Search Documents

By J. H. Emrick

When I was asked to read a paper to you, I wondered what idea I could bring before you which would be interesting and which would be helpful in your work in operating coal mines. The Institute has been studying ways and means of increasing the safety and efficiency of mine operations. Almost every subject along this line has been discussed from time to time. In thinking the matter over it occurred to me that there was one thing used by practically all coal mining companies in considerably large quantities and which in many cases does not receive the attention it should. It is the cutter bit placed in the cutter chains on coal mining machines. Coal mining machines have been repeatedly improved during the last twenty-five years until their efficiency and convenience have reached a high level. The generating units making electrical power to operate them also have been developed to a similar degree. This machinery has been in- stalled at a great expense to coal mining companies and the installation made for the sole purpose of pulling coal cutter bits through coal. Why not then give these cutter bits some attention so as to see that they do their work as efficiently as their driving and propelling units? The consideration of this question easily divides itself into three principal parts-First, the kina of steel out of which to make the bit; Second, the proper form or shape to give it; and Third, the tempering of the bit. Let us discuss them in that order. There have been tried at different times' various grades of steel for cutter bit uses. The cheaper steels, having a very low carbon content (.10 to .30 per cent carbon) have proved un- satisfactory because such steel cannot be tempered so as to produce a satisfactory cutting tool. Because of the low carbon content, it cannot be hardened to retain its cutting edge. It dulls quickly, bends easily on striking any hard obstruction in the coal, and so requires constant resetting to its original form. The high priced alloy steels when properly shaped and tempered will give a bit that would make a clean, even cut in the coal if no impurities were encountered. Such a condition is rarely found. Alloy steel is quite brittle and on striking impurities, such as sulphur balls or a sand spar, is readily broken and so the loss of material through these broken bits and the high price paid for it more than offset all the other advantages which this steel has shown in cutting. Experience has shown that steel having approximately .70 per cent carbon and from .25 to .35 per cent manganese will give the most economical results. Some mines have obtained better results by using a steel of slightly higher carbon content and in some cases a grade of tool steel has been used. The disadvantage of using a steel having too much carbon is that it can easily be spoiled in the black- smith shop by overheating. Steels having a carbon content of about .70 per cent have a sufficiently wide range of temperatures at which they can be forged and hardened so that with ordinary care and attention they are not likely to be burned. Steel of this quality, therefore, has been found to be the most practicable because of its reasonable cost, ease in working and tempering and general durability. In the early days of mining machines, comparatively few bits were used because each machine required but a few bits because there were but

Jan 1, 1925

Allis Mineral Systems ARCO Coal Company Buckley Powder Co. CALCO, Inc. Coal Magazine Colowyo Coal Company Continental Conveyor & Equipment Company Crane & Hoist Sales Cummins Southwest, Inc. Energy West Mining Company Paul J. Epley FMC Corporation The Falkirk Mining Company Fleischli Oil Co., Inc. T. J. Gundlach Machine Company Halbach & Braun Harnischfeger Corporation Hemscheidt Corporation Hyatt Regency Beaver Creek Jennmar Corporation Joy Technologies, Inc. K&P Sales Engineers, Inc. Kennametal, Inc. Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation McLanahan Corporation National Coal Association The North American Coal Corporation Northwestern Resources Company Peabody Coal Company Phillips Machine Service, Inc. Pincock, Allen & Holt, Inc. Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. Roberts & Schaefer Company Rust Tractor Company Salt River Project Santa Fe Pacific Coal Corporation Schroeder Industries Shearson-Lehman Brothers Southern Pacific Transportation Stamler Corporation Trapper Mining Inc. Wagner Equipment Company Western Energy Company Wheeler Machinery Company

