Search Documents

By Jaime Lomelin

[First of all I want to thank the Society of Mining Engineers of AIME for the opportunity to present what Industrias Penoles, S.A. is doing in Mexico to reach the basic objetive of the enterprise without compromising, in short or long term, the living conditions of the community or attempting in an irreversible form against Nature. Industrias Penoles, S.A. is one of the largest mining and metallurgical companies in Mexico. It was founded in 1887 and at the turn of the century installed a lead smelting operation close to the village of Torreon, which became city five years after the start up of the Penoles smelter. Now Torreon has a population close to 300,000 inhabitants. In 1974 Penoles is still the largest industry in Torreon and the dynamic growth of the city is close related to this factor. Today Penoles in Torreon has a lead smelter with a capacity of 130,000 metric tons/year of bullion, an electrolitic zinc plant of 105,000 metric ton/year, and it is modernizing its lead smelter to control pollution and expand it to 190,000 metric ton/year of bullion including all the services and refinery. The Penoles complex in Torreon is the biggest in the non-ferrous metals field in Latinoamérica.]

Jan 1, 1974

By André Vien, Robert Edwards, Rob Perry

A metallurgical control application can only succeed if the system's lowest common denominator, its instrumentation and regulatory control is implemented and maintained correctly. This paper describes the basics of regulatory control implementation including some practical guidelines for instrumentation installation, operator interface design, loop tuning, and continuous loop performance analysis. Tuning and analysis techniques are illustrated by step-by-step industrial examples. A small investment in basic control pays dividends in better overall plant performance and provides a solid foundation for advanced control efforts such as expert systems.

Jan 1, 2000

By J. D. Kennedy

The alchemists of old are remembered well for their tireless efforts in attempting to convert various common metals, such as lead, into gold. Not so well known generally, but no less intense, have been the efforts of certain individuals who attempted to manufacture diamonds over the last 100 years. Diamond, the most glamorous and permanent of gems and the hardest industrial abrasive, is carbon in a high-density unique crystalline form with a cubic structure and a density of 3.5. This contrasts with graphite at a theoretical density of 2.2 and possessing a hexagonal structure. Diamond is the hardest natural, material known and until very recently had no close competitor, natural or otherwise, with respect to hardness. The hardness of diamond exceeds that of any other industrial abrasive by a factor of approximately five. The early theories of diamond synthesis were rather vague. Since diamonds occurred in nature, man then looked to nature for clues as to how this might be accomplished. The original known diamond deposits of India are alluvial in character and provided little insight as to how diamond had been formed by nature, for in, these locales the diamonds have been washed by streams or carried by the glaciers long distances from the areas in which they occurred originally in the earth's crust. As a matter of fact, we are told that even today the locations of the mother ground for the Indian alluvial deposits are not known.

Jan 1, 1959

By L. Bloom

"Man-Made Parameters" refers to the importance of selecting appropriate analytical procedures to acquire useful chemical data. The correct procedures are particularly critical at the sample preparation stage where decisions concerning pulverizing equipment, sample size, contamination and dissolution will impact on the final results independent of the instrumental method of analysis. Several experiments were designed to quantify the impact of these approaches.

Jan 1, 1993

By Ted M. Noskiewicz, James A. Ramsay

INTRODUCTION During the various stages of an underground project from inception through design and construction, probably the single factor of most interest and concern is the nature of the ground. The ground conditions more than any other item govern costs and feasibility; and although the methods available for assessing the ground have become increasingly reliable during the past thirty years, it is still very difficult in many cases to predict the behaviour of soil and rock during and after excavation. To help in this ground evaluation process, we have frequently supplemented the boring program with one or more large diameter inspection holes; and during the past eighteen years, seventeen of these holes have been constructed on tunnel projects which we have designed. There are references in the literature to similar inspection holes (1); however, as far as we are aware, no detailed description of them has been published. The behaviour of soil or rock during and after excavation and the effect of ground water on tunneling operations are of vital interest to tunnel designers and contractors. A comprehensive geotechnical investigation is therefore among the early and most important tasks carried out on a tunnel project and the backbone of every geotechnical investigation is the boring program. A series of borings, typically 50 to 100 mm (21 to 4 in) diameter, are drilled from which soil samples or rock core are recovered and the ground water observed.

