Search Documents

By S. P. Hansen

Gravity sedimentation is one of the most widely used processes for separating solids from liquids whether it be for ore and mineral processing or for treating municipal sewage or industrial wastes. Investment in sedimentation equipment can represent a significant portion of the total capital costs associated with a processing or treatment facility. In spite of the importance of sedimentation, little attention has been devoted in recent years to improving this equipment by applying the basic principles involved in sedimentation. In the water and waste treatment field, design criteria established one half-century ago is still the accepted standard and in reflection of this lack of progress, sedimentation and thickening equipment has remained virtually unchanged. The primary purpose of this paper is to present and describe a new innovation in gravity sedimentation which has been applied to water and wastewater treatment and could definitely have application in the field of ore and mineral classification. A secondary object is to introduce the mixed media filter which has been widely used to treat municipal drinking supplies, industrial process water and to provide tertiary treatment of sewage and industrial wastes. The tube-type clarifier was developed primarily to be applied in the field of water and waste treatment where it was found that it could be used to considerably reduce the size and cost of clarification facilities. A logical extension of the tube clarifier would be to the area of minerals classification, ore separation, and for treating waste water associated with these activities. In water treatment practice, most clarification processes are followed by a filtration step to provide further polishing of the water prior to use. This paper will also discuss the mixed media filter which is graded from coarse to fine in the direction of filtration and is capable of operating at high filtration rates and with greater applied suspended solids loading than other filter designs while providing a high qualify filtrate.

Jan 1, 1970

By B. Kolonja

This paper considers simulation of truck dispatching system designs using maximum expected production of the truck-shovel system as the measure of performance. Two methods are utilized, multiple comparisons with the best (MCB) and the combination of MCB and the variance reduction technique known as common random numbers (CRN). These two techniques are compared via simulation experiments. The results show that the combined procedure of MCB with CRN is the superior tool to reduce the total number of replications needed to ensure the specified probability of correct selection over the finite number of designing systems. In this case study, MCB with CRN reduces the variance by 29% and the number of required replications by 48%. Also, the MCB with CRN procedure narrowed the confidence interval by 18%.

Jan 1, 1994

By I. Dunlop, A. Goulsbra, R. Dunne

Mineral liberation or more aptly the particle size at which cost effect liberation is attained is an important mineral processing parameter. This implies that not all the mineral is liberated as further size reduction is not economically warranted. For ores of low grade minimising both the comminution capital and operating costs are crucial aspect to ensure project visibility. As a consequence the focus of attention for the most part is direct­ed to 'coarsening the grind" ahead of any downstream process­ing treatment. In most cases, recovery will be sacrificed to pro­vide for 'more tonnes' of capacity and in general this is eco­nomically justifiable. Preferential liberation and its measurements is an aspect of mineral processing that has created much attention and contro­versy. It is not the purpose here to discuss this matter in depth other than to state in broad terms that if an ore from the same source is subjected to comminution by two different methods, such that the product particle size distribution is similar, and subsequent downstream treatment demonstrates substantial dif­ferences in recovery, then there is reason to believe that prefer­ential liberation has occurred. Comminution by high pressure grinding rolls (HPGR) is a relatively new technology claimed to have two major advan­tages over conventional comminution. Firstly and more impor­tantly is the ability to improve comminution power efficiency. Power reductions of 10 to 40 percent being claimed. (Pagett et al (1995), Sargent (1995)). A secondary benefit claimed is that preferential liberation can occur. Generally, for HPGR there is a natural tendency of the product to have a skewed particle size distribution to the finer size. This in its own right could manifest itself in improved leaching and preconcentration performance. The question remains that if in using another comminution device, other than a HPGR, to produce a similar product size distribution as the HPGR, will there be any difference in downstream between the products from this and a HPGR.

