Search Documents

By G. A. Murphy

This tipple differs from the ordinary tipple only in that it embodies numerous refinements for grading and otherwise preparing the coal. Coal from the mines is delivered to the tipple over a surface tram. There are two tracks for loads, which will hold about forty cars, and one track for empties which will hold about the same number. The loads are fed to the dump by gravity from both tracks and are controlled by two squeeze blocks. These blocks are of the type originally designed by Mr. W. J. Elwood, but unlike the original blocks which were of wood and operated by hand levers, are built of steel and operated by com¬pressed air at 100 pounds pressure. They are capable of holding securely twenty-four three-ton cars on a grade of 2.5%. The dump is of the complete revolving type and has a capacity of five cars per minute. After being dumped the empty cars go to the usual kick-back and onto the empty track by gravity. The hopper under the dump has a capacity of approximately fifteen tons, and the coal from this hopper is fed to the shakers by a reciprocating feeder. The screens are of the usual shaker type. They are eight feet wide, seventy-two feet long in two sections, balanced, pitch 12° 30", travel six inches and the eccentric shaft makes 100 revolutions per minute. The upper section of the screen is shorter but heavier than the lower section, and contains the slack and nut screens, consisting of plates with 1 5/8" and 3" round perforations respectively. The lower section contains plates with 4 ½ ", 6" and 8" round perforations respectively, from top to bottom in the order named. The shaker is so arranged that nearly all changes for making the different sizes of coal are made by merely shifting levers. The most complicated change has been made in two and a half minutes; most of the other changes can be made in less than one minute and some of then without stopping the shaker. One of the refinements is what we call the degradation screens. Just before the coal leaves the shaker it goes over a screen with 1 3/8" round perforations, which takes out the fine coal made while the coal is going over the other perforations. This fine coal goes into hoppers and onto the degradation conveyor and to the slack chute. The different sizes of coal, excepting the slack, are delivered by the shaker onto three picking tables. These tables are horizontal for twenty-four feet and then hinged to form the loading booms, so that each picking table forms a unit of continuous conveyor. Centrally located under the picking tables and under the floor, is the refuse conveyor which runs at right angles to the tables. The impurities picked from the coal are dropped into openings in the floor and onto this conveyor, from which they are discharged into a bin of 100 tons capacity. From this bin the refuse is loaded into railroad cars through a gate. The slack may be loaded directly into railroad cars through a chute from the hopper under the shaker, or it may be conveyed to the rescreener. Gates are provided by which all or any part of the slack may be loaded either directly into railroad cars or conveyed to the rescreener. The rescreener is a shaker four feet wide with sixteen feet of plate perforated with 3/4" round holes. The framework is wood, the pitch is 5° and it is driven by eccentrics having a 5 3/4" throw running 143 R.P.M. It is hung on 1"x10" ash boards, rigidly fixed at the support and on the shaker, so that the spring of the boards allows for its movement. The eccentric rods are also of ash, rigidly fixed and spring to allow the movement of the eccentrics. The dust going through this shaker drops into a bin of 80 tons capacity and is loaded into railroad cars

Jan 1, 1925

Jan 1, 1993

National Energy Technology Laboratory ?Only DOE national lab dedicated to fossil energy -Fossil fuels provide 85% of U.S. energy supply ?One lab, five locations, one management structure ?1,200 Federal and support-contractor employees ?Research spans fundamental science to technology demonstrations

Jan 1, 2006

? Develop a six year capital budget for future emission controls at Western Springfield Power Plant that would provide long-term operating certainty

Jan 1, 2005

Effect of Iron on ash fusion temperature and waterwall deposits FeS, H2S on tube material corrosion and erosion [ ]

