Search Documents

The Bureau of Mines is responsible for a broad spectrum of programs for meeting the diverse and changing mineral resource needs of the Nation. These programs are managed by the Director and two Deputy Directors, who formulate general policy and program direction from the Washington, D.C., headquarters. A senior advisory staff, consisting of the Chief Staff Officer, Chief Scientist, and Chief Mining Engineer, provides advice and consultation to the Director on a wide range of scientific and technical matters and acts on behalf of the Director to maintain liaisons with other government agencies, mineral industries, and professional societies. Bureau program activities are classified into two major functions: (1) Developing new and improved technology that will make the production and processing of minerals more efficient, safer and more healthful for mineral workers and the public, and more compatible with a quality environment.

Jan 1, 1980

By Stephen C. Tadolini

The U.S. Bureau of Mines has developed ultrasonic measurement instrumentation capable of measuring strains and elongations on tensioned and untensioned mine roof bolting systems. This report evaluates the pulsed-phase-lock-loop and pulse-echo systems. The pulse-echo systems measure time of flight of a signal through the bolt. The ultrasonic instrument converts the measurement into elongations or stress. The most recent Bureau instrument development converts travel-time measurements directly into elongation, load, stress, and torque by simple data manipulation from the keyboard. Bolt preparation and instrument calibration are described in detail.

Jan 1, 1990

[~lis is the f'fth in a ~erieG of reports on properties of commercial motor fuels, made in accordance 1,'Vi t:h fl cooperative ae,ree-ment betwGon tho Cooperative Fuel ReRRarch (e.F.R.) Committee and the Bureau of I ines of the Dcpart~ent nf the Interior. The first report gave data on motor r-asolino~ sold during the wintor of 935-36.31 Thi~ report covers 84 brands of ga~oline represented by l,722 samples exclurling the Pacific Coast. T 3)Se J.rom th~. ?~'tcific Coast IV .ro avnrL)f:od b~r tho Pacific Coa!3t tecilnical group "bofore o8ing submi ttcd ruld arc p~.lbl:'shcd GX Gtl~r as they were submi tted. In some areas r~lJort~ . erc roceivod f~om ~ ix to eicht compD.l1ie~ on the same brands of gasoline. whoruar. in other areas only one company reported on a brond. Thut., it CU .. "! be senn that BO .. 0 uf the dnt ;.U'e more rCY>l'c entat vc thM others. The inclusion of r~0rts fro:n several ci tie. w' thin somo of tho di stricts has ir.rpr,)vcd the report by reducinc; tr.e numb~r of brand rcportel by only ono company. ]

Jan 1, 1938

[~lis is the f'fth in a ~erieG of reports on properties of commercial motor fuels, made in accordance 1,'Vi t:h fl cooperative ae,ree-ment betwGon tho Cooperative Fuel ReRRarch (e.F.R.) Committee and the Bureau of I ines of the Dcpart~ent nf the Interior. The first report gave data on motor r-asolino~ sold during the wintor of 935-36.31 Thi~ report covers 84 brands of ga~oline represented by l,722 samples exclurling the Pacific Coast. T 3)Se J.rom th~. ?~'tcific Coast IV .ro avnrL)f:od b~r tho Pacific Coa!3t tecilnical group "bofore o8ing submi ttcd ruld arc p~.lbl:'shcd GX Gtl~r as they were submi tted. In some areas r~lJort~ . erc roceivod f~om ~ ix to eicht compD.l1ie~ on the same brands of gasoline. whoruar. in other areas only one company reported on a brond. Thut., it CU .. "! be senn that BO .. 0 uf the dnt ;.U'e more rCY>l'c entat vc thM others. The inclusion of r~0rts fro:n several ci tie. w' thin somo of tho di stricts has ir.rpr,)vcd the report by reducinc; tr.e numb~r of brand rcportel by only ono company.]

Jan 1, 1938

These inspection standards have been prepared for use in the Federal inspection of bituminous and lignite mines. They are a revision of "Tentative Coal-Mine Inspection Standards," published as Bureau of Mines Information Circular 7204 in February 1942 and employed a guide for Federal inspections. Numerous changes have been made in the original standards owing in part to recognition of shortages of some types of safety equipment due to the war, in part because of need of additional standards to cover certain mine conditions' arid' practices, and in part to conditions not foreseen when the original standards were prepared. About one-fourth of these standards are marked with an asterisk (*) as being of particular importance in preventing accidents in many coal mines; however; failure to carry out the suggestions made in such of the other standards as are applicable may also' lead' to the loss of lives.

