Search Documents

K. W. Turner, Sail Francisco, Cal. (communication to the Secretary*): The recent papers in the Transactions by Vogt,' Lindgren2 and Weed: on ore-deposits that have formed as a direct result of igneous intrusions, show that deposits of this class are widely distributed over the world, and are occasionally of commercial value. This is especially true if we consider under this head all deposits in the zone of contactrnletamorphism, the origin of which may be ascribed to the gases and vapors generated by the heat of the intrusive rock. Mr. Smith's description of the Chillagoe garnet-formations containing copper, leads one to regard these depoaits as of contactrmetamorphic origin, although he gives certain reaeons for supposing them to be of igneous origin.

Jan 1, 1904

R. V. Norris, Wilkes-Barre, Pa. (communication to the Secretary*):—Mr. Stow's paper presents a series of arguments, numbered from 1 to 18, concerning the relative merits of four systems of colliery-ventilation, designated by the author as " plain pressure-ventilation," " plain exhaust-ventilation," " obstructed pressure-ventilation," and " obstructed exhaust-ventilation." These arguments are subsequently compared by means of tables, in which an arbitrary numerical value is assigned to each, and which consequently serve no other purpose than that of showing his opinions and predilections, as indicated by his assignment of the said numerical values. In addition to this general summary, Mr. Stow intimates his preference for a fifth method of colliery-ventilation—namely, what he calls " alternating pressure-ventilation," which consists in the running of the fan at "pressure " during working-hours, and as an " exhaust" between shifts—a system which he proposes as, perhaps, new, yet which he thinks deserves recognition " as a standard form." This proposed " standard form " is not to be found in practice ; and I think it would be impracticable in gaseous mines of large extent, for the following reasons: 1. It takes considerable time to reverse the air-current in a large mine; and the reversal would involve a period of complete stoppage of ventilation, long enough to permit serious accumulations of gas. 2. In shaft- and slope-mines, at least, it is hardly practicable to have " every man out of the mine" during the night, and certainly impracticable to avoid keeping mules and horses inside. 3. The doors necessary to divide and direct the air-current are properly hung to open against the air-pressure; and, unless

Jan 1, 1910

Mr. Tays (communication to the Secretary): Mr. Wynne's criticism of my paper* brings forward a few points which are really important, and might properly have been considered in the original paper. By calling attention to them he has rendered me a service. It is quite true, as Mr. Wynne says, that, in the tests reported by me, the Bryan mill was always working at a relative disadvantage, and my comparison of the work of this mill with that of the stamp-battery should be interpreted, therefore, so much the more favorably to the mill. Of course, wire screens can be used to advantage on the Bryan mill, if they are not of smaller size than 30-mesh; but

Jan 1, 1902

Charles Catlett, Staunton, Virginia (communication to the Secretary*): I have had occasion to examine a few of the irondeposits in the immediate section of which Mr. Watson speaks, but have not had an opportunity to visit any of the well-known manganese-deposits. I find the former can be very safely read in light of the information which it is possible to get from the same measnres farther. north, where they are less completely decomposed. In the same way all of his conclusions in regard to the geology of the manganese-deposits bear out their occurrence in Virginia, when we allow for the far more complete decomposition in the section he has so carefully studied. Judging from the same measures farther north, I think he will be safe in agreeing even further with Penrose as to the origin of these ores. Some years ago I carried on prospecting work in these measures in Virginia, in which the iron-ore and manganese-ore were followed down to undecomposed material, and in which their occurrence along a definite line of stratification, and apparently a part of the original bedding, was plainly shown. This is unusual, however, even in the section of which I speak. At Crimora, Virginia, the decomposition is quite complete; at the same time the results of some hydraulic work, which has been done there, disclosed, at the time of my last visit, the manganese interbedded in the residual clay along a definite and distinct plane parallel to the bedding of the underlying quartzite, and which, as is shown at other points, corresponds with the plane of the original material. In view of the phosphorus reported by Mr. Watson as existing in the Cartersville ores, and the not uncommonly prohibitive amount in southern ores, I am interested to know whether

