Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Rock Drill v. Hand Labour.

The following report frefm the mine manager of .the Caledonia! Low Level G-.M. Co. shows the cost of the two systems of driving:—The following particulars of cost of drive to present date will show, as near as L>can at present, the cost of work per foot. The drive was started on the 13th February, and was continued a fortright by baud labour, until February 26. DuriDg that time a distance of 26 feet was driven. On this date (February 2(5) the rock drill was commenced to work, which makes it to have been_ working six weeks to present date (April 8), but deducting the various stoppages of the pump (three in number) which prevented the men from working, and which was about a week's lost time, this leaves the drill to have been working five weeks full time. During that time a distance of 165 feet has been driven. This, you will see, makes an average for five weeks of 33 feet per week for the rock-drill. > I find it difficult to get at the exact cost, owing to the stoppages, not having had a clear month!s juS. But taking the last month's accounts and wages, it will stand as follows, exclusive of hauling account:—Wages, from March 8 to March 22, £52 10s 6d; ditto from March 23 to April 5, £66 15s: total wages/£llß 5s 6d. Accounts for month of March, exclusive of account of winding, £85 12s 4d; four weeks' rent of drill, £12: total cost of driving 132 feet (being four weeks' driving at 33 feet per week), £215 ltsTlOd, You will thus see the average cost per foot is about £1 13s; adding hauling account for four weeks, £34 2s (per foot about ss 2d), gives atotal of to 18s 2d per foot. This is exclusive of saving in drainage fees, whichis at the rate of £65 per month. There may be, ■ome items I have omitted, but they would increase the amount but little. For your guidance I/would state that I believe the lowest contract that has been let for driving at the'64o-feet level crosscut drive of similar description cost about £2 9s 6d Ser foot, not including hauling, airoxe?.: t timber, or rails and sleepers •f'inficejy cutting the ground and trucking;?mtillock to shaft. Their average driving per week about 12 to 13 feet. This shows the advantage of the rock-drill over hand labour, as you will see we have, as far as we can judge at present, been able to drive- nearly three for one by hand labour; and also as to cost, as, including timber, rails, hauling, &c, the cost is still less, and, as you know, time is a great consideration.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THS18840419.2.21

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Thames Star, Volume xv, Issue 4767, 19 April 1884, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
454

Rock Drill v. Hand Labour. Thames Star, Volume xv, Issue 4767, 19 April 1884, Page 3

Rock Drill v. Hand Labour. Thames Star, Volume xv, Issue 4767, 19 April 1884, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert