Search Documents

A special committee on the Classification of Surface Mining Methods was appointed by the A.I.M.E. Board of Directors on Nov. 17, 1939. The committee was headed by Gerald Sherman, and the members were Chester A. Fulton, C. F. Jackson, Earl E. Hunner and Arthur Notman. The following form of classification was reported to the Board by the Committee on May 16, 1940, as its unanimous recommendation. SURFACE MINING Dry Mining Bottom Benching Bank Mining < Top Benching Dry Mining Dry Mining Bottom Benching Hydraulic Mining Pit Mining Dredging Dry Mining Top Benching Wet Mining Top Benching River Bed Dredging Subaqueous Mining Lake Bed or Dredging Ocean Bed (Hand Mining Ground Sluicing Hydraulicking Dredging In most cases the terms used in the accompanying outline define themselves. Bank Mining is distinguished from Pit Mining by its situation. In Pit Mining the ore is taken from an operation below the level of the surrounding surface. In the secondary classification, Bottom Benching is an operation in which a bench is attacked from below, but the material mined might be hauled up out of the pit or moved out horizontally or downward.

Jan 1, 1940

A special committee on the Classification of Surface Mining Methods was appointed by the A.I.M.E. Board of Directors on Nov. 17, 1939. The committee was headed by Gerald Sherman, and the members were Chester A. Fulton, C. F. Jackson, Earl E. Hunner and Arthur Notman. The following form of classification was reported to the Board by the Committee on May 16, 1940, as its unanimous recommendation. SURFACE MINING Dry Mining Bottom Benching Bank Mining < Top Benching Dry Mining Dry Mining Bottom Benching Hydraulic Mining Pit Mining Dredging Dry Mining Top Benching Wet Mining Top Benching River Bed Dredging Subaqueous Mining Lake Bed or Dredging Ocean Bed (Hand Mining Ground Sluicing Hydraulicking Dredging In most cases the terms used in the accompanying outline define themselves. Bank Mining is distinguished from Pit Mining by its situation. In Pit Mining the ore is taken from an operation below the level of the surrounding surface. In the secondary classification, Bottom Benching is an operation in which a bench is attacked from below, but the material mined might be hauled up out of the pit or moved out horizontally or downward.

Jan 1, 1940

H. M. BOYLSTON E. B. YOUNG SECRETARY-TREASURER OF SECRETARY-TREASURER OF BOSTON SECTION MONTANA SECTION R. M. KEENEY F. G. MOSES SECRETARY-TREASURER OF SECRETARY-TREASURER OF COLORADO SECTION UTAH SECTION

Jan 7, 1919

Established as a Division November 17, 1948 B W Gonser, Chairman J C Kinnear, Jr, Past Chairman H H Kellogg, Chairman-Elect R C Cole, Vice-Chairman, &apos;58 A E Lee, Jr, Vice-Chairman, &apos;59 W R Opie, Vice-Chairman, &apos;60 R W Shearman, Secretary AIME, 29 West 39th Street New York 18, N Y

