Search Documents

By K. H. Concannon, K. I. Hindle

"The use of simulation modeling in the primary metals industry (including mining, smelting, and metals processing) is expanding as significant cost-benefits can be realized by companies employing capital intensive processes. The economic scale and complexity of operations found in this industry is well-suited to applications using this ""what-if' computer modeling technique, ranging from proof-of-concept projects to testing facility design or configuration, and determining resource requirements. More recently this technique is being used to support on-going planning and scheduling for operations using the simulation as the engine to derive the best schedule. With increased computer processing capability, deterministic models are now being developed to capture the workings of a production system or conversion process, allowing real-time monitoring and scheduling of these operations. This paper presents a sample of some recent discrete-event simulation modeling applications that demonstrate the capability and benefits of this technique in the primary metals industry. These include the use of simulation to support the long-range planning of underground mining operations; the modeling of a metals supply chain network that employs a multi-modal distribution system; the scheduling of a metals coil finishing process using a deterministic simulation model; and a more detailed description of the use of simulation to model furnace and converter aisle activities within a smelter operation in Northern Canada."

Jan 1, 2007

By Greg Yuriy

Over the past two decades, Vale Canada has used discrete-event simulation in a key role to support many underground mining studies. Traditionally, general purpose simulation software was developed for manufacturing and service applications. Not until recently have Mine Designers and Simulation Specialists been able to model the dynamics of underground mining scenarios without extensive manipulation of the inherent tools and entities contained within these simulation environments. This paper discusses Vale Canada?s past experiences with a variety of simulation software, describing model development methods and highlighting some of the lessons learned. The paper concludes with a review of recently considered software and provides a framework of desired attributes/functions for modeling mining scenarios.

Aug 1, 2013

By Guangyao Si, Ismet Canbulat, Xun Luo, Yi Duan

Routine analyses of seismicity and event locations are essential for coal burst risk management, especially in the presence of unfavorable and complex geology. In an Australian longwall coal mine, a small-scale seismic monitoring network was installed to monitor a section of a major dyke intersected by the roadway, which was classified as a coal burst prone zone. The Deep Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN) technique was adopted for automatically discriminating seismic events to assess seismicity in this zone. The discriminated seismic events were located with the Shortest Path Method based on the Boundary Discretization Scheme (BDS-SPM) for temporal-spatial seismic event distribution analysis. The results demonstrate that the seismic events are discriminated with an average accuracy of 94%. Moreover, the seismic events are more accurately located using the BDS-SPM with a 3D heterogeneous velocity model compared with results obtained with a homogeneous velocity model. The temporal and spatial variances in seismic activities identify that the rock fractures in the dyke zone are closely related to the longwall mining process and a local dyke has a controlling influence on the stress concentration in its vicinity.

Apr 26, 2022

By Sherwin F. Kelly

THE present lull in engineering activities presents an advantageous moment for inquiring into the position now occupied by geophysics in its various fields of application. The recent over-expansion in all lines of work resulted in an uncritical employment of these methods of exploration which was bound to have its harmful reaction. The pendulum has now swung back, producing a decidedly hypercritical attitude toward the new science that had been recently welcomed so joyfully as the panacea for prospecting troubles. The severe retrenchment in exploration has forced upon us a period of waiting and, it is to be hoped, of profitable contemplation. This can well be employed in trying to pass a reasoned judgment on what position geophysics should occupy in the new geological exploration programs that will inevitably ac- company the looked-for industrial recovery.

