Pillar Design in Bump-Prone Deep Western U.S. Coal Mines
 
    
    - Organization:
- The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
- Pages:
- 12
- File Size:
- 1027 KB
- Publication Date:
- Jan 1, 1992
Abstract
This paper presents a brief overview of  current bump mechanics theories and pillar  design methodologies, and relates these concepts  to experiences at two mines located in a north- central Utah coalfield where different pillar  designs were used to control mountain bumps.  Experiences gained at the first mine  demonstrated the successful implementation of a  two-entry, 9.8 m (32 ft)-wide, yield-pillar  design. A U.S. Bureau of Mines field study  quantified the timing of chain pillar yielding  and resulting load transfer from the gateroad.  In-mine pillar response, although apparently  sensitive to site-specific conditions, compared  favorably to estimates derived using two yield- pillar design methods. A second study conducted  at another mine located in the same district,  but subjected to different geologic conditions,  documents the unsuccessful attempts to employ  progressively narrower three-entry pillar  designs based on successes achieved at the first  mine site. This second mine never achieved a  true yield-pillar design. Use of pillar widths  ranging between 9.1 m (30 ft) and 27.4 m (90 ft)  always resulted in violent bumps in the tailgate  pillars. The pillars were either too large to  yield, or too small to support peak operational  loads. Hypothetical gateroad systems were  evaluated using both analytical and empirical  approaches for configurations comprised of two  rows of conventional pillars, and systems  incorporating both yield and abutment pillars.  Analysis concluded that yield pillars less than  6.1 m (20 ft) wide and abutment pillars ranging  between 30.5 m (100 ft) and 39.6 m (130 ft)  square would be required to achieve a stable  gateroad design. However, results of a field  study conducted on a two-entry, 36.6 m (120 ft)- wide abutment pillar concluded that abutment  pressures from the first panel overrode the  pillar, and that a still larger pillar may be  required to preclude bumps in the tailgate  during second panel mining. Without the benefit  of a demonstrated in-mine success, it is not  clear which design would ensure elimination of  gateroad bumps.
Citation
APA: (1992) Pillar Design in Bump-Prone Deep Western U.S. Coal Mines
MLA: Pillar Design in Bump-Prone Deep Western U.S. Coal Mines. The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1992.
