Search Documents

By J Gresham, A Turichshev

Ore from Henderson’s 7700 Southwest panel cave is transported between the production and truck haulage levels through a series of orepasses. A typical orepass complex consolidates dump points from four production drifts into two long bored raises feeding into a single truckloading chute. The system typically covers a vertical extent of 200 m and a lateral extent of 90 m. In the process of commissioning several initial orepass complexes, challenges with preferential draw in the long bored raises were observed. Preferential draw occurs when one long orepass mobilises much sooner and/or flows significantly faster than the other orepass. This has negative implications for orepass availability in the production drifts. As future mining at Henderson relies on the construction and use of such orepass systems, the development of appropriate design criteria and practical solutions to existing flow problems was necessary.A series of PFC3D numerical models were developed to assist in identifying the factors influencing preferential draw and possible corrective measures. The models helped to identify two primary factors that caused the preferential effect: the relative elevation of the brow at the bottom of each long bored raise, and the location of the bin used to funnel fragmented rock from both raises into the chute. This paper covers the initial design of the orepass complexes at Henderson, results of the numerical models, mitigation work done to date on existing orepass complexes, and design criteria for future construction.CITATION:Gresham, J and Turichshev, A, 2016. Correcting preferential flow problems in long orepass systems at Henderson Mine, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 549–554 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

Redetermination of the Chromium and Nickel Solvuses in the Chromium-Nickel System by C. J. Bechtold and H. C. Vacher, p. 14 The text of pages 16 and 17 is in improper sequence. The correct version will appear in the bound volume.

Jan 1, 1962

By J. Richard Kyle

On page 1617, the author's box was incorrect. It should have read: J. R. Kyle, member SME, is an assistant professor of geology. Dept. of Geological Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin. Austin, TX. On page 1616, the italic line 22, beginning "Murray, R.C. ... " should have been deleted. On the same page, the first two lines (27 and 28) referring to Norris, A.W., 1965 . . . should have been deleted. Column 2 should have preceded column 1.

Jan 1, 1981

By AIME

[Fig. 1], at left, is a corrected version of the first figure of the paper. Please note corrections in labeling of deposits.

Jan 1, 1973

By AIME

The following corrections (in italics and bold face) were received too late for the September issue of Transactions: Page 270, Abstract, line 1, spelling should be goethite. Page 270, column 1, authors' box, authors' affiliations should read: L. A. BAKER, formerly Principal Research Scientist, is Pellet Plant Superintendent, Cliffs Western Australian Mining, Cape Lambert, W. A., Australia. C. G. THOMAS is Experimental Officer, Minerals Research Laboratories, C.S.I.R.O., North Ryde, N.S.W., Australia. R. J. CORNELIUS and K. S. LYNCH are General Superintendent, Product and Process Development, and Superintendent, Pellet Plant, respectively, Hamersley Iron Pty. Ltd., Dampier, W. A., Australia. G. J. ARMSTRONG, formerly Chief Metallurgist, Hamersley Iron Pty. Ltd., is Mill Superintendent, Samin Ltd., Burra, S. A., Australia. Page 271, column 2, line 41, should read "highest possible spalling temperature and to adjust the. . :' Page 275, column 1, line 1, should read "(LOI) figures are shown in Table 1 and vary from 2.61..." Page 275, column 1, line 16, spelling should be goethite. Page 276, column 2, line 6, should read "Predicting Grate Speed and Production Rate: The cor-..." Page 276, column 2, line 8, should read "basis of Blends A, B, C, D, and Plant Ore 1, shown in Table..." Page 276, Table 3, heading under "Prediction Method" should read Blend E. Page 277, column 1, line 38, should read "=293 tph of specification pellets (see Table 1 for loss-..." Page 277, column 2, replace caption for Fig. 14 with the following: Fig. 14-Example of calculation of hood temperature profile during downdraft free-water drying, given plant free-water drying time. Page 277, column 2, replace caption for Fig. 15 with the following: Fig. 15-Example of calculation of hood temperature profile during drying, given plant goethite drying time.

Jan 1, 1974

By Joseph Cervik, Fred Garcia

Gob holes are routinely used by the mining industry to vent methane from gobs and to prevent it from entering the mine ventilation system. In some cases, flows from gob holes are measured by centering an anemometer on the end of the discharge pipe. These measurements are erroneous and tend to be high by as much as 30%. The Bureau of Mines determined correction factors (method factors) for anemometer measurements taken in this manner. Method factors for 10.2, 15.2, and 20.3 cm (4, 6, and 8 in) ID pipe are 0.68, 0.71, and 0.78, respectively. Comparisons between horizontal and vertical flows indicated no significant change in method factors. Consequently, the method factors for horizontal pipe flows can be applied to vertical upward flows.

