Search Documents

RMCMI members were welcomed at 12:30 p.m. by President McKeever. Following the luncheon held at the Conference Center, McKeever introduced Mr. Brooks Mitchell who is President, Human Resources Management, Inc. in Richardson, Texas. His topic was "Perspective on the Last Five Years. " The RMCMI Championship Tennis Tournament was held at the Marriott's Mark courts under the direction of Chairman Alan W. Czarnowsky and his committee members Mary Kay Aisenbrey and Jon Pratt. EVENING Tuesday, June 29, 1982 From 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. a Mini-Banquet was held for the young people of RMCMI members in the East Room of Lionsquare Gore Creek Lodge. The 6:00 p.m. time found RMCMI members gathered for a social hour at Marriott's Mark poolside, The Annual Speechless banquet followed at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Center. After the dinner, President McKeever introduced the Golf and Tennis Chairmen who announced the prize winners. Robert W. Wilson, Chairman of the Nominating Committee, presented the following slate of officers for 1982-83: President, Vernal Mortensen; Vice Presidents-Colorado, Charles W. Margolf; Montana, Art K. Neill; New Mexico, Robert Diederick; North Dakota, James A. Brown; Utah, Bernard Bernstrom and Wyoming, John T. Goodier. It was moved by Loren V. Linville, seconded and carried that the elective ballot of RMCMI be cast for the officers as nominated. Mr. Wilson advised RMCMI that a successor to Mrs. Whiteside would be selected at a later date by the Committee and Executive Board inasmuch as Mrs. Whiteside's resignation had been received only ten days earlier and there had been no time for interviews. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. MORNING SESSION Wednesday, June 29, 1982 President McKeever called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in Salon A of the Marriott's Mark. New business included a report of the Auditing Committee and it was moved by Chairman Paul Hronich, seconded and carried that the Financial Report as prepared by the Treasurer, Mrs. Augusta Whiteside, be approved as submitted. The report of the Resolutions Committee was presented by Chairman Ed Ziolkowski who moved that certain resolutions be approved. The motion was seconded, carried and the resolutions follow: 1. RESOLVED, WHEREAS, in the year since the last convention of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, the Institute and the coal industry have suffered the loss, through death, of the services of: John Chrystal Richard R. Fenner G. D. Grayer Albert M. Keenan C. E. Osborn Stanley C. Shubart George Sumers Cal Witmer NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that there be recorded in the minutes of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute recognition of the passing of these members, who have so greatly contributed to the advancement of the industry, both nationally and in the Rocky Mountain area, and that a copy of this resolution be sent to the next of kin as evidence of the sincere and deep regard and sympathy of the members of the Institute. 2. RESOLVED, that in recognition of the faithful service to the coal industry generally, and to this Institute in particular, the status of Life Membership in The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute be hereby conferred upon these members: John T. Leech George C. Lindsay A. George Setter

Jan 1, 1982

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Before we open the discussion on the Utah mining laws, I want to bring out what I consider a slight misunderstanding on some of the things that I said this forenoon relative to our comparison of accidents. I did not mean to infer that we, as mine officials, are satisfied we have done the best we can to eliminate the accidents, when I was talking about a four-to- one comparison. I do not want any- one to get the idea in their heads that I do not think we are doing all we can. There is not any of us who can state that, even if we better these figures. It is the general understanding that these figures are based upon ratios per thousand man shifts and not upon the tonnage basis that we use. If it were based upon a tonnage basis, I think the figures would be pretty nearly reversed, for we are producing from two to four tons more per man than they do in Great Britain. The discussion will now be continued as I said this morning. There is a gentleman in the audience here that is as guilty of making these laws as I was, and I am quite sure when speaking he will confine himself to the subject of Utah Mining Laws and the prospective results. Before Mr. Monay starts with his paper, I want it understood that this discussion must be finished by 2:30 for the reason that we have still quite a lot of business before us this afternoon.