Jan 1, 1979

By M. J. Ramos

Without an exclusive definition of administration in business, we could propose to define it as performance by management to adopt or implement established business formulas. Administration could also be defined as a universal process that organizes people, and achieves, through efficiency, common objectives and goals. Humanity developed some form of this process from the beginning of civilization. To imply that something is new in administration might be considered specious or naïve. Moreover, what is new in management? Administration of business is not new to the world. To prove this statement, we need only ask this question: Does the architecture and monumental workmanship of the past civilizations of ancient Egypt, Rome, and the Incas demonstrate management without administration and without definition of objectives? The answer must be a resounding ?NO!? In spite of this acknowledgment and for the purposes of this presentation, I will use the word ?new? in business and hope that the reader will follow my reasoning. The mining industry has unique characteristics in respect to other industries. It is multi-disciplinary, has a single purpose (majority for one metal), has two players (man and nature), and it involves high risks for generating environmental imbalance. Mining exploits non-renewable and finite resources, creates an unstable job market (work hard to have no work) and a speculative economic market with unpredictable prices ? a one-time payment for a finite resource with multiple recycling. On top of all that, the industry still operates within obsolete petroleum-based technology, utilizing practices that were designed two centuries ago. Today, we confront the challenges of the millennium with outmoded practices and management. Ordinarily, several styles of administration are standardized into a FRAGMENTED vertical system of organization. Mining has rigid objectives in production, with profitability as the focus from the beginning to the end. Citing the concept of safety, as an important facet of production is bombastic since, in truth, mining is an experimental industry that consistently reports high numbers of fatal accidents. In mining, we designed a process to work according to our objectives, demanding attention and supervision of all levels of management with a halo of parameters that are not assimilated into the design. We continue to perform a rigid style of management in an industry that is still not responsive to variations of the market ? losses in particular. The existing design process generates loss without capitalization and without response to said loss. This perception is reflected in a mindset that is only too ready to ignore mining liabilities. The reality of the enterprise has created an immense pressure from top to bottom in the hierarchy to do more with less. It is for all of these reasons that I propose to set forth a new essence for administration that encompasses an alternative vision and style in mining: Management by Loss. MANAGEMENT BY LOSS Management by Loss (MBL) is a systematic, integral process organized to quality control operation and the human profitability within the industry. It permits focus on achievable goals by utilizing the best practices (Mining Open-closing). Identification and characterization of loss in the process determine how objectives are defined, controlling the time limits to execute based on constant balance of mass, energy, water, and ?wastes? in each stage of the industry, in order to reach final objectives. The concept of loss can be defined by various criteria. Generally, it is the mass that could not make or arrive at its destination from a designed process or simply, it could not maintain balance. Otherwise, the design of the process describes the final point of the resource. However, those resources could not make their destination because of failure to use the best design, resources and TIME. The loss has typical characteristics such as Identifiable, classifiable, measurable, manageable, controllable, valuables, negotiable, avoidable, reportable, and monitoring. In the traditional scheme, these losses are not registered; they are made exclusions. We are trapped within a system, which was designed to obtain objectives of the industry in a specific timeframe. In the present style of administration, the focus is total - our emphasis in this treatise is in the loss. The current traditional report form contains only the most positive achievement of objectives, only the best of the exercise, humanizing numbers, without touching what we left behind or what we were waiting for to assimilate as a ?surprise account?(new account of liabilities). Management by loss is a method that redefines the concept of waste (waste zero) for controlling the mine operation under the equilibrium of the ecosystems. This method confronts the problems that impact our industry in this millennium. Understanding and quantifying losses (reserves, resources, time, energy, water, soil, materials, equipment, tasks, labor, ecosystems, etc) is a priority mandate for the industry and demands the application of a ?new ? style of administration by seeking to maintain balance instead of the disequilibrium that mining now creates in nature. It is necessary to answer questions such as: How can we minimize loss? How can the loss be assimilated during the life of the mine? What is the vision of mining in respect to the generation of waste? How can we convert liabilities into assets? In addition, the control of loss is determined in the achievement of the plan. Loss occurs because of a failure of the process in the original plan. Still we do not plan to fail but we fail to plan appropriately. It is a remarkable thing to accomplish and compel those objectives described in the original plan when that plan is designed with a determined budget. If not, we lose time and, of course, capital. Moreover, in Management by Loss (MBL), we can find answers to the following questions: What is the multiplier of productivity in mining? What are the influences of identification and characterization of loss and what is the level of efficiency of energy in order to achieve waste zero (effective cut off grade)? The challenges of mining in this millennium validate this new style of administration. Finally, it is important to point out that mining is entering into an era that has different rules, but the industry is still run by companies functioning with objectives from two centuries ago. They are trying to confront issues with concepts that are not designed for new tasks. Therefore, I ask you to consider this new style of administration of business under a vision of how the industry should be organized and managed, with an attitude of balance toward nature and social responsibility.

