72 
PRELIMINARY REPORT ON COAL-TESTINO PLANT, [bull. 261. 
and the coke, are not in harmony, so it is difficult to determine the! 
effect of washing. 
The analyses are as follows: 
Analyses showing effect of washing West Virginia No. 4 coal. 
Coal. 
Coke. 
Raw. 
Washed. 
From raw 
coal. 
From 
washed coal. 
Ash 
8.39 
.86 
7.53 
.74 
11.85 
.82 
13.23 
Sulphur 
.69 
The change in the amount of impurities is so slight that the irregu- 
larities of sampling are probably responsible for the difference in the 
figures. 
West Virginia No. 5. — Lump and nut coal from mine of Davis Col-j 
liery Company, Coal ton, W. Va. . 
Three coking tests were made of this coal to determine the possi-j 
bility of reducing the ash to within the limit of coke for blast furnace) 
use. The first charge consisted of about 6£ tons of raw coal; the! 
second charge contained about 7 tons of coal crushed in rolls to 1|J; 
inches in size and then washed; the third charge contained about » 
tons of coal, which was pulverized in the Williams mill and washed in- 
the New Century jig. The results of washing are shown by the fol- 
lowing analyses: 
Analyses showing effect of washing West Virginia No. 5 coal. 
Ash.... 
Sulphur 
Raw. 
10.73 
.90 
Coal. 
Washed. 
Coke. 
10.28 
.91 
Pulverized 
and washed. 
11) 
79 
From raw 
coal. 
19.14 
.77 
From 
washed coal, 
14.81 
.83 
From pul- 
verized and 
washed coal 
15.9 
.8 
; 
West Virginia No. 9. — Run-of-mine coal from Vulcan mine, Mou 
Carbon Coal Company (Limited), Powellton, W. Va. 
This coal was tested in the coke ovens in both the raw and tb 
washed condition. The charge of raw coal contained about 4J tor 
and of washed coal about 6 tons. The coke from the washed coi 
showed much improvement over that from the unwashed coal. Tt 
change in composition is shown by the following analyses: 
