Search Documents

MR. C. M. GODDARD: Mr. Poli invented this little safety switch box. This junction box he has does improve the appearance mentioned in the underground junction boxes used in the foreign countries, where this thing is compulsory. There was some arrangement whereby the attachment could not be made with the switch in. The switch has got to be out of place before they can put the terminals into this box, which avoids all possibilities of short-circuits, except where protected on the inside of this box. In mines that are not gaseous, this is not so essential, but he has invented a very small junction box which probably. could be built for six or eight or ten dollars; if those things are necessary, for the handling of mining machines and their apparatus, takes current off the transmission line, and he has something that would meet that requirement, and I think when it is looked into it will meet the approval of the Bureau of Mines. He had this little box yesterday, and some of the members had looked it over and think, if they will look more favorably into it, they will find something to their advantage. PRESIDENT PRYDE: I think it is a good idea to bring in safety appliances and devices at this meeting. There were two more devices brought in here this morning; one a safety powder flask, and the other a carbide can. We have talked a great deal about permissible powder. It is going to take a little time to change over, and we would have to use the black powder cans. I will leave them in the window, if you care to investigate them.

Jan 1, 1924

[Page Minutes 5 The Power Problem of the Coal Mine 8 A. L. Jones. Discussion of A. L. Jones' Paper 13 Why Alternating Current 15 C. E. Drennan. Discussion of C. E. Drennan's Paper 17 Dry Cleaning Coal at Brilliant Mine 26 F. A. Young. The Possible Substitution of Pulverized Coal for Fuel Oil in Smelting Operations in the Southwest 33 T. H. O'Brien. Special Discussion of Paper of T. H. O'Brien by D. C. McClure 35 Discussion of T. H. O'Brien's Paper 40 The Gebo Mine 45 J. C. Rae. Low Temperature Carbonization 52 J. F. McDermott. Safety Discussion 54 Order of Business 57]

Jan 1, 1923

PRESIDENT BOTTOMLEY: Gentlemen, the next order of business, if you wish to discuss it is Mechanical Loading. We still have a little time left that could be devoted to that subject, and the meeting will be open now for that purpose. Where is Mr. Edge- worth? J. E. EDGEWORTH (Foreman, Union Pacific Coal Company, Rock Springs, Wyoming): Here. PRESIDENT BOTTOMLEY: Yon start the ball rolling. Tell us what you are doing in the Rock Springs District, on the mechanical loading. SECRETARY SHURART Mr. Edgeworth is the man at the face handling the coal. He never sees the light of day these late winter mornings.

Jan 1, 1927

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

By Sam Andrews

Mr. President, Officers and Members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: This is my first attempt to prepare and read a paper before your association. The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, I understand, was formed for the purpose of increasing knowledge relating to coal mining in all its various branches by study, research and discussion. In writing my paper, I have tried to be as practical as I can, at the same time, present my arguments so that they can be easily understood. When I use the word science, I mean organized common sense. I humbly ask my hearers to be a little patient, while I read my paper, and be "to its faults a little blind, and to its virtues a trifle kind". Western Europe is said to be the cradle of the coal mining industry. We are told that the Ancient Britons were acquainted with the use of coal long before the Romans invaded and conquered their country. The Romans were never too proud to learn from the outer barbarians, and possibly acquired the precious secret from them: We are told that it was not until the 13th century, that the coal mining industry, assumed any noticeable importance in Britain, and on the Continent. In the year 1259 Henry the 3rd granted a charter to the freemen of New Castle on Tyne, allowing them to mine coal. For a long time it was used in the arts and manufactures only, wood continuing to be the common domestic fuel. As has been the case with almost every great benefit, the introduction of coal as a fuel was stoutly resisted at first, and we find its use prohibited in the city of London in the reign of Edward II, by Royal proclamation ; which was soon discovered to be injurious and foolish, and consequently withdrawn. It is interesting perhaps, to know how this Royal proclamation was brought about. A lady of the Royal household was riding in her coach one day through a village in which coal was burned as a fuel, and she suffered such a cough by inhaling the coal smoke that she decided to call a council of suffragetts, who ultimately decided that the burning of coal was injurious to their health and complexion. They drafted out a petition and presented it to the king, who speedily issued the order that no coal was to be burned in the city of London. The penalty for disobeying this order was death by hanging. We are informed of one poor man who continued to burn a lump of' coal on his fire in winter time; he was arrested, sent to prison and condemned to death; the judge in passing the sentence solemnly stating that if he was not allowed to get a fire that was hot enough in this world, he felt that he surely would be allowed one in the next.

