Search Documents

By J. D. Christensen

In August 1987, we marked the tenth anniversary of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. Anniversaries are supposed to be times of celebration, and I truly believe that we have something to celebrate on this anniversary. For, after ten years, there has been much progress in the implementation of the surface mining law.

Jan 1, 1988

By Warren D. MacEvoy

INTRODUCTION Good ventilation bulkheads (stoppings) can be obtained only by conscientiously adhering to four basic principles: carefully selecting the site for the bulkhead, adequately preparing the site, properly constructing and sealing the bulkhead, and checking the results with a smoke tube before leaving the area. If all these guidelines are followed during each ventilation project, a poor job will result only from the use of improper materials and cannot be blamed on carelessness or oversight. SITE SELECTION A perfectly constructed bulkhead in the wrong location can be completely worthless. Conceivably, a bulk-head in the wrong location could cause dangerous ventilation conditions that are difficult to identify and isolate. If the suggestions herein are followed, a considerable amount of work, time, and material may be saved. Perhaps the single most important step is always to select the exact site for a bulkhead before starting construction. Although the latitude in selecting a site may be limited by instructions or operating conditions, it is common to find poor bulkheads built within a few meters (feet) of a site that would have been far superior but was overlooked during the planning process. The ideal site for a bulkhead should have as many of the following features and conditions as possible: 1) To provide a solid bulkhead, the selected site should be in firm and unbroken ground. 2) To minimize the amount of work and material required and to minimize the danger of later damage to the bulkhead, the site should have as small a cross section as possible. 3) The bulkhead site should not be encumbered by interferences such as pipes, wires, ditches, wire roof supports, trash, muck piles, etc. 4) The walls and timbers of the site should be free from oil, grease, or tar that would inhibit adhesion of the sealant used on the bulkhead. 5) Unless special precautions are taken, the site should not have water seepage, standing water on the floor, or water-carrying ditches. 6) To expedite construction of the bulkhead, the site should have reasonable access to transportation, supplies, communication facilities, and compressed-air lines. 7) The site should have a reasonably level floor, allowing direction of the bulkhead door swing to be reversed at a later time if so desired. In a steeply sloping location, it may be possible to open the door in one direction only. SITE PREPARATION Once a suitable site has been selected for the bulk¬head, it must be prepared properly. All site preparation work should be completed before starting any construction work on the stopping itself. Unfavorable site conditions can be identified during the course of thepreliminary site preparation, saving time, effort, and materials that otherwise might be wasted. The follow¬ing preparation steps help assure the construction of a good stopping: 1) If wire mesh has been used at the site, a strip 457 mm (18 in.) wide should be cut and removed from the walls and roof at the selected location. 2) The exposed strip of rock should be barred down thoroughly to provide a smooth surface. 3) All obstructing materials should be removed, including old timbers, pipes, rockbolts, wires, etc. If a conduit must cross the bulkhead area, it should be located or relocated away from the floor, walls, and roof to allow a 6.28-rad (360°) seal around the juncture between the conduit and the bulkhead structure. 4) All loose muck should be cleaned from the site and a trench about 152 mm (6 in.) deep should be dug from wall to wall in the floor. The trench must be wide enough to accommodate the entire bulkhead, including the posts. 5) The rock surfaces of the walls and roof should be cleaned with a wire brush to remove as much loose surface material as possible. Thorough cleaning promotes adhesion of the bulkhead sealant to the surfaces of the walls and roof, thus promoting an airtight seal. 6) It is quite difficult to seal landing mats that cross a bulkhead. If such a crossing cannot be avoided, the bulkhead should be placed between the end and the first hole in the steel so at least one side of the bulk-head can be sealed easily and completely. That may have to be done prior to actual construction if the end is located on the opposite face from the seal coating of the bulkhead. BULKHEAD CONSTRUCTION The three principal considerations in bulkhead con¬struction are the type of bulkhead, materials to be used, and construction method to be employed. For many projects, the bulkheads are specified by the requesting agency, with no latitude for independent choice of the type, materials, or construction method. In such cases, any deviations from the specifications, for any reason, must be approved in advance by the proper department or by the project senior ventilation engineer. Types and Materials When a choice of type, materials, or method is allowed, consideration should be given to factors such as cost, required useful life, proximity to blasting concus¬sions, availability of materials, direction of permissible air leakage, and degree of airtightness required. Other factors to be considered include the amount of time available, accessibility of transportation, potential for interference with operations or production, ambient water conditions, availability of connections to com¬pressed-air lines, etc. Despite the multitude of factors to be considered, most stoppings can be analyzed easily and the proper choices can be made without much difficulty. The four common classes of bulkheads utilized in