Jan 1, 1925

By Eugene McAuliffe

The labor turn-over at coal mines has long been a fertile subject for parade by complaining coal operators, the question invariably occupying a place of prominence in the list of disabilities that tend to increase the cost of producing coal, adding likewise to the now startling number of accidents that occur in coal mines. This disability, however, is like the weather question, which some humorist once remarked of by saying, "The weather is something we all talk about, but nobody does anything to improve it." Endless compilations covering the shift of employment by coal mine labor have been made and published, and while the actual loss expressed in cents per ton in cost of coal produced has never been determined, the fact remains that such represents a substantial item, taking the mines of the country as a whole. Efficiency engineers who have made studies covering the cost of breaking in and training each new man employed in certain manufacturing industries, fix same as averaging not less than $100.00 per man, and when the character of mine employment is given due consideration, including its ever-present hazards, the difficulty of close personal super- vision of individual employes, and the, at times, almost impossible ability to transmit to men of many diverse nationalities understandable instructions, it is quite safe to say that the cost of securing and breaking in new men for underground mine work will fully equal that suffered by the factory managements. When we speak of mine labor turnover we must necessarily exclude the enforced shifting about of men who are laid off by the closure of mines due to accident or lack of market, con- fining ourselves to the turn-over occasioned by- (a) the dismissal of individual men or groups of men; (b) the voluntary resignation of the individual workman. It is these two methods of severance that the employer and employe alike suffer from; the item "Unclaimed Wages" carried in the accounts of every large coal company illustrative of the "quit this job, get another one" attitude of many workmen, who frequently, when leaving, fail to claim small sums due them, while others, in turn, leave a train of debts, large and small, behind. There is' ample evidence abroad to the effect that many

Jan 1, 1925

A great many questions were asked Mr. Bright, and Mr. Bright's opinion was given on a number of subjects. He spoke at length on spring suspension of locomotives, bringing out the necessity for better spring suspension due to heavier weights and higher speeds now developed. The subject of dynamic braking was brought up, and the opinion of the engineers present was that dynamic braking was not a desirable feature except where heavy, long, adverse grade is encountered. Mr. Goddard and Mr. Bright had a spirited discussion regarding ball bearings, bringing out the opinion of the meeting that ball bearings in motors are preferable to sleeve bearings, and the few failures so far encountered are due to improper application or insufficient size of bearing. Mr. Shubart brought up the question of locomotive speed, mentioning some high speed work on main haulage, also an interesting experiment in a large Eastern mine where very slow speed, 3 1/2 miles per hour, gathering locomotives were substituted for the high speed gathering locomotives with an increase in cars gathered and a material decrease in derailment and accident. Mr. Bright mentioned the improvement in gathering reels, and Mr. Shubart mentioned the safety in the use of the concentric cable in direct current, using the outer wire as the ground wire, so that in case of accident to the cable, the ground wire acted as a protector to the live wire, materially decreasing the danger of sparking. Mr. H. I. Smith of the Bureau of Mines brought up the question of explosion proof construction, and Mr.. Bright and. Mr. Shubart explained the construction adopted by two of the larger manufacturers. Experiment has shown that the force of explosion in motors due to gas does not exceed 150 pounds per square inch. All forms of screen or baffles have proven an actual source of danger, due to the collection of dust, usually soaked in oil, forming an active means of propagating flame, together with the fact that all these appendages are frequently left off when the motors are repaired. Modern construction eliminates all openings, screens, devices for stopping or extinguishing flame. The motor is made entirely enclosed, practically air tight, all joints are ground and all openings necessary for access and attention are closed by bolted plates. The case is made stout enough to withstand any interior explosions, and ample ribbing is provided for heat dissipation. Mr. Bright was asked regarding the use of contactor control. He replied that his company is now recommending contactor controls for series and parallel starting on all locomotives of 13 tons and over, and particularly on the tandem units that are now becoming popular in coal mining work. The question of dynamic braking and reversing was brought up and Mr. Bright explained that this made a very complicated contactor installation but they had

Jan 1, 1922

The 1933 meeting will be held in Denver in May or June, the exact date to be announced later. If you have any suggestions for the place or program, send them to the Secretary at once.