Jan 1, 1904

Gus C. Henning, New York City: In taking up the discussion of these specifications it is necessary that I give definitions of what I understand under the term " Specifications." There may be three kinds, viz.: (1) Specifications in general; (2) Standard Specifications; (3) Standard International Specifications. 1. A Specification is a document used in commerce which should clearly define the qualities of material to be supplied by the producer, the tests which shall be applied for their determination, and the methods which shall be applied for the purpose of determining that the entire product shall possess such qualities, properties and finish as are desired. The terms used in such document must be applied in accordance with their strict technical definitions as used by those most conversant with them, and the language should be of such accuracy that there can be but a single interpretation of each and every clause. A specification is a part of a contract, and should be legally perfect and accurate. Inaccuracy of definition and dic-

Jan 1, 1903

R. Trimble, Pittsburg, Pa (communication to the Secretary) : There are in the proposed specifications only two points on which I wish to comment at this time.

Jan 1, 1902

In Mr. Weed's interesting paper, frequent reference is made to the Cananea copper-deposits, which are said to have been so vigorously exploited that they produced 14,000,000 Ib. of copper in 1901. The ore-bodies which yielded this large quantity of metal are described as a product of contact-metamorphism, and in Mr. Weed's genetic classification of such deposits, they receive a place under the sub-heading, "Deposits impregnating and replacing beds of contact-zone."* They are considered by Mr. Weed to represent a special type under this head, and are further classified as: " l. Chalcopyrite deposits: (a) Pyrrhotite ores; (6) Magnetite ores, Cananea type." In condensing much information into a comparatively small space, the presentation of a subject may be so abbreviated as to detract from its clearness. The situation at La Cananea, considering its importance from an economic as well as scientific standpoint, may he worthy of more detailed description. As Mr. Weed rightly remarks, " structural differences are so important, and have SO marked a bearing, not alone on the theory of their genesis, hut also on the working of the deposits and a determination of their value as mines, that they merit a full discussion."† It is my present purpose: (1) to show that it is doubtful whether the copper of La Cananea is mined, except to a limited

Jan 1, 1903

MR. Woo's succinct description of the mining and smelting of silver-lead in Mongolia, with the roasting-and-reduction process and cupellation, has much interest as a picture of methods that not only may have been in use, as he suggests, a thousand years ago, long before the existence of mining schools or chemical laboratories, but probably vary little, if at all, from the practice of prehistoric times, when King Priam's handsome silver vases, cups and bowls were formed. For it is highly improbable that such large objects were made from comparatively rare native silver, and the metal must have been smelted from ore, and most likely in great part from galena,, with cupellation of the lead. Dr. W. A. P. Martin, in his excellent book on the Lore of Cathay, points out that Chinese alchemy is over 2000 years old, antedating the European by at least six centuries; and he infers that the Chinese skill in metallurgy and many branches of practical chemistry owes its origin to " those early devotees of the experimental philosophy who passed their lives among the fumes of the alembic." Those alchemists, however, may have more likely derived some of their leading ideas from the mys terious, and at that time wholly unexplainable results observed in already very ancient metallurgical processes; in which, for example, certain stones were transmuted, as it were, into metals widely divergent in character from their ores, and even silver and gold were obtained from the most unlikely-looking mate rials. It is therefore, in any case, not improbable that the Chinese may have preceded western nations in the discovery of metallurgical methods. At all events, it is now evident that the Japanese acquired these arts from China, the former source of all their higher civilization. My own observation of old-fashioned silver-smelt ing at Hosokura, on the main island of Japan, and about 220

