Replies
Login to add a Reply

Drifting About

Posted on 22. Aug. 2012 - 07:05

Gasgoine Wood,Selby, N Yorks had 2 x 14mile drift belts. One by REI/Anderson Strathclyde and t'other by Cable Belt. Rated for about 8000tph each they were extendable underground and were hot vulcanised above ground. Both were works of art:high quality machines, too rich for today's blood. Different league: but still side by side: considering the extensive foundation requirements. ■

Two Drifts?

Posted on 23. Aug. 2012 - 05:35
Quote Originally Posted by louispanjangView Post
Gasgoine Wood,Selby, N Yorks had 2 x 14mile drift belts. One by REI/Anderson Strathclyde and t'other by Cable Belt. Rated for about 8000tph each they were extendable underground and were hot vulcanised above ground. Both were works of art:high quality machines, too rich for today's blood. Different league: but still side by side: considering the extensive foundation requirements.

Yes there was two conveyors BUT one was in the North Drift and the other in the South Drift!

The Cable belt was in the North Drift and the Steel-cord belt in the South Drift - see below

https://forum.bulk-online.com/showth...sus-Cable-Belt

Does anyone else know of twin belt installations????? ■

Re: Twin Conveyors ( Drift/Incline )

Posted on 24. Aug. 2012 - 02:57

Hi There..

We designed and commissioned a 3.4 Megawatt incline shaft conveyor for the then Majuba Colliery here in SA, way back in the early 90's.

It was the first one of a pair (side-by side with room for a Scotch car in between) in the same decline. The second one never went in, as the mining turned out to be too difficult due to faults in the seams.

It was subsequently de-commissioned.

The thing is though that the mine called for two belts to do 4500t/h total of coal, and asked for two 1200mm wide St 4500 belts.

I never understood why they didn't ask us to just put in a single but wider belt

Incidentally, what made you ask the question?

Cheers

Taggart LSL Tekpro ■

Graham Spriggs

Reply To Graham

Posted on 27. Aug. 2012 - 03:53
Quote Originally Posted by Graham SpriggsView Post
Hi There..

We designed and commissioned a 3.4 Megawatt incline shaft conveyor for the then Majuba Colliery here in SA, way back in the early 90's.

It was the first one of a pair (side-by side with room for a Scotch car in between) in the same decline. The second one never went in, as the mining turned out to be too difficult due to faults in the seams.

It was subsequently de-commissioned.

The thing is though that the mine called for two belts to do 4500t/h total of coal, and asked for two 1200mm wide St 4500 belts.

I never understood why they didn't ask us to just put in a single but wider belt

Incidentally, what made you ask the question?

Cheers

Taggart LSL Tekpro

Thanks for reply I am doing a small project where two proposed underground mines would like to utilise ONE drift to house two conveyors.

This way they claim they can save sinking an additional drift BUT the single drift will have to be wider to accommodate the additional

conveyor and have a centre access way .

There is some thought that they could place the conveyors in an under/over configuration but access would be very difficult. ■

Mind Your Footprint

Posted on 27. Aug. 2012 - 04:05
Quote Originally Posted by MechniqueView Post
......... small project where two proposed underground mines would like to utilise ONE drift to house two conveyors.

This way they claim they can save sinking an additional drift BUT the single drift will have to be wider to accommodate the additional

conveyor and have a centre access way .

There is some thought that they could place the conveyors in an under/over configuration but access would be very difficult.

How small is small? Double deck conveyors will present the following for starters:


Concentrated foundation loads

Maintenance access for the bottom conveyor

Vulcanising etc clearances for the bottom conveyor



You will need 2 instead of 3 accesses. You should, must if there is fire risk, provide side accesses.

As Graham mentioned: why not use just a single bigger belt on the grounds of reduced tunnel work; pull wires; scraper adjustment etc etc? That is the machinery option. What yourClient does about his tunneling work is going to be another story which will, or should, govern his schedule as well as his CAPEX. ■