Jan 1, 2005

Jan 1, 1999

Jan 1, 1997

By Don Sakata

Jan 1, 2005

By P. F. Patterson

It is a well established fact that 60 per cent of all accidents in coal mines occur from falls of roof and coal at or in the proximity of the working face. Notwithstanding that this is well known, and has been frequently discussed by mining men, this seems to be the irreducible minimum. It is even said by those in a position to know that the percentage stated is increasing. With this, information before us it would seem that not enough attention is being given to close supervision at the working face, and until this is done we may expect to continue experiencing an increase in the accidents in this area. No workman generally feels that it is more important to finish loading a car of coal than to set a timber for protection, and many accidents happen from this source, not from a lack of knowledge of the dangerous conditions existing, but negligence in taking remedies necessary to remove the danger. It is true that nearly all state laws require the mine foreman or his assistant to visit each working face every day, but with the constantly changing conditions on account of the advance of the working faces, these daily visits may be entirely inadequate to discover possible dangers and prevent accidents. The obvious remedy then is closer and more systematic inspection and supervision of the working faces. Many accidents are caused in mines on account of not enough clearance between the rib and track or between timber and track. On all main haulage ways. there should be a space of at least 30 inches between the rib and track, or timber and track, and on all rooms not less than two feet should be left between the track and upright timbers.. A great deal has been said and written with regard to systematic timbering. We doubt very much the feasibility of adopting any standard of timbering that would be suitable for all roof conditions, and any such system in our opinion would not tend to cause a decrease in the number of accidents. The proper place to put up a prop, regardless of whether it conforms to any established system, is under a piece of loose roof. No habit is becoming more prevalent among miners and other mine workers than wearing gloves, principally flimsy canvas gloves, which afford no protection to the wearers and are the direct cause of many hand injuries. If gloves must be worn, and no doubt they will be as the habit has become well established, then they should be made from some heavy material and should fit the hands fairly snug.

Jan 1, 1923

[Page Minutes 5 Present Status of Petroleum Industry 9 F. M. Van Tuyl. Developments Along the Line of Low Heat, Carbonization 13 A. C. Watts. Uses for Fine and Pulverized Coal 14 C. A. Allen. Have Mining Engineers Accepted All That Developments in Machinery Apply? 16 R. Dawson Hall. Coal Mine , Accidents and State Mining Law 23 D. Harrington. Harmony and Co-Operation 26 H. F. Nash. Personal Dangers 28 John Bevan. Methods of Improving Safety and Health Conditions 29 C. A. Allen and A. L. Murray. The Economic Relation of Accidents and Preventable Diseases to the Coal Mining Industry 39 Recent Developments in the Use of Electricity in Mines 43 Graham Bright. Discussion of Graham Bright's Paper 48 Mine Safety Work at Dawson, N. M 49 W. F. Murray. Mine Safety Work 54 Eli Follett. Wire Rope in Mining Operations 56 James F. Howe. Discussion of F. E. Shepard's Address 69]

Jan 1, 1922

By Dan Jackson

9:00 a.m., June 28, 1983 MR. MORTENSEN: Good morning ladies and gentlemen. Again, it gives me great pleasure to welcome you to another session of the 79th meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. The thing again that has always been impressive are the activities that we've had so far. The success in the meetings has been delightfully encouraging to all of our committee people. Please welcome the chairman of the session, Charlie Margolf. MR. MARGOLF: Thank you, Vernal. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It would be my privilege to serve as the session chairman this morning. To allow the maximum time for our speakers, I'll turn the microphone over to Bernie Bernstrom who will introduce our first speaker. MR. BERNSTROM: Thank you. As Vernal mentioned, Dan Jackson will be our first speaker. He is the Western Editor of Coal Age Magazine. Dan really doesn't need an introduction to this group. He's belonged to the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute about 25 years. Dan is a native of West Virginia and he's an ex-coal miner. He graduated form West Virginia University as an electrical engineer and worked for Amherst and West Bending Coal prior to employment by Coal Age Magazine. Back in 1972 Coal Age moved him to Denver from New York City. MR. JACKSON: When Vernal Mortensen asked me speak to the members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute earlier this year I found it impossible to say no to the guy because of what he has contributed to western coal. Little did 1 know that the subject he had in mind would be entitled, "An Outsider's View of Western Coal." At first I asked myself-I've been associated with the coal industry for some 38 years, 12 years in national operations and 26 years reporting on it. You might say that I've been married to two industries, coal and the business press for 26 years, but today I'll put on my business press hat and try to make an impression of what an outsider might think of western coal. But at the outset, let's get one thing straight: When you say press, whether it's business press, the media or whatever, and you heard some comments yesterday as far as what the media has done .to this industry and there's been some definitions bandied around as to just what an editor is. One of the most recent ones has defined an editor as a person who can talk on any subject with an open mouth. Now that's not my case. Secondly, I don't give long talks. Several years ago I was giving a rather lengthy talk to a group similar to this and it was halfway through the talk when I noticed one guy on my right looking at his watch quite frequently. I didn't mind that too much because all of us do that once in a while, but when he looked at his watch, took it off and shook it, I thought, "My God, better cut short." But for more than a decade western coal has enjoyed substantial annual increases in production from some 30,000,000 tons in 1970 to some 264,000,000 tons in 1981, but 1982 was a different story. We lost about 6,000,000 tons of production in that year. In 1983 it's expected to be a little worse than '82. Coal historically doesn't rebound from a recession as quickly as other industries. It takes about eight to 10 months longer for us to really get moving again and I'm afraid that you'll still have to don your fighting helmets and flack jackets when you go out into the market to sell your product. Western coal, as you know, has problems and al l of them are not going away when the recession ends and they won't go away overnight. I'm sure most of you are aware of what those problems are. Carl Bagge and Jim Harris, along with other speakers, at this meeting have educated us well on those problems and I'm sure you'll hear more from Jim Watt at today's luncheon. If everyone in this room were asked to list three orfourof the most serious problems facing western coal, I'd make book that the total of the answers wouldn't vary by more than 3 to 5%, if that much. But coal is not the only mining segment in the U.S. with problems. Metal and non-metal mining has its share, too. I'd like to step back into the past for a few minutes, if I may, to a time when our problems were just beginning. Since 1979 a third of the nation's mines, including coal, metal and nonmetal have been shut down. The total volume of all mining in the U.S. in that year totaled some $24 billion. Today that figure has dropped some 21 %. The after tax rate on return for mining companies has fallen from 6'/% in 1980 to minus 3% in 1983. But that's really not where our problems began. They began 20 years ago when a profound change began taking place in the U.S. economy. Our economy had been growing at about 2'/-3% annually without exception except for the great depression. Our inflation rate was about I'/%, interest rates were running about 6%, and the federal budget was $77 billion, really great figures compared to today. From 1960 to 1980 the federal budget increased almost 1.000% and taxed paid by individual families increased by 700% during that same period. Despite the huge increases in taxes, the federal deficit kept getting larger and larger year after year and within this 20 year period the national debt climbed to a trillion dollars. Economic progress of this type can't continue indefinitely without some serious consequences. The result of that economy, well, you know what happened and there is a direct relationship of that

