Search Documents

By Markus Papst, Denise Millier, Daniel Beckers, Axel Preusse

"At an open-pit lignite extraction mine in Germany, groundwater has to be pumped over a large area, which leads to subsidence at the surface. As long as the geology of the area of influence is homogeneous, the subsidence is uniform and has marginal influence on buildings.Since the geology of many regions is characterized by faults, there are different rates of subsidence along those faults, which can lead to considerable consequences. Those different rates of subsidence on both sides of a geological fault are associated with the structure of the geology and soil mechanical properties. Horizons with various thicknesses and types of soil are affected differently by the groundwater pumping because of the offset of the faults, and thus react dissimilarly to dewatering.The smaller the grain of the geological horizon, the stronger the chance of shrinking, which leads to a stronger effect at the surface; therefore, dewatering impacts on clayey soil are different to those on sand and gravel. Regions consisting of meadows with turf inclusions are endangered as well; compared to the surrounding geology, those areas react in an entirely different way to water removal, which leads to immense differences in subsidence.The differences in area and respective subsidence impacts, as well as if it is possible to localize those areas, is an issue which needs to be analyzed. Furthermore, detailed mapping can help in the development of future forecasts about those subsidence differences and can also help with monitoring geological faults. In the context of subsurface spatial planning, this mapping has to be kept under review medium- to long-term.INTRODUCTIONThe utilization of underground mining is of increasing significance and of high interest, both for the common good and for future generations. For decades, humanity has been extracting resources from the subsurface, and salt, coal, lignite and water - just to mention a few resources - have been extracted from underground (Sailer, 2013)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Frank Schmidt

Due to changing geology, rib bolting is an ever-changing problem in ground control. With the economic status of the coal market, the need for safely increasing productivity in rib bolting is at an all-time high. The current solutions used in the market often require a long installation time (e.g. if collapsed holes have to be redrilled) or result in poor quality installations that can lead to insufficient ground control. A new bolting product based on the simple screw principle has been developed to bolt ribs faster and with a more repeatable, higher level of installation quality. The paper covers the product invention and development, the fastening principle and its advantages over current systems and first experiences in the market. The first underground trials have shown that the screw anchors can be installed safely and efficiently, often faster than traditional methods. The screw anchor does not suffer from conventional bolting issues such as collapsed holes due to bad ribs. The screw anchors are designed to obtain steel failure and load testing underground shows consistent fastening in all types of conditions.

Jan 1, 2013

By J. F. T. Agapito

Overcore measurements at the North Fork Valley (NFV) coal mines in western Colorado have shown that horizontal stresses are highly anisotropic. Measurements have been made in four mines at various depths. In many measurements, the maximum horizontal stress is three to four times higher than the minor horizontal stress. At the West Elk Mine, maximum and minimum horizontal stresses of 24 MPa and 6 MPa, respectively, have been measured at depths of 640 meters (m). Under highly anisotropic stress conditions, ground control problems associated with both high and low horizontal stresses can develop. While high horizontal stresses can produce cutter failures and floor heave, low horizontal stresses can allow block fallouts. This paper summarizes the horizontal stress measurements in NFV mines and, in particular, in the West Elk Mine where their role in roof fall and floor heave failures is discussed. This experience has led to an improved use of ground support and safer mining operations at depths of 640 to 700 m.

Jan 1, 2005

By Erdal Akyol

The rockbolting method of support is employed widely in several countries in different of mines. Hard rock mines use this method extensively. Soft rock mines, such as coal mines, have employed standing supports (steel sets) as the main method, although some countries such as the U.S.A. and Australia have preferred rockbolting. There is increasing interest in extending the rockbolting method in coal mines. The application of rockbolting techniques in an industry which traditionally has not applied such techniques, has required the development of a systematic design approach. This design approach uses extensive monitoring, to asses the viability of the support system in differing conditions. Currently at a number of new and existing mine developments in the U.K., rockbolting is being successfully applied. Although, inevitably some localised geotechnical problems have been encountered and have needed to be taken into account. The effect of faulting on roadway conditions is discussed in this paper and a design approach has been applied using a numerical analysis method, namely the Finite Element Method. The results presented in the paper serve as a useful guide to roadway support designers, and in particular the role played by different bolts in a range of conditions.

