Search Documents

The Honor Roll includes the names of all members of the Institute Whom we know to have been on active military duty it the date of compilation, Mar. 5, 1919. Despite our efforts to have this list accurate and complete, some of our members who have been rendering military service are probably left off because of the fact that we have not been informed of their military connection. The list of men in military service has been compiled with great difficulty owing to the modesty of the members, who in their patriotism began their service but neglected to send us notice. In 1918, We published a separate Honor Roll of the Institute in which we included a list entitled "On active duty in other departments of the service" which contained the names of members who were rendering important emergency service to the Government other than in the Army. This list is entirely omitted this year because any list We might compile for this purpose would be entirely inadequate and must inevitably do injustice to a large number of our members who have been devoting great time and making many sacrifices for the benefit of the government along lines not within our ken. It is not too much to say that almost all our membership in this country has been, more or less directly, doing its uttermost for the successful prosecu¬tion of the war. The active work of many of these members we are Well aware of, as is also the rest of the civilized world. Faithful and wholehearted efforts on the part of many other members we have not been informed of, so that any list would be both incomplete and unsatisfactory.

Jan 1, 1923

YEAR OF ELECTION 1913. FRANK DAWSON ADAMS, Montreal, Canada. 1922. FEDERICO GIOLITTI Torino, Italy. 1921. FRANK WILLIAM HARBORD London, England. 1917. HERBERT HOOVER Washington, D. C. 1941. DANIEL COWAN JACKLING San Francisco, Calif. 1939. HENRY KRUMB New York, N. Y. 1921. C. McDERMID London, England. 1913. EZEQUIEL ORDONEZ Mexico City, Mexico. 1935. ROBERT PEELE New York, N. Y. 1938. A.M. PORTEVIN Paris France 1937. JOHN V.W. REYNDERS, New York, N. Y. 1937. GEORGE S. RICE Washington, D. C. 1911. ROBERT H. RICHARDS Cambridge, Mass. 1934. T.A. RICKARD Victoria, B.C., Canada

Jan 1, 1942

PROF RICHARD ÅKERMAN Stockholm, Sweden DR. FRANK DAWSON ADAMS Montreal, Canada PROF RICHARD BECK Friberg, Germany ANDREW CARNEGIR New York, N.Y. DR. JAMES DOUGLAS New York, N.Y. PROF HATON DE LA GOUPILLIERE Paris, France SIR ROBERT A. HADFEILD London, England PROF HANS HOFFER Leoben, Austria JAMES FURMAN HOEFER Leoben, England PROF HENRI LOUIS LE CHATELIER Paris France

Jan 1, 1917

Jan 1, 1915

YEAR OF ELECTION 1913. FRANK DAWSON ADAMS, Montreal, Canada. 1933. KARL EIKERS New York, N. Y. 1922. FEDERICO GIOLITTI Torino, Italy. 1906. SIR ROBERT A. HADFIELD London, England. 1921. FRANK WILLIAM HARBORD London, England. 1917. HERBERT HOOVER Washington, D. C. 1941. DANIEL COWAN JACKLING San Francisco, Calif. 1939. HENRY KRUMB New York, N. Y. 1921. C. McDERMID London, England. 1913. EZEQUIEL ORDONEZ Mexico City, Mexico. 1935. ROBERT PEELE New York, N. Y. 1938. A.M. PORTEVIN Paris France 1937. JOHN V.W. REYNDERS, New York, N. Y. 1937. GEORGE S. RICE Washington, D. C. 1911. ROBERT H. RICHARDS Cambridge, Mass. 1934. T.A. RICKARD Victoria, B.C., Canada

Jan 1, 1941

1913. FRANDKA WBONA DAMS Montreal, Canada. 1921. WILLIAM CUTHBERTB LACKETT Sacriston, Durham, England. 1923. GELASIOC AETANI. Rome, Italy. 1929. TAKUMAD AN Tokyo, Japan. 1920. HENRYS TURGISD RINKER. Merion Station, Pa. 1922. FEDERICGIOO LITTI. Torino, Italy. 1906. SIR ROBERTA . HADFIELD. London, England. 1928. JOHNHA YSH AMMON.D. New York, N. Y. 1921. FRANKW ILLIAMH ARBORD London, England. 1917. HERBERTH OOVER. Washington, D. C. 1906. HENRI LECHATELIER. Paris, France. 1900. WALDEMAR LNDGREN Cambridge, Mass. 1879. JOHNM ARKLE .New York, N. Y. 1921. C. MCDERMID London, England. 1913. EZEQUIELO RDONEZ Mexico City, Mexico. 1909. ALEXANDRPEO URCEL Paris, France. 1911. ROBERT H . RICHARDS Cambridge, Mass.

