Posts tagged ‘Tech’

August 23rd, 2010

Tech Talk: Longwall Mining with Shearers

The development of longwall coal mining took a significant step forward with the development of the armored face conveyor (AFC) and the self-advancing supports of both chock and shield designs that I described last time. Put together they provide two of the three major parts of a modern longwall. The third, and the topic for today is the mining machine itself.


The longwall panel with shields and a mining machine is at D.

In the evolution of longwall, an undercut beneath the face was initially cut out by a man wielding a pick. By the turn of the 19th century, this was starting to be replaced by a machine, much like a giant chain saw, that undercut the face to a depth of around 5 – 7 ft. And, while in earlier times the coal was broken from the solid by hewers that used picks to break out the coal to the free face left by the slot, with machine undercutting the bulk of the coal was broken down by single sticks of explosive set into the coal at about 6-ft intervals along the face.

The AFC, as well as carrying the coal away from the face, had two hard bearing surfaces at the top of each pan, which connected together to provide a path along which a machine might move. But what sort of machine was going to be capable of mining the full face of the coal? There were a number of different designs developed, many of which started with the long cutting chain of the coal cutter, and added other blades to it, in order to fully remove the bulk of the coal. I’ll mention only three of them, in passing.

The first idea was simply to mount a cutting post at the turning wheel of the conveyor, deep in the cut, in order to back cut the coal, and move it out of the web. The machine had a number of teething problems and did not prove very effective in underground trials. It was quickly passed by the Meco-Moore Cutter loader which by 1956 had become one of the most popular integrated mining machines in the United Kingdom. It is important for those who talk about the energy required to mine coal to understand how it worked.


Meco-Moore Cutter Loader

This was still at the time that the roof was supported by manually placed props and bars (which can be seen in the background). However the bottom of the coal was first cut with a cutter bar that was 6 ft long. Concurrently the central part of the seam was cut by a second cutter bar, which cut a slot to a depth of 4 ft 6 inches in the coal. A third slot, at the back of the face, was cut using the triangular shaped cutter bar shown in the illustration. Coal has sensibly no strength in tension, because of the cleats and bedding planes that form within it during the process of forming the coal. Thus the web of coal that has been undercut, mid-cut and back-cut will collapse onto the small cross-conveyor, which carries it over to the main AFC.

As I mentioned, the machine became quite popular, since it both cut the coal, and loaded it onto the conveyor. However the small cross-conveyor needed to move the coal over to the main conveyor was relatively fragile, and frequently broke, dropping production. The scene was therefore ready for two more machines, one of which I will discuss today, and the other (when I talk about mining thinner seams of coal) in a later post.

The new machine was called a shearer. Developed by John Anderton, who worked for the British National Coal Board, the initial concept was brilliantly simple. Take the coal cutting machine that was common in many mines, turn it on its side so that the drive shaft was horizontal, and mount a cutting drum to the drive shaft that used to operate the cutter bar.


Cutter and Shearer

The picks on the drum were set on a spiral, so that as the drum turned it would feed to coal over to the conveyor, on which the machine was riding. The shape of the scroll, with and without picks, can be seen from the lower parts of the Anderton Shearer Memorial in St Helens. Lancashire.


(From Lowton Websites) The lower scroll shows how the shape would, as with a wood drill, feed the coal back to the conveyor as the drum rotated.

This proved to be a relatively simple machine, adaptable from existing machines in the mines and became the predominant mining machines for longwall faces. Over time the drum was mounted on a boom, so that it could range up and down to adapt to varying seam conditions, and a second drum, also ranging, was added to many machines, at the other end. In this way higher coal could be mined.

Modern shearer, showing the size, and how it would integrate with the AFC, on which it rides, ahead of the shield supports which protect the miners. (Note the coal face would be where the man is standing).

The machines need many less miners to operate than the fifteen men that would hand load out a face back in the early 1960s, and now there are automated devices to detect the interface between the coal and the rock, and which can raise and lower the drums to adjust for these geological changes.

Looking down on a model of such a mining operation, with the front canopies of some of the shields removed to show how the conveyor “snakes” over. The operation of the face is as follows:


First the shearer mines off a web of coal that is perhaps 2-ft deep. This is loaded onto the AFC (green) and carried away. The hydraulic rams on the shields then push the conveyor over so that it is beside the face. Then, in turn, each shield lowers, and the ram is reversed, to pull it forward the same 2-ft so that it again covers the working area. It then raises, and resupports the roof, while the support next to it is advanced. In this way the machine continuously slices off the coal as it moves the face forward.

The technology allows high rates of underground production. For example, in May 2009 the Newlands Northern mine in Queensland mined 961,891 tons from its longwall, 251,720 tons of that in a single week. (And up to 46,000 tons in a day).

For those interested in the technical details:

The Newlands longwall is equipped with Bucyrus EL3000 shearers which have installed power of 1,590 kW and cutting power of 2 x 650 kW.

The shearer employs a jumbotrack 2000 haulage system with haulage power of 2 x 125 kW and is fully automated. The longwall is equipped with 147 two-leg roof supports with a yield load of 1,040 t and a working range of 3 – 5m. The face conveyer is a Bucyrus PF4, 1332mm wide with a 42mm twin inboard chain with 2 x 855 kW CST drives.