Jan 1, 1992

By Russell C. Frith

This paper examines the design of longwall shields, focusing on those aspects that are critical to either their successful application or contribution to failure during longwall extraction. In many instances, longwall shields are assessed and designed along lines similar to that of roadway ground support systems, namely according to typical or normal geotechnical conditions. However it will be contended that for longwall shields, this is inappropriate because unlike roadway ground support systems, longwall shields cannot be supplemented with additional or secondary support in localised areas of adverse geotechnical conditions. In other words, the longwall shield needs to be designed according to what are judged to be worst case or adverse geotechnical conditions?the outcome being that a well-designed shield will be significantly over-rated for the majority of its working life. Therefore, it will be argued that the additional capital cost of such shield design can be readily justified as a prudent riskbased outcome that is essential to minimising future business risks due to strata instability on the longwall face. Shield geometry will be discussed, including such relevant factors as leg angle, inclination of the top caving shield, canopy ratio, operating height range, and tip to face distance. These are all well-established longwall shield design considerations and, most importantly, areas whereby inadequate design can render a longwall shield as highly ineffective. The issue of tip to face distance will be considered in detail, in particular, the extent by which it is an important geotechnical design consideration, the conclusion being reached that, in fact, it is not. The critical importance of maximising set to yield ratio within practical operating limits will be justified, the wisdom of this having been subject to questioning in more recent technical literature. Overall, the aim is to provide the industry with a set of suggested guidelines for future use when designing longwall shields and, hopefully, to initiate discussion on a subject that, unlike roadway ground support design, is not well covered in its entirety in the published technical literature.

Jan 1, 2013

By Pinnaduwa H. S. W. Kulatilake

To exploit an underground mine effectively and safely, it is important to have a good understanding of the geotechnical behavior of the rockmass surrounding the underground mine excavation. The aim of this study was to investigate, at the threedimensional level, the geotechnical behavior around a tunnel excavated in a metal mine in China. A three-dimensional numerical model was built by using the 3DEC software package to simulate a tunnel excavation under a high in situ stress condition and by relying on the information available on lithology, geological structures, in situ stress measurements, physical and mechanical properties of intact rock, discontinuities, and interfaces between different rocks. The authors also investigated the effect of the discontinuity network, possible intact rock and discontinuity parameter variability, representation of rock masses as discontinuum or equivalent continuum material and rock support system on the deformation, and stability around the tunnel. A very good agreement was obtained between the collected field deformation monitoring results and the results of the conducted numerical stress analyses with appropriate geomechanical property values.

Jan 1, 2013

By D. W. H. Su

Following a roof fall in the B12 headgate of a CONSOL Pennsylvania Coal Company (CCPC) underground coal mine in February 1998, CONSOL R&D and Exploration initiated an underground roof geology reconnaissance program along the B13 and B14 developments to define potential roof instability areas and to recommend appropriate supplemental headgate support. This reconnaissance program revealed the presence of a thick, massive Pittsburgh sandstone channel overlying the B13 and B14 panels. Surface and underground core holes confirmed the close proximity and the very massive, nonlaminated nature of the sandstone. To mitigate anticipated adverse conditions at the B 13 and B 14 longwall faces due to delayed caving of the massive sandstone behind the shields, a task force consisting of Operations, Exploration, and R&D personnel was formed in May 1998. Several operational adjustments were made by mine management, including repairing damaged lemniscate links, maintaining immediate forward shield support, and implementing measures recommended by the task force intended to boost the shield set load density at the face. After reviewing available geotcchnical information, the task force also recommended fracing of the massive sandstone over the B13 and B14 panels to enhance caving characteristics and further reduce the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone near the face. Horizontal fracs were created at a horizon about 25 feet above the Pittsburgh seam main bench over the two panels in June and November 1998, respectively. To evaluate the effect of sandstone fracing and operational adjustments on the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone, three finite element models were constructed and analyzed. Results from the finite element analyses indicate that one horizontal frac, 25 feet above the Pittsburgh seam, would reduce the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone by approximately 50 percent, maintaining them at a level below the ultimate strength of the sandstone. Operational adjustments to increase the support set load density and support stiffness could reduce the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone by a maximum of an additional 10 percent. Shield pressure monitoring at the B14 midface confirmed the presence of a lower roof pressure zone inby and outby the 1314 frac holes. This lower face pressure significantly contributed to improving the B13 and B14 longwall productivity and safety. The total production downtime due to bad top at the B 12 face within the interval of channel influence was 30,600 minutes compared to about 3,500 minutes each for the B13 and B14 faces. The average longwall advance per machine shift for the B13 and B14 faces within the channel was about 70 percent higher than that for the B 12 face.