Jan 1, 1932

The Role of Partnerships ?Industry history ?Companies were their own kingdoms ?MSHA and NIOSH were out of touch and focused on enforcement with no direction ?Labor and management were constantly at odds with each other

Jan 1, 2002

The Institute thanks the following for their invaluable assistance, not only in assisting of the planning and organizing for the Vail meeting, but also for their tireless effort in transcribing, editing and processing the various speeches for these proceedings: Elizabeth Sturges-Murray Executive Assistant to the President Western Mining Operations W. R. Grace & Co. Jacklyn Grove Office Supervisor Mining Division W. R. Grace & Co Donna Hollister Further, the Institute announces the appointment of Doris G. Finnie as Secretary-Treasurer. Formerly Office Manager of K&P SALES ENGINEERS, INC., Doris has assisted for the past 15 years in registration for RMCMI. The Institute has opened an office at 777 Nile Street - Suite C Golden, CO 8040 1. Phone her at 3031278-1912 with any changes, corrections or suggestions.

Jan 1, 1982

Jan 1, 1985

By Stanley C. Suboleski

Overview ? Ten minutes or ?the hook? ? Focus on Appalachia, productivity and production ? Message: ? Appalachian mining scene has fundamentally changed

Jan 1, 2007

By F. C. Miller

The briquetting of fuel is an industry centuries old and has followed the hammer and tongs method of making use of any by-product fuel by the simple process of sticking the mass together with anything that will stick. If fuel briquetting, as an industry, once in the lead over coal mining, had kept pace by introducing science, there would not at this time be the mad scramble to look up the fuel briquette family tree and accept every new method as fruit without the cultivation that makes fruit worth while. Cultivation of industry is a mass of evidence showing a tremendous expenditure of money for mistakes paving the way to success. Cultivation of the mining industry is practiced by nations and low temperature distillation and fuel briquetting will in the near future receive the same consideration. Fuel briquettes were used as a winter fuel in Ireland and Scotland before the discovery of America' or the introduction of coal as a fuel to replace briquettes in Ireland. This industry was practiced by the peasants who collected peat from the bogs and cut it into brick-shaped blocks, which were set up to dry in the sun and stored under cover for use or for sale. Demand for peat briquettes led to competition that resulted in a highly refined fuel. In some localities the peat was ground and purified from the earth by washing before placing in presses to squeeze out the excess moisture and form a block of peat about four inches thick. These blocks, after standing in the sun for a few weeks, were cut into briquettes about four inches square by twelve inches long and moved under cover where they remained until thoroughly dry. In this form peat makes an excellent fuel with considerable heat, small amount of smoke while burning, and tough enough to stand hauling in carts and boats without breakage. Slack from domestic coal, non-coking and anthracite, has until recently commanded a very low price and the attention of briquette men has centered on ways and means of preparing this class of fuel for the market in the form of briquettes. Industrial plants with automatic stokers have taken kindly to cheap slack or slack that was cheap because the price has been boosted to a figure where the cost of slack plus the cost of binder and operation makes fuel briquettes somewhat expensive. However, fuel briquettes are being turned out in commercial quantities to compete with prepared lump coal and the demand is in favor of the briquette man. Science has been called to aid the briquette and it is possible to purchase a complete coal briquetting plant that will turn out between four tons per hour and thirty tons per hour of briquettes at a calculated cost per ton to cover material and every item down to insurance on the plant. A few briquettes are being ' made with a mixture of- Portland cement and pulverized coal, where this class of briquette is cheap in the making, there is the increased amount of ash due to the cement to contend with and the briquette is not one that can compete with lump coal. Most binders have a fuel value, such as coal tar, pitch, asphalt residium, flour, glue and secret binders. Most briquettes are of an egg shape, weighing between one and one-half ounces and five ounces, pressed to form with a pressure varying between 1,000 pounds and 2,500 pounds per square inch. This' pressure, together with the binder, make a lump of fuel harder than most grades of soft coal. Most of the briquettes are free from pitch odor, and any tendency to leave a trace of the binder on the fingers, easy to handle, quick to, ignite, high in heat value and capable of indefinite storage without any change. Evaporative efficiency of briquetted fuel in stationary, marine and locomotive boilers has proved that a great many low-grade coals can be fired successfully in the briquetted form, where the same fuel without briquetting failed to give boiler rating.

