Search Documents

By C. L. Workman-Davies

Noise is a form of pollution arising mainly from the activities of man. One such activity is mining, in which man, as in many of his other activities, uses machinery of various kinds to achieve safe, healthy, and economic production. Trackless mining makes use of an advanced state of technology over that required In traditional mining methods. One of the advantages of the former, as distinct from any disadvantages it may have, is a reduction in noise levels, the number of people exposed to noise, and the duration of their exposure to noise. This paper briefly examines why noise is a problem and what various countries are doing about it in terms of standards, codes of practice, and regulations. It also investigates the extent to which noise is a problem in mining and how trackless mining alleviates this problem. The question is then posed as to whether South Africa is not setting too high a standard at this stage of its national development by comparison with what is being done by other, more-advanced countries.

Jan 1, 1989

By David S. Yantek, Paul Jurovcik, Eric R. Bauer

Workers in coal preparation plants, where vibrating screens are significant noise sources, are often exposed to sound levels exceeding 90 dB(A). The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a major coal company, and a vibrating screen manufacturer conducted a cooperative study of vibrating screen noise. Rubber isolators reduced sound levels by 1 dB. Urethane screen panels did not reduce sound levels in this case. Drive noise was determined to be the dominant noise source on the screen. Damped side plates reduced vibration levels on the screen sides by 1 to 7 dB(A). Detailed results of the study are presented.

By P. Marcotte, G. LeBlanc, S. Ouellette, J. Boutin

"To characterize noise and vibration sources of different types of mining equipment used in underground mining, the authors performed a study in eight Quebec mines on 28 pieces of equipment. This paper presents the procedure followed to select the equipment to be evaluated, and the low-cost acquisition system developed to perform multichannel time-domain data acquisition in harsh environments. It also presents the results obtained for the noise level produced by the equipment and for handarm and whole-body vibration exposures.RÉSUMÉ Dans le but de caractériser les sources de bruits et de vibrations de divers équipements miniers utilisés sous terre, les auteurs ont étudié 28 équipements dans huit mines du Québec. L’article présente la procédure suivie pour choisir les équipements à évaluer ainsi qu’un système multicanal à faible coût développé pour acquérir des données dans des environnements difficiles. Il présente aussi les résultats obtenus pour les niveaux de bruit produit par les équipements et pour les expositions main-bras et du corps entier aux vibrations."

Jan 1, 2015

By Julie H. N. Hampden, Per G. Reinhall

"Executive summary: Impact pile driving of steel piles is a common construction practice in freshwater and marine environments for the building of structures and foundations. This practice produces extremely high sound levels underwater that have proven injurious to aquatic fish and wildlife. To limit impacts to sensitive species, resource management agencies employ a variety of different strategies including timing restrictions to limit in-water construction windows to those months when there are low flow conditions in lakes or rivers, to those hours when tides are low, or to periods of the year when species of concern are least likely to be present in the project vicinity. In addition, permitting agencies have identified noise thresholds above which sensitive species could be injured, resulting in additional project conditions to curtail the extent of project noise impacts including: limiting the number of piles or pile strikes per day, requiring biological monitoring, and mandating the use of noise attenuation techniques, such as bubble curtains and cofferdams. Numerous studies have shown current noise attenuation techniques are costly and provide limited or variable noise reduction [1-3]. This is because the noise from pile driving is not only transmitted through the water column, it is also transmitted through the sediment back into the water column [1, 4-8]. Though these protective measures may help to reduce project impacts, they also result in additional complexity, expense, and potential risk for project delivery. Marine Construction Technologies, a Public Benefit Corporation, in collaboration with University of Washington and Washington State Department of Transportation, has developed a pile that can be installed with standard pile driving technologies (vibratory or impact hammers) and consistently decreases the total noise transmitted into the water. The double-walled pile is relatively quiet in comparison to unattenuated piles or existing noise attenuation techniques. This technology not only reduces the risk to sensitive species by minimizing the extent of potential impacts, it also reduces potential risks to project delivery by limiting the size of monitoring areas, minimizing the need to cap daily production rates, and eliminating the need for deployment of additional noise attenuation devices. Results from finite element modeling of the pile, scaled prototype testing, and full scale field testing in Commencement Bay (October 2014) and Vashon Island (October 2015) in Puget Sound, Washington indicate a reduction the peak sound pressure between 14 and 20 dB relative to single walled piles at a range of approximately 10 meters. These tests also confirm that the double-walled piles provide drivability similar to standard steel piles. In addition, preliminary calculations for capacity and structural characteristics demonstrate that double-walled piles provide equivalent or better performance than same-sized standard piles."

