Search Documents

Jan 1, 2009

[Page Officers of the Institute 5 Minutes of the Twenty-third Meeting 9 Preservative Treatment of Mine Timber at Primero Mine-F. T. Baker 10 Discussion of Treatment of Mine Timber JA Shearing Coal-John H. Emrick 19 Discussion of Shearing Coal 22 Local Chapters 29 Experiments in Increasing the Production at Dawson, New Mexico-Scott Dupont 30 Discussion of Experiment in Increasing Production 33 Report of Safety Committee-Warren C. Bracewell 41 Bureau of Mines Defines a Gassy Mine 58 Mechanical Loading in Coal Mines-S. W. Farnham 59 Discussion of Mechanical Loading 65 Vocational Training-Discussion 69 Accident Rate-Discussion 71 Holmes Safety Association Chapter Plan-J. J. Forbes 73 Washing Domestic Coal-f. M. Charles 78 Discussion of Washing Domestic Coal 81 Safety Work in Western Mines-Discussion 86]

Jan 1, 1926

At 10 a. m., Tuesday, November 12, 1912, the following members of the committee appointed by "Coal Age" to organize a Coal-Mining Institute for the Rocky Mountain region, met in the State Capitol, at Denver, Colo. : E. H. Weitzel W. J. Murray T. H. O'Brien W. B. Williams James Dalrvmple F. W. Whitksiie A. C. Watts David Griffiths The following members of the committee were not present: Frank Manley Allan French H. C. Williams Frank Cameron J. E. Pettit D. W. Brown C. H. Gibbs E. H. Weitzel acted as chairman of the meeting. This committee drew up a form of Constitution and By-Laws, to be recommended to the general meeting to be held on the following day; and, with the exception of two alterations, this Constitution and By-Laws, formulated by the Organization Committee, were accepted as a whole by the general meeting. With the exception of a general discussion of affairs that might be brought out by means of such an institute, no further business was done at this meeting of the Organization Committee, and it was adjourned.

Jan 1, 1913

MINUTES OF MEETING, AUGUST 27, 1923. Meeting called to order at 10:00 a. m, by the President, George B. Pryde. In the opening remarks Mr. Pryde commented on the Kemmerer disaster, making the work of the Institute particularly important, the desirability of using a more up-to-date emblem for the Institute, the formation of local chapters. The minutes of previous meeting were presented by the Secretary in connection with our publication. Announcements were made regarding the program. Under reports of officers, no reports were made. No reports of standing committees. Report of Special Safety Committee was postponed for a full session, August 28th. There was no further business. Under the head of new business, the following names were proposed and accepted for membership: J. P. Russell, Salt Lake City, Utah, W. A. LaPierre, Salt Lake City, Utah, G. A. Schultz, Latuda, Utah, W. A. Seyffert, Salt Lake City, Utah, P. C. Bunning, Rock Springs, Wyoming, F. L. Gates, Superior, Wyoming, F. C. Miller, Trinidad, Colorado, G. B. Parker, Trinidad, Colorado, Robert Williams, Jr., Somerset, Colorado, F. L. McCarty, Rock Springs, Wyoming,

