Search Documents

By Robert E. Palmer

The Hawkesworth detachable drill steel shank and bit were invented by A. L. Hawkesworth, while he was a mechanical foreman for the Anaconda Copper Mining Co., at Butte, Mont. Mr. Hawkesworth died on June 16, 1925, at the time that his invention was practically a proved success. The first application for patents was made by him in November, 1918, and the bit is now being manufactured under patents issued in 1922 and 1923. The credit for its development in the early stages belongs to A. L. Hawkesworth, Roy S. Alley, Harry A. Gallwey, E. J. Bowman and various officials of the Anaconda Copper Mining Co. Later improvements, manufacturing problems and the direct usage in the mines were originated and perfected by the mechanical department under C. D. Woodward, E. R. Borcherdt, head of the Rock Drill Equipment Department, Robert E. Kelly of the Mechanical Department, and various operating department heads of the Anaconda Copper Mining Co. The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of these officials in the preparation of this paper. Comparison of Costs Using Regular Drill Steel and Detachable Drill Steel In 1922 production was satisfactory and sufficient enough to warrant a complete installation in an operating mine. The study and tests were made at the Badger State mine, the production of which averaged 1200 tons of ore per day. E. R. Borcherdt, head of the rock drill equipment department, was in direct charge of the trials, installation, operating problems and records during the entire .period, arid still continues in that position. This mine is a typical Butte mine, operated through a standard four-compartment shaft, served by a double drum hoist and an auxiliary hoist. The texture of the ground and ore has all the variations from soft to very hard granite and sulfide ore with production from levels between the

Jan 1, 1930

By A. B. Cummins

THE past year has been of unusual interest for industrial minerals. It is increasingly evident that requirements for these raw materials move with general economic trends. Thus, with a peak year in the construction, chemical and petroleum industries, the nonmetallic mineral industries have been brought into the complex maze of an economy in which military spending is in the billions and in which the national income and wholesale commodity prices reached new levels. Many industrial minerals are of first rank essentiality in the defense effort and its supporting industries, and since some of these are of limited supply and others dependent on imports, the problems of procurement, distribution and conservation of available supplies make a complicated pattern. Despite some drawbacks and weak spots, the industrial mineral industries have, in general, met the national situation with great credit and many new production records have been set. The general accomplishment in 1951 should be one of satisfaction with confidence for the future. Difficulties, unsolved problems and uncertainties should not obscure the general trend which many consider optimistic. Prices in the main have been upward, in line with the inflation spiral, but nonmetallics appear with some exceptions to be behind the general increases. Labor difficulties have not been serious throughout the year. Retarding influences in expansions and planning have been the uncertainty of the Korean and international situations and a lack of confidence by many in the government economic program and its ultimate impact on the economic structure. It must also be kept in mind that stockpiling, unless all-out war develops, reaches a level and then ceases to be a major sustaining factor in the mineral markets. In accordance with the Defense Production Act of 1950 various control agencies have been set up to establish the desired rate of stockpile acquisitions. The objectives are subject to change depending on availabilities and needs-military, industrial, and civilian. In some minerals there has been disagreement on actual stockpile requirements, and there is some feeling that the needs of defense might be better met if more funds went into the development of new sources of supply of scarce raw materials and more materials were released to industry at this time. Nonmetallic minerals on the strategic and critical list of the Munitions Board as of July 1951 were: Group I; asbestos, some types; bauxite, refractory grade; beryl; celestite; chromite, chemical and refractory grades; columbite; corundum; diamonds, industrial; fluorspar, acid grade; graphite, some types; kyanite; manganese ore, battery and chemical grades; mica, some types; quartz crystals; rare earths; sapphire and ruby; talc, steatite, block; and Group II; bauxite, abrasive; cryolite, natural; diamond dies; graphite, crystalline fines; iodine; mica, muscovite block, stained and lower; rutile; selenium; talc, steatite, ground; zirconium ore, zircon. Details on the current status of stockpiling inventories are not available. The Defense Minerals Exploration Administration has, since April, executed 39 contracts for the exploration of nonmetallic minerals, including twenty for mica, seven for beryl-mica, six for asbestos, three for sulphur and one each for monazite, steatite talc and fluorspar. Total value of these contracts came to $892,059, of which the Government's participation amounts to $689,247. There were on hand at year's end another 97 applications for exploration aid on nonmetallic minerals in twenty different