Jan 1, 2017

By J. K. Weglo, M. U. Savich

"The measurement and evaluation of the noise emanating from an ST4A scooptram in an underground stope under a simulated work cycle, and under three conditions of after-treatment systems is covered.These include scooptram without muffler or filler (bare engine), an in-line small filter, compared to a larger-filter, and the larger filter with an in-line muffler in series with fume diluter, which were tested under three engine operating conditions-IDLE, wide open throttle (W. 0. T.), and working condition. This is load, short haul and dump operation.The results showed an attenuation of the scooptram at work of 8 to 15 dBA, 16 cm from the exhaust pipe of the machine, to 4.8 dBA at the operator's ear. Recommendations are made to increase the attenuation at the operator 's ear by additional improvement in design of the fume diluter.IntroductionIn current mining operations, the diesel engine provides a safe, efficient and highly mobile source of power. In the major underground mine s in Canada the most common types of diesel equipment are load-haul-dump (LHD) machines and ore trucks. In general, there is a tendency to use high horsepower, diesel LHD machines in mines to achieve maximum productivity. The increased use of diesel-powered equipment in underground mines has shown no cause pressure levels were measured at the exhaust and outlet pipe. Also, while measuring the octave band and A-weighted sound pressure levels, the operator's position was also measured."

Jan 1, 1986

Cominco began investigations about ten years ago relative to noise abatement in underground operations. As a result of intensive research, this study has advanced so that the practice now has wide application. Automotive mufflers are used on vane-type blasthole diamond drills. Exhaust hoses are attached to longhole percussion drills. Hand-held drills, such as airlegs and stopers, are equipped with mufflers which are either part of the drill, as received from the manufacturer, or are light rubber de-vices developed, fabricated and installed by Cominco. Ear defenders are in general use. The paper reviews details of practices employed, and assesses the success achieved. Noise is generally associated with some of the basic equipment used in mining. About ten years ago, in order to improve on this situation. The Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada Limited began investigations relative to noise abatement in its underground operations. As a result of intensive research, this study has advanced to the point

Jan 1, 1964

By Aarne Visnapuu

Unmodified pneumatic rock drills may have noise levels of 115 to 130 dB at the operator's position. Experimental modifications have been made to a standard drill to suppress the noise from the three main sources: the air exhaust noise, the noise radiated from the drill, and the resonance noise of the steel drill rods. A prototype model developed at the Bureau of Mines, Rolla Metallurgy Research Center, operates at a noise level below 100 dB. A close-fitting case and muffler unit, consisting of a metallic skeleton filled with viscoelastic absorber and having a durable cover, provided both muffling and noise absorption. Damping alloys were used at strategic points in the drill. Drill steel resonance noise was reduced by a constrained-layer treatment on the outside of the drill rod. The singular and combined effects of the treatments are presented in detail.