Jan 1, 1923

By Samuel Tescher

The operation of gaseous mines is a problem, due to the fact that we have not only the ordinary mine accidents to guard against, but have also the ever present menace of a mine disaster involving a large number of human lives, and the destruction of valuable property. In looking over the reports of mine disasters throughout the country in the past several years, we find that methane gas, coming in contact with an ignition agency of some kind, has been the source of at least 75 per cent of our mine explosions. Coal dust, of course, plays its part in propagating the explosive action throughout the mine workings and rendering it more violent and destructive; nevertheless, the initial ignition of a body of explosive gas-sometimes of very small volume-has been the primer for the large majority of our mine disasters. We find also, that the places of initial ignition are most frequently found at the working faces, or in close proximity thereto. This is mainly due to the following reasons: First-The working faces are, as a rule, the places where methane gas is most freely generated. Second: They are places that are most poorly ventilated. Third-They are the places where ignition agencies are most frequently found. The sources of ignition, as a rule, consist of naked lights, the shooting -of shots, defective flame safety lamps, and electrical arcs. The problem, then, in the operation of gaseous mines, is primarily to so ventilate the working faces that an explosive mixture is not likely to occur, and to endeavor to keep away from the working faces all sources of ignition. To do both of these things may seem impossible. Nevertheless, by working along both of these directions, a great many disasters can be avoided. The efficient ventilation of the working faces is paramount. By efficient ventilation, we mean the continuous passing of large volumes of air at the working faces. This can only be accomplished by adequate ventilating equipment, capable of being driven by at least two independent and distinct sources of power, together with large, clean, straight air courses which are free of short turns, constructed areas, and leaky doors and stoppings. In other words, furnish a suitable course for its travel through the mine. Many of us sharpen our pencils and rack our brains to properly estimate the proper size pump and pipe equipment that may be needed to handle a certain amount of water. We estimate the size of copper conductors to a nicety. We immediately rush to repair leaks in our water, compressed air or electric lines. But how many of us give serious thought to the travel of the air through our mines, the health and safety-giving fluid on which so much depends! In driving air courses, a certain economical cross-sectional area should be adopted and maintained as standard. When turns are necessary, they should be made with long radius curves, and the cross-sectional area should be increased on the curves. All entry stoppings should preferably be built of monolithic concrete, with suitable hitches into floor and ribs, and after the concrete has set, they should be examined and leaks due to shrinkage and settling should be eliminated. Overcasts and their approaches should have cross-sectional areas larger than the entries leading to them, to allow for the sudden change of direction, bearing in mind that air wants to travel in straight lines. In the early development of a property, ample provision should be made in the size of the main entry pillars to allow for the driving of additional

Jan 1, 1925

By R. R. Knill

With the advent of mechanical loading the need of definite information has become more apparent. The co-ordination of all the individual units of operation has become very necessary From these two essential features in running a mechanized coal mine has come the demand for the "time study." The time study is nothing more or less than the recording of each operation together with the time of clay or the total time expended during a period of work. Using the latter, it is impossible to have information showing just when each piece of work was clone and to what extent they overlap. The studies used here are of the former type, being based on the recording of the operation together with the time of day so that the details of performance of the machine or crew may be followed from starting to quitting time by' referring to the graph upon which the study is taken.

Jan 1, 1928

The morning session opened at 9:00 a.m. and was presided over by Mr. Don Ross, Manager of Mines, Kaiser Steel Corporation,- Sunnyside, Utah. The first speaker was Mr. S. W. Zanolli, Partner in Law Firm of Webster and Kilcullen, Washington, D.C. Mr. Zanolli was born and raised in a coal mining community of Fredericktown, Washington County, Pennsylvania. He was educated at Washington and Jefferson College and graduate schools of the University of Pittsburgh. He served as an infantry officer in the European Theatre of operations during World War 11. He worked as' a handloader at Vesta No. 5 Mine of Jones & Laughlin during summers while attending Washington and Jefferson College. He worked at a variety of production jobs at No. 7 Mine. of Island Creek Coal Co. of Holden, West Virginia. Assigned to a variety of industrial relations assignments at Island Creek Coal' Company during 1949-51, attaining position of Supervisor of Personnel and Labor Relations. Served in many industrial relations assignments at U.S. Steel Corp. headquarters during 1953.-1967, attaining a position of Personnel Director-Heavy Products Operations. In January, 1968" he became a member of the Bituminous Coal Operators Association-as Executive Vice President. This past year he went back to practicing law and is a member of the Law Firm of Webster and Kilcullen, Washington, D.C. He is married and has five children.

