Search Documents

By Victor J. Lynch

The Andover-Sulphur Hill mines are 12 miles northeast of Andover and 5 miles southeast of Newton, in Sussex County, N.J. The property is situated on the Lehigh Valley and Hudson River Railroad and half a mile east of U.S. Highway 206. It is connected with the main highway by a hard-surfaced county road. (See fig. 1.) Howard J. Hewitt of Lafayette, N.J., has under lease the Sulphur Hill tract, consisting of 28 acres, and has an option on the Tar Hill tract of 106 acres. The Tar Hill property adjoins the Sulphur Hill on the northeast. (See fig. 2.) The Andover-Sulphur Hill property is owned by the Lenape Corp. of Andover, N.J., while the Tar Hill tract is owned by the Crane Iron Co. of Phillipsburg, N.J. These mines produced iron ore during a period of about 100 years but have not been operated since 1880. Zinc and lead sulfides occur mixed with iron ores in the lower workings of the old mines. A diamond-drilling program was recommended to determine the extent of the sulfide mineralization in depth and also to explore further the iron-ore deposits on the property. The project was started October 6, 1942, and finished November 25, 1942.

Dec 1, 1947

By D. K. Ingram, G. L. Mowrey, T. R. Rehak

This paper summarizes fly rock and blast area security fatalities from 1989 to 1999 and examines the causative factors. Coal and nonmetal mining used about 43 billion pounds of explosives and blasting agents between1989 to 1999. A majority of this consumption was used at surface mines. Accident data indicates that fly rock and lack of blast area security were the primary causes of blasting related injuries in surface mining. Fatal injuries due to lack of blast area security were attributed to: failure to clear blast area; failure to follow instructions; inadequate guarding; inadequate blasting shelter; and unsafe location. Seven fatalities due to fly rock and lack of blast area security were reported in surface coal mines and six in nonmetal mines. Out of these, two fatalities (one each in coal and nonmetal mines) occurred outside the mine property. In the coal mining sector, two fatalities were attributed to fly rock, and five to lack of blast area security. In the nonmetal mining sector, three fatalities were attributed to fly rock, and three to lack of blast area security. Preventive measures include: ensuring that all personnel have evacuated the blast area during shot firing; using adequate blasting shelters for employees whose presence is required in the blast area; controlling and monitoring all entrances to the blast area; ensuring that the blast is properly designed, drilled, and loaded; and emphasizing education and training to enhance skill levels for implementation of engineering control techniques.

By Arno C. Fieldner

Forty years have elapsed since the Bureau of Mines was established on July 1, 1910, by Act of Congress. The convocation of this Sixth International Conference of Safety in Mines Research Directors, 24 days after our 40th birthday, seems to be an appropriate time for reviewing our contributions to mine safety research and the problems yet to be solved from the American point of view. Actually research on safety in coal mines was started by the United States Government in the Technologic Branch of the U. S. Geological Survey of the Department of the Interior in 1908, as a result of a succession of disastrous coal mine explosions in which many lives were lost. In 1910 this work was transferred to the newly created Bureau of Mines. 394 lives were lost annually per 100,000 men employed in the coal mines of the United States in the 5-year period ended in 1910, as compared to 203 lives lost annually in the 5-year period ended with 1949. In 1908 no safe, permissible types of explosives and no certified permissible equipment of any kind were used in American coal mines. Black powder was in universal use and open oil or acetylene lights were common in all but mines known to be gassy. Rock dusting was not practiced to limit propagation of explosions, nor was ventilation in many mines adequate, Our safety practice lagged behind that of foreign coal- mining countries and therefore one of the first steps in carrying out the Congressional Authorization of 1908 to investigate the causes of mine explosions was to obtain assistance from the leaders of mine safety research in foreign countries. At the request of Dr. Joseph H. Holmes, director of the Technologic Branch of the Geological Survey, James R. Garfield, Secretary of the Interior, obtained the cooperation of the Governments of England, Belgium and Germany in sending Captain Arthur Desborough, Inspector of Explosives in England, Mr. Victor Watteyne, Inspector-General of Mines in Belgium, and Mr. Carl Meissner, Counselor for Mines in Germany, to visit American mines and make recommendations for increasing safety and efficiency in mining coal in the United States.