Jan 1, 1982

By Bernard F. Anderson

INTRODUCTION In this chapter, the term "down-the-hole drill" (DTH drill) is used as a generic name that encompasses the various trade names and other references such as "downhole drill," "in-the-hole drill," etc. This chapter is limited to a description of DTH drills used in stoping large underground ore bodies. DTH drills differ from conventional drills by virtue of the placement of the drill in the drill string. The DTH drill follows immediately behind the bit into the hole, rather than remaining on the feed as with ordinary drifters. Thus, no energy is dissipated through the steel or couplings, and the penetration rate is nearly constant, regardless of the depth of the hole. Since the drill must operate on compressed air and tolerates only small amounts of water, cuttings are flushed either by air with water-mist injection or by standard mine air with a dust collector at the collar. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT Mine managers have long known the economies enjoyed by quarry and open-pit operators in producing large quantities of ore. The savings are due primarily to the availability of massive equipment, capable of drilling large blastholes to reduce the amount of drilling, increase the fragmentation, reduce secondary blasting, and im¬prove the flow of the product. In an attempt to reduce underground mining costs, various methods are used for long-hole drilling, includ¬ing standard pneumatic percussion drifters and diamond drills. These systems have their shortcomings; percus¬sion drills are limited to small hole sizes and they ex¬perience excessive deviation and significant loss of energy with increased depth. The diamond drills provide deeper and straighter holes, but only at high cost. Both systems suffer from high noise levels, low penetration rates, and poor explosives distribution, among other problems. When the mining companies approached the drill manufacturers for a compact and portable large-hole jumbo for underground use, they specified not more than 1 % deviation on 60 m (200 ft) of vertical hole and a penetration rate of 15 m/h (50 fph). On Dec. 23, 1960, a test unit was placed in service in Montana and met the performance criteria. Though lacking the so¬phisticated features available today, the economies of surface blasting were brought underground. Unfortunately, the first system did not gain immedi¬ate acceptance in the industry. Among the factors con¬tributing to its demise were resistance to change, the need to alter development methods for the ore bodies, and a lack of flexibility in moving the rig from setup to setup and from level to level. In 1972, the mining industry again challenged the drill manufacturers to provide a workable jumbo that would combine compactness, ease of maintenance, relia¬bility, and efficiency, all on a self-propelled chassis. The manufacturers responded by providing improved jumbos, which have been accepted with enthusiasm throughout the mining industry. Today's DTH jumbos are capable of drilling from 100 to 200 mm (4 to 8 in.) diam holes that can be reamed to even larger diameters. The holes can be drilled to depths of 150 m (500 ft), depending upon ground conditions and the capability of the jumbo to retrieve the steel and drill. Fig. 1 illustrates a typical DTH jumbo. APPLICATIONS The uses to which DTH drill jumbos have been put are quite numerous, with new uses being found regularly. For convenience, these uses may be classified as primary blastholes and nonblasting holes. Primary Blastholes The original purpose for the development of the DTH jumbo was for drilling primary blastholes that could be mined by open-stope methods. Prior to the advent of the DTH jumbo, extensive development was required before production drilling could begin. Sub¬levels were required to allow access for column-and-arm stopers or ring/fan jumbos, to the extent necessary based on the effective penetration of the chosen machine. With the DTH jumbo, the mine engineer is able to reduce preproduction time and development costs. How¬ever, the most significant saving results from an im¬proved cost per ton of broken ore in the production phase. To utilize a DTH system, only a top heading and drawpoints are necessary. The top heading can be the width of the ore body with a 3.7-m (12-ft) back. A drop-raise pattern is drilled and shot to begin the stoping operation, providing a free face for subsequent blasting. A typical layout is illustrated in Fig. 2. The advantages of this system include: 1) Drilling and blasting are independent operations, and blasting can be performed at a rate congruous with the mine's ton-per-day capacity. 2) The development layout is simplified. 3) Good explosive distribution is achieved, provid¬ing more uniform fragmentation. 4) Environmental conditions for operators are im¬proved, including improved safety with all work directed downward (not overhead), lower noise levels, little fog, and a reduced dust count. 5) Improved production per manshift. 6) Simplified and easier operator work cycles. 7) Reduced cost per ton of product. 8) Fewer holes lost due to ground shifts. Nonblasting Holes With the introduction of the compact DTH jumbos, other practical uses became apparent, including the drilling of: 1) Holes for sand fill, from level to level and from level to stope. 2) Drain and dewatering holes. 3) Power and communications cable holes.