Jan 1, 1973

By W. F. Murray

Coal mining as an occupation, is hazardous under the most, ideal conditions. Confronted with this inescapable fact, every possible emphasis is placed by the Phelps Dodge Corporation, at the Dawson mines upon the employment of every means available for safeguarding its employes from the dangers attending their vocation. Accidents have a human aspect and a direct bearing upon the well-being of the workmen themselves. They cause a loss of wages, suffering and often privation of the employe and those dependent upon him. In case of death, his children are often forced into the wage earning class without preparation to fight the battles of life, with the result that the efficiency of the next generation is lowered. Dr. Jones, formerly of the war industries board, is responsible for the following statement. "Accident prevention as it is now conducted is principally a matter of education and not merely one of protection against physical hazards as frequently believed. In fact, the last ten years experience in accident prevention has demonstrated conclusively two things: 1. That three-fourths of all deaths and serious injuries in industry can be prevented. 2. In the industries doing the most efficient work, two-thirds have been accomplished thru organization and education as against one-third accomplished by means of mechanical safeguards or equipment. Experience in the past decade has conclusively proven that the work of accident prevention is not a "one man job" that satisfactory results can be secured only thru the highest measure of co-operation between the employer and employe, and this by means of organization. The employer must be vitally interested in the work if he expects to educate his men to share the responsibility with him. The men must be given a part to perform in it, if their interest is to be aroused and maintained. It is only thru organization that this is possible. In this connection it is interesting to note the results obtained by the Old Dominion Co. of Globe, Ariz., in reducing accidents after the organization of their safety department. The O. D. Co. are pioneers in the adoption of the workmens safety committees and and the results obtained by this, company after their safety work was well organized are truly wonderful. For the years 1913 to 1916, inclusive, at which time the safety work was not well organized, there were a total of 18 fatal accidents, the years 1917 to 1920, inclusive, was a period of intensive safety work, during which time there were only three fatal accidents, none having occured during 1919.

Jan 1, 1922

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Before we open the discussion on the Utah mining laws, I want to bring out what I consider a slight misunderstanding on some of the things that I said this forenoon relative to our comparison of accidents. I did not mean to infer that we, as mine officials, are satisfied we have done the best we can to eliminate the accidents, when I was talking about a four-to- one comparison. I do not want any- one to get the idea in their heads that I do not think we are doing all we can. There is not any of us who can state that, even if we better these figures. It is the general understanding that these figures are based upon ratios per thousand man shifts and not upon the tonnage basis that we use. If it were based upon a tonnage basis, I think the figures would be pretty nearly reversed, for we are producing from two to four tons more per man than they do in Great Britain. The discussion will now be continued as I said this morning. There is a gentleman in the audience here that is as guilty of making these laws as I was, and I am quite sure when speaking he will confine himself to the subject of Utah Mining Laws and the prospective results. Before Mr. Monay starts with his paper, I want it understood that this discussion must be finished by 2:30 for the reason that we have still quite a lot of business before us this afternoon.