Jan 1, 1903

Robert W. Hunt, Chicago, Ill.:—It has been my good fortune to know of this development of Mr. York's for some time, and I think he will permit me to say that this is not the first demonstration that he has made of his method for rolling difficult shapes, and which, as he has stated, had in the past been regarded as practically impossible. I have good reason to know that Mr. York has been successful on other lines, because I myself went through a period of professional disrepute for having reported favorably on his methods, which received discredit up to the time that it was practically demonstrated that his claims were true ones. Years ago Mr. York built a mill at Duluth, Minn., for the production of structural shapes, and notably of what might be called balanced beams—beams that did not have flanges of restricted width. His scheme was to produce beams with flanges so wide that they could be used in place of built-up beams. The mill, of course, went through the difficulties that such a mill would have to encounter. I mas called upon to make an examination of the property and report. These beams were rolled on a universal mill—a mill which would admit of various-sized sections without change of rolls. I was convinced that Mr. York could do it, and I so reported. Having received condemnation and ridicule for having taken that position, later on I was glad to find that Mr. John Fritz had come to the same conclusion, and had so reported. I concluded we both could rest content, while awaiting developments. Later still, as we all know, there was another difficulty that Mr. York met with—namely, that the architects or structural engineers would not accept his proposed sections. That is still a great difficulty in America. Later, the Grey mill came into successful operation in Luxemburg, producing such sections, which are being used in England and on the Continent. In fact, the whole process, both from a commercial and a mechanical point of view, is a success. The Bethlehem Steel Co., Bethlehem, Pa.,

Jan 1, 1907

By E. C. Robertson

D.G. Wilder I found the suggestion that the amount of displacement of a fault can be numerically related to the thickness of gouge or breccia to be both intuitively satisfying and intriguing. I have long agreed that there is some type of relationship between the amount of gouge and the amount of displacement of faults. I congratulate the author for developing a numerical relationship between them. However, I am concerned that the limits for applying this relationship be fully understood. An underlying assumption in this approach is that there is either a uniform thickness of gouge or breccia along a given fault or the thickness does not vary widely. Since it is not always possible to confirm this, the displacements derived by this method should be viewed with caution unless significant fault extent can be observed. At the Nevada Test Site, in drifts constructed in granite for test emplacement of spent nuclear reactor fuel, we found a fault with 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gouge. Within a few meters of this location, the fault had no clay gouge, but rather consisted of a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides. Based on Fig. 1, the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness of gouge would indicate a displacement in excess of 30 m (98 ft). However, no gouge thickness would indicate essentially no displacement. Based on a quartz vein that terminated on the fault, and is not identified nearby, an estimated displacement of more than a few meters was made. This estimate is consistent with that obtained using the regression line proposed in the paper if the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness for the gouge is used. However, using the regression curves with zero thickness would not yield results consistent with what was observed in the field. Therefore, it is important to recognize that the suggested procedure would properly yield a range of probable displacements. ? *Work performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract W-7405-Eng-48. Reply by E.C. Robertson It is certainly true that the t (thickness) of gg-bx (gouge and breccia) on a fault does vary along the fault. My observations have been that near the termination of a fault, the displacement d is small and the t is also small, whereas the maximum d and t will usually be found in the central part of the fault. The information on gg-bx and t of the fault found in granite in the NTS tunnel by Mr. Wilder could be interpreted somewhat differently than he does. He speaks of the fault changing within a few meters from 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gg to "a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides," but no gg. The highly fractured rock may be taken to be bx, rock not so finely ground as gg but still crushed by the fault movement, equivalent to the gg in my usage, and probably occupying about the same t. Mr. Wilder's estimates for the fault in the NTS tunnel for t of 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) and for d of a quartz vein, in excess of "a few meters," would place the point on the low side of the central trend line in my Fig. 1, at the lower limit. There is, of course, a problem with determining d using displacement of only one planar surface. It would be greater or lesser depending on the rake of the movement. Finally, estimating the d of a fault from its t should be made with awareness of our present uncertainties, as pointed out by Mr. Wilder. Although the central trend line in my Fig. 1 has a ratio of d/t of 100, I have put the limiting ratios at 10 and 1000. Understanding of the values of the ratio will be improved only with collection of more data, for which the discussion of Mr. Wilder is much appreciated. G.C. Waterman E.C. Robertson's paper provides significant information to a geologist attempting to deduce fault offset by noting the products of structural dislocation. However, considerable mapping in underground and open-pit mines, and examination of structures produced in different geological settings, have convinced me that gouge and breccia thickness are controlled by geological conditions and fault movement. The following paragraphs suggest geological variables that control them. 1. Depth of Loading A near-surface fault resulting from tensional stress has more breccia/gouge than is produced by a similar stress at considerable depth. A deep-loaded compressional stress may produce a linear zone of schist, or structural dislocation may occur along an earlier formed belt of schist. Such "shear zones" are common in Canadian mines in precambrian rocks. In neither case can offset be directly deduced by an analysis of the minimal gouge/breccia in the shistose rocks. At greater depth, stress may be partially to wholly relieved by flowage. I vividly recall first noting the regional "Midas Thrust" in the Lark mine, Bingham Mining District, UT (where we called the structure the North Fault). My recorded notes, as I remember them, showed a narrow gouge streak separated the `Jordan" and "Commercial" limestone units from impure, muddy limestone beds of uncertain stratigraphic position. The visible structure did not indicate the great importance of this premineral fault

