Search Documents

By H. M. Crankshaw

THE early methods of mining anthracite in the steep pitching Mammoth bed consisted in driving breasts up the pitch from the gangways and airways driven in the bed along the strike (Plate 2, Fig. 1). Breasts are simply rooms driven up the pitch the full thickness of the bed (Plate 2, Fig. 2), having a width of from 18 to 30 ft., and a manway or traveling way on one or both sides. (For detail of breast method see Whildin, Trans., vol. 50, p. 704). Many difficulties were encountered, and the maintenance cost of the timbered gangways was so great as to be practically prohibitive. To reduce this .expense, the gangways were driven in the thin Skidmore bed underlying the Mammoth, and the coal mined through rock holes. (Plate 2, Fig. 2;-A.) It was found that after the breasts were driven up 80 to 100 ft., the coal almost invariably rushed or "ran away," making good ventilation almost impossible and the extraction of coal from the upper portion of the lift very difficult. The economic length of a lift is from 200 to 250 ft., and the percentage of extraction by the old method above mentioned was often under 50 per cent., while the coal recovered was so badly broken up as to reduce materially the percentage of large sizes.

Jan 7, 1916

By Wayne D. Gould, Robert S. Shoemaker

Modern mill design is a combination of many factors which permit the efficient production of a mineral concentrate from operating, maintenance, and capital requirements. In general, mills should be designed to use the largest possible equipment compatible with the requirements of the ore and the owner's operating philosophy. The paper discusses the major parts of concentrating mills, from primary crushing through comminution, both conventional and autogenous, and the production of a final concentrate. Features of various plants are compared and discussed in the light of operating practice and maintenance requirements.

Jan 1, 1978

Mine closure is a legitimate element of the mining cycle and like mine development involves technical planning, permitting, and finally construction. Closure begins with the mine's operational footprint and transforms the site so that it meets the explicit requirements of the owners and regulators. Implicitly, the closure will increasingly need to meet the requirements of other interested parties such as the local community, workforce, and future land users. Golden Cross is the first modern mine closure in New Zealand. It operated for 6 + years as a mid-size gold and silver mine winning ore from both underground and open pit sources, and processing via a carbon in leach circuit including a cyanide recovery stage prior to tailings disposal. The mine is situated in a sensitive high rainfall environment, and is complicated by the existence of a large ancient landslide underlying most of the tailings dam and waste rock embankment. The regulatory process for mine closure in New Zealand is not clearly understood by operators or regulators alike. The Golden Cross mine was permitted under the Mining Act 1971 and closed primarily under the Resource Management Act. This switch of legislation, the parallel reorganisation of many government departments, and change in societal expectations with respect to long term environmental stewardship during the life of the mine resulted in the requirements of closure being significantly different to the expectations at permitting.

Jan 1, 1999

By Edo Engel

Whereas only a handful of decades ago, typical blast furnace working volumes were below 1000 m³, such furnaces are currently designated compact or even mini blast furnaces. For certain business cases, however, small furnace sizes remain an attractive option. Decades ago, this size blast furnace would have produced a maximum of 0.3 Mtpa with its 600 m³ working volume over a campaign of up to four years. The current state of technology and operational know–how will allow a similarly sized furnace to produce over 0.7 Mtpa while achieving the multiple decade campaigns that have become familiar to steel producers in full sized operations. This level of productivity, but especially the reliability and supply security associated with mature technology, allows for integration into minimills or taking a first step towards a full scale BF–BOF integrated mill. Steel producers considering such scenarios, which are typically attractive for emerging economies, are confronted with fundamental decisions, one of which is for the technological basis for the compact or mini blast furnace to be included in the plant. This article addresses some of these decisions from an operations–based perspective. A small number of case studies is included.