Jan 1, 1983

By Jim Gunderson

Jan 1, 2004

By Jeane Hull

Jan 1, 2009

President Heiner opened the final session of the Institute at 9:30 a.m. Frances Leonard read the report of the Auditing Committee. Motion made by Stan Shubart for acceptance of audit and approval. Seconded and carried. R. R. Williams of the Resolutions Committee presented the following resolutions to the, group for their approval: RESOLVED: That the members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, in convention assembled, hereby ratify and confirm all official actions of the Officers, the Executive Committee and other committees of the Institute between and including July 3, 1963 and July 1, 1964.

Jan 1, 1964

By Grainne A. Matthews

Jan 1, 2009

Jan 1, 1996

Disclaimer ?You may hear something today that surprises you. If you are pregnant or have a heart condition, you may elect to stop hearing now. ?Some of what you are about to hear you may already know. ?Much of what you are about to hear and see is information that is from and can be found via other sources. ?If any of my statements during the course of this presentation are thought or found to be incorrect, I am not responsible for these comments.

Jan 1, 2006

The Annual Business Meeting of the members of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute held during the 83rd Regular Meeting of the Institute was called to order by the president, Bernard Bernstrom at 2:50 p.m. Tuesday, June 30, 1987 in the Janss Auditorium of the Snowmass Conference Center in Snowmass Village, Colorado. Thirty-one were present and a quorum was established. The president outlined the purpose of the meeting was to inform the members of the status of the affairs and activities of the corporation during the preceding year. It was moved by Leon Jeannot, seconded and carried to approve the minutes as published in the 1986 Proceedings. The chair called for reports of the various committees and these reports will by placed on file in the RMCMI Office. Bylaws and Resolutions. Chairman Loren V. Linville reported there were no bylaws revisions. He further reported that the Board had adopted three resolutions: (1) Noting the passing of members since the last convention-Benton Boyd, E. A. Hare, E. S. Moran, Jr. and Edward Prostel. (2) Of appreciation to the Executive Secretary, officers, chairman, Diamond Jubilee chairman and committees and convention committees for an outstanding job in preparing for the 83rd Regular Meeting of the Institute. (3) To recommend to all RMCMI members that, on an individual basis, they each oppose replacing coal fired generation with natural gas generation. Membership. Chairman Leon Jeannot reported that at the beginning of the 1986 fiscal year, there were 881 active or dues-paying members. During the year, 219 members were dropped for a variety of reasons such as non-payment of dues, transfer, employed elsewhere, change of address. Ninety-six new members have been recruited for an active total of 758. In addition there are 55 Life Members, 20 senior members, six scholarship winners and seven supporters for a net total of 846. The budget of RMCMI calls for 1,000 active members and we must address and plan for those short-term prospects as they will certainly impact our membership. A full report is on file in the RMCMI office. Patrons of the Institute. Chairman Ira McKeever reported that only 59 Patrons renewed their support during 1986-87. Program. Chairman Bill Balaz announced that the convention program theme "This is OUR Life", as presented in "Past", "Present" and "Future" segments was very well received. He called for additional helpers another year and suggested that next year's program format be changed to a hard hitting one. Publicity. Chairman Tom Egan reported that of the three newsletters sent members during the year, that the most effective one was the newspaper format one and recommended its use next year. RMCMI hired Bob Jacob who heads his own public relations firm to solicit advertising for the Proceedings on a contract/ commission basis. He attended the convention for this purpose and to solicit business card ads. A full report is on file in the RMCMI office. Scholarship. Chairman Keith McGinnis reported that five of the six scholarship recipients were present at the convention. Each was introduced to the membership at the Tuesday morning Scholarship Breakfast, presented a plaque and responded. The input from each winner was most favorable to the program. Each was appreciative of the many contacts made and the educational seminars and programs. The selection process started in March and was completed in May, except for one university which had difficulty in providing a candidate. It