Jan 1, 1925

PRESIDENT MOSES: I thank you, Mr. Emrick. Mr. Shubart would like to supplement your paper with another article. SECRETARY SHUBART: My paper really should not supplement Mr. Emrick's paper, because I secured some data from him, I knew Mr. Emrick had had a great deal of experience in shearing and I thought he could give you some useful data. (Here Mr. Shubart read the following:) "For the past two years, there has been considerable discussion among coal mining men concerning the advantages of a shearing cut in addition to the undercut, in mine work. We have had a number of requests for information on sheared coal. We were asked questions like these: What percentage increase in lump can be obtained from sheared coal? What has been the experience of mine men who have employed the shearing cut? Is the shearing cut a means of increasing the lump content? If so, is it increased to such an extent as to warrant the installation of shearing machines? Upon investigation it was found that no one could give us any definite information on the subject as no one had weighed separately the grades of coal produced from' the shearing cut. With a view of getting this information first-hand, the Goodman Manufacturing Company built up a shearing machine to be used in experimental work only. The officials of the Troy Coal Company were eager to share in the expense of obtaining this information, so that in May of this year we shipped to their mines our first type 319 shearing machine. The Troy Coal Company operates a mine at Troy, Illinois, in the No. 6 seam and produces about 275 tons daily. The coal seam averages five and one-half feet in thickness. Previous to the arrival of the shearing machine the coal was undercut six feet deep by a' Goodman Shortwall Machine. To break down the coal required two shots in the entries and three in the rooms. The percentage of lump measured over two-inch screens, averaged 58.2 per cent. The conditions of the mine were very favorable for obtaining accurate weights on the amount of lump and slack coal run over the shaker screens. The shearing machine easily cut the entire tonnage of the mine so that all coal dumped into the railroad cars had been produced from a shearing cut, in addition to an undercut. Accurate records were kept of the railroad weights and front this data the percentages of lump and slack were computed. During the month of June the percentage of lump produced over two-inch shaker screens was 69.9 per cent. This result demonstrated that the introduction of the shearing cut had increased the percentage of lump twenty per cent. The entries were driven ten feet wide and the rooms thirty feet wide The shearing cut was made near the center of the face in all places. A hole was drilled in each rib and the coal shot down with one-half the powder required when the places had been undercut only. The coal was broken down to the back of the cut so that very little pick work was necessary to load it out. The benefits derived from the shearing cut were as follows: 1. Increased percentage of lump, thus increasing the average price of coal per ton. 2. Preservation of a tender top due to the decreased amount of explosive used. 3. Facilitated handling of coal by the miner thus increasing the tonnage per man. 4. Eliminated coal yardage in entries and crosscuts of ten feet or less in width for the reason that the shearing cut provides a loose end from which to shoot the coal. This applies to the union fields only, as the non-union mines do not pay for coal yardage. Based on a price of $2.50 for lump coal and $1.25 for slack coal, the average price per ton was increased

Jan 1, 1926

By W. R. Deeths

The Great Plains Coal Gasification Project is the first commercial scale grass roots synthetic fuels (SNG) plant to be built in the United States. The plant will be constructed in two phases, with each phase producing 125 million cubic feet per day of pipeline quality (970 BTU per cubic foot) substitute natural gas from lignite coal. The plant is located north of Beulah in Mercer County, North Dakota. The first phase complex, when completed, will cost about 1.2 billion dollars and will include all necessary process units, oxygen production, steam generation, coal handling and preparation, utilities and infrastructure. The plant will be owned and operated by, the Great Plains Coal Gasification Associates, a partnership consisting of the following companies: ANG Coal Gasification Company, Mid Con Corporation, Tenneco, Inc., Transco Energy Company and Pacific Lighting Co. The Project began in late 1973 with a Phase I feasibility study and site selection study. The feasibility study was completed in 1975, at which time Kaiser Engineers and C. E. Lummus, the two engineering contractors, proceeded with a Phase II conceptual engineering design for the project. The culmination of the Phase II work was the publication of a detailed scope definition and control estimate, which was to become the cost guideline for procurement and plant construction. Following an engineering slowdown period in 1979, due to continuing delays in regulatory procedures, detailed engineering effort was reinstituted in early 1980 and by mid-1981 was approximately 35 percent complete. The total home office engineering effort amounts to approximately 3.5 million man hours of work split between Kaiser Engineers and Lummus. These totals exclude the engineering effort expended by Lurgi of Germany in the process design. The gasification plant shares the site and certain other facilities with the Basin Electric Power Station. Among these facilities are the plant access railroad, peripheral drainage ditch and raw water supply system. In addition, the gasification plant will draw its power directly from the Basin main substation, and Basin will receive coal from the gasification plant, consisting of the coal fines which cannot be gasified in the Lurgi units. The overall construction program covers a period of approximately 44 months with mechanical completion and initial gas production slated for late 1984. Craft labor requirements amount to approximately 11.5 million man hours and the work force peaked in excess of 4,500 people. In anticipation of an early resolution of both Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ruling and Department of Energy loan guarantee commitments, certain work on the site was commenced during 1980. This work consisted of site rough grading, driving of piles, and erection of three of the plant auxilliary buildings. Orders and subcontracts were placed for compressors, pumps, electrical equipment, material handling equipment, piping, structural steel, boilers, oxygen plant and cooling towers. Over 40 major Federal, State and local permits were required. Among these were such diverse permits as: ? Soil conservation ?Railroad and pipeline rights of way ? Certificates of site compatibility ? Permits for structures in areas controlled by the ? U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ? Environmental permits required by the North ? Dakota Department of Public Health. The preparation of an Environmental Impact Report began in September of 1973. FPC (now FERC) guidelines and North Dakota special requirements were followed except that, at the time, the highly structured form of environmental impact statements we know today was not in use. We were required to develop a number of new sampling and evaluation techniques and reporting procedures at a time when the requirements were vague and often contradictory. In March 1975, field studies were completed and submitted to the Bureau of Recla¬mation, which then began to prepare its own EIS. Two years later, in May 1977, public hearings began on the Project. The hearings and public review of the report drew over 400 comments or questions. Responses o the comments were in¬corporated in a Final Environmental Impact Statement issued in January 1978. In March 1975, the original filing was made for an FPC Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity which included: ? A technical feasibility study ? An Environmental Impact Assessment ? An Economic and financial feasibility assessment. An amended filing was submitted in 1976 to build the plant in two phases because studies then indicated that the cost of the plant had increased substantially. A second amended filing was submitted in 1977 to reflect the involvement of Peoples Gas (now Mid-Con Corporation) in the Project. At the time, it was believed that an FPC Certificate could be issued by December 1977. However, approval would be contingent on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation having a complete Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Project. In 1977, with the formation of the Department of Energy, the FPC