Jan 1, 1952

By C. M. Shigley

Tan record of the largest magnesium plant in the country utilizing sea water as a primary raw material stands as another victory in the struggle for large-scale production of pure chemical elements from the oceans. Bromine was the first element to be economically and commercially recovered when, in 1933, a six million pound per year unit was built on the Atlantic Coast near Wilmington, North Carolina, by the Ethyl-Dow Chemical Co.1 The bromine was reacted with ethylene to produce ethylene dibromide, a necessary associate of tetraethyl lead in ethyl antiknock fluid. Within eight years that plant was doubled and redoubled, and another large unit was put into operation at Freeport, Texas, taking bromine from the Gulf of Mexico. In 1940, in fortunate anticipation of the impending demand for magnesium and the limitations of the production from natural brines, the Dow Chemical Co. turned again to the sea, and designed and erected a plant at Freeport to produce 18,000,000 lb. of magnesium per year from sea water.2 In March 1941, two months after the new plant had been put into successful operation, construction of an 18,000,000-lb. Government-financed addition was started. Late in 1941, as a part of the $400,000,000 defense program intended to produce 600,000,000 t0 700,000,000 lb. of magnesium per year, Dow was asked to build and operate for the Government a 72,000000-lb. plant near its original plant at Freeport. Within a few days after the Japanese made their attack at Pearl Harbor, preparation of a site was started at Velasco, Texas, for the construction of the Texas plant of the Dow Magnesium Corporation-the largest known magnesium plant utilizing sea water as its raw material. Less than six months after the first piling was driven, urgently needed magnesium was in steady production. Five months later, the plant had exceeded its rated capacity. It remained above rated production until the general magnesium curtailment was applied to Government-owned plants in September 1944. Credit for the construction and operation record of the Dow magnesium plant must be divided among the efforts of a very determined group of men, an extremely favorable location, and a simple process. It is with the two latter aspects of the plant that this article will deal. The site for the new enterprise was chosen near Velasco, Texas, on property bordering the Brazos River at a point approximately 6 miles inland from the original magnesium plant and y miles inland from the Freeport Harbor on the Gulf of Mexico. This location was far enough away from the operating units to reduce both interference from construction and the vulnerability of closely bunched manufacturing operations to the then feared air attack. Yet the distance inland was not too great for the economical construction of a barge canal from the harbor to serve both the transportation of raw

Jan 1, 1945

By Roshan B. Bhappu, Ronald J. Roman, Dexter H. Reynolds

The reaction between manganese dioxide and molybdenite in a water- sulfuric acid medium was studied at atmospheric pressure and from 25° to 103°C. Both solids are dissolved to give, as final products in solution, Mo(VI), S(VI), and Mn(II). Stoichiornetric relationshifis are most simply represented by the equation MoSz + YMnO2 + 15H+ - HMoO-4 + 2HSO-4 + 9Mn++ + 6H20 The rate of this reaction was found to be dependent on temperature, manganese sulfate concentration, acid concentration, and, in a complex way, the surface areas of both manganese dioxide and molybdenite. Both the total amount of manganese dioxide and tnolybdenite and the ratio of manganese dioxide to molybdenite played a part in determining the over-all rate of the reaction. The effect of acid concentration on the rate was also dependent on the ratio of manganese dioxide to molybdenite. SEVERAL reports in the literature describe reactions using manganese dioxide in water-sulfuric acid media as an oxidizing agent. Nearly all previous work describes interactions between an ion and manganese dioxide, such as the oxidation of ferrous to ferric iron,' or the interaction between a molecule in solution and manganese dioxide, such as the oxidation of toluene to benzaldehyde.2 Only a few references describe the use of solid manganese dioxide to oxidize another solid in sulfuric acid. One report3 states, "Manganese dioxide in dilute sulfuric acid solutions had no beneficial effect (in leaching copper from chalcopyrite), but in more concentrated acid solutions the rate of solution was about the same as that for permanganate." In 1902 a German patent4 described a process which used manganese dioxide in strong (50°Be') sulfuric acid for oxidizing chromite ores to soluble iron and chromium salts. The process consisted of mixing the sulfuric acid with the finely ground ore and manganese dioxide. The pulp was then heated to about 120°C and an electric current passed through it. The manganese dioxide apparently dissolved in the strong, hot acid solution, oxidized the iron and chromium and itself was reduced to manganese 11! then was oxidized at the anode back to manganese dioxide, and the cycle repeated. An extensive study5 of the kinetics of the oxidation of pyrite with manganese dioxide indicated that in dilute sulfuric acid solutions (about 0.1 N) and at elevated pressures the dissolution of the pyrite was brought about by air oxidation of the iron to ferrous sulfate, followed by manganese dioxide oxidation of the ferrous sulfate to ferric sulfate. The mechanism proposed by the authors involved the oxidation of the iron at the surface of the manganese dioxide. Also! the oxidation of sulfide sulfur to sulfate was credited to the oxygen in the air, not to the manganese dioxide. Since the metallurgical literature is lacking in information concerning the use of one solid to oxidize another solid. the current investigation was under-