Jan 1, 1996

By S. S. Churchill

Introduction Amidst the apparent chaos of the final push to complete a major construction project, a small group of specialists works with great intensity. Armed with yellow "in test" and green "turned over to operations" tags, these startup engineers follow detailed preoperational test procedures to confirm that a plant is ready to operate. They follow a test schedule designed to complete individual process system in the order they will be needed by operations. After extensive preliminary testing, the startup engineers begin the truly exciting part of their work - initial operations. The thrill of engaging the clutch for the first time on a 10,000 horsepower grinding mill makes all the long hours worthwhile. Preoperational testing and startup are of critical importance to the success of a project. No other aspect of a construction project allows such opportunities for success or failure, and no other aspect is so critically influenced by careful planning. At Bechtel, the tasks of preoperational testing and startup are among the responsibilities of the Mine and Plant Operations group. The Preoperational Testing Process Preoperational testing is the transition phase between constructon and startup on a new plant. It includes the preparation of detailed test schedules and procedures. The schedules are used to coordinate construction completion activities, so that systems are available for startup and operations in a rational sequence. The procedures form the basis for performing the testing and documenting its completion. Tests include instrument calibration, wire insulation tests, wire termination verification, mechanical alignments and inspections, and system cleaning and flushing. Where possible, the systems are then operated on water and their performance recorded. Normally, either the construction contractor or a team of specialists has the responsibility to perform preoperational testing. Witnesses to the testing may be owner operations and maintenance personnel, engineers from the design firm, or specialists assigned to the project who provide assistance and guidance to the contractor in addition to witnesing the work.

Jan 1, 1986

By S. G. Vick, K. E. Robinson, W. D. Webb

INTRODUCTION This paper discusses two uranium tailings waste disposal studies that reflect the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulatory actions and their changing requirements during the mid to late 1970's. Present guidelines require that all new uranium tailings impoundments be designed and constructed to eliminate, to the extent that it is reasonably achievable, exposures and risks to the public from the tailings. This includes positive measures for control of seepage losses from the impoundment and for control of radiological releases caused by wind and water erosion. Long-term stability of the reclaimed impoundment is also a very important requirement. That is, it is intended that the tailings impoundment, once it is reclaimed, will require little or no care or maintenance as long as the uranium tailings remain a hazard. Principally because of the long-term stability objective, the NRC has now identified subsurface burial of the tailings as the "prime option" for tailings disposal. The environmental implications of these proposed regulatory actions are obviously desirable. The economic implications the actions may have on a particular project are not always so obvious because they are so dependent on environmental suitability of site conditions. Selection of a site with favorable topographic, geologic and hydrologic conditions will usually result in the most economically and environmentally attractive alternative for tailings disposal. The first project discussed in this paper was initiated before the NRC guidelines had been developed to favour subsurface burial. At the beginning, seepage and radon emission control requirements were moderate. Constraints were imposed on the design by site topography, geology, and project capitalization considerations, factors which were dealt with according to straightforward engineering and design principles. More serious constraints were imposed by changing regulatory requirements. Unlike the more usual engineeringrelated constraints, regulatory requirements were upgraded during the design process, causing the design itself to undergo numerous modifications. The second project was initiated after the NRC proposed regulations had become better defined and below grade burial appeared to be the preferred

Jan 1, 1980

By Aaron Jones, Guy Reed, Russell Frith

"In 2017, one of the international authorities on coal bursts, Dr. Chris Mark, published a paper entitled “Coal Bursts that Occur during Development: A Rock Mechanics Enigma,” in which several relevant technical issues were identified, the most pertinent being:i.whilst development coal bursts are commonly associated with geological faults, understanding which specific faults result in burst-prone development mining conditions and why, remains undefined.ii.conventional wisdom in relation to strong roof and floor geology of the coal seam might be limiting, based on certain burst examples in Colorado.iii. development coal bursts can occur without the local ground stresses being substantially elevated from their in situ levels.This paper outlines what is considered to be a credible, first-principles, mechanistic explanation for these three current development coal burst conundrums by reference to early published coal testing work examining the significance of a lack of “constraint” to coal stability and an understanding of how very specific structural geology and other geological features can logically cause this to occur in situ, albeit on a statistically very rare basis. This basic model is examined by reference to published information pertaining to the development coal-burst that occurred at the Austar Coal Mine in New South Wales, Australia, in 2014 and from the Sunnyside District in Utah, USA.The “cause and effect” model for development coal bursts presented also offers a meaningful explanation for the statistical improbability for what are nonetheless potentially highly-destructive events, being able to explain the statistical rarity being just as important to the credibility of the model as explaining the local conditions associated with burst events.The model could also form the basis for a robust, risk-based approach utilising a “hierarchy of controls” to the operational management of the development coal burst threat. Specifically, these include the use of pre-mining predictions for likely burst-prone and non-burst-prone areas, the use of the mine layout to avoid or at least minimise mining within burst-prone areas if appropriate, and finally the development of an operational Trigger Action Response Plan that reduces the likelihood of inadvertent roadway development into a burst-prone area without suitable safety controls already being in place."

