An Assessment of Coal Pillar System Stability Criteria Based on a Mechanistic Evaluation of the Interaction between Coal Pillars and the Overburden

"Coal pillar design has historically been based on assigning a design factor of safety (FoS) or stability factor (SF) to coal pillars according to their estimated strength and the assumed overburden load acting on them. Acceptable FoS VALUES (have been assigned based on past mining experience, and at least one methodology includes the determination of a statistical link between FoS and probability of failure (PoF).The role of the pillar width-to-height (w/h) ratio has long been established as having a material influence on both the strength of a coal pillar and its potential mode of failure. However, there has been significant professional disagreement on using both FoS and w/h ratio as part of a combined pillar system stability criterion, as compared to using FoS in isolation. The argument is that, as w/h ratio is intrinsic to pillar strength, which, in tum, is intrinsic to FoS, it makes no sense to include w/h ratio twice in the stability assessment. At face value, this logic is sound.However, this paper will argue that there is a valid technical reason to bring w/h ratio into system stability criteria (other than its influence on pillar strength), as it is related to the post-failure stiffness of the pillar, as measured in situ, and its interaction with overburden stiffness.When overburden stiffness is bought into pillar system stability considerations, two issues emerge. The first is the width-to-depth (W/H) ratio of the panel, in particular whether it is sub-critical or super-critical from a surface subsidence perspective. As a minimum, this directly relates to the accuracy of the pillar loading assumption of full tributary area loading. The second relates to a reevaluation of pillar FoS based on whether the pillar is in an elastic or non-elastic (i.e., post-yield) state in its as-designed condition, as relevant to maintaining overburden stiffness at the highest possible level.The significance of the model presented is the potential to maximise both reserve recovery and mining efficiencies without any discernible increase in geotechnical risk, particularly in thick seams and higher depth of cover mining situations. At a time when mining economics are, at best, marginal, removing potentially unnecessary design conservatism without negatively affecting safety is of interest to all mine operators and is an important topic for discussion amongst the geotechnical community."