Jan 1, 1943

By Bill Linville

During calendar year 1972, the Bureau of Mines was engaged in some 20 major areas of research for the development of new and improved efficient methods of conservation and utilization for petroleum and natural gas, oil shale, and coal. Made up of numerous projects described in this report, the program was carried out through research performed at research centers and laboratories in the field supervised and supported by administrative personnel of this Bureau of the Department of the Interior. Based un this research, 186 technical reports were published by the Bureau or others, and numerous other reports were prepared for Federal agencies, State agencies, and organizations engaged in cooperative research programs with the Bureau.

Jan 1, 1973

By Leonard J. Prosser, Joseph Cervik, John H. Perry

The Bureau of Mines has developed several techniques for draining methane from coalbeds in advance of mining. Drilling long horizontal holes from an underground location is one such technique, which was successfully demonstrated in the Pittsburgh and Sunnyside Coalbeds. The same technique has now been applied in the Mary Lee Coalbed at Jim Walter Resources, Inc. 's No. 4 Mine, Brookwood, Ala. , where two holes were drilled horizontally--one to a depth of 1,010 feet (308 m) and the other to 540 feet (165 m). The 1,010-foot (3083) hole proved successful in degasifying a portion of the Mary Lee Coalbed. The hole drained methane for 1 year, during which time the initial gas flow of 200,000 ft3/d (5,663 m3/d) declined to 65,000 ft3/d (1,840 m3/d). Total gas production was 40 x lo6 ft3 (1.1 x lo6 m3 ). The gas was of commercial quality, with 98 pct methane and a heat rating of 990 Btu/ft (36.89 Mj/m3). The methane emissions from the faces of the mine section advancing into the degasified zone were reduced by 60 pct. The 540-foot (165-m) hole was terminated prematurely when it became impossible to maintain an open hole. Because of caving, very little gas was drained through this hole.

Jan 1, 1982

By CDC CDC

In 2004, a total of 251 metal mining operations reported employment to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). Metal mines were the smallest mining commodity sector, comprising 1.7% of all mining operations. • Gold mines

Sep 1, 2007

By Clarence A. Wright

The Missouri-Kansas-Oklahoma lead and zinc district, better known as the Joplin district, includes the mines in southwest Missouri and in those parts of Kansas and Oklahoma that are directly adjacent. (See PI. I.) This report of investigations carried on by the Bureau of Mines gives the methods used in mining and milling and indicates in some detail the conditions that affect the efficiency of those methods; it does not attempt to discuss the geology of the district, except incidentally, as this has been described in numerous reports by several geologists. Some of the more important recent publications are those of the United States Geological Survey by Smith and Siebenthal, a Bain, b and also those of the Missouri State geological survey by Buckley and Buehler." Other reports are those by Schmidt and Leonard," and Winslow,e of the Missouri geological survey, by Haworth and Crane,! of the Kansas geological survey, and by Jenney.g Although the lead and zinc ores are closely associated, the proportion of zinc ore mined at present is far greater than in former years. For this reason and because the losses in milling zinc ores are proportionately greater than in milling those of lead, the zinc ores are here given most consideration. Only the mines and mills actually examined and tested are discussed in detail, statements of results being restricted to the mines in general, with no special reference to anyone mine. Several mill tests were made to determine in a general way the efficiency of the milling practice in this district and to discover at what stage of the process the losses were greatest. Making these mill tests proved difficult,for, because of the arrangement of the mills and the necessity of estimating the tonnage treated, systematic mill testing and sampling can be done at only a few plants. Many tables giving results of mill tests and screen tests have been omitted because they would serve only to emphasize the important points shown by other data given. The writer has tried to bring out the possibilities of making certain improvements that would effect a greater saving, and has endeavored to avoid the use of technical terms and phrases in order that all statements may be clear and easily understood.

Jan 1, 1918

During the period 1979 thru 1982, Multi Mineral Corporation conducted a mining research program at the United States Department of the Interior's Bureau of Mines Oil Shale Mining Environmental Research Facility in the Central Piceance Creek Basin, Rio Blanco County, Colorado. The program consisted of mining, environmental and geotechnical research data and, the results are described in this report.

Jan 1, 1983

By Terrence J. Stobbe

The authors investigated the nature, cause and treatment of 234 back injuries which occurred in 156 different situations in underground coal mines. A detailed interview was conducted with each injured miner as 137 variables were explored to provide a complete picture of the injury scenario. The miners worked at 23 mines in six states. An important finding of the study was that sudden movement, which occurred in 527 of the injuries, is a more frequent factor than heavy lifting in causing hack injuries. Along with sudden movement, other major injury causing factors were equipment seat design, lifting, cable handling, and slips/trips. No significant differences were found between the injury scenarios associated with lost time and non-lost time injuries; thus, both sets of scenarios should he used in doe loping back injury control strategies. Medical treatment and rehabilitation varied in content and quality. Dialogue between the medical, rehabilitation and mining communities is needed to develop an effective treatment strategy. Back injury control related training was found to be inadequate in most mines. Mine specific training for physical stress recognition and potential sudden torte release should he added to the training currently given. Based on the information collected in this study, recommendations were made regarding equipment design, mechanical assists and procedures for material handling, training, etc., which, if implemented, will assist in reducing the frequency of back injuries in underground coal mining.