Jan 1, 1931

Dr C. M. van Staden (Fellow): Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for this opportunity to contribute to the paper by Dr Stander, and Messrs Henzen and Funke. First of all, my congratulations to Dr Stander on being re-elected President of the International Association of Water Pollution Research. We in South Africa are proud that this honour was again bestowed on our leading scientist in the field of water research. Furthermore, my congratulations to the authors of this paper. The growth of the pollution problem caused by acidic water discharged from abandoned collieries, is known to most of us. However, I am not aware of any case where an abandoned gold mine is directly discharging polluted underground water. I think it is also a debatable point as to what the quality of underground water being discharged from abandoned gold mines would be in the long run. Any reduction works on a gold mine which practises only fairly good housekeeping, should not cause any water pollution by cyanide. First of all, any cyanide solution before gold precipitation would be too valuable to lose. Secondly, the precipitated solution, which contains the cyanide, is used to pump slime to slimes dams. Any cyanide pollution that may occur at the slimes dam, must come from the top and, fortunately, the days when pen stock water was discharged directly from the top of dams into public streams, have gone. Run-off and seepage is usually acidic, thus decomposing the cyanide. The code of practice by the Chamber of Mines is quite clear on the point as to how the tops of dams should be secured, to prevent any process water or storm-water polluting public streams. The general standards are given on page three of the paper. To my knowledge, under certain circumstances a degree of relaxation can be given regarding the faecal coli count; namely a permissible count of 1 000 per 100 ml. I feel very strongly that research aimed at inhibiting the activity of acid-producing bacteria should be encouraged. Success in this field would be of great benefit to the mining industry. I am very thankful that the authors have mentioned vegetation of dumps as a method to combat water pollution, with the full awareness that the key objective in vegetating dumps is to prevent air pollution. A problem that I have not heard mentioned before and on which I would appreciate the views of the authors, is the pollution that may be caused by power-stations discharging

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: I have every reason to know Mr. Pryde was carrying out some experiment a while ago in some of his mines. He and I had a little correspondence on the question, and I think he may have a word or two to say about it. He has not been on his feet today at all. I will ask Mr. Pryde to tell us what he has to say. MR. PRYDE: I have not very much to say about shooting coal with permissible powder as far as slack is concerned because we are not in the commercial business. All of our coal goes to the railroad and a very large part of it is crushed for use in the stokers of the locomotives. We are on a 100 per cent permissible powder basis and as far as I am able to see, I do not believe that the percentage of slack is increasing with its use. We find it hard to convince our commercial neighbors of this fact because they are naturally very much against increasing their percentage of slack on ac- count of the low price received for this grade of coal. I, personally, believe that where a change is made from black powder to permissible powder the percentage of slack will be increased for a time because the miners have been accustomed to using black powder and they are rather suspicious about going to the permissible powder and I do not believe that we can blame them very much. So the tendency with them is to use too much powder. We have gradually overcome this, although, as I said before, we have not kept close track of the production of slack. However, we try to get as large an amount of lump coal as possible. Broadly speaking, I can say from observation that in my opinion there is very little difference in the percentage of slack with the use of the permissible powder that we have today than there was with the use of black powder. I also get this information from our mine superintendents. Mr. Peterson and the other explosive men have been very helpful to us in the use of permissible powder and I confess I have to take everything back that I said several years ago. At that time I was against permissible powder, particularly on account of the cost, but, with the newer permissible powder, we have gotten the cost down very well. I know today that the cost of permissible powder in the coal mines of the Union Pacific Coal Company is less than when we were using black powder. I know this because of the fact that we kept a record of the number of tons we got with black powder, and the number of tons we get with permissible powder compares very favorably in cost. I know this, too, because of the fact that our employes, except in the first few weeks of using permissible powder, have made no demand upon us for any in- crease ill pay to offset any added cost that might accrue in the use of permissible powder and the fact that they have asked for no increase is very conclusive proof to me that it is not

