Search Documents

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

PRESIDENT PRYDE: Any discussion on Mr. Poster's paper? MR. J. BEVAN: I would like to ask the gentleman how fine the dust has to be to cause an explosion? MR. T. FOSTER: According to the Bureau of Mines, it is claimed coal passing through a 100 mesh screen would be considered fine enough. That is all I can learn from the different bulletins. MR. BEVAN: Will the coal dust be that fine; going back in the empty cars on the tipple in the mine? MR. FOSTER: Possibly a great deal of it would be. MR. BEVAN: Will the coal dust be that fine, going back, in the empty the coal dust going back in the cars on the tipple, and into the mine? MR. FOSTER: In some places, they are wetting the cars at the tipple, -in the Rock Springs District, we have as the trip goes out, they have a big pipe, and they souse the car, and wet the load, and in some places, near the timbers; that helps to a certain extent. That does not absolutely eliminate it all, but it helps considerable. MR. WM. LITTLEJOHN (Utah Fuel Company) : I think we have all listened very attentively to the paper that Mr. Foster has just read. He has brought up a subject rather close to my heart, for a long time. He mentions particularly, the Scofield disaster, which happened the first of May, 1900; two hundred men lost their lives in the explosion; and I think it is generally conceded that is about the first time it had ever been brought to the attention of coal miners or operators that such a thing was possible, namely, a purely coal dust explosion. The term "Scofield disaster" is rather a mistake, in a way; while the mine that exploded at the time is in the Scofield District all right, it is now known, and probably was known at that time, as the Winter Quarters Mine, one of the mines which belongs to the Utah Fuel Company at the present time, and did at that time. This mine

Jan 1, 1924

(Referring to map) If there are any methods to improve on this I would like to have some suggestions on it. The maps there are on a scale of one inch to two hundred feet. At the time of each extension a letter is used and a line drawn across the entry and the room. The date of the extension is given up in the margin of the map. Here is an extension made April 6th. Extension L is shown in each one of the rooms, November 29th. N-you see the two rooms have been finished down into here. 0-the last extension, has just been stopped, and the three working rooms. Now, one of the features of this plan, when the rooms have been stopped, the line is drawn straight across. When the room or entry is still going, there is a small projection beyond the line, indicating that the next cut is changed. When the distance cannot be ascertained by the engineer, he gets the distance from the mine boss or some other source which is reliable, and that is put on in a dotted line. That gives you a complete story. Anyone looking over the map can see immediately every place that was working at the time of this extension, every place that is inaccessible, and get a complete picture. The extension of the coal is put on the extension at each extension. The survey stations are put in, showing each survey point. The pillars when they are pulled-only the pillars that are pulled are cross-hatched. The whole map is in cross-hatch without any regard as to what pillars are pulled. If a little stump is left in, that is shown on the map. The engineer only shows what pillars are pulled that he has actual knowledge of, or has been given to him in detail by the mine foreman. I believe that concludes the work on the mine map, and there is certainly room for a lot of improvement on most of the mine maps which we have been getting into the office. PRESIDENT PRYDE: Does anyone want to ask any questions? Any questions about the leasing regulations? I want to say there are several leases in the Rock Springs field, and when Mr. Smith comes on one of his visits the Rock Springs Institute have asked him to address them on the leasing proposition.