Aug 16, 2017

By David P. Hale

THE Cartersville barite district is near Cartersville, Ga., in the southeastern part of Bartow County, about 43 miles northeast of Atlanta. The area over which active mining is being done extends about six miles in a northeasterly direction and is about three miles wide. Barite production in Georgia began about 1907,1but the existence of the mineral was known much earlier. At present four companies are operating washing plants and three other plants are operating on leases from those companies. The chief impurities in the ores are silica and iron oxide. The silica is easily washed and jigged out and gives little trouble. Any gravity separation between the iron and the barite is generally poor, owing to the slight difference in specific gravity. Two operators have turned to magnetic separation as the solution to the problem and have made remarkable improvements in the finished product. By very close sizing prior to jigging, the separation between iron and barite has been greatly improved. In some localities manganese occasionally appears as an impurity, but is fairly easy to eliminate by gravity methods. A considerable percentage of iron and silica is eliminated by being broken free in crushing. Until methods for the recovery of fine ore were introduced a minimum of crushing was done, but modern methods allow more than formerly. The depression years brought about the need for increased recovery of ore handled on the part of the producers and a demand for a higher grade of product on the part of the buyers. Improvements in milling and mining practice have had a far greater effect, however, than merely the production of a better grade of ore with greater recovery. They have opened for mining large areas that a few years ago were considered noncommercial deposits because of their inaccessibility and their high iron content. It is no exaggeration to say that the new methods have more than doubled present known reserves of barite ore of economic value.

Jan 1, 1938

By G Fahey, S Rose

"Mining geology as a defined profession is only about 100 years old. The successful modern mine geologist needs to be a multidisciplinarian, but also needs to maintain a focus on the key outputs of the role. The technical skills needed in the role have increased as mining methods move to increasingly mechanised techniques. As well as being the guardian of the orebody and ensuring minimal dilution to expected ore grades, the mine geologist should be competent in the 12-point mine geology process. The mine geology process should include:a statement of purpose (a ‘mission statement’)geological mapping/logging system that supports consistent and regular geological data collection, storage, and interpretationsampling system that can produce representative samples and fits in with the mining scheduleassay database with relevant controls to ensure only ‘clean’ data is loadedsimple quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) system for samples and assays, with a response process to react to out of specification resultsconsistent method of exporting, visualising, processing and interpreting assay data to create mining blocksdevelopment sign-off system so that all development and stoping is controlledproduction tracking system to monitoring and reporting what ore and waste volumes have been moved from the face, to any intermediate stockpiles, the run-of-mine (ROM) pad and into the crusherreporting system for daily, weekly and monthly reporting of tonnes and gradesdocumentation so that the grade control system has simple, but effective descriptions of how it works, who has responsibilities, and authorities, and be easily maintainedreconciliation system to compare resource and reserve to grade control and to mined and milledtraining system so that the geology team can quickly become competent.In this paper, the authors discuss the requirements of each point, and comment on common shortfalls observed by them over several years’ experience on producing mines worldwide.CITATION:Rose, S and Fahey, G, 2014. Modern mining geology, in Proceedings Ninth International Mining Geology Conference 2014 , pp 461–466 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Aug 18, 2014

By Kenneth P. Katen

Though the use of continuous mining machines consolidated the operations of cutting, drilling, blasting, and loading in one machine that would theoretically provide uninterrupted production, it was soon realized that the face haulage and roof support operations remained as major impediments to continuous production. The ability to provide not only continuous cutting and loading, but also continuous haulage and roof support (see Fig. I), was the basis for the introduction of mechanized longwall systems in this country from Europe in 1951. The early systems employed friction props for roof support, but were to become obsolete shortly after introduction of the first hydraulically powered, self-advancing supports in 1960. Since then, use of the longwall technique has grown to the point where it is currently providing more than 5% of the annual output of underground coal mines in the United States. The shortwall system had its origin in Australia, but was first introduced into this country in 1962 following the development of powered roof supports. It, too, provides for continuous cutting, loading, and roof support (see Fig. 2), but has not experienced the widespread popularity of longwall due to its inherent inability to easily provide for continuous haulage. While there are in the neighborhood of 100 longwall systems currently in operation in this country, there are only a handful of short- wall operations providing production of slightly more than 907 184.7 t/a (1,000,000 stpy) Both of these systems provide uninterrupted roof support for face operations by means of hydraulically powered steel roof supports. In each case, the coal removal consists of open-end cuts made from the narrow end of a large rectangular pillar (panel) which has been blocked out by continuous miners developing entries around its perimeter. However, this is the extent of the similarities between the two systems. It is hoped [ ] that the information presented in this chapter will enable the reader to better understand the two mechanical systems and the mining concepts involved in their employment.