Jan 1, 2001

By Xinzhi (Thomas) Du

"In order to monitor the overburden strata deformation over a longwall mining area in the Pittsburgh Coal Seam, three boreholes were drilled across the longwall panel. Each borehole employed multiple-point borehole extensometers (MBE) to monitor overburden strata movement during and after the longwall face passed under the study area. The longwall face in the study area was 1,428 ft wide and 4,000 ft long. The average mining height was about 7 ft. The overburden depth ranged from 550 ft to 650 ft with an average of 600 ft. The final extensometer readings indicated that overburden strata initially showed sign of movement when the longwall face was 700 ft inby the MBE. The rate of strata movement accelerated when the face was 300 ft inby MBE. When the face was directly under MBE, a sudden anchor displacement occurred, indicating rapid strata movement once under-mined gob. The readings showed insignificant strata movement after the longwall face was 400–700 ft outby MBE.INTRODUCTIONThe longwall mining method is an efficient mining method of underground mining. Surface and subsurface strata are inevitably disturbed above the longwall mined out gob. Figure 1 shows the four zones of disturbance in the overburden strata in response to longwall mining.A longwall shear cuts the coal seam and allows the immediate roof strata to cave into irregular blocky material to fill the void. This is called the caved zone. The caved zone extends from the mining horizon to six or eight times the mining height, depending on the bulk factor of each caving strata layer. The fractured zone is located above the caved zone, in which the strata breaks into regular blocks by vertical or sub-vertical fractures caused by bending forces due to the weight of the underlying strata. The surface soil and rock crack zone extends to approximately 50 ft below the surface. The surface cracking is caused by downward movement of the surface. Between the fractured zone and surface crack zone is the continuous deformation zone. The strata in this zone deforms gently without causing any major cracks that extend long enough to cut through the thickness of the strata, as in the fractured zone (Peng, 2006).The objective of this project is to provide fundamental rock mechanics research about overburden strata movement response to longwall-related activity. The findings aid in better understanding pillar stability, gas well subsidence management, hydraulic impacts, and numerical modeling."

Jan 1, 2018

By Lawrence R. Artler

The North American Coal Corporation, its subsidiaries and other coal companies, have been mining the Pittsburgh #8 seam in Eastern Ohio for several decades. Underground mining by the "room and pillar" method, and more recently by longwall methods, have been practiced. This presentation deals with ground control problems and subsequent solutions to those problems for both mining methods. But first, let me briefly discuss some pertinent points about the geologic conditions of the coal seam near the southwest edge of the Pittsburgh Coal Basin. The Eastern Ohio region of the Pittsburgh Coal Basin is situated along the western edge of the unglaciated Allegheny Plateau. The local terrain is quite steep, with topographic relief of 430-500 feet being common. The coal thickness in the region ranges from 36"to 120", with the average being 60" in the areas being currently mined. Regional dip of the seam is toward the southeast in an amount of 10 to 40 feet per mile. A cross-section of the mineable seam generally consists of the main bench (60"), a rider coal (6"-12"), and a claystone parting (6"-12") for a total excavated height of 6-7 feet. Greater excavated height occurs where the fireclay floor is so soft and friable that movement of mechanical equipment breaks up the first 4-8 inches. Generally, the main bench and rider coal thin and become more variable toward the southwestern portion of the mining area. The rider coal also grades laterally into a coaly carbonaceous shale. In those areas where the roof coal can no longer be counted on to help support the immediate top, some of the main seam (6") is left to protect the overlying 8'-12' of mudstone/claystone strata. These strata are virtually non-bedded, highly slickensided units and are "hung in suspension" by roof bolts from a more competent limestone stratum above. These mudstone/claystone units are very susceptible to moisture and thus to the weathering cycles. The rider coal or 6" of the main bench is left in place to "seal" the mudstone/claystone units in Mains and Submains development. For many years, it was thought that the strength of the limestone member was detrimental in attempts to fully extract the seam by conventional means; however, longwall methods that have been more recently employed have broken the "myth" that the Redstone Limestone prevents full extraction of pillars.

