Metal Mining - Problems of a Mine Mechanization Program

UNDER present economic conditions the necessity of mechanizing the mines of our country has become a very important problem. More and more mines are looking toward increased or complete mechanization of their operations, so in the writer's opinion it is quite pertinent that some of the associated problems that accompany such a program be pointed out. The following generalization on attempting a comparatively slight change in mining methods at the Southeast Missouri properties of the St. Joseph Lead Co. is an attempt to point out to anyone faced with a mechanization program that much time and C. KREMER BAIN, Member AIME, is Assistant to General Manager, St. Joseph Lead Co., Bonne Terre, Mo. AIME Sun Francisco Meeting, February 1949. TP 2743 A. Discussion (2 copies) may be sent to Transactions AIME before March 31, 1950. Manuscript received Dec. 27, 1948; revision received Oct. 13, 1949. effort can be saved, and many headaches avoided, if company policy can be established whereby everyone in the organization from the top down is desirous of improvement and is working towards the common objective. Any changes in mining methods, machinery, and so on, must entah coordination of all the other phases of mining as they all have to mesh as accurately as a smooth running chain of gears if satisfactory results are to be obtained. The purpose of this paper is to point out some of the problems which :have to be surmounted when any mechanization program is attempted, rather than to go into the mechanical details and actual operating data of the equipment employed. After all, machines have to be adapted to best suit the local conditions, so no general formula can be given that would apply to other properties. Although St. Josepll Lead Co. has been mechani-cally-minded for a number of years, as shown by the fact that over 110 million tons have been loaded mechanically since 1922, any further mechanization or changes always present a problem. When our ore bodies were of great height and area the breaking and loading were developed to a high degree of efficiency according to known standards. But in recent years, when our ore bodies became smaller and more scattered, the amount of tonnage we were able to break was not sufficient to supply our shovels with enough rock to keep them working to capacity. Our first step in attempting to rectify this situation was to develop a technique of moving the shovels to the broken ore in various stopes, which sometimes entailed a move each shift. A shovel is not producing when being moved, so within the last two years we have been endeavoring to devise some means of getting more rock broken in these smaller stopes and it was then that we became interested in jumbo drilling. To illustrate the fact that mechanization is a process of a chain of developments rather than a stroke of genius can best be shown by a general summary of conditions and obstacles which were encountered in our present attempt to establish template drilling of a standardized round. Our first jumbo was more or less the conventional type with two machines mounted on a crossbar. This arrangement proved to be impractical to duplicate satisfactorily the regular routine of slabbing in a more or less radial pattern as carried out by column drilling. One machine was either too close to or too far from the face and there was another disadvantage in that one drillman was frequently delayed while waiting for his partner to bottom a hole. Our next step was to eliminate the crossbar so the machines could operate independently of each other, but we still encountered the same objections mentioned above except that one drillman was free to drill three holes instead of one in a vertical plane independently of his partner. Time studies while trying to adapt the jumbo to the regular slabbing practice as accomplished by column drilling, revealed that twice as much time was spent in maneuvering the jumbo into position and aligning the holes as was consumed in drilling.