Jan 1, 1929

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1922

By Stephen P. Quin

One of the most prospective undeveloped greenstone belts in Canada, the Hope Bay greenstone belt extends over 80km in a north-south direction and is between 7 and 20km wide. The belt lies on the arctic coast and comprises mafic meta-volcanic and meta-sedimentary rocks that are bounded by Archean granite intrusives and gneisses. The greenstone package has been deformed during multiple events and is transected by major northsouth trending shear zones that appear to exert a significant control on the localization of mineralization. The Hope Bay belt contains a number of significant gold deposits hosted in a typical Archean greenstone belt and which occur in several geologic settings, including shear-hosted, lode-style and breccia-associated. Combined, the deposits host a measured and indicated resource of 1.6 million oz of gold averaging 15.7 g/t plus an inferred resource of 2.7 million oz of gold averaging 12.3 g/t. All deposits remain open to expansion. Exploration in the period 2000-2002 by Miramar includes more than 110,000m of drilling to more fully define the nature of the known deposits, while regional exploration has focused on identifying and evaluating new targets. In carrying out its programs, Miramar uses a number of techniques to improve its chances of exploration success. Activity in 2003 includes 43,000m of drilling focused on expanding resources in the Madrid area, testing the Boston deposit at depth and continuing the hunt for more discoveries. Meanwhile Miramar is advancing one of the deposits towards a production decision, based on a low capital, high return development scenario.

May 1, 2003

By J. D. Potts

Installation of a horizontal air blocking shelf around the inside perimeter of the surface mining drill deck shroud is proposed to improve dust capture. Without the use of this shelf, a strong coanda effect airflow pattern results in dust leakage to the environment, especially at the shroud-to-ground interface. Bailing air exits the drill hole and travels along the drill steel to the underside of the table, where it fans out across the bottom of the drill table and continues down the sides of the shroud. This dust-laden bailing air then strikes the ground and fans out under gaps between the shroud and the ground. The proposed shelf prevents dust-laden air from striking the ground by redirecting it toward the center of the enclosure, where it can be captured. Laboratory tests demonstrated that the shelf reduced dust levels outside of the shroud by 81% under operating conditions consisting of a 1.9:1 collector to bailing airflow ratio, and a 5.1-cm (2-in) gap between the shroud and ground. The shelf was 15.2-cm (6-in) wide and located at a height equal to 2/3 the distance measured from the bottom of the shroud to the bottom of the drill table. The air blocking shelf was also capable of overcoming the adverse impact of vertical leakage along the shroud seams as long as this leakage was confined to an area below the horizontal plane defined by the shelf location.

Jan 1, 2009

By Michael F. Roach, Joseph K. Cavey, Gary E. Taylor

A rigorous horizontal drilling and chemical grouting program was specified beneath the Hollywood Freeway (U.S. Route 101) section of Los Angeles Metrorail Contract C-311.Twin 6.67-m (22-ft.) diameter starter tunnels were to be conventionally mined through amixed alluvial and bedrock face consisting of silty sand, gravel, and weathered sandstone and siltstone of the Topanga Group. The contact between the alluvium and bedrock dipped toward the Crossover Excavation where the horizontal drilling and grouting operations were performed. The intent of this grouting program was to stabilize the mixed face to minimize ground loss and surface settlement, and to reduce groundwater inflow into the tunnel headings. Given the highly variable mixed face conditions, horizontal drilling up to 86 m (284 ft.) resulted in upward trending trajectories which likely followed the bedrock contact. Chemical grouting was performed in a primary, secondary and tertiary, three dimensional sequence. Evaluation of the primary and secondary grouting parameters indicated where tertiary grouting was required. Grouting pressures induced a small rock failure at the tunnel heading as well as increased stresses on the tiebacks of the excavation.