Jun 1, 1950

By David C. Oyler, Paul W. Jeran, William P. Diamond

The Bureau of Mines is cooperating with the U.S. Department of Energy in a directional degasification project at the Emerald mine near Waynesburg, Pa. This project is designed to combine the highly successful underground horizontal degasification technology with surface drilling methods. The objective of this program is to demonstrate that directional drilling can be used as a technique for degasifying coalbeds ahead of mining to reduce the hazards of methane-air explosions in coal mines. The directional hole at the Emerald mine is designed to start vertically and enter the Pittsburgh coalbed horizontally. A 3-inch-pilot hole entered the Pittsburgh coalbecl at a vertical depth of 999 feet, The hole will be reamed to 8-3/4 inches in diameter, and 5-1/2-inch casing will be cemented in place. Three individual 3-inch-diameter, 3,000-foot horizontal gas collection holes will be drilled into the coalbed in a “bird foot” pattern. A corehole and vertical dewatering hole have been completed at the anticipated coalbed intercept. The dewatering hole was drilled to130 feet below the Pittsburgh coalbed, a depth of 900 feet, and 880 feet of 7-inch-OD casing was cemented in place. Seven vertical holes for monitoring the extent and progress of degasification have been drilled within the horizontal drilling area.

Jan 1, 1979

By Industrial Research Office

"The U.S. Bureau of Mines established on August 15, 1983, the Generic Mineral Technology Center for Respirable Dust within the Mining and Mineral Resources Research Institutes (MRIs) at The Pennsylvania State University and West Virginia University in association with participating MRIs at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Minnesota. The Center's research program has been developed with recognition of the stated objective of the Federal Mine Safety and Health laws which is to ""... permit each miner the opportunity to work underground during the period of his entire adult working life without incurring any disability from pneumoconiosis or any other occupation-related disease . . . ."" The Center's program is designed to permit an accelerated attack on the fundamental research problems for the control of respirable dust in mines.The primary goal of the Center is to reduce the incidence and severity of respirable dust disease through advancing the fundamental understanding of all aspects of respirable dust associated with mining and milling and the interaction of dust and lungs. The Generic Technology Center's research program explores these concerns with the objective of refining existing strategies and developing new respirable dust control techniques that are consistent with the fundamental dust-lung interaction processes that lead to mine worker disability. The work concentrates on: (1) control of dust generation; (2) dilution, dispersion and collection in mine airways; (3) characterization of dust particles; (4) interaction of dust and lungs; and (5) relationship of mine environment, geology, and seam characteristics to dust generation and mobility. The fundamental aspects of this work are applicable to the control of respirable dust problems in both hard rock mines and coal mines and to other dusts such as diesel-generated. The Center activities involve the training of engineers and scientists, graduate students and undergraduate students through their respective institutions, and the technology transfer to the industry. The Center also serves as the reference center for publications' in the respirable dust area.The Center is composed of faculty from the four universities/institutes listed above. The personnel, facilities and equipment that are available to the Center from these entities are diverse, complementary and comprehensive. More than fifty scientists, engineers; and medical personnel in the Center are engaged in respirable dust research. Additionally, the expertise and facilities of the NIOSH--Division of Respirable Disease Studies are available as a result of the existing relationship between NIOSH and West Virginia University.The breakdown of the dust research program into the five areas mentioned above recognizes the importance of an integrated fundamental research approach to the respirable dust problem compatible and complementary with the existing and ongoing U.S. Bureau of Mines activities. The specific projects in the research areas are a result of a careful evaluation of the past and ongoing research activities, the identification of areas where data and information are scarce, and awareness of the recommendation of the National Academy of Sciences Study on the Measurement and Control of Respirable Dust. Penn State is the administrative unit for the Center. Funding to date is nearly $6.5 million."