Jan 1, 1925

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Have you any maximum length that you make your dust barriers? What I mean by that is, your entries are 10 feet wide, and I believe if I remember right, in your single track entries you had only one dust barrier to cover the full width of the. entry in your double track entries, I believe you had two-I would like to know, have you any maximum length you make these barriers? MR. CHAS. LEGER, ROYAL FUEL CO., UTAH: It is stated that they shouldn't be over 8 feet long to obtain sensitiveness. If they make them over 8 feet they are not as sensitive as they should be. They should be made short for two reasons in order to keep the sagging out and to make them as sensitive as possible. MR. DAN HARRINGTON, U. S. BUREAU OF MINES: I didn't come here to enter into any extended discussion on rock dusting or to discuss in particular the situation at Dawson. At the February meeting at Denver, we made a complete study of this matter. Since that time a report was completed and reported to the Phelps-Dodge Corporation and Mr. Moorhead probably has a copy of it, which can give you more complete information as to what we found. We found that with the adobe dusting that they have done, they had six miles of entry pretty thoroughly dusted and of all the samples we took, at least 95 percent of them showed that not only the floor but the ribs and roof were in such a condition that an explosion could not originate in any part of this entry. In other words, this entry as it was dusted was absolutely protected from ignition and propagation. The adobe they used was of material that was non-combustible. In most instances there was not more than 3 per cent of moisture in it.

Jan 1, 1924

THE CHALRYAN.--I think that we have set the stage for the balance of the sym- posium. Most of the emphasis has been placed on the immediate value of every- thing we can do and everything we can learn for the furtherance of the war effort. I believe that ought to be first, but I also believe that this is the time for us to con- sider very seriously not only what these improved methods and techniques do to form a closer approach to ideal segregation but what effect these great quantities of scrap metals and alloys that are going to be produced this year and next, are going to have-what their impact will be-on post- war industry in general and in particular ,, on the primary metals fields. In some cases we have been hearing in the last month or two of the law of diminishing returns coming to the fore. We find alloy simplification growing and certain alloys being produced in great quantities, which will perhaps drop out of the picture some- what as the war ends but never to the lower ( stage they had before. We have I think a pretty good cross- section of the producers, the refiners, the reclaimers and ingot makers, the ultimate users here, and there ought to be some good and helpful discussion. The papers are open for discussion. Mr. Beattie, do you want to make any 1 comment? H. J. BEATTIE.*-To start the discussion I might ask Mr. Deitz what they do with manganese bronze turnings? We segregate the manganese bronze turnings from the other bronze turnings. The value of it seems to be much out of line with the price of ingot, that is, as compared to some of the other alloys like 88-10-2 or 85-5-5-5. I assume it is because they can only use a

Jan 1, 1943

(The following discussion took place on this screen lecture in the dark.) MR. SHUBART: Would you give us a little .explanation as to the operation of this machine and what you are doing with it? MR. TESCHER: There is a 20- horsepower motor, rheostat, crusher, and a fan mounted on one base plate and operating on one shaft. The fan is overhung on the shaft. The only bearings you have are the bearings on each side of the crusher and the motor hearings. On one side of the ma- chine there is an opening for feeding shale. The machine is operated at 1,200 revolution per minute and as the shale is pulverized, the fan automatically exhausts fine dust from the crusher from an opening in the top of the crusher. The machine pulverizes 3,000 pounds in eight hours, reducing the materid to one hundred mesh. The last ma- chine we put in has been operating continuously fifteen hours a day for the past sixty days, without repairs of any kind. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Where is the machine in operation? MR. TESCHER. At the Royal mine. We have used ordinary mining ma- chine cable in local movements of the machines. This has enabled us to have twenty-two locations throughout the mines. The mine is highly gaesous, and the machines had to be placed on intake air. MR. SHUBSRT: What type of crusher do you use? MR. TESCHER. A No. 16 Universal, operating at 1,200 revolution per minute. M. SHURART: What material do you feed to it? MR. TESCHER: We have shale three-quarters of a mile from the mine. In the winter months we have been troubled with moisture. We build a kiln and get this shale and load it into the kiln for drying and then place it into a pit car and take it into the mine. The material must be dry. We have also used slate in the mine and have had good success. The slate at the mine is fairly hard. I presume, however, that the slate will probably carry a high silica content. MR. SHUBART: Mr. Harrington claims that silica does not do the harm, as was formerly supposed. MR. TESCHER: There is still a question as to whether it is harmful or not. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Are there any of these machines in operation closer than Aguilar? MR. TESCHER: There is one at the Alamo mine. Mr. Quealy also purchased a couple of them for use at his Wyoming mines. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Are there any other questions you would like to ask Mr. Tescher regarding his rock dusting machine while it is on the table for discussion? MR. DALRYMPLE, SR.: How many men does it take to operate it? MR. TESCHER: One man operates the machine. Sometimes we put the