Jan 1, 2019

"The seventh annual Mineral & Metallurgical Processing Division (MPD) student poster contest was held last February at the SME Annual Conference & Expo in Phoenix, AZ. A total of 21 students entered the poster competition. The students were required to submit one-page abstracts, which were reviewed by the judges, after which they prepared posters to display their work. A panel of judges went to each student and listened as the student explained his/her research in five minutes.The students worked hard at their research and then set aside time to complete all the necessary steps to enter the competition. Recognizing the effort required to participate, the MPD provided monetary rewards to all participants. First place received $1,000; second, $500; and third through seventh, $200. All remaining entrants received $100 each. The winners have their abstracts published in this issue of Mining & Metallurgical Processing. As in past years, there were separate levels of competition for undergraduates and graduates.Now for the winners:Graduate winnersJoseph Halt won first place for research on the use of additives to starch binders to create iron ore pellets. Vivek Agarwal received second for working on using solvent extraction to concentrate lanthanum. Jordan Rutledge placed third for utilizing tannins to depress calcite in fluorite flotation. Fourth through seventh places were Vu Truong, Jacob McDonald, Hunter Sceats and Doug Schriner.Undergraduate winnersLaura Nugent won first place for using high-frame-rate cameras to follow bubbles as they moved from the pulp to the froth in flotation cells. Taylor Graham earned a second-place finish by researching how to acid leach low-grade manganese carbonate.Although its cliché to say everyone’s a winner, everyone can benefit from attending the MPD Student Poster contest. All the students were able to display their work to potential future employers, and industry professionals could talk to the up-and-coming engineers. Next year, there will be another competition for more posters and networking, so get ready to attend.Thank you to all the students for participating; Lisa Schlink for chairing the session; the judges, Aaron Noble, Debra Switzer, Mohammad Rezaee, Nick Gow and Ren Bryce, for evaluating the abstracts and posters; and the MPD sponsors for supporting the competition. This has only been successful with the input of all three groups. Engineering iron ore pellets to reduce their dustinessJ.A. Halt and S.K. KawatraGraduate student and professor and chair, respectively, Department of Chemical Engineering,Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USAIntroductionIron ore pellets are hard spheres made by agglomerating iron ore concentrate and binders. Pellets are the preferred ironbearing feed for blast furnace ironmaking. Starch has been proposed as a binder because it has good adhesive properties, does not contaminate pellets and is relatively cheap. However, starch binders typically lead to weak pellets with rough surfaces, and these can cause high levels of dust within process equipment and when pellets are handled and shipped (Halt and Kawatra, 2014). Our research shows that by adding a small quantity of other additives, pellets made with starch binders become smooth and strong. The newly designed binder leads to significantly lower levels of fines when pellets are handled."

Jan 1, 2016

By Faruk Oksuz, Cary Hirner, Ray Brainard

"Key project participants, including owners, engineers, and contractors continually seek for sound and structured decision analysis on how to select the best contracting method for successful project delivery. In addition to being burdened with technical challenges, lack of resources, budget shortcomings, regulatory requirements, and bureaucratic and politically mandated obstacles, the project participants need a reliable decision analysis model on the best project delivery method. The pendulum of choice for contracting continually swings back and forth between traditional design-bid-build and alternative delivery options such as design-build, progressive design-build, construction manager at risk, and public-private-partnership. For large tunnel projects, the decision process is further complicated due to contract packaging options as well as risks in underground construction. Contracting strategies for large tunnels require thorough consideration of performance, risk, quality, operability, cost and schedule. This paper compiles an array of decision making criteria and tools for an unbiased and balanced evaluation and ranking system in the procurement of large tunneling projects. INTRODUCTION Successful project delivery hinges upon meeting the owners’ expectations and key performance indicators. Large tunneling programs benefit from a thorough understanding and successful implementation of project delivery options by key project participants including the owners, engineers and contractors. The key to success is a collaborative advancement of project as the key project participants knowledgably address the applicable management, performance, risk, quality, cost, operability and schedule considerations throughout a project realization cycle. PROJECT REALIZATION CYCLE All projects have customary planning, design, construction, commissioning and operation phases that may seem to be sequential but in reality that are well integrated and dependent on one another. A glitch in any phase of a project realization cycle could hinder a successful outcome and none of the project partners are immune to consequences whenever and wherever they may surface."

