Mick
Shotfirer.
Posts: 163
|
Post by Mick on Jun 29, 2008 16:42:43 GMT -5
Hi all as anyone on forum had anything to do with the Glaethbal Plough.(I think thats how you spell it)we had one in the blocking bed at Gomersal.
We only had it for about 6 month it was a right pain,sometimes we would only advance 1 foot a shift
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jun 29, 2008 18:06:34 GMT -5
Hi all as anyone on forum had anything to do with the Glaethbal Plough.(I think thats how you spell it)we had one in the blocking bed at Gomersal. We only had it for about 6 month it was a right pain,sometimes we would only advance 1 foot a shift There were two styles of plough Mick Anbehobel, (sp) and Lobehobel(sp) Not too many used in the UK as the coal wasn't suitable on most seams in the UK. There's a video on the site showing one in operation, probably in South Shields, looks like the 1950's. They were still popular on high production faces in Germany at the peak of their coal industry, and have also been used in Australia, but not that successful. I don't even think there's any operating outside of Europe now. I'll look for the video and put a link here to it for you. coalmine.proboards23.com/index.cgi?board=NCB&action=display&thread=263 |
|
Mick
Shotfirer.
Posts: 163
|
Post by Mick on Jun 30, 2008 4:43:16 GMT -5
Thanks for that John,Well i got that spelling wrong lol.
When they were installing it at Gomersal some of the lads went to Markham Main
to work on a face that had a plough,but i dont think it was the same one.
Mick Ps John videos are no long on u tube wot a shame.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jun 30, 2008 9:14:44 GMT -5
Thanks for that John,Well i got that spelling wrong lol. When they were installing it at Gomersal some of the lads went to Markham Main to work on a face that had a plough,but i dont think it was the same one. Mick Ps John videos are no long on u tube wot a shame. I'll see if I can replace those videos and see if they work. Later on today when I have some more time, I have one of DBT's plough to install, it's a lot better than the old ploughs! Plus some other videos I found. |
|
|
|
Post by garryo on Mar 13, 2009 8:51:57 GMT -5
Germanys revenge for WW2 Many years ago after working on numerous plough faces the above statement seems to be true. On a more serious note, here is a short history of the coal plough and the various types that were in use. The coal plough or Kohlenhobel was invented in Germany during WW2. After the war British mining engineers visited Germany, saw the plough in action and decided to trial one in the UK. The first trial was in 1947 at the Morrison Busty Colliery in West Durham. The face was 3ft 3inches high and 75 yards long in the Bottom Busty seam. The Kohlenhobel was a slow speed plough hauled along the face by ropes. The trial was a reasonable success owing to the coal being very friable (soft). Incidently this plough was made under licence by Huwood The next development was a faster plough again rope hauled this was called a Scrahmhobel. The first plough type to use chain haulage was the Lobbehobel, in this system the AFC and plough were driven by the same motor with a clutch to disengage and engage the plough. The next improvement was the Anbauhobel which had separate motors for the AFC and the plough. Most of this type of plough used in the UK were made by UMM at Newton Aycliffe in County Durham. Variations of the anbau included the Tandem plough which was dsigned for high faces. The most important development was the Reisshakenhobel or high speed hook or planer plough, this plough had its haulage chains in guides on the goaf side and was designed for undulating thin seams. The last development for use in medium height seams was (is) the Glethobel which has a higher speed and a different cutter turret. Both the Reishakenhobel and Gleithobel 9-38 are still in production by DBT in Germany Other types of plough included the Megahobel, Gusto Multi-plow and a type designed by RB Bolton. The remains of the RB Bolton plough can be seen at the NCM museum at Caphouse. Similar to ploughs were scraper boxes including the Harrman Scraper and for Ultra low seams the Hydrocell (also trialled at the Morrison Busty Colliery in 1966) Hope this is of interest More info if wanted  |
|
|
|
Post by coalfire on Mar 13, 2009 10:53:00 GMT -5
Coal ploughs were used for years here in the US. Cleveland Cliffs Pinnacle mine still uses one. In less than 4 feet of coal they will out produce a shear. I know they started to phase them out in the 1980s. Ranger Fuel Beckley #4 had one when they shut down.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Mar 13, 2009 13:24:35 GMT -5
Nice bit of info there Garryo!