Aug 31, 1989

By David C. Oyler

The Bureau of Mines is cooperating with the U.S. Department of Energy in a directional degasification project at the Emerald mine near Waynesburg, Pa. This project is designed to combine the highly successful underground horizontal degasification technology with surface drilling methods. The objective of this program is to demonstrate that directional drilling can be used as a technique for degasifying coalbeds ahead of mining to reduce the hazards of methane-air explosions in coal mines. The directional hole at the Emerald mine is designed to start vertically and enter the Pittsburgh coalbed horizontally. A 3-inch-pilot hole entered the Pittsburgh coalbed at a vertical depth of 999 feet. The hole will be reamed to 8-3/4 inches in diameter, and 5-1/2-inch casing will be cemented in place. Three individual 3-inch-diameter, 3,000-foot horizontal gas collection holes will be drilled into the coalbed in a "bird foot" pattern. A corehole and vertical dewatering hole have been completed at the anticipated coalbed intercept. The dewatering hole was drilled to 130 feet below the Pittsburgh coalbed, a depth of 900 feet, and 880 feet of 7-inch-OD casing was cemented in place. Seven vertical holes for monitoring the extent and progress of degasification have been drilled within the horizontal drilling area.

Jan 1, 1979

By Bowles Oliver

"Modification of Quarry Process.Limestone beds are formed by processes of nature, processes that have been in operation for thousands and perhaps millions of years. Therefore, their com- position and physical properties are long-established and unalterable features over which man has no control. He must take them as he fields them.It is undoubtedly true that the character of lime depends largely on the nature of the parent limestone. A high-calcium lime cannot be manufactured from a dolomite, nor can a pure lime result from the calcination of an impure raw material. However, in the process of turning limestone into lime man is not entirely helpless in his control of quality. Even though a deposit is variable in character a single lime product of uniform quality may be produced by judicious quarrying. A single grade of product may not always be desired, the producer may wish to supply the needs of a variety of users each demanding U different grade or quality of lime such a series of graded products may be produced in part at least by modifying the quarry method. Thus, by changes in quarry practice a single product or a variety of products may be made. The latter problem will be considered at a later time, and the present paper devoted to the first named question' that of producing a single grade of lime from a deposit of variable rock,It is realized of course that uniformity in the product is influenced greatly by manufacturing processes such as calcining' hydrating' grinding or storage, but the present discussion is confined to the influence of raw materials only. In considering the various devices that may be employed it is realized that much remains to be learned, and it is hoped that many operators will contribute to the discussion as they have already done in connection with previous papers of this series."

May 1, 1923

"An active list of permissible explosives was published in September 1935 as part of United States Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 32S6, under the title ""Active List of Permissible Explosives and. Blasting Devices Approved. Prior to July 31, 1935."" This list included 154 brand names,Changes in the list that have been authorized subsequently placed 24 addi¬tional brands of permissible explosives on the active permissible list as a re¬sult of tests, changes in brand names, or transfer from the inactive list. Eight permissible explosives were transferred from the active to the inactive list. The present active permissible list contains 170 brand names. The brand names of the permissible explosives placed on the active list are as follows:Black Diamond Nu-Gel No. 4 By test.Black Diamond Special A,do.Burton 11, L. F. By change in name,Burton G, L. F. By test.Columbia B By change in name.Columbia C Do.Columbia D Do.Columbia E Do.Columbia. F Do.Columbia G Do.Columbia 1 Do.Columbia 2 D.Columbia 3 DoColumbia 4 Do.Columbia-Gel 1 Do.Columbia-Gel 2 Do.Genite 5, Do.Genite 7, Do.Genite G Do.Lump Coal C By test.Peerless No, 1 By transfer from inactivePeerless No. 8, L. F. Do.Tri-State Special No. 1 Do.Unilite No. 2 Do."

Dec 1, 1936

By T. M. Klemetti, G. M. Molinda, D. M. Pappas

Some of the most difficult coal mine roof in the U.S. can be found in the Illinois Basin. Factors contributing to the high roof fall rate include: weak moisture-sensitive roof rock, high horizontal stress, and limited longwall mining. The depth of cover ranges from 90-1,000 ft and roof damage from horizontal stress can be severe. Moisture sensitive-roof rock is common above the Springfield-Harrisburg Herrin #5 and #6 seams in the Illinois Basin, and contributes to roof skin deterioration. The roof fall rate increases significantly in the humid summer months. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has shown, using lab and field studies, that highly moisture-sensitive roof rock can be directly correlated to poor roof conditions. Controlling the skin is the key to reducing rock fall injuries, and roof screening is, by far, the best remedy. Illinois Basin coal operators have been successful in reducing the number of rock fall injuries in recent years. NIOSH has documented best practices for screen installation which has resulted in safe, efficient operations. Other solutions to skin failure include: the use of denser five bolts per row patterns to reduce spans between bolts, systematic supplemental support in intersections, straps and large pans protecting operators, and air conditioning to remove moisture from the intake air.