Jan 1, 1973

By D. S. Yantek, L. A. Alcorn, M. J. Lowe, H. E. Camargo

U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) studies show that 43.5% of surveyed coal preparation plant workers had noise exposures exceeding the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration permissible exposure level of 90 dB(A). Sound levels around vibrating screens in these plants often exceed 90 dB(A). NIOSH is currently developing noise controls for horizontal vibrating screens. To characterize noise sources, NIOSH researchers performed sound pressure level (SPL) measurements on a vibrating screen at their Office of Mine Safety and Health Research laboratory in Pittsburgh. The results show that the entire screen contributes to noise below 1 kHz, and the vibration mechanism housings are most significant above 1 kHz. Constrained layer damping (CLD) treatments and an enclosure were used to reduce mechanism housing noise in this range from 1-10 kHz. These were evaluated using sound power level measurements according to ISO 3744. The CLD treatments reduced the A-weighted sound power level by 3.1 dB in the 1 to 10 kHz one-third-octave bands. A panel-on-frame vibration mechanism enclosure using various types of panels further reduced the A-weighted sound power level from the CLD configuration in the 1 to 10 kHz one-third-octave bands by 3.7, 4.0, and 3.9 dB for aluminum, steel, and Dynalam™ panels, respectively. The combination yielded a 7 dB reduction from baseline in A-weighted sound power for the same frequency range.

Jan 1, 2011

By E. R. Bauer

Prolonged exposure to noise can cause permanent damage to the auditory nerve and/or its sensory components, known as noise induced hearing loss (NIHL). It is the most common occupational disease in the United States today. The Pittsburgh Research Laboratory (PRL) of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is addressing NIHL in the mining industry through several research efforts. This paper presents a general review of NIHL, the status of NIHL in mining, the results of the longwall noise surveys, and a review of the longwall engineering controls research efforts.

Jan 1, 2008

By David G. Chedgy

It is probably safe to assume that most operating personnel working in coal preparation plants are exposed to noise levels in excess of the MESA Noise Regulations unless they are wearing ear protection. The excessive in-plant noise levels have received little attention until recently. Noise control has not been an important design consideration in existing coal preparation plants. This situation is rapidly changing as plant owners and plant operators are requiring that new coal preparation plants be designed to provide a safe noise environment for operating personnel and also meet MESA Noise Regulations. This paper discusses the noise exposure hazards, noise generating mechanisms, and some possible noise control solutions for typical coal preparation plants.

Jan 1, 1975

By Terry L. Muldoon

On July 7, 1971, noise regulations for underground coal mines were implemented under provisions set forth in the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. These same regulations now also apply to coal mine surface facilities. In August 1971, in anticipation of these regulations, the Bureau of Mines, through the cooperation of the mine operators, conducted extensive noise surveys in three coal cleaning plants. The survey was conducted in an attempt to identify those occupations where exposures would exceed the proposed regulations.

Jan 1, 1972

By Edmund H. Warner

Any city dweller who has walked alone along a remote mine passageway has to be impressed by the eerie silence - the total absence of noise except for ones own breathing and scuffing of boots on the bottom. An underground mine can have tremendous contrasts, from complete silence to the ear piercing clatter of percussion drills working on the mine roof. Noise in underground mining machines is both useful and detrimental. Without characteristic noises that are recognizable to miners, operators would have a more difficult job operating their machines. Noise serves as a warning of approaching machinery, and changes in noise give indication that breakdowns may occur. But excessive noise is a health hazard. In recognition of this fact, our Congress included noise exposure as a part of the "Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969". As Fig. 1 indicates, allowable noise exposure is established by specifying a time duration permitted at different noise levels. This is the well known "Walsh-Healey" criteria which governs noise exposure in many industries.

Jan 1, 1977

The development of a noise attenuated compressed air driven fan is described. The fan, which employs the jet reaction principle, possesses blade extension pieces which penetrate into an acoustically treated annular chamber. The dominant noise source, namely the air jets, is thereby partially suppressed. In addition, the increased moment arm of the jets leads to an improved propulsion effect which contributes to the improved aerodynamic performance of the unit.A typical measure of the improvement of this type of auxiliary mine ventilation unit is a 4 per cent increase in efficiency and a 10 dB (A) drop in sound level for a fan duty of 0·5 kPa and 1600 litre/s. This degree ofattenuation corresponds to at least halving the loudness level, a subjective noise measure.