Jan 1, 1982

By Andrew B. Allen, Charles W. Robinson, Robert L. Schneider

In April, the US Synthetic Fuels Corp. broke a three-year silence and made its first financial award by approving a $820,750 loan for the First Colony peat-to-methanol project in North Carolina (ME, May, page 403). Peat Methanol Associates (PMA), a partnership between Koppers Co., ETCO Methanol Inc., Transco, Peat Methanol Co., and l. B. Sunderland, broke ground at First Colony last year and plans to begin production in Dec. 1985. Although the award is only a small part of Synthetic Fuels Corp.'s $15-billion budget, it does signal the corporation's intention to move aggressively ahead. It also is a positive indication that First Colony will be completed and operated successfully. This article describes the methods and equipment that will be used to harvest peat at First Colony, as well as how the peat will be converted to methanol. Introduction Peat deposits found along North Carolina's coastal plain contain high-quality fuel-grade peat with an average heating value of more than 23.3 MJ/kg (10,000 Btu/lb) (dry), with a low sulfur and ash content. The deposits differ from other US peats in that they contain large, sound Atlantic White Cedar and Cypress logs, stumps, and roots that may extend throughout the full depth of the deposit. A second difference is that these deposits are much more highly decomposed and, in the raw state, have the appearance and feel of a heavy, reddish-brown grease. These factors make it impractical to use standard production equipment so a new line was developed. Also, because of these conditions, techniques were modified to facilitate production. First Colony Farms, located near Creswell, NC, developed and evaluated a milled peat program. Equipment for this production method was designed and built, production rates were established from field operations, drying rates were established, weather data were analyzed, and total operating and capital costs were estimated. The method depends on the sun and wind for drying peat to the desired moisture content, in this case around 40%. Therefore, field preparation is actually the construction of a large solar collector to dry the peat so it can be harvested and stockpiled. It is essential that this collector be properly profiled initially and maintained during production to prevent precipitation from ponding. Initial Field Preparation Initial field preparation includes cleaning existing canals and constructing ditches and water control structures for proper drainage of rainwater run-off, building adequate roads for site access, removing surface vegetation, and profiling and sloping the fields. At First Colony, the 60.7-km2 (15,000-acre) harvesting area was divided into 129.5-hm2 (320-acre) blocks about 1.6 km (1 mile) long and 805 m (0.5 mile) wide. This was accomplished by cleaning main outfall canals with adjacent roads built from canal spoil at 1.6-km (1-mile) intervals. Existing intermediate canals that feed into main outfall canals at 805-m (0.5-mile) intervals also are cleaned. Headland roads are constructed from canal spoil along each side of each intermediate canal. This 129.5-hm2 (320-acre) block is then divided into 32 harvest strips by small V-ditches constructed at 50-m (165-ft) intervals. At the end of the field with the lowest elevation, corrugated steel pipe culverts are installed under the headland road in each V-ditch to control rainwater runoff into intermediate canals. Runoff water from the fields is diverted to a holding pond to prevent any increase in peak water runoff rates and to allow for more uniform drainage rate than experienced to date. After the drainage system is installed, harvest strips are ready for grinding and sloping operations. Surface vegetation, made up of small, waxy-leafed shrubs such as Gallberry, Bayberry, Magnolia, and scattered pond pine, can be effectively ground and incorporated into the upper surface of the peat layer. Here, it will rapidly decompose and have little effect on overall peat quality, thus eliminating the standard practice of pushing the vegetation and upper wood layer into long windrows with bulldozers and hauling this debris from the fields. Incorporating vegetation into the upper surface is known as the initial 102-mm (4-in.) surface vegetation grind and is accomplished by using a modified Bros Rota Mixer. Following this operation, and by using the same unit, a sec¬ond grind with a depth of 200-255 mm (8-10 in.) is made. This reduces the debris to a finer consistency, mixes it with the upper peat layer, and grinds any wood found in the upper 200-255 mm (8-10 in.). After initial grinding operations are completed, the augering or sloping operations can be accomplished with little or no hin-

Jan 7, 1983

By L. Cui

X. Huang (1997) recently suggested a poroelastic model for simulating the hydraulic fracturing breakdown pressure. His paper began with a discussion questioning Haimson and Fairhurst's (H&F) model. He claimed that the H&F model failed to lead to the Hubbert and Willis (H&W) model as[ a --> 0.] Huang also tried to explain why the H&F model could only work for special types of rock conditions. He pointed out that one possible reason could be that the Terzaghi's effective-stress concept had been adopted. The H&F model (Haimson and Fairhurst, 1969) was derived under the conditions that the borehole wall is fully penetrated (pp = pi) and a drained state is realized (steady pore-pressure field). Cui et al. (1997a) demonstrated that, under drained conditions, the total stresses in the penetrating poroelastic model (identical to the H&F model) degenerate into their counterparts in the elastic model (identical to the H&W model) as [a -- 0.] However, the effective-stress conditions are different for both of these models, because different pore-pressure conditions at the borehole wall were adopted. In the H&W model, p = po was assumed, i.e., the pore pressure field is not disturbed; but pp = pi was assumed in the H&F model. Assuming that Terzaghi's effective-stress controls tensile failure (that was the hypothesis adopted in both the H&F and the H&W models), only the following two special drained poroelastic cases may degenerate into the H&W model for very small a: • when the pore pressure at the borehole wall remains at the same level as the virgin pore pressure for a penetrating model and when the borehole wall is simply impermeable (i.e., the nonpenetrating model, Cui et al., 1997b). Therefore, simply setting a = 0 in the H&F model generally does not lead to the same problem described by the H&W model. On the other hand, when the porepressure boundary conditions do not correspond to the ones in the H&W model, a degeneration of the poroelastic model to the H&W model as [a – 0] should be questionable. The pore pressure at the borehole wall is generally dependent on the injection-fluid pressure and the penetrating conditions at the borehole wall, such as the existence of a filter-cake. For an impermeable wall, pp is independent of Pi, and it is basically an unknown [(how¬ever, pp -- po as t --oo).] For a fully permeable wall, pp is the same as Pi. Between these two extremes, pp should be a function of p; and the permeable condition of the borehole wall, which may be dependent of the leak-off coefficient cf. (the range of cf is from 0 to 1). Theoretically, for a rock with low permeability, a penetrating borehole wall is still possible. For saturated porous materials with very low values of a, poroelasticity shows that a pore pressure will be built up due to the stress concentration subjected to a nonhydrostatic in situ stress field (Cheng et al., 1993). This phenomenon is known as the Skempton effect. The variation of the pore pressure may be evaluated by [AP = 3 B(A rr + 06ee + A (Y,,)] (1) where B is the Skempton pore pressure coefficient. This pore pressure variation dissipates as time increases (it is totally gone as the drained state is approached). The rate of the dissipation mainly rely on the permeability of the formation. The dissipation is very slow for tight formations because their permeability is very low, and it is fast for rocks of high permeability. According to our analyses, the time period for this process could be from seconds (for sandstone's) to a couple of days (for stales). One possible reason that the H&C model did not agree well with the experimental results for rocks with low permeability might be that the time interval between the application of the loading and the fluid injection had not been long enough for the dissipation of the Skempton effect. The effective-stress law basically defines how much pore pressure contributes to the total stress. The difference between Terzaghi's effective stress and Biot's effective stress is that 100% of the pore pressure contributes to the total stress in Terzaghi's definition, while only a certain portion of the pore pressure ((ap) goes to the total stress in Biot's definition. Therefore, when the pore pressure at the boretole wall (pp) is determined according to Biot's effective-stress law, app in the total tangential stress is attributed to the pore pressure. In other words, Terzaghi's effective tangential stress is expressed

