Search Documents

By ELIHU THOMSON

IN 1877, Professor Thomson delivered at the Franklin Institute, [Philadelphia, five lectures on electricity. The object of the lectures and the demonstrations, which were numerous and many of them original even to the employment of special apparatus constructed by the lecturer, was to show clearly that electricity, of whatever name, was the same., differing only in tension (as it was termed) and in the current flowing, or quantity (the old term), in steadiness or in wave-like character. In those days, the textbooks divided the subject into statical and dynamic electricity, with sub-divisions such as frictional electricity, voltaic electricity, magneto electricity, electromagnetism, thermo electricity, and animal electricity. The well-known Ruhmkorff coil,' or spark coil as it is now called (as when used for the ignition of automobiles), was employed to step, up a battery current to a high-tension discharge which would charge condensers, such as Leyden jars.

Jan 1, 1921

By Kristopher John Shelswell

The work in this paper describes the theory, development and analysis of a computer model simulating a mine operation moving material using concurrent decline ramp truck haulage and skipping practices. This simulation was designed specifically to assess the performance of the truck haulage component and to expand on the scope and capabilities of traditional TKM fleet calculations. Haulage fleet simulation results were similar to TKM calculations for the lower to moderate production rate cases. However, comparisons of ramp-up and high production rate scenarios indicated that the simulation model was significantly more sensitive to operating practices and factors not accounted for by calculations derived when using a single TKM figure. Given the proper calibration of inputs and logic, the simulation model was additionally capable of providing information associated with general mine operations efficiency. Further benefits of the simulation model over a TKM approach included logistical assessments such as production schedule feasibility, productivity trade-off quantifications for proposed operating practices, and the validation of mine resource utilization scheduling. The simulation model was able to expand on traditional methods to approach planning and logistics by considering factors such as truck queuing, real-time traffic interactions, random events, and competition for resources on mine productivity.

May 1, 2013

By Bill Dershowitz

Consider a deep gold orebody with grade of 4 g/t (0.11 oz/st). At the time of this writing, with gold prices at historic highs, it could be a good, but not great, prospect. But if it is a vein deposit, and those veins are 200 g/t (5.8 oz/st), it would be significantly more attractive if there was a way to produce directly from those veins, leaving the rest of the rock in place. [Figure 1 The red around each of the four injector wells shows areas of high pressure, where the lixiviant fluid is pumped into the rock mass, with orange and yellow indicating dissipated pressure. The black lines indicate some of the fracture pathways through which the lixiviant, with absorbed metal, flows toward the central recovery well where low pressure is indicated in blue. Lixiviant is pumped out through the recovery well. Image courtesy of Golder Associates.] There is a way to do this, in situ leach (ISL) or solution mining. It has been a viable commercial technology for more than five decades.

Jan 1, 2011

By A L. de Ambrosis, F M. Weir, M Fowler

Traditional kinematic and statistical analyses of geological structure for geotechnical engineering applications, while considered industry standard practice, have some limitations and unrealistic assumptions. An improved approach involves a discrete fracture network (DFN), a numerical model that explicitly represents how defects may be spatially distributed through the rock mass. The DFN technique utilises the structural data in stochastic analyses to give a range of possible models used for visualisation and stability analyses.The early development of the DFN approach was largely associated with modelling fractured hydrocarbon reservoirs and nuclear waste isolation programs. With recent improvements to computational power it has become recognised internationally as a valuable tool for modelling some geomechanical problems encountered when designing excavations in fractured rock masses. For tunnelling or slope stability projects DFN modelling provides visualisation of a rock mass and identification of likely failure mechanisms.This paper presents a suite of DFN modelling undertaken for the design of a tunnel within the Ashfield Shale unit of the Sydney Basin, Australia. The necessary input parameters and derivation of these, along with the importance of both an accurate engineering geology model and validation of the synthetic fracture network are demonstrated. Multiple realisations of the DFN were analysed to provide an indication of the number and volume of unstable blocks for the proposed tunnel geometry, enhancing support design. One fracture network realisation was sliced along multiple sections for use in finite element modelling.CITATION:Weir, F M, de Ambrosis, A L and Fowler, M, 2014. Discrete fracture network modelling for tunnel design in the Sydney Basin, in Proceedings 15th Australasian Tunnelling Conference 2014 , pp 219–226 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Sep 17, 2014