The longwall is controlled by Bucyrus PM 4 controllers, with the 400 kW PF4/1532 coal crusher and 400 kW SK11/18 beam stage loader also from Bucyrus, and motors manufactured at ATB Morley’s factory in Yorkshire.


The Oil Drum – Discussions about Energy and Our Future

May 17th, 2010

Tech talk: Coal mining – the transition to pit ponies

One of the problems that has consistently plagued underground coal mining lies in the height of the coal seam that is being mined. This was the portal (i.e. entrance) to a coal mine that we once ran a research project in, near Summersville, W Va.


Dr. Rupert and I in May 1975 at the portal of a W Va mine. (Note the kneepads).

The mine was extracting only the coal, and you can see that the entry height comes to just below our shoulder blades, which made walking into the mine (about half-a-mile or more) very tiring, since you have to walk in quite bent over. As a result, the machines that work in these low conditions, have the operators lying almost recumbent as they steer and operate them. Back in earlier times, however, before there was much machinery underground, conditions were much different. And so today I thought I would talk a little more about those early conditions and how changes began to evolve.

I’m motivated a bit in this by finding (on a market stall in Lancaster) an illustrated autobiography by James Dunn called “From Coal Mine Upwards,” that was written in 1910 by a 70-year old who began his life in a mine. As the prologue noted (abbreviated):

Over sixty years ago in a small village on the border of the Leicestershire coalfields a company of men met to discuss what was to be done with a poor lad eight years old. The richest farmer in the neighborhood said” “I should like to ask two questions before you decide. The first is, how much learning does it want to drive the plough?” and “How much learning does it need for a lad to work in the coal-pit?” The answer was very little, and to the coal pit at eight years of age I was sent to work. It was in those dismal mines, four hundred yards deep and about a mile underground from the bottom of the shaft, that I commenced to earn my daily bread.”

He was fitted with a flannel shirt, wide trousers, a cap, a smock-frock, and heavy nailed boots. He walked the two miles to the mine to be there at 6 am and he earned tenpence a day, except that the mine rarely worked more than half days, so that he made around 30 pence (when 240 pence made a pound which was worth about $4 at the time I believe) a week. After a ten to twelve hour day underground he then had to walk home.

He was lowered into the mine on a chain fitted with loops, and then walked to the working face, having been given a candle to light the way. His job was to haul at the front of a tub, so that he took off all, but his trousers, socks and boots and his flannel cap.

The man I had to work with showed me how to place a leathern belt around my loins, with a light chain attached about a yard long, which was hooked to the front of the small wagon of coal thus pulling from the front while the man pushed behind.


From James Dunn “From Coal Mine Upwards”, W. Green London, 1910. 227 pages

The mine was worked by subletting different jobs, thus a miner would work in measures of a “stint” which was two yards wide, by a yard deep to mine the coal. He loaded the tub from the face of a tunnel that he was driving into the coal, and then swopped out a full and an empty tub to continue.


Loading the coal. A sculpture in the archive at Missouri S&T

The initial rails were wooden, and the tubs were turned on steel plates at the end of the tunnel (the “flat”). Once the tubs were started back to the mine shaft, they passed through a series of folk:

this process was worked in what they called “stages”, or lengths, a man having one stage, and then two boys the next, then another miner, and then two boys, and this was continued throughout the whole length. Now it will be seen that every pair of boys were running between two men – one at each end of their stage, and the great concern of the boys was to meet the man at either end, so as not to keep them waiting. . . .(if late) The man at the other end would be waiting with his empty truck (tub) and the probability was that the boys would be beaten with his strap.

The men were paid by the ton delivered to the shaft top (a token in the tub marked who had loaded it) but the boys were paid by the day, and thus not nearly as well rewarded.

Rails were the first major improvement, transitioning from just dragging the corves on one’s back, which had been the earlier method. But the tubs had still to be moved manually. It was pictures such as this, that had led to the legislation that got women and young children out of the mines in 1842.


Woman hauling a corf, Royal Commission Report, UK, 1842.


Hauling the flat (on which a corf or two would be mounted. Note the chain) MO S&T archive

They were replaced, in large part by ponies, but there was an immediate consequence. It had been possible to use people to drag tubs along in low coal, but that doesn’t work with ponies. (And in some seams they still remained impractical).


Putting in a 2 ft 10 inch coal seam, 1929 (A Bevin Boy Remembers, Ted Holloway, Henge Publications, 1993)

The tubs were also of wood at this time, since it allowed the front planks to be removed to fill the tub, where the roof was too low to easily fill it over the walls. But the ponies had to have more height, and so the height of the roadways had to be increased (which also made it easier to walk down them). This was done by blasting a small amount of rock from the roof of the tunnel, giving the extra height. As James Dunn noted “My lot was never as hard again.”


From “The Miners,” Anthony Burton, Andre Deutsch Ltd 1976

The ponies had the advantage that they could pull more than one tub at once, and with the restriction on height gone, they were more frequently made of metal. You may notice the lad riding on “the limmers.” That was, strictly speaking, forbidden, though I think we all did it.

As mines became more productive, so the ponies could not keep up with the number of tubs that had to be hauled down the access roads, and they were, in turn, replaced by long “endless” ropes of wire, to which we attached the tubs, and which then hauled them from around the face area down the mile or more to the shaft, where they were disconnected, loaded onto the skip and hauled to the surface. But I’ll talk about the first steps in mechanization next time.