Jan 1, 1965

By Bob Snashall

"We could blow that damned fort out of existence if we could run a mine shaft under it!," claimed one Union soldier eyeing Bobby Lee's Petersburg defense line protecting Richmond and Jeff Davis. Puncture the line, take the hill behind, and the Confederate capital would celebrate Yankee jubilee, 1864. That was June. At 4:15 am, July 30, mine boss Henry Reese, sergeant, 48th Regiment, Pennsylvania Volunteers, gingerly entered the mine, dark and muddy. Something had gone wrong. The mine, set to go off at 3:30, hadn't exploded. It had to be checked. The main mine gallery, 1.5 m high x 1.4 m wide (5 x 4 ft) narrowing at the top to 0.6 m (2 ft), forced Reese into a tuck run. Some¬where up there in that 155 m (511 ft) stretch running 6 m (20 ft) under the rebel works, moisture may have doused the charge. Or maybe a fuse splice went awry. Or maybe there was live fire steaming like a locomo¬tive towards 3.6 t (4 st) of black powder. Perhaps now Reese wished this sprint was shorter. For the mine boasted a record break¬ing distance in military annals. Lieut. Col. Henry Pleasants Credit goes to Lieut. Col. Henry Pleas¬ants, commander of the 48th, who overheard the soldier's claim for what a mine could do. In peacetime, Pleasants had been a railroad engineer working on the Sand Patch Tunnel. He later switched to mining, working for the Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co. He even married the daughter of the editor of The Miners Journal. Grieving over his wife's early death, Pleasants plunged into the ven¬ture of war. This Union officer took the mine idea to the brass. Headquarters was less than enthu¬siastic. "The chief engineer of the Army and the rest of the regular Army wiseacres said it was not feasible," Pleasants wrote to his uncle. The pros scoffed, ticking off a list of horribles: No mine has ever gone that far, men will suffocate and be crushed, the rebs will countermine, the men will be trapped. Still, Pleasants eked out a signal to proceed. In the meantime, the miners of the 48th had commenced to dig anyway. It was like the 48th to proceed against the odds. The 48th Pennsylvania Volunteers The 48th had been recruited from Penn¬sylvania's Schuylkill County, anthracite coal mining country. The mines had been torn with strife over wages. Strikes and rioting were prevalent. Murder was not unknown. This "Buckshot" resistance centered in Pottsville, PA. It forced the governor to call in troops. Coal was in high demand to run the war machine. Pennsylvania operators worried that a military draft would stir up violence, closing the mines altogether and further shift¬ing business to emerging Illinois mines. Men lit out for the western gold fields in the tens of thousands. Secret societies bred in the mining camps invited draft agents to dance at the end of a rope. Jobs threatened by cheap, victorious South¬ern labor were one warning intended to get immigrant miners interested in the war. Operators gave miners time off to help de¬fend Philadelphia during Lee's thrust to Gettysburg. Even so, the draft spawned new violence and troop intercession. Soldiers were not welcome. The dust had barely settled when into this Pennsylvania "minefield" marched the 48th on a recruitment drive. The 48th had been in Lexington, KY on guard duty. When it came time for the regiment to pull out, the townspeople had prevailed upon authorities to extend the regiment's stay. Finally ordered to move out, the 48th was feted by a hanky-waving, tear-dropping send-off to the lyrical lament Auld Lang Syne. And Kentucky fancied itself to be rebel. Striding smartly into the Pennsylvania coalfields, the 48th attracted 400 recruits and marched off under regimental colors specially made by the proud citizens of none other than Pottsville, PA.

Jan 1, 1989

By Rudolf Gahl

THE history of flotation in America is very short, at least as far as the large-scale application of the process is concerned. It is remarkable how many important developments have taken place inn the last few years and are already being extensively utilized. What was new a year ago, seems almost commonplace now. For this reason it is with hesitation that I follow the suggestion: of Dr. Ricketts, President of the Institute, to describe the experiences of the Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co. with the flotation process. TESTS CONDUCTED IN SMALL TEST-MILL When the Inspiration company first decided to build a concentrating plant, nothing was known about flotation, and the process was to be gravity concentration pure and simple. Demonstration Tests Conducted by Minerals Separation Co. While plans were being prepared by H. Kenyon Burch (who had been intrusted with the design and construction of the concentrator) the Minerals Separation Co., a concern at that time little known in America, asked and obtained permission to demonstrate the value of its flotation process for Inspiration ore. As. a consequence, a small 50-ton flotation machine of standard design was added to the company's test plant and started to operate in the beginning of 1913. This marks the beginning of flotation at Inspiration. The results obtained with this machine, which was operated by members of the Minerals Separation staff, so far surpassed what this company anticipated that it was decided to continue flotation tests for this purpose, and two of the flotation experts of the Minerals Separation Co., I. L. Greninger and G. A. Chapman, were retained. L. R. Wallace, now superintendent of the Miami works of the International Smelting Co., was at that time metallurgist of the Inspiration company and in that capacity took an active part' in these tests. Great credit is due to him for his quick recognition of the possibilities of flotation.

Jan 9, 1916

By Roy Lindgren

Since the year 1643, when the first blast furnace in America for treating iron ore was built at Saugus, Mass., out of mica schist quarried in the neighboring district, the procurement of a suitable refractory for furnace lining has been a problem of concern to the operators of furnaces. The stacks built of mica schist continued to smelt iron ore until about 1836, when, according to F. H. Norton, the first firebrick were produced1, at Queens Run, Pa. Other writers speak of brick having been molded and burned in Massachusetts about the year 1834. In 1841, Andrew Russell began to produce medium refractory plastic clay brick near East Liverpool, Ohio, that were used for lining blast furnaces1. The well-known Kentucky clay-producing district was not opened up until the year 1871, but since then it has produced a large percentage of the linings for iron blast furnaces. While some strides have been made by the refractories industry during the 100 years that have passed since the first firebrick were produced, it has been only during the last two decades that any real progress has been made towards bettering the product, even though the method of production had improved. Perhaps the fault lies with the user of the brick rather than with the producer, for not sooner demanding a supe¬rior product. During the past 15 years the tonnage produced per lining has increased from 500,000 gross tons to 1,000,000 gross tons, and now some furnaces are producing 1,600,000 gross tons and better on a single lining. It is true that enlarged capacity of furnaces and improved practice have accounted for some of this increase in tonnage, nevertheless better quality in firebrick must be given credit for its share. However, we are not yet ready to say that we have reached a maximum life of furnace lining. We believe that a better product can be produced and that the refractories industries of America will, through their extensive research depart-

Jan 1, 1936

By Richard W. Jolk

A pollution control equipment exemption which reduces the fair and equitable taxable value of a mine property is allowed under Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 361.077 and must be filed in accordance with the filing requirements of NRS 361.155. USMX Nevada Operations annually saves a substantial amount of State property tax dollars by taking advantage of this tax exemption. The State documents received by USMX and the documents filed by USMX are reviewed in this paper. The application filed by USMX exhibits the format and detail used to obtain this tax exemption and the extent to which environmental control equipment may be claimed.

