Search Documents

Objective To improve seats on mine shuttle cars with ergonomic design and by reducing shock impact transmitted through the mine vehicle seat to the vehicle operator. Background Operators of underground mobile equipment, particularly shuttle cars, are often exposed to significant levels of shock and whole-body vibration. Past studies have reported that as many as one-third of underground equipment operators could be exposed to adverse levels of shock and whole-body vibration. Moreover, seats on mining equipment, historically, are inadequate relative to the ergonomic needs of the equipment operator. In the extreme, amine vehicle seat has sometimes consisted of blocks of wood or a bent steel plate bolted to the machine frame. Also, the lack of sufficient vertical clearance in some underground mines is an impediment to providing adequate shock isolation systems on mine equipment seats. Approach The NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Center (PRC) is conducting research with viscoelastic foams to improve seats on mine shuttle cars. Viscoelastic foams were used in an ergonomically designed seat to reduce the amount of shock transmitted through the mine vehicle seat to the vehicle operator. Data on selected viscoelastic foams were analyzed from laboratory shock tests at PRC. Using information from the analysis, two ergonomic seats incorporating selected foam were constructed for in-mine testing on a shuttle car (Joy 21SC) in eastern Kentucky. The shuttle car operated in a 35-in-thick coal seam with an approximate mining height of 43 in. Operational data were recorded on the ergonomic and original seats. Further, the shuttle car operator was asked to compare these seats. Results When comparing the original seat (figure 1) with the ergonomic seat (figure 2), the shuttle car operator described the ergonomic seat as generally “much better” than the original seat. The operator explained. “It’s just easy to adjust. And it’s got the lower lumbar support. And the pad is thicker. It’s just much better all the way around.” He added, “It does support you more and [there is] less shock when you hit a hole...I liked the lower lumbar support. That’s where most of your shock is at, in your lower back.” The operational data supported the operator’s comments. In the full-load case, significant improvements in isolation were achieved(down to 15 Hz) with the ergonomic seat. Additional laboratory testing of seven viscoelastic foams was done to further improve the level of isolation from shock and better characterize the material properties of each foam. Data from this testing were used in an analytical model of the seat pan isolation system. Results showed that two of the viscoelastic foams, SUN-MATE EXTRA-SOFT and PUDGEE, gave the most effective shock isolation of the seven materials tested. A composite of EXTRA-SOFT and PUDGEE foams improved the isolation characteristics of the seat pan to approximately 4 Hz. Similarly, EXTRA-SOFT by itself provided isolation to 5 Hz. These results will be validated with future in-mine measurements. Cooperative Research Opportunity NIOSH is seeking cooperators to assist in further research and development of this technology. Additional information on cooperative reseach may be obtained by contacting Jacqueline H. Jansky, Technology Transfer Officer, NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Center, P.O. Box 18070, Cochrans Mill Rd., Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0070, phone: (412) 892-6615, fax: (412) 892-6678, e-mail:jgj7@cdc.gov

May 1, 1997

Objective: To enable mine operators and mine inspectors to make quick and accurate measurements of the explosible nature of coal and rock dust mixtures.

Jul 1, 2008

Background: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recently investigated ignition incidents resulting from drilling holes into sealed and filled plow frame sections. A farmer and farm worker were seriously burned in two separate incidents that occurred in the same county in New York under similar conditions. They had just penetrated sealed sections of their plow frames with electric drills when a roar of escaping gas at high pressure was heard, and the victims were thrown back by the gas jet and engulfed in flames. The flames were quickly extinguished ,but the victims suffered burns. NIOSH experts were asked to help find the cause of these hazardous incidents.

Jun 1, 1998

To reduce equipment operator exposure to respirable dust in enclosed cabs by examining the effectiveness of retrofitting air pressurization and filtration systems on existing cabs.