Jan 1, 2009

By T. W. Camm

"As engineers, we are trained to use logical, rational problem solving to insure our mines operate at maximum efficiency. We tend to use the same technical approach to design safety into all mining systems. This works well for machines, but not so much for the human component. Recent insights in the field of behavioral economics provide useful ideas for addressing the fact that we are driven by emotions more often than by rational thought. Understanding the nonrational aspect of human behavior is an important piece of any safety system design. INTRODUCTION The most common economic model is based on humans making rational decisions; that given the proper information, we will make a logical, rational decision based on what is best for ourselves (Ariely, 2009, p. xviii). In many cases this is an accurate description of how we make decisions. As an engineer, I was trained to apply the precision of mathematics and logic to solve problems. As an engineering professor, I now teach this approach to bright young minds preparing them for a life of professional effectiveness as practicing engineers. That said, we are not only rational. Daniel Kahneman, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, describes a model for how we think (Kahneman, 2011). System 1 is the part of our mind that is fast, intuitive, and emotional; while our logical, slower, and deliberative mind is System 2. According to Kahneman’s model, System 1 runs automatically, most of what you think and do originates in System 1. System 2 takes over when things get difficult, including the application of math and logic, and the resolution (or avoidance) of conflict. As engineers, we would typically assume that we operate in System 2 mode most of the time. This is where the model becomes useful, for Kahneman points out two important aspects of the dynamic between the two systems in our mind. First, System 1 has biases, systematic errors that lead to answering questions with an easier answer (rather than a right answer) before System 2 is engaged. Second, we can be blind to the obvious, and also be blind to our blindness. Complicating things further, System 1 cannot be turned off (Kahneman, pp. 24-25)."

Jan 1, 2015

By H. V. S. Tingley

My topic today is future trends in compensation for the mining industry. I seldom get the chance to speak about a subject of such immediate interest to an audience, so I would like to make the most of this opportunity by telling you that everybody in this room will become rich beyond his wildest dreams in the next few years. I would like to open my talk that way, but in compensation, like everything else, there is a great gap between dreams and reality. Back to reality. When we talk about compensation, we?d better define our terms because the compensation is really an umbrella for five basic types of payment made to management personnel. Slide 1 identifies these elements of compensation.

Jan 1, 1980

By Robert C. Peddicord

Application of Quality Management philosophies and techniques commonly referred to as Managing for Continuous Improvement, Team Management , or Managing for Consistency is required in today's mining, manufacturing, and service industries in order to meet quality demands, beat competition, lower costs, optimize operations, effectively use personnel, improve morale, and enhance profitability. Most of these phiosophies and techniques are known to today's managers but either have fallen into disuse or were never allowed to surface in the corporate environment of the organization. Managers should review and adopt the philosophies and techniques of Quality Management and use them to revitalize their organizations and bring about a "paradigm" shift in the way we manage, thereby achieving the goals listed above.

Jan 1, 1991

By William Gleason

The mining industry is a unique space. It is one in which geologists and chemists can intersect with computer and data science professionals daily. The industry requires expertise in not just mining and metallurgical engineering, but also electrical, mechanical, environmental and more. It requires expertise in worker health and safety, behavioral science, finance and economics, as well as human resources management. The locations of mining operations are often in remote corners, and for underground activities, they are unlike anything else in the world. The industry presents those who join it a wealth of opportunities, but often struggles to overcome incorrect perceptions of safety, labor and environmental standards, making it difficult to recruit and retain employees at a time of increased demand for mined materials.

Dec 1, 2025

By Ben F. Dickerson

For a number of years in office bull sessions, I have not so jokingly discussed the engineering or management fiasco of the year or decade. Usually, governmental projects are in the vanguard, such as tanks that won't tank, or heavy water plants that don't produce heavy water, etc., etc., all to the flutter of the taxpayers' hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars. The mining industry has also brought forth a share of this type of fiasco. Ordinarily, due to lack of funds, not opportunity, the stockholders only stand losses of a few tens of millions. Little knowledge of these major errors gets to the outside world, for the ordinary stockholder is usually not very alert, and managements are extraordinarily adept at discreet midnight internments in the fine print of the footnotes of annual reports.