Jan 1, 1957

By Harlowe Hardinge

[Crushing Tests by Pressure and Impact (T.P. 1895, by F. C. BOND,, Min. Tech. Jan. 1946). Discussion by H. HARDINGE and the author 1 Pumping Sands, Slurries and Slimes and Installation and Performance of Sand Pumps (T.P. 2013, by W. B. STEPHENSON, Min. Tech., May 1946 and T.P. 1978, by C. G. SOUTHMAYD, Min. Tech., March 1946). Discussion by OSCAR LEE, G. J. HOLT, L. D. ANDERSON, and the author 2 Rapid Polarographic Method for Determination of Copper, Zinc and Lead in Flotation Tailings (T.P. 2010, by G. A. CROWE and W. T. BISHOP, Min. Tech., March 1946). Discussion by E. H. ROSE and the authors 4 Ball Wear and Functioning of the Ball Load in a Fine-grinding Ball Mill (T.P. 1984, by W. I. GARMS and J. L. STEVENS, Min. Tech., March 1946). Discussion by J. F. MYERS, E. W. DAVIS, F. M. JARDINE, H. HARDINGE, F. C. BOND and the authors 5 Correlation between Mineral Behavior in Cataphoresis and Flotation (T.P. 2005, by A. M. GAUDIN and S. C. SuN, Min. Tech., May 1946). Discussion by 0. C. RALSTON, G. L. SIMARD and D. J. SALLEY 7 Accident Experience in Milling (T.P. 1981, by J. F. MYERS and S. E. SHARP, Min. Tech., May 1946). Discussion by C. E. MCKNIGHT, C. H. BENEDICT, T. S. WILSON and S. POWER WARREN9 Mill Design for Labor Economy (T.P. 1997, by NORMAN WEISS, Min. Tech., May 1946). Discussion by R. S. HANDY and the author13] Crushing Tests by Pressure and Impact (0.C. Ralston presiding) HARLOWE HARDINGE.*-Has the impact method described in the paper been used to compare the resistance to reduction in size of various materials with actual operation results of mills in the field? Is this impact method a better index of the true resistance to grinding under actual field conditions than other methods the author has reported in the TRANSACTIONS? F. C. BOND (author&apos;s reply).-The impact crushing device was designed to measure relative resistance to crushing, or what may be called the crushability, and is not used for comparing the resistance to grinding, or grindability. The correlation between crushability and grindability of different materials is not at all close, since fractures, zones of weakness, and structural features of rock have a much greater effect upon the crushability than upon the grindability. We still depend upon our standard grindability tests for measuring resistance to grinding, and use the impact crushing tests only in relation to crusher installations. The impact crushing device has several advantages over the measurement of crushing strength in pounds per square inch as an index of crushing resistance.

Jan 1, 1946

Meeting of Nov. 20, 1914.-Charles F. Rand was unanimously elected as the representative of the Institute on the John Fritz Medal Board of Award. E. Gybbon. Spilsbury was unanimously elected to succeed himself in January, 1915, on the Library Board of the United Engineering Society. . The President appointed Messrs. Walter Douglas, Charles E. Mills, and L. D. Ricketts as delegates to the seventeenth National Convention of the American Mining Congress, Phoenix, Ariz., Dec. 7 to 11, 1914. It was voted that the sum of $857.61, or so much of it as may be necessary, be advanced to the Land Fund from the general funds of the Institute, in anticipation of the collection of unpaid installments of subscriptions to the Land Fund; and that the Treasurer be instructed to pay to Andrew Carnegie at the present. time the sum of $2,500 on account of the Land Fund indebtedness.

Jan 1, 1915

CHARLES H. FULTON (author&apos;s reply to discussion*).-Mr. E. E. Thum is kind enough to point out an apparent discrepancy between the conclusions drawn from experiments and the results of those experiments. It is stated on page 1383 that carbon dioxide in excess of 1 per cent. is not found in the gases above the carbon reduction temperature (of zinc oxide). This statement refers to such temperatures as occur in ordinary zinc distillation and is not meant to include temperatures above 1350° C., and it should have been so stated in the original paper. When the temperature of the distilling chamber reached 1400° and above, it was noted that the amount of carbon dioxide in the gases increased. This cannot be explained by the equilibrium of the reaction 2CO?CO2 + C, and in seeking reasons for the discrepancy, the experiments of Meyer

Jan 1, 1919

NEW MEMBERS The following list comprises the names of those persons who became members during the period of Feb. 10, 1918, to Mar 10, 1918. ADKINSON, HENRY M., Min. Engr Walker Bank Bldg., Salt Lake City, Utah. BARKE, A. C., Min. Engr., United States Smelt., Refin. & Min. Exploration Co., 1503 Hobart, Bldg., San Francisco, Cal. BARKER, F. L., Prof. of Min. and Geol., Pei Yang University, Tientsin, China. BEASLEY, ALFRED F., Supt. Of Refinery, Bunker Hill & Sullivan Min. & Cone. Co., Kellogg, Idaho. BEEKLY, A. L Chief Geol., Cosden & Co., Tulsa, Okla. BELLIS, ARTHUR E Met., N. E. Westinghouse Co., Springfield, Mass. BRAIN, ELMER C Mgr., United Gold. Min. Co., Granite, Ore. BRUNER, CRANE S., Engr., American Zinc, Lead & Smelting Co., Carterville, Mo. COLLINS,. HARRY R Mech. Engr., Fuller Engineering Co., Allentown, Pa. CRANKSHAW, ALDEN, Experimental Met., New Jersey Zinc Co. (of Pa.), Palmerton, Pa. GALLIGAN, EMMET F., Mine Supt., Homestead-Iron Dyke Mines Co., Inc., Homestead, Ore. GREENE, FRANK C Geol., Cosden Oil & Gas .Co., Tulsa, Okla. HALSEY, HOWARD G Field Engr., 0. M. Bilharz Min. Co., Miami, Okla. HARROUN, DOUGLASS HOUGHTON, Supt.., Aguascalientes Metal Co., Asientos, Aguascalientes, Mexico.