By Thomas J. Fisher, Christopher C. Jobes, Edward F. Fries

This report (Software Safety 2.2) is the third in a nine-part series of recommendations addressing the functional safety of processor-controlled mining equipment. It is part of a risk-based system safety process encompassing hardware, software, humans, and the operating environment for the equipment’s life cycle. Figure 1 shows a safety framework containing these recommendations. The reports in this series address the various life cycle stages of inception, design, approval and certification, commissioning, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. These recommendations were developed as a joint project between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Mine Safety and Health Administration. They are intended or use by mining companies, original equipment manufacturers, and aftermarket suppliers to these mining companies. Users of these reports are expected to consider the set in total during the design cycle. • 1.0 Safety Introduction.—This is an introductory report for the general mining industry. It provides basic system/software safety concepts, discusses the need for mining to address the functional safety of programmable electronics (PE), and includes the benefits of implementing a system/software safety program. • 2.1 System Safety and 2.2 Software Safety.—These reports draw heavily from International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard IEC 61508 [IEC 1998a,b,c,d,e,f,g] and other standards. The scope is “surface and underground safety-related mining systems employing embedded, networked, and non networked programmable electronics.” System safety seeks to design safety into all phases of the entire system. Software is a subsystem; thus, software safety is a part of the system’s safety .• 3.0 Safety File.—This report contains the documentation that demonstrates the level of safety built into the system and identifies limitations for the system’s use and operation. In essence, it is a “proof of safety” that the system and its operation meets the appropriate level of safety for the intended application. It starts from the beginning of the design, is maintained during the full lifecycle of the system, and provides administrative support for the safety program of the full system. • 4.0 Safety Assessment.—The independent assessment of the Safety File is addressed. It establishes consistent methods to determine the completeness and suitability of safety evidence and justifications. This assessment could be conducted by an independent third party. • 5.0 Safety Framework Guidance.—It is intended to supplement the safety framework reports with guidance providing users with additional information. The purpose is to assist users in applying the concepts presented. In other words, the safety framework is what needs to be don and the guidance is the how it can be done. The guidance information reinforces the concepts, describes various methodologies that can be used, and gives examples and references. It also gives information on the benefits and drawbacks of various methodologies. The guidance reports are not intended to promote a single methodology or to be an exhaustive treaty of the subject material. They provide information and references so that the user can more intelligently choose and implement the appropriate methodologies given the user’s application and capabilities. [ ]

Jan 9, 2001

By Thomas J. Fisher, John J. Sammarco, Gary L. Mowrey, Edward F. Fries

This report (Safety File 3.0) is the fourth in a nine-part series of recommendations addressing the functional safety of processor-controlled mining equipment. It is part of a risk-based system safety process encompassing hardware, software, humans, and the operating environment for the equipment’s life cycle. Figure 1 shows a safety framework containing these recommendations. The reports in this series address the various life cycle stages of inception, design, approval and certification, commissioning, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. These recommendations were developed as a joint project between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Mine Safety and Health Administration. They are intended for use by mining companies, original equipment manufacturers, and aftermarket suppliers to these mining companies. Users of these reports are expected to consider the set in total during the design cycle. • 1.0 Safety Introduction.—This is an introductory report for the general mining industry. It provides basic system/software safety concepts, discusses the need for mining to address the functional safety of programmable electronics (PE), and includes the benefits of implementing a system/software safety program. • 2.1 System Safety and 2.2 Software Safety.—These reports draw heavily from International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard IEC 61508 [IEC 1998a,b,c,d,e,f,g] and other standards. The scope is “surface and underground safety-related mining systems employing embedded, networked, and nonnetworked programmable electronics.” System safety seeks to design safety into all phases of the entire system. Software is a subsystem; thus, software safety is a part of the system’s safety. • 3.0 Safety File.—This report contains the documentation that demonstrates the level of safety built into the system and identifies limitations for the system’s use and operation. In essence, it is a “proof of safety” that the system and its operation meet the appropriate level of safety for the intended application. It starts from the beginning of the design, is maintained during the full lifecycle of the system, and provides administrative support for the safety program of the full system. • 4.0 Safety Assessment.—The independent assessment of the safety file is addressed. It establishes consistent methods to determine the completeness and suitability of safety evidence and justifications. This assessment could be conducted by an independent third party. • 5.0 Safety Framework Guidance.—It is intended to supplement the safety framework reports with guidance providing users with additional information. The purpose is to assist users in applying the concepts presented. In other words, the safety framework is what needs to be done and the guidance is the how it can be done. The guidance information reinforces the concepts, describes various methodologies that can be used, and gives examples and references. It also gives information on the benefits and drawbacks of various methodologies. The guidance reports are not intended to promote a single methodology or to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject material. They provide information and references so that the user can more intelligently choose and implement the appropriate methodologies given the user’s application and capabilities. [ ]