Jan 1, 1924

By K. L. Marshall

A facetious title was purposely given this talk, so that a formal paper would not be expected. TWO or three days ago, while discussing with Mr. Dickinson some of the details of the dust explosion demonstrations we are planning for this coming Saturday, I remarked that we would like to have as many people as possible see some samples of 20 and 200 mesh dust, so they would more fully understand just what was causing the explosions. Mr. Dickinson requested that I bring samples and screens and in this informal manner, give you all a ".close-up" of coal dust which is considered in Explosion Hazard reports. While sampling mines, for road, rib, and roof dust, in connection with safety service and hazard reports which the Bureau of Mines Engineers make at the request of coal operators, I have often been assisted by under- ground mine officials or other men of many years experience and on almost every occasion, while we were carefully brushing the very fine dust from timbers or coal surfaces, they would make some remark such as: "never had noticed this kind of dust, didn't know it was here", or "well, that's the first time I really understood what all 'this dust talk was about." Such experience makes me believe that the much published terms, 20 mesh and 200 mesh are just numbers to the great majority of both miners and operators. We are now going to have lesson one in the primer of coal dust explosions and I want to say, in all sincerity that a complete course in the hazards of mining is deserving of a place in the curriculum of the best mining schools of this country. Sample No. 1 is fine coal and dust and is a fair sample of what can be found every where in rooms and entries of a mine, as it is too small to be gathered up with a shovel and is left in the ordinary mining at the faces and is spilled along the entries in haulage. In this you will see some quarter inch coal, much eighth and sixteenth inch coal, in fact those are the sizes I find many people have in mind when they are asked about the dust made in mining. Although the sizes mentioned are the ones which seem to almost entirely make up this sample, such is not the case, for from 10 to 20% of such a sample will usually pass this 20 mesh screen and in Sample No. 2 we have 20 mesh dust. Result of many tests, supports .the statement of the coal mining division of the Bureau, that it is quite probable that coal over 20 mesh does not take part in any but the most violent of explosions and that all dust under 20 mesh may take part in any explosion. The largest particles in this sample will not be over .03 inches in their largest dimension and a pound of dust to a foot of average heading is very easily found in most every mine I have visited and usually a great deal more can be readily gathered up. It was .found early that the finer the dust the more dangerous it was for a given coal. So for the early explosion tests conducted by the Bureau a commercial pulverizer was used and it turned out a 20 mesh dust of which about 75% would pass 200 mesh. Some men question whether the ordinary mining methods made such a dust and so doubted the explosibility of the dust in their own mines. The question was well taken, and hundreds of dust samples were taken by the field men of the Bureau to determine the kind of dust being made in all methods of mining and all classes of coal. The result of such sampling showed some coals. resisted breakage more than others and that actual mine road dust, through 20 mesh, would show from 10 to 20% through 200 mesh, and for actual rib and roof dust through 20 mesh, they would get from 20 to 40% of 200 mesh dust. In testing the

Jan 1, 1924

I have sketches of the radiators, and on this sketch up in here (indicating) we show the line from the fan-exhaust steam from the fan, and the trip spray at the mouth of the mine, which is usually near the tipple, the set of radiators on each side of the entry, exhaust steam exhausting in by the radiators, the small atomizers which I mentioned, and the man sprinkling at the hose. There are times, when at different times we have a man sprinkling during the day time, when he is out of the way, and during the night, sprinkling on the motor roads. I will leave that print up here and let you look at it and if you have any questions you wish answered, Mr. McAllister and myself will be glad to answer them. (Applause.) PRESIDENT PRYDE: . I am going to ask Mr. Hair to leave the sketch on the wall. From the back part of the hall, it is hard to see what is there. The figures are very important. I think one member of this association will be glad to know the cost of water, Friend Littlejohn. MR. LITTLEJOHN: I don't know as I want to ask any questions. The only thing I' would say about the cost there, it is very close to that cost that we tabulated for the Utah Fuel Company at the Utah mines here some time ago. We have not tabulated lately. It may be a little over that at the present time if you take the. labor costs and the material. costs. As I remember, some time ago we did get up some figures and it was, as near as I can remember, exactly two cents per, ton for the labor and material. We haven't got the radiators, etc., that the C. F. & I. have in their mines there, probably due to the fact that we have no shortage of water. We have plenty of that there, and our system is absolutely nothing more nor less than pipe lines, hose and nozzles and the man at the end of the nozzle. PRESIDENT PRYDE: I would like to ask Mr. Hair about the cost of the steam. MR. HAIR: That steam we use there in exhausting, of course, is from the fan, and we have a back pressure valve set right here (indicating), from three to four and sometimes five pounds, and the exhaust from the fan was a five or six inch exhaust, and our exhaust into the mine is nothing less than eight inches, and is practically low back pressure you might say, and all those large radiators, that I spoke of, are heated by live steam, and these probably take a little more coal, but as to just what that cost is I couldn't say. As far as the exhaust steam is concerned, you might as well use it in the mine as discharge it outside. MR. HARRINGTON: Mr. Hair, I would like to ask, is this installation on an intake haulage-main haulage course? MR. HAIR: Yes, sir. MR. HARRINGTON: In the winter time, when it is, say between five or ten degrees below zero, how far into that haulage road does the fogging go? MR. HAIR: Well, that goes in half a mile, sometimes in 3,000 feet. MR. HARRINGTON: Wouldn't that interfere pretty seriously with the motor? MR. HAIR: To some extent, but I wouldn't say seriously enough to interefere with the production of coal. We have one mine we are working in two and three-quarters miles. Our mines are all pretty deep, and we don't find it objectionable. I don't believe that it interferes in the production of coal. I don't believe it makes any more difference between a real cold day in winter time than it does in the summer time. MR. HARRINGTON: I was down at Dawson, and in their mines they have an installation very much like Mr. Hair describes, but we went in there one night and stayed all night, getting a certain amount of data, and the fog was intense for-a full half mile; so intense that you could hardly see your hand in front of your face-see your hand that far (indicating) dis-