Jan 1, 2001

Objective To reduce equipment operator exposure to respirable dust in enclosed cabs by examining the effectiveness of retrofitting air pressurization and filtration systems on existing cabs. Background Many types of heavy equipment are used in mining, construction, and agriculture. Most have enclosed cabs to protect the equipment operator from excessive dust and noise exposure. When the equipment is new, controls are normally implemented into the cab to keep these exposures at acceptable levels. However, as this equipment becomes older, many components of the enclosure deteriorate, such as gaskets and seals. This causes the effectiveness of the enclosed cab to be greatly reduced. Once this occurs, the equipment operator's dust exposure can increase to hazardous levels. In surface mining operations, elevated exposures to crystalline silica have caused an excessive incidence of silicosis. Approach A cooperative research study with a mining operation and a cab filtration company was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of retrofitting an older surface drill with two controls to lower the drill operator's respirable dust exposure. These two controls were: (1) A good air filtering and pressurization system to ensure that clean air was delivered into the enclosed cab. Ideally, the incoming air filter should be 99% efficient in removing particles with an aero- dynamic diameter of 0.3 pm or greater from the airflow. (2) Sufficiently sealing the cab to develop a positive static pres- sure and ensure that dust was not leaking into the cab. This was done by plugging all holes and cracks and maintaining good gaskets and seals. To prevent wind from forcing contaminated air through holes in the cab, the cab's static pressure must be greater than the wind's velocity pressure. During the course of this research, it was found that a floor heater fan used in the drill during the winter months greatly increased the operator’s Respirable dust exposure. Problem Identification Four days of background dust levels were measured as a baseline for this research. These baseline measurements were taken in May 2000 when air temperatures ranged from 60° to 70° F. When this was completed, the two controls were implemented. The first control was to install an improved air filtering and pressurization system on the enclosed cab. This was composed of a two-stage prefilter, a blower, then the respirator-medium secondary filter. Since the secondary filter was on the positive side of the fan, all air delivered into the enclosed cab had to pass through this secondary filter. After the filtering system was installed, the cab was pressurized to a static pressure of0.01 inches of water (w.g.), which is still very minimal. The second control was to seal the cab. New door gaskets were installed, and all cracks and holes in the shell of the enclosure were plugged. This increased the cab pressurization to approximately 0.1 inches w.g.

Mar 1, 2001

Objective To reduce dust generated from soiled floors within enclosed operator cabs. Background Enclosed operator cabs are widely used on mobile excavation equipment in the mining and construction industries. They protect the operator from bad weather, noise, and airborne dusts. The inside cab environment usually must be kept at very low dust concentrations because of quartz dust generated from the excavation of silica-bearing rock. For cabs to be effective in controlling airborne respirable dust, they must have an efficient air filtration system, while providing a positive pressurization of the cab interior. Ideally, the recirculated and exterior makeup air filtration should provide at least 99% capture efficiency for dust particles as small as 0.3-µmaerodynamic diameters. Many of these enclosed cabs use heating units mounted or directed along the floor (see figure 1), which can cause dust entrainment problems. Prior studies by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of enclosed cabs have shown that these floor heaters can generate notable amounts of dust within the cab enclosure (see Technology News 486). Multiple-shift dust levels measured inside a drill cab increased on average from0.04 mg/m3 during the summer months to 0.68 mg/m3 during the winter months. Additional dust level measurements, made with optical particle counters during a nondrilling time period, verified that dust levels inside the cab increased from 0.03 to 0.26 mg/m3when the floor heater/fan was turned on. Dust levels within the cab also became greater than the ambient air dust levels outside of the cab when the floor heater was turned on during the nondrilling time period. This shows that the floor heater was a notable dust source problem. Cab floors are commonly soiled from operators tracking dirt inside the cab upon entering from the mine or construction site. Interior cab dust levels can be increased by (1) airflow disturbance of the soiled floor or (2) operator disturbance of the soiled floor. Approach During prior NIOSH surveys of surface coal mine drills, several drills with very low cab dust levels (#0.1 mg/m3) were observed to have floor sweeping compound spread out over the cab floor during the working shift. This initial observation led to a more controlled A-B study of the effect of the sweeping compound on the interior cab dust levels. This study involved dust sampling with and without sweeping compound inside the cabs of a bulldozer and two drills. Sweeping compounds commonly use sawdust or cellulose as the main bulk material, with oil or wax added for dust adhesion purposes. Sand is sometimes added to increase bulk density. Sweeping compounds with sand are commonly used to sweep up concrete floors. Those without sand (usually referred to as "gritless") are used to sweep up smooth finished floors. Most of the oils and waxes used for the adhesive ingredient are petroleum-base and can have an irritating odor. People sensitized to petroleum distillates could have allergic reactions to these sweeping compounds. A few companies offer non petroleum-base sweeping compounds, using either a natural oil or chemical additive for dust adhesion. During this study, it was decided that only the gritless sweeping compound (without sand) would be used, eliminating the addition of another potential silica source inside the cab. Since the sweeping compound would be applied on the enclosed cab floor for the duration of the shift, it was decided to use a canola oil-base sweeping compound to eliminate irritating odor from the petroleum-base sweeping compounds. The natural canola oil-base sweeping compound had a slight woody scent. The three pieces of equipment used in this study had notably different cab layouts. The bulldozer had a small cab with vents discharging air-conditioned or heated air from adjustable louvers at operator waist level and floor level. The bulldozer also had a cloth fabric seat and a carpeted floor. Drill A had a large cab with the heat directed from adjustable louvers at operator knee level and the air-conditioned air directed from cabin ceiling louvers. This drill had a vinyl fabric seat and a steel plate floor. Drill B had a small cabin with the heat directed across the floor (see figure 1) and the air-conditioned air directed down from the ceiling. It had a vinyl fabric seat and a worn rubber mat on a steel floor.