Jan 1, 1981

By Edwin R. (Original by) Phelps

Surface mining refers to the process of removing the material (over- burden) overlying a coal seam and exposing the coal so that it can be loaded out and conveyed by trucks or other methods to the preparation plant or other facility. Surface mining has not always been important in the coal industry. In the early 1900s, almost all of the coal mined in the United States was mined by underground methods. In 1900, about 192 Mt (212 million st) of bituminous coal were mined and less than 1% was mined by surface methods. The development and use of larger equipment has allowed surface mining to gain prominence throughout the years. Table 1 shows the total production of coal by mining method in the United States for ten-year periods since 1920 and indicates the growth of surface-mined coal production. Surface mining will undoubtedly continue to account for a large percentage of the coal production in the US for many years because: 1) The capacity of surface mining excavators has continued to increase. Today, mining companies are using shovels (see Fig. 1) which are able to move up to 137.6 m3 (180 cu yd) in each bite and draglines (see Fig. 2) which move up to 168.2 m3 (220 cu yd) in each bucketful. 2) Increasing tonnage from the thick western coal seams is being produced by surface mining methods. 3) Surface mining has normally had lower costs and a better safety record than underground mining; 4) Surface mining normally recovers a- much higher percentage of the coal reserve than can be recovered by underground mining. 5) Some coal measures can best be extracted by surface mining [ ] methods because of geologic reasons such as the nature of the roof or bottom, thickness of the seam, multiple bedding, etc.

Jan 1, 1981

By R. S. Douglas

Introduction During the past few years, a number of changes in the mine operations at Copper Mountain have taken place. The modernization and mechanization were necessitated and given impetus by wartime and other conditions, which were: (1) The urgent need for copper for wartime purposes. (2) The scarcity of skilled labour for underground work. (3) The increase in labour and supplies cost. (4) The necessity of finding ways and means of increasing the output per man-shift, because of the scarcity of skilled labour and the rising cost of labour. (5) The desire to increase safety measures, reduce the silicosis hazard, and aid mine ventilation. (6) The desire to improve the general working conditions in the mine for all workmen. (7) The desire to reduce the amount of dilution in the ore stream by a more selective yet highly productive method of mining. To this end, mining with diamond drills, and transferring broken ore with slusher hoists, appeared to be the answer to the problem. After considerable discussion and estimation of costs for comparison with those of the operation as carried on at that time, the proposed methods were tried out and, in practice, gave very gratifying results. Reference at this point is made to the paper written by C. H. Brehaut, W. N. Taylor, H. A. Shannon, and R. S. Douglas, which was published in the September, 1945, issue of Mining Technology, by the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, Inc., and subsequently in commercial mining journals. Since that time some improvements have been made in undercutting an orebody - the first through experiment and practice, the second through making use of the earth's barodynamic or gravitational forces. It is the purpose of this paper to describe and discuss these later developments.