Jan 1, 1925

THE CHAIRMAN.-Thank you. Since the papers are rather closely related, I think rather than taking them one at a time we will entertain discussion on any of these problems at this time. W. A. REICH.*-We, of course, quite a while ago got the yellow light that Mr. Cole spoke of, and like everyone else immediately started to study silicon bronzes and brasses. We were interested in the silicon bronzes and brasses because we felt that in order to replace gun metal which makes up a large part of our use we needed something with an elastic limit at least equal to that of gun metal. That means at least 12,000 lb. per sq. in. This study was aimed only at tin conservation. Then we dropped the study of silicon bronzes because high purity copper which is needed in their manufacture became a scarce item. To make a long story short we have recommended to our designing engineers that they use 85-5-5-5 wherever possible because 85-5-5-5 we understand can be made entirely from scrap with little or no tin addition. 85-5-5-5 has a lower elastic limit than 88-8-4, so we felt that we would need another substitute material, a structural alloy with an elastic limit equal to that of 88-8-4, and we immediately turned to the manganese bronze type of alloy. The poor foundry properties of standard manganese bronzes were mentioned by Mr. Thieme and since we feel that high zinc content is largely responsible for this difficulty, our development is directed along the lines of uncovering a material with a lower zinc content and which gains its elastic strength from the addition of other alloying elements, such as, aluminum, manganese and iron. It must be possible to make this alloy entirely from scrap with no additions of scarce high purity material. I would appreciate an expression of opinion on how low we can go in zinc content with this type of alloy without seriously impairing the availability, and how high we can go in aluminum content without making use of aluminum restricted for that use. We assume that the maximum lead content must be placed at 1 ½ per cent to insure good availability and we feel that about I per cent of tin in the alloy would improve salt water corrosion resistance similar to the effect of tin in Admiralty Metal. Has anyone here had experience with the effect of tin and lead on the weldability of such an alloy? C. S. COLE.-What percentage of lead and tin? W. A. REICH.-About 1 per cent of lead and 1 per cent of tin. We are studying the weldability of the alloy but perhaps someone already has the answer. (Pause, no answer) The claim has been made that 1 per cent of lead can be added to certain silicon bronzes without impairing their properties. A silicon bronze with a low zinc content requires high purity copper in its manufacture but if say the 15 per cent zinc, 44 silicon balance copper alloy could be made, with a I per cent lead content, some quantity could be made from scrap. We do not know whether the aforementioned is

Jan 1, 1943

By R. T. Rudd

DISCUSSION R. T. RUDD I have the following comments on Mr Bosman's paper. Before giving the company permission to discharge neutralized mine drainage containing 1800 mg/l of dissolved solids into a public stream, my Department had to consider the matter from both the legal and the practical viewpoint.