Jan 1, 1993

By Michael A. Gustafson, Fernando B. Sotelino

INTRODUCTION The degree of success of any new project will ultimately depend on two factors: (i) the underlying economic strength of the project; and (ii) how successfully the parties involved can coordinate their interests to establish a financing structure which indeed capitalizes on the project's inherent economic attractiveness. A project's underlying economic attractiveness is determined by its inherent comparative advantage in accessing the factors of production, combining these factors of production to create a product and marketing this product. Initially, the decision regarding whether to go ahead with the project - the go/no go decision - has to be based on its total ability to generate cash flow returns to project participants to compensate them for resources committed and risks undertaken. The extent to which project sponsors will actually benefit from the project's inherent economic attractiveness is fundamentally dependent on their ability to establish the long-term financing arrangement which best meets the objectives and constraints of each project participant and sources the most advantageous funding. The decision regarding the financing of the project, the "how-to-go" decision, is then an attempt to find the capital structure, consistent with market terms and conditions and sound financial management policies which will best: (i) match planned outflows with cash inflows; and (ii) maximize the return for project sponsors. This article makes use of a case study to illustrate the analytical process involved in dealing with the go/no go and the how-to-go decisions on a project. Though most commonly applied to project finance situations, the guideline described herein is equally applicable to other financing situations, such as leveraged buyouts and debt restructurings, where timely repayment of debt depends largely on the future cash flows to be generated by the entity being financed. Our case study is of a hypothetical expansion of an existing copper mining operation in Latin America. The company, Latin American Copper (LAC) currently has 147 million metric tons of proven sulphide ore reserves. The existing mine complex consists of an open pit mining operation and a conventional flotation plant with a processing capacity of 20,000 metric tons of ore per day. LAC sells copper concentrates primarily to Japanese custom smelters. The mine has been in operation for 5 years, fine copper production last year was 108,240 metric tons, and LAC currently has assets of $175 million and net worth of $135 million. Due to a recent increase in proven reserves, LAC is considering doubling the treatment capacity of its flotation plant to 40,000 tons per day, and expanding its mining capacity to meet the additional concentrator capacity (the "Project"). Project capital expenditures and incremental working capital have been estimated at approximately $210 million. The construction period is expected to cover one year, including a three-month start-up phase. The Project is to be funded by a combination of equity, senior debt, including both supplier credits and/or commercial bank term loans, and subordinated debt. LAC's shareholders are willing to commit a maximum of $50 million to the Project. A government development agency, which is also a minority shareholder, might be willing to lend approximately $40 million to LAC in the form of subordinated notes, depending on the ability of the Project to generate foreign exchange reserves. Commercial banks cannot be expected to offer loans with maturities longer than ten years. The Project is expected to increase the value of the firm because: (i) It will solidify the Company's position as a low-cost copper producer by taking advantage of economies of scale. As a result of the expansion, cash production costs are expected to decrease 7.0[c]/lb. and all-in costs 11.0[c]/lb; (ii) The potential earnings stream from the sulphide ore reserves will be realized

Jan 1, 1985

By Robert L. Davidoff

INTRODUCTION The impact of taxation differs substantially from state to state in a complex fashion that depends on both the physical characteristics of a mineral deposit and on the price of the mineral commodity relative to its costs of production. A comparative analysis of the tax structures of eight states (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wisconsin) showed wide variations in rates of return for any given type of mineral property, with no state having either the most burdensome or least burdensome tax structure under all circumstances. Three hypothetical mineral operations were analyzed: a producing open-pit copper property, a non-producing underground platinum operation, and a non-producing underground gold operation. None of them corresponds exactly to an existing property. Each of these property types is further defined to have ore feed grades at three different levels, leading to three potential profitability levels, referred to in this paper as "economic", "marginal" and "subeconomic". Thus the differential impact of state tax structures is measured for mineral properties of different types, as well as for different profitability levels. Montana is used as the base case. This study does not address the topic of corporate structures or tax consolidation. There are no costs assumed external to the operation of the deposit (e.g. exploration to locate additional deposits). Two types of analyses were performed for this study. The first calculates the total cumulative tax payments in each state using all applicable taxes (including U.S. federal income taxes and examines the resultant differences in discounted cash-flows rate of returns DCFROR's amoung the eight states. The second is a sensitivity analysis that examines each type of state tax separately (i.e. state income, property, and severance taxes) in order to isolate and examine the differences in tax payments that are due to the difference in rates and methods of computing specific types of taxes in each state. The results of this study serve to illustrate the complex nature of interactions among various taxes. For example, property tax is a deduction in calculating severance tax in some state. Changes in property-tax and severance-tax payments both enter into the calculation of state and federal income-tax liability. This, in turn, could change the timing and usage of tax-loss carry forward amounts and investment tax credits. Additionally, the physical characteristics of a property, the method and costs at which the mineral will be extracted, and the profitability level at which each property operates will affect tax treatment. Each mineral operation was evaluated at three different predetermined profitability levels, referred to using the terms economic, marginal and sub-economic. These three profitability levels are defined by the ore feed grades of the primary commodity that yield in constant terms, approximately an "economic" 18% DCFROR, "a marginal." 10% DCFROR, and a "sub-economic" 5% DCFROR, respectively, under the Montana tax structure. In the analyses, the mining and processing parameters for each of the three types of properties were assumed to be identical for each of the eight states. It was assumed that each operation produces at full operating capacity throughout its life. This implies the level of mineral commodity demand will support the inferred commodity price, such that each operation will be able to sell all its output. The analyses performed for this study were done using a comprehensive economic evaluation simulator that is used in the Bureau of Mines, Division of Minerals Availability MAS program to perform DCFROR analyses. All economic evaluations performed upon these data (see appendix 2) were in constant January 1981 dollars. By-product prices used for the analyses were: [Gold $425.00/troy ounce Palladium$200.00/troy ounce Silver $ 10.00/troy ounce] Typical cash-flow calculation layout is given in Appendix 3. The initial step for each evaluation is to define an "economic" profitability level scenario. An 18% DCFROR rate in Montana was considered the