By S Rogers, D Stead, E Eberhardt

The last decade has seen a major increase in use of the discrete fracture network (DFN) approach applied to cave mining problems, often integrated within more complex geomechanical simulations. Because the value of the DFN model directly depends on the quality and quantity of available field data, there is the need to apply dedicated mapping procedures to collect sufficient structural data at the required engineering scale. This paper attempts to address several key questions about DFN modelling; for example: are current methods for fracture mapping suitable for DFN modelling? What are the critical parameters that we need to measure and what do we need to change in the current practice? Particularly at the earlier stages of a cave project, engineers may have to account for the lack of appropriate data, which manifests itself in the form of increased uncertainty and the difficulty to characterise variability in an objective manner using a limited set of data. DFN models could in principle be generated using limited data by assuming statistical distributions for the sampled parameters; however, engineers would need to be aware of the implications that such limited knowledge (and increased uncertainty) would have on stability analysis, fragmentation analysis and mine design. When used correctly, a DFN approach offers practitioners the opportunity to:maximise the use of fracture data collected from mapping of rock exposuresgenerate more realistic synthetic rock mass modelsprovide estimates of natural fragmentation that also account for rock mass variability.CITATION:Elmo, D, Eberhardt, E, Stead, D and Rogers, S, 2016. Discrete fracture network modelling – importance of accounting for data uncertainty and variability, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 845–852 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By Greg Yuriy

Over the past two decades, Vale Canada has used discrete-event simulation in a key role to support many underground mining studies. Traditionally, general purpose simulation software was developed for manufacturing and service applications. Not until recently have Mine Designers and Simulation Specialists been able to model the dynamics of underground mining scenarios without extensive manipulation of the inherent tools and entities contained within these simulation environments. This paper discusses Vale Canada?s past experiences with a variety of simulation software, describing model development methods and highlighting some of the lessons learned. The paper concludes with a review of recently considered software and provides a framework of desired attributes/functions for modeling mining scenarios.

Aug 1, 2013

The Role of the Drilling Contractor BY FERRIS E. SAINSBURY Ron Haxby, Occidental Minerals What is the best method for drilling a 12-in. diam hole to a depth of 1200 ft and maintaining the deflection within 25ft from vertical? Ferris Sainsbury: In order to drill a 12-111. hole down to 1200 ft, In most places you would have to employ a rotary tricone bit With a down-the-hole hammer, I expect by that depth significant Inflows of water would be experienced Even with foams, we would not be able to get the water out of a hole of that diameter So the down-the-hole tricone method of drilling would be best. To keep it straight, we would probably employ the largest square drill stem compatible with the diameter of the hole. Ron Haxby: Is it common in drilling contracts to put in a vertical hole clause? Ferris Sainsbury: You can put in the vertical hole clause Ron Haxby: Does it cost more? Ferris Sainsbury: Normally, if the hole deviates, the driller can correct it with deflection wedges and will charge it back to you at cost, plus 10% or somewhere along that range Any drill hole has a tendency to go perpendicular to the dip, and there are times when stabilization systems are not successful in preventing the hole from turning into the dip of the formation. The only solution, in this situation, is to go in with an oriented wedge and kick the hole back out.