Jan 1, 1999

By G. C. Van Bever, J. J. Zaluski

Introduction The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (Public Law 9587) (hereinafter the "Act" or "SMCRA") passed by Congress in August 1977 represents a comprehensive federal scheme for controlling surface coal mining and the surface effects of underground mining through permitting requirements, performance guidelines and reclamation planning. While the provisions of the Act have been the subject of numerous legal challenges and court battles over the years, it is difficult to identify a more controversial program within the Act than the provisions for designating lands as unsuitable for surface coal mining operations. The lands unsuitable designation process provides for the acceptance and review of petitions submitted by citizens or organizations seeking to have specified land areas designated unsuitable for all or certain types of surface coal mining activities. In filing these petitions, the interested parties or petitioners are required to make allegations about potential adverse impacts on people or the environment and submit evidence supporting their allegations. In 30 U.S.C. § 1272, Congress provided that "[a]ny person having an interest which is or may be adversely affected shall have the right to petition ... to have an area designated as unsuitable for surface coal mining operations." Under the Act, an area can be designated as unsuitable where the mining operation will (1) be incompatible with existing state or local land use plans, (2) affect fragile or historic lands, (3) affect renewable resource lands where mining operations could result in substantial loss or reduction of long-range productivity, or (4) affect natural hazard lands where such operations could substantially endanger life and property. In enacting SMCRA, Congress mandated that each state establish a process to determine which, if any, lands within the state are unsuitable for all or certain types of surface mining operations. In response to this federal legislation, the Kentucky General Assembly adopted a state regulatory program for surface mining that included provisions direct¬ing the Secretary of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet to establish a program for designating lands as unsuitable for surface mining as required by the Act. In recent litigation in Kentucky, several environmental groups filed a lands unsuitable petition, later joined by the University of Kentucky, challenging a proposal by Arch Mineral Corporation to surface mine over 3 million tons of recoverable coal. The petition sought to designate over 10,000 acres of land adjacent to Arch's proposed operations as unsuitable for surface mining operations, basically alleging that the mining would disturb an outdoor laboratory. The filing of the petition activated Kentucky's regulatory scheme for reviewing lands unsuitable petitions that can result in an absolute prohibition against surface mining on the petitioned land for historical, environmental and other related reasons. The designation process involves vague petition requirements creating a situation that Arch argued is devoid of constitutional due process and subject to abuse by the petitioner on many fronts. Arch maintained that the lands unsuitable regulations do not grant adequate protection to Arch's legitimate property rights under the due process clauses of the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and are thus void and unenforceable. The entire process resulting in a decision on the petition took just under 12 months in the Arch case, and although Arch was ultimately successful in preserving its right to mine, Arch's surface mining permit was held up for this period of time. This delay led to the cessation of mining operations by Arch and the idling of over 250 workers. This paper will review the lands unsuitable designation process and the significant implications the process has for existing surface mining operations, currently proposed operations and even those long-range operations not yet contemplated. Special emphasis will be given to Kentucky's lands unsuitable program. Finally, the recent litigation involving Arch Mineral Corporation and its effort to surface mine 81.5 acres of Arch controlled property will be utilized to illustrate this very unusual regulatory scheme. Regulatory background Chapter 30, Subchapter F of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) promulgated to implement the provisions of SMCRA, requires that each state establish procedures under the state's surface mining program for designating non-federal and non-Indian state lands as unsuitable for all or certain types of surface coal mining operations. 30 C.F.R. § 764.1. The C.F.R. establishes minimum standards for state lands unsuitable programs and sets out requirements for filing a Lands Unsuitable Petition (hereinafter "LUP"), processing LUPs, decision-making guidelines and hearing requirements. Kentucky has adopted regulations providing for the implementation of the lands unsuitable process as part of the state's regulatory program under SMCRA. The following discussion summarizes the principle components of the Kentucky lands unsuitable program.

Jan 1, 1993

By M. SIDDARAJU, Rameshwar Sah, Satendra Kumar, Arvind Jaiswal

The study explores a novel process to sinter porous iron ore with improved productivity and quality. The iron ore is pre-processed with calcined lime to temporarily close pores, preventing water absorption during granulation. This enhances reaction kinetics and early slag formation during sintering, resulting in significant improvements in sinter productivity, product yield, and cold strength property.

Feb 28, 2022

By N. W. Stump

New developments in on-stream analysis using immersed radioisotope gauges including results from plant installations are described. The control of grinding and flotation using a small digital computer has been complemented by this development. A control scheme for grinding which is based on maximum throughput at constant product size and preliminary work in flotation control are also outlined.

Jan 1, 1974

By R. A. Matuszak

U.S. Government sponsored studies proclaim large reductions in surface mine productivity. Consulting studies place a large share of the blame on increased governmental regulatory activities and on inexperienced, improperly train people. Union rules, which allow indescriminate bidding for job openings, seem to be a major factor causing the lack of experience in spite of elaborate training programs.

Jan 1, 1982

By John A. Brooks

The description of a phosphate flotation operation is repeat information for many people, except for variations in flow sheets. This paper is written to show the variations in flows, and to give enough. of the overall flows to allow anyone not familiar with the operation to be able to formulate a fair idea of the operations.