Jan 1, 1985

By Robert B. Parsons

"Although the April 19, 1983 federal budget appears to put greater emphasis on new or expanded government spending programs in an effort to get Canadians working again, the budget proposals contain a light sprinkling of tax changes which could be of some direct benefit to the mining industry.This month, Tax Notes examines some of the more important of these changes.IntroductionSome sectors of Canada's mining industry could benefit from the proposed income tax changes announced by Finance Minister Lalonde in delivering his budget address to the House of Commons on April 19, 1983. Improved depletion allowance rules, expanded investment tax credits, better use of business losses, and inflation proofing of personal capital gains on Canadian common shares are all part of the measures included in Mr. Lalonde's first budget to try to reinvigorate the battered Canadian economy.Improved DepletionUnder the Income Tax Regulations, a taxpayer who incurs Canadian exploration expense (and certain other eligible expenses) is permitted to deduct not only the full amount of the Canadian exploration expense (""CEE""), but also an additional allowance (the so-called earned depletion allowance) equal to one-third of the CEE. Thus, a taxpayer in certain circumstances can claim a deduction of $1.33 for each $1.00 of eligible expenditure, including CEE.Although CEE can be deducted from any source of the taxpayer's income (for example, from investment income, salary income, and so on), prior to budget date the earned depletion allowance was deductible only from the taxpayer's resource profits. This restriction on the deductibility of the earned depletion allowance substantially reduced the attraction of the allowance: few individual investors or investment companies, for example, have the required stream of resource profits, at least when the CEE or other eligible expenditure is made."

Jan 1, 1983

By J. J. Beeson

Fox the past fifty years or more, the structural features of the Cordilleran mountain system of western United States have presented some most interesting problems. Any geologist or engineer living in this region, or even making occasional examinations. of the mines, will lose much of interest and importance if he is not familiar with the literature. Some of the greatest works on geology have been the, result of studies carried on in sections of this region. Among the more important of the earlier works are those of Dutton,1. King,2 Gilbert,3 and Powell;4 of the more recent Lindgren,5 Ransome,6 Spurr,7 Butler,8 and others have contributed much. Many of the papers are largely of scientific interest but even these lay the foundation for the commercial application of the broader features of the geology. I have read many of these works with the keenest interest and pleasure; in fact, some have been read until some of the more important findings seem to be my own. In this paper, however, it is my aim to accept credit for little more than the labor of assembling some of the ideas of others. This is done with the hope that an interesting and valuable discussion will be the result. If some of the ideas presented should

Jan 9, 1925

By L. C. IlsLey

Coal mining is more widely distributed throughout the United States than is generally known, as 30 States are credited with having coal mines. In 1919 twenty-three of these States each produced at least a million tons of bituminous coal, and all the States produced about 560,000,000 tons. In addition, Pennsylvania produced about 85,000,000 tons of anthracite. Twenty-eight States have regulations prepared by commissions or have enacted laws governing the operation of coal mines. Pennsyl¬vania has separate codes for the anthracite and bituminous fields. The codes may be classified as follows: Twelve distinctly coal¬mining codes; eight codes that are essentially coal mining, but also apply to other mines; five codes that are subdivided, referring partly to coal mines and partly to other mines; and four codes that are essentially metal mining, but apply in part or in whole to coal mining. The first State to have a coal-mining law was Pennsylvania, which enacted a law, for Schuylkill County only, in 1869. The first State to enact a coal-mining law governing all the coal mines in the State was Illinois in 1872, followed by Ohio in 1873. Pennsylvania in 1879 enacted a law for anthracite mines only, but did not enact similar laws for bituminous mines until 1577. At least 10 other States enacted coal-mining laws between the years 1870 and 1890. Before 1890 electricity was little used in coal-ruining operations and therefore practically no provisions governing the installation, inspection, or maintenance of electrical equipment were made in any of the laws enacted up to 1890. In the law of Colorado, approved April 8, 1885, there is a reference to the use of telephones, probably the first reference to electrical equipment of any kind in a State-mining code. Most of the mining codes have been changed from their original form by amendment or by complete revision. In some of the early changes a casual reference is made to the use of electricity or to the handling of electrical equipment. In 1911 Pennsylvania added