Lannie, US coal seams are "soft" in comparison to UK seams. During WW2, mine owners came out to look at American machinery to mechanize UK mines but on getting the machinery back, were very disappointed with it's performance. Most machinery was of the continuous miner type designed for US conditions, and it performed dismally in UK seam conditions.
Ploughs were tried out in all NCB areas after nationalisation, some seams they worked in, others were failures. I heard of one used at Wollaton Colliery in Nottingham, no idea which seam, but hazard a guess at the Piper Seam. Most certainly wouldn't have worked in Deep Hard or Low Main seams, just too hard.
Likewise, the first longwall to operate in Australia was a failure! They used modified Gullick Seaman 5 leg chocks and an AB 16/125 shearer. Wasn't the shearer that let them down it was just conditions were too "heavy" and they lost the face to convergence.
There were a couple of plough faces in NSW at one time, but none are being used there now, all power loader faces with heavy duty shearers.
|
|
|
|
Post by kilburn on Mar 15, 2009 9:44:39 GMT -5
Hi this is my first post having just found the site today - 15 March09 so my starter for ten on this subject is as follows:
During the late 50's and early 60's Granville colliery in South Derbyshire had three Anbauhobel's working in the 'Little Kilburn' seam, think this was formerly known as either the Little Coal or Block Coal. I do have a photo somewhere of a face (K2's) showing the plough at the gate end, I will sort it out and post. I recall working on this face during my apprenticeship and having the job of replacing the shear pins as they failed, several a shift I seem to recall.
|
|
|
|
Post by gordonallan on Dec 4, 2010 10:50:18 GMT -5
For your information Coal Ploughs were used in Scotland at Cardowan Colliery and Bedley in the Kilysth Coking Coal Seam.
Both collieries had a major problem with methane gas from the coking coal seam.
The coking coal seam at both collieries where they used ploughs because the Mines Inspectors did not permit any form of electrical equipment on the coking coal faces.
Previous to the introduction of the 'Dutch' ploughs being introduced the coal face was hand stripped using compressed air picks, setting supports, wooden props and straps. Face length 100 meters (300feet) and a coal seam thickness of 24inches (0.600 mm). 160 mm was the the amount of coal ploughed from the coking coal face each shear.
Sorry, I cannot remember the type or name of Plough.
A plough face consisted of Dowty Dukes with steel square bars for support, set on Meter square system of supports. with low seam 24" AFC and plough haulage motors set in main gate.
This was in the middle sixty's and was quite successful in comparison to the conventional system, evening working on longwall advancing extraction system.
I cannot remember in a plough motor was also set in the return gate or not.
The first shifts production from the first plough faceline was five shears. I remember the shift supervision complaining to the colliery under-manager that "to many 'high headings' from Robertson Street" ( Central West HQ) just getting in the road of production.
From the surveyors point of view, plough faces had to be kept concaved so as the coal ploughs could ploughed correctly. Very difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by philipford734 on Dec 5, 2010 14:31:10 GMT -5
I visited Cardowan in the early 1970s. The plough motor was mounted in the advanced heading in the intake gate. The advanced heading had an undercut machine working at the heading face. They where having problems with methane in the advanced heading, this was causing delays in production due to the plough drive being in the heading. When the plough was working the coal flew of the face, the face team had to work fast keeping the afc shoved over and moving supports forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by erichall on Dec 18, 2010 11:13:29 GMT -5
We had a plough face at Markham Colliery, N.Derbys (Note: Not Markham main which was a Yorkshire pit) in the Threequarter Seam - one up from the Piper - when I was first transferred in 1973/74. Plough seemed to work ok nut we had trouble anchoring it to the soft floor, and in advancing the headings which were hard sandstone. Ths often meant that we ploughed for a large part of the shift in the centre of the face, then had to advance the gate ends quickly at the end of the shifts.