Jan 1, 1962

By William R. Barton

The domestic portland cement industry consumes more than 12 million tons annually of raw materials chemically similar to fly ash. How these materials are used and how fly ash can serve in their place are discussed. Factors influencing whether or not a particular plant will use fly ash in place of an alternate material are discussed.

Jan 1, 1968

By L. P. Hendriks

Consolidated Murchison, the only antimony producer in South Africa, is situated in the northeastern part of Transvaal. Phalaborwa, an important copper/phosphate mining town is situated about 60 km to the east of Consolidated Murchison, on the border of the Kruger National Park. The mine is jointly controlled by Johannesburg Consolidated Investment Co. Ltd. (JCI) and Anglovaal Limited.

Jan 1, 1998

By R. L. Guerguerian

Critical fasteners are described as they apply to the specification, manufacture, and assembly on large grinding mill bolted joints. The importance of adequate design methods, related joint diagrams and pivot analyses, and special emphasis on the quality of manufacturing and the tightening procedures in the field, are discussed; all in an effort to ensure high availability plant operation.

Jan 1, 2001

By Richard R. Klimpel

Introduction Froth flotation is one of the most common unit engineering operations in use today. Its aim is to upgrade the quality of coal by removing ash/pyrite and separating selected minerals from undesired gangue materials. Flotation has been successfully practiced at the industrial scale for more than 50 years. Its use is increasing due to the ever decreasing feed grades of the coals and minerals being processed. Flotation has also shown itself to be a flexible process that lends itself well to many solid/solid separations. Thus, with surprisingly little equipment modification, separations can involve very different particle sizes and densities, and relative weight ratios of materials to be separated. In addition, the flotation process is economic, especially when compared to size reduction, its associated precursor process. Flotation also lends itself to continuous operations with a given equipment configuration. The operation must exhibit an ability to vary feed rate of solid to the process by as much as 50% without a total collapse of separating efficiency. In addition, the mechanical flotation cell is scaleable from 2.8 to 57 or 85 m3 (100 to 2000 or 3000 cu ft) with surprising ease relative to other unit engineering operations over the same relative size increase. The separating medium used is water. Most of the chemicals required - pH regulators, frothers, collectors, activators, and depressants - are all relatively inexpensive and common. They are not usually used in large quantities. Froth flotation is certainly one of the most versatile and forgiving unit operations in the chemical, mining, and agricultural industries. The problem with the industrial flotation process is that it is fairly easy to get reasonable results and relatively difficult to get excellent results. Why is it so difficult to fine tune the froth flotation process? There are some obvious reasons and a few not-so-obvious factors. The obvious category would certainly contain the tendency of natural feed materials (ores and raw coals) to have variable physical, metallurgical, and surface properties. This occurs even when special care is taken to minimize such differences with blending. There is another obvious reason for difficulty. An inherent broadness of the feed particle size range to flotation results from using any of the common industrial-scalefine grinding devices - ball-, rod-, or autogenous mills. Research has been done into the chemical reagent and equipment aspects of flotation. It has shown strong interactions (limitations) of chemical reagents and equipment on larger and smaller particles. The point is that current flotation practice works best on average- or medium-sized feed particles. The greater the amount of large or small particles, or of both large and small, the more difficult it is to achieve excellent flotation results. Other reasonably obvious factors include: • variations in mineral type and liberation sizes; • water chemistry variations such as those involving Ca", C03, or Fe", or various soluble metal cations; • the presence of stray organic materials such as returning soluble reagents or partially degraded reagents in reuse water; • the lack of reliable on-line instrumentation for monitoring and control; • frequent equipment malfunctions of all types; • excessive feed rates for installed plant capacity; • poor operator interaction with the process; and • poor reagent dosage control. There are less obvious, but real limitations to flotation. These are inherent in the design and operating characteristics of the most common cell design in use today - the mechanical flotation cell. Individual performance attributes of the chemical reagents used, along with their manner of use, also carry limitations. The bulk of this paper will deal with chemical reagents and their use. Chemical reagents In 1979, the author and his co-workers were asked to invent and implement, at the industrial scale, new flotation reagent chemistry. After reviewing some of the literature (Sutherland and Wark, 1955; Klassen and Mokrousov, 1959; M. Fuerstenau, 1962; D. Fuerstenau, 1976; and Leja, 1982), a series of carefully controlled plant scale tests were set up. These tests were designed to understand existing reagent scale-up from the laboratory to the plant. They were to quantify at the plant level the effect of some of the more important, controllable chemical reagent factors (frother and collector type, frother and collector dosage, pH effects). This is a learning experience that all researchers involved in flotation theory should experience. It quickly became apparent that: • because a factor is important

