Search Documents

By Launa G. Mallett, Charles Vaught, Kathleen M. Kowalski, Charles D. Litton, Michael J. Brnich, Ronald S. Conti, Henry P. Cole, William J. Wiehagen

How do people behave when they are trying to get out of a fire? Are escape activities different in each incident, or will most actions be predictable across events? Do persons make the same sorts of decisions whether they are responding as individuals or as group members? Because the social costs of fire-related deaths and injuries are likely to continue to rise, societal pressure for greater safety will also undoubtedly increase. There are, therefore, compelling reasons to further our understanding of action in fires. If human behavior in fire is studied scientifically and predicted according to some well-defined principles, the benefits will be significant. Design engineers could incorporate real-world findings into their plans. Equipment manufacturers could gain from insights into how their technology is actually used in fire emergencies. Safety personnel would have a better appreciation of what constitutes adequate evacuation procedures. Trainers could upgrade the content of their courses that teach escape skills. The result would be an overall improvement in the quality of fire preparedness and safety.

Jan 1, 2000

By Marc T. Filigenzi

Two of the major ground control safety issues confronting underground mine operations today are shaft pillar stability and the failure of rock around active mine openings. Failure of a mine shaft can lead to the entrapment of workers. Failure of rock around active underground mine openings can lead to roof falls, which in turn can result in worker injuries and fatalities. Finite-element analysis has proven to be a reliable method for predicting stresses and displacements around underground mine openings. However, this is a complex and time-consuming technique and is not used as often as it could be in mine planning. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate one technique developed at the Spokane Research Center that allows the user to create a finite-element model of a two-dimensional section of an underground mine in a relatively straightforward manner. This model is then used to calculate stresses, displacements, and safety factors around mine openings. With this information, mine planers can evaluate the stability of mine openings as well as the stability of pillars and mine shafts. This analysis will help develop mining sequences and layouts that minimize stresses in that section of the mine. This, in turn, should minimize the occurrence of shaft failure, roof falls, and other hazards associated with underground mining.

By D. K. Ingram, G. L. Mowrey, T. R. Rehak

This paper summarizes fly rock and blast area security fatalities from 1989 to 1999 and examines the causative factors. Coal and nonmetal mining used about 43 billion pounds of explosives and blasting agents between1989 to 1999. A majority of this consumption was used at surface mines. Accident data indicates that fly rock and lack of blast area security were the primary causes of blasting related injuries in surface mining. Fatal injuries due to lack of blast area security were attributed to: failure to clear blast area; failure to follow instructions; inadequate guarding; inadequate blasting shelter; and unsafe location. Seven fatalities due to fly rock and lack of blast area security were reported in surface coal mines and six in nonmetal mines. Out of these, two fatalities (one each in coal and nonmetal mines) occurred outside the mine property. In the coal mining sector, two fatalities were attributed to fly rock, and five to lack of blast area security. In the nonmetal mining sector, three fatalities were attributed to fly rock, and three to lack of blast area security. Preventive measures include: ensuring that all personnel have evacuated the blast area during shot firing; using adequate blasting shelters for employees whose presence is required in the blast area; controlling and monitoring all entrances to the blast area; ensuring that the blast is properly designed, drilled, and loaded; and emphasizing education and training to enhance skill levels for implementation of engineering control techniques.

By C. E. Saxon, F. E. Cash

"Adequate lighting for all mining operations would unquestionably tend to promote both safety and efficiency; this would be true not only for men but also for the animals that man impresses into service in mines. The Markeeta Coal Co. and the Alabama Fuel & Iron Co. both operating mines in Alabama, have found that equipping mine mules with portable electric lights is more efficient, much more humane, and far more safe for both men and animals then the more or less usual method of forcing the animal to do its work essentially in darkness.This report is intended to give the mining industry data, that will aid in trying to bring about safe and efficient operation of mines.The authors desire to thank Charles F. DeBardeleben, president, Fred R. Bell, general manager, Hewett Smith, C. H. Shepherd, and R. A. Sensing, superintendents for the Alabama Fuel & Iron Co.; and Charles F. DeBardeleben, Jr., president, and H. M. House, superintendent for the Markeeta Coal Co., for their cooperation in furnishing the data for this paper.The eight mines operated by the Alabama Fuel & Iron Co. and one operated by the Markeeta Coal Co. in Jefferson and St. Clair Counties, Ala., are the only mines in Alabama where mules are provided with portable electric lights, and there are few if any mines in other States in which this system is in use.These two companies are convinced that equipping all mine mules with good lights decreases underground haulage cost by animals by prolonging the useful life of the animals, increasing their efficiency, lessening haulage wrecks and delays on haulage, and increasing production. Last but not least of the advantages would be the more humane treatment of the animals.The nine mines are developed by slopes along the dip of the coal bed, with double-room entries on 200- to 300-foot centers turned right and left off the slopes and with approximately 1 per cent grade in favor of the loads. Rooms are driven up or diagonally up the pitch from these entries.A surface hoist delivers the empties from the surface to the entry sidetracks at the slope and pulls the loads to the surface. From these sidetracks, mules pull one to four wooden cars, each of which holds 1-1/2 to 2-1/2 tons of coal, deliver the empties to the rooms and entry faces, and pull the loads to the slope sidetracks. The mule haul varies from 100 to 3,000 feet; there are no locomotives or trolley wires in any of these nine mines, seven of which are rated as gassy and two as nongassy by the Alabama state Mining Department."

May 1, 1933