Jan 1, 1992

[Participating Scholarship Colleges and Universities 154 ACZ 149 AmerCable,Inc 144 Andalex Resources, Inc 118 Behre Dolbear & Company, Inc 101 Canyon Fuel Company 145 Commercial Testing & Engineering Company 95 Continental Conveyor 148 Cove Shoes 136-137 Crane & Hoist Sales Inc 121 Crested Butte Mountain Resort 134 Cyprus Amax Minerals Company 115 Dakota Coal Company DriltechInc 135 Empire Machinery Company 94 Energy West Mining Company 122 Fluor Daniel 100 GH Hensley Industries 126. 127 Hitachi Construction Machinery (America) Corp 123 Holme, Roberts & Owen 98 Honnen Equipment Company 150 Ingersoll-Rand Company 141 Jennmar Corporation 142 Joy Mining Machinery - A Harnischfeger Industries Company 104 K & P Sales Engineers, Inc 114 Kennecott Energy Company 155 Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation 96 LeTourneau,Inc 160 Long-Airdox Company 112 Magnum Metals, Inc 133 McLanahan Corporation 129 Mine Technik America 124 Mineral Tech 151 Morrison Knudsen Corporation 97 The North American Coal Corporation 130 Northwestern Resources Company 125 P&H MinePro Services 157 Peabody Western Coal Co 131 Phillips Machine Service, Inc Pincock Allen & Holt 120 Powder River Coal Company 107 Pyro-Chem 156 RamseyTechnology, Inc 119 Rust Tractor Company 90 Salt River Project 91 Savage Industries Inc 89 Schroeder Industries 147 Sheraton Steamboat Resort and Conference Center 111 Skelly & Loy 138 Snowmass Village at Aspen 146 Stamler Corporation (An Oldenburg Group Company) 117 Tamarron Hilton Resort 140 TerraMatrix Inc 139 TIC (The Industrial Company of Wyoming, Inc.) 99 Trapper Mining Inc 106 Wagner Equipment Company 116 Weir International Mining Consultants 113 Westech 152 Wheeler Machinery Company 128]

Jan 1, 1997

[Participating Scholarship Colleges and Universities 136 Big Sky Coal Company 111 Canyon Fuel Company LLC 97 Coal Age Magazine 109 Commercial Testing & Eng. Co 99 Continental Conveyor & Equip. Co 103 Copper Mountain Resort 128 Dakota Coal Co 100 DBT America Inc 117 Empire Machinery 101 Energy West Mining Co 102]

Jan 1, 2001

By Vern Pfannenstiel

Jan 1, 2005

SECRETARY SHUBART: This letter will not surprise you. (Reads) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Mines Washington Sept. 4, 192G. Benedict Shubart, Secy, Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. Denver, Colo. Dear Sir: "Sorry not to be able to be with you but since my function in the Institute has been largely along the line of `stirrer up of trouble' (of course always with the aid of Dalrymple), I do not wish to fall from grace now so am sending you a pamphlet on the last page of which is a' tabulation as to accident indices of various coal mining states and it seems to indicate that the states comprising the Rocky Mountain Institute have the poorest accident record of all the states producing coal. "It seems to me that even allowing for possible deficiencies in connection with placing accidents upon basis of hours of exposure, our western states need to `tighten up' as to safety practices, hence I hope that the Safety Committee report will be both drastic and progressive and that western coal mines apply the drastic proposals in addition to approving them as the policy of the Institute. Why wouldn't it be advisable to have a committee appointed to ascertain why the safety record of the states comprising the Institute is so bad as to coal mines? Wishing the Institute all kinds of success." (Signed) D. HARRINGTON. SECRETARY SHUBART: He encloses this pamphlet issued by the Bureau of Mines. On the back of it is this table; and it is a fact that the Rocky Mountain States are down at the lowest in almost every case, at the lowest point, with the highest accident rate in almost every kind of accident. Maybe he is wrong; maybe he states this for reasons. That is a rotten looking table for us.

