A Case Study of Multi–Seam Coal Mine Entry Stability Analysis with Strength Reduction Method

"In this paper, the advantage of using numerical models with the strength reduction method (SRM) to evaluate entry stability in complex multiple-seam conditions is demonstrated. A coal mine under variable topography from the central Appalachian region is used as a case study. At this mine, unexpected roof conditions were encountered during development below previously mined panels. Stress mapping and observation of ground conditions were used to quantify the success of entry support systems in three room-andpillar panels. Numerical model analyses were initially conducted to estimate the stresses induced by the multiple-seam mining at the locations of the affected entries. The SRM was used to quantify the stability factor of the supported roof of the entries at selected locations. The SRM-calculated stability factors were compared with observations made during the site visits, and the results demonstrate that the SRM adequately identifies the unexpected roof conditions in this complex case. It is concluded that the SRM can be used to effectively evaluate the likely success of roof supports and the stability condition of entries in coal mines.INTRODUCTIONSince the introduction of roof bolts in the coal mines during the late 1940s and 1950s, roof bolts promised to dramatically reduce roof fall accidents (Mark, 2002). However, ground falls still remain a significant factor in underground coal mine injuries and fatalities. In 2013, ground falls accounted for 4 of the 14 fatalities and 166 of the 1577 reported lost-time injuries in underground coal mines (MSHA, 2015).The design of appropriate support systems requires the understanding of: 1) the variable nature of the rock mass, 2) the performance and characteristics of the roof support, 3) the interaction between the rock mass and the installed support system, and 4) the in-situ and mine-induced stress distribution around the excavation. Over the past 25 years, multiple design approaches have been used in coal mine ground control. The approaches include empirical mechanistic methods, empirical statistical analysis, rules of thumb, and numerical methods (Hebblewhite 2006). In the U.S., Analysis of Roof Bolt Systems (ARBS) can be given as an example of an empirical method. ARBS uses relatively simple equations to calculate the intensity of support provided by a roof bolt system and compares it with a suggested ARBS value (Mark et al., 2001). The suggested ARBS design equation is derived from an analysis of 100 case histories. The ARBS design equation is dependent on two parameters: depth of cover and Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR). More recently, a probabilistic design approach was developed by Canbulat and van der Merwe (2009) in South Africa. In this method, the variability of the rock mass, the mining geometry, and support characteristics are included in the analytical models. The major advantages of these two methods are: 1) they can be applied rapidly and easily, 2) complex rock mass/ roof support interaction mechanisms are represented with simple equations, and 3) they are supported by large databases. However, both methods generally ignore mining-induced stress distribution, details of the roof support system, details of the geological setting, and the interaction between the support system and the rock mass."