Jan 1, 1984

By Baogui Yang, Jie Yang, Anthony Iannacchione

"The cemented coal gangue-fly ash backfill technique (CGFB) has commonly been used to control subsidence damage caused by underground coal mining. This paper discusses the CGFB backfilling process used at the Xin-Yang coal mine, Shanxi Province, China. A general description of the components of the CGFB are provided. The reaction of the strata to the backfilling process is simulated with a scaled physical model based on the Xin-Yang conditions and verified with subsidence points on the surface. With the help of the cemented filling materials, the CGFB produces only a slight bend to the overburden roof strata over the longwall panel. Physical models were constructed at the China University of Mining and Technology, Beijing, to simulate actual conditions. The modeling results show minor fracture distribution in the overlying strata and lower abutment pressure development within the backfilling area. The effectiveness of the CGFB technique is verified by a reduction in the vertical surface subsidence measured above the backfilled area.INTRODUCTIONUnderground longwall mining is the most efficient underground means to recover coal resources and is used widely in China, the US, Australia, and Europe. However, this type of mining has introduced some serious environmental impacts. Perhaps the most significant environmental issues are the surface and groundwater impacts associated with the formation of the subsidence basin (Bell and Donnelly, 2006). Backfill technology has been used for years to mitigate subsidence impact. Simply speaking, the backfilling technique places filling materials into the void left from the extraction of coal. When this material is placed within the gob, it is capable of partially supporting the overburden until a new equilibrium is reached. Essentially, the backfill material inhibits crack development and expansion caused by the strata movement and mitigates damaging ground deformations.The cemented gangue-fly ash backfill (CGFB) is one type of novel backfill technology, consisting of cement, coal gangue, fly ash, water, and additives in varying concentrations. The CGFB is mixed on the surface, pumped underground through a pipeline as a slurry, and placed in the void behind the longwall shield under the protection of specially designed hydraulic supports."

Jan 1, 2018

By Peter Zhang

"Room-and-pillar mining with pillar recovery has historically been associated with more than 25% of all ground-fall fatalities in the underground coal mines of the United States. The risk of ground falls during pillar recovery increases in multiple-seam mining conditions. The hazards associated with pillar recovery in multiple-seam mining include roof cutters, roof falls, rib rolls, coal outbursts, and floor heave. When pillar recovery is planned in multiple seams, it is critical to properly design the mining sequence and panel layout to minimize potential seam interaction. This paper addresses geotechnical considerations for concurrent pillar recovery in two coal seams with 70 ft of interburden under about 1,000 ft of depth of cover.The study finds that, for interburden thickness of 70 ft, the multiple seam mining influence zone in the lower seam is directly under the barrier pillar within about 100 ft from the gob edge of the upper seam. The peak stress in the interburden transfers down at an angle of approximately 20° away from the gob, and the entries and crosscuts in the influence zone are subjected to elevated stress during development and retreat. The study also suggests that, for full pillar recovery in close distance multiple seam scenarios, it is optimal to superimpose the gobs in both seams, but it is not necessary to superimpose the pillars. If the entries and / or crosscuts in the lower seam are developed outside the gob line of the upper seam, additional roof and rib support needs to be considered to account for the elevated stress in the multiple seam influence zone. INTRODUCTION Room-and-pillar mining accounted for about 40% of underground coal production in the United States in 2016. Pillar recovery, practiced in about one-third of the room-and-pillar mines, represents about 10% of the coal mined underground, yet it has historically been associated with more than 25% of all ground fall fatalities (Mark, Chase, and Pappas, 2003). In some U.S. coal fields, particularly central Appalachia, many coal mines are operating under geological conditions with multiple coal seams. The risk of ground falls during pillar recovery increases under multiple-seam mining conditions. The hazards of pillar recovery associated with multiple-seam mining include roof cutters, roof falls, rib rolls, coal outbursts, and floor heave (Mark and Tuchman, 2007; NIOSH, 2010b). Pillar retreating creates abutment pressure, not only in the currently mined seam, but also in the overlying or underlying seams. Multiple-seam interactions become more pronounced as overburden depth increases and interburden thickness decreases. To safely recover the pillars in multiple seams, it is critical to properly plan the mining sequence and panel layout to minimize potential multiple-seam interaction."