May 1, 2001

Background Carbon monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless gas that can cause illness and death by asphyxiation. Although the toxicity of CO is understood, CO exposure can occur from unrecognized sources. On April 2, 2000, a couple and their newborn infant were poisoned by CO migrating through the ground from blasting at a nearby coal strip mine into their home near Kittanning, Armstrong County, PA. They were treated at the hospital and diagnosed with CO poisoning. The infant had a carboxyhemoglobin level of 31%, the father 28%, and the mother 17%. Carboxyhemoglobin is the compound formed in the blood when CO is breathed. Persons not exposed to CO have carboxyhemoglobin levels of 0.3%-0.7%, and cigarette smokers have levels of up to 9%. Following release from the hospital, the family installed a CO detector in the basement of their home with the help of the local fire department. This Technology News briefly describes this incident to help increase awareness of the problem. It is discussed in more detail by Eltschlager et al. [2001]. Figure 1 shows the coal strip mine believed to have generated the CO. The initial suspect for the source of the CO was the furnace in the house. Only later did it become apparent that blasting at the nearby strip mine might be the culprit. A State investigation concluded that CO had migrated approximately 500ft from the blast, through the ground, and into the home. Figure 2 shows the locations and order of blasts at the mine. Initially, the mine did not plan to blast. Overburden generally consisted of weathered shale that could be dug without blasting. However, the mine decided to blast when hard sandstone that could not be dug out was encountered within 3 ft of the coal top. The blasting was intended to break up the sandstone. Blasting was done using bulk ammonium nitrate-fuel oil (ANFO) in 6.25-in holes 25-30 ft deep on a 16-ft by 16-ft pattern, with charge weights ranging from 17 to 170 lb. The closest blast to the home was 430 ft on April 17, 2000. The distance from the home to the blast area on the day when CO was first reported (March 31, 2000) was 500 ft. Twenty blasts were detonated at the mine between March 7, 2000, and April 20,2000. The blaster was careful to prevent fly rock since another home was only 150 ft away and a garage was 50 ft away. The quantity of explosive used in the blasts was sufficient to break the sandstone, but was less than would normally be used to blast overburden. The holes were typically one-third explosive and two-thirds stemming, with powder factors averaging 0.43 lb/yd3. Additionally, the muck was not immediately excavated after each blast. The heavy confinement on the explosive acted to prevent the typical release of blasting fumes into the atmosphere. Instances of CO migrating from blasts into homes have occurred before, but generally the distances involved were under 150 ft. It is believed that the blast design contributed to the confinement of CO in the ground, and discontinuities in the ground strata facilitated migration toward the residence. Upon inspection of the blast pitwall, a regular system of joints was observed. These joints are oriented roughly from the blast pit toward the house (figures 3-4).Blast-generated CO appears to have been driven into the joint system, displacing the air. When the joint system was saturated, the next succeeding blast pushed the CO into an uncased well next to the house (a high level of CO has been measured in the well shortly after a blast). From there, the CO entered the French drain system and then the basement of the house. The joints are vertical cracks through rock layers that occur on a regular spacing (figure 3). They are most common near valley slopes and are caused when valley walls converge as the stream cuts down through the rock layers. Often called hill seams, they roughly parallel the valley walls, but can curve and split, creating a pathway for gas movement (figure 5). These fractures are often encountered when underground mining proceeds close to outcrop. The system of fractures at the Kittanning blast pit was well developed and provided a path for transmission of CO both through the sandstone and up and through the overlying shales. Blasting engineers should be able to distinguish naturally occurring fractures from blast fractures and note the frequency, development, and orientation of the hill seams and their proximity to occupied houses. The limits of transmission of