It seemed to work reasonably well, but you needed softer coal than ours to get any benefit. You also needed advance heading material of a much softer material than we had.
Pleased when we opened another face, and equipped it with a DECMT. Seemed rather strange to me having only a couple of CMT Drivers on the whole shift, and fortunately we had just had an intake of men from the newly closed Oxcroft Colliery, which contained a number of experienced Machinemen.
Must admit that I was never over-impressed by ploughing and felt much happier when we turned to the more familiar CMT.
|
|
Mick
Shotfirer.
Posts: 163
|
Post by Mick on Dec 20, 2010 16:35:01 GMT -5
I was glad when they tuck the plough off the face at gomersal,i worked in the loader gate on the anchor station.
I dont remmber a shift that we did'nt spend lowering the legs to the floor to get under the gate bar.
There was also a stage loader in the heading that was always getting fast.
Mick.
|
|
|
|
Post by ummal on Mar 8, 2011 9:53:27 GMT -5
We had a plough face at Markham Colliery, N.Derbys (Note: Not Markham main which was a Yorkshire pit) in the Threequarter Seam - one up from the Piper - when I was first transferred in 1973/74. Plough seemed to work ok nut we had trouble anchoring it to the soft floor, and in advancing the headings which were hard sandstone. Ths often meant that we ploughed for a large part of the shift in the centre of the face, then had to advance the gate ends quickly at the end of the shifts. It seemed to work reasonably well, but you needed softer coal than ours to get any benefit. You also needed advance heading material of a much softer material than we had. Pleased when we opened another face, and equipped it with a DECMT. Seemed rather strange to me having only a couple of CMT Drivers on the whole shift, and fortunately we had just had an intake of men from the newly closed Oxcroft Colliery, which contained a number of experienced Machinemen. Must admit that I was never over-impressed by ploughing and felt much happier when we turned to the more familiar CMT. |
|
|
|
Post by ummal on Mar 8, 2011 10:08:59 GMT -5
I was Project Engineer for the UMM Gleithobel system around 1973 and on-wards for a few years.All the comments are interesting and correct as ploughing was no suitable for a lot of the coal faces it was put on.The best results were obtained in the Welsh pits where the coal seams were higher and softer.Often one pass with the plough was a shift's worth of coal depending on the height of the seam.
I was involved in Markham's introduction to ploughing and Markham Main where this was classed as a 'super pit'' if I remember correctly.The Plough drives were more powerful and I also was involved in the design of the hydraulic drive and gearbox.
If the coal was harder the huckapack fitted with the picks would stand off the face and wear out in no time.Good for business for re-tipping picks but not good for coal production levels.I could see this at Cardowen in Scotland where the coal was hard.
The welsh pits around Abertillary area were the prime ploughing seams and UMM had its distribution centre for spares set up in Wales so this gives some idea of the success of ploughing in that area.
UMM also made Line Pans and Mine Transportation Systems based on the ''coolie car'' ropeway system with small trucks running on dedicated welded track sections and I was also involved in the designs in this sector.
Anyway , in conclusion , ploughing was ''horses for courses'' and was not suited to a lot of seams e.g. Markham , Cardowan and it's eventual demise to coal cutters proved the point clearly.
Alastair - ex UMM 1967-1974
|
|
|
|
Post by gobbings on Mar 14, 2011 18:13:02 GMT -5
Bentinck colliery had a plough, as UMMAL said horses for courses, Bentink sent more shear-pins up the pit then coal. It didn't last long there.
|
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Mar 18, 2011 1:59:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Mar 18, 2011 7:16:28 GMT -5
Interesting Daz, I thought the plough was an outdated dinosaur, but seems to be doing fine. Those output figures are impressive to say the least!!
|
|
|
|
Post by bulwellbrian on Jun 25, 2011 10:44:24 GMT -5
They used a plough in the Main Bright seam at Hucknall. A thin seam of lovely bright House Coal.
|
|
Mick
Shotfirer.