Jan 1, 1979

By C. J. Pritchard, R. E. Gundersen

I commend the authors on examining an interesting method of shaft lining and attempting to improve safety in a dangerous environment by remotely installing the shaft lining. It is important, though, to not trade off shaft lining safety for long-term mine safety by lining an intake shaft with combustible material. In many operations, the mine utilities are installed next to the lining of the intake shaft, supplying a possible ignition source if damaged or overloaded. Although the polyurethane studied in the paper is of relatively high density, no mention is made of the flame retardency of the samples. When exposed to heat, small amounts of polyurethane will melt and bum but are extinguished when the heat source is removed. If large surface areas of combustible polyurethane - a tunnel or mine shaft- are exposed to ignition heat sources that are not removed or extinguished early, an uncontrollable, fuel rich fire may result with high carbon monoxide levels, low oxygen concentrations, and greatly increased burning rates that can have devastating effects on the ventilation system and miners' safety. Although these heavy polyurethanes lend themselves to a "pouring" application around the annulus of the shaft liners and is a continuous process, past experience with atomizing and frothing polyurethane spray systems indicates a high degree of maintenance and operator attention to the nozzle1 delivery system. This may require more miner's time to be spent in the shaft maintaining the foam system, negating some of the safety advantages of the system. If polyurethane foams are to be used in mines, they must be of the highest quality available in terms of flame spread, heat emitted while curing, and contaminants emitted while curing and spraying. In addition, employees must be given adequate training and be thoroughly informed in all aspects of polyurethane foam safety procedures. As witnessed by our fellow miners in South Africa, we can accept no less.

Jan 1, 1991

Contribution by W.D. Ortlepp? The authors are to be commended for publishing their interesting view of an aspect of deep-level mining technology that is becoming increasingly topical and vitally important. This is the second paper in the journal within four months to deal with the crucial needs of highly stressed tunnel construction, the other being the paper on the design and testing of rockburst support in the February 1994 issue. Both papers re-examine important innovative ideas that are more than a quarter of a century old, but that have not yet been implemented by the industry. It is to be hoped that they will now, taken together, serve as a new starting point for a definitive examination of what constitutes proper tunnel-support design. There can be no question that the need to develop a design approach that will solve the problems of tunnelling at depths of 4000 m or more has now become crucial. Contribution by A.M.J. Vervoort* Although the overall paper is very interesting and the future research (comparison between numerical simulations and underground measurements) will be very challenging, I would like to make some remarks regarding the set-up of the numerical model and the interpretation of the elastic results.

Jan 1, 1995

By R. F. Kovar, R. N. Torbin, R. E. Gundersen

I have to express my .surprise and must send a note of warning concerning the use of polyurethane foam as described in a paper by R.N. Torbin and R.F. Kovar, entitled "Innovative Shaft Lining Method," published in your February 1989 edition. In September, 1986, 177 miners lost their lives when they were exposed to fumes downwind from a fire in a tunnel lined with polyurethane foam. Whilst polyurethane exhibits reasonable fire retardent properties in small-scale tests, mass use in a tubular configuration, exacerbated by the furnace effect of cross-radiation, can lead to a rapid, uncontrollable conflagration. I do not wish these comments to detract from the engineering achievements of the authors but rather to sound a loud warning as to the application of the system. Any shaft designed for human access- be it for transport or shaft work - and any intake airway, should not consider the use of polyurethane foam. It only needs a slip with a cutting torch or an electric fault to initiate a disaster. Many countries have banned or restricted the use of polyurethane foam in the workings of a mine and maybe alternative foams (e.g. phenolics) can be used or developed

Jan 1, 1991

Discussions of the paper of Mr. Gayley read by title at the Lake Superior hieeting, but first presented at the New York meeting of the Iron and Steel Institute, October, 1904 (see p. 746). With the exception of Mr. Pourcel's discussion (p. 1038), these papers are here published under a mutual agreement between the Councils of the two Institutes, and will also be found, with others, in the Journal of the Iron and Steel In-slitute for the pear 1904, Mr. E. Windsor Richards, Past-President,' said that in 1799 Mr. Dawson, of Low Moor, read a paper before a scientific society in York pointing out the great diff'erence in the moisture of the air going into the blast-furnace in the hot months of the year and in the winter months. A cold blast-furnace was a very sensitive instrument, and showed this very clearly, for in June, July and August the furnace did not drive so well; it did not make the quality of iron and required more fuel; so that Mr. Gayley was on the right road to effect an enormous improvement in this direction. He considered that Mr. Gayley was on the way to great success, and hoped that the apparatus would not be a very expensive one. He supposed it mas too early for Mr. Gayley to let them know what the saviug was