Jan 1, 1923

of our good friends and fellow members: James Dalrymple, Sr. R. M. Perry A. E. Oliver R. M. Harding C. L. Oliver Arthur S. White Arthur N. Fancher A. E. Lindrooth D. A. Stout Clayton Morrison Frank O'Ryan Charles Billington who left the world better for their having lived in it.

Jan 1, 1935

By R. A. McAllister

The haulage system employed to convey coal from the face to the outside, dates back to 300 B. C., when slaves carried the mineral from the face to the consumer. The British discovered coal on their island about 800 A. D. and they were the first people to make practical use of coal and make coal mining a successful operation. The Britons carried cargoes of coal in their trading expeditions long before Columbus discovered America. The early history of mine haulage in the British mines relates to women with baskets, a practice still in use in Korean mines. Coal was discovered in America in 1679. The first mine worked in the United States was opened at Richmond, Va., in 1770. The haulage inside consisted of a crude sled loaded with, sacked coal ready for the market and drawn by a mule. The tipple consisted of the very simple operation of loading the sacked coal to the back of a lame mule, which represented the transportation system between mine and boat. The capacity of the boat was one ton and this large production of coal was intrusted to a small boy, who delivered to any place in town his bushel basket filled' with winter fuel. One daring coal operator shipped fifteen tons of coal by boat to Philadelphia and the man in charge had to seek employment to pay his board while finding customers for his fuel. A production of five tons per day would hardly attract attention to any system of haulage, add three ciphers and the importance of mine haulage is made very plain to the management. I will consider a production between 3000 and 5000 tons in eight hours and endeavor to bring out the essential features necessary to make the haulage system a regulated precise factor. There are two phases to mine haulage, the mule trip from the room to the motor or gathering party and the main haul to the outside. The motive power, whether done by mule, wire-rope or electric motor cannot be effective if left to the power alone. Conditions must offer no obstacle and it is the removal of obstacles that make the haulage system. This paper will consider a flat seam with the usual jump ups and downs or natural obstacles to be met and mastered by the successful tail-rope or electric system. The pit car is no longer a screening system scattering the fine coal from the room to the outside, adding to the costs by giving employment to road cleaners and polluting the ventilating system with a fog of coal dust. It is not a contrivance with four flat wheels and a labor killer in the room or on the tipple The large producing mine has a pit car with a tight body, roller-bearing wheels, with a self-oiling system that offers the least possible draw-bar pull to overcome the friction resistance, a hand brake conveniently placed and positive in action, a wheel base short enough to make room necks and long enough to

Jan 1, 1921

President Robert Wilson opened the meeting at 9:00 a.m. He introduced William A. Bear, General Manager Bear Coal Company, Inc., Somerset, Colorado, who presided over the session. George Nugent, Peter Kiewit Sons' Company, Sheridan, Wyoming, presented a most interesting film "Montana Mine Reclamation." His biography follows: George Nugent first entered the coal business in 1943 when he developed Peter Kiewit Sons' Co.'s first coal mine-Big Horn Coal Company at Sheridan, Wyoming. Since that time he managed an expansion program for P.K.S. in mining that resulted in the development of two other producing mines - Rosebud Coal Sales Company at Hanna, Wyoming and Decker Coal Company at Decker, Montana, in which Pacific Power and Light is a partner. Applications are now pending for a third mine. Black Butte, a joint venture of P.K.S. and Rocky Mountain Energy Company, near Point of Rocks, Wyoming. Nugent is a Past President of the Wyoming Chapter, Association of General Con- tractors, Wyoming Mining Association and Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. He was President of Big Horn Coal Company and Rosebud Coal Sales Company as well as Manager of the Mining Division of Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. and Decker Coal Company when he retired Jan. 1, 1975.