Jan 4, 1918

PRESIDENT GEORGE OTIS SMITH, District 4 WASHINGTON, D. C. PAST PRESIDENTS SAMUEL A. TAYLOR, District 3 PITTSBURGH, PA. E. DEGOLYER District 0 NEW YORK, N. Y. FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT W. H. BASSETT District 1 WATERBURY, CONN. TREASURER KARL FILERS NEW YORK, N. Y.¬ SECRETARY H. FOSTER BAIN NEW YORK, N. Y.

Jan 1, 1923

STANDING COMMITTEES Executive-SIDNEY J. JENNINGS, chairman. Membership-KARL EILERS, chairman. Finance-J. V. N. Dorr, chairman. Library-E. GIBBON SPILSBURY, chairman. Papers and Publications-BRADLEY STOUGHTON, chairman. Nominations-R. V. NORRIS, chairman.

Jan 1, 1919

By Paul Cherin

ThE angle of intersection, 0, between h2k2l2 planes and the (loo), (110), (101), and (111) planes was calculated on an IBM 7040 using the well-known relationship

Jan 1, 1968

OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS For the year ending February, 1934 PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR FREDERICK M. BECKET NEW YORK ,N . Y. PAST PRESIDENTS AND DIRECTORS ROBERT E. TALLY JEROME ARIZ SCOTT TURNER WASHINGTON D. C.

Jan 1, 1932

OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS For the year ending February, 1932 PRESIDENT ROBERT E. TALLY JEROME, ARIZ. FREDERICK W. BRADLEY SAN FRANCISCO, CAL. WILLIAM H. BASSETT,P WATERBURY, CONN KARL EILERS NEW YORK N. Y.

Jan 1, 1929

The regular activities of the Institute are financed mainly by income derived from members&apos; dues, from advertising in MINING AND METALLURGY, and from the sale of publications to the public. In addition, collateral activities and special projects are financed each year by means of income from endowed funds controlled and administered by the Institute. In the aggregate, the amount of these endowments totals more than $684,000. An active effort is being made to increase the endowment funds of the Institute through a standing committee, of which Henry Krumb is Chairman, and of which the other members are: George D. Barron, Cleveland E. Dodge, John V. N. Dorr, Howard N. Eavenson, D. %. Jack- ling, Harvey S. Mudd, Wallace E. Pratt, Milnor Roberts, and Wilfred Sykes. This committee believes that there exists a tremendous opportunity for the Institute to be of evergrowing service to the public, to the mineral industries, and to the profession. It welcomes suggestions as to names of men of means who are vitally interested in the mineral industries, and to whom the opportunity to make a contribution or bequest might appeal favorably if presented in the proper light.

Jan 1, 1946

The regular activities of the Institute are financed mainly by income derived from members&apos; dues, from advertising in MINING AND METALLURGY, and from the sale of publications to the public. In addition, collateral activities and special projects are financed each year by means of income from endowed funds controlled and administered by the Institute. In the aggregate, the amount of these endowments totals more than $637,000. An active effort is being made to increase the endowment funds of the Institute through a standing committee, of which Henry Krumb is Chairman, and of which the other members are: George D. Barron, Cleveland E. Dodge, John V. N. Dorr, Howard N. Eavenson, D. C. tackling, Harvey S. Mudd, Wallace E. Pratt, Milnor Roberts, and Wilfred Sykes. This committee believes that there exists a tremendous opportunity for the Institute to be of evergrowing service to the public, to the mineral industries, and to the &apos;profession. It welcomes suggestions as to names of men of means who are vitally interested in the mineral industries, and to whom the opportunity to make a contribution or bequest might appeal favorably if presented in the proper light.