Jan 4, 1974

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Is there any member that has any question to ask Mr. McCleary on the subject? MR. TESCHER: What do you figure it costs to do this? MR. McCLEARY: Between one and a half and one and three-quarters cents per kilowatt hour. MR. TESCHER: That includes all charges? MR. McCLEARY: All charges, fuel and labor. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Mr. McCleary, you were talking about a ten-inch top on the cars. Don't you find there is considerable spillage when raising or lowering the cars? MR. McCLEARY : Not after the men get accustomed to loading cars properly; at first, they just loaded it on in any old way, but wall it onto the cars solidly after a few days at the mine. I do not think we have that condition now. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Did I understand from the paper there that the rock dust you are using contains 90 per cent silica? MR. McCLEARY: Twenty; less than twenty. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: I got that figure wrong. Are there any other questions to ask? MR. SCHLOSS: I would like to know what kind of machinery Mr. McCleary is using for rock dusting and are they rock dusting the rooms, or not? MR. McCLEARY: We have only recently started rock dusting, and the machine that we are using is Mr. Tescher's machine. We start in at the face of the main entry and move against the air current rock dusting every room and the entry every 50 feet. Every 50 feet, we stop the machine fifteen or twenty minutes at that point and rock dust up in the room and around the entry at that point. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Do you do any water sprinkling at the faces-at the working face? MR. McCLEARY: Yes, sir, every working face is sprinkled every day, and at least every two days at all points in the mine. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Does it affect the rock dust in any way? MR. McCLEARY: That was true before we started rock dusting. The faces only are sprinkled now. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Where you stop to sprinkle with water, you do not figure on rock dusting? MR. McCLEARY: I will just change that around. Where we do rock dusting, we do not expect to sprinkle. Where the faces of the coal are fresh, from day to day, that is where the sprinkling will be clone. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: That is the fresh faces? MR. McCLEARY: Yes. I might add right here, I believe Mr. Tescher made the statement that cross-cuts up an 8 per cent pitch were the steepest that

Jan 1, 1925

The Role of the Drilling Contractor BY FERRIS E. SAINSBURY Ron Haxby, Occidental Minerals What is the best method for drilling a 12-in. diam hole to a depth of 1200 ft and maintaining the deflection within 25ft from vertical? Ferris Sainsbury: In order to drill a 12-111. hole down to 1200 ft, In most places you would have to employ a rotary tricone bit With a down-the-hole hammer, I expect by that depth significant Inflows of water would be experienced Even with foams, we would not be able to get the water out of a hole of that diameter So the down-the-hole tricone method of drilling would be best. To keep it straight, we would probably employ the largest square drill stem compatible with the diameter of the hole. Ron Haxby: Is it common in drilling contracts to put in a vertical hole clause? Ferris Sainsbury: You can put in the vertical hole clause Ron Haxby: Does it cost more? Ferris Sainsbury: Normally, if the hole deviates, the driller can correct it with deflection wedges and will charge it back to you at cost, plus 10% or somewhere along that range Any drill hole has a tendency to go perpendicular to the dip, and there are times when stabilization systems are not successful in preventing the hole from turning into the dip of the formation. The only solution, in this situation, is to go in with an oriented wedge and kick the hole back out.

Jan 1, 1979

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Gentlemen, you have heard Mr. Dyer's paper. The meeting is now open for discussion. MR. NORMAN: I would like to ask the gentleman what is the distance between your crosscuts for the ventilation of rooms and entries in the state of Utah?