Jan 1, 1976

T. T. READ, BUREAU OF MINES: Mr. McAuliffe has asked a very practical question. Expressed in another way, the question is: If we have decided to use rock dust to prevent coal dust from exploding, have we got to take rock, that is, solid material,, break it up and finally grind it into dust (and fine grinding is very expensive), or can we take material that is already in a pretty fine state of subdivision and thereby save the expense of pulverizing it? Most of the preceding discussion has been from the view-point of practical experience, and I should like to suggest that we have not had enough practical experience in rock dusting to be able to answer this question, from the viewpoint of experience, with the degree of definiteness that Mr. McAuliffe desires. With your permission I will discuss the matter briefly from the theoretical standpoint, because after all the theoretical considerations, insofar as we understand them correctly, will apply to every' case, whereas in coming to a decision on this matter it will be necessary to take into consideration local conditions, which will necessarily vary in every case. Considering the matter in a rather elementary way, the first point is: What makes coal dust explode? The air of this room is full of dust at the present moment, even though we do not notice it. If you were to close up the room for a week, enough dust would settle on the floor so you could write your name on it. Of course, the dust which is in the air of this room is not coal dust but even if it were coal dust and you were to bring an open light in' here we all know that the dust would not explode. The reason for that is that the dust particles are not close enough together for the flame to propagate itself from one to the next. You will probably be able to see in the demonstration in the gallery on Saturday that the coal dust explosion is practically a very rapid burning of the dust. When you light one piece of dust it burns and gives out heat and if there is another piece of dust close enough to it so that the heat from the first piece is able to bring a second piece up to the burning temperature, then the flame will propagate itself through the mixture. But, if the particles are so far apart in the air that the' heat from one particle is dissipated before it reaches an adjoining one, and is therefore not able to bring the second particle up to the burning temperature, then the flame will not propagate. To get a coal dust explosion, it is not sufficient to have coal dust suspended in the air. The coal dust particles must be close enough together in the air so that the heat from one burning particle is able to heat the adjoining particles up to the point at which they will burn. There has been some discussion of the size of dust particles that will cause an explosion to propagate, and it has been pointed out that the minus 200-mesh dust is the most dangerous, and that particles coarser than 20-mesh will not propagate an explosion. There are two reasons for that. A large particle has very much smaller surface in proportion to its weight than a small particle has. You know the old story about the Indian who when asked how he could go around in cold weather without any clothes on said that an Indian was all face. A 200-mesh particle is almost all surface and there= fore is able to burn almost instantaneously, which means that it gives out its heat almost instantaneously, whereas a large particle with less surface in proportion to its weight burns more slowly, gives out its heat more slowly, and the heat has more time to be dissipated. The second reason why coarse dust does not easily propagate a flame is because it is so hard to make it

Jan 1, 1924

[Page Officers of the Institute 5 Minutes of the Twenty-third Meeting 9 Preservative Treatment of Mine Timber at Primero Mine-F. T. Baker 10 Discussion of Treatment of Mine Timber JA Shearing Coal-John H. Emrick 19 Discussion of Shearing Coal 22 Local Chapters 29 Experiments in Increasing the Production at Dawson, New Mexico-Scott Dupont 30 Discussion of Experiment in Increasing Production 33 Report of Safety Committee-Warren C. Bracewell 41 Bureau of Mines Defines a Gassy Mine 58 Mechanical Loading in Coal Mines-S. W. Farnham 59 Discussion of Mechanical Loading 65 Vocational Training-Discussion 69 Accident Rate-Discussion 71 Holmes Safety Association Chapter Plan-J. J. Forbes 73 Washing Domestic Coal-f. M. Charles 78 Discussion of Washing Domestic Coal 81 Safety Work in Western Mines-Discussion 86]