Jan 12, 1988

By Bob Snashall

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

Jan 1, 1989

By E. J. Garrison

Discussion by E.J. Garrison A.C. Noble presents a clear and concise summary of the factors pertinent to a competent reserve evaluation of a mineral occurrence. However, I believe that he confuses the difference between a resource and a reserve. By definition, a reserve estimate includes all known economic, legal, mining, metallurgical and environmental factors impacting the recovery of the product(s) found in the deposit. A resource estimate, however, is an estimate of what is there - what is available for exploitation and should not include economic and other considerations. Only after defining the resource, its extent, location, physical and chemical properties, can an intelligent selection process begin of the extraction and processing technologies most appropriate to the circumstances encountered. The early and almost certainly inappropriate application of these often cookbook choices has probably lead many companies to walk away from good properties. (How many mines have been found in others rejects?) An example of the process is the early selection of metallurgical samples, after encouraging values are found in a few holes or surface samples, in an attempt to determine the economics of the prospect. Unfortunately, the sampler does not know how representative of the occurrence the sample is because he does not know what the deposit looks like. As a consequence, the property becomes saddled with a bad metallurgical sample that is often inappropriately used in evaluating the deposit which it does not represent. Reply by A.C. Noble E.J. Garrison asserts that I confuse the difference between a resource and an ore reserve. In fact, this paper was motivated by the observation that resources and reserves are almost universally confused throughout the industry. While Garrison is concerned that too-early consideration of engineering, metallurgical and economic factors will result in dropping properties too soon, some issues that must be considered include: •The purpose of exploration is to discover ore reserves, not to discover resources. •Ore reserves are always smaller than resources. • Decisions on exploration expenditures must be made based on the expectation of the quantity of ore reserves that will ultimately be defined. Noble's Fig. 2 can be used to give guidance as to when it is appropriate to begin reserve calculations. When exploration enters the "flat" portion of the curve, representative samples can be selected for metallurgical studies and appropriate mining methods chosen. It is at this stage that we know enough about the deposit to make intelligent choices of representative samples and recognize constraints on mining caused by the deposits shape, environment and physical properties. Once the appropriate technologies have been chosen, then their cost can be estimated with reasonable accuracy. Early entry of economic and process factors gives the false appearance of reserve status to the resource estimation. It would be more informative and less subject to abuse and misunderstanding if resource calculations were made at a number of cutoff grades. The cutoff grades should be chosen to cover the range of grades found in practice in existing operations of similar type. This would emphasize the open nature of resource estimates and encourage creative evaluation of mining and process technologies. It does not preclude the use of economic, environmental and recovery technology factors in deciding the advisability of continuing exploration expenditures, but would highlight their speculative nature. It is thus hoped that decisions on the future of the deposit would not be made on the presumed suitability of a given technology but on the actually known reality. I agree that resource estimates should be reported as a range of cutoff grades. Since reporting at a cutoff implies application of underlying economics (even by analogy to similar properties), however, it should be clearly stated that resources do not consider economic, mining or cost factors, and that ore reserves will be substantially less. The dilemma of the explorationist is that until the continuity and limits of ore-grade mineralization have been established, it is difficult to make quantitative estimates of either resources or ore reserves. Further industry discussion is needed regarding standards for disclosing early exploration information in such a way as to fairly represent the potential of an exploration property.

Jan 1, 1995

By Jeffrey B. Smith

Introduction The gas shortage is going to be with us for some time to come. If we can set aside political and industry rhetoric (along with subjective personal opinions), we still are confronted by two serious "facts of life": (1) for almost a decade the U.S. has been con¬suming natural gas at a greater rate than we have been finding new reserves; and (2) there is a finite amount of natural gas present within the earth&apos;s crust. Much of the known and easily exploitable sources of gas (the so-called "conventional" sources, such as the high permeability sand reservoirs of the Tertiary sequence along the Gulf Coast) already have been developed; their production is declining rapidly. The total producible reserves from con¬ventional gas reservoirs amount to only 216 Tcf, less than an 11-year supply. However, several large potential resources of natural gas remain to be developed. These "uncon¬ventional sources" have low permeability and/or peculiar producing characteristics. The DOE program for development of these unconventional sources of gas is called the enhanced gas recovery (EGR) program. The primary goal of this program is to provide a data base of resource characterization and production technology that will lead to commercial development. DOE will encourage and support in¬dustry participation in developing and demonstrating technologies needed to reach this goal. Unconventional Resources Four major unconventional resources of gas have a high potential for commercial development. There are other unconventional sources (such as gas hydrates) that are too poorly defined to warrant a major development thrust at this time. The four unconventional sources of gas currently included in the EGR program are: 1. The carbonaceous shales of Devonian age in the Appalachian, Illinois, and Michigan sedimentary basins are the targets of the Eastern Gas Shales Project (EGSP). 2. The low permeability, low porosity so-called "tight" gas sandstones of the Upper Cretaceous/Lower Tertiary in the Rocky Mountain areas constitute the resource target for the Western Gas Sands Project (WGSP). 3. The free methane trapped in coal beds of both the eastern and western U. S. constitute the Methane from Coal Beds Project (MCBP). 4. The abnormally high pressured, high-temperature saltwater aquifers of the Texas¬Louisiana gulf coast are targets of the Geopressured Aquifer Project (GPAP). Basic implementation strategy for these EGR projects involve (1) assessing and characterizing the resource potential of the resource; (2) conducting cost-shared field testing with industry to improve, develop, and demonstrate various stimulation and production technologies; (3) coordinating EGR activities within DOE and with other federal agencies (such as the Bureau of Mines) to minimize duplication; and (4) aiming all projects toward commercial development of the gas resources. EGSP What type of "geological animal" is the EGSP dealing with? While gas undeniably is related to the occurrence of natural fracture systems within the shale, the overall producing mechanism and precise location of fractured, gas¬bearing locales within each basin is still poorly understood. By developing reliable resource characterization techniques and applying effective stimulation technologies we intend to elevate the Devonian shale from the status of a potential gas resource to that of a proven gas reserve. Once we have done this the private sector can take over the large-scale commercial development of the Devonian shale gas resource. WGSP The second largest project (both in terms of complexity and level of funding) is the WGSP. The primary targets for this project are the low permeability (< 1 md) gas sandstones of the Piceance, Uintah, and Greater Green River basins and the Northern Great Plains Province. Project success in these four primary geologic locales will permit investigating additional low permeability sandstones in 16 other sedimentary basins. It ap¬pears that the only practical means of increasing permeability and resultant flow rates from these sandstones lies in the use of massive hydraulic fracturing techniques. Unfortunately, it is still too early to design such jobs with predictable results. MCBP The MCBP is to be involved in producing and utilizing methane derived from coal beds. The coal, like portions of the Devonian shale, is impermeable, highly fractured (termed "cleat" by