Jan 1, 2016

By L. B. Anderson, G. A. Carmody

We wish to comment on the paper by G.W. Heunisch (MINING ENGINEERING, January 1987), which raised several important points regarding treatment of acidic waste waters. This paper confirms, in part, tests carried out by Allyn Corp. Allyn is the manufacturer of the proprietary product Alka-Ment, one of the materials that Heunisch tested. The first point is the extreme sensitivity of the sedimentation rate on the nature of the treatment material used. This apparently results from differences in nucleation of the metal hydroxides, and is consistently higher for Alka-Ment. This decreased sludge volume is also observed when Alka-Ment is combined with flocculants, such as organic polymers (see Table 1). Our second point is to emphasize that Heunisch's work shows how dependent the sludge volume is on pH. It is common practice to overtreat AMD by raising pH to 9 or 10. This practice, in addition to being wasteful of material, actually decreases the density of the resulting sludge, probably by creating charged particles that do not readily coalesce. When treating with Alka-Ment, we recommend that the treatment be monitored by testing both pH and dissolved iron. For both tests, it is important to allow adequate time to elapse between treatment and measurement, so that dissolution of alkali, aerobic oxidation of iron, and precipitation of the metal hydroxides are nearly complete. Our tests have indicated that from 30 minutes to one hour is commonly required. Only in this way can a minimum pH be attained, with adequate treatment, denser sludge, and lower treatment rates achieved. Thirdly, Heunisch correctly recognizes that ASTM titration of Alka-Ment does not reflect the true treatment value available in a unit of Alka-Ment. Our work at Allyn indicates this is a most important consideration when evaluating various materials for the treatment of acidic waste waters. While we were unaware of Mr. Heunisch's work, we welcome comparisons between Alka-Ment and any competitive products readily available for field use. Allyn has hundreds of hours of laboratory and field data we are ready to share with interested parties treating acidic waste water.

Jan 1, 1988

By V. W. Skema, M. W. Smith

Pennsylvania has 4,000 km (2,500 miles) of streams that do not meet water-quality standards due to acid mine drainage (AMD), making AMD the greatest cause of water pollution in the state. The problem is mainly caused by abandoned coal mines. To abate AMD, Pennsylvania is using a watershed-based approach that includes remining as a key component of a comprehensive restoration strategy. The Tangascootack Creek Water-shed was targeted for AMD restoration through remining. Geologic mapping and overburden data were analyzed using Earth Vision software to identify areas of coal reserves that could be remined to improve water quality. Incentives are offered to encourage mining in these designated areas.

Jan 1, 2002

By V. A. Evans, D. L. Hellier

Introduction Preparing a report on fluorspar economics in the US could have been somewhat complicated at one time. This was because the number of producers, both large and small, derived production from different locations through-out the western US and the southern Illinois and western Kentucky fluorspar districts. Companies, such as Allied Chemical and Williamson Mining, operated in the Jamestown district of Colorado. In Walden and Salida, CO, the Colorado Fluorspar Co. operated mines and mills. In New Mexico, both Du Pont and Allied had mines and mills. In the Illinois-Kentucky district, US Steel, Rosiclare Lead and Fluorspar, Minerva Oil Co., and Marathon Oil all produced spar for the US market. Now all of the companies are out of the fluorspar business and, with the closing of the Seaforth Mineral Co.'s Inverness Mining Co., only Ozark-Mahoning Co. survives as a domestic producer. History Ozark-Mahoning Co., as it now exists, was formed in 1946 by the merger of Ozark Chemical Co. and Mahoning Mining Co. Ozark Chemical Co. was started in the 1920s to produce sulfuric acid for two refineries located in Tulsa, OK. Mahoning Mining was originally formed by the founders of Ozark Chemical Co. and the Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. to produce fluorspar and associated minerals from properties in the southern Illinois and western Kentucky fluorspar district. In 1937, Mahoning Mining started an exploration program, employing contractor-operated churn drills to look for reserves in Hardin and Pope Counties in southern Illinois. Based on known reserves in the area and the results of the exploration program, work was started in the fall of 1938 to build a selective flotation plant at Rosiclare, IL. The mill was completed and put into operation in August of 1939. The company's first mining efforts were in the Cave-In-Rock district just north of Cave-In-Rock, IL. The deposits in this area were of the Manto or bedded type. They have been the mainstay of the company's operations in the Illinois-Kentucky fluorspar district. In 1950-51, the company expanded its operations by purchasing fluorspar properties from Colorado Fluorspar Co. at Walden, CO. This location was operated from 1952 through 1958 and from 1968 through 1973 when it was closed permanently. In 1974, Ozark-Mahoning Co. was purchased by Pennwalt Corp. Presently, it is a wholly-owned subsidiary of that corporation. As the only major domestic producer of fluorspar in the US today, the company's ability to survive under the flood of imported material is directly related to the four major segments of its operations. These are: exploration, mining productivity, maintenance, and marketing. All are done in-house. Exploration The Southern Illinois fluorspar district is located in the most complexly faulted area of the central US. The formations are sedimentary in nature and range in age from Devonian through Pennsylvanian. The deposits are small, they range in size from a few thousand tons up to 900 kt (1 million st), with the average minable deposit being around 544 kt (600,000 st). The ore occurs in both nearly vertical vein deposits and in Manto or flat lying bedded deposits. Due to the relatively small size of the deposits and the depth at which they occur, a good low-cost exploration program is essential to ensure that new finds of ore are equal to the mining extraction rate. Ozark maintains a leased land position in Pope and Hardin Counties that will fluctuate somewhere between a low of 40 km2 (10,000 acres) up to a high of 129 km2 (32,000 acres), depending on total size of tracts leased. Most all lands are obtained through a standard lease purchase option, with a small minimum royalty per acre during the normal 10-year option period. All leases are standard and without deviation to control land cost. All land leasing is done through Ozark's geological staff, who also