Jan 1, 1924

PRESIDENT PRYDE: I think that the overcutting machine undoubtedly presents a great many benefits, especially where the roof is frail. I have found a good substitute for the Arcwall, getting a lighter machine by equipping a machine with a turret truck, you get a much lighter weight, and while the cutter is not movable vertically, you cut not on top of the seam, but about the middle of it. MR. SC'HLOSS: I would like to ask Mr. Pryde the advantages of cut- ting with this turret-mounted Shortwall machine. PRESIDENT PRYDE: It is better for development work in narrow places. In development work you have a lot of narrow places. MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Chairman, we were compelled at Winter- quarters, one time, to introduce them for reason of sand rolls'. We have in that mine a condition-we have sand rolls from twelve inches to two and a half feet, sometimes higher than that-usually twelve inches to two and a half feet, and we had to get some of the C. E. 7's on the turret there and used them for advance work not only in the entries, but in rooms; not only in that particular district, but in fact all the districts in the mine-we have abandoned the power trucks. You can cut without unloading, and that is one of the principal advantages, and when the sand rolls come in it enables you to cut over the top of the sand roll, but the particular objection, we were working a nine-foot wall, and some of the coal was twelve feet thick, so that the miners have raised a little objection to the drilling.

Jan 1, 1924

Mr. Geo. B. Pryde, Chairman; Committee on Safety, Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, Rock Springs, Wyoming. Dear Mr. Pryde: In accordance with suggestion in your letter to me of June 21, 1923, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Dalrymple and I had a meeting and attached find our contribution to the proposed August report of the Committee on Safety. You will note that we have confined ourselves to matters in connection with explosions and prevention of explosions, in coal mines. If the committee is to report on general safety in coal mines, including accidents from haulage, timbering, rock falls, electricity, etc., we would like to suggest that you ask other members of the committee to specialize on one or more of these subjects. Especially we believe it would be advisable to specialize as to precautions against electrical accidents with giving of data as to maximum voltage, precautions to be taken as to gas ignitions by mining machines at faces, best methods of placing power wires underground, etc.; also give information as to up-to-date safety installations, such as whistle devices notifying of disarrangement of ventilation or devices for quick cutting off of electrical power from mines under certain conditions; also give data as to efficient safety man cars on various pitches, etc. Yours truly, D. HARRINGTON.