Jan 1, 1905

JAmes E. Howard, Watertown, Mass.:—In connection with this paper, it is the desire of the Watertown laboratory to receive suggestions as to the lines of work and the particular direction along which the examination of the ingot-metal should proceed, and any suggestions so offered will be noted with care, and the tests conducted so as to embrace such features as it is thought desirable to have investigated. To me the question of structural continuity seems of para-

Jan 1, 1909

By Thomas Adair

Moderator-Thomas Adair is now a tunnel consultant with Perini Corp., Spring Lake, N.J. He has had 40 years experience in tunnel and shaft-sinking work in both soft and hard rock, as well as subaqueous rock. He has used moles in various locations and has traveled around the world studying the problems. SOME BRIEF COMMENTS ON "MOLES" by Thomas Adair We of the Perini Corp. have been, over the past 15 years, in the forefront of the battle to develop the mechanized miner. We have contributed much to pioneer, develop, and promote the use of the mining machine. Our money and talent have not been spared in this effort. However, we are sorry to say that as of the present time (1968), at least from the economic stand- point, this effort has not been very rewarding. But, I must say to those who are presently involved in the work of building mining machines, do not be discouraged. There is money in it. We of Perini Corp. know because we put it in there. It has been estimated that during the next 15 years, some $20 billion will be spent on underground excavation; more than 13 thousand miles of sub- surface tunnels will be excavated throughout the nation. An aggressive, properly structured research and development effort would produce, within the next five or ten years, a better excavation technology and improved boring system capable of reducing present costs drastically, with a resultant great saving. The time for this effort is now, but where the enabling money for this effort will come from, I have no idea. Machine builders should be encouraged to design and develop a shield- type boring machine capable of continuous mining through varying types of ground or rock by incorporating the possibility of making minor modifications such as change of bit type, power package, etc. Such a machine could

Jan 1, 1970

By C. J. Barber

This paper Donald describes how New Jersey Zinc Co. made surveys for a connection between the Ivanhoe and Van Mater shafts at Austinville, Va. Except to say that the two faces had to meet "accurately" on line and grade, Donald does not indicate the required precision. Assuming that there were 24 angles in the 1 ½ -mile traverse and 15 in the one-mile traverse, it can be shown that if the average error in plumbing each shaft was ±30" and the average error in measuring each traverse angle was ±10", then the average error at the point of connection would have been about ±1.9 ft normal to the line between the shafts. This calculation assumes that any errors in the triangulation would be negligible compared with the errors in the plumbings and traverses, and it also neglects taping errors. With no constant errors or blunders, the latter would be important only in lines normal to the line between the shafts.