Jan 1, 1946

BOSTON SECTION ALFRED C. LANE, Chairman, GEORGE A. PACKARD, Vice-chairman, E. E. BUGBEE, Sec&apos;y-Treas., Mass. Inst. of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. R. L. AGASSIZ, FRED W. DENTON. Forty-sixth Meeting The forty-sixth meeting of the Boston section was held at the University Club on Monday evening, Jan. 28, 1918. Thirty-six members and guests were present, which is a record for this Section. After a good dinner, President Philip N. Moore, of the Institute, was introduced, and spoke of the many problems of the Institute. The topics covered were the progress and growth of the Institute during the administrative year, the efforts to stimulate the local sections and to bring them more in touch with the policies and problems of the parent body and, last but not least, of the constructive results and patriotic work of the Institute in the national service of the war. The other guest of the Section, Mr. Thomas Nelson Perkins, Counsel for the Priority Board, spoke most entertainingly of recent experiences in Russia, England and France. After considerable discussion during which Mr. Perkins most obligingly answered innumerable questions, the meeting adjourned at about 10 p. m.

Jan 7, 1918

PUGET SOUND SECTION SIMON H. ASH, Chairman, I. F. LAUCKS, Vice-Chairman, CHARLES SIMENSTAD, Sec.-Treas., 425 Lyon Building, Seattle, Wash. GLENVILLE A. COLLINS, JOHN N. POTT. The Puget Sound Section met at the Arctic Club, Oct. 28, 1916, for the annual meeting. Those present were: Chairman Glenville A. Collins, Vice-Chairman H. L. Manley, Sec.-Treas. Amos Slater, Chester F. Lee, R. P. Tarr, G. E. Rockefeller, Simon Ash, Geo. W. Evans, Joseph Daniels, I. F. Laucks, F. C. Greene, Darsie C. Bard, Marcel Daly, Milnor Roberts, F. A. Hill, Percy E. Wright, and as guest, Mr. Coates of British Columbia. After dinner had been served, Chairman Collins called the meeting to order. The reading of the minutes of the last meeting were suspended upon request of the Secretary. The Secretary read the report from the Committee on the Associated Engineering Societies of Seattle. Upon motion, duly seconded, the report was adopted and placed on file. Mr. Lee, Chairman of the Committee. on the Mining Men&apos;s Convention to be held this coming winter, gave his report orally, and upon motion the committee was continued. The report of the Secretary-Treasurer was read, received, and placed on file.

Jan 3, 1917

By Larry D. Patts

Section 317(e) of the Federal Coal Mine Health & Safety Act of 1969 directed the Secretary of the Interior to prepare standards under which all working places in a mine shall be illuminated by permissible lighting while persons are working in such places. Section 317(e) further provides that such working places shall be illuminated within 18 months after such standards are promulgated. In accordance with this section of the Act, there was published in the Federal Register for December 31, 1970, a notice of proposed rulemaking which prescribed the illumination to be provided in the working places of underground coal mines. In light of written comments, suggestions, and objections to this proposed rulemaking, the proposed standards were withdrawn and reproposed in the Federal Register for Wednesday, October 27, 1971. In light of further comments, suggestions, and objections, a public hearing was held on April 4, 1974, and standards were again reproposed and published in the Federal Register for April 1, 1976. Promulgation of the final lighting-standards &k place on October 1, 1976, which means that the underground coal mining, industry must comply with face illumination requirements by April 1, 1978.