Jan 11, 1986

By G. Kemp Williams, Peter H. Dohms, Barry A. Hillman, Laurie A. Williams

Introduction In 1969, the US devalued the dollar. This action, over the ensuing four years, resulted in the deregulation of the price of gold. It also resulted in the rebirth of the US gold mining industry. The extreme inflation of the 1970s led to a dramatic increase in the price of precious metals. Consequently an increased interest in the exploration for and mining of gold has occurred. The enthusiasm began among the few existing producers who had survived on marginal profits during a prolonged period of fixed prices and constantly rising costs. Then came the newcomers. They saw the opportunity to enter an industry that historically had been characterized by small operations with low capital costs. It was not until the late 1970s that large mining companies recognized that investment in gold projects could generate cash flows that previously were associated only with world class deposits. Today, gold mining has tremendous appeal for the entire mining community, despite the dramatic price drop from 1980-81 levels. There are even major firms with no mining experience attempting to gain a foothold. But how easy is it to enter the US gold mining industry? What are the basic factors that influence the economics, and what are they likely to be for the remainder of the decade? How has the industry changed, and what is the composition of the active companies? An examination of the industry will help to answer these questions. US Gold Mining History The current gold rush is actually the fifth in the 208-year history of the US. The first recorded commercial mining of gold occurred in the Southeast in 1799. It produced from small, yet relatively rich placer deposits. The famous California gold rush of 1848 placed the US as a major producer with 62.2 t (2 million oz) of output by 1850. More than 93.3 t (3 million oz) was mined by 1853, equivalent to 63% of world production. But the richest placers were soon depleted. By the end of the Civil War, annual production had declined to well below 62.2 t (2 million oz). The government then relaxed prices and the industry again began to recover. The 1870-80s saw the great mines of the California Mother Lode and Grass Valley brought into production. This was followed by development of Nevada's Comstock, which later became one of the world's largest producers. Discovery of gold at Cripple Creek in 1892, coupled with technological advances in the use of large dredges in the California placers, resulted in significant production increases. And, with the expansion of the Homestake mine at Lead, SD, in 1898, US output again surpassed the 93.3-t (3 million-oz) level. By 1905, produc¬tion climbed to 124.4 t (4 million oz) with the addition of the Alaskan deposits, new output at Goldfields, NV, and the introduction of the cyanidation process. During World War I, the government forced the shutdown of gold mines. By 1920, total production had dropped to little more than 62.2 t (2 million oz). Many mines remained closed until the Great Depression. This, combined with the devaluation of the US dollar in 1934, resulted in a gold price increase to about $1.13/g ($35 per oz). Then began the fourth gold rush. By 1937, output had again surpassed 124.4 t (4 million oz). This was due to an increase in primary production and new byproduct production from base metal operations. Unlike the previous period of growth, however, this period was short-lived. The imposition of Executive Order L-208 in 1942 once again forced the shutdown of most mines. At the end of World War II, cumulative US gold production had