Jan 1, 2017

By Brian Daniels, James Farroni

"Draw rock (small rock that forms/falls when bolting the roof and/or rib) is the cause of numerous injuries annually. These injuries result in lost work hours and low morale. The report below explains how ""Mine Safe Draw Rock Shields"" (Pans) are used in an underground operation. This report will chronicle the application of these pans in a Southern West Virginia coal mine along with testing data that measures their effectiveness. Since the introduction of these pans in 2002 the amount of reportable accidents relating to draw rock has decreased by 80%. The report below reinforces that perimeter contact is critical to the performance of these pans. In addition the strength of these products at the perimeter will determine their effectiveness. The results of the testing data outlined in this paper, along with the physical records at the study mine, confirm that the use of pans has significantly reduced draw rock falls at this facility.BACKGROUNDSupplemental support is defined as ground control that is used in addition to required support in an underground mine. Some examples of supplemental support are:• Pans• Mesh/Geogrid• Mats• Half Headers• Boards• ChannelA typical roof condition that warrants the use of pans is when loose small rock is dislodged while bolting. If the top is very scaly (loose, thin rock) additional supplemental support can be used in conjunction with pans such as mesh or geogrid (See Figure 1). Pans will provide protection where used and approximately 12 in (250 mm) out from perimeter. This is achieved by contact with a surface which will put scale in tension up to 12 in (250 mm) from perimeter of pan.INTRODUCTIONThe ease of applying a roof support system is critical to effectively operating a deep mine. Figure 2 shows how a pan is installed in conjunction with a roof bolt and bearing plate. The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) requires that supplemental support cannot decrease the performance of required support. The goal of using all supplemental support is to provide additional safety for the miner which equates to increased productivity.The ability of skin control products to contact a surface is the single most critical characteristic (Figure 3 and Figure 4). If the material does not contact the surface it cannot be effective. Therefore, the flexibility, design and proper installation of the products are critical in determining their effectiveness. Figure 5 shows the proper installation of the roof pan.To reiterate, all skin control must be applied in conjunction with a roof bolt and ASTM approved bearing plate as shown in Figure 4."

Jan 1, 2010

By David F. Gearhart

A cooperative study was conducted between Signal Peak Energy and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to evaluate the behavior of a pre-driven recovery room under less than 200 ft of cover. The design of the support systems for a pre-driven recovery room must provide control of the roof and ribs during the changing stress environment experienced throughout the final advance of the longwall into the recovery room. It must also provide a stable area where mine personnel are not exposed to undue hazards during shield recovery operations. This recovery room was constructed in two phases; each phase mined a 21-ft-wide room that was heavily supported, and subsequently fully backfilled with 800-psi, cellular concrete. Instrumentation to monitor the recovery room performance included borehole pressure cells (BPCs) placed in the head gate and tailgate pillars, at four locations across the longwall panel, in the fill material, and in the first row of outby pillars near the center of the panel. Four roof-to-floor convergence sensors were installed in the back fill material and a vertical, multipoint borehole extensometer (MPBX) measured the displacement of the strata above the recovery room. Surface surveys were conducted to measure MPBX collar movement. The data show that the front abutment load was transferred onto the recovery room backfill and the out by pillars as the longwall panel was extracted. As the longwall approached the recovery area, the fender and shields yielded, but the backfill provided enough support to keep the room stable as the longwall advanced to its final position. The system worked as planned and the face was recovered in record time.

Jan 1, 2014

By Bruce K. Hebblewhite

Tower Colliery is a longwall mine operated by BHP Coal Illawarra Collieries, Southwest of Sydney, Australia It mines the Bulli Seam at a depth of approximately 450m. The surface topography overlying the mine consists of several steep-sided river gorges, up to 68m in depth, which run at oblique angles across a sloping terrain Apart from some light rural development, the surface land is essentially natural bushland, but is traversed by a major freeway. This crosses one of the gorges on twin, six-span, box-girder bridges, with bridge piers up to 55m in height. Consequently, a major surface subsidence monitoring program has been in place for several years now, including intensive conventional, GPS and E DM surveying, plus real-time monitoring of critical components of the bridge structure. Although the bridge and freeway are outside the conventional angle of draw' subsidence influence criteria, and have seen only negligible vertical deformation as a result of mining, there has been widespread evidence of regional horizontal deformation of the land surface, large distances away from the mining area The effect at the bridge has been well within acceptable tolerances, primarily because of the regional nature of the movements, with very little differential movement observed at the bridge piers Gorge closure and evidence of large headlands of land moving `en masse' have been observed. Horizontal movements of hundreds of millimetres have been recorded in some locations where gorge closure has been monitored. Possible explanations of these movements include one or a combination of mechanisms such as pre-mining stress relaxation. valley notch effects, valley bulging, regional joint patterns, movement toward active goaf areas, vertical gorge shearing' and shear failure of horizontal bedding planes below the surface This paper presents a case study of the regional horizontal ?subsidence displacements? measured during mining. and a discussion of the possible explanations for these phenomena