Jan 1, 1947

By Kenneth P. Katen

INTRODUCTION Though the use of continuous mining machines consolidated the operations of cutting, drilling, blasting, and loading in one machine that would theoretically provide uninterrupted production, it was soon realized that the face haulage and roof support operations remained as major impediments to continuous production. The ability to provide not only continuous cutting and loading, but also continuous haulage and roof support (see Fig. I), was the basis for the introduction of mechanized longwall systems in this country from Europe in 1951. The early systems employed friction props for roof support, but were to become obsolete shortly after introduction of the first hydraulically powered, self-advancing supports in 1960. Since then, use of the longwall technique has grown to the point where it is currently providing more than 5% of the annual output of underground coal mines in the United States. The shortwall system had its origin in Australia, but was first introduced into this country in 1962 following the development of powered roof supports. It, too, provides for continuous cutting, loading, and roof support (see Fig. 2), but has not experienced the widespread popularity of longwall due to its inherent inability to easily provide for continuous haulage. While there are in the neighborhood of 100 longwall systems currently in operation in this country, there are only a handful of short- wall operations providing production of slightly more than 907 184.7 t/a (1,000,000 stpy) Both of these systems provide uninterrupted roof support for face operations by means of hydraulically powered steel roof supports. In each case, the coal removal consists of open-end cuts made from the narrow end of a large rectangular pillar (panel) which has been blocked out by continuous miners developing entries around its perimeter. However, this is the extent of the similarities between the two systems. It is hoped

Jan 1, 1981

By Kenneth P. Katen

INTRODUCTION Though the use of continuous mining machines consolidated the operations of cutting, drilling, blasting, and loading in one machine that would theoretically provide uninterrupted production, it was soon realized that the face haulage and roof support operations remained as major impediments to continuous production. The ability to provide not only continuous cutting and loading, but also continuous haulage and roof support (see Fig. I), was the basis for the introduction of mechanized longwall systems in this country from Europe in 1951. The early systems employed friction props for roof support, but were to become obsolete shortly after introduction of the first hydraulically powered, self-advancing supports in 1960. Since then, use of the longwall technique has grown to the point where it is currently providing more than 5% of the annual output of underground coal mines in the United States. The shortwall system had its origin in Australia, but was first introduced into this country in 1962 following the development of powered roof supports. It, too, provides for continuous cutting, loading, and roof support (see Fig. 2), but has not experienced the widespread popularity of longwall due to its inherent inability to easily provide for continuous haulage. While there are in the neighborhood of 100 longwall systems currently in operation in this country, there are only a handful of short- wall operations providing production of slightly more than 907 184.7 t/a (1,000,000 stpy). Both of these systems provide uninterrupted roof support for face operations by means of hydraulically powered steel roof supports. In each case, the coal removal consists of open-end cuts made from the narrow end of a large rectangular pillar (panel) which has been blocked out by continuous miners developing entries around its perimeter. However, this is the extent of the similarities between the two systems. It is hoped

Jan 1, 1981

By Edwin R. Phelps

In the year 1900 about 212 million tons of bituminous coal were produced in the United States. Almost none of this was produced by surface mines (Fig. 1), because there was no large equipment suitable for stripping overburden at that time. By 1915 the surface mines had built up their capability largely through use of the steam shovel to the point that they produced 2.8 million tons of the nation's total production of 443 million tons. Over the intervening years between 1915 and 1970 surface mining provided a continually increasing percentage of the nation's bituminous coal, stimulated by the growing availability of giant surface mining machines, some of which are presently capable of removing 220 cu yd of earth with one bite of their mighty buckets. In 1970 the nation's surface mines produced 244 million tons of bituminous coal, over 40% of the total national production. On the other hand, the nation's underground mines hit a peak of 560 million tons in 1920, dropped to a low of 273 million tons in 1961, and are presently on a very slow rise. Environmental pressures generally oppose surface mining, and have forced coal companies to consider more underground mining in future planning. Also, since strippable reserves are decreasing in the eastern states, an increase in underground mining is expected over the coming years. However, in the western states there are enormous reserves to be extracted by surface methods. Why has surface mining increased, while underground mining has decreased? It's largely a matter of economics. The cost per ton is greatly reduced by surface mining because of the relative ease of obtaining the coal. Also, there is a much greater percentage of coal recovery-nearly 85% in surface mines within the minable area, as compared to an average of about 50% in underground mines. Much surface mining recovers coal that could not be extracted by underground methods because of coal bed thinness, or multiple beds close together, split seams, the nature of the roof, and other geologic conditions. What are some of the limitations of surface mining? First of all, with presently available machinery it is difficult to surface mine at depths