May 1, 2001

Objective To develop safety training tools for mine health and safety trainers that fill gaps in currently available materials and help capture the wisdom and knowledge of “expert miners.” Background NIOSH began a series of stakeholder meetings in 1998 to determine what research was needed to improve miner health and safety. One of the more common concerns among stakeholders was a critical lack of appropriate training materials applicable to metal/nonmetal mining. Participants provided many insights into what effective training materials should include and how materials could best reach both new and experienced miners. The most important factors were that any materials be realistic and interesting and that some way must be found to capture the wisdom of expert miners before they retired. Approach NIOSH researchers chose videos as the best means of achieving these training goals. Over the past 3 years, NIOSH has produced three training videos that present information on safe work practices in underground mines: handling explosives, recognizing roof hazards and using proper scaling techniques, and installing ground supports. The last two videos, “Rock Falls—Preventing Rock Fall Injuries in Underground Mines” and “Miner Mike Saves the Day—or—Ground Support…It’s Important,” have won Alice Hamilton awards, NIOSH’s highest recognition of Excellence in Occupational Safety and Health, in the Educational Materials category. Two new videos are now being released. Both of these videos were shot completely in operating underground hard-rock mines and used expert miners to tell the story. Hazards In Motion The first, “Hazards in Motion,” deals with the dangers of working around mobile equipment in an underground mine. Ben, a new trainee, refuses to pay attention in his 40-hour New Miner Training class, and when the class takes its first trip underground, he wanders off and finds himself in many dangerous situations. He encounters many experienced miners who both chew him out for his unsafe attitude and give him advice and information on how to survive around mobile equipment. Many common pieces of equipment are shown, including haulage trucks, LHD=s, tracks and trains, slushers, skips and hoists, and air doors. The dangers of ignoring signals and of horseplay are also included. After nearly losing his life numerous times, Ben learns his lesson with the help of the Safety Angel, an experienced miner who looks suspiciously like his safety trainer. Ben’s Safety Angel saves his life repeatedly, teaches him how to work safely around these common conveyances, and introduces him to experts who have specific safety tips. Ben learns the error of his ways and vows to be the safest miner in the mine. “Hazards in Motion” is approximately 30 minutes long. Hidden Scars The second video is the first in the NIOSH “Expert Miner” series. “Hidden Scars” is a narrative interview with Don Capparelli, a miner and supervisor at the Sunshine Mine in north Idaho. This video captures the story of a fatal rock burst in May 1994, when Don was seriously injured and his long-time partner, Jimmy Findley, was killed. “Hidden Scars” is a very powerful story. Don Capparelli shares the physical and emotional pain he lives with daily as he relates the events leading up to the rock burst that took the life of his best friend and partner. This video is an excellent reminder of the human cost of uncontrolled accidents and the hidden scars that survivors must deal with for the rest of their lives. It runs approximately 25 minutes.

Jun 1, 2001

Information Circular (IC) 9453 Roof falls continue to be the greatest single safety hazard faced by underground coal miners. During1996-99, 44 coal miners lost their lives in rock falls and nearly 2,400 were injured. In addition, nearly 6,000 non injury roof collapses were reported. Roof supports are installed to protect the miners, but support system failures contributed to most of these incidents. Reducing the terrible toll taken by ground falls continues to be a major goal of research by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).During 2000-01, NIOSH conducted a series of open industry briefings on New Technology for Coal Mine Roof Support in Norton, VA, Charleston, WV, Evansville, IN, Tuscaloosa, AL, Price, UT, Glenwood Springs, CO, and Washington, PA. Drawing on many years of research undertaken by the NIOSH Pittsburgh and Spokane Research Laboratories, the proceedings describe what types of coal mine roof support are available, how they work, and when they should be used. The major subjects covered include roof bolts, standing roof supports, cable supports, and longwall shields. Some special topics are also addressed, including an analysis of roof fall accident statistics, techniques for better skin control, and material handling considerations. The proceedings volume also contains information on several important new technologies, which are described for the first time, e.g., guidelines for selecting roof bolt