Jan 1, 1975

By Jerry W. Danni, R. Craig Ford, Kermit C. Benke, Jim B. Finley, Donald D. Runnells

Steady-state water balance models have historically been used in the management of acid drainage at mine sites. Such systems could be more realistically described by non-steady-state conditions. In addition, the evaluation of alternatives for closure and management of acid drainage must consider non-steady-state conditions. Dynamic systems modeling is a method for simulating water management systems, offering flexibility in: (1) simulating either steady-state or non-steady-state conditions, (2) allowing "what-if' scenario testing. and (3) optimization of operation and closure alternatives. A case study is given for acidic drainage management during closure at a heap leach facility that demonstrates the utility of dynamic systems models.

Jan 1, 2000

By T. A. Gray

The environmental liabilities of coal waste disposal sites can have a major impact on a mining project's economic viability. Developing a waste disposal site is no longer simply an exercise in completing paperwork to obtain a permit, with the proliferation of environmental regulations in recent years, managing disposal sites now requires design creativity, short term and long term planning and detailed monitoring to maximize the benefits to the mining company. Operating costs and future capital costs for expansion of existing sites, new site development and regulatory compliance should be reviewed periodically and considered in the overall management plan. This paper discusses various management methods that are being employed in the industry to improve waste disposal operations both environmentally and profitably.

Jan 1, 1994

By P. Croney

Environmental monitoring requires major effort and expense but management of data receives less attention. A modem database system can manage hydrochemistry, water levels, meteorology, geology and downhole geophysics data and is flexible to allow the storage of ad hoc data. Reports can be customized by the user and derived data generated from input values. The production of high quality maps with contours and hydrochemical diagrams is an essential part of the reporting process. These maps integrate directly with the current site survey information. These facilities are best provided by storing the data in an industry standard database such as Oracle or Access to which customized AutoCAD and Microsoft Office routines make direct SQL calls.

Jan 1, 1997

By J. R. Schafler, J. L. Brinkman

"Since the year 2000, 59 miners have lost their lives to explosions occurring in underground coal mines in the US. More accurately, those explosions were methane ignitions that propagated through the mines due to coal dust involvement; despite current explosion prevention standards. There are 4 basic strategies employed to manage the risk of coal dust explosions in many other coal mining countries around the world: removal of the coal dust, wetting of the coal dust to prevent it from becoming airborne, mixing of the coal dust with stone dust to increase the total incombustible content, and explosion activated barriers which make the entire roadway inert. However, American standards only mandate the first 3 of these 4 methods. It is possible that US coal mine safety measures could benefit from the implementation of the 4th method, the use of explosion barriers. This paper will discuss differences/similarities in barrier regulations used in other countries, as well as some potential difficulties with adapting a stone dust bag barrier system to US underground coal mines. Also, details and feedback gathered from two operating mine site trial barrier installations will be shared.INTRODUCTION Since the year 2000, 59 miners have lost their lives to explosions occurring in underground coal mines in the United States (US); 29 miners were killed at the Upper Big Branch mine in 2010, 5 at the Darby Mine No. 1 in 2006, 12 at the Sago Mine also in 2006, and 13 at the Jim Walter No. 5 Mine in 2001.[14] To be more accurate, the explosions that killed those miners were methane ignitions that propagated through the mines due to coal dust involvement.[18, 19, 20, 21] These deaths occurred despite current explosion prevention strategies, standards, and regulatory oversight. This poses the question, can more be done in the US to prevent coal dust explosions and their widespread damage. In review of current practices and regulations from several large coal mining countries, a disparity in prevention strategies arose. The main difference between the US and other countries was that the US does not encourage, mandate, or regulate the use of explosion barrier systems as an additional coal dust explosion mitigation measure. This raised many questions. First and foremost was whether or not the US coal mining industry and its miners could benefit, in terms of safety and fatality prevention, from the implementation of the explosion barrier systems that are used in other countries. Furthermore, are there significant differences between the coal mines in countries where explosion barriers are used and US coal mines, which would preclude the system from being adapted and implemented in the US? Also, what are the similarities and differences in explosion barrier systems, use, and regulations between other countries that use them?"

Jan 1, 2017

By Juan P. Camus

Mining is one of the oldest industrial activities. Its products are essential to modern civilization. Paradoxically, and despite a deep-rooted belief to the contrary, mining is not a lucrative industry— at least not in the aggregate. This assertion is true not only for recent years, one of the weakest periods in terms of metal prices, but also for a long time past. In 1776,Adam Smith said in The Wealth of Nations: “Of all those expensive and uncertain projects, how-ever, which bring bankruptcy upon the greater part of the people who engage in them, there is none perhaps more perfectly ruinous than the search after ... mines. It is perhaps the most disadvantageous lottery in the world... Projects of mining, instead of replacing the capital employed in them, ... commonly absorb both capital and profits.”