Jan 1, 1920

By C. F. Clausen

"Cement" means binding agent or glue. It is derived from the Latin word "Caementum," the name of a limestone, chips of which were used in mortar more than 2,000 years ago in Italy. During the middle ages "cement" or "cement" generally denoted mortar. Today it means any binding material. The Thomas Register lists nearly 200 classifications for "cement" including automobile cement, household cement, rubber cement, etc. The material most commonly associated with this word, however, is portland cement which, when mixed with water and allowed to hydrate, is a ceramic binding material used to cement aggregates (crushed stone, gravel and sand) together in "concrete," the most universally used building material of today. It is estimated that more tons of concrete are used annually than all other building materials put together including steel, lumber, gypsum, bricks, tiles, aluminum and glass. Its use in foundations, building construction, sanitary work, dams, railroads, and highways, makes it difficult to conceive of modem civilization without concrete. A survey made in October 1955 showed the following uses of portland cement: [Percent Highways20 Nonresidential buildings20 Residential buildings15 Military construction10 Sewer and water works8 Public utilities10 Other (conservation, farm, and maintenance and repair)17 100] As of today, the percentage for highways is probably even higher. Ceramic binding materials have unquestionably been used in construction work for thousands of years. The mortar between the blocks of the great pyramids was calcined gypsum (plaster of paris). The use of calcined and slaked limestone goes back earlier than the Roman Empire. Gypsum, however, is relatively soft, and common lime mortar is not "hydraulic," i.e., it does not harden under water. The Greeks and Romans discovered later that an addition of a finely divided active siliceous material (Santorin earth or Pozzolana) would react with slaked lime to form a stronger, and hydraulic, cement. The Appian Way in Italy, Colosseum, and the great Aqueducts built by the Romans were made with this type cement, and some of these structures are still in existence today. However, not until 1756 did some serious research result in the development of better cements. In that year the English engineer, John Smeaton produced a stronger cement by burning a limestone containing considerable proportions of clayey impurities. Other investigations and improvements were made by Bryan Higgins, Bergmann, Joseph Parker, L. J. Vicat, J. F. John, James Frost, and I. C. Johnson.2 Traditionally, but perhaps unfairly to others, the invention of the prototype of today's portland cement is credited to the English mason Joseph Aspdin who in 1824 obtained a patent and gave the product its name, because in color the mortar produced from it resembled a natural building stone obtained from the British Isle of Portland. The contributions of Johnson and Aspdin were primarily the important step of preparing a synthetic mixture of lime and clay without depending on raw materials found in nature which might contain such elements in desirable proportions. However, even these early

Jan 1, 1960

CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: We have with us this afternoon, Mr. D. W. Rockey, of the Industrial Educational Organization, who would like to occupy a few minutes of our time. There is still an hour left, and there is a lot more talking to be done, and when the time is up you can go. D. W. ROC'KEY (U. S. Vocational Training Bureau, N. M.) : Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: I am sorry to say I am not more closely connected with the coal mining game. I am interested in it because I am interested in a great deal of educational work being done in New Mexico. Two years ago, this Institute appointed an Educational Committee to investigate the opportunity for education in coal mining, and you have the report of that committee; it was issued in May 1924. Mr. Littlejohn, Mr. Moorhead of the Phelps-Dodge Corporation, Mr. Dickinson, and Mr. Miller, I think, of the C. F. C I., and Mr. Pryde, were members of that committee. They investigated the work being done in Safety, Training, First- Aid, and other topics, and made a general survey of the educational problems that might be said to be of benefit to the coal operators and to the coal miners. I believe, if I understood Mr. Moorhead correctly, while this report was accepted the committee was not discharged; but everyone seemed to be a little in doubt as to whether this activity should continue. My plea here directly is, of course, to ask that they be made a permanent committee, and asked to report to you at the next meeting in February on what has been accomplished in carrying out the program that was advised by the various companies, and what success, from a standpoint of improved work and financial return to the company, has been had. I believe that the whole trend of your discussion here has shown the need or the opportunity for improved production through education. For instance your mechanical loader the need of men who are experienced along mechanical lines, rather than the old pick and shovel methods, and the need of better understanding of your problems, just as in your safety lamp discussion that came up in the report of your Safety Committee. We have also developed a new phase, a new may of getting at some of your problems at Dawson this year, that has not been covered previously. I want to ask Mr. Holman here to tell you what is being done as a starter. Remember, we have not worked this out. He will tell yon how we are making a preliminary start in training inexperienced miners with the idea of cutting the accident record and keeping the production of inexperienced men at a higher level. If you are interested in that, I would like to suggest that this committee be requested to investigate some of these things very carefully. The State of New Mexico was willing to put five hundred or a thousand dollars into this training program as an experiment. We are willing that the Institute should have the credit for it, but we want it carefully surveyed so at your next meeting or some subsequent meeting, they can say this has been a feasible project and worthy of consideration. Mr. Holman, will yon tell us a little about this? (Applause.) MR. HOLMAN: We had an idea that by putting a green man in the mine with an experienced miner, the green man would probably learn something, and not get into trouble, etc. We decided to take a certain portion of one of our best mines, cross entry room work, and establish an underground school. We picked one of the assistant foremen who was well trained in our particular mining methods, and any green man who was employed was put into this school. He was paid a salary and he trained each and every man. Each man or two men world be working in a room and we paid them the regular contract price; they were trained how to shovel coal, pick waste and various other things. Some would stay in there a month and be transferred to other portions of the mine or other