Jan 1, 1984

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: I have every reason to know Mr. Pryde was carrying out some experiment a while ago in some of his mines. He and I had a little correspondence on the question, and I think he may have a word or two to say about it. He has not been on his feet today at all. I will ask Mr. Pryde to tell us what he has to say. MR. PRYDE: I have not very much to say about shooting coal with permissible powder as far as slack is concerned because we are not in the commercial business. All of our coal goes to the railroad and a very large part of it is crushed for use in the stokers of the locomotives. We are on a 100 per cent permissible powder basis and as far as I am able to see, I do not believe that the percentage of slack is increasing with its use. We find it hard to convince our commercial neighbors of this fact because they are naturally very much against increasing their percentage of slack on ac- count of the low price received for this grade of coal. I, personally, believe that where a change is made from black powder to permissible powder the percentage of slack will be increased for a time because the miners have been accustomed to using black powder and they are rather suspicious about going to the permissible powder and I do not believe that we can blame them very much. So the tendency with them is to use too much powder. We have gradually overcome this, although, as I said before, we have not kept close track of the production of slack. However, we try to get as large an amount of lump coal as possible. Broadly speaking, I can say from observation that in my opinion there is very little difference in the percentage of slack with the use of the permissible powder that we have today than there was with the use of black powder. I also get this information from our mine superintendents. Mr. Peterson and the other explosive men have been very helpful to us in the use of permissible powder and I confess I have to take everything back that I said several years ago. At that time I was against permissible powder, particularly on account of the cost, but, with the newer permissible powder, we have gotten the cost down very well. I know today that the cost of permissible powder in the coal mines of the Union Pacific Coal Company is less than when we were using black powder. I know this because of the fact that we kept a record of the number of tons we got with black powder, and the number of tons we get with permissible powder compares very favorably in cost. I know this, too, because of the fact that our employes, except in the first few weeks of using permissible powder, have made no demand upon us for any in- crease ill pay to offset any added cost that might accrue in the use of permissible powder and the fact that they have asked for no increase is very conclusive proof to me that it is not

