. The interaction between minerals and water solutions, with special reference to geologic phenomena, by E. C. Sullivan. 1907. 69 pp.
SEKFES LIST. Ill

B 310. Contributions to economic geology, 1906, Part II: Coal, lignite, and peat; M. R. Campbell,

geologist in charge. 1907. pp., 23 pis. 

B 32:i. Experimental work conducted in the chemical laboratory of the-. United States fuel-testing

plant nt St. Louis, Mo., January 1,1905, to July 31,1906, by N. VV. Lord. 1907. 49 pp.

SERIES Q, FUELS.

B 2(1.1. Preliminary report of the operations of the coal-testing plant of the United States-Geological 

Survey at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, St. Louis, Mo., 1904; E. VV. Parker,.!. A. Holmes, 

M. R. Campbell, committee in charge. 1905. 172pp.

PP 48. Report on the operations of the coal-testing plant of the United States Geological Survey at the 

Louisiana Purchase Exposition, St. Louis, Mo., 1904; E. VV. Parker,.!. A. Holmes, M. R.Campbell, committee in charge. 1906. Spurts. 1,492pp., 13 pis. 

B 290. Preliminary report on the operations of the fuel-testing plant of the United States Geological 

Survey at St. Louis, Mo., 1905, by J. A. Holmes. 1906. 240 pp.

B 323. .Experimental work conducted in the chemical laboratory of the United States fuel-testing 

plant at St. Louis, Mo., January 1, 1905, to July 31, 1906, by N. VV. Lord. 1907. -19 pp.

Correspondence should be addressed to

THE DIRECTOR,

UNITED STATES (.GEOLOGICAL, SURVEY,

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

SKHTKMBKK, J907.

o