is suggested that the initial contact with the institutions be made in December and completed by April 1. This year, for the first time, three of the six universities were visited for the purpose of interviewing the candidates. They were Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. A very positive feedback was received from these schools and it is recommended that the practice continue. CONVENTION COMMITTEES Convention Arrangements. Doris Finnie presented the following report: As a professional meeting planner, this Diamond Jubilee convention was indeed a great challenge. One meal was added to the package and thus increased the individual cost. Snowmass Resort Association is unique in that they utilize a conference coordinator who acts as the middle man between myself and the usual persons we deal with, like AV personnel, the chef, the banquet director, the steak fry personnel, the Sunday tour etc. so the office had to become creative. For instance, we learned early on we could not deal with the local florists. It cost us lots less to buy our flowers wholesale in Denver, have my husband drive them up and our West Virginia daughter to arrange them! But, finally her floral arrangement class at CSU paid off! This was truly a Finnie family orchestrated convention. Our Lakewood daughter acted as Scholar-

Jan 1, 1987

By Glen A. Knox

The writer has been asked to set forth for this Institute, the experience of the past eleven months in the mining operation conducted at Sweetwater Mine in which coal has been produced by the use of Link-Belt Conveyors on long faces. The coal in this mine has an average of six feet three inches in thickness, and lies on an average pitch of five degrees. The roof is a sandy shale of medium hardness and has been generally considered as good top in the room and pillar method of mining. When our company became interested in conveyors, the writer visited most all of the mines in the East where conveyors and other mechanical methods of mining were in use and decided that the modified method of w-hat is in use at the Norton-West Virginia mine would be the most feasible for our conditions. We in- stalled three hundred feet of conveyor as an experiment to see whether or not our roof could be handled and taken care of on long faces. This three hundred feet was installed as two separate conveyors, one as a face conveyor-100 feet in length, the other as a heading conveyor that delivered the coal into the mine car on the main entry. This face was worked directly on .the strike and down the pitch. This did not prove to be a success as the caving of the roof carried over to the working face and necessitated propping between the conveyor and the face and it was also necessary to shovel coal on the conveyor up the pitch. After working out this block, 200 feet in length, we installed these two conveyors at a place adjoining this worked out block, but on a half V shape shown on the sketch. This block of coal was sixty feet wide. This method proved to be very successful. We cut a place, moved the conveyor against the face before shooting and carried two rows of cribs between the conveyor and the cave, and caved the roof every second cut. After working out this block we were satisfied that this system was feasible with our mine. We then ordered twelve hundred feet more of the same type as the trial conveyor with the exception of a very few modifications. We then installed this fifteen hundred foot unit on the four faces shown on the sketch, with one hundred feet to each face, two hundred feet on each heading and three hundred feet on the main conveyor that delivered the coal into the pit cars. We also had a head and rear section for each of the four advancing places shown on the sketch. As the sections were taken out of the heading conveyors they were installed on the advancing conveyors, and when the faces approached the main conveyor, the main conveyor was taken out and installed in the next uphill or main conveyor place. The roof caved very well in line of the points and was broken about every twenty feet. It broke in a straight line and did not curve at each V. We encountered no trouble unless we permitted one of the points to get behind. The maximum tonnage possible to be produced on this method was estimated to be seven hundred and twenty-five tons a day, assuming that all places were cut and cleaned up in one shift, and this we did for several consecutive days. While this was a success from a cost standpoint, we felt that we could

Jan 1, 1925

By Leigh Freeman

The War for Talent ?McKinsey & Company 1997 and 2000 survey ?2001 book by Michaels, Handfield-Jones and Axelrod, Harvard Business School Press

Jan 1, 2007