Jan 1, 1921

Pictured on these pages are the seven RMCMI Scholarship Award Winners for the 1987-88 year followed by a brief profile. Six of the winners were present as RMCMI guests at the June convention in Breckenridge, Colorado to receive their recognition plaques at the welcome session held Monday, June 27, 1988. In addition to the plaques, each winner receives $500.00 to be used toward tuition in the coming academic year. Also, as this is a continuing award, the winners from the previous year will also receive an additional $500.00 for tuition use in their senior years provided they have maintained a good academic standing and are recommended by their university. Criteria for these awards is (1) That the award be made in the spring to a sophomore student to be used toward tuition during the junior year. (2) That the recipient be both a U.S. citizen and a resident of the state involved. (3) That the recipient have good academic standing, be pursuing a degree in a mining related field and have an expressed interest in Western coal as a possible career path. The scholarship program was extended in early 1988 to include curricula other than mining department, but in the engineering disciplines, such as geology, mineral processing and metallurgy. Contributions to this worthy project are tax deductible to each individual RMCMI member. Checks payable to RMCMI Scholarship may be mailed to the RMCMI Office at 2700 Youngfield Street, Suite 100 in Lakewood, CO 80215. Profiles of the 1988 winners follow: [ ] Anthony T. Bowler University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona Tony has taken a well balanced curriculum and at the same time maintained significant progress toward a Geological Engineering degree. He is interested in computer science and programs as a hobby He is the master of several computer languages including machine language on different personal computers. [ ] Christopher Taylor Colorado School of Mines Golden, Colorado Before matriculating at Mines, Chris served four years with the U.S. Army Special Forces attaining the rank of sergeant. He is active in the military, serving in the Reserves and R.O.T.C. This duty precluded his attendance at the Breckenridge meeting. He plans to get summer work experience in mining before graduation and is interested in the managerial and technical aspects of the mining business. [ ] Laverne West New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology Socorro, New Mexico A native American of Laguna/Navajo ethnic origin, Laverne graduated from the Sante Fe Indian School as valedictorian. She served as both secretary and president of the American Indian Science & Engineering Society. She works at the Nevada Test Site with contractors assisting project engineers in a variety of jobs. She plans to earn a dual degree in Mining and Geological Engineering then pursue a Master's degree in Mineral Economics at the University of California at Berkeley. Among her honors are a four year scholarship from Sante Fe Southern Pacific Foundation, a one year scholarship from Mobil Oil Corporation and another from Eastman Kodak.