Jan 12, 1984

By D. G. Wilder

D.G. Wilder I found the suggestion that the amount of displacement of a fault can be numerically related to the thickness of gouge or breccia to be both intuitively satisfying and intriguing. I have long agreed that there is some type of relationship between the amount of gouge and the amount of displacement of faults. I congratulate the author for developing a numerical relationship between them. However, I am concerned that the limits for applying this relationship be fully understood. An underlying assumption in this approach is that there is either a uniform thickness of gouge or breccia along a given fault or the thickness does not vary widely. Since it is not always possible to confirm this, the displacements derived by this method should be viewed with caution unless significant fault extent can be observed. At the Nevada Test Site, in drifts constructed in granite for test emplacement of spent nuclear reactor fuel, we found a fault with 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gouge. Within a few meters of this location, the fault had no clay gouge, but rather consisted of a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides. Based on Fig. 1, the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness of gouge would indicate a displacement in excess of 30 m (98 ft). However, no gouge thickness would indicate essentially no displacement. Based on a quartz vein that terminated on the fault, and is not identified nearby, an estimated displacement of more than a few meters was made. This estimate is consistent with that obtained using the regression line proposed in the paper if the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness for the gouge is used. However, using the regression curves with zero thickness would not yield results consistent with what was observed in the field. Therefore, it is important to recognize that the suggested procedure would properly yield a range of probable displacements. ? *Work performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract W-7405-Eng-48. Reply by E.C. Robertson It is certainly true that the t (thickness) of gg-bx (gouge and breccia) on a fault does vary along the fault. My observations have been that near the termination of a fault, the displacement d is small and the t is also small, whereas the maximum d and t will usually be found in the central part of the fault. The information on gg-bx and t of the fault found in granite in the NTS tunnel by Mr. Wilder could be interpreted somewhat differently than he does. He speaks of the fault changing within a few meters from 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gg to "a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides," but no gg. The highly fractured rock may be taken to be bx, rock not so finely ground as gg but still crushed by the fault movement, equivalent to the gg in my usage, and probably occupying about the same t. Mr. Wilder's estimates for the fault in the NTS tunnel for t of 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) and for d of a quartz vein, in excess of "a few meters," would place the point on the low side of the central trend line in my Fig. 1, at the lower limit. There is, of course, a problem with determining d using displacement of only one planar surface. It would be greater or lesser depending on the rake of the movement. Finally, estimating the d of a fault from its t should be made with awareness of our present uncertainties, as pointed out by Mr. Wilder. Although the central trend line in my Fig. 1 has a ratio of d/t of 100, I have put the limiting ratios at 10 and 1000. Understanding of the values of the ratio will be improved only with collection of more data, for which the discussion of Mr. Wilder is much appreciated. ? G.C. Waterman E.C. Robertson's paper provides significant information to a geologist attempting to deduce fault offset by noting the products of structural dislocation. However, considerable mapping in underground and open-pit mines, and examination of structures produced in different geological settings, have convinced me that gouge and breccia thickness are controlled by geological conditions and fault movement. The following paragraphs suggest geological variables that control them. 1. Depth of Loading A near-surface fault resulting from tensional stress has more breccia/gouge than is produced by a similar stress at considerable depth. A deep-loaded compressional stress may produce a linear zone of schist, or structural dislocation may occur along an earlier formed belt of schist. Such "shear zones" are common in Canadian mines in precambrian rocks. In neither case can offset be directly deduced by an analysis of the minimal gouge/breccia in the shistose rocks. At greater depth, stress may be partially to wholly relieved by flowage. I vividly recall first noting the regional "Midas Thrust" in the Lark mine, Bingham Mining District, UT (where we called the structure the North Fault). My recorded notes, as I remember them, showed a narrow gouge streak separated the "Jordan" and "Commercial" limestone units from impure, muddy limestone beds of uncertain stratigraphic position. The visible structure did not indicate the great importance of this premineral fault