Jan 5, 2002

By John J. Sammarco, Edward F. Fries

This report (Independent Functional Safety Assessment 4.0) is the fifth in a nine-part series of recommendations addressing the functional safety of processor-controlled mining equipment. It is part of a risk-based system safety process encompassing hardware, software, humans, and the operating environment for the equipment’s life cycle. Figure 1 shows a safety framework containing these recommendations. The reports in this series address the various life cycle stages of inception, design, approval and certification, commissioning, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. These recommendations were developed as a joint project between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Mine Safety and Health Administration. They are intended for use by mining companies, original equipment manufacturers, and aftermarket suppliers to these mining companies. Users of these reports are expected to consider the set in total during the design cycle. • 1.0 Safety Introduction.—This is an introductory report for the general mining industry. It provides basic system/software safety concepts, discusses the need for mining to address the functional safety of programmable electronics (PE), and includes the benefits of implementing system/software safety program. • 2.1 System Safety and 2.2 Software Safety.—These reports draw heavily from International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard IEC 61508 [IEC 1998a,b,c,d,e,f,g] and other standards. The scope is “surface and underground safety-related mining systems employing embedded, networked, and nonnetworked programmable electronics.” System safety seeks to design safety into all phases of the entire system. Software is a subsystem; thus, software safety is a part of the system’s safety. • 3.0 Safety File.—This report contains the documentation that demonstrates the level of safety built into the system and identifies limitations for the system’s use and operation. In essence, it is a “proof of safety” that the system and its operation meets the appropriate level of safety for the intended application. It starts from the beginning of the design, is maintained during the full lifecycle of the system, and provides administrative support for the safety program of the full system. • 4.0 Safety Assessment.—The independent assessment of the safety file is addressed. It establishes consistent methods to determine the completeness and suitability of safety evidence and justifications. This assessment could be conducted by an independent third party. • 5.0 Safety Framework Guidance.—It is intended to supplement the safety framework reports with guidance providing users with additional information. The purpose is to assist users in applying the concepts presented. In other words, the safety framework is what needs to be done and the guidance is the how it can be done. The guidance information reinforces the concepts, describes various methodologies that can be used, and gives examples and references. It also gives information on the benefits and drawbacks of various methodologies. The guidance reports are not intended to promote a single methodology or to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject material. They provide information and references so that the user can more intelligently choose and implement the appropriate methodologies given the user’s application and capabilities. [ ]

Jan 5, 2003

By A. W. Ambrose

"Those having an intimate knowledge of the relation between production and consumption of crude oil in the United States have realized for some time that production will not be able to keep pace with consumption. The American public has had this called forcibly to its attention by the increased prices of gasoline and crude oil, and by the recent shortage of gasoline on the Pacific Coast. In substance, each year we are consuming millions of barrels of oil more than we produce, and this deficit must be made to by importations. A careful analysis of the situation makes it evident that we need every barrel of oil that can be produced.Need for the Petroleum Production Engineer.Under present production practices perhaps 80% of the oil still remains in the sand. (See Lewis, J.O., Methods for increasing the recovery from oil sands, U. S. Bureau of Mines, Bulletin 148 p. 8.) Many wells are making water, and even whole pools are being flooded. The burning of fuels under field boilers is not generally efficient, and often gas is not made to do its full duty in bringing the oil to the well.In the past the producer has had to combat these and other problems single-handed. He has been too busy to give them special attention, and he has had little competent engineering advice. Oil, gas, and water occur underground according to certain natural laws. Undoubtedly an engineer, who is familiar with production practices and understands the fundamentals of the accumulation of oil and gas, can be of service to the producer by specializing on certain problems with a view of getting mare oil from the sand. In every other enterprise of similar magnitude the engineer is regarded as a necessary unit to its operation, and he should be so in the production of oil. His field of work should extend to every phase of production in which science and engineering and geology"