Jan 1, 2000

By Cosmo P. Fazio

Remote control roof bolting is approaching reality with the continued improvement of a number of components and subsystems being developed by The Bendix Corporation under sponsorship of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Department of Energy. The era of remote control research in roof bolting was initiated by the USBM in June of 1973 with the award of a contract to Bendix Corporation to design and build a roof bolt bender/inserter device. One year later in June of 1974, the Bureau awarded five parallel R&D contracts to develop a longer-than-seam-height flexible roof drill. The Bendix flexible drill design has been the most successful of the five, has been thoroughly tested in both laboratory and underground situations, and has been incorporated into a number of machine applications along with the roof bolt inserter. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the advantages of remote control bolting from both a safety and productivity standpoint. Applications of the flexible drill and roof bolt inserter on a number of government and industry supported programs are used to illustrate the advances being made toward the goal of remote control.

Jan 1, 1982

By Michael Jenkins

This paper reviews the history of rock burst research in the Coeur d'Alene Mining District of northern Idaho over the last 30 years. Rock bursting is a problem because of a combination of geological factors in the region--complex structure, high horizontal stresses, and strong, brittle rock that readily stores strain energy. The Bureau of Mines has cooperated with industry to study rock burst phenomenon for many years. Early work focused on methods to mitigate bursting problems within the context of existing mining methods. In the 1970's, researchers began investigating methods for altering or controlling conditions that lead to rock bursts. These control measures become part of the stope development that precedes mining or are changes in the mining process itself. Although, researchers continue to develop microseismic techniques, the major research effort focuses on developing a new mining method to reduce the number and severity of rock bursts in order to improve safety and increase productivity in the Coeur d'Alene Mining District.

Jan 1, 1987

By David P. Conover, Jake Bain, Christopher M. Ross

"Highwall mining of thick (up to 100 ft) steeply dipping (20° or more) coal seams provides many challenges, both geotechnically and operationally because seam dips near or in excess of highwall mining machine capabilities are encountered. Maximizing coal recovery while maintaining highwall stability requires innovative techniques with regard to web and barrier pillar layout, depth of penetration, and choice of mining horizon within the seam. Stability of highwall mining slopes, openings, and pillars are typically analyzed using the ARMPS-HWM program, as well as LAMODEL, UDEC, and Slope-W modeling. Highwall stability can be maintained and highwall mining production optimized by applying design criteria in creative ways, including alternating miner penetration depths and initiating mining of thick seams toward the bottom of the seam. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal requires careful planning and execution, including close cooperation between geotechnical design engineers, the mining company, and the highwall mining contractor. This paper describes the application of creative design techniques to a specific pit arrangement at the Westmoreland Kemmerer Mine, Kemmerer, Wyoming. Highwall mining was accomplished by UGM ADDCAR Systems, LLC, on a contract basis. INTRODUCTION Highwall mining is a technique for attaining additional coal recovery after the economic strip limit is reached in surface mining. It involves remote deployment of a continuous miner in openings beneath the final highwall, with no personnel entry. Many candidate areas for highwall mining have thick and steeply dipping seams. Mining downdip presents challenges related to the maximum pulling capacity of the machine, traction of the cutting head, and material conveying, all of which limit penetration depth. Maximum penetration is greater for flatter slopes and decreases for slopes nearing the threshold of the maximum machine operating angle. Most highwall mining operations are relatively flat with slight undulations within the seam; therefore, the highwall mining pillar design criteria applies fairly equally to the entire mining area. However, in steeply dipping deposits, design criteria based on higher overburden loads at the far end of the penetration are excessively conservative for the shallower portions of the openings near the highwall."

Jan 1, 2017

By Matthew J. DeMarco

Research personnel at the U.S. Bureau of Mines have conducted longwall gate stability studies at four western U.S. mines attempting to employ yield pillars for improved ground conditions. Located in the Book Cliffs and Wasatch Plateau coalfields of north-central Utah, these operations are generally characterized by multiple-seam mining, cover depths averaging 450 - 600 m (1,500 - 2,000 fl), occasionally extending beyond 760 m (2,500 ft), abrupt cover depth variation due to the overlying canyon/mesa topography, and massive, rigid sandstone roof units. Such conditions encourage severe gate and panel coal bumping, as well as various types of roof instabilities and occasional floor-heave problems. To alleviate these adverse conditions, several mines have employed yield pillars to-reduce hazard-inducing excessive gateroad stress concentrations. This paper describes the evolution of gateroad designs at four of these operations, the specific mining conditions involved, and the general stability performance attained by using yielding gate systems. Mine experiences are "compared" in terms of basic setting conditions, and the general concepts of yielding system applicability and success potential are