Jan 3, 1978

By Thomas P. Forbath

THE sudden realization that known sulphur reserves amenable to mining by the Frasch hot water process are nearing exhaustion focused attention on widely scattered surface deposits throughout the world. These deposits are not necessarily of lower sulphur content than ores located underneath Louisiana or Texas salt domes which usually average about 30 pct sulphur disseminated in limestone matrix. Their near surface occurrence, however, renders exploitation by the Frasch process impossible. As is well known, the Frasch process depends on the presence of 500 to 1000 ft of overburden and cap rock above the sulphur deposits to permit melting underground sulphur in place by diffusing hot water under pressures of 200 to 600 psig in the formation and raising the molten sulphur to surface by air lift. This process renders possible the production of pure sulphur which is 99.5 pct pure without any subsequent treatment. Surface deposits contain sulphur in the same range of concentrations as the salt dome deposits, i.e., from 10 to 50 pct sulphur, associated with various gangue materials such as silica, limestone, and gypsum. The pirincipal distinction, then, does not lie in the percentage of sulphur contained in the ore, but in the geological nature of the deposit. A recent study&apos; of the world sulphur supply situation estimated 1950 sulphur production in the free world countries at 5.6 million long tons, of which the United States produced 5.2 million tons, or 93 pct of the total. While America&apos;s domestic needs alone would have been covered by national production, about 1.4 million tons were exported during the same year. Despite all the steps which are being taken to restrict use of elemental sulphur and to force the fullest possible development of alternate sulphur sources here and abroad, the deficit in elemental sulphur production will probably increase with time. As a result of intensive prospecting for oil throughout the Gulf Coast area discovery of significant new salt domes is held unlikely. With the growing scarcity of sulphur and what appears to be an inevitable rise in price, recovery from deposits not amenable to Frasch-process mining assumes greater economic importance. Untapped Reserves The most important deposits in this category are located in Sicily, where elemental sulphur occurs in Miocene limestone and gypsum formation. Sulphur content of these ores ranges from 12 to 50 pct with an estimated average of 26 pct. Although quantitative estimate of these reserves is not available it is held that they exceed 50 million tons of sulphur. Similar deposits occur also on the mainland which contribute about one-third of Italy&apos;s total current annual production of 230,000 tons, but these are known to be nearing exhaustion. Significant surface deposits of volcanic origin are located in South America, Japan and western United States, silica being characteristic gangue con-stituent. The largest of these deposits are in South America. More than 100 extend over a zone 3000 miles long, paralleling the west coast of South America. &apos;Total sulphur content of these deposits has been estimated to be as high as 100 million tons. The main islands of Japan also possess at least 40 known volcanic sulphur deposits with probable reserves of 25 to 50 million tons.&apos; Prospected reserves in western United States might amount to 2 million long tons, principal deposits being located in the northwestern part of Wyoming, southern Utah, and eastern California. Volcanic deposits of lesser importance are found around the Mediterranean, in Turkey and Greece, and in Africa, Egypt, Abyssinia, and Somaliland. Beneficiation Methods Different methods of beneficiation have been used in these various locations. In Italy the Calcarone kiln and Gill regenerative furnaces are used exclusively. Both utilize heat liberated by burning part of the sulphur in the ore to liquify or vaporize the remaining sulphur, which is recovered by solidification or condensation. The Calcarone kiln is of conical shape, generally 35 ft in diam at base and 18 ft high. A kiln of 25,000 cu ft capacity burns for about two months and yields about 200 tons of sulphur. The Gill furnace consists of a series of chambers with domed roofs. Sulphur is burned and melted in one chamber at a time and the hot combustion gases are used to preheat the ore charge in the subsequent cell. These furnaces operate on a cycle of 4 to 8 days. The recovery yield of both systems is about 65 pct. Sulphur losses amount to 25 pct through the combustion to sulphur dioxide; about 10 pct is retained in discarded calcines. Ores containing less than 20 pct are not considered suitable as furnace feed. These methods are not only wasteful because of the low recovery obtained, but represent a serious atmospheric pollution problem. Sulphur produced ranges from 96 to 99 pct purity and thus does not match Texas or Louisiana sulphur. Owing to the present shortage, sulphur in the Middle East sells

Jan 1, 1954

By K. P. Gupta, A. K. Pal, L. Chandrasekaran, U. P. Singh

The Mn-Sn binary system, investigated at the high-manganese end and between 500° and 1000° C, shows four phases at temperatures below 727"C, namely the u Mn, the p Mn, the Mn3 Sn, and the Mn, Sn phases, while at higher temperatures only the last three phases remain stable. The solubility of tin in a Mn is very small and the maximum solubility of tin in P Mn phase appears to be abollt 10 at. pct Sn. The solubility range of the Mn,Sn and the Mn, Sn phases is 23.0 to 26.0 and 37.0 to 40.0 at. pct Sn, respectively. The lattice parameter of the 13 Mn phase increases with increasing tin content. The Mn, Sn thase is hexagonal with and appears to be basically of the Ni3 Sn type structure except that for quite a few X-ray diffraction lines the calculated and observed relative intensities do not agree well. The Mn-Sn binary system has been studied by several investigators.&apos;&apos;~ Their results indicate that three intermediate phases, namely, the Mn3Sn, Mn,Sn, and MnSn, phases, exist at high concentrations of tin. However, so far the proper phase equilibrium has not been established at the manganese-rich end and very little data is available for the composition range between pure manganese and Mn3Sn. Moreover, earlier investigators differ in their opinion about the exact composition range at which the Mn3Sn and Mn,Sn phases appear and some doubt has been cast by some investigators3 regarding the structure of Mn3Sn phase which has been reported to be isotypic with Ni3Sn (Mgscd type) structure. In this investigation an attempt has been made to establish the proper phase equilibrium between pure manganese and Mn + 50 at. pct Sn composition in the temperature range of 500" to 1000°C. PROCEDURE The raw materials used were from three different sources. For exploratory work five alloys containing 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 at. pct Sn were prepared using 99.9 pct pure manganese and tin supplied by E. Merck & Co., Germany. The rest of the alloys and one more 25 at. pct Sn alloy were prepared using 99.9 pct Mn supplied by Gallard Schlesinger Chemical Mfg. Corp., U.S.A., and 99.999 pct Sn supplied by Semi Elements Inc., U.S.A. Weighed amounts of manganese and tin were melted in recrystallized alumina crucibles in an inert gas (argon) high-frequency induction melting furnace. By careful control of temperature and time of melting the losses were reduced to below 0.2 pct in all cases. Since the losses were very small, no attempt was made here to analyze the samples chemically. Alloys were wrapped in molybdenum foil and sealed in small evacuated fused silica capsules. The alloys were annealed at different temperatures, controlled within + l°C, for sufficiently long periods to attain proper phase equilibrium, and subsequently quenched in cold tap water. The annealing periods used at different temperatures were 15 days at 500°C, 7 days at 600°C, 5 days at 700" and 750°C, 3 days at 800°, 850°, and 900°C, 2 days at 968"C, and two alloys annealed at 968°C were reannealed for 10 hr at 1000° C. From each annealed specimen, a part was utilized for metallographic study while another piece was used for X-ray diffraction study. 1.0 pct HNO, solution and oxalic acid solutions of concentrations 0.05 to 1.0 pct were used for etching Mn-Sn alloys above and below the MnsSn composition, respectively. Since all alloys were brittle, X-ray specimens were prepared using the as-crushed -325 mesh alloy powders. Only one 25 at. pct Sn alloy powder was reannealed in an evacuated silica capsule at 800°C for 5 min and water-quenched. X-ray diffraction patterns . for the Mn3Sn phase with the as-crushed and the reannealed powders did not show appreciable change. Un-filtered iron radiation at 25 kv, 15 ma was used with either Norelco 114.6-mm-diam Debye Scherrer Camera (for phase identification) or Norelco 12-cm-diam symmetrical focusing camera (for lattice parameter determination of the 6 Mn phase). The estimated accuracy of lattice parameter determination for the focusing camera was * 0.001A. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The results of metallographic and X-ray diffraction study made with different alloys are shown in Fig. 1. The variations in lattice parameter with composition for the p Mn and the Mn3Sn phases are given in Tables I and 11, respectively, and the lattice parameter as a function of composition for the p Mn phase is shown in Fig. 2. The lattice parameter of the p Mn phase increases with increasing tin content while for the Mn,Sn phase the data obtained from two two-phase alloys and one single-phase alloy indicate increase in a,, and decrease in c, parameters with increasing tin content. The results, Fig. 1, indicate that the solubility of

Jan 1, 1969