Jan 1, 1973

By Edwin R. Phelps, Charles W. Porterfield

BACKGROUND OF SURFACE MINING Surface mining refers to the process of removing the material (over- burden) overlying a coal seam and exposing the coal so that it can be loaded out and conveyed by trucks or other methods to the preparation plant or other facility. Surface mining has not always been important in the coal industry. In the early 1900s, almost all of the coal mined in the United States was mined by underground methods. In 1900, about 192 Mt (212 million st) of bituminous coal were mined and less than 1% was mined by surface methods. The development and use of larger equipment has allowed surface mining to gain prominence throughout the years. Table 1 shows the total production of coal by mining method in the United States for ten-year periods since 1920 and indicates the growth of surface-mined coal production. Surface mining will undoubtedly continue to account for a large percentage of the coal production in the US for many years because: 1) The capacity of surface mining excavators has continued to in- crease. Today, mining companies are using shovels (see Fig. 1) which are able to move up to 137.6 m3 (180 cu yd) in each bite and draglines (see Fig. 2) which move up to 168.2 m3 (220 cu yd) in each bucketful. 2) Increasing tonnage from the thick western coal seams is being produced by surface mining methods. 3) Surface mining has normally had lower costs and a better safety record than underground mining. 4) Surface mining normally recovers a much higher percentage of the coal reserve than can be recovered by underground mining. 5) Some coal measures can best be extracted by surface mining

Jan 1, 1981

By Edwin R. Phelps, Charles W. Porterfield

BACKGROUND OF SURFACE MINING Surface mining refers to the process of removing the material (over- burden) overlying a coal seam and exposing the coal so that it can be loaded out and conveyed by trucks or other methods to the preparation plant or other facility. Surface mining has not always been important in the coal industry. In the early 1900s, almost all of the coal mined in the United States was mined by underground methods. In 1900, about 192 Mt (212 million st) of bituminous coal mere mined and less than 1% was mined by surface methods. The development and use of larger equipment has allowed surface mining to gain prominence throughout the years. Table 1 shows the total production of coal by mining method in the United States for ten-pear periods since 1920 and indicates the growth of surface-mined coal production. Surface mining will undoubtedly continue to account for a large percentage of the coal production in the US for many years because: 1) The capacity of surface mining excavators has continued to increase. Today, mining companies are using shovels (see Fig. 1) which are able to move up to 137.6 m3 (180 cu pd) in each bite and draglines (see Fig. 2) which move up to 168.2 m3 (220 cu pd) in each bucketful. 2) Increasing tonnage from the thick western coal seams is being produced by surface mining methods. 3) Surface mining has normally had lower costs and a better safety record than underground mining. 4) Surface mining normally recovers a much higher percentage of the coal reserve than can recovered by underground mining. 5) Some coal measures call best be extracted by surface mining

Jan 1, 1981

By John L. Schroder

In selecting the best system of mining for a particular operation, many different factors must be considered. The system to be finally selected should be that which provides: 1) The highest possible degree of safety for mine personnel. 2) The lowest cost per ton of product. 3) The maximum coal production per man-shift. 4) The most suitable quality of final product, considering its intended use. 5) The maximum percent recovery of coal per acre of reserve consistent with cost and subsidence rights. 6) Consideration for the ecology of the area. Some of the important factors to be considered when choosing a method of mining are: 1) Amount of cover over the coal seam. 2) Type of the rock in the overburden. 3) Characteristics of the coal seam including: (a) the thickness of the coal seam; (b) the nature and location of any impurities or irregularities; (e) the dip (or pitch) of the coal seam; (d) the nature and direction of any definite cleavage ill the czoa1 seam; (e) the hardness of the coal; (f) the structural strength of the coal; and (g) the presence, anti amount, of explosive gas (methane). 4) Quantity of water likely to be encountered in the mining operation. 5) Nature and strength of the roof (top) over the coal seam. 6) Nature and strength of the floor (bottom) under the coal seam. 7) Any previous or concurrent mining in seams above or below the coal seam to be worked. Information on items 1-7 may be obtained in several ways. Topographical and geological reports and maps of the area are generally available