Jan 1, 1985

By K. A. Grace

K.A. Grace's article advocates usage of the terms describing resources as defined by the US Bureau of Mines (USBM) and the US Geological Survey (USGS). Originally recommended in 1943, the terms were revised in 1976 and again in 1980. Mr. Grace further recommends that the term reserves should be severely restricted and that it should encompass mining and processing factors. The list of references quoted in the article does not, however, mention the study concerning reserves that was made over a period of almost four years by a joint Committee on Definitions. This committee was sponsored by three societies - the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers (AIME), the Society of Economic Geologists (SEG), and the American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG). Most of the detailed work was done by a working party appointed by the Society of Mining Engineers (SME) of AIME. After studying previous definitions in the US as well as in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, France, and other European countries, the following definitions were proposed and accepted in 1974 by the SME board of directors. (Ore reserve definitions in Rhodesia, South Africa, or New Zealand were not mentioned as having been reviewed.) Table 1 lists definitions from MINING ENGINEERING, July 1975. Notice in Table 1 it was mentioned, under Resources, that the definitions of reserves were recommended for the purposes of commercial evaluation. It was further stated that the terminology adopted by the USBM and the USGS, as released to the public, covering resources, was recognized as such. Mr. Grace also recommends that reserve calculations should allow for future losses in ore tonnage, ore grade, milling, and smelting. Unfortunately, it might take years to develop a prospect after it has been discovered. Mining methods have to be tested before being finalized in order to know what tonnage of ore is going to be lost, or how much dilution is likely to occur. The same problems are present in concentrating or in smelting. Operating mines usually know how mined grade compares with ore reserve grade. They can usually predict fairly closely what their final metal recoveries are probably going to be. It is, however, expecting too much to have to delay quoting reserves from say a recently drilled prospect. Any responsible mining geologist or mining engineer (or company for that matter) should state several things about an ore reserve calculation: that it is or is not a preliminary estimate only; that estimated grades have not been diluted to allow for a future, as yet unknown, mining method; that metal recoveries are or are not only tentative, based perhaps on drill hole samples only or on no metallurgical testing at all. Reserves of a partially explored prospect are always quoted when it becomes necessary to raise capital. If they are described as preliminary only (really just tonnage and grade estimates and not true "reserves") in addition to being accompanied by some of the items just mentioned, nobody is going to be misled. If, on the other hand, a report by a member of the SME or SEG is intentionally misleading, the individual must be reported and eventually disbarred from his or her society. To summarize, let us stay with the definitions of ore, ore reserves, and related terms as recommended and accepted by SME. I might add that on occasion I have used a fourth category in my ore reserve calculations, namely Geologically Possible Ore. This category is more or less the same as Inferred ore defined by the USBM and USGS. I have never given a grade to this category, which may be based only on geological mapping, geochemical sampling, or geophysical traversing.