Jan 1, 1926

Robert M. Magraw John W. Roshold Thomas H. O'Brien Joe Mann Walter M. Dake E. P. Lucas "How well they fell asleep Like some proud river, widening toward the sea; Calmly and grandly, silently and deep. Life joined Eternity."

Jan 1, 1948

By Sam Andrews

Mr. President, Officers and Members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: This is my first attempt to prepare and read a paper before your association. The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, I understand, was formed for the purpose of increasing knowledge relating to coal mining in all its various branches by study, research and discussion. In writing my paper, I have tried to be as practical as I can, at the same time, present my arguments so that they can be easily understood. When I use the word science, I mean organized common sense. I humbly ask my hearers to be a little patient, while I read my paper, and be "to its faults a little blind, and to its virtues a trifle kind". Western Europe is said to be the cradle of the coal mining industry. We are told that the Ancient Britons were acquainted with the use of coal long before the Romans invaded and conquered their country. The Romans were never too proud to learn from the outer barbarians, and possibly acquired the precious secret from them: We are told that it was not until the 13th century, that the coal mining industry, assumed any noticeable importance in Britain, and on the Continent. In the year 1259 Henry the 3rd granted a charter to the freemen of New Castle on Tyne, allowing them to mine coal. For a long time it was used in the arts and manufactures only, wood continuing to be the common domestic fuel. As has been the case with almost every great benefit, the introduction of coal as a fuel was stoutly resisted at first, and we find its use prohibited in the city of London in the reign of Edward II, by Royal proclamation ; which was soon discovered to be injurious and foolish, and consequently withdrawn. It is interesting perhaps, to know how this Royal proclamation was brought about. A lady of the Royal household was riding in her coach one day through a village in which coal was burned as a fuel, and she suffered such a cough by inhaling the coal smoke that she decided to call a council of suffragetts, who ultimately decided that the burning of coal was injurious to their health and complexion. They drafted out a petition and presented it to the king, who speedily issued the order that no coal was to be burned in the city of London. The penalty for disobeying this order was death by hanging. We are informed of one poor man who continued to burn a lump of' coal on his fire in winter time; he was arrested, sent to prison and condemned to death; the judge in passing the sentence solemnly stating that if he was not allowed to get a fire that was hot enough in this world, he felt that he surely would be allowed one in the next.

Jan 1, 1921

By R. S. Morton

MR. CHAIRMAN AND GENTLEMEN: To be invited to address the members of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute on a particular subject is an honor I sincerely appreciate. The subject of this paper is, ?The Advantages of Having Such Men as the Fireboss Under State, Rather Than Corporation Jurisdiction." On the fireboss, primarily, depends the safety of the mine. When all the rest of the mine workers are still comfortably sleeping in the wee small hours of the morning the fireboss steals noiselessly away, from his bed to take up his daily task, a tour of inspection. He enters the mine, he inspects alone they workings that will be filled with men whose safety is in his keeping. Loyal to his fellow men and responsibilities of his position; he seeks for danger in every place, on every road and travelingway; going over caves, through dangerous places where none of the others are expected or allowed to go alone. How many of us give a thought to these dangers and the faithful work that this guardian performs for our safety. After the fireboss has made this round of inspection, he reports all the dangerous places to the foreman and enters them in the book; he is supposed to have performed his duties; he has no authority to enforce his recommendations. He has found a number of rooms that have not been timebered as they should be for the safety of the digger; he has told the diggers to they timber, up better for their own safety; he has kicked to the foreman about these same places. These conditions. continue until there is an accident. The fireboss reports, broken crossbars or bad roof on a roadway or some other danger to the foreman, but the foreman does not have it fixed, making, excuses, as he cannot put any one on that work today; or that it will stand until some idle day, and that is the way things go until the fireboss gets so he wonders what good he really is, is it any wonder it is hard to get good men to take this position of fireboss? The remainder of the shift the fireboss is used as a general roust-about, having to do such, work as building stoppings, help the timberman or track layers, pull rails out of danger in pillars, a trapper is off and he is told to trap that day, when the mine is idle he is laid off to cut expenses. That is the way the fireboss is treated. The fireboss is not merely a merely a necessity to be lightly regarded but a factor whose authority should be unquestioned. The fireboss has made his district and knows just what conditions the workings are in, and sees lots of dangers that the foreman does not. In the morn-