Jan 1, 1973

By John L. JR. Schroder

INTRODUCTION-SYSTEM DESIGN The design of an underground mining operation requires the integration of transportation, ventilation, ground control, and mining methods to form a system which provides the highest possible degree of safety for mine personnel; the lowest cost per ton of product; the most suitable quality of final product, considering its intended use; the maximum percent recovery of the reserve, consistent with cost and subsidence rights ; and the minimum disturbance to the environment. The selection of mining method is generally the controlling factor in overall mine design. Some important considerations in the choice of mining method are : 1) Depth of cover over the coal seam. 2) Strength and thickness of rock strata in the overburden. 3) Characteristics of the coal seam, including thickness, nature and location of impurities or irregularities, dip (or pitch), nature and direction of cleavage, hardness, and structural strength of the coal. 4) Nature and strength of the immediate roof (top) over the coal seam. 5) Nature and strength of the floor (bottom) under the coal seam. 6) Presence and amount of explosive gas (methane). 7) Quantity of water likely to be encountered in the mining operation. 8) Any previous or concurrent mining in seams above or below the coal seam to be worked. 9) Any restrictions on recovery required for subsidence control. Topographical and geological reports and maps of the area are usually available from state and federal geological surveys, and contain excellent general information to guide more detailed investigations. Exploratory drilling, and the plotting and analysis of the information thus obtained, are essential steps in any development program, and aid in the correlation and evaluation of information gained by other means. Other good sources of information are operating coal mines that may be in the same

Jan 1, 1981

By John L. Schroder

INTRODUCTION-SYSTEM DESIGN The design of an underground mining operation requires the integration of transportation, ventilation, ground control, and mining methods to form a system which provides the highest possible degree of safety for mine personnel; the lowest cost per ton of product ; the most suitable quality of final product, considering its intended use; the maximum percent recovery of the reserve, consistent with cost and subsidence rights ; and the minimum disturbance to the environment. The selection of mining method is generally the controlling factor in overall mine design. Some important considerations in the choice of mining method are: 1) Depth of cover over the coal seam. 2) Strength and thickness of rock strata in the overburden. 3) Characteristics of the coal seam, including thickness, nature and location of impurities or irregularities, dip (or pitch), nature and direction of cleavage, hardness, and structural strength of the coal. 4) Nature and strength of the immediate roof (top) over the coal seam. 5) Nature and strength of the floor (bottom) under the coal seam. 6) Presence and amount of explosive gas (methane). 7) Quantity of water likely to be encountered in the mining operation. 8) Any previous or concurrent mining in seams above or below the coal seam to be worked. 9) Any restrictions on recovery required for subsidence control. Topographical and geological reports and maps of the area are usually available from state and federal geological surveys, and contain excellent general information to guide more detailed investigations. Exploratory drilling, and the plotting and analysis of the information thus obtained, are essential steps in any development program, and aid in the correlation and evaluation of information gained by other means. Other good sources of information are operating coal mines that may be in the same

Jan 1, 1981

By John L. Schroder

The design of an underground mining operation requires the integration of transportation, ventilation, ground control, and mining methods to form a system which provides the highest possible degree of safety for mine personnel; the lowest cost per ton of product; the most suitable quality of final product, considering its intended use; the maximum percent recovery of the reserve, consistent with cost and subsidence rights; and the minimum disturbance to the environment. The selection of mining method is generally the controlling factor in overall mine design. Some important considerations in the choice of mining method are : 1) Depth of cover over the coal seam. 2) Strength and thickness of rock strata in the overburden. 3) Characteristics of the coal seam, including thickness, nature and location of impurities or irregularities, dip (or pitch), nature and direction of cleavage, hardness, and structural strength of the coal. 4) Nature and strength of the immediate roof (top) over the coal seam. 5) Nature and strength of the floor (bottom) under the coal seam. 6) Presence and amount of explosive gas (methane). 7) Quantity of water likely to be encountered in the mining operation. 8) Any previous or concurrent mining in seams above or below the coal seam to be worked. 9) Any restrictions on recovery required for subsidence control. Topographical and geological reports and maps of the area are usually available from state and federal geological surveys, and contain excellent general information to guide more detailed investigations. Exploratory drilling, and the plotting and analysis of the information thus obtained, are essential steps in any development program, and aid in the correlation and evaluation of information gained by other means. Other good sources of information are operating coal mines that may be in the same seam in nearby properties. Such mines may indicate in advance much about roof control, drainage, ventilation, and other mining problems.