Jan 1, 1926

Jan 1, 1966

By Fredrick D. Palmer

The World is Turning to Coal Peabody?s View ?We believe the world is increasingly energy-short, led by unprecedented demand from population centers and economic hubs in Asia, the Middle East and South America ?This occurs as:?Traditional energy sources are clearly constrained, requiring coal-based alternatives?Energy-rich nations leverage political gain from their assets, and nations urgently look to improve energy security ?In this environment:?Oil, coal and gas face a greater long-term convergence, ?Coal?s traditional regionalized nature becomes global, and ?Coal?s compact energy form becomes an attractive source for liquids and substitute natural gas ?The world is blessed with an abundance of coal to help meet all human energy needs

Jan 1, 2008

By Grainne A. Matthews

Jan 1, 2009

By Michael L. Jones

Outline ?Background ?Identify and quantify CO2 sources ?Consider options for CO2 separation and capture ?Review options for sequestration/reuse ?Determine best option for managing CO2

Jan 1, 2008

By John D. Janak

Thank you for inviting me to come here and be your keynote speaker. Texas also thanks you for being included as part of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. We'll kind of think of Texas as Baja Rocky Mountains. I've always wondered why coal miners were the only people to go to the mountains in the summer time-and now I know why. The program committee should be given a big hand for selecting this RESORT. And the golf course is stimulating to say the least. This is a very beautiful location. I was asked to talk about CHALLENGES, OPPORTUNITIES and INNOVATIONS as they affect the coal industry. I am going to do that from a Texas perspective. But first, since Texas is the newest state to belong to the Institute, I would like to give you a little background on how our coal industry got started and where we are at today. The vast majority of our coal is called lignite-it has a little lower heating value than most other coals and ranks somewhere between buffalo chips and sub- bituminous. Lignite is found In three geological formations running Northeast to Southwest through South and East Texas. In-place reserves lying within 200 ft. of the surface total 14 billion tons. This slide shows the lignite formations with cur- rent mine operations colored in RED. Mines that are planned to be built in the next 10 years are shown in BLUE. Lignite was used mostly by settlers in Texas during the 1800s. It was used as a fuel to fire locomotives during the Civil War. Between 1900-1930, about 100 mines, mostly underground, were operating in Texas producing lignite for home heating and as a boiler fuel. Here are some slides showing underground access, [lie tipple used to process the lignite, and the underground workings. This is the "BIG LUMP COAL COMPANY" as shown here. The typical underground mine was 100-150 ft. deep and each miner produced 7-10 tons per day-all by hand. In 1926, the Texas Power & Light Company built the Trinidad Power Plant and began using lignite as a boiler fuel. The lignite was mined by the McAlester Fuel Company at the nearby Malakoff Mine. Here are some slides showing a stripping shovel at Malakoff uncovering lignite. The lignite was loaded into railcars in the pit for transport to the power plant. This is a picture of the Trinidad Plant which had two 20 MW units and one 32 MW unit. At the time, Trinidad was the largest power plant in the United States using lignite exclusively as a fuel. Trinidad operated until 1942 when it was converted to natural gas that was sold to the plant for 3 ½ ¢ per MMBT'U. The mine closed after having produced 7 million tons. Lignite was mostly forgotten about until 1953 when Alcoa started an aluminum smelter. Our Company formed a subsidiary called Industrial Generating Company to operate the power plant that furnished electricity to the smelter. We also operated the nearby Sandow Mine that supplied lignite as a fuel to the power plant

Jan 1, 1989

By Don Sakata

Jan 1, 2005

Effect of Iron on ash fusion temperature and waterwall deposits FeS, H2S on tube material corrosion and erosion [ ]