Jan 1, 1921

By D. C. McKeehan

The importance of properly bonded rail joints has received the attention of The National Research Council, whose committee will investigate several methods now used and determine the merits of each as applied to street railways. The results of this investigation should be appreciated no less by the mining industry. Literature on the subject of bonding mine tracks agrees, as a rule, "that the work is poorly done." With present day facilities there is little excuse for inadequate track conductivity, and a job well done must be maintained in order to realize results. Many years ago The Union Pacific Coal Company installed their first haulage locomotive, and at that time used the channel pin bond for joining the rails. The system utilized 500 volts and the, relatively small current for a large amount of power, undoubtedly, contributed to the success of the system. The bonding of both rails was considered imperative in those days, while now the bonding of one, rail is considered sufficient in most instances. The recent installations utilizing 250 volts and correspondingly heavier currents required a more effective method of joining the rails for use as an electrical conductor. The company has used the arc-weld bond since its introduction in 1919. The art of electric welding found great favor for various methods of doing the work. The first arc-weld bonds were placed on the outside of they ball of the rail, but the bonds were ill-adapted to rails lighter than sixty pounds per yard, and the results were that grooved locomotive wheels or derailed cars removed the bonds. Familiarity with the process of electric welding brought forth numerous schemes for joining the rails. In one, instance the rails and splice-plates were welded together and with excellent results for a short time. Track movement and vibration finally broke the welds and the method was dis¬carded. Another scheme consisted of placing a channel pin over each end of an annealed copper wire about twenty inches long. The idea was to develop some way of using short lengths of scrap wire. The pin and wire were then welded to the base of the rail. Numerous joints made in this way are still intact, but successful welds were so exceptional that the practice was abandoned. Some of these bonds were welded to the web of the rail, with the result that practically all rails broke at the weld; however, this is our only record of broken rails with arc-welded bonds. At one time a quantity of No. 2 bare iron wire wasp available and was tried as a bond and proved very satisfactory. Two or three strands twenty inches long were used and were welded to the base of the rail. The method was cheap and effective and of some merit for light rails on temporary track. The use of iron wire was criticized because it did not give a balanced circuit; that is, one having equal carrying capacity for trolley and track circuits; and I am of the opinion that this is not always necessary. The total length of bond that is in circuit is so small that it contributes very little additional resistance to the complete circuit consisting of trolley wire, rails and bonds.

Jan 1, 1923

[President Vernal Mortensen Vice Presidents Colorado Charles W. Margolf Montana Art K. Neill New Mexico Robert Diederick North Dakota James A. Brown Utah Bernard Bernstrom Wyoming John T. Goodier Secretary-Treasurer Doris G. Finnie Executive Board Roy Coulson A. Z. Dimitroff Claude P. Heiner J. R. Kastler Loren V. Linville Shirl C. McArthur Ira E. McKeever, Jr. Ralph E. Moore Robert E. Murray V. O. Murray George A. Nugent John Peperakis John A. Reeves Max A. Robb Joe T. Taylor R. M. von Storch R. R. Williams, Jr. Robert W. Wilson Mike Zakotnik, Jr. Edward F. Ziolkowski]

Jan 1, 1982