Jan 1, 1926

it may be clearly seen that one of the most rapidly increasing items in mining operations is the cost of the timber alone, to say nothing of the cost of installation. Consequently, any practical means that may be used to lengthen the life of mine timber will greatly tend to decrease mining costs and result in important economies in operation. The four principal agents by which mine timbers are destroyed are, decay, insect attack, fire and mechanical abrasion. Decay and insect attack are credited with more than 50 per cent of the total amount of timber destroyed in the mines. Numerous methods may be used to conserve mine timbers, such as better selection, preparation, storage and segregation. It frequently happens that good timber goes into places where poor timber would do as well, and timber of inferior quality is sent into places where only the best grade should be used. However, the most effective method of conservation is by treatment with some standard preservative to prevent decay. Some of. the benefits to be noted from the use of preserved timbers are; the reduction in operating costs by decrease in timber purchases; cuts down interference with mining operations due to timber failures on main haulageways; prevents excessive falling of roof in entries by maintaining timber in sound condition; conserves timber supplies and makes possible the utilization of inferior woods; reduces the danger of mine accidents; improves mine ventilation; lessens fire hazard. Our experience thus far with preservatives, while not of a sufficient period of time to establish just what length of life we may obtain from timber so treated, results obtained during the past four years indicate that the intelligent use of preservatives will effect sufficient economies in mine timber costs to justify the expenditures made for this purpose. MR. BAKER (Concluding): Now, if there are any questions you gentlemen would like to ask about our particular operations, I will attempt to answer them. J. H. EMRICK (Sullivan Machinery Company, Denver, Colo.) ; I was wondering how much penetration you get. MR. BAKER: We get between one-sixteenth and one-eighth of an inch; it is a dipping process. With pressure treatment you get-a greater absorption; that is, better than one-sixteenth of an inch. As long as there is no mechanical abrasion, it seems to serve the purpose. MR. EMRICK: Does that apply to the condition of the timber before it is treated? If it is perfectly dry, will it absorb more treatment than if it is partly green? MR. BAKER: Certainly; one of the things we do is to have it thoroughly seasoned before it is put into the preservative. We put some green timber into the mine once, and the fungus went after it right away. MR. EMRICK: What was the difference in the depth reached by the preservative? MR. BAKER: It hardly penetrated at all when it was green. It has to be sound and well seasoned. MR. EMRICK: How long was the timber dipped or treated? MR. BAKER: According to the seasoning. If it was well seasoned, it was left in the hot bath for an hour; if not so well seasoned, it was left for about a couple of hours. C. M. BILLINGTON (General Superintendent, Rocky Mountain Fuel Company, Lafayette, Colo.): Have you found it necessary to treat timber that has been charred? MR. BAKER: No. However, I suppose it has the sane effect; in lots of places they char timber for the purpose of treatment. MR. BILLINGTON: Have you ever tried lime and salt? MR. BAKER: No, this is the only thing we have tried, the creosote and the Aczol; the Aczol is a foreign product. WM. LITTLEJOHN: Which I is preferable, the Aczol or the creosote? MR. BAKER: I couldn't say as to that. MR. LITTLEJOHN: Have you had any tests as to the value of either? MR. BAKER: We have had some of the Aczol timbers in service for a little over four years; we have had some creosote timbers in service

Jan 1, 1926

By Roy A. Lindgren

Since the year 1643, when the first blast furnace in America for treating iron ore was built at Saugus, Mass., out of mica schist quarried in the neighboring district, the procurement of a suitable refractory for furnace lining has been a problem of concern to the operators of furnaces. The stacks built of mica schist continued to smelt iron ore until about 1836, when, according to F. H. Norton, the first firebrick were produced1, at Queens Run, Pa. Other writers speak of brick having been molded and burned in Massachusetts about the year 1834. In 1841, Andrew Russell began to produce medium refractory plastic clay brick near East Liverpool, Ohio, that were used for lining blast furnaces1. The well-known Kentucky clay-producing district was not opened up until the year 1871, but since then it has produced a large percentage of the linings for iron blast furnaces. While some strides have been made by the refractories industry during the 100 years that have passed since the first firebrick were produced, it has been only during the last two decades that any real progress has been made towards bettering the product, even though the method of production had improved. Perhaps the fault lies with the user of the brick rather than with the producer, for not sooner demanding a superior product. During the past 15 years the tonnage produced per lining has increased from 500,000 gross tons to 1,000,000 gross tons, and now some furnaces are producing 1,600,000 gross tons and better on a single lining. It is true that enlarged capacity of furnaces and improved practice have accounted for some of this increase in tonnage, nevertheless better quality in firebrick must be given credit for its share. However, we are not yet ready to say that we have reached a maximum life of furnace lining. We believe that a better product can be produced and that the refractories industries of America will, through their extensive research depart-