Jan 7, 1959

By Maurice Grieves

GC. Waterman Mr. Grieves' paper on "Shaft Sinking Today--A Boring Business Tomorrow" in the Dec. 1981 issue of MINING ENGINEERING is an excellent description of recent improvements in speed and costs of shaft sinking. However, shaft boring techniques are not a recent development. In 1935-36, the Idaho Maryland Co. (gold), Grass Valley, CA, bored the vertical 1.5-m-diam Idaho No. 2 ventilation and supply shaft to a depth of 346 m. The equipment was designed and perfected by Branner Newsome and was, I believe, described in "Transactions." Pickands Mather later bored a 1.8-m-diam shaft to a depth of about 305 m using Newsome's design. The Idaho No. 2 shaft cut through hard gabbro, diabase dikes, soft serpentine, very incompetent ankeritized serpentine and a strong fault zone. The completed shaft did not require timber support; the fault zone was cemented. Equipment consisted of a rotating 1.5-m or 3-m core barrel with a slotted bottom which cut a 76-mm kerf. The cutting agent was chilled steel shot introduced into the slot as needed. The driving mechanism and core barrel were lowered into the shaft, the former secured to the wall and the inshaft "engineer" operated the motors which controlled core barrel rpm and advance. After an advance of 1.5-3 m the equipment was lifted out of the shaft, a half(?) stick of powder cut off the drilled core, and it was hoisted to the surface with a cable attached to an eye bolt at the tope of the core. A "shift" consisted of three men: hoistman, equipment operator (down the shaft), and a surface laborer. Advance was variable as equipment and techniques were perfected. Near the end of the job advance was, as I remember, 1.5-3 m per shift. Costs were, as I recall, about $115/m. Up to 4 m cores were lifted out in one piece and swung to the dump by a stiff leg derrick. The Newsome equipment was relatively inexpensive to build and operate and his method should be (more than?) competetive with the methods described by Grieves. W.E. Hawes The author, in mentioning the South African developments of the cactus grab, ignores the parallel development of the Cryderman mucker in this hemisphere. Perhaps a slightly longer history of blind hold drilling would have been in order. Blind shaft boring got a major boost at the Nevada Test Site, as part of the nuclear weapons development, when it was essential to be able to quickly assess depth for weapons testing. One of the early civilian attempts to utilize this technology occurred when Kerr McGee drilled the shaft at the Section 19 Mine at Ambrosia Lake, NM. This twin masted drill rig belonged to a subsidiary of Kerr McGee, not Shaft Drillers. This was a difficult hole, due to bentonitic shales that decomposed. Later advances in drilling fluids eliminated this problem. The Conoco project referred to is not entirely correct, and needs minor amplification: The depth of the development (not pilot) shaft drilled was 684 m, at a diameter of 3.05 m, with a 2.16 m ID hydratatic casing being installed to a depth of 669 m. Conoco Inc., not Challenger, executed the drilling, however Conoco did use Challenger Drilling Company's Rig 14-S. Rig 14-S is unique in that it is specifically designed for shaft drilling, rather than being an oil field rig used for this service. All work was planned and directed by Conoco personnel. Deviation of the aforementioned shaft from vertical was 31 cm. Two smaller shafts (pilot shafts) were drilled with the same rig. These smaller ones were drilled 1.8 m in diameter, to depth of 665 m and cased with .91-m-diam casing, to depth of 650 m to be used as pilot holes for 5.5 m diameter shafts. The total elapsed time for all drilling, casing, cementing, and rig moves was 50 weeks. The constraints mentioned of vertical accuracy, torque, wall collapse, rig set up time, lining time etc., pumping out, etc., may not be as serious as the author implies. First, vertical accuracy: The record achieved by Conoco indicates that with reasonable care, good accuracy can be obtained, primarily by having a fair amount of weight in tension, rather than on the drill bit. Second, the amount of torque that can be applied to the drill stem has been greatly increased by the introduction of larger diameter drill stems, such as the new Hughes rig uses. Third, risk of collapse of shaft walls is minimal with the proper mud program. Basically, the walls are supported by the weight of the mud and it is not removed until some type of casing is installed and grouted in. Here in the real challenge of blind drilling shafts to devise a more economical method of lining bored shafts than using steel casing. The remaining issues were minor at Conoco, provided adequate planning and scheduling takes place. An excellent paper, "Shaft Drilling--Crownpoint Project" by Hassell H. Hunter, presented at the Fifth Uranium Symposium in Albuquerque in Sept. 1981 contains details of this project. A combination of blind boring, with enlargement by either mechanical means (boring machine, or tunneling type shield) or slabbing down, with muck removal through a larger bored shaft would seem to be the future trend in shaft development. The economics, especially for wet conditions, favor this concept over conventional sinking, as has been demonstrated at Kerr McGee --Churchrock, UNC--Churchrock and Conoco at Crownpoint.