Jan 8, 1985

A. Cook K.A. Grace's article advocates usage of the terms describing resources as defined by the US Bureau of Mines (USBM) and the US Geological Survey (USGS). Originally recommended in 1943, the terms were revised in 1976 and again in 1980. Mr. Grace further recommends that the term reserves should be severely restricted and that it should encompass mining and processing factors. The list of references quoted in the article does not, however, mention the study concerning reserves that was made over a period of almost four years by a joint Committee on Definitions. This committee was sponsored by three societies - the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers (AIME), the Society of Economic Geologists (SEG), and the American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG). Most of the detailed work was done by a working party appointed by the Society of Mining Engineers (SME) of AIME. After studying previous definitions in the US as well as in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, France, and other European countries, the following definitions were proposed and accepted in 1974 by the SME board of directors. (Ore reserve definitions in Rhodesia, South Africa, or New Zealand were not mentioned as having been reviewed. Table 1 lists definitions from MINING ENGINEERING, July 1975. Notice in Table 1 it was mentioned, under Resources, that the definitions of reserves were recommended for the purposes of commercial evaluation. It was further stated that the terminology adopted by the USBM and the USGS, as released to the public, covering resources, was recognized as such. Mr. Grace also recommends that reserve calculations should allow for future losses in ore tonnage, ore grade, milling, and smelting. Unfortunately, it might take years to develop a prospect after it has been discovered. Mining methods have to be tested before being finalized in order to know what tonnage of ore is going to be lost, or how much dilution is likely to occur. The same problems are present in concentrating or in smelting. Operating mines usually know how mined grade compares with ore reserve grade. They can usually predict fairly closely what their final metal recoveries are probably going to be. It is, however, expecting too much to have to delay quoting reserves from say a recently drilled prospect. Any responsible mining geologist or mining engineer (or company for that matter) should state several things about an ore reserve calculation: that it is or is not a preliminary estimate only; that estimated grades have not been diluted to allow for a future, as yet unknown, mining method; that metal recoveries are or are not only tentative, based perhaps on drill hole samples only or on no metallurgical testing at all. [ ] Reserves of a partially explored prospect are always quoted when it becomes necessary to raise capital. If they are described as preliminary only (really just tonnage and grade estimates and not true "reserves") in addition to being accompanied by some of the items just mentioned, nobody is going to be misled. If, on the other hand, a report by a member of the SME or SEG is intentionally misleading, the individual must be reported and eventually disbarred from his or her society. To summarize, let us stay with the definitions of ore, ore reserves, and related terms as recommended and accepted by SME. I might add that on occasion I have used a fourth category in my ore reserve calculations, namely Geologically Possible Ore. This category is more or less the same as Inferred ore defined by the USBM and USGS. I have never given a grade to this category, which may be based only on geological mapping, geochemical sampling, or geophysical traversing. ?

Jan 1, 1986

By D. F. Ball, P. R. Dawson, J. T. Fitton

Report of discussion at December, 1970, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) and contributed remarks on the paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, September, 1970, pp. C189-96, plus the authors' replies. Contributors included Cohen E., Hope B., Wasse D.G., Shakespeare A.G., Burwood D.S., Jones H.A., Dartnell J., Carter G.C., Henderson T.A., Relf G. and Clark S.W.

Dec 1, 1971

By S. Y. Ezz

Report of discussion at February, 1971, IMM general meeting (Chairman : M. J. Cahalan, President) of a paper published in Transactions/ Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, September, 1970, pp. C226-C233 with contributions by Wild R. and Astier J. on fluidised bed reduction of iron ore fines

Dec 1, 1971

By B. W. Hester

Report of discussion at January, 1971, general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) of the paper published in Transactions/Section B (Applied Earth Science), vol. 79, May, 1970, pp. B60-B67, and contributed remarks. Comments were made by Taylor J.T.M., James C.H., Lethbridge R.F. and Heath K.C.G.

Dec 1, 1971

By A. W. Fletcher

Report of discussion at February, 1971, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J, Cahalan President) of a paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, December, 1970, pp. C247-52, and contributed remarks. Contributions are included from: Cahalan M.J., giving figures related to leaching Cu from pyrite at Rio Tinto 1880-1910; Noakes F.D.L.; Embling P.M.K.; Bradshaw A.V.; Le Roux N.W.; Kelly D.P.; and Tuovinen O.H. Questions were raised regarding impurity removal, effects of light and ultraviolet light on the bacteria, the economics of solvent extraction and the possibilities for other organisms or other metals

Dec 1, 1971

By J. R. Hammond, I. C. Herbert

Report of discussion at October, 1970, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) and contributed remarks on the paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, June, 1970, pp. C128-36 and introduced by I.C. Herbert. Contributors were von Struve G., on the application of balling discs and the use of basic additives; Young P.A., asking for details of the drying, grinding, balling, induration and specification testing equipment and processes; Davison J. on pellet swelling properties and Carter G.C. on disc operation, refractories and green ball properties.