Jan 1, 1981

By J. H. McMillan

Most of the recent papers read before the Institute have dealt with purely scientific matters, or with experiences in the various phases of mining operations. Very little, if anything, has been said concerning the part played by the human element in the industry. It is now opportune to consider this vital factor if we are to cope with the complex work of the present-day miner and, at the same time, meet the demands of the executive for greater efficiency. It is time we made an inventory of our knowledge to determine if we are absorbing the information so essential to modern mining practice. We must keep in close touch with all new ideas and developments in our chosen field and keep ourselves up-to-date in regard to everything pertaining to mining operations in general. The man who ceases to study ceases to advance. There are men who on attaining an executive chair give up all study, because they think they have reached the pinnacle of success. Modern industrial business, and coal-mining is no exception, demands that executive officers shall be 'live wires' -- men who are not only well-informed as to their immediate duties, but who are closely in touch with all matters of importance affecting the industry as a whole. We may be graduates of schools and colleges, but the training we receive in these institutions is only the foundation for our later work. Certainly no executive officer can know too much concerning the work he is engaged in, and the more he knows the more pleasure he will get out of his work.

Jan 1, 1925

By D Kent

"There has been a revolution occurring in underground mining over the last several years, where big headline items such as the Internet of Things (IoT), optimisation, managing data, data mining etc – the list of current catchphrases, goes on. In the end these are nothing new; but the ‘things’ (sensors) are becoming smaller, cheaper and easier to deploy, and the analysis much more powerful as computer processing speeds increase. However, to take advantage of the myriad of devices out there and gain the processing power to analyse and use the data, a reliable ‘conduit’ is needed for that information to be delivered where it can actually be used. That is, a high quality data network.Modern mining is like any other industry in the information age: the access to reliable data is the first, critical step in improving productivity (Stevens, 2015). The convergence of communications onto an IP (Internet Protocol) backbone has been the driving force in enabling the productivity gains in general industry over the last two decades.This paper overviews how this technology has developed as an enabler in accessing productivity and safety benefits, and how it has used access to large amounts of data to manage mining processes underground. Reams of data are useless, but with the reliable receipt, analysis, processing and feedback system in place to use that data, benefits can be realised.Automated mining systems are increasingly being seen as a key requirement for a productive mining operation, and the importance of an integrated communication network infrastructure to support such systems is growing. Another emerging driver is the much talked about IoT and data analytics, both dependant on reliable, accurate, high volume data.The author will outline how communication infrastructure is fundamental to the operation of such systems, and explain why the resultant communication networks require much more than just increased bandwidth (data capacity) to properly support the automation and other data hungry systems within the overall mine operation.Mining operations embarking down this road are discovering that the required network must be based on a true enterprise level architecture to, not only enable the mine’s current plans for remote or automated mining, but also to provide a scalable and integrated platform for future developments. The emerging issues for the communication network to truly support automation systems include: increased complexities of operating and maintaining multiple networks integration issues with disparate systems problems with reporting, particularly as demands for corporate reporting and compatibility with enterprise systems become the norm ongoing management challenges, which will only increase with the proliferation of new technologies.How certain mining operations lay the necessary foundations to meet their current requirements, while supporting their visions for a more automated and proactively managed mine, will be explored.CITATION:Kent, D, 2017. Modern mining – why bandwidth matters, in Proceedings 13th AusIMM Underground Operators’ Conference 2017, pp 123–128 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Oct 16, 2017