Jan 1, 1980

By Dwane K. Johnson

INTRODUCTION The small mining company faces the dilemma of how to finance the development of its properties because it doesn&apos;t have the financial resources to pay for the development costs from its own funds and doesn&apos;t have the financial strength which will enable it to borrow the money needed for development. However, with a little imagination and the right set of circumstances, a financing can be arranged for the small mining company. This paper is an attempt to describe the fundamental steps on how such financing can be obtained --in other words--what is required to provide ad- equate capital at a low cost for developing and bringing a mining property into production. Innovative financing follows from this. The basic keys for building and maintaining a successful mining company are "the four M&apos;s": Management, Market, Mine, and Money. The writer believes their order of importance is as presented and each is a building block required in order to obtain the type of financing that best suits the borrower and lender. MANAGEMENT Management must be experienced, highly organized, realistic, able to take advantage of opportunities and fulfill promises. Mine financing requires a variety of skills and concentration on the part of management. Management should have a thorough understanding derived from experience in geology, construction, mining and metallurgy and environment, marketing, and financial matters. Management must realistically visualize what will be produced at what cost and truly evaluate the risks associated so the proper security can be correctly designed. Since risk cannot be eliminated, the objective of management is to identify the risk which will be present in a given venture and assess the level of that risk which will be acceptable to the firm. Generally the risk which is present is subject to little or no modification. After management identifies and measures the acceptable risk the firm will proceed in a way that it will be least exposed. Management must determine its long-term objectives and strategies within the context of a constantly changing world. This question must be addressed before examining the sorts of risk which affect the development and operation of a specific property. The compilation and interpretation of "hard data" by competent people is good to a point but the experience and instinct of seasoned individuals are the important factors in management choosing a long-term direction for the corporation. The attitude towards risk greatly affects the goals of the corporation. Major risks in a mining project can be placed in four categories: 1. Market - Price, demand, substitution. 2. Costs - Capital, operating, financial. 3. Regulation. 4. Taxation. The feasibility study for a project is the fundamental tool used in the management of risk. Management should employ an experienced team with an established and well-understood set of ground rules for the preparation and assembly of a feasibility study. The necessary degree of realism is built into all levels of the study and if the project is technically feasible, the company&apos;s hurdle rate is then used to discount the base-case project cash flow in order to determine its financial viability. Understanding the geological significance of the mineral deposit is critical. There should be strong interplay among the pure regional geologist, the detailed mine geologist, the mining engineer, and the metallurgical engineer. The collaboration among these different disciplines will yield a feasibility study that is more reliable. The essence of this work must be appreciated and understood by the executives planning the financing. It is vital that they thoroughly understand the risks and make the proper risk assessments to cope with our rapidly changing market environment. Projecting future revenue values is paramount and is subject to much estimation. One way to mitigate fluctuations and the risk of falling prices is by selling production for future delivery. MARKET Since mining is a worldwide industry it is mandatory that bankers be aware of what is occurring in the marketplace, both foreign and domestic. The marketing of the production is a very important facet when considering financing for the small