Jan 1, 1973

By J. Alton Burks, Roy C. Bartholomae

The chain conveyor is utilized extensively in underground mining to convey raw ore, especially coal. It is estimated that several thousand loading and continuous mining machines rely on this type of conveyance. Although the chain conveyor is both efficient and highly reliable, its use is generally associated with the production of noise levels that often exceed 105 dBA at the operator's position. Thus, it is one of the most significant contributors to the occupational noise problem experienced by miners in the underground coal mining environment. Conventional engineering noise controls that result in an average reduction of 4 dBA have been previously designed and implemented. However, a novel solution involving a change in conveyor operation has been proposed that takes advantage of two aspects of conveyor noise: 1) conveyor noise has an approximately cubic dependence on conveyor chain speed and 2) due to the damping provided by coal, a full conveyor is 5 dBA quieter than an empty one. An engineering analysis has shown that a significant reduction in the operating noise level of a typical continuous miner can be achieved through the use of an adjustable speed drive automatically controlled by a coal loading sensor that maintains a full conveyor at all times. The potential reduction depends primarily on the mining conditions (coal seam thickness and the presence of either rock or water) and varies from 7-18 dBA. Other benefits to be derived from the use of a variable speed drive include reductions in power consumption, dust, and maintenance costs.

Jan 1, 1992

By Hugo E. Camargo

Noise Induced Hearing Loss is the most common occupational disease in the U.S. and of paramount importance in the mining industry. According to data for 2006 from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Continuous Miner operators accounted for 30.2% of underground mining equipment operators with noise doses exceeding the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL). This figure becomes more significant considering that 49% of the 2006 national underground coal production was extracted using continuous mining methods. Thus, there is a clear need to reduce the sound radiated by Continuous Mining Machines. The first step towards efficient noise control of a Continuous Mining Machine requires identification of the various noise sources under controlled operating conditions. To this end, a 42-microphone phased array was used in conjunction with 4 reference microphones to sample the acoustic field of a machine in the Hemi-anechoic chamber of the Pittsburgh Research Laboratory. These data were processed using a frequency-domain beamforming algorithm to obtain acoustic maps of 5 sides of the machine. The focus of the test was on the conveyor noise since previous studies showed that operation of the conveyor is the most important contributor to the sound radiated by the machine. From the acoustic maps, the following potential areas for noise control were identified, and included: chain-tail-roller interaction, chain flight tip-side board interaction, and chain-upper deck interaction.

Jan 1, 2008

By J. Partyka, Trevor R. J. Kelly

This paper presents the results on noise testing of a fan only, as well as the results of a steel silencer and of flexible silencers that were connected directly to a fan. On-site facilities and free-field method set by the British Standards Institution were used to measure and then compare the fan only and different practical silencer configuration setups. In order to determine the fan-silencer combination that would give the maximum noise attenuation, total noise intensity, noise contributed to by the fan motor only, as well as aerodynamical noise created through air interacting with the fan parts were considered to obtain decibel readings for the octave bands. Subsequently, the optimal configuration found was the setup with flexible silencers on the fan inlet and the fan outlet. If only one silencer is used, it should be installed on the fan inlet. The aerodynamic noise affects the low frequencies. The flow noise is then overtaken at 1 kHz by the mechanical noise.

Jan 1, 1995

By J E. Gordon

For many years, it has been known that certain loud noises may, with prolonged exposure, temporarily or permanently damage a person's hearing ability. Pneumatic rock drills, al-though among the offenders, have, until recently, remained unaltered and unrestricted as to noise output. Now, there are drills available with higher rates of penetration and yet with noise levels reduced to those of previous models or less. Use of such drills, when proved to be superior in noise attenuation and of acceptable performance, should be encouraged in order to reduce future hearing losses to a minimum. People Have the Right to Hear P ERHAPS the earliest recognized indication of hearing loss due to industrial noise was the deaf-ness developed by the workmen in boiler factories. Here, the vibration set up in the shells by the riveting hammers gradually deteriorated the workmen's hearing, especially those whose job it was to hold the dollies inside the drum, where the sound is greatly intensified by reflection