Sep 1, 1920

By James R. Coldwell

Mining and processing cost analyses were conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Mines on stratiform zinc-lead-silver, coal, and stratiform barite deposit types that are found in the Colville Mining District. Reserves and gross revenues which would allow these deposits to be minable were modeled. A 15% Discounted cash-flow rate-of-return economic threshold was selected as the minimum acceptable return on investment for the three deposit types. The economic modeling indicated combinations of grades and tonnages for stratiform sulfide deposits that could be economically viable for orebodies ranging in size from 25 to 130 million metric tons. The gross revenues for a surface mine range from $200/mt for a 5,000 mtpd operation using the proposed South corridor to $140/mt for a 17,000 mtpd mine using the proposed North corridor. The economic modeling indicated underground coal mining was subeconomic for deposits ranging in size from 42 to 250 million metric tons. The required gross revenues ranged from $300/mt for a 2,200 mtpd mine to $21 D/mt for a 13,000 mtpd mine. The economic modeling indicated supplying projected in-state barite demand was subeconomic for the three seasonal surface mines modeled. The required gross revenues ranged from $600/mt for a 90,000 mtpy mine to $840/mt for a 6,000 mtpy mine.

Jan 1, 1995

By R. Karl Zipf

MULSIM/NL (multiple scams, nonlinear) is a three-dimensional boundary-element method (BEM) program developed at the U.S. Bureau of Mines for stress and displacement analysis of coal mines and thin metalliferous veins. It can analyze one to four parallel seams that can have any orientation with respect to the Earth's surface. Three main new features distinguish MULSIM/NL from its predecessors: (1) nonlinear material models, (2) multiple mining steps, and (3) energy release and strain energy computations. MULSIM/NL has six material models for the in-seam material: (1) linear elastic for coal, (2) strain softening, (3) elastic plastic, (4) bilinear hardening, (5) strain hardening, and (6) linear elastic for gob. Detailed checks show that numerical stress and displacement calculations compare well to known analytic solutions for simple problems. The total energy release calculated by MULSIM/NL is comprised of three basic terms: (1) strain energy release from the mined-out material, (2) linear kinetic energy release due to change in gravitational potential over the mined-out area, and (3) nonlinear kinetic energy release due to nonlinear materials in the total backfill and gob area. The strain energy release term is modified to account for nonlinear stress-strain behavior in the unmined materials. Comparisons of these numerical energy release rate calculations with known analytic solutions show excellent agreement.

Jan 1, 1992

"The town of Monson in Piscutaquis County, Maine is the, center of an important site industry. Monson slate has a nation-wide reputation, particularly for electrical switch boards, and the deposits have been worked for the manufacture of such products for many years. Open-pit quarrying is the method most commonly employed in obtaining slate. Underground methods have been used in the Peaon Bottom district near Delta, Pennsylvania, but the quarries that were thus operated are now abandoned. Underground methods have been used more extensively in foreign countries, the most famous example being the slate mines at Angers in France, where an over-head stoping method has been employed successfully for many. It is only under special conditions that underground methods can be successfully used. If the deposit is wide and relatively thin, or if the material is too unsound to constitute a safe roof, open-pit methods must be used, for slate is too low-priced a commodity to justify the heavy expense of any timbering methods. It is only where the deposit is relatively narrow, of great depth, and sufficiently sound to afford a strong roof that ordinary mining may be employed.The best slate beds in two of the three quarries operated at Monson are no worked by underground methods. The chief bed worked by the PortlandMonson Slate Co. is 10 feet thick, stands vertical and strikes N. 63º F. The slaty cleavage is vertical and crosses the strike of the beds at an angle of 5 to 10°. The grain or second direction of splitting is vertical and perpendicular to the cleavage. In addition to the 10-foot bed, to 2-foot beds and one 5-foot bed are available but are not now utilized. In theMonson Maine Slate Co. quarry (the old Pond quarry) a greater number of beds available, but at present quarrying is confined to a single bed about 9 feet thick which dips 30º S.E. and strikes N. 47ºF. The slaty cleavage is vertical and strides N. 45º F., while the grain strikes N. 45-50º W. and is also vertical."