Dec 1, 1971

By S. V. Shiraishi, H. B. Bell

Report of discussion at February, 1971, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) of a paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, June, 1970, pp. C120-C127, with a contribution by Wright P.A. on the miscibility gap

Dec 1, 1971

By R. F. Shurtz

R. Duval (Mining Engineer, Ancien eleve de PEcole Polytechnique, Paris, France) I do not agree with the Eq. 3, reading: m =1/100- [(0.214x30.4) + (0.7B6 x0.00)] =6.5pct CaO If 0.214 and0.786 were proportions by weight, the equation would represent the well known mixtures law of the conventional arithmetics and 6. 5 pct CaO would be the correct average content. But it is not the case as the author states: "In samples consisting of single grains of mineral, those grains must, as already mentioned, be either of dolomite or magnesite. Since 78.6 pct of the deposit consists of magnesite and 21.4 pct of dolomite (excluding for present purpose the presence of other minerals), for any single grains picked at random the probability will be 0.214 that is it dolomite and0.786 that is it magnesite. In 1000 such samples the expected numbers of dolomite and mapesite grains will be 214 and 786 respectively." 0.214 and 0.786 would be proportions by weigbt under the necessary condition that all grains of dole mite and magnesite should have an identical weight. Obviously it is not the case, as the specific gravities are not the same for mapesite and dolomite and the volumes of the grains are different. Furthermore, because of these differences the conditions for a random sampling are not fulfilled and we are not authorized to state that the probabilities are, respectively, 0.214 and 0.786. The author however makes a simple application of Eq. 1: M = 1/n— ? fi x i . n Should we deduce that this relation is wrohg? Not at all, but when applying Eq. 1 you must not overlook what it actually. means. Eq. 1 gives a definition of the arithmetic mean of a total of n observed values Xi and nothing else. But the average conteht of a deposit has not the same significance. It is the ratio between the weight of concerned mineral in the deposit and the total weight of the deposit. As from 1000 particles the 214 of dolomite and the 786 of magnesite have not the same weight, the two definitions do not concur, and when applying Eq. 1 the result is an arithmetic mean of figures which has no connection with what is named average contentof a deposit. The situation is similar to the calculation of an average velocity. If a car travels a first mile over at 30 miles per hr and a second mile over at 60 miles per hr, when applying formula 1 you find as average velocity for the 2 miles: 30+60 ------- - 45 miles per hour. Many people calculate in this way and they do not realize that a mistake is involved. In fact the definition of he average velocity for the 2 miles is the quotient of the distance of 2 miles by the time (in hours) necessary for 2 miles travel, i.e.: 2 ---------- = 40 miles per hr. 1 + 1 30 60 In other words, the average volocity wanted is not the arithmetic but the harmonic average of the two velocities. The above mentioned bias in the calculation of the average contents of deposits is frequent, even in the assessments made by experienced engineers and is independant of what is named the sampling error. In order to supress the bias and to be able to use Eq. 1, you must apply a correction. An example on the subject can be found in an article by Duval et al. in the January 1955 issue of the ''Annales des Mines" (French), page 19. R. F. Schurtz (Author's Reply) Mr. Duval's position is quite correct. The proportions shown for dolomite and magnesite., respectively, of 0.214 and 0.786 are, in fact, proportions by weight uncorrected for specific gravity. In our day to day operation of producing magnesite from these mines at a very substantial rate, we do not normally make corrections for the difference between the specific gravity of dolomite and that of magnesite. If these corrections are made in Eq. 3 as shown in my article, then the numbers of grains turn out to be in proportions of 0.226 dolomite and 0.774 mapesite instead of the values actually shown in the equation. For the purposes of our work, and in view of the inherently low accuracy of the data, this correction was not deemed worthwhile making.

Jan 1, 1961