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1923

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

By T. H. Brien, O&apos

At nearly all of the copper smelters in the Southwest, at some time, calculations have been made having in view the economy of replacing fuel oil with pulverized coal as a heat-producing medium for smelting operations This matter has been, and is more so now than at any time heretofore, of very great importance. Due to the intensive development of oil-producing areas of the world and the tremendous use of fuel oil for many purposes, it seems that before many years the supply of oil will become so small as to prohibit its use for such operations as smelting. This may be caused by prohibitive prices, or even by government decree as a conservation measure. In the event that the use of fuel oil becomes out of the question, the copper companies have just two alternatives: the use of pulverized coal or electricity. The copper companies of the Southwest produced an average of 808,400,000 pounds of copper per year for the war years of 1916, 1917 and 1918. This figure is, of course, a higher one than has prevailed since the war, but at the present time nearly all of the mines and smelters are getting back to capacity. There is no doubt whatever that the consumption of copper is going to increase, perhaps for the next ten years. This means that more copper mines will be discovered and developed, and that the mines which are now producing will be called upon for a greater production. This all tends to show that the mine manager who is looking ahead must develop some substitute for fuel oil in the event of its use becoming prohibitive, and all indications seem to point in that direction. The only coal which is commercially available to the smelters in the district under discussion must come from Colorado and New Mexico. These coals are high in ash and volatile matter and comparatively low in calorific value. The proximity of the smelter to the coal mines is a large factor in determining which fuel is more economical. Most of the smelters within two or three hundred miles of the coal mines find it more profitable to burn coal, while those at greater distance find that the higher freight charges on the coal make the use of oil more economical.

Jan 1, 1923

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

MINUTES OF MEETING, AUGUST 27, 1923. Meeting called to order at 10:00 a. m, by the President, George B. Pryde. In the opening remarks Mr. Pryde commented on the Kemmerer disaster, making the work of the Institute particularly important, the desirability of using a more up-to-date emblem for the Institute, the formation of local chapters. The minutes of previous meeting were presented by the Secretary in connection with our publication. Announcements were made regarding the program. Under reports of officers, no reports were made. No reports of standing committees. Report of Special Safety Committee was postponed for a full session, August 28th. There was no further business. Under the head of new business, the following names were proposed and accepted for membership: J. P. Russell, Salt Lake City, Utah, W. A. LaPierre, Salt Lake City, Utah, G. A. Schultz, Latuda, Utah, W. A. Seyffert, Salt Lake City, Utah, P. C. Bunning, Rock Springs, Wyoming, F. L. Gates, Superior, Wyoming, F. C. Miller, Trinidad, Colorado, G. B. Parker, Trinidad, Colorado, Robert Williams, Jr., Somerset, Colorado, F. L. McCarty, Rock Springs, Wyoming,

Jan 1, 1923

PRESIDENT WHITESIDE: I am sure we are very grateful indeed for this very interesting talk that Mr. McClure has given us. If anyone has any questions to ask Mr. McClure I am sure he will be glad to answer them at this time. MR. WEITZEL: I want to ask Mr. McClure whether in the instance he described by-passing the drier, whether there was any rest period between the crusher and the furnace, whether the powdered coal that was not dry was allowed to rest in the pipe or was blown directly into combustion chambers. MR. McCLURE: Yes, it moved directly; there might have been some difference had we given it an opportunity to rest. We just had to get in and get out so as not to interfere with operations. MR. WEITZEL: Your idea is, even though you did use a high moisture lignite, you could store it under water if you eliminated surface moisture later. That is a new idea to me; I always had thought that you had to reduce the moisture down under 2 per cent, and to try to store it with anything more than that, any higher moisture, you would have to break the stuff loose again, as it gets so hard it won't move. MR. McCLURE: It might develop I am absolutely wrong; I am just saying what I observed, and I may have had some unusual condition, which I did not detect; something may actually develop which will make my statement of drying lignite entirely wrong. It was quite a surprise to me, surprise to every-