Jan 3, 1983

Contribution by W.D. Ortlepp In the Journal of May 1994, the authors first presented the concept and analysis that formed the basis for a design approach for deep tunnels, now expressed more explicitly in the present paper (March/April 1996). In a contribution in the Journal of March/April 1995, I expressed a certain disquiet about the validity of their original approach. The authors responded to these criticisms in the same issue. It is apparent to me now that both the contribution and its rebuttals were written, probably for different reasons, in such an obscure and pedantic way as to further confuse the reader rather than provide enlightenment. My concern still persists. But in order to avoid further confusion I will attempt to pose my uncertainties and difficulties in a much more direct way. On page 98 (top of 2nd column) in the earlier paper, an important statement concluded as follows: '. . . the horizontal ellipse requires 140 per cent less force for equivalent stability'.

Jan 1, 1996

By Hickling G.

Discussion at the Manchester Geological and Mining Society's general meeting held in Manchester, February 8th 1916, with Mr. Leonard R. Fletcher, President, in the chair, of papers previously published in Trans. Inst. Min. Engrs.,1915, vol. L, p.322 and p.328. Included are a written contribution by Ollerenshaw W. and oral discussion by the author, Gerrard J., Paton J.D., Smith S.A., Stephenson H., Dixon H.O., Pickup W., Fletcher L.R. and Atherton H.S.

Dec 1, 1916

Jan 1, 1900

Victor G. Hills, Cripple Creek, Colo. (communication to the Secretary): In continuation of the subject of the perform ance of "baby machine-drills," presented by Mr. Thane, I sub mit the following records of work done with these drills in the Cripple Creek district of Colorado. Two years ago, the Anchoria-Leland mine began to use baby drills ; and, to make the experiment more complete, began by purchasing two machines, of the same size, but of different make. The little drills were first used for stoping and up raising, in which they achieved at once an unqualified success. Soon after, they began to be used for the smaller branch-drifts and prospecting cross-cuts, while the large two-man drills were still used for the main drifts. Now they have almost entirely superseded the large drills, since it has been found that they will do any ordinary work in the mine at less cost, both for labor and for powder, per ton of rock broken. The large drills, of course, make more rapid progress; but it is only where time is a specially important factor that they are now used. The Portland mine, where, until within a year, only the large machines were used, is now using some small drills for stoping, and also for drifting. Mr. Thane speaks of having two men to operate a baby-drill; but in this district the baby-machine is always worked by one man without help. Again, in Prof. Christy's postscript, the quoted extract from a letter of Mr. L. T. Seymour, the South African engineer, mentions a " 2 1/2-inch Little Giant," as though that were the smallest machine used in that region. These statements leave some doubt as to just what Mr. Thane means by a " baby-drill." To avoid any such uncertainty as to the present communication, I will say that the large or two-man drill in common use at Cripple Creek has a 3 1/8-inch cylinder; while a few mines employ a 3-inch, and a few, in running large tunnels, a 3 1/2-inch drill. What we call a baby-drill here has a