Jan 1, 1963

Reduce the noise levels to which operators of double-drum longwall shearers are exposed without compromising the operational effectiveness of the shearer. The Problem Noise produced by double-drum longwall shearers can be harmful to machine operators. Typical noise levels at the lead-drum operator position range from 100 to 105 dBA, and Federal noise regulations allow only one to two hours of exposure per shift at these levels. Noise radiated by the shearer cutting drum is the primary contributor to the overall noise level. However, test of a noise-controlled cutting drum developed by the Bureau of Mines reduced the operator noise level to 95 dBA, thereby increasing the allowable operating time to four hours per shift. Approach The key design aspect of the noise-controlled shearer drum is its reduced vibration-al response to coal-cutting forces. Laboratory studies have shown that these forces are concentrated in the low-frequency region (500 Hz and below). Since the cylindrical core and the cantilevered I plate-like helix of the standard shearer drum are easily excited by these forces (natural vibration frequencies be-

Jan 1, 1985

By A. L. Edwards

A retrospective study was conducted on the Rand Mutual Assurance (RMA) noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) compensation claims from 1998 to 2008 to determine if the 2008 milestone agreed at the 2003 Mine Health and Safety Summit was achieved. The number and costs of NIHL compensation claims in different commodity sectors and workplaces were collated. A secondary analysis of the ages of employees compensated after 2008 was conducted. A complementary retrospective analysis of audiogram data investigated the percentage loss of hearing (PLH) shift in different homogeneously exposed groups and occupations at two gold mines. The compensation claims analysis indicated a significant decrease in NIHL claims from 1998 to 2008, but the milestone was not achieved. The reason may be either that claims have not been submitted timeously as required by Instruction 171 and that the current submissions are a result of pre-2003 noise exposure, or that employees who were baselined are still developing NIHL owing to ineffective hearing conservation programmes in place in the mining industry. On the basis of best practice for hearing conservation, recommendations are made for leading indicators in hearing conservation programmes and for reducing the risks of NIHL in order to achieve the 2013 milestone.

Jan 1, 2012

The Committee on Nominations begs to submit the following names as its nominees for the respective offices indicated: For President, SIDNEY J. JENNINGS, New York. For Vice-Presidents. C. W. GOODALE,* Butte, Mont.; MARK, L. REQUA, San Francisco. For Directors, J. E. JOHNSON, JR., New York; ALLEN H. ROGERS, Boston; HOWARD N. EAVENSON, West Virginia; ROBERT AI. RAYMOND, New York; WILLET G. MILLER, Canada. The nomination for President has attracted the attention of a large number of members, as is evidenced by the receipt of many hundreds of letters and postcards. Most of these favored either Sidney J. Jennings or Philip N. Moore, each of whom received many cordial endorsements. Such a wide interest on the part of the members is a very wholesome sign, but where there is so much activity it is natural to expect a certain amount of criticism. Some of the letters indicate that the authors feel that the nomination of President should be left entirely to the Committee on Nominations without any effort by the members at large to influence them. Others feel that the nominations are largely controlled by a small group and that the members at large can have little influence. As the result; of the experience of the last few months; a majority of the Committee on Nominations begs leave to suggest that the method of making nominations be changed so that two candidates, at least, for the various offices to be nominated, and suggests that the Directors appoint a committee to investigate this question thoroughly with. a view to making definite recommendations. In accordance with its opinion that the best interests of the Institute would be served by a change in the Constitution, allowing the nomination of two candidates, and in view of the fact that this Committee has no authority to make more than a single nomination for each office, considering the high standing of both Mr. Jennings and Mr. Moore and the large number of members favoring each of these gentlemen, this Committee respectfully suggests the desirability of ,the immediate nomination of Philip N. Moore by a petition of 25 members in accordance with the present Constitution. This Committee regrets, its inability to make two nominations. Respectfully submitted, S. W. MUDD, Chairman.

Jan 1, 1917