Aug 1, 2001

Objective The main purpose of this video is to teach mine rescue personnel certain aspects of rescue work that are not traditionally taught. These include the strain caused by working continually under adverse conditions; the "survivor guilt" that occurs from being spared the fate of one's deceased cohorts; and the posttraumatic stress that may be experienced during the sometimes lengthy task of recovering the victims' bodies. Background On November 20, 1968, an explosion rocked the Farmington No. 9 Mine in northern West Virginia (figure 1). The explosion killed 78 of 99 miners who were working in the mine, including all but one member of the mine's rescue team. Some 30 years after the event, researchers from the NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Laboratory (PRL) conducted a video interview with Danny Kuhn (figure 2), the only Farmington No. 9 mine rescue team member who was not working that day and who did not die in the explosion. According to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), there are about 80 underground coal mine rescue teams in the United States, and according to the National Mining Association, there are more than 850 underground coal mines. This represents a significant decrease in both over the past decade. The low number of rescue teams is a concern because serious incidents, though fewer, still happen, and if a disaster occurs, there will be fewer rescue teams to respond. This would result in an increased need to use available human resources very efficiently. Much training to prepare these rescue teams still takes the form of what educators call "teaching to the test." In other words, teams practice in order to win mine rescue contests. This test-oriented approach has traditionally been augmented by interactions with others who have responded to real situations or by participating in actual incidents. Given few incidents and fewer rescue teams from whom to derive enrichment, the preparation of coal mine rescue personnel becomes a problem. Recently, more emphasis has been placed on active learning, such as working out problems in smoke. These sessions more nearly simulate the actual conditions that today's team members might rarely encounter. To properly prepare and retain the current coal mine rescue personnel who are left in the workforce, it is necessary not only to offer such hands-on experience, but also to replace the learning narratives that once were passed from team to team. The present video is intended to contribute in that capacity. Approach NIOSH researchers first learned of Mr. Kuhn in the fall of1998. Mr. Kuhn was contacted and agreed to an interview. An oral history interview was conducted with Mr. Kuhn in early November1998. After reviewing the videotape of the interview, researchers determined the content to be so rich as to warrant a second interview in a more formal setting. The second interview was done in early December 1998. During this interview, Mr. Kuhn spent about 2 hours describing the Farmington disaster, including the workplace climate leading up to the explosion, the events that took place in the 10 days after the explosion, and the nearly 10-year effort to safely and successfully recover most of the victims' bodies. The videotape of the second oral history interview with Danny Kuhn was reviewed and edited by NIOSH researchers for content. Careful attention was used to ensure that valuable information was presented, but within a reasonable timeframe. A detailed map of the Farmington No. 9 Mine was edited into the final video and used to highlight critical features as they were being described by Mr. Kuhn. Results and Accomplishments A 60-minute videotape and instructor's guide for use in safety training or other settings was completed. The target audience consists of all those who work in underground coal mines. This training video will help safety instructors better prepare mine rescue team members for the situations that they will encounter when engaging in extended rescue and recovery work. As a result of this expectations training, team members will be more likely to serve their

Mar 1, 2002

Objective As mines become safer and disasters fewer, a time may come when no employees in the mining industry have any practical experience in managing a mine emergency. To fill an emerging gap in mine emergency response training, a multidisciplinary team of researchers and computer programmers from the NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Laboratory has developed an intervention for mining personnel who would be in leadership positions in the command center during emergencies. It is called MERITS, a computer-based emergency simulation exercise. MERITS is short for "Mine Emergency Response Interactive Training Simulation." It provides trainees an opportunity to gain command center experience during a simulated underground coal mine emergency. MERITS allows trainees to practice information gathering, situation assessment, decision-making, and coordination skills without risk to personnel or property. Individuals representing mine emergency response personnel, various State safety officials, and private mine management from three States have participated in MERITS training. What Is MERITS? MERITS is an extension of previous work that compiled a knowledge base relevant to mine disaster management via interviews, analysis of literature, reviews of past events, and observations of mock mine disasters. Findings from prior research found a need for an alternative method of command center training. This new computer simulation is being used to train emergency command center personnel to effectively manage an underground mine fire. Modeled after training simulations developed for other industries (e.g., to address nuclear accidents, chemical spills, evacuations, etc.), MERITS simulates underground and surface events related to the disaster. It exposes the user to events that typically occur during a mine emergency, such as lack of information and miscommunication. It also presents trainees with issues that must be addressed, such as making provisions for briefing news media and victims' families, ordering needed supplies, interfacing with Government enforcement agencies, and housing mine rescue teams. The outcome of the scenario is determined by the users' decisions and their emergency response plans. Field Results Field testing of MERITS was conducted with eight full-day training sessions at four different locations in Colorado, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. These field tests benefited from the knowledge and experience of State of Pennsylvania inspection officials, representatives of the United Mine Workers of America(UMWA), and private mine management who served as trainees for the MERITS training sessions. Trainees self-reported an average of20 years of work experience in the mining industry. All trainees had participated in Mine Emergency Response Development (MERD) training exercises, and many had been involved in real mine emergencies. Trainee evaluation of the MERITS program is summarized below: •Twenty-six of the 27 trainees believed that the MERITS simulation helped them know how to prepare for a real emergency. •Twenty-five of the 27 trainees believed that the storyline for the MERITS simulation was either "very realistic" or "realistic." •All 27 trainees believed that the MERITS simulation helped them learn how to better handle a real emergency. •None of the 27 trainees stated that they were bored during the simulation. After the initial field tests, MERITS was refined and retested during training sessions for individuals from State agencies, the UMWA, and private industry. Mining personnel from underground coal and underground stone mines participated and responded positively to the learning experience. Technology Transfer Industry introduction to the MERITS program will occur throughout 2002. MERITS presentations at the Joseph A. Holmes Safety Association National Meeting in Virginia Beach, VA, in June.

