粗煤泥分选是选煤过程中的重要环节，传统的粗煤泥分选设备对难选粗煤泥难以实现有效分选，因此选煤厂通常采用两段分选来满足产品要求，但两段分选工艺比一段分选工艺复杂。为简化粗煤泥分选工艺流程，以TPS和TBS在回坡底矿选煤厂的工业应用为例，对比了两种设备在自身结构、产品结构和分选效果上的差异。在设备结构上，TPS通过在分选桶内增加一个内桶实现了两段分选，并通过顶水分配装置和内桶溢流导流槽等结构优化保证了两段分选的可靠性。在产品结构上，TBS可分选出精煤和矸石两种产品，但无法同时获得合格精煤和高灰分尾煤；TPS不仅可获得精煤、中煤、矸石三种产品，而且可根据产品质量要求灵活调节出两产品或三产品，在精煤产品灰分合格的前提下TPS尾煤灰分为72.21%，同时可得到产率为36.62%、灰分为35.72%的中煤产品。在分选效果上，TPS的数量效率比TBS高2.82个百分点，可燃体回收率比TBS高24.53个百分点。TPS与TBS分选粗煤泥的对比研究可为TPS与TBS的合理选型提供有益参考。

Separation of coarse slime is a key link in coal cleaning process, but it it difficult to have the slime effectively separated with use of conventional equipment. Such being the case, the coal preparation plants usually resort to the use of a two-stage separation process to produce the product with a quality as required. However, the two-stage process is a much more complicated process as compared with the single-stage process. With an aim to simplify the coarse slime separation process, the 3-product interference-bed separator (TPS) and the teetered-bed separator (TBS) in industrial application at Huipodi Mine Coal Preparation Plant are taken to serve as an example to explore the differences of the two separators in structural design, product structure and separation performance. Structurally, TPS has an outer and an inner cylinders for realizing the 2-stage separation process, and the reliability of the separation is ensured through its upward water distribution mechanism and the inner cylinder′s overflow diversion channel. In terms of product structure, TBS can produce only two products, namely, clean coal and refuse, and it is impossible for it to simultaneously produce up-to-standard clean coal and high-ash refuse products. Contrarily, with the use of TPS, three products (clean coal, middling and refuse) can be produced, and it can be turned into a two-product separator through flexible adjustment according to the required quality of products. While ensuring the required ash of clean coal product, TBS can produce a refuse product with an ash as high as 72.21% and a middling product with an ash of 35.72% and a yield of 36.62%. As viewed from the separation performance, the organic efficiency and recovery of combustible matter of TBS are 2.82 and 24.53 percentage points higher than those of TBS, respectively. The comparative study of TPS and TBS made in the paper may serve as a valuable reference for the optimum selection of the use of TPS and TBS.