Jan 1, 1923

By J. F. McDermott

The problem of converting our raw coal, and especially those coals that are not suited for long storage, in other words soft, into a fuel which would be at once clean; of a high B. t, u. content and low ash, is one that has occupied the minds of many able chemical engineers and hydrocarbon technologists during the past few years. Low temperature carbonization is the present outcome of this line of research, and many methods have been evolved of recent years to turn out a serviceable, useful fuel, and at the same time, save the by-products. As most of the research and data within my experience and knowledge pertains to lignite or sub-bituminous coals, I will confine my remarks to coals of that character and grade: I might say that Colorado coals, commonly called lignite, are not in reality true lignite, but are sub-bituminous, although I have in my possession an analysis of a Colorado coal which shows a moisture of 17 per cent, volatile 31.5 per cent, fixed carbon 28.8 per cent, and an ash of 22.7 per cent, and B. t. u. less than 8,000. Even this, though useless for domestic or indeed industrial purposes, could not be classified as true lignite. However, for the purposes of this paper I will refer to these coals as lignite. Two thousand pounds, or one ton, of raw lignite carries about 20 per cent moisture. This, of course, varies in some coals, but is, I believe, a fair average. For carbonization purposes this is usually dried to a 5 per cent moisture, therefore leaving but 1,700 pounds of coal to be placed in the retort. From present knowledge, and with the average process of carbonization, 70 per cent of this coal will come out carbonized, or 1,190 pounds, to which is added about 10 per cent pitch, which is fried out as the coal passes through the retort, and which is used as a binder, making a total of 1,360 pounds of coke or carbonized coal. This is usually in appearance a dark colored, rather porous coke of about the size of pea coal. It burns without smoke and have a very high B. t. u. content. According to most authorities on this subject, carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sulphur and ash constitute the only elements on which carbonization value of a coal depends, and of these hydrogen is the most important. It is claimed the value of a coal for carbonization purposes may be roughly surmised from the hydrogen content. If this is promising, that is, showing an available hydrogen content of from 3 to 5 per cent, the coal should be given a careful ultimate analysis. Should the seam, as often happens in lignite coals, show varying bands of coal of different structure or appearance, samples should be taken from each band as well as a gross sample taken down the face of the seam in the usual way. This is in order to determine what part of the seam is most promising for by-product processes. A seam showing a high nitrogen content adds to the attractiveness of the coal in carbonizing as; if available nitrogen is 2 per cent or better, it should give a very high ammonia yield.

Jan 1, 1923

By P. F. Patterson

It is a well established fact that 60 per cent of all accidents in coal mines occur from falls of roof and coal at or in the proximity of the working face. Notwithstanding that this is well known, and has been frequently discussed by mining men, this seems to be the irreducible minimum. It is even said by those in a position to know that the percentage stated is increasing. With this, information before us it would seem that not enough attention is being given to close supervision at the working face, and until this is done we may expect to continue experiencing an increase in the accidents in this area. No workman generally feels that it is more important to finish loading a car of coal than to set a timber for protection, and many accidents happen from this source, not from a lack of knowledge of the dangerous conditions existing, but negligence in taking remedies necessary to remove the danger. It is true that nearly all state laws require the mine foreman or his assistant to visit each working face every day, but with the constantly changing conditions on account of the advance of the working faces, these daily visits may be entirely inadequate to discover possible dangers and prevent accidents. The obvious remedy then is closer and more systematic inspection and supervision of the working faces. Many accidents are caused in mines on account of not enough clearance between the rib and track or between timber and track. On all main haulage ways. there should be a space of at least 30 inches between the rib and track, or timber and track, and on all rooms not less than two feet should be left between the track and upright timbers.. A great deal has been said and written with regard to systematic timbering. We doubt very much the feasibility of adopting any standard of timbering that would be suitable for all roof conditions, and any such system in our opinion would not tend to cause a decrease in the number of accidents. The proper place to put up a prop, regardless of whether it conforms to any established system, is under a piece of loose roof. No habit is becoming more prevalent among miners and other mine workers than wearing gloves, principally flimsy canvas gloves, which afford no protection to the wearers and are the direct cause of many hand injuries. If gloves must be worn, and no doubt they will be as the habit has become well established, then they should be made from some heavy material and should fit the hands fairly snug.