Jan 1, 2002

By M. Javier

Management is a major part of sustainability research. Many different aspects of sustainability have already received significant research attention, but the management processes in mining from the perspective of their impact on society are less understood and integrated as a holistic frame. It is evident that mining technology has received major blame in past ecological disasters and major mining-induced environmental hazards, but the management-mining process has escaped unscathed. This should not have happened. Instead, the management processes should share equal blame with obsolete technology for the failure to identify and monitor potential environmental hazards before their inception of mining. We will present an emergent style of management for the future of mining. It challenges the actual ?mind-set? of mining management. It describes balance and equilibrium: physical, chemical, and biological in nature as an understanding of nature?s language, which is Geomimic along side ?the bottom line?. The goal is to minimize loss instead of maximize profits (waste design) at the design stage of mining and to develop clean technologies (nature's values) to achieve non-social environmental impacts that provide a prosperous legacy to future generations.

Jan 1, 2010

By Olivia Perkins, Shawn Sismondi, Adrian St. John, Vicky Potts

"INTRODUCTION An inherent aspect of any tunnelling project is ground risk: how it is identified, quantified and managed throughout the various stages of a project. Early identification of these risks, such as adverse ground conditions or potential obstructions is crucial; however specific identification of all risks will inevitably be limited by the extent of the desk study, ground investigation and accuracy of as-built information available, particularly in a densely populated urban environment such as London with a long and varied history of development. It is therefore crucial to have suitable plans and procedures in place for dealing with potential ground risk scenarios if they occur during construction work to ensure the safety of the workforce and to protect nearby critical assets. A number of experiences of potential ground risk were encountered during the Sprayed Concrete Lining (SCL) works on Crossrail contract C300/410 which was constructed by a joint venture of BAM Ferrovial Kier (BFK). The C300/410 works, undertaken in the heart of London, comprised of over 2.5km of SCL tunnels for Bond Street and Tottenham Court Road Stations and the Fisher Street crossover, as well as two 6.2km TBM tunnel drives between Royal Oak and Farringdon. BFK appointed Donaldson Associates as their SCL designers for the works; together they were responsible for excavation stability up to the point of ring closure. Despite the majority of SCL tunnelling works at Bond Street and Tottenham Court Road being through the favourable medium of London clay, there remained areas of local geotechnical challenges. Some of these were expected from the outset, some became apparent as works progressed from records of other nearby excavation works, and some were only encountered during tunnel excavation. Being located in the centre of London meant that there always remained a possibility of meeting some form of obstruction from previous structures. However, identification of all potential issues prior to the commencement of the works was challenging and proved to not be entirely possible. Through a series of case studies, this paper documents incidents where obstructions or adverse ground conditions arose. These scenarios all had the potential to cause safety risks, impact the tunnel design and/or construction methods and ultimately add time and cost to the works. The paper discusses how these challenges were overcome which utilised in part, a progressive risk reduction cycle, feeding back knowledge gained at all stages of construction into the approach for undertaking the works. It also examines what could be done in future to further reduce the ground risk through early identification, communication, education and appropriate contingency measures."

Jan 1, 2016

By R. R. Guzman

In this study, the "Mine Project Risk Management" methodology, MPRM (Botin et al. 2011), has been applied to characterize the sources of uncertainty and to quantify risk in the mining engineering stages of Block Caving mining method. As the result, rock mass caveability and ore fragmentation were identified as the two most relevant parameters of this process and a methodological model has been developed to quantify the risk associated to each of these two parameters. Furthermore, the applicability of the proposed model has been validated using as a case study the Chuquicamata Underground Mine Project in Chile.

Feb 23, 2014

By T. H. Phillips

The Mission Mine is an open-pit copper mine located 18 miles south of Tucson, Arizona in the eastern foothills of the Sierrita Mountains. Mining is done on 40 foot benches using P & H 2100 shovels and 170-ton Terex trucks. Drilling is accomplished With two (2) Bucyrus-Erie 45R?s, one (1) Bucyrus-Erie 60R and two (2) Ingersoll Rand T-5?s. For secondary drilling. a Joy VCR-ISO truck mounted drill is used. The mine is currently operating 3 shifts/day, 7 days/week at 59,100 tons per day, with the mill receiving 28,500 tons per day. The management of the drilling and blasting program requires extensive record keeping in all phases of the operation. This is essential in order to evaluate different products and procedures.

Jan 1, 1988