Jan 1, 1989

Papers presented at a U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) technology transfer seminar describe the causes of violent material failure in U.S. mines, measurement techniques for monitoring events that result in violent failure, and mitigation techniques for controlling failure. Specific factors contributing to violent failure are identified on the basis of geotechnical monitoring in 16 U.S. hard-rock and coal mines and on statistical analyses of 172 coal bump events. New monitoring and analysis techniques developed as tools for assessing violent failure; geotomographic methods that provide new capabilities for the study of material failure and stress changes over large areas; and seismic methods for determining source locations, calculating energy release, and determining source mechanisms are described. Fair correlations have been established among seismic parameters, elastic stresses, face support load, and violent events. USBM studies have identified the advantages using both yielding and stable pillars for coal bump control. A computer program has been developed as an aid for selecting room-and-pillar layouts. The practical aspects of implementing a destressing program is outlined for coal mines, while the importance of mine orientation and timely support installation in controlling buckling-type failure is identified for hard-rock mines.

Jan 1, 1995

In 2004, data obtained from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) indicated a total of 891 underground (6.2%) and 13,587 surface (93.8%) mining operations.

Sep 1, 2007

By Oliver C. Ralston

The nonmetallic minerals work of the Bureau of Mines started with the organization of the Mineral Technology Division in 1912. A special experiment station devoted to the mining, preparation, and processing of nonmetallic minerals was established in 1923 at New Brunswick, N. J., and concentration problems on nonmetallic minerals of all kinds also were studied at the Mississippi Valley Experiment Station at Rolla, Mo. In July 1936 the Nonmetals Division was organized, and in May 1937 the Nonmetallic Minerals Experiment Station at New Brunswick, N. J., was moved to and made a part of the new Eastern Experiment Station at College Park, Md. At present the Nonmetals Division operates at three points: The Eastern Experiment Station, College Park, Md., which is headquarters for the division chief; the Southern Experiment Station, Tuscaloosa, Ala.; and the Northwest Experiment Station, Seattle, Wash., where coal washing and preparation studies are included with those on nonmetallic minerals. Sand, gravel, and aggregate work is carried on by the Mining Division, as sand and gravel preparation are intimately associated with mining methods. The Economics Branch of the Bureau of Mines also prepares occasional papers on nonmetallic technologic subjects in connection with the presentation of statistics on a particular industry and reviews of the mineral industry in foreign countries for use in the monthly publication, "Mineral Trade Notes."

Jan 1, 1937

By A. U. Miller

Definite progress has been made in accident prevention in Illinois during the past few years; the State Department of Mines and Minerals is receiving excellent cooperation from coal companies and employees, the companies are making greater effort to maintain their mines in good condi- tion, and the employees are eliminating more unsafe practices. As a result, some coal companies have made commendable safety records that prove that coal can be mined with a comparatively low accident rate. However, there is need for further improvement, as the accident rate of the State as a whole is much higher than it should be. During the 55-year period 1882-1936, in- clusive, reports of the State Department of Mines and Minerals show a total of 7,005 (an average of 127.36 per year) men killed in and around the coal mines. Of this number, 6,425 (91.7 percent) were killed underground, 346 (4.9 percent) in the shaft, and 234 (3.3 percent) on the surface. Of the fatalities underground, 3,300 (51.3 percent) were killed by falls of roof, sides, or face coal, 1,167 (18.1 percent) by haulage, 639 (9.9 percent) by handling explosives, 579 (9 percent) by explosions, 151 (2.3 percent) by electricity, and 589 (9.1 percent) by other means. Of the fatalities in the shaft, 171 men (46.5 percent) were killed by falling down the shaft, 14 (41.6 percent) by the cage, and 31 (8.9 percent) otherwise. On the surface, 113 (48.2 percent) of the fatalities were due to railroad cars, 51 (21.7 percent) to machinery, and 70 (29.9 percent) to other causes. The fact that 7,005 lives (an average of 127.36 per year) were lost during 1882-1936 is sufficient evidence that in the past too little interest has been taken in safety by either the management or workers. A realization of this deplorable loss of life should act as an incentive to the industry to make greater effort to prevent accidents in the future. After an accident occurs, the facts pertaining to it become history, and anything that may be done afterward cannot change in any way the damage that has already been done, such as loss of life, personal injury, and destruction of property. The main benefit that can be derived from an acci- dent is that suitable procedure may be adopted and some lesson may be learned to aid in preventing a similar accident in the future. All accidents, par- ticularly serious ones, therefore should be investigated and an effort made