Jun 1, 2002

Experience, it is said, is the best teacher. Some experiences, however, should be shared so that no one else will ever have to live through them again. The fire at the Sunshine Mine is one such experience. ?Hard-rock mines don?t burn.? The Sunshine Mine near Kellogg, ID, was the nation?s premier silver producer for many years. In 1972, the mine was nearly 6,000 feet deep, contained hundreds of miles of worked-out areas, and employed nearly 500 people. Because of its depth and the type of host rock for the silver (unburnable quartzite), the general thinking of the day was that fires in mines such as the Sunshine were impossible, because ?hard-rock mines don?t burn.? What wasn?t really considered was that timber supports, foam insulation, and mining equipment do burn and that the carbon monoxide gas produced by burning is far more deadly than fire itself. Thus, no one was prepared when, on May 2, 1972, a fire of un-known origin broke out below the 3100 level of the mine. Before long, 173 miners on the day shift were trapped by thick, black smoke. By the time the fire was out, 91 miners had died, and the Sunshine Mine Fire became known as one of the worst mine disasters of the 20th century. It became the catalyst for passage of the Metal/Nonmetal Health and Safety Act of 1977, which applied the same federal safety standards to hard-rock mines as those regulating coal. Mandated safety training, mine inspections, and equipment standards were brought into force.

Aug 1, 2002

To improve the air quality in large-opening stone mines by developing better ventilation techniques, including appropriate fan selection in conjunction with air-coursing methods. Background Stone mines are the most common underground large-entry mines in the United States. Data from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) for the year 2000 indicate that there were 162 active nonmetal underground mines in the United States, of which 117 were stone mines. Many underground stone mines are drift mines developed from previous quarry operations. Typically, these room-and-pillar mines have entries that are 20 ft or higher and at least 40 ft wide. These large dimensions lead to a very small ventilating pressure loss, even when significant air quantities move through the mine. This is especially true of drift mine operations where ventilating pressure losses of <0.25 in w.g. are common. Underground stone mines with shafts that are<200 ft deep typically have ventilating pressure losses that are <2 in w.g. The pressure losses through these mines are much lower than those of a typical coal mine or deep metal/nonmetal mine. Therefore, the ventilation techniques and principles are quite different. In addition, because of new MSHA regulations that limit the concentration of diesel particulate matter, these mines may need to greatly increase their ventilation airflow. Therefore, large-opening mines need a fan that can move large air quantities and operate at low static pressures. There are three fan types for mine ventilation: centrifugal, axial vane, and propeller. Centrifugal fans are uncommon in underground stone mines as they are often associated with mines requiring the highest of ventilation pressures. Axial vane fans are widely used in all types of mining operations. They are the most common fan type currently found in underground large-opening stone mines. However, they typically do not operate at low static pressures with high efficiency. Propeller fans are currently uncommon in underground stone mines. They are designed for low static pressures and large air quantities at higher efficiency. This fan type best suits the ventilation needs in large-opening stone mines?they produce large air quantities at low pressure losses. Mines with air shafts<100 ft long and at least 12 ft in diameter have fairly low mine static pressures and may also benefit from propeller fans.

Dec 1, 2002

It is now widely accepted that horizontal stress is present nearly everywhere underground. Often it is more severe than the vertical stress. It is a major cause of roof control problems in underground mines. The AHSEM computer program contains two modules to improve mine layouts for control of horizontal stress. For development, the user specifies the orientations of the maximum horizontal stress, the entries, and the crosscuts. Angled crosscuts may be used, and the angles may be different for the right- and left-hand crosscuts. AHSEM then shows the user how the stress condition would vary as the entry and crosscut orientations are changed. The second module is for longwall mining. Severe stress concentrations can make headgate conditions hazardous when the entries are improperly oriented. AHSEM shows whether a particular longwall orientation and extraction sequence places the headgate corner in a stress concentration or in stress relief. It also estimates the magnitude of the stress concentration.