Jan 1, 1923

PRESIDENT WHITESIDE: The chair will now throw the meeting open to discussion. GEO. B. PRYDE: In the old days at Rock Springs we had electric plants situated about half a mile from our mines; we had small boiler plants; we had an electric plant with about 600 kilowatt capacity. About ten years ago we discarded the old steam plants and started building towards a centralized power plant. We now have three 2,500-kilowatt turbine generators and one 1,000, and our peak load is about 7,000 kilowatts. We have had to rebuild the old power plant, scrap the old machines, and install water tube boilers. We did this as a matter of economy in a small local plant we had years ago, and it has grown to be a large central plant, supplying power for about 20,000 tons of coal daily, and distributing this power within a radius of twenty miles. We have found this method of power to be more economical than with the old plants, and the people who buy power from us in the Rock Springs field say it has been to their advantage also. We found this last year, when we had to shut down for five months, that that plant was the only plant operating in the Rock Springs field, supplying all the power, running of fans and pumping during the time the mines were shut down, and it helped the situation very much. We had an old wooden building which we had to tear down, raise the walls, and put on a steel roof; had to rebuild the boiler room and rebuild the boilers. The water situation at Rock Springs has never been very good; we get our water from wells 250 to 500 feet deep, and use one and one-quarter million gallons a week. We have two large spray ponds and we have gotten along well. There isn't any comparison between the central power station and the old method of making power. (Applause.) FRANK YOUNG: I listened with a great deal of pleasure to the paper just read, and it struck me it was remarkable how a paper prepared by anyone could be so nearly identical and coincide so very near with the experience of another. It is just like some work I have had. I had the engineering part to do for the power plant for ten years, and I think at that time we did all of the things that he mentioned in his paper. Also his analysis of the cost of power seems to me exactly right. If I had gathered the figures and made the statement myself I think it would have been very much the same as was read. The recommendation that it is better to buy

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1923

[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

By J. C. Rae

A Japanese mining engineer was given a year's leave of absence by his company and dispatched on a tour of inspection of all the principal coal mining regions of the world. He visited the New Castle region of England, Wales, Scotland, France, Germany and Alsatian mines, the underseas col¬lieries at Nova Scotia and Vancouver, and our own important fields of Illinois, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. You are probably surprised to know that after seeing all these, he pronounced the Gebo mine of the Owl Creek Coal Company as the most interesting operation he had seen. The Gebo Mine is located about three miles west of Kirby on the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad in the Big Horn Basin region of Wyoming, 500 miles north of Denver and 200 miles south of Billings, Montana. The mine is working on a coal bed five or six to eleven or twelve feet' thick, dipping 22 to 23 degrees toward the northeast. The coal occurs in what is called the Eagle formation; and is found between two massive sandstones from 25 to 65 feet thick, which, weathering into bold', gray-colored cliffs, serves as a guide to the location of the coal bed. The deepest workings have an overburden of 800 feet. Cleavage planes of the coal extend at an angle of 45 degres to the pitch, and perpendicular to roof and floor. The coal itself is generally clean and not difficult to cut. It ignites readily from spontaneous combustion, however, which circumstance makes an ever-present fire hazard which must be carefully watched and guarded against. The coal is classed as sub-bituminous with analysis about as follows: Moisture 17% Volatile Matter 33% Fixed Carbon 46% Ash 4% Sulphur, about ½ % B. t. u. value a trifle under 11,000. It is known as Owl Creek coal, is one of the best domestic and steam fuels in the West, and is very popular in Montana, Idaho, Washington, Wyoming, South Dakota and Nebraska. While the coal slacks somewhat rapidly when exposed to the weather, it stores readily for months if placed under cover. On account of the somewhat isolated position of the mine as regards manufacturing establishments, there was a decided difficulty in disposing of slack, especially during the early years of the mine (1907 to 1914), and approximately 10 per cent of the entire product had to be wasted as slack during those years. This difficulty has been largely overcome since 1914, due partly to growth of manufacturing establishments in tributary territory, and also to enlarged transportation facilities. Also largely due to its isolated position, the mine has been compelled to use an extremely large proportion of box cars, much over 50 per cent of the product (in some years 75 per cent) being shipped in box cars, which, of course, entails extensive loading equipment and increases cost of loading. The output of the Gebo Mine for 1920 was 348,000 tons, for 1921, 273,000 tons; the rate of production during the year 1922 was over 1,700 tons daily, and 2,000 tons daily in January, 1923. The mine was developed by driving three openings straight down the pitch, the main slope being 12 to 14 feet wide and 3,000 feet long. A little distance from the surface a pair of level entries were turned right and left, known as the first East and first West. From these, rooms were driven up the pitch and chute mining attempted with only indifferent success: The failure of this rise-room method of mining was attributable to several