Apr 1, 1938

By David Hoadley, Kenneth R. Maser, Ashok B. Boghani, James E. Billar, D. Randolph Berry, Mackenzie Burnett, Robert H. Trent

APPENDIX C - HOISTING SYSTEMS - AVAILABLE EQUIPMENT C 1 - Introduction A survey has been made of available hoisting equipment which has applications for use in metal and non-metal mine emergency escape hoist systems. The information was gathered from a number of sources, including representatives in the USBM and MESA, mine operators, personal visits and telephone interviews with manufacturers, field visits to inspect equipment, advertisements, catalogues and indices of manufacturers. Wherever possible, technical specifications and prices were checked out with the manufacturer, or supplier. The sections on individual sub-systems and components, such as automatic control systems, winches and controls, are not intended to be all encompassing surveys. Rather a reasonable number of representative units in each category are discussed. The sample is large enough to provide a general picture of the kind of equipment available, including the abilities and limitations and a reasonable price range. The survey has been divided into six categories 1. Complete Hoisting Systems A Above ground installations B Below ground installations 2. Hoist Assemblies ^(Man-rated) 3. Hoists (not Man-rated)

Jan 1, 1976

By D. Harrington

A uniform hoisting-signal code for mines hoisting from more than one level, if adopted by all mining States, would be beneficial to employees and owners alike and should largely reduce the number of hoisting accidents. Misunderstood hoisting signals cause many shaft accidents involving injuries to men, damage to equipment, and loss of production from the resultant delay. Many of the metal-mining States have adopted codes for hoisting that are effective within the borders of that State but usually entirely different from the signal code, if any, in use in an adjoining State. For many years safety engineers have recognized this lack of uniformity as a distinct hazard, but a uniform code has never been adopted by the States or by the mining industry in those States that have not incorporated signal codes in their mining laws or mining regulations.

Jan 1, 1944

By Mark Sanders

This report compares a proposed 10/60 "piggyback" 02 generating self-rescue unit to the standard CO self-rescue unit with respect to work task interference. A simulated low seam coal mine was constructed and subjects performed locomotion, shoveling, cart pushing, and timbering tasks with the 10/60 or self-rescuer attached to their belts. Task completion time was longer on all tasks when wearing the 10/60 unit, although only locomotion was statistically significant. The 10/60 unit was bumped over 100% more often than the standard self-rescuer. Implications for design of the proposed 10/60 container are: 1) unit?s container must be extra durable to withstand the added abuse it is likely to receive by low coal miners; and 2) extra consideration must be given to preventing the device from slipping on the belt while working, especially in low coal.

Jan 1, 1980

By W. L. Cooley

A significantly different method of evaluating mine ground system safety is investigated. The method measures touch and step potentials around ground beds and grounded equipment resulting from a series of extremely small simulated faults. The values are then scaled for a full-scale fault. The method should be particularly useful for large ground beds and under conditions where the ground bed cannot be isolated from the rest of the ground system in order to make traditional ground bed resistance measurements. Instrumentation for making the alternative measurements is evaluated under rigorous field conditions. A step-by-step procedure is proposed for evaluating a surface mine ground system. This procedure was subject to several field tests at eastern metal/non-metal mines. The final evaluation procedure is written as a stand-alone document for use by MSHA inspectors and mine operating personnel, and is included as an appendix to the report. The authors conclude that the procedure is effective in evaluating ground system safety and recommend that it be further evaluated in the field.

Jan 1, 1985

By G. S. Rice

To those concerned in attaining greater safety to life and incidentally to property in coal mining, the meeting of representatives of the national mine safety research organiza¬ tions of the principal coal-producing countries, which was called by the Safety in Mines Research Board of Great Britain at its experimental station near Buxton, should have deep significance. It is notable, first, because it meant the friendly cooperation of countries not many years ago engaged on either side in the great World War; and second, because of the remarkable degree of agreement in the essential fundamental factors and methods of attaining greater safety in coal mines when it is considered that the questions were approached by different paths and that the applications dealt with widely differing natural conditions and national points of view. Varying views, of course, were held as to the relative importance of certain factors, but the differences were of detail rather than of principle. When the meeting adjourned it was unanimously agreed that such meetings should be continued annually and that the greatest benefit was to be derived by close cooperation in the exchange of data. Belgium, France, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States were represented by one or several members of the respective national research organization. It is of interest to note that this research work in Belgium, France, and Germany is supported directly by na¬ tional organizations of mine operators or owners but placed under a scientist appointed by the respective Government, thus giving the work official standing. In Great Britain the work is carried on by a Government board, consisting of persons connected with the coal¬ mining industry or in mining research, appointed by the Secretary for Mines, to direct the work of research of the Mines Department. It does not, however, come under its inspection service. Its work is supported by a penny-a-ton tax on output of coal. In the United States the mine-safety research work is directly supported by the Federal Government.

Dec 1, 1932