Jan 12, 1984

By W. A. Haley

The use of diesel engines in underground hard-rock mines dates back to the late 1940s. For the first several years, they were used only occasionally, being limited to a few metal mines that experimented with crawler¬mounted front-end loaders, tractor-trailer hauling units, a few tractors for drill-compressor mounts, and utility cleanup machines. By the mid-1950s, track loaders had become commonplace in limestone mines and uranium mines on the Colorado Plateau in the United States, as well as in Canada. Use of crawler-mounted tractors as drill and compressor mounts also increased. By the end of the 1950s, rubber-tired loaders and some haulers began to replace the track-type machines and rail-mounted cars that had been in use. About 1960, the rubber-tired machines brought about a new era of underground mining mobility and flexibility, centered on a method commonly known as "trackless mining." Ultimately, many of the underground rail-type systems for loading and hauling were replaced by the trackless mining technique. ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS The size and nature of mineral deposits, plus ground control techniques, historically had dictated small open¬ings to the surface from many underground mines. The small mine openings led to the development of special rubber-tired loaders and haulers designed specifically for access through the small openings. However, some mines, particularly those in massive mineral deposits, are able to excavate and maintain very large openings, and some use modified room-and-pillar systems. With the large mine openings, the use of larger, more produc¬tive equipment such as that commonly found in surface mining becomes economical. In fact, productivity gen¬erally increases at a more pronounced rate than machine size increases because many of the larger machines were designed for heavy-duty shot-rock applications in surface mines and construction sites where the handling of blasted rock is common. Table 1 can be used as a very Table 1. General Productivity Comparison for Conventional Machines In Underground Use (Shot-Rock Conditions) 2.3 m3 (3 cu yd) 4.6 m3 (6 cu yd) Loader Loader Expected Surface 230 t/h 540 t/h Production (250 stph) (600 stph) Expected Underground 90 t/h 270 t/h Production (100 stph) (300 stph) Expected Total Efficiency: Surface 40%-60% 50%75% Underground 25%.-40% 30%50% Expected Useful Machine 8000 hr 12,000 hr Life Before Replacement general comparison of the production and efficiency between small and large machines. Combining greater productivity often inherent in larger machines, with reduced downtime resulting from using fully developed machines with fast parts and service backup, some mine operators have been able to reduce material handling costs appreciably while reduc¬ing manpower requirements for operators and main¬tenance men. Large mine openings increase the amount of rock that must be handled in the development work, and they sometimes increase the dilution in stopes or rooms, de¬pending upon the dimensions of the ore zone. Providing adequate space for the unrestricted operation of large surface mining machines could, therefore, lead to more waste segregation and handling costs. It could also cause greater ore dilution that would result in a lower grade of ore being delivered to the processing plant. The tradeoffs between opposing cost factors must be reconciled and balanced to achieve the best overall cost of the crude ore, concentrates, or product. EQUIPMENT MODIFICATIONS Loaders and haulers designed for surface mining are seldom used underground in their standard con¬figurations without some modifications. If done, the modifications generally are made by the equipment dealer and/or the user, and the modifications usually include one or more of the following items: 1) The exhaust stack is lowered, and its direction is changed. Usually, it is repositioned horizontally to the rear, or it is fed into the engine fan to diffuse the exhaust gases. 2) The operator's position is lowered by either lowering the seat or changing the seat to a side mount. 3) The operator controls are adjusted to fit the new operator position. 4) Other components, such as the radiator and loader tower, are lowered. 5) Special bumper guards are mounted at the base of the radiator area. 6) An exhaust conditioner is mounted and con¬nected, using either a catalytic or a water-type condi¬tioner, or both. This usually is controlled by the safety and health regulatory authority having jurisdiction. 7) The positions of other components are rearranged

Jan 1, 1982

By M. Rieber

In July 1985, as the U.S. copper industry contracted and the Mexican industry expanded, a trans border pollution agreement was signed which included smelter air pollution control in the "Gray Triangle": Cananea, Nacozari and Douglas. Since then the Douglas smelter has been closed, a year earlier than initially required; though its new smelter is operating, S02 collection and acid disposal at Nacozari is yet to come; and the Cananea smelter has been un-touched. Nacozari and Cananea copper mining have expanded while a reduced U.S. copper industry has rationalized to a point of fragile profitability. As a paradigm of U.S. copper competitiveness, this paper attempts to explain the differential fortunes of copper in the two countries, to project the future of the smelter agreement as a function of acid disposal, and to consider the consequences of the politicized application of smelter pollution control in Arizona.