Jan 1, 1987

By Mark A. Krall, Robert L. Geddes, James C. Frost

Introduction The Conda Partnership&apos;s Dry Valley phosphate mine is a thinly bedded, multiple seam open-pit mining operation where selective mining techniques are used to recover phosphatic shales. The mining methods used are truck/shovel and scraper/dozer operations. Ore is shipped 32 km (20 miles) by rail to a beneficiation facility. The ore is upgraded by washing and calcining. The mine and beneficiation complexes are owned by the Conda partnership. It is a joint venture between Beker Industries Corp., of Greenwich, CT, and Western Co-Operative Fertilizers (US) Inc., of Alberta, Canada. The Partnership operates as a separate entity of the two partners. The Dry Valley mine is located 48 km (30 miles) northeast of Soda Springs in Caribou County in southeastern Idaho. The mine is situated on the Caribou National Forest. Mining operations take place between 2 and 2.4 km (6400 and 7900 ft) in elevation. It is accessible partly by 32 km (20 miles) of paved roads and 16 km (10 miles) of dirt roads. The winters are long and severe, and the summers are short and mild. This article describes the history, geology, exploration, mining, and reclamation that makes this mine Idaho&apos;s largest producing mine and the western US&apos; leading phosphate producer. History and production In the mid-1950s, Western Fertilizers of Salt Lake City, UT, drove an exploratory drift in Maybe Canyon. A large bulk sample of phosphatic shales was analyzed for phosphate content and processing characteristics. No large scale mining or processing operations were undertaken. In the late 1950s, the Dry Valley property was sold to Central Farmers of Chicago, IL. No major operations took place. In 1964, Central Farmers sold the property to El Paso Products Co. of Odessa, TX. El Paso Products supervised the mining operations of Wells Cargo Mining Co. from 1965 through 1967. During this time, El Paso Products built a beneficiation facility and a fertilizer complex in Conda. A 32-km (20-mile) railroad was also constructed from the mine to this facility. From 1968 through 1972, the mine was shut down due to a depressed fertilizer market. In 1972, El Paso products sold its ore reserves, beneficiation plant, and fertilizer complex to Beker Industries Corp. In 1979, Beker Industries sold 50% of its ore reserves and 50% of its beneficiation plant to Western Co-Operative Fertilizers (US) Inc., of Alberta Canada, forming the Conda Partnership. It has operated the mine and beneficiation plant since January 1979. From the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s, no substantial production took place. From 1965 to 1967, El Paso Products stripped 3 Mm3 (4 million cu yd) and mined 2.3 Mt (2.5 million st). From 1972 through 1983, 50 Mm3 (66 million cu yd) were stripped and 18 Mt (20 mil¬lion st) were mined. Geology The Wells Formation forms high ridges and hillsides in the Dry Valley area. It is best exposed along the west face of Dry Ridge. It forms the imposing wall on the east side of Dry Valley. The formation is divided into two members. The lower member, about 213 m (700 ft) thick, is dominantly thin to medium-bedded limestone and silty limestone. It contains nodules and stringers of chert and minor sandstone. The upper member is composed principally of thick-bedded to massive cross-bedded, light-gray to orange-yellow, fine grained sandstone. There is some interbedded brown to light-gray limestone. This member varies from 369 to 457 m (1300 to 1500 ft). Recent investigations indicate that the upper Wells is of Permian age. Under some conditions, the Wells may be water-bearing. Otherwise, it has no apparent economic significance. Grandeur Member (Park City Formation) Overlying the Wells Formation is a distinctive light-gray to white dolomitic fossiliferous limestone. This unit has been identified by the US Geological Survey (USGS) as the Grandeur Tongue Member of the Park City Formation. This member is sometimes absent due to its contact with the Meade Peak Member of the Phosphoria Formation. It is easily detectable by its color, hardness, and fetid odor. Phosphoria Formation The Phosphoria Formation of Permian age was named from Phosphoria Gulch, Bear Lake County. The formation has been studied extensively and developed for its economically valuable phosphate reserves.

Jan 11, 1985

By Tan Zhenxiang

INTRODUCTION Koolyanobbing is an open cut iron ore mine, which is located in Yilgarn region of Western Australia. To prevent the operators from suffering silicosis diseases and protect the air from being polluted, a series of dust control measures have been taken. These measures include ventilation and dust control system for sample preparation shed, dust collecting system for drill rig, dust suppression system for ore processing plant, dust control for haul road. The details related to individual dust control measure are dealt as follows. SAMPLE PREPARATION SHED DUST CONTROL The sample preparation is one of the major dust sources at Koolyanobbing. The activity is being carried out at the sample preparation shed. It typically needs to go through the following stages, that is, crushing, splitting, drying and pulverising. The amount of dust generated from crushing and splitting is mainly determined by the moisture content contained in the pre- pared sample. A significant amount of dust is generated at the sample pulverising stage due to cleaning sample bowl with com- pressed air. To protect the sample preparing personnel&apos;s health and make the dust level in the air meet the requirement from the health and safety authority, a central ventilation and dust control system has been installed at the sample preparation shed. As shown in Fig. l, the system consists of suction heads, suction lines, dust collector and vacuum fan. The fan creates vacuum environment in the system, therefore the dust is drawn into the dust collector through the suction heads and suction lines. The dust collector is of fabric filter. When the dusty air comes to the filter, the dust in the air is collected and retained on the surface of the filter while the clean air passes through and enters the atmosphere. The retained dust is blowed out by the pressured air pulses and deposits into the dust bin underneath the filter. A time relay device is used to control the cleaning time and the cleaning interval. DRILL RIG DUST CONTROL A hydraulic percussion drill is used to drill blast holes. To carry out the drilling operation properly and efficiently, the cut- tings are being flushed out of the hole by the compressed air. In order to prevent from the fine particles in the cuttings escaping to the air, a dust collector is attached to the drill. The collector mainly consists of suction head, cyclone and bag filter. Refer to Fig. 2. The suction head is installed at the lower end of the feed beams and is movable. The moving range is up to 250 mm. It is not only used to restrict the cuttings, but also used to prevent water from entering the filters when drilling wet hole. A 406 mm diameter primary cyclone is used to separate the heaviest particles in the cuttings. It is also used as blast holes sampling equipment. One part of the dust particles are collected by a sample bag through a splitter attached to the end of the cy- clone. The rest of the particles fall down to the ground through the closing rubber. The bag filter is driven by a hydraulic motor (1). It is used to collect the lighter particles in the cuttings. The filtering area is 16 m2 and the dust separation efficiency is up to 99.9%. The working principle of the filter is demonstrated in Fig. 3. When the rock drill (9) flushing is turned on, the pressurised air from the compressor is directed to the rock drill and to the pres- sure switch (10). The pressured air will open the pressure switch to de-energise and close the solenoid valve (4) The pressure affecting the cut-off cylinder (5) keeps the exhaust port flap open. When the flushing valve (8) is closed, the pressure affecting the cut-off cylinder disappears and the internal intake opening flap is closed by a spring. The pressure also ceases to affect the pressure switch and the spring switches the contact to the point 2. The time relay (11) is now activated and gives a 0.5 second current impulse to the solenoid valve and keeps the current cut off for approx 8 seconds. When the solenoid valve is live, it opens and lets an impulse of pressured air to the filters (2). These impulses will clean the filters.

Jan 1, 1997