Jan 1, 1923

MR. TESCHER (Disaster at Dawson) : I move that you appoint a committee of nine members of this Institute to draft a set of resolutions that we can send out to all members of this Institute, to the mine officials in all four states, that might go towards preventing these disasters; that we reach all men, all mining men, mine officials of all kinds. I think we have enough brains to carry out a few suggestions of that kind. I think you are fully familiar or know men who are fully qualified to act on this committee. The only qualification that I have is to ask that Mr. Harrington be appointed a member of this committee. PRESIDENT WHITESIDE: You have heard the motion, and I believe it was seconded. Is there any discussion? That is a subject that really needs a great deal of thought. MR. LAMB: Things like that can't be handled in a minute. What Mr. Tescher suggested is all right, but to my mind, going into a great many of these different properties, seeing the conditions, such things hit pretty close to home. I would suggest that you put this off; lay it over until such time as the people who had the disaster have some time to think these things over. It is too soon to offer even a suggestion. Suggestions are all right, but there are no nine living men in the United States who can stand up or sit down and talk it over and give you any reasonable answer, in one hour or six months. First, you would naturally have to go down there and converse with the men who were at the camp at the time. You are all operators; all you operators would -like to talk it over today. You realize that anything that is good for the camp is always acceptable in disasters of this kind. I say, do it gracefully and not by publication. MR. TESCHER: I feel that the men present know these suggestions by heart and they don't have to discuss them. They know them instinctively and they know they will apply to any mine. It must be understood that if these suggestions are not carried out, they ought to be; and there is a motion before the house. PRESIDENT WHITESIDE: Mr. Murphy, you started to rise to your feet a moment ago. Have you anything to say on the subject? MR. MURPHY: I have just returned from a visit to Mr. Brennan. Mr. Brennan and I have worked together for twenty years. The manager of our company asked me to go down there and express his sympathy. Those things come to all men if they live long enough, in the coal business, and he wanted me to express to Mr. Brennan personally his sympathy and deep regret. What I had in mind when I started to rise, was to suggest that the Institute as a whole express its sympathy to Mr. Brennan. I don't think there is a man in Utah, Wyoming, Colorado or New Mexico who has done more in safety' lines than Mr. Brennan, and it just seems bad luck that he had this disaster, and I am in hearty sympathy with the gentleman who spoke about not appointing this committee. I believe a resolution to Mr. Brennan would be very much better. JAMES DALRYMPLE: I am in sympathy with this gentleman here. I think it is going to hurt the feelings of those connected with the mines in which this disaster occurred. If you will give me the privilege for a few minutes, I will gladly express myself and the action that has been taken in the past by this Institute, and my opinion combined with a great many other opinions. And what I am going to say is going to be said by the-well, I am going to say it as I see it. I am going to say it not in an unfriendly spirit, but from a spirit of not undue criticism. I happen to be one of the original members who organized this Institute. I did what I could to obtain memberships. I remember very well when we had our first meeting that we had a very large membership. I think I have a photograph of the members which was taken on the steps of the Capitol building at that time. Our membership at that time was composed largely of underground officials. I mean by "underground" officials, the superintendents to some extent, the mine foremen, their assistants,

Jan 1, 1923