Jan 1, 1925

By D. C. McClure

MR. McCLURE: Mr. Chairman, you sprang a surprise on me; I really came over here for a good time. Gentlemen, I am not at all qualified to pose as an expert on pulverized fuel; I have merely been making some rather interesting observations, and unfortunately at the present time, a great deal of substantial data, the technical data, I don't happen to have with me; it is still in the process of being calculated, but I will be very glad to tell you some of the observations as I have made them, and in as truthful and complete a way as I can. The question of how we would handle fuel became a very pressing subject in this new Valmont electric plant, which is now under progress. We have studied the methods of burning fuel for a number of years on different types of stokers at the existing plants in Denver; we are burning it with a natural draft chain grate and with underfeed and with forced draft chain grates, and I am very frank to confess at the present time that I have no answer as far as stokers are concerned for a better solution of the problem of burning lignite. In other words, I could not tell you that this or that is a better type of stoker to use for that coal. However, to boil the thing down, after considerable trials, the underfed stoker was chosen as the one most adaptable for the utilizing of lignite fuel if stokers are to be used. In other words, the chain grate was put aside. I might say in support of the chain grate, the prime reason for which that type of stoker was condemned, as far as lignite goes, is the initial investment charge and the large maintenance which is involved.

Jan 1, 1923

At 5:30 p.m. a social hour was held for all RMCMI registrants on the lawn area south of the Gondola Lift House. This was followed by a western steak fry and dancing to the country western band, "The Cat's Night Out". MORNING SESSION Tuesday, June 29,1982 RMCMI golfers came out in force for a shot-gun start of the Championship Golf Tournament at Vail Municipal Golf Course which began its first session at 7:30 a.m. followed by a second at 1:15 p.m. The tournament was headed by William Carpender, chairman and his committee members Gary Bennewitz, Jr. and Gene Christmann. RMCMI members were treated to early morning rolls and coffee in the Conference Center preceding a showing of the RMCMI slide/tape program on enhancing the image of coal mining, by telling the story of the Institute. Following this, the meeting was called to order by President McKeever at 8:30 a.m. when he introduced Mr. Carl Terzian who presented a workshop entitled "Sure You Have an Image - But What Kind?". MR. McKEEVER: Good morning Carl. I see you're ready to address this bright and busy tail audience. One of the things that I really want to point out this morning and I knew we would have a second chance with Carl Terzian but Carl is someone that will leave a good lasting impression on you and what he will hopefully be talking about, as I remember, is that what he's saying here can be used personally, or for company, or for the Institute, or anything else on image. Carl is Chairman of the Board of Carl Terzian Associates. He is a prominent author, lecturer and consultant. He is headquartered in Los Angeles and he's nationally known: governmental affairs, man¬agerial development and executive speech training and has served nearly four hundred clients since 1969. Each year he travels nearly 300,000 miles to address conventions, conferences and sales and management meetings as a motivational speaker. Carl has been speaking professionally for more than twenty-five years. He was graduate magna cum laude 1957 from the University of Southern California where he was elected Phi Beta Kappa and student body president. He later served as State Department goodwill ambassador for President Eisenhower; public relations director for Lutheran Hospital Society of Southern California; dean and professor of political science and speech at Woodbury University and public affairs director for architect Charles Luckman. He has been honored for his civic and philanthropic and professional accomplishments by the Congress and State Department, California Assembly and Senate, City and County of Los Angeles, Her Majesty the Queen of England, and six times by the Freedom Foundation of Valley Forge. Carl, welcome to our Coal Mining Institute and it's been kind of a historical situation on Tuesday morning that we will probably have people straggling in after that wonderful steak fry that we had last night. You're very welcome to come and takeover the command. MR. TERZIAN: Thank you very much Ira. This gives me an opportunity for those who were in my luncheon audience yesterday to again thank you for giving me the opportunity of that platform and for the very kind comments that were made following the address. Those of us who had been working for some months with Ira, Charlie, Betsy and many