Jan 1, 2005

By Jeane Hull

Jan 1, 2009

By J. Kendall Hales

Jan 1, 2005

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: The paper of Mr. Emrick will now be open for discussion for about twenty minutes. The meeting is now open for discussion. MR. EMRICK: There is some question that may have occurred to you at different times, that is how are you going to tell when the bits are properly made? A fairly good rule to go by is when the used bits come out of the mine, if half of them are bent and half of them are broken, the average is pretty good MR. GEO. B. PRYDE (Union Pacific Coal Company): I would like to ask Mr. Emrick if he has any figures as to the saving of Dower with the different styles of its. MR. EMRICK: I suppose you mean chisel point bits and pick point bits? MR. PRYDE: Yes. MR. EMRICK: So far as I have been able to learn, the only reason why chisel point bits are used is to prevent coring that might be done by the cutter chain. The pick point bit, of course, is the proper thing to use. It can be used when the position of the cutter links in the cutter chain is right. I do not know of any figures which give power consumption ratings on the use of pick point and chisel point bits, but there are tests and ratings, etc., which have been taken- which have been tested as against different bits, which have been given proper clearances against bits not having been given proper clearances, and they will run,-in their saving in power, they will run 20 to 25 per cent. MR. A. C. WATTS (Chief Engineer, Utah Fuel Company) : I would like to ask Mr. Emrick if he has any record showing the saving in power on using the alloy steel chisel bits. I know that several experiments have been made; I do not recall the figures now, but we had a very decided saving in power. MR. EMRICK: I haven't any of the records. Do you think that is because of the steel that has been used? MR. WATTS: Well, they were all sharpened by the same man and used in the same machine, and at the same shop. I do not know the composition. It is "Red Star" Vanadium that I had in mind. MR. EMRICK: I have not seen any records. Some companies are using the tool steel bits because they stand up a little bit better. MR. BENEDICT SHUBART (Secretary) : I was going to ask Mr. Emrick about that question. There is one company that does not recommend tempering the bits. They recommend using not exactly self-hardening steel, but one that is bard enough without quenching-they use 80-90-point car- bon but about a 70-point manganese, not exactly self-hardening steel, but they do not temper this at all. Will Mr. Emrick state if a steel of that kind could be worked in the bit sharpening machine that his company makes, as it

Jan 1, 1925

T. T. READ, BUREAU OF MINES: Mr. McAuliffe has asked a very practical question. Expressed in another way, the question is: If we have decided to use rock dust to prevent coal dust from exploding, have we got to take rock, that is, solid material,, break it up and finally grind it into dust (and fine grinding is very expensive), or can we take material that is already in a pretty fine state of subdivision and thereby save the expense of pulverizing it? Most of the preceding discussion has been from the view-point of practical experience, and I should like to suggest that we have not had enough practical experience in rock dusting to be able to answer this question, from the viewpoint of experience, with the degree of definiteness that Mr. McAuliffe desires. With your permission I will discuss the matter briefly from the theoretical standpoint, because after all the theoretical considerations, insofar as we understand them correctly, will apply to every' case, whereas in coming to a decision on this matter it will be necessary to take into consideration local conditions, which will necessarily vary in every case. Considering the matter in a rather elementary way, the first point is: What makes coal dust explode? The air of this room is full of dust at the present moment, even though we do not notice it. If you were to close up the room for a week, enough dust would settle on the floor so you could write your name on it. Of course, the dust which is in the air of this room is not coal dust but even if it were coal dust and you were to bring an open light in' here we all know that the dust would not explode. The reason for that is that the dust particles are not close enough together for the flame to propagate itself from one to the next. You will probably be able to see in the demonstration in the gallery on Saturday that the coal dust explosion is practically a very rapid burning of the dust. When you light one piece of dust it burns and gives out heat and if there is another piece of dust close enough to it so that the heat from the first piece is able to bring a second piece up to the burning temperature, then the flame will propagate itself through the mixture. But, if the particles are so far apart in the air that the' heat from one particle is dissipated before it reaches an adjoining one, and is therefore not able to bring the second particle up to the burning temperature, then the flame will not propagate. To get a coal dust explosion, it is not sufficient to have coal dust suspended in the air. The coal dust particles must be close enough together in the air so that the heat from one burning particle is able to heat the adjoining particles up to the point at which they will burn. There has been some discussion of the size of dust particles that will cause an explosion to propagate, and it has been pointed out that the minus 200-mesh dust is the most dangerous, and that particles coarser than 20-mesh will not propagate an explosion. There are two reasons for that. A large particle has very much smaller surface in proportion to its weight than a small particle has. You know the old story about the Indian who when asked how he could go around in cold weather without any clothes on said that an Indian was all face. A 200-mesh particle is almost all surface and there= fore is able to burn almost instantaneously, which means that it gives out its heat almost instantaneously, whereas a large particle with less surface in proportion to its weight burns more slowly, gives out its heat more slowly, and the heat has more time to be dissipated. The second reason why coarse dust does not easily propagate a flame is because it is so hard to make it