Apr 1, 2003

Introduction Research has shown that when an emergency occurs, work-ers often do not get the information they need to take appropriate action. Important information about incidents is either not com-municated effectively or not at all to those affected by the event. The "Emergency Communication Triangle" safety talk focuses on the content of emergency warning messages. It presents a procedure using mental cues that can be used by senders and receivers of emergency warnings. The talk includes graphics for use during the presentation, as well as references for more information. Background Interviews with 48 miners who had escaped one of three different underground mine fires revealed that warning information provided to them was inadequate. Either insufficient information was provided to miners inby the fire areas or they failed to ask the questions needed to let them plan and execute an effective escape. Most of the miners who evacuated from these three mines did not have information that would allow them to make decisions about efficient escapes. The communication breakdown came from two directions: (1) the individuals providing the warning did not offer details about the situations even though some were known and (2) the individuals who received the warnings did not ask for clarification of the situation. The lack of information allowed miners to continue attempting to place cues into normal frameworks after they should have evaluated the situation as abnormal and threatening. The uncertainty created by the lack of information influenced their decision-making and therefore their actions. Approach Researchers at the NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Laboratory have developed a training intervention that can be used by senders and receivers of warnings during a mine emergency. This material was developed for use in short safety training sessions such as start-of-shift safety talks. The information can be presented in about 15 minutes. Although the illustrations were taken from the underground coal mining industry, the training can be tailored to any work setting by substituting appropriate examples. How It Works During the safety talk, miners learn about the six categories of critical information that should be provided during emergency communications: Who, Where, What, Miners, Event, and Response. • Who: When reporting an emergency or receiving a warning, the first thing a miner must do is identify himself or herself. This is important because people react differently based on who gives them information. • Where: Giving or finding out the location of the problem is important. Of the 48 miners interviewed about their escape, only 2 knew where the fire was located. However, this information was known by either the dispatcher or the person who discovered the fire. • What: Miners must tell or ask exactly what is happening. At one mine fire, miners near the phone heard the message to evacuate and went to gather the others on their crew. One worker shouted to a machine operator: "Come on down to the mantrip. We&apos;re going out." Because it was close to quitting time, the machine operator thought they were just leaving the section a little early and went through his normal end-of-shift routine, wasting valuable time. After giving or obtaining the three initial pieces of critical information, miners can then give or obtain details about the response in progress. • Miners: Is anyone hurt? Has everyone been accounted for? When and where was a missing person last seen?

Sep 1, 2004

Coal miners, especially roof bolter and continuous miner operators, work in a hazardous underground environment where they are often exposed to poor roof conditions. Nearly 500 rock fall injuries are reported each year, and 99% of them are caused by rocks falling from between the roof bolts. These loose rocks that injure miners are usually just a few inches thick, but on average weigh 280 pounds. NIOSH has found that most rock fall injuries can be prevented by installing roof screen during the bolting cycle. Roof screen is a sheet made of steel wires in a grid pattern. When screen is bolted up against the mine roof, it provides far more coverage than any common surface control used in the mines today. Because more mine roof is covered, there is less chance that a rock will fall and injure a miner. The facts about roof screen are shown in the new NIOSH video entitled “Make It Safer With Roof Screen.” Using extensive underground footage, the 7-minute video shows how well screen keeps loose rock from falling in difficult roof conditions. Techniques for installing screen from both outside-controlled and walk-thru roof bolting machines are shown. The video also provides safe handling tips, best practices, and information about machine technology that can greatly improve material handling. Throughout the video, a coal mine safety manager and a shift foreman talk about the tremendous difference that roof screen has made at their mines. An instructional booklet supplements the video with additional information. It presents compelling data from mines that have practically eliminated rock fall injuries with a roof screening program. Other sections of the booklet discuss in greater detail roof screen installation, tips for manual screen handling, a material handling system for roof screen, and use of the personal bolter screen, which can be easily handled by one person. Screen specification and custom ordering are described, including the sizes of screen, grid sizes, reinforcing (indicator) wires, edge cut options, and screen strength. A list of additional sources of information is also provided. Nearly every mine eventually encounters poor roof. Screen is one of the most powerful control techniques available. This new video will help make mine managers aware of screen, and it can help them in developing a roof screen installation program. It also serves as an information source and teaching tool for safety managers and trainers. The video can easily be integrated into new miner training programs or annual refresher training.

Mar 1, 2005

To develop a quick, safe, and effective method that allows workers at mineral processing operations to clean their dust-soiled clothing periodically throughout the workday. Background Reducing workers&apos; respirable dust exposure to silica and other harmful dusts and contaminants is an ongoing goal in the U.S. mining industry. One area of known worker exposure is from contaminated work clothes. A U.S. Bureau of Mines report documented a number of cases where a tenfold increase in a worker&apos;s dust exposure was measured from contaminated work clothes. In these cases, the dust emitted from clothing caused the worker&apos;s dust exposure to exceed the permissible exposure limit in less than 2 hours. The most effective way to eliminate this dust source is to have workers clean or change their work clothes. There are two federal regulations that impact the clothes-cleaning process. The first states that at no time shall compressed air be directed toward a person, but that when compressed air is used, then all necessary precautions shall be taken to protect persons from injury. The second regulation states that compressed air should only be used for cleaning purposes when it is less than 30 psi and used along with personal protective equipment. For the mining industry, by default, the only approved method to perform clothes cleaning is to have workers vacuum their clothes using a HEPA filter system. This is very difficult and time-consuming and, in most instances, not very effective. Most workers would prefer to use a single compressed air hose to blow dust from their work clothes. However, not only is this method prohibited by law, it usually creates a significant dust cloud in the work environment and contaminates coworkers.