Jan 1, 1997

By M. Santillan

Minerales Monclova S.A. de C.V. (MIMOSA) has applied different methane gas drainage technologies, according to the top industry requirements in order to keep the methane gas at the lowest possible concentration in our operations, both in the development sections and longwall sections. Our staff has used the horizontal rotary technique. In 2004 MIMOSA bought a re-built drill machine and signed a contract with Resource Enterprises Inc. (REI), which included a training program in Horizontal Directional Drilling using the reflex system. The training system was developed for a period of three months in Mine VII, with very good performance by the MIMOSA staff. After the training the equipment was moved to Esmeralda Mine, where we had already drilled holes at the development section, 2,500 ft. It was the longest distance that could be reached with our original equipment, obviously; the directional drilling program is another challenge for us and our staff, but we are very confident that our result will be better every time. We will be evaluating each borehole and expect to improve our results in each progressive borehole, until we can drill up to the capacity of the equipment. We are in the process of buying another drill with an electronic monitoring device (DD DMecca) in the following months.

Jan 1, 2009

By P. P. Jenkins, T. G. Ball

Paper presented at the Drillex '90 conference held in London, 5 April 1990. Two drilling techniques are employed - guided longhole drilling and reverse circulation coring - for underground longhole exploration of the coal reserves and the fault structures that affect them. These are complementary to, or replacements for, surface boreholes, underground development drivages and seismic techniques. The developments of the drilling techniques and some case histories are presented in detail.

Jan 1, 1991

By Bockhorst R. W, Christopher D. A

Over the past fifteen years, horizontal drilling in coal seams for advance degasification has become an established practice in the United States of America. Consolidation Coal Company pioneered the development of the horizontal drilling system and licensed the technology in the U.S. A. and to Du Pont (Australia) for commercial production. This paper discusses the most recent developments in the equipment design, especially the borehole telemetry system, known as the Downhole Drill Monitor (DDM).

Jan 1, 1988

By Nick Salisbury, Alan Howard, Scott Tunison

INTRODUCTION Geotechnical investigations for tunneling projects typically use vertical test borings and, to a lesser extent, angled borings. Horizontal drilling applications were often limited to specialty testing programs and to perform probe drilling from a tunnel boring machine (TBM) as part of production tunneling. The former often involved cumbersome setups with skid rigs and cribbing in a pilot tunnel or shaft. The latter usually was limited to generic probing for rock quality and ground water conditions with no sampling. Neither yielded continuous core at production rates suitable for design and construction planning. Conventional vertical investigations still make sense in many instances, particularly for tunnels planned beneath urban settings where truck access is convenient and where the tunnel horizon is not readily accessible via a portal or shaft. However, equipment is presently available to conduct horizontal geotechnicall investigations at reasonable production rates and cost. Advantages include continuously sampling the tunneling horizon and minimizing “access drilling” to get the zone of interest at the underground construction horizon. Horizontal boring lengths of up to approximately 800 m are considered feasible and those in the range of 150 to300 m are now routine. These capabilities make horizontal borings an attractive option to consider when looking at deep tunnels beneath ridges, especially where access is limited. Fewer drilling staging sites can also mean reduced environmental impacts when investigating tunnels proposed beneath sensitive lands such as public wilderness areas. Investment in early construction packages to develop portals for investigation access and, possibly in excavating test shafts for the same purpose should even be considered. Potential benefits in the form of achieving improved overall project costs using horizontal borings exist because of the significant additional data collected in the tunnel horizon. For this reason they should be considered during the routine cost-benefit analyses generally conducted for planning geotechnical investigations for tunneling. The authors also believe that collection of such data will reduce Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) conservatism and lead to lower potential for

Jan 1, 2005

By Wen Songlin

This paper presents an experimental program to investigate the behavior of a pile with wings under horizontal loads in sand at laboratory. The work focused on evaluating the lateral resistance behavior and the geometric effect of wing board on the horizontal resistance. Based on the measured data and observed phenomenon, the following behaviors have been observed: 1) A pile with wings is not only a powerful means to improve the horizontal bearing capacity of a pile foundation but also economy and feasibility; 2) The horizontal bearing capacity of a pile with wings increases with increasing of it?s wing board?s area; 3) The pile lateral capacity is also influenced by the wing board?s geometric shape. Under a certain soil and pile condition, there is a critical embedment depth of the wing board, which will yield the maximum horizontal bearing capacity. It was further observed that when the displacement of the pile head increases, part of the horizontal bearing capacity of the pile is developed by the so-called shaft?s anti-pulling capacity.