Jan 1, 1924

BENEDICT SHUBART: I am rather surprised at one statement of Mr. McKeehan, that he found it satisfactory to bond only one track. It has always been my idea of good practice to bond both tracks and cross bond frequently, so that in case of any break in the bonding of one track, which frequently occurs, there will be no interruption in the circuit.

Jan 1, 1923

Secretary's Apology: Although every effort was made to secure efficient stenographers, the railroad conditions at the time made it impossible to get stenographers from Salt Lake City. Practically all of the discussion was therefore lost, and the Secretary's apologies are offered to those whose names and remarks we are unable to record. 'We are indebted to R. Dawson Hall of Coal Age for what we have been able to print. The question was asked why belt conveyors are not more generally used. BENEDICT SHUBART: Belt conveyors lack the ruggedness of metal conveyors and require more accurate alignment. They are much used in England though comparatively scarce here. The H. C. Frick Company's belt installation at Colonial mine is an unusual installation for unusual purposes. It is hardly main haulage, but is more comparable to railroad transportation. The belts are in long sections,, nine hundred to twenty-three hundred feet, there are no particular grades, only two turns, and the immense tonnage handled justifies a quality of installation that at this day would not prove economical in most mines. EUGENE McAULIFFE, Union Pacific Coal Co., Omaha: Was much impressed on learning at the American Mining Congress that the Hudson Coal Company had mined last year 1,500.000 tons of coal from a 36-inch bed and had transported this coal to the mine cars by scrapers and conveyors. He did not believe that because one or two percent of the men around the mines were opposed to loading machines, that it should be said that the mine workers were inimical to such labor saving means. He believes that when duly explained to them they could see the advantages of the equipment offered and would be friendly to its introduction. The Sheridan-Wyoming Coal Company at Sheridan have eight Goodman Hydraulic loaders in operation in rooms .with Joy loaders driving the headings. It is not possible for the mines which had to pay high wages to compete with those whose wage scales were lower unless by the introduction of loading machines. He received a letter from Dr. L. E. Young of St. Louis, general manager of the Union Collieries Company, that his two Goodman Hydraulic machines were loading an average of three hundred tons each daily. THE SECRETARY: H. N. Taylor, president, Sheridan-Wyoming Coal Company, said Mr. Green of the American Federation of Labor told him he would have no trouble with Union Labor, and, if any local disturbances were created, they would be stopped. The Union nationally is with the introduction of labor saving equipment. J. B. FORRESTER, General Superintendent. United States Fuel Company, Hiawatha. In his opinion metal conveyors are preferred because they can be lengthened and shortened at pleasure, and so can be operated with greater flexibility than belt conveyors. W. C. HOLMAN, Chief Engineer. Phelps Dodge Corp: The Phelps Dodge Corporation have two Jeffrey belt conveyors in tandem which obviates brushing where the coal is low. MR. E. O. WIEDERANDERS, Jeffrey Mfg. Co.: Says he has seen belt conveyors in use in England and is much taken with the idea. MR. WM. MOORHEAD, Phelps Dodge Corp.: Our conveyors are in twenty-foot sections, each with a motor. Three of them tandem make a sixty-foot face. GENERAL: There was discussion regarding the size of the coal produced by conveyors. It was said that when the Gunn-Quealy Company started their operations, the coal was very large, but now there is not so much care taken to produce large coal as the market is now demanding smaller coal. The Secretary said that the use of conveyors at the Kemmerer Coal Company's mine had almost doubled the percentage of lump coal. Mr. McAuliffe questioned