Jan 1, 1982

[Proceedings VOL. II. PART VI. CONTENTS PAGE A Few of the Adverse Conditions Encountered in Mining Coal in the Utah Fields, by J. B. Forrester ..185 Growth of the Electric Power System of the Union Pacific Coal Company at Rock Springs, Wyoming, by D. C. McKeehan ?.. 193 Screening and Preparing Coal at the Tipple, by Benedict Shubart ?.199 Coal Mine Accounting, by E. R. Gibson List of Members ?.211]

Jan 1, 1921

Chairman: Mr. R. C. Heers, Project Manager, Kaiser Company, Inc. CHAIRMAN HEERS: Fellows, I can't say it gives me a lot of pleasure to call this meeting together because I would rather somebody else had the job. I haven't anything to say this morning and I think the sooner we get started with the fellows that have something to say, the better pleased everybody will be. The first speaker this morning is Mr. John Griffen of the McNally Pittsburgh Company. He has a talk on coal preparation and I am pleased to present Mr. Griffen.

Jan 1, 1947

[Adams, Douglas K General Electric Co., P.O. Box 2331; Denver 1, Colo. Allan, Andrew Thompson Creek Coal & Coke Corp., Glenwood Springs, Colo. Allen, Earl W Mine Safety-Appliances Co.; 257 Rio Grand St., Salt Lake City, Utah Alston, George L Mine Safety Appliances Co., 201 N. Braddock, Pittsburgh 8, Pa. Anderson, Nephi W Standard Colombine Coal Co., Scofield, Utah Anderson, W. J Texaco, Inc., 845 N. 5th E., Price, Utah Ankeny, Marling J U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1822 Metzerott Rd., Adelphi, Md. Archer, Bryon J., Jr Peabody Coal Co., 421 Glenwood St., Grand Junction, Colo. Arentzen, E. M Lee-Norse Co., P.O. Box 582, Charleroi, Pa. Arentzen, L. E Lee-Norse Co., 6030 W. 55th P1., Arvada, Colo. Arentzen, Rolf F Lee-Norse Co., Box 582, Charleroi, Pa. Artis, Cliff E Big Horn Coal Co., 247 Sherman Ave., Sheridan, Wyo. Atchison, Lee Atchison Construction Co., Drawer D, Aztec, N. Mex.]

Jan 1, 1965

[Page Officers of the Institute 5 Minutes of Twenty-first Meeting 9 The U. S. Fuel Company's Tipple at the Hiawatha Mine John M. Jennings 11 Some Experiences With Mechanical Loading in Central Pennsylvania¬ O. G. Sharrer 13 Mechanical Loading Underground- A. W. Dickinson 25 Operation by Long-Face Conveyor Method at Sweetwater Mine Glen A. Knox 39 Discussion of Mechanical Loading 44 Discussion-Safety in Mechanical Loading 45 New Steel Tipple, Spring Canyon, Utah- G. A. Murphy 46 A Theory on the Cause of Spontaneous Combustion-C. P. Crawford... 48 Rock Dusting in the West-D. Harrington 50 Mudite-L. C. Clare 57 Discussion of Harrington's and Clare's Papers 59 Material for Rock Dust-Prepared Discussion-Edward K. Judd 60 Tipple and Mine of the Columbia Steel Corporation-T. C. Harvey 63 Mechanical Stoking of Domestic Fuel-Joseph Harrington 67 The Garrison Automatic Domestic Stoker-Lloyd Garrison 70 Discussion of Domestic Stokers 71]