Jan 1, 1925

MR. HARRINGTON: I would like to ask Mr. Bottomley if they fire their shots while the men are in the mine? MR. BOTTOMLEY: No sir; the shot-firing law in our State requires the shots to be fired after the men are out of the mine. We fire more shots than we did under the hand method of loading. Where formerly four holes were drilled, now we drill eight, using the same amount of powder as we did formerly, perhaps a little more, but we use a slower grade of powder. CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: Any further discussion, gentlemen? MR. GIBSON: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Bottomley, if, in his shot-firing system, as I understand it, he has a very high coal and is working something like eleven feet? MR. BOTTOMLEY: Something like that. MR. GIBSON: I read the article that you referred to. Did you use both the first and the second delay explo¬ders in shooting the coal? MR. BOTTOMLEY: We use the ordinary fuse. MR. GIBSON: That is what I wanted to find out; whether you use the delay exploders and the detonators. In Utah, we are getting away from the fuse altogether, because we do not think it is accomplishing anything to use the electric light on the cap, and' at the same time shooting with fuse. We are defeating the object we might gain in using the electric safety lamp. That is a point that might be discussed a little further. MR. E. H. JOHNSON, The Coloder Company: I would like-since it is a general opinion that mechanical loading breaks up the coal, to ask Mr. Bottomley, if he finds a larger percentage of small coal, or how much, through the use of the mechanical loaders? MR. BOTTOMLEY: We do not find any great difference. In fact, we have succeeded in improving our lump coal percentage, and that is important, because it is largely domestic. At first, when the machines were installed, the boys shot the coal too hard, and we fell down a little, about two or three per cent, the first month, in our lump percentage, and we tightened up a little and changed our methods in shooting and got on to the stunt of drilling more holes and getting a slower grade of powder. We could not load as much coal in one day as we could before, but we did succeed in in. creasing our lump coal percentage four and a half per cent over the hand method, and that is quite a factor-quite an important factor and since our domestic trade is over with, we loosened up on the shooting and we are running about the same as we did with the hand loading, maybe a half per cent more, or one per cent, but pretty much the same. MR. SHUBART: Your coal is very high? MR. BOTTOMLEY: Yes. MR. SHUBART: Have you tried sunbbing the coal before shooting? MR. BOTTOMLEY: No, we have not tried that. It is very hard coal to shoot; we have no defined cleavage in our coal. It is the worst coal I ever saw to shoot. We do not try to snub it. Formerly, as I said, the miners drilled four holes, pretty well up near the top, and then four holes down, within about three feet of the bottom. It is the same thing as a snub shot, and that we find is the best method for shooting the coal. We have not tried any mechanical device for snubbing as yet. SECRETARY SHUBART: At one mine I saw snubbing tried with a Jeffrey undercutter with a seven-foot Jeffrey bar. This mine, by the way, is very similar to Mr. Bottomley's condition. They have very high coal, so the snub cut is a small percentage. They cut a seven foot undercut and raise the machine on an eight inch tie and undercut five feet to give the effect of a snub cut, 14 inches at the front of the cut, and then six inches at the back of the cut. They made a very marked increase in lump. (The bug dust would be a small percentage of the total coal), and they increased the percentage of the slack at the same time. They found a decrease by reason of the easier shooting of about 15 per cent in their slack. In other words their nut and lump coal ran considerably higher and their slack decreased 5 per cent with the snubbing cut. Mr. Bottomley, I believe, understands those conditions.

Jan 1, 1926

T. T. READ, BUREAU OF MINES: Mr. McAuliffe has asked a very practical question. Expressed in another way, the question is: If we have decided to use rock dust to prevent coal dust from exploding, have we got to take rock, that is, solid material,, break it up and finally grind it into dust (and fine grinding is very expensive), or can we take material that is already in a pretty fine state of subdivision and thereby save the expense of pulverizing it? Most of the preceding discussion has been from the view-point of practical experience, and I should like to suggest that we have not had enough practical experience in rock dusting to be able to answer this question, from the viewpoint of experience, with the degree of definiteness that Mr. McAuliffe desires. With your permission I will discuss the matter briefly from the theoretical standpoint, because after all the theoretical considerations, insofar as we understand them correctly, will apply to every' case, whereas in coming to a decision on this matter it will be necessary to take into consideration local conditions, which will necessarily vary in every case. Considering the matter in a rather elementary way, the first point is: What makes coal dust explode? The air of this room is full of dust at the present moment, even though we do not notice it. If you were to close up the room for a week, enough dust would settle on the floor so you could write your name on it. Of course, the dust which is in the air of this room is not coal dust but even if it were coal dust and you were to bring an open light in' here we all know that the dust would not explode. The reason for that is that the dust particles are not close enough together for the flame to propagate itself from one to the next. You will probably be able to see in the demonstration in the gallery on Saturday that the coal dust explosion is practically a very rapid burning of the dust. When you light one piece of dust it burns and gives out heat and if there is another piece of dust close enough to it so that the heat from the first piece is able to bring a second piece up to the burning temperature, then the flame will propagate itself through the mixture. But, if the particles are so far apart in the air that the' heat from one particle is dissipated before it reaches an adjoining one, and is therefore not able to bring the second particle up to the burning temperature, then the flame will not propagate. To get a coal dust explosion, it is not sufficient to have coal dust suspended in the air. The coal dust particles must be close enough together in the air so that the heat from one burning particle is able to heat the adjoining particles up to the point at which they will burn. There has been some discussion of the size of dust particles that will cause an explosion to propagate, and it has been pointed out that the minus 200-mesh dust is the most dangerous, and that particles coarser than 20-mesh will not propagate an explosion. There are two reasons for that. A large particle has very much smaller surface in proportion to its weight than a small particle has. You know the old story about the Indian who when asked how he could go around in cold weather without any clothes on said that an Indian was all face. A 200-mesh particle is almost all surface and there= fore is able to burn almost instantaneously, which means that it gives out its heat almost instantaneously, whereas a large particle with less surface in proportion to its weight burns more slowly, gives out its heat more slowly, and the heat has more time to be dissipated. The second reason why coarse dust does not easily propagate a flame is because it is so hard to make it