Jan 1, 1988

By Joseph Harrington

It is sufficiently correct to say that domestic solid fuel is universally hand fired and it is almost as correct to state that a very large proportion of hand-fired domestic fires are extremely inefficient and smoky. This is particularly true with raw bituminous coal for the fuel. The smokeless and efficient firing of domestic coal affords one of the most difficult problems confronting the combustion engineer. This is due to the universally constricted combustion space in the domestic furnace, the complete ignorance regarding the laws of combustion on the part of the average person, and the fact that the laws of efficient combustion are almost completely nullified under these conditions. It is well to familiarize ones self with these laws. These are: 1. The gradual introduction of the fuel to the furnace. 2. The admission and mixing of the right quantity of air with the coal gases. 3. A temperature high enough to permit complete combustion, and 4. A furnace space of volume sufficient to permit of the combustion gases and the oxygen getting together within the confines of the furnace. Even a casual inspection of the domestic heater will show that none of these essential things are present in proper degree, and this is the reason why the problem of domestic firing presents such difficulties. I have analyzed these conditions in a paper published by the Black Diamond, and which has already had wide distribution, so that I will not repeat the rather lengthy discussion in this paper. A survey of the entire field indicates very clearly that a reversal of existing methods and equipment must be had before any real improvement can be expected. It is my firm belief that in this instance above all others it is necessary to build the efficiency and smokelessness into the equipment in such a manner that its performance will be entirely independent of both skill and interest on the part of the operative. To attempt to educate every man, woman and child who periodically throws coal into a domestic furnace would be literally impossible. Much can be done, however, if we could teach the householder the simple essentials of alternate firing, which I have explained at length in the above mentioned paper. This would go a long way toward making the domestic furnace problem more satisfactory, as well as efficient and smokeless. Many will argue, and with good reason, that the domestic fuel should be prepared coke and with this I agree up to the limit imposed by the practical considerations of quantity production, price and the possibility of marketing the by-products. It will be obvious that if enough raw coal should be processed to provide all of the required domestic fuel that the amount of by-products recovered during the coking process would be so great that there would be little or no market at any price which would justify the manufacture of coke. If the by-products were wasted they would not only be a tremendous economic loss, but the price charged for the coke would probably be so high that the market would be limited, and this would defeat the very idea of the whole thing. Much can be done, however, in advancing the use of coke, but I believe that much more extensive and careful experimentization should be had in order to determine the right size and quality of coke for the various domestic furnaces. If coke were to be developed for extensive domestic consumption it is more than probable that the coking process should and could be stopped at a point where the volatile content of the coke would be sufficiently high to permit of prompt ignition and combustion in low draft installations. If the volatile content were from five to ten per cent a very different kind of coke would be produced from that which is now produced with perhaps one per cent of volatile. A skillful manipulation of this feature would make coke adaptable and satis-

Jan 1, 1925

This session was devoted to Surface Mining. Presiding was Virgil W. Carmichael, Vice President- Exploration, North American Coal Corporation, Bismarck, North Dakota, and John (Jack) F. Ratchye, Manager of Marketing and Resources, Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. Mining District, Sheridan, Wyoming. Subject-The new Federal Surface Mining Regulations-a thorough briefing as to content of law and how it will affect western mining. Introductory Speaker: William Hynan, Senior Vice President, National Coal Association, Washington, D.C. (See index for printed text of Mr. Hynan's paper.) Panel Members: The first speaker was George M. L. Robinson, Senior Hydrologist, Peabody Coal Company, Denver, Colorado. Mr. Robinson has a B.S. Degree from New Mexico University, Portales; Masters in Hydrology, Kent State, Ohio.

Jan 1, 1978

By George Cherpelis

1. Historical Background of the Employment Relationship A. The Relationship at Common Law 1. Jacob & Rachel 2. Domestic Relations 3. Statute of Laborers (Black Plague) 4. Puritan View (idleness as the parent of all vices) 5. Shift from law based on status to one based on contract B. Enforcing the Employee's Promise to Work I. Forced Labor a. English law b. Thirteenth Amendment 2. Forced Labor vis a vis Forced Performance - Role of the Court 3. Prevent working for another employer C. The Employer's Promise of Employment 1. Originally employment was considered of personal nature and employer could not be forced to employ or continue to employ 2. Impact of modern statutes

Jan 1, 1984

James Westfield, Assistant Director, United States Bureau of Mines, Washing- ton, D. C., called the second morning session of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute to order, and promptly introduced John Peperakis, Manager of the Sunnyside Operations, Kaiser Steel Corporation. Sunnyside, Utah, who spoke on "Ground Control Developments, Sunnyside Mines, Kaiser Steel Corporation." Mr. Peperakis illustrated his talk with a number of slides which were not reproduced with the printed text. (For the printed text of Mr. Peperakis' paper see index.) James J. Diamanti, President of the Car- bon Fuel Company, Helper, Utah, was introduced by Mr. Westfield, and he spoke on "Small Mine Operators Help Themselves." Questions from the floor followed Mr. Diamanti's talk.