Jan 1, 1925

CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: Some of the members will want to question Mr. Farnham on some of the things he has brought tip, so we will throw the meeting open for discussion. I am quite sure Mr. Farnham will be willing and glad to answer any questions that may be put to him. MR. HOLMAN: I would like to ask Mr. Farnham a question in regard to the Duckbill: How wide a face will it operate without moving the bill? MR. FARNHAM: The Duckbill is a device that was developed in the Union Pacific Mine at Rock Springs, within the last few months, and it is shaped something like, a dustpan, with discharge throat in the rear. They made one seven feet wide and found it was too wide, and the one they are using now is between three and four feet in width. The front section of the conveyor, which attaches to the duckbill, meshes into it to form a sliding section, and the front end of the Duckbill is pushed by the upper segments. I saw one used in a room twenty-four feet wide, and they drew it back after they cleaned out one room and pushed it forward again. MR. HOLMAN: You have no arrangement other than ratchet work? MR. FARNHAM: The ratchet is for forward working and back; the sections are made 12 or 13 feet long, and the stroke of the conveyor automatically works the ratchet; they can ratchet it back; it is a hand device. MR. HOLMAN: They just swing the end of the conveyor across the face to pick up the loose coal? MR. FARNHAM: Yes; they are also planning to use it endwise along the panel face, that and the room work both are quite new in their application, and I do not think the Union Pacific is giving out any results as yet, because the system has not been in use long. MR. HOLMAN: We are planning on putting one in very shortly. MR. HALL: I understand they can swing it over 30 degrees one way or the other, and it goes the same way easily because of the continual jar of the back and forward motion on a 60-degree swing. SECRETARY SHUBART: Take on a comparatively long conveyor, you can get quite a sweep, a large part of the circle. The Duckbill could command quite a large range. For a 12-foot entry, take a four-foot wide advance through the middle of the shot coal, with a 12-foot advance, ratchet back, swing the Duckbill to the rib and repeat; but I do not think they could get as much as 60 degree. on the end of the Duckbill without curving further back. The conveyor is light and not normally set on any permanent foundation. I saw one of Mr. McCarty's first machines, a rather rudimentary one, clean tip a 12-trot entry, 21 tons of coal, in 16 minutes, three men at the face and one at the loading end. MR. FARNHAM: The average time to clean the entries is about an hour-to clean up good-it wouldn't take but a short time; that is why they get this record of several cuts a shift. CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: Are there any other questions you would like to ask Mr. Farnham? MR. HOLMAN: We were discussing this entry driving in regard to the entry loader; an entry loader in advance work, just what you have to do to place the jackbars with the sheave-blocks? Do you dig along the ribs after the coal is shot or do you have any other scheme that could be worked out to a good advantage? MR. FARNHAM: This record is a report I have just received from our Chicago office, without the full details, which I have written for. I am sorry I cannot give you the details. This was an Indiana or Pennsylvania mine, near Pocahontas, not the one where they had an accident. I assume they set the jacks ahead and swung and dumped the coal partly out with a scoop and partly by hand, but the application for that for entry driving is entirely new. The reports stated that they anticipated using that as a standard method of entry driving in the future. I will be glad to see that you get a copy of it when I get the report completed. MR. MONAY: Mr. Shubart, did you say they loaded 12 tons in 16 minutes? SECRETARY SHUBART: Twenty-one tons. MR. MONAY: How long did it take to change the machinery out of there

Jan 1, 1926