Jan 1, 1987

By R. W. Baldwin

On page 309, column 1, the second equation should read: Ma-M1 = dlog_Pa M2-M1 d log P2

Jan 1, 1961

By Donald R. Williamson

Ore estimation at Cyprus Pima mine begins with estimating average copper grades for mine model blocks. Accuracy of the estimates has been checked four times in the last several years by comparing the estimates with arithmetic averages of corresponding blasthole (BH) assays. The data file now contains 3.567 estimated blockgrades and more than 10,000 blasthole assays. These data were compared by straight-line regression analysis at appropriate intervals as the body of data grew. Arithmetic averages of the estimates differed each time from arithmetic averages of the BH averages by nearly the same amount. More significantly, regression curves of the new total sets of data did not change position appreciably showing that copper grade estimates of blocks in all grade ranges from the lowest to the highest grade ores remained in error by nearly the same amount. Other studies revealed that core hole assays of the dominant ore type are biased and that that bias almost equals the error in estimation. Discovery of constancy in error indicated that regression analysis could be a means for correcting estimates of average block copper grades. A correction for estimated block grades was developed. It required determining which regression is appropriate for the particular problem, and a mechanism that is demonstrably sound. This paper describes the problem and the solution: No comparable study has been, found in the literature. Two other applications of regression analysis to metal grade comparisons are presented. Each adds a bit of support to a generalization which was suggested by correction of average block copper grades, namely, when performance of an estimate is to be evaluated, the variable taken to be the yardstick for the performance should be regressed on the estimate.

Jan 1, 1980

By Carmel Bofinger, Maureen E. Hassall, David Cliff, Eric Stemn

e Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

By I. WILKOMIRSKY, J. BECKER, F. Parada

CORRECTION

Jan 18, 2023

By E. Yiğit, M. N. Saridede

Correction to: Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03402385 The original online article has been revised to correct the author names. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. The online version of the original article can be found at https://doi.org/ 10.1007/BF03402385 * M. N. Saridede theng@smenet.org 1 Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul,

Dec 23, 2021

By Society of Mining Engineers of AIME

An error has been noticed in one of the figures in the 1974 Jackling Lecture "The Henderson Ore Body-Elements of Discovery, Reflections" by Stewart R. Wallace, published in SME Transactions, Vol. 256, No. 3, September 1974, pp. 216-227. The horizontal scale shown on Fig. 5 of this article is incorrect. The horizontal and vertical scales should be equal, i.e., the horizontal distance shown as 1000 ft should be 2000 ft.

Jan 1, 1976

By SME

"Comparison of Secondary Fe-Mn Oxides in Fracture Coating and Heavy-Mineral Concentrates as Sampling Media, Silver City Mining Region, New Mexico," a technical paper, appeared in the Aug. 1983 issue of the magazine. In Table 1, page 1182, the correct sequence of the first five metals in column 1 (Elements) should read: Zn, Pb, Cu, Fe, and Mn under "Central District" and Zn, Fe, Pb, Cu, and Mn under "Pinos Altos District." The published table shows the sequences transposed under the opposite districts. All other columns and sequences read correctly.

Jan 1, 1984

Jan 1, 1960

This investigation was supported by a grant from the American Iron and Steel Institute and a fellowship given by the Armco Steel Corp. We are indebted to J. F. Butler of the Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. for a portion of the alloys used in this investigation and to R. L. LeRoy of the Armco Steel Corp. for chemical analyses.

Jan 1, 1962

By R. L. Mauger, P. E. Damon, B. J. Giletti

On page 85 of the March 1965 issue of Transactions the heading of the third data column of Table II should read Ar40 Atmos %, and the first decay constant at the bottom of the Table should read ?ß.

Jan 1, 1965

By L. D. Clark

Jan 1, 1964

By T. S. Lovering

Jan 1, 1965

By J. A. Herbst, G. E. Agar

Beginning with the second paragraph in the second column of page 148, this paper should read: The Reynolds number in Fig. 6 was calculated from the inlet diam and it is evident from the graph that above NR = 5000 the value of K2 is as it should be, a constant. The data10 shown in Fig. 7 was obtained for fluids flowing in pipes of diam D with sharp edged orifices of diam d. To be consistent with the representation in Fig. 6 the Reynolds number was calculated with the orifice diam d. These two sets of data show similar patterns and the variation in the orifice coefficient C is believed to account for the variability of the cyclone coefficient K2. The values of C given in Table IV are derived from K2 by conversion of units. C more nearly represents an equivalent orifice coefficient for a cyclone. Armstrong1' showed that data reported by Chaston 12 and Elcox13 yielded values for C of 0.24 and 0.27, re- spectively, Dahlstrom's4 data gives a value of 0.22. As a consequence of the variability of the cyclone coefficient some caution must be exercised in substituting for Q in the split size equation.

Jan 1, 1967

By Frank C. Canney

The word "other" in paragraph 4, line 11, column 1, page 205, should read "over;" the correct version of reason 2, this paragraph, is: 'L. . . 2) to evaluate the usefulness of certain geo-chemical techniques, V. C. Kennedy and S. W. Hobbs of the USGS had already studied the distribution of copper, lead, and zinc in the soils (both in background areas and over veins) and in the water and plants, providing a criterion for measuring the magnitude and effect of soil contamination; ...9 On page 206, in the top left hand corner of Fig. 1 (in the area bounded by 47°35' and 116°10), the reference to Fig. 3 is incorrect. The area of Pine Creek, South Fork Coeur d'Alene River, and portion of Big Creek (the area which includes, from left to right, Kingston, Pinehurst, Smelterville, and Kellogg) should be identified as that of Fig. 2A. The headings for columns 1, 3, and 4, Tables I and 11, page 209, column 2, were reversed when the paper was printed. The corrected tables are:

Jan 1, 1961