Jan 1, 1988

By W. C. Morgan

The Federal Surface Mining Law enacted in 1978 is now being translated into regulations which must be followed in future coal mining. Substantial change to mining procedures is required to maintain stricter air and water control while mining and to return the mined out land to equal or better use than before. These changes do not come easy; and in most cases, they create a substantial additional cost. Based on field observations and mining studies, Caterpillar has been making suggestions on the use of their types of equipment to conform to the new standards at the least cost. This paper will be a brief review of some of the overburden stripping and reclamation methods suggested by Caterpillar. A production and cost comparison of dragline, scraper/dozer and truck, loader systems in 20 to 150 ft. Overburden conditions illustrates potential cost savings using mobile equipment.

Jan 1, 1980

By D. W. Frommer

In continuing its long range studies of methods of treating low-grade iron ores, the Bureau of Mines has developed a new selective flocculation, desliming, and flotation procedure that enables effective beneficiation of the finely disseminated ferruginous jaspers of the Marquette range, Mich. The process, developed on a bench scale and later confirmed in the 800-lb/hr pilot plant, comprises dispersion, selective flocculation, desliming to reject fine silica and clay, and flotation of silica from the remainder of minus 400-mesh pulps. Pilot plant flotation of two Marquette range ores, using the selective flocculation procedure on feeds containing 36 percent Fe, yielded iron recoveries of about 84 percent in concentrates containing 65 to 66 percent Fe and 4 to 5 percent silica. These results were metallurgically superior to those obtained when selective flocculation was not used. Also operating characteristics were better, and reagent costs were lower.

Jan 1, 1964

By John S. Livermore

I feel very privileged to be added to the distinguished group that has received this award since the first recipient, Reno Sales, received it in 1954. If my research is correct, the last geologist to be honored was Bill Callahan in 1982. Perhaps the Awards Committee decided it was about time to select a geologist, and I became the beneficiary. Regarding the discovery of the Carlin ore body, it was the culmination of several studies - one going back as far as 1939 when a US Bureau of Mines engineer named W.O. Vanderberg recognized an unusual type of gold mineralization in sediments in northern Nevada. What was unusual was the fact that the gold was so fine that it would not concentrate in a pan. This, plus the study of the Roberts Mountain thrust by Ralph Roberts (1960) and conversations with Harry Bishop, manager of the Gold Acres Mine, pointed Alan Coope and me in the direction of the Lynn Window and, eventually, the Carlin discovery. There has been a great deal written about this discovery. I thought it would be interesting to discuss the evolution of Carlin gold exploration in Nevada since this time and to discuss the changes in perception of this unique type of mineralization. The method used by Coope and me in following up on Roberts' work was to map geologically the Roberts Mountain thrust and conduct geochemical sampling of favorable outcrops and float. Coope was highly experienced in geochemical exploration, as he had graduated from the Royal School of Mines in London, studying under John S. Webb, one of the pioneers of geochemistry as applied to mineral exploration. We first considered using pathfinder elements, but finally concentrated on gold analyses alone, even though the sensitivity of fire assays used at that time was only about one-half part per million. According to the spatial relationship of the mineralization to the Roberts Mountain thrust, as pointed out by Roberts (1960), we were looking for mineralization within the thrust itself. Our models were the known Gold Acres and Getchell mines, which contained reserves on the order of 0.9 to 1.8 mt (1 to 2 million st). These were not of substantial size, but I had hoped we might find more than one of these tributary to a mill that would justify an operation for our employer, Newmont Mining Corp. What we ended up with was the type of deposit we were looking for - an open pit deposit of micron gold, which the old timers had missed because the gold was not capable of being panned. But never in our wildest dreams did we think there was a chance of finding a body containing 10 mt (11 million st) of ore at 0.30 oz/st (10.3 g/t).The deposit was not in the thrust proper but was found in a favorable horizon of Roberts Mountain siltstone that was below the thrust. This is the first example of how a model should not be followed blindly. Newmont was successful in keeping this discovery quiet for some time. After a considerable amount of drilling, a rumor circulated that they had discovered a large low-grade ore body of around 1.7 to 2.1 g/t (0.05 to 0.06 oz/st), which of course would not have been economic with gold at $1.13/g ($35/oz), which was the fixed price at that time. The company, for obvious reasons, did not discourage the rumor. When, however, the true results came out there was a lot of feverish activity. Because of this new type of so-called "invisible gold," which could have been missed by the old timers, the thought was that other deposits would be discovered very soon. The Carlin and other smaller deposits, including Bootstrap, Blue Star and Gold Quarry, were in windows where the lower plate of the Roberts Mountain formation (below the thrust) had been exposed by erosion. This then became the new