Jan 1, 1924

By H. Nemutolluhi

Discussion by G.E. Agar In the April issue of Mining Engineering there is a technical note "New size laboratory ball mill for Bond Work Index determination" written by M. Nematollahi which is very confusing. My recollection is that a description of an experimental procedure should be such that someone skilled in the art should be able to reproduce the results. Applying this test to this particular article would according to me cause a failure to be registered. There are apparently three batch laboratory test procedures referred to in the article. One of these is the traditional Bond test with all its limitations such as dry grinding followed by exclusively dry screening, two attributes which fail to simulate conventional industrial grinding. There is a second procedure (NSBM) which the author is advocating as an improvement of the Bond procedure but from the description I doubt that anyone would be able to repeat the procedure. For instance, is the grinding to be done wet or dry, if wet at what pulp density, and how is the screening to he done, wet or dry or a combination? On top of that uncertainty the author refers to a simplified "Anaconda" test. No reference is provided for this procedure and in the text the results of the technique are referred to "Denver wet ball mill" results and say nothing of Anaconda results. Reply by H. Nematollahi I think that the method proposed to determine the Bond Work Index in this paper is clearly described in the paper as follows: •The method of grinding is dry (Ref. paragraph I, subject Method description); •The size of ball mill, the quantity and size of balls are noted (Ref. paragraph 1, subject Test equipment); and The test procedure is described in detail (Ref. paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, subject Test procedure). As it is noted in the paper, the test has been worked out under the same condition as Standard Bond Test with ball mill, so dry (screening should be dry also), but using a smaller ball mill and a smaller quantity of sample. Considering the above mentioned points, I believe that the method has been fully and clearly described and it ought to be repeatable as well. The Anaconda test is a method for determination of Work Index and could be done by any types of laboratory wet ball mill (Yan, R.F., et al., cf. References). I applied this method using a laboratory Denver ball mill (Ref. paragraph I subject Determining the Bond Work Index). So the results referred to Denver wet ball mill can be equated the same as Anaconda method.

Jan 1, 1996

By Jay F. Smith

The Alan Wood BOF Shop consists of two 140 ton furnaces with a rated yearly capacity of 1-1/4 million ingot tons, he hot metal for the BOF Shop is supplied by two 18 foot blast furnaces which produce an average of 2000 tons per day, To achieve the rated ingot ton capacity with this limited supply of hot metal, the preheating of scrap is necessary. This is accomplished in the furnace by using an oxygen-natural gas burner. Piping Arrangement The natural gas and oxygen are piped into the Shop through 8-inch lines to their respective valving stations. As can be seen from Figure 1, the flow of natural gas passes through a flow control valve which is common to both furnaces, after which it divides into two 6-inch lines forming two identical and independent gas control lines, one for each furnace.