Jan 1, 1937

By Ludwig Strah

"The paper outlines the history of rubber mill liners beginning with the awarding of the first North American patent rights in 1923. It includes the early-day applications and installations of the 1920s and 1930s through to their present-day application. Over-all rubber mill liner design is discussed in relation to present day installations employing rubber mill liners in various grinding applications. A brief overview is given of a manufacturer's procedures to produce rubber mill liners.IntroductionIn early 1910, it became apparent that the productive life of the silver mines in Cobalt, Ontario, could be substantially prolonged by mining lower-grade ores.The mining of lower-grade ores required the establishment of treatment facilities which initially employed jaw crushers, stamp mills, jigs and concentrating tables. The recovery of silver in other than a coarse metallic form required the additional step which was introduced at that time: the cyanidation of silver concentrates from the tables. The resultant requirement for increased and improved recovery led to the introduction of grinding mills, i.e. tube mills.Shortly after the introduction of the tube mills to the Nipissing Mine's mill in 1914, the idea of using rubber as a mill liner material was spawned. However, no action was taken due to the advent of World War I. It is interesting to note that the idea of rubber mill liners emanated from having used pieces of solid rubber tire as an emergency repair on a set of liners when a liner had broken and no immediately available spare was on site.The credit for this ingenuity and subsequent application for a patent on rubber mill liners falls to James John Denny, the mill superintendent, and Rolla Barnum Watson, the general manager of Coniagas Mines Limited. The patent application was formally made on December 3, 1921. The U.S. Patent Office issued Patent No. 1,470,597 on October 16, 1923."

Jan 1, 1982

By Roy Lindgren

SINCE the year 1643, when the first blast furnace in America for treating iron ore was built at Saugus, Mass., out of mica schist quarried in the neighboring district, the procurement of a suitable refractory for furnace lining has been a problem of concern to the operators of furnaces. The stacks built of mica schist continued to smelt iron ore until about 1836, when, according to F. H. Norton, the first firebrick were produced1, at Queens Run, Pa. Other writers speak of brick having been molded and burned in Massachusetts about the year 1834. In 1841, Andrew Russell began to produce medium refractory plastic clay brick near East Liverpool, Ohio, that were used for lining blast furnaces1. The well-known Kentucky clay-producing district was not opened up until the year 1871, but since then it has produced a large percentage of the linings for iron blast furnaces. While some strides have been made by the refractories industry during the 100 years that have passed since the first firebrick were produced, it has been only during the last two decades that any real progress has been made towards bettering the product, even though the method of production had improved. Perhaps the fault lies with the user of the brick rather than with the producer, for not sooner demanding a supe-rior product. During the past 15 years the tonnage produced per lining has increased from 500,000 gross tons to 1,000,000 gross tons, and now some furnaces are producing 1,600,000 gross tons and better on a single lining. It is true that enlarged capacity of furnaces and improved practice have accounted for some of this increase in tonnage, nevertheless better quality in firebrick must be given credit for its share. However, we are not yet ready to say that we have reached a maximum life of furnace lining. We believe that a better product can be produced and that the refractories industries of America will, through their extensive research depart-

Jan 1, 1936

By W. O. Philbrook

An engineering analysis indicates that the coke rate in present blast-furnace practice is set not by chemical or thermal needs but to give adequate charge permeability for economical driving rates. An equation showing interrelations among pressure drop, gas flow, and charge characteristics has been derived. Flooding conditions and the location of the fusion zone are discussed. Maximum ore size is probably limited by chemical re-ducibility rather than by heat transfer. THE intention of this paper is to show that the ].imitations on the production rate and coke requirement of the iron blast furnace are not primarily chemical or thermal in nature but are related to characteristics of the burden and operation that govern gas flow, heat transfer, and stock movement. A semiquantitative analysis will be developed in terms of standard engineering principles to give a useful picture of the relative importance of physical and mechanical factors in contrast with the chemical features of the process that are more commonly emphasized. Most of the details of calculation have been omitted in the interest of brevity and to avoid submerging the rnain points in a sea of arithmetic. Numerical values have been arrived at by objective methods from reported operating data or by reasonable estimates of material properties where exact data are lacking and then tested to see how well they fit practice, rather than by working backward to find what assumptions are needed to give the desired answers. The analysis is oversimplified in many ways because exact engineering relations have not yet been studied for bed distributions as complex as are known to exist in the blast-furnace stock column. One objective of this paper is to show that the blast furnace, in spite of its complexity, can be at- tacked by engineering methods in the hope that this viewpoint will stimulate the kind of research needed for a more exact treatment. The basic ideas and many of the conclusions presented are qualitatively well known. A careful literature survey to credit the source of all observations not original to the author would indeed be voluminous, and such has not been attempted. T. L. Joseph's Howe Memorial Lecture' gives an excellent background of what is known about the internal workings of a blast furnace. Other important reference works or sources of specific information will be noted. It is hoped that the present paper will contribute something new, in method of attack and interpretation, that will aid in a clearer understanding of how to operate the blast furnace to best advantage. Factors Limiting Production and Coke Rates The rate of combustion of coke in a blast furnace, as in any fuel bed, is exactly proportional to the rate at which air is supplied. It is axiomatic, then, that the production rate of a furnace is limited by the rate at which it will take wind, i.e., burn coke, and the amount of coke that must be burned at the tuyeres to make a ton of iron of suitable composition. These two possible limiting factors will be considered briefly in the order mentioned. One common restriction on wind rate is flue-dust production. Since the volume of top gas is nearly proportional to the blast volume (by a factor of about 1.35 on a dry basis), an increased wind rate causes a correspondingly increased linear velocity of top gas in the throat of the furnace. The higher

Jan 1, 1955