Posts: 163
|
Post by Mick on Jun 25, 2011 11:46:09 GMT -5
When the plough left Gomersal it went to Wheldale,but by the time i got there 1973 it had gone thank god.
Some of the lads that worked on it said it was rubbish,i could have told them that.
Mick.
|
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Jan 11, 2012 16:14:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jan 11, 2012 17:45:31 GMT -5
All those good low faces way back in the 60's Daz, where were all our development engineers?  With good British craftsmen, we could have ruled the mining world had we had the development tools of today. |
|
|
|
Post by dickthecoal on Jan 11, 2012 19:15:53 GMT -5
The Gleithobel and Reishakenhobel ploughs were well used in Mardy Colliery in the Rhondda Fach, S Wales. They were used in the Gorllwyn seam in the upper Yellow horizon and worked in a coal section of around 4 feet. The outbye faces (G1 - G8) used the Reish while the inbye faces (G20/21) used the Gleit. The coal in the inbye faces was much harder than that of the outbye faces hence the heavier duty Gleithobel plough. I worked on G20 as a face team member and the plough was installed to replace a failed trepanner which kept catching fire. Of course the whole drive configuration needed to be changed to instal the plough after a trepanner but in those days it could be accomodated. All faces were advance faces with 25 metre advanced headings.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jan 11, 2012 22:38:29 GMT -5
The Gleithobel and Reishakenhobel ploughs were well used in Mardy Colliery in the Rhondda Fach, S Wales. They were used in the Gorllwyn seam in the upper Yellow horizon and worked in a coal section of around 4 feet. The outbye faces (G1 - G8) used the Reish while the inbye faces (G20/21) used the Gleit. The coal in the inbye faces was much harder than that of the outbye faces hence the heavier duty Gleithobel plough. I worked on G20 as a face team member and the plough was installed to replace a failed trepanner which kept catching fire. Of course the whole drive configuration needed to be changed to instal the plough after a trepanner but in those days it could be accomodated. All faces were advance faces with 25 metre advanced headings. Dick, as the advertising sayings go, "these aren't your Dads ploughs" These are brutes at side of the ones we knew years back. Bit like the 60's AB16's at side of modern shearers, no comparison. Do a Google of caterpillar longwall mining, these guys own what we knew as Anderson Strathclyde and have taken it up several layers. It's a whole new ballgame out there!! I thought I was working with the "bees knees" in the 80's at Angus Place Colliery, but modern coal faces are far bigger in horsepower and output. The Chinese have perfected not only thin seam extraction but also very thick seams that we had to take in two passes. They perfected the French method of Longwall Top Cave in and are selling that technology around the world. There's no wonder the UK coal industry cannot compete, we had the world in our hands at one time with mining machinery and methods and let it slip by us. We were in the forefront of supports, power loaders, switchgear, control etc....And one politician screwed a whole industry up including the manufacturing side. Not to mention the best fitters, electricians, engineers and Managers! Leaving politics out, but how can one? I was lucky, I was living overseas but working on keeping the best equipment in the world running, an Anderson Strathclyde shearer, Dowty shields with automatic controls, and now all owned by an international conglomerate. |
|
|
|
Post by dickthecoal on Jan 12, 2012 4:31:02 GMT -5
Hi John - I've just viewed the Cat web site. Nothing short of mindblowing. 3.6 metres per second!!!!!. Fully automated horizon control the lot. I'd love to see one of those faces operating.
When I think of the advances in maintenance technologies I suppose those advances are to be expected. At the time when I was in the industry we thought we were probably miles behind other industries but when I left and went into railways I found a different picture. The rail industry in the UK is stuck in the 50's and because of the union hold (RMT/ASLEF) on the industry it is not going to move far.
I invented, patented and developed a new track laying system for our company. We built 6 such systems at great expense but they were never allowed to take off as it meant a drastic redution in manpower required, even though it halved the time taken to replace the track and sleepers.
I saw then that the mining industry led the way with technology. It clearly still does.
|
|