Jan 1, 1961

The Sixty-First Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convening at the Stanley Hotel in Estes Park, Colorado, was declared in session at 10:00 a.m. by Past President Claude P. Heiner, President, Minerals Development Corporation, Salt Lake City, Utah. Claude introduced Oren F. Bridwell, Secretary, Northern Colorado Coals, Inc., Denver, Colorado. His introduction of President Bridwell follows: Ladies and gentlemen, it is my privilege and pleasure to open this session of the Sixty-first Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. My particular assignment is to introduce to you (those of you at least who do not know him) our Acting President, who for now we will call "Brid."

Jan 1, 1965

The Morning Session of the Forty-Eighth Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convened in the Little Theater of the Broadmoor Hotel, Colorado Springs, Colorado, at 9:30 a.m., June 4, 1952, Albert M. Keenan, Chairman, presiding. CHAIRMAN KEENAN: Ladies and Gentlemen, here we have our third and final clay of our program, and I wish to take this opportunity to thank all of you for your attendance, both in the past meetings and this one this morning... I am particularly delighted to see that we are all here this morning after the very enjoyable banquet last night. It is a little difficult to get people gathered up after such an occasion.

Jan 1, 1952

By Eli Follett

It is indeed gratifying to note the marked improvement in the methods used in the coal- mines today compared to the methods in earlier days. Away back in the decade of 1900 to 1910 many of the mines were conspicuous for their absence of sprinkling and humidifying systems, as a result much of the natural moisture was absorbed by the dry air current and carried out of the mine and the mine was left dry, dusty and dangerous. This dangerous condition was intensified by large accumulations of fine coal dust on the haulageways where fire flashed from poorly lubricated rollers and bullwheels-trip riders used a torch with a flame reaching to the back of their necks, and large supplies of blasting powder were kept in the mines. Accidents and disasters were very frequent as we, in our ignorance flirted with danger. Staggered by the numerous accidents, and the nature of them; men began thinking along lines of safety, they worked out schemes and after many disappointments succeeded in having, some very whole some legislation enacted covering coal mining operations only to find that much lawlessness was still being practiced by the miners whom they sought to protect; step by step these safety men forged ahead, enlisting the co-operation of a few men about the mine whom they called a safety committee, until, today, we have an ironclad mining law which all have to respect. We have sprinkling and humidifying systems, the miners electric lamp, permissible explosives and many other devices making for greater safety in the operation of our coal mines. Our mines are no longer veritable gasometers and powder storehouses, as I. knew them to be in South Wales, Britain, where I started to work in the mines. Instead, the mines of this day are healthy, well lighted and ventilated workshops and too much cannot be said in the praise of safety engineers who, fought altruistically in their efforts to bring about the wonderfully improved conditions in the coal mines of this day. While the possibility of a mine fire starting, in these days of scientific mining, is remote every one admits there still exists a possibility and to deal with a fire, should one start, most coal miners are equipped with fire extinguishers. Extinguishers of all designs conceivable are on the market, the different extinguishers are charged with different chemical substances, Some are charged with patented chemicals and others with baking soda and sulphuric acid and so on, however, many of them are equipped with about eighteen inches of rubber hose and bear the conventional "FOR FIRE-TURN UPSIDE DOWN" but nothing is said to indicate how close it may be necessary to take the extinguisher to the fire before doing the "TURN UPSIDE DOWN" act, neither is anything said as to what effect the contents may have upon the' hands, face or body of operator should he come in contact with the liquid, nor is any warning given as to the dangers in the fumes which may come from the contents of the extinguisher in contact with the fire.

