Search Documents

Jan 1, 1946

The following discussion occurred on the afternoon of Sept,. 22, 1930, as part of the fall meeting of the Iron and Steel Division at Chicago. About seventy-five men attended this session. C. B. Murray opened the meeting, as follows: C. B. Murray, Cleveland, Ohio.—It is very encouraging to see so many here this afternoon to discuss this important matter of beneficiation. The producers of ore, I am sure, are anxious to furnish the grade of ore that the consumer wants. The consumer sometimes wants that which cannot be economically produced and often the producer cannot understand why the consumer wants certain things. It was to bring together these two interested parties that this meeting was proposed. I was appointed the chairman of the meeting, chiefly because I happened to be the chairman of the Iron Ore Committee of the Institute. I know a little about iron ore but have not perhaps kept up with the times in blast-furnace practice. I am asking Mr. Sweetser, who is well informed from both sides, to take over the meeting and carry on the discussion. R. H. Sweetser, Columbus, Ohio.—We want to have a free discussion between the iron-ore men and the blast-furnace men as to just what we are trying to reach in the beneficiation of iron ores. Many of those present have had a great deal of experience. There are men here from the ranges who have been passing through the experimental stage of beneficiation of iron ores, and there are some who have already gone on to commercial production. We have reached the point where the beneficiation of iron ore is important to the whole iron and steel industry. The connection between iron-ore beneficiation and the cleaning of coal is so close that I think we can profit by working very close to the coal people. Some Aspects of the Iron-ore Situation W. G. Swart, Babbitt, Minn.—I was very much interested in Mr. Richards'* paper on tonnages and the 20-year life. There is one interesting thing about the ore reserves; that is, the irregular distribution of that tonnage. On the Mesabi Range, for example, the United States Steel Corpn. owns between 70 and 75 per cent. of the reserve tonnage. They ship bctween 40 and 50 per cent. of the annual Lake Superior

Jan 1, 1930

Jan 1, 1959

Jan 1, 1924

Jan 1, 1933

Jan 1, 1963

Jan 1, 1896

In the past few years the hydraulic aspects of rotary drilling have received considerable attention. It is generally recognized that accurate prediction of circulating pressures is desirable, particularly in those areas where a delicate pressure balance is necessary to prevent both blowouts and lost circulation. For calculation purposes the standard hydraulic equations for the pipeline flow of Newtonian fluids have been altered to facilitate similar calculations for non-Newtonian or plastic fluids.'.' This latter classification includes most colloidal types of drilling muds. Two properties: plastic viscosity, un, and Bingharn yield value, Y,, are commonly used to define the flow characteristics of a plastic fluid. These are commonly obtained with multispeed viscosimeters such as the Fann V-G meter.3 Normally these measurements are obtained at some surface temperature, and are not corrected to circulating temperatures for calculation purposes. This may result in considerable error, particularly in the laminar flow calculations which comnlonly apply to the drill pipe-borehole annulus. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of temperature on the flow properties of some water-base muds. A laboratory model Fann V-G meter was used for measurement of viscosities, yield values and gel strengths. An aluminum water jacket with O-ring seals was machined to fit around the mud cup of the Fann meter. All mud samples were prepared by thorough mixing in a Hobart mixer. Viscosity and gel strength measurements were made with the Fann meter using standard procedures. Flow properties of muds were studied at 80, 120, 160 and 180°F. The compositions of the test samples are given in Table 1. The typical effect of temperature on the flow properties of these drilling muds is illustrated by Fig. 1. It was found that plastic viscosity and apparent viscosity decreased with an increase of temperature. However, the curves were not linear, and did not appear to follow any definite trends or patterns. Yield point data showed much more scattering.' Since a usable method for predicting drilling mud flow behavior with temperature was desired, an attempt was made to find a simple relationship between these variables. The basic approach used by Havenaars for predicting the same effect on turbulent viscosity resulted in Fig. 2, which shows that

Jan 1, 1920

Jan 1, 1937

Jan 1, 1908

Jan 1, 1888

Jan 1, 1961

Jan 1, 1905

Jan 1, 1957

Jan 1, 1960

Jan 1, 1949

Jan 1, 1914

Jan 1, 1968