Jan 1, 1997

By S. Norman Kesten

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, commonly known as RCRA, which amends the previous Solid Waste Disposal Act, was signed into law on October 21, 1976. Members of the mining industry began their contacts with EPA in this area two to three years before the Act finally was passed, and that seemed and probably was all to the good. We reviewed and commented upon their studies and in general tried to acquaint them with the peculiarities and the uniqueness of the wastes generated by our industry, of which they were abyssmally ignorant. I suppose we thought that through the bureaucracy we might have some influence upon the provisions of the solid waste legislation that was being bandied about on the hill. Certainly the industry, in general, did very little direct lobbying, as I recall, and there were several reasons for that. For one thing we conceived that the legislation was aimed at the chemical industy and believed that if their people looked after their interests, ours would be safeguarded automatically. Also, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) was heating up at the same time and, in fact, was signed into law on the same day. In addition, a great deal of lobbying activity was required by amendments of the Clean Air Act and Federal Water Pollution Control Act that were being put together in Congress. These were conceived to be of far greater importance to our industry than a bill to control mostly chemical wastes and, in fact, new bills in both areas became law the following year. Finally, the solid waste bill, RCRA, was patched together by committee staffs over one weekend and was reported out by a conference committee rather hurriedly. Some little goodies about mining were almost after-thoughts in this process.

Jan 1, 1981

By David Brown, Adrian St. John, John Comins, Mike King

"INTRODUCTION The Crossrail project provides an East-West link across London enabling an additional 200 million journeys each year linking up major business centres and existing transportation interchanges, while reducing congestion at street level and within the current underground system. The project has built major structures in Sprayed Concrete Linings (SCL), including 5 new stations, 6 crossover caverns and numerous passages, adits and ventilation tunnels. Construction has taken approximately 4 years, and has involved the spraying of over 200,000m3 of concrete. At the start of the project there was a lack of available records from previous projects concerning concrete falls, which hindered risk assessments and the ability to make meaningful comparisons around spraying or material performance. This paper redresses this lack of data by providing information on falls experienced on this project and makes recommendations to assist future projects. Construction Methods Table 1 below summarises the main contracts with elements of permanent SCL. The listed primary lining lengths include pilot tunnels, side drift tunnels and enlargements as separate tunnels.A range of construction sequences were used in order to deal with the design requirements, geometry, and the ground and ground water conditions. The following briefly summarises the build up by layers, with typical design dimensions provided for a platform sized tunnel (approximately 9m internal diameter), excluding tolerance allowances. Some linings were sprayed in more than one layer to allow for inclusion of reinforcement layers or to avoid a too aggressive build-up of thickness: •,Initial shotcrete, or sealing, layer (ISL) of 75mm followed by a Primary Lining (PL) of 300mm. •,Regulating layer of 40mm followed by a Waterproof membrane (Sprayed membrane, 3-6mm). •,Secondary lining (SL) of 250mm with a separate sprayed fire protection layer (FPL) of 50mm."

Jan 1, 2016

By R. G. Lundquist

The idea that fragmentation for mineral processing results from some tradeoff between increased drilling and blasting and increased load on the primary crusher is well known. In a previous paper (Lundquist and Konya, 1963) the authors reported on the results of a laboratory scale study which attempted to quantify this tradeoff in energy terms. If we look only at the production of new surface area, blasting is 1700 times as energy efficient as crushing. On an energy cost basis, crushing is 57 times as expensive per unit surface produced as blasting with dynamite and more than 700 times as expensive as blasting with ANFO. The comminution process at an open pit operation starts with the drilling of blast holes and ends after the material has gone through the fine grind circuit. Operators usually break the process into several separate operations and do their cost analysis based on this approach. Often drilling and blasting is considered as one system and crushing and grinding are considered as one or two separate and independent systems. Operators will independently optimize each system. The cost for the drilling and blasting system is obvious in operations which use contract drillers to do the drilling and either contract the blasting to a distributor or do the blasting themselves. The cost of rock breaking in this manner is readily available since the contract driller will supply a monthly drilling cost to the operation and either the distributor who is contracting the blasting or the distributor who is supplying the powder to the blasting operation will also supply a monthly billing. In either case, the costs can easily be seen on a monthly or per ton basis. They are not difficult to compute even when drilling and blasting are done entirely in-house.

Jan 1, 1985