The Stress In Rock Around Surface Openings

The paper "Design of Surface and Near-Surface Construction in Rock" by Deere, Hendron, Jr., Patton, and Cording discloses a principal difference between civil and mining engineering as applied to openings in rock. Generally, the civil engineer considers an opening as an asset, where a mining engineer finds that most of his openings are a liability. The openings, or rock surfaces, treated in the paper by Deere and coauthors are designed for lasting stability and the foundations for dams, the diversion tunnels, abutments, and surface excavations are expected to be stable for long periods or provide continuous access and other useful purposes. Except for those openings used for the transportation of men, materials, ore, and for ventilation, the mining engineer finds that his underground openings serve no useful purpose once the mineralized rock has been removed. Usually, these openings create problems such as reduced ventilation efficiency, added requirements for scaling, sealing, and other tasks necessary to maintain or isolate the openings. The surface openings and mine plants present another liability to the mining engineer. After the product has been removed from the earth, the abandoned pits or strips, tailing ponds, dumps, and buildings sometimes become hazardous, unsightly, or occupy surface areas that could be used for other purposes. As a general rule, the various disciplines involved in rock mechanics have different objectives and uses for openings; however, the basic concepts regarding the design or control of openings in rock are similar for each discipline. The review by Deere and his coauthors contains examples of the duplications in this technology, and, in particular, the common approaches used by civil and mining engineers. Therefore, both the review paper and this report consider the problems that are common to most of