Jan 1, 1972

By B. E. Grant

There are several exceptions from the practical operating viewpoint that might be taken with the paper. The author recommends using a "curve" in plotting safety factors of ropes and suggests that the U. S. Bureau of Mines change its present "step curve" method to the "curve" method. From an engineering theoretical point of view that is possible, but from a practical standpoint it is not possible. Rope manufacturers fabricate their ropes in diameter gradients of 1/16 in. to 1/4 in. which automatically sets up a step pattern gradient. If ropes were manufactured in the diameter gradients of 1/1000 of an inch or thereabouts, the curve method could be used. Also, from a practical standpoint, if an operator is to hoist from a depth of 4000 ft, for example, he will determine the size of the rope necessary for that depth, and it is only natural that he will have safety factor to spare at lesser depths, and in plotting this excess capacity the natural end result is a curve. The U. S. Bureau of Mines tables are set up so that the operator will know what size rope at the required safety factor he will need at his maximum depth. He is not concerned with lesser depths. W. A. Boyer (author's reply)-Mr. Grant states, "Rope manufacturers fabricate their ropes in diameter gradients of 1/16" to 1/4" which automatically sets up a step pattern gradient." There is no connection or relationship between the "size" pattern gradient and the present "factor of safety" step pattern gradient. The inherent factor of safety values for any particular size of rope with a given connected load when plotted for various depths is a curve, and with modern rope material and construction the inherent factor of safety curve is quite far removed from the present recommended factor of safety step curve. This is shown quite clearly in Figs. 3 and 4 of my paper.

Jan 11, 1954

By L. W. Saperstein

P.J. Ehret By and large, I agree with many of the precepts discussed in the Saperstein paper. I believe there is much more that can be done on the local level to involve both government and planning in the mine permit review process. Admittedly, much can be done to improve discussion between the state regulatory authority, local authorities, and mine operators. However, I strongly disagree, as suggested in the paper's conclusion, that such a system, as outlined in Saperstein's paper, could result in a reduction of review time or a lowering in the cost of permitting. The implementation of such a system by its very nature would only add a new level of bureaucracy to an already cumbersome process. This system, in my opinion, would only add to the cost of permitting and the time necessary to obtain a permit. Admittedly, it would achieve the result of adding local influence into the permitting process, but at what off-setting cost? It has been my professional first-hand experience and observation in the permitting and lands unsuitable processes to note that under the present system, local governments that do feel they have a stake in local mines and actively ad¬vocate their position (not simply comment), have had significant input into the conduct of mining and reclamation plans in their areas. Mining companies that mine in these areas are aware of local interests and attitudes, and do consider them in their plans. Simply put, local governments that want to get involved and want to play significant roles can and do. Those that do not advocate a position or have no input to offer do not. Although the present system is not as direct in effect in regard to local control as Saperstein's, it does work. It does so without the red tape that would result from developing miniature regulatory authorities in every county in which mining occurs. Although local input is important, there are many more sections of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) than Sections 508(a)(8) and 522(a)(3)(A) that also are important. It appears Saperstein's paper may overindulge these sections. An additional specific comment is made in regard to the statement that while local areas benefit from mining (wages, salaries, and purchases), they also endure environmental deterioration caused by mining affects. It is believed that the whole purpose for which SMCRA and its resulting regulations were enacted and developed was so mining would not be permitted if significant environmental deterioration could occur. Therefore, it could be argued that this point under current law is moot. Reply by L.W. Saperstein P.J. Ehret writes in a reasoned and rational way and makes some good points. The arguments in favor of central control of the designation process reflect all of the benefits associated with central environmental control: consistency of enforcement, efficiency of operation, ease of communication among enforcing agency, etc. Nonetheless, the decision to mine or not to mine is a landuse decision which, in substance, is similar to the decision to build a shopping mall, a new highway, or a housing subdivision. Although, state and federal governments' interests in the protection of public welfare are real and are expressed properly in mining laws and mining enforcement agencies (OSM, Illinois Department of Mines and Minerals, etc). I continue to maintain that the permitting and designation processes should originate with local government, which is in keeping with the American tradition of delegation of the land-use decision to local or regional government.

Jan 4, 1984