May 1, 2005

Objective To characterize the roof fall risk associated with underground limestone mining. Background During the first 5 years of this decade, more than one-fourth of the underground mining fatalities occurred as the result of fall of ground. The large openings in underground stone mines present limitations in observing ground conditions because of floor-to-roof heights ranging from 20 to 60 ft or more. Generally, the status of ground conditions in under-ground stone mines is based on observation and experience obtained during mining development. Some mines use monitoring instruments to gain information on roof conditions, but this practice is typically focused and localized to address issues in a particular area or section of the mine. The Roof Fall Risk Index (RFRI) described here provides a method of systematically characterizing the risk of roof falls to enhance the safety of mine workers. Approach As in many industries, a defective product signals the potential for failure. Similarly, defective rock or strata in an underground stone mine presents a potential risk. Assessing ground conditions relative to the concentration of defects observed provides a way to index or rate these conditions and the subsequent risk. Through observations at approximately 50 underground limestone mines in the United States, strata defects were categorized to develop a quantitative method for determining the RFRI. This method is specifically geared to underground lime-stone mines because strata defects are difficult to see and limited by the experience and knowledge of the observer. Overall, 10 defect categories were deter-mined: 3 that relate to geology, 4 that result from mine development, 2 that are indicative of the roof profile, and 1 that addresses moisture or water flow (see RFRI Chart 1). The defect categories are also weighted to reflect the conditions indicative of roof or strata movement or separation (categories 4 through 8). These weights are multiplied by the assessment value to determine the total category value. The benefit of using monitoring techniques to gain information on roof conditions is also factored into the RFRI for overall assessment of an area in the mine. Each defect category is assessed with a value of 1 to 5 based on parameters as defined in each defect category, with 5 indicating the highest degree or level of defect. The assessment value of 3 is also used when information on a parameter is unknown. The parameters for the defect categories are illustrated in RFRI Chart 2 for use in determining the assessed value. How It Works The RFRI provides a means to categorize the risk for roof falls in underground stone mines. The concept of this calculation is aimed at providing an indication of the level or degree of defect relative to the area of the mine examined. The RFRI for the calculation produces a distribution where RFRI values approaching 0 represent a stable condition and those ap-proaching 100 represent an unstable condition.

Oct 1, 2006

Develop a mobile manipulator that one person can use to lift and maneuver 50- to 600-pound loads. It can be used in maintenance shops and mines to reduce lifting accidents (Figure 1 and 2). Background Lifting heavy items is one of the leading causes of injury in the workplace. Mine Safety and Health Administration statistics showed that, in 2004, back injuries accounted for over 20% of all injuries (1,699 cases) and resulted in 110,000 lost days of work. Forty-one percent of those injuries resulted from materials-handling or maintenance activities.1 In addition to back injuries, lifting injuries include hernias, ruptures, sprains, and strains resulting from losing control of the item being lifted. Factors associated with accidents are weight of the item being lifted, awkward postures, inadequate handholds, and the working environment itself. High accident rates were noted when lifting items that ranged from 50 to 600 pounds, particularly in tight working quarters where maneuverability was critical. Research indicated that a mobile lifting arm would eliminate many lifting accidents in environments where other lifting devices (fork lifts, overhead cranes, mobile A-frames) would not be practical. NIOSH has built a first-generation mobile manipulator unit designed to be used on hard, level floors such as in a shop. The complexity of motion, number of moving parts, compact design, and design constraints of the manipulator required advanced computer-aided design work (Figure 3). As a result of the design work, thirty-eight claims are included in the patent applications. NIOSH will be conducting field trails and working with manufacturers to put the manipulator into industrial use.

Dec 1, 2006

Rock mass classification is widely used throughout the underground mining industry—in both coal and hard-rock mines. The technique has been successful because it— • Uses simple measurements to rate rock mass strength. • Helps mine planners to make the best use of geologic information in mine design. • Makes it possible to compare ground control experiences between mines, even when the geologic conditions are very different.

Jul 1, 2007