Jan 1, 1900

By D. D. Donald

C. J. Barber (U. S. Smelting Refining & Mining Co., Salt Lake City)—In his paper Donald describes how New Jersey Zinc Co. made surveys for a connection between the Ivanhoe and Van Mater shafts at Austin-ville, Va. Except to say that the two faces had to meet "accurately" on line and grade, Donald does not indicate the required precision. Assuming that there were 24 angles in the 11/2-mile traverse and 15 in the one-mile traverse, it can be shown that if the average error in plumbing each shaft was 230" and the average error in measuring each traverse angle was 210". then the average error at the point of -connection would have been about ±1.9 ft normal to the line between the shafts. This calculation assumes that any errors in the triangulation would be negligible compared with the errors in the plumbings and traverses, and it also neglects taping errors. With no constant errors or blunders, the latter would be important only in lines normal to the line between the shafts. To make the average error at the connection less than 1.9 ft would, therefore, require either reducing the error in the plumbings to less than ±30", or that in the traverse angles to less than ±l0", or fewer stations, or a combination of these. Referring briefly to the triangulation, because of the problem of fitting a new triangulation into older surveys of the district the orientation deserved some mention, even though the connection could have been made with an assumed bearing. It would be interesting to know how many triangles were required and what the average summation error was before making any adjustments and without considering the algebraic signs. Perhaps this is referred to indirectly in the statement that the maximum angular error distributed was 2". Turning to the shaft plumbings, it would be helpful to know how many men were employed and how long each shaft was in use. Donald says that the surface positions of W-2 and W-3 were carefully surveyed from the collar position of W-1, without indicating how this was done. The length of the backsight would be particularly important. There must have been some error in setting W-1 vertically below the stations in the headframes. How immovable were the headframes, especially the Van Mater, which appears higher than the Ivanhoe and subject to more vibration because of skip hoisting? Donald does not say whether the plumbing wires had been previously restraightened to minimize spinning (otherwise they behave like weak helical springs). The use of light steel weights is most surprising because there seem to be excellent reasons for using heavier, nonmagnetic weights. Did the shafts contain no steel sets, pipes, power cables, etc., which might attract steel? The plumbing method described by Donald was designed for deep shafts in South Africa but differed from the South African practice in two important respects. As described by Browne,6 in South Africa the line between the wires was made parallel to the long axis of the shaft, whereas in the Ivanhoe shaft the lines between the wires were diagonally across the shaft. The main reason given for the South African practice is to insure that the gravitational attraction between the wires and the rock walls is the same on both wires, and therefore does not affect the bearing of the line between them. It seems probable, however, that the effect of air currents might be minimized in the South African procedure, and might be serious with the wires in the diagonal position at the Ivanhoe shaft. In the South African case cited by Donald the wires were swinging freely (although the plumb bobs were sheltered from air currents) but in the Ivanhoe case they were dampened with the plumb bobs set in water. In the discussion of Browne's paper R. St. J. Rowland said:' It has been the practice for a long time to damp the oscillations by immersing the bobs in oil or water. The time per oscillation is thus increased, thereby extending the time taken to complete the work. The longer the suspended wire the less there is to recommend the practice . . . The theoretical time for one swing of a simple pendulum 1050 ft long is approximately 36 sec, which would be increased by dampening the plumb bob in water. Hence very few complete swings would be observed in the 5 min intervals used at the Ivanhoe shaft. In the two South African cases described by Browne, the length of plumb line in one shaft was 5425 ft, the calculated period of swing was 81.6 sec, the average actual period was 76.6 sec, and 94 complete swings were observed in 2 hr. In the other case the length of plumb line was 3116 ft, the calculated period of swing was 61.8 sec, the average period was 63.5 sec, and 86 complete swings were observed in 1 hr 31 min. Browne concluded that observations of more than 30 swings are not likely to result in sufficient gain in accuracy to be justified. Returning to the Ivanhoe and Van Mater plumbings, an objection to the method used is that all four azimuths were taken from fixed points instead of swinging wires, and that each pair of observations would— barring blunders— check closely, and so perhaps give a false feeling of security. In fact, it seems that only two azimuths were obtained from one plumbing, and not four as stated by Donald. Nevertheless, the tying in of each pair of wires from both sides of the shaft has much to commend it. Donald's description leaves the impression that if each shaft was plumbed only once, the engineers were fortunate indeed if the average error in the underground orientation was as little as 30". Because the survey was done over a period of three years, it seems likely that the plumbings were repeated, perhaps more than once. The underground traverse angles were measured by conventional methods, but because the number of angles in the overlapping traverses was not given, the angular closure given by Donald does not indicate the accuracy with which this was done. Donald's description of a method of taping lines of irregular length is welcome. The literature on taping is usually confined to lines of about one tape length, generally 100 ft. Such lines are rare in metal mining because the time, trouble, and cost of setting points at 100-ft distances underground are not warranted. (Nevertheless civil engineers may go to this expense

Jan 1, 1960