Nov 1, 1920

By Raymond B. Ladoo

The uses of talc are many but are not, in general well known or fully developed within the last decade several companies have realized the possibilities of greatly increased use and have intelligently proceeded to develop some of the fields which seemed most promising. This has had a tendency to lift talc from the obscurity in which it had existed for years, but the work is only started and much remains to be done. Considerably more attention has been paid to the technology and utilization of talc in Germany and Austria than in this country, despite the fact that the United States produces 65 of the world's talc and Germany and Austria combined but 5.4%. In the "Bericht,uber die tatigkeit des verbends der talcum-interessenten in Oesterreich-Ungarn" (Proceedings of the Austro-Hungarian Talc Association), for the years 1912 and 1913, many notes upon new uses appeared, together with suggestions as to further development of old uses. Aside from a few notes on the use of tar in paper, little has been published in the English language upon this subject. By recent action of the Talc and Soapstone Producers Association (U.S.A.) funds for research into the properties and uses of talc have been made Available and it is hoped that markets will be materially broadened a a result of this work.

May 1, 1920

Decrease the dust concentrations at the shearer and reduce downtime associated with spray system maintenance. Approach Increase the quantity and quality of the water supply on longwall faces by decreasing pressure losses, Increasing pump capacity, and installing a "non-clogging" filtration system. How It Works Water sprays and ventilation are two of the primary methods of dust control on longwall operations. Increasing the quantity and quality of the water supply to spray systems is one of the more effective and least costly dust control methods that operators have at their disposal, yet this method is largely ignored. Poorly positioned spray nozzles operating at low pressures (and flows) which plug frequently cannot be effective. Water supply system Improvements should be a fundamental part of all longwall dust control plans. Upgrading a water supply system may require one or more of the following improvements depending upon where a particular system may be deficient: Increasing pump capacity for additional flow and pressure; increasing line sizes to decrease pressure losses: and, decreasing maintenance downtime and Improving water quality by installing a "non-clogging" filtration system.

Jan 1, 1981

By Maust. E. J., W. R. Crane

"IntroductionIn the study of mine drainage in the red iron ore mines of the Birmingham district of Alabama, an extensive series of measurements were made in order to determine the drainage from the area overlying and adjacent to the mines. Gaging rods were generally used in measuring streams, and weirs in ditches and sometimes as a check on rod work. These tests in turn were checked by current meter tests. In all, 725 separate stream gagings and 97 weir measurements were made. Certain relationships were worked out, particularly between rod and weir tests, which permitted obtaining results that are much more accurate 'under the existing conditions, than any available formula would give. The large number of weir measurements and the period covered by the tests made it impracticable to construct a weir for each observation so portable, adjustable weirs were built. The methods used are described here for the benefit of those interested in measurement of streams in connection with a study of mine drainage or otherwise. The Drainage AreaThe area draining the mining district lies between the crest of Red Mountain and Little Shades Creek, and for convenience was divided into sub-districts adjacent to certain groups of mines. Gaging stations were established on Little Shades Creek at the upper and lower boundaries of each sub-district, also at points on the tributaries near their junction with the creek. The difference between the volumes of water flowing in Little Shades Creek as it entered and left the sub-districts represents the flow from the tributaries on both sides of the creek. Since the flow coming from the sub-districts was measured direct, the inflow from the tributaries on the opposite side of the creek can be computed from the three volumes determined."

Oct 1, 1926

By L. C. IlsLey

[The last previous Bureau of Mines publication relative to details of permissible methane detectors (Bulletin 331, published in 1930) describes detectors of four different types, namely flame, combustion, catalytic, and a combination Wheatstone-bridge axed catalytic type in which catalytic action at the surface of a platinum filament when in methane causes a change in the temperature and resistance of the filament, thus unbalancing the bridge circuit and giving a reading proportional to the methane concentration. Three detectors of the latter type have been approved since 1933. A brief description of each follows: U. C. C. Detector Approved No. 902, covering the U. C. C. indicating detector, as described in Bulletin 331, was entered January 27, 1330, to cover important chances in design that permit checking; the calibration of the detector at any time, whether in gas or fresh air. Essential features of the detector are shown in figure 1.]

Jan 1, 1937