Jan 1, 1925

I have sketches of the radiators, and on this sketch up in here (indicating) we show the line from the fan-exhaust steam from the fan, and the trip spray at the mouth of the mine, which is usually near the tipple, the set of radiators on each side of the entry, exhaust steam exhausting in by the radiators, the small atomizers which I mentioned, and the man sprinkling at the hose. There are times, when at different times we have a man sprinkling during the day time, when he is out of the way, and during the night, sprinkling on the motor roads. I will leave that print up here and let you look at it and if you have any questions you wish answered, Mr. McAllister and myself will be glad to answer them. (Applause.) PRESIDENT PRYDE: . I am going to ask Mr. Hair to leave the sketch on the wall. From the back part of the hall, it is hard to see what is there. The figures are very important. I think one member of this association will be glad to know the cost of water, Friend Littlejohn. MR. LITTLEJOHN: I don't know as I want to ask any questions. The only thing I' would say about the cost there, it is very close to that cost that we tabulated for the Utah Fuel Company at the Utah mines here some time ago. We have not tabulated lately. It may be a little over that at the present time if you take the. labor costs and the material. costs. As I remember, some time ago we did get up some figures and it was, as near as I can remember, exactly two cents per, ton for the labor and material. We haven't got the radiators, etc., that the C. F. & I. have in their mines there, probably due to the fact that we have no shortage of water. We have plenty of that there, and our system is absolutely nothing more nor less than pipe lines, hose and nozzles and the man at the end of the nozzle. PRESIDENT PRYDE: I would like to ask Mr. Hair about the cost of the steam. MR. HAIR: That steam we use there in exhausting, of course, is from the fan, and we have a back pressure valve set right here (indicating), from three to four and sometimes five pounds, and the exhaust from the fan was a five or six inch exhaust, and our exhaust into the mine is nothing less than eight inches, and is practically low back pressure you might say, and all those large radiators, that I spoke of, are heated by live steam, and these probably take a little more coal, but as to just what that cost is I couldn't say. As far as the exhaust steam is concerned, you might as well use it in the mine as discharge it outside. MR. HARRINGTON: Mr. Hair, I would like to ask, is this installation on an intake haulage-main haulage course? MR. HAIR: Yes, sir. MR. HARRINGTON: In the winter time, when it is, say between five or ten degrees below zero, how far into that haulage road does the fogging go? MR. HAIR: Well, that goes in half a mile, sometimes in 3,000 feet. MR. HARRINGTON: Wouldn't that interfere pretty seriously with the motor? MR. HAIR: To some extent, but I wouldn't say seriously enough to interefere with the production of coal. We have one mine we are working in two and three-quarters miles. Our mines are all pretty deep, and we don't find it objectionable. I don't believe that it interferes in the production of coal. I don't believe it makes any more difference between a real cold day in winter time than it does in the summer time. MR. HARRINGTON: I was down at Dawson, and in their mines they have an installation very much like Mr. Hair describes, but we went in there one night and stayed all night, getting a certain amount of data, and the fog was intense for-a full half mile; so intense that you could hardly see your hand in front of your face-see your hand that far (indicating) dis-

Jan 1, 1924

The final session on Wednesday morn¬ing was given over to a panel discussion of safety questions submitted by members of the institute. Mr. Murray presided, and Lyman Fearn, chief, Wyoming Dept. of Mines & Minerals, Rock Springs, Wyo., was moderator. Members of the panel were: John A. Garcia, chief mine inspector, New Mexico; Leonard Ford, mine foreman, Frederick- mine, CF&I, Valdez, Colo.; A. C. Moschetti, chief, coal mine inspection branch, USBM, Denver; Kirk V. Cammack, mining engineer, USGS, Denver; Joel N. Van Sant, chief engineer, St. Louis, Rocky Mountain & Pacific Coal Co., Raton, N. M.; Emery Olsen, safety engineer, coal mine and quarries, U. S. Steel Corp., Dragerton, Utah; F. J. Peternell, safety engineer, Union Pacific Coal Co., Rock Springs; and J. J. Reddy, mine inspector, Colorado Dept. of Mines, Grand Junction, Colo. On a question concerning the effect of roof-bolting on the maintenance of a breakline in pillar removal, Mr. Van Sant reported that some experience at his company's mines indicate that wood supports are not necessary to make the break although shooting is sometimes done to get it. Furthermore, bolting improves the roof in these pillar areas and extraction has increased about 20%. Mr. Fearn concurred in describing operations in parts of Wyoming.

Jan 1, 1953