Jan 1, 1922

By George B. Pryde

Dear Sir: Yours of July 23rd, relative to my appointment on the Safety Committee in connection with the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. As you say in your letter, "The duty of this committee is to draft suggestions as to safer mining practices with the idea of preventing disasters in coal mines." Much has been written and many suggestions made on this same subject, and it is very hard to put up further recommendations than have already been made. The disasters you mention in your letter unquestionably have direct reference to coal mine explosions, which from time to time still occur in this and other countries. As far as our Western mines are concerned, you know that sprinkling and shot firing by electricity have been very extensively carried out. Notwithstanding these precautions; we have had a few rather serious disasters in the past in these mines. I do not care to place any blame or responsibility on the companies having these disasters, but it is a fact that in each and all of them, after careful investigation has been made, that the human element has had more or less bearing on the accidents happening. From most reports that we gain, either directly or indirectly, it is very evident that investigation shows after an explosion that the rules governing one or both of the above safety measures have been somewhat carelessly or negligently carried out. Much has been written and read about rock dust sprinkling, but it is questionable if this method is doing a great deal toward the eliminating of disasters. While it is true it may have the effect of preventing propagation, still I do not believe anyone claims for it a sure preventative against initial explosions. I had occasion not long ago to visit a mine, after an explosion, in which dust barriers were supposed to be hung, and from indications it was quite evident that the dust barriers had been in operation, but they did not prevent the explosion from reaching all open parts of the mine. It is also true that profuse scattering of rock dust throughout a mine would have a beneficial effect, but there is a question arises here as to whether the sprinkling by rock dust or the spraying by water, if available, is the most effective. I am satisfied that if all coal mines are kept well sprinkled and all open workings maintained in a thorough moist condition, that the biggest factor in a coal mine explosion is in this way eliminated. There is no doubt but what the use of permissible powder, particularly if shot by electricity, has had a very marked effect on the number of disasters in mines, and if this method of shooting was energetically carried out there would be a difference in the number of explosions, both minor and Major, all over the country. Some of the recent explosions have taken place where no shooting was being done, but there is no denying the fact that the other ingredient, namely, coal dust, entered in the elements very extensively. We have read and heard of hydraulic cartridges and other patents (substitutes for powder) that were being worked out for the purpose of

Jan 1, 1923

The final session of the meeting was preceded by a movie, "Contact That Kills," which was a color film clearly pointing out various causes of electrical accidents in mines and how such accidents could he prevented. This film was made underground and produced by the U. S. Bureau of Mines for use in teaching accident classes. President R. R. Williams, Jr., called the meeting to order and introduced Mr. Leif Arentzen of the Lee-Norse Company, Charleroi, Pennsylvania, who spoke on "Coal Mining in Australia." The text of his address is as follows: "I arrived in Australia in February of this year-my father sent me over there for an installation. He preceded me as he does in most things, and set up a showing of our machine in Australia. We had 200 of the top level coal mining men visit this showing. They were interested in what the Americans are doing and what the American manufacturer had to offer them. Conditions in Australia are very similar to our mining conditions in the United States and they have looked to us, the coal industry in general, because we have the know-how in answering some of their problems. They feel that European methods and their type of machines are too inadequate to cope with their conditions. My visit was to South Wales, 60 miles south of Sidney. Their mining operation resembled mining coal in Florida. The work is on about a 500-ft. elevation about three miles from the ocean and when you turn around and see about 30 miles of beach, it is quite a picture - the Pacific Ocean is so blue. The coal seam is about ten feet of relatively clean coal. Labor relations are very, very taught right now. They are agitated by a strong Communistic influence and their weekly publication is known as the ?Common Cause,? which is against mechanization of coal mines." Mr. Arentzen enlarged on the fact that America was the example they held before them and described the Australian coal men and their character.

Jan 1, 1959

President Schloss called the third session of the fifty-eighth annual meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute to order at 9:30 a.m. and introduced James Westfield, Assistant Director, Health and Safety, U. S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D. C., who presided over the session. First speaker of the session was S. L. Jewell, Vice President, Peabody Coal Company, St. Louis, Missouri, who spoke on "Our Three Main Routes From Here." (Biographical sketch of Mr. Jewell, see index.) (For the printed text of Mr. Jewell's paper see index.) Mr. Westfield introduced Marling J. Ankeny, Director, U. S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D. C., who served as moderator on the panel, "How Do We Go From Here in Safety?"

Jan 1, 1962

The thirty-ninth regular meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order in the Cosmopolitan Hotel, Denver, Colorado, Thurs- day, June 26, 1941, at 11:20 a.m., by President Charles M. Shott, following which President Shott made his opening address. On motion of H. C. Marchant, duly seconded, voted and carried, the reading of the minutes of the thirty-eighth regular meeting was dispensed with. On motion of Ronald C. Oliver, duly seconded, voted and carried, the President was authorized to appoint auditing, new members, resolutions and nominating committees, which appointments he then announced would be made at the afternoon session. An interesting talkie entitled "Coal Mine Explosions" was shown by Mr. William Forbes for the U. S. Bureau of Mines.

Jan 1, 1941

President-elect Bob Wilson opened the business meeting at 9:30 a.m. He called on Shirl C. McArthur to report on the financial statement of the treasurer. He read the data and asked for its approval. A motion was made, seconded and approved. The Resolutions Committee was called upon to make its report. The following resolutions were submitted: (1) RESOLVED: WHEREAS, in the year since the last convention of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, the Institute and the coal mining industry have suffered the loss through death of the services of: J. S. Besser Harry Brophy Walter E. Burleson A. F. Geiger Wilbur J. Gunther Albert W'. Holmes Harold Levene Larry Littlejohn David H. Michael Carmal Patton Charles M. Schloss Ira R. SigMan

Jan 1, 1975

By Geo. B. Pryde

Dear Sir: Yours of July 23rd, relative to my appointment on the Safety Committee in connection with the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. As you say in your letter, "The duty of this committee is to draft suggestions as to safer mining practices with the idea of preventing disasters in coal mines." Much has been written and many suggestions made on this same subject, and it is very hard to put up further recommendations than have already been made. The disasters you mention in your letter unquestionably have direct reference to coal mine explosions, which from time to time still occur in this and other countries. As far as our Western mines are concerned, you know that sprinkling and shot firing by electricity have been very extensively carried out. Notwithstanding these precautions; we have had a few rather serious disasters in the past in these mines. I do not care to place any blame or responsibility on the companies having these disasters, but it is a fact that in each and all of them, after careful investigation has been made, that the human element has had more or less bearing on the accidents happening. From most reports that we gain, either directly or indirectly, it is very evident that investigation shows after an explosion that the rules governing one or both of the above safety measures have been somewhat carelessly or negligently carried out. Much has been written and read about rock dust sprinkling, but it is questionable if this method is doing a great deal toward the eliminating of disasters. While it is true it may have the effect of preventing propagation, still I do not believe anyone claims for it a sure preventative against initial explosions. I had occasion not long ago to visit a mine, after an explosion, in which dust barriers were supposed to be hung, and from indications it was quite evident that the dust barriers had been in operation, but they did not prevent the explosion from reaching. all open parts of the mine. It is also true that profuse scattering of rock dust throughout a mine would have a beneficial effect, but there is a question arises here as to whether the sprinkling by rock dust or the spraying by water, if available, is the most effective. I am satisfied that if all coal mines are kept well sprinkled and all open workings maintained in a thorough moist condition, that the biggest factor in a coal mine explosion is in this way eliminated. There is no doubt but what the use of permissible powder, particularly if shot by electricity, has had a very marked effect on the number of dis¬asters in mines, and if this method of shooting was energetically carried out there would be a difference in the number of explosions, both minor and Major, all over the country. Some of the recent explosions have taken place where no shooting was being done, but there is no denying the fact that the other ingredient, namely, coal dust, entered in the elements very extensively. We have read and heard of hydraulic cartridges and other patents (substitutes for powder) that were being worked out for the purpose of

Jan 1, 1923

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