Jan 1, 2007

By G. J. Hasenfus

Although theoretical and conceptual knowledge regarding the impact of horizontal stress on underground coal mining excavations have existed since at least the mid-1900s, it wasn?t until the late 1970?s that the theory and practical understanding began to mesh. Since that time, particularly over the last 25 years of this Conference, increased empirical study, as well as advances in measurement technology, computer simulation, and bolt design, has significantly improved our understanding of horizontal stress impact, and provided coal mine operators with tools to reliably predict and manage it. This paper provides a retrospective review of some of the more important horizontal stress-related advancements made during the 25 years of Conference proceedings, particularly those for predicting and controlling horizontal stress impacts within underground coal mines. Relevant and significant CONSOL experiences and studies will be presented in context, with particular attention to horizontal stress considerations for longwall faces and gateroads. The significance of horizontal stress will also be placed in context with respect to local geology and structure, ground support measures, and mining configuration, method, and sequence.

Jan 1, 2006

By D. Dolinar, T. P. Mucho

Horizontal stresses are caused by global plate-tectonic forces. During 1995 alone they were largely responsible for the closing of two longwall mines in the United States. This paper presents six case histories from Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky and Alabama. In each case, a mine encountered roof falls or difficult ground conditions at the headgate caused by horizontal-stress concentrations. The problems are detailed, and the control measures adopted are described. In most cases, nearby longwall panels without stress concentrations were trouble free. The paper also discusses detailed measurements that were made at two adjacent Pennsylvania longwalls. One headgate was oriented to avoid a horizontal-stress concentration, and the other was not. Eliminating the stress concentration dramatically reduced roof support loads and roof deformation. The paper concludes that proper panel orientation and sequence is the key to maintaining headgate ground control. The optimum orientation is not parallel to the maximum horizontal stress, as previously thought, but rather it is 20° in the stress shadow of the gob. Other stress-control techniques, including artificial support, are briefly discussed.

By D. Dolinar, T. P. Mucho

Horizontal stresses are caused by global platetectonic forces. During 1995 alone they were largely responsible for the closing of two longwall mines in the United States. This paper presents six case histories from Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky and Alabama. In each case, a mine encountered roof falls or difficult ground conditions at the headgate caused by horizontal-stress concentrations. The problems are detailed, and the control measures adopted are described. In most cases, nearby longwall panels without stress concentrations were trouble free. The paper also discusses detailed measurements that were made at two adjacent Pennsylvania longwalls. One headgate was oriented to avoid a horizontal-stress concentration, and the other was not. Eliminating the stress concentration dramatically reduced roof support loads and roof deformation. The paper concludes that proper panel orientation and sequence is the key to maintaining headgate ground control. The optimum orientation is not parallel to the maximum horizontal stress, as previously thought, but rather it is 20o in the stress shadow of the gob. Other stress-control techniques, including artificial support, are briefly discussed

Jan 1, 1999

By Thomas P. Mucho, Dennis Dolinar, Christopher Mark

Horizontal stresses are caused by global plate tectonic forces. During 1995 alone, they were largely responsible for closing two U.S. longwall mines. This paper presents six case histories from Pennsylvania. West Virginia, Kentucky and Alabama. In each case history, a mine encountered roof falls or difficult ground conditions in the headgate, caused by horizontal stress concentrations. The problems are detailed and the control measures adopted are described. In most cases, nearby longwall panels without stress concentrations were trouble-free. The paper also discusses detailed measurements made at two adjacent Pennsylvania longwalls. One headgate was oriented to avoid a horizontal stress concentration, and the other was not. Eliminating the stress concentration dramatically reduced roof support loads and roof deformation. The paper concludes that proper panel orientation and sequence is the key to maintaining headgate ground control. The optimum orientation is not parallel with the maximum horizontal stress, as previously thought but rather 200 in the stress shadow of the gob. Other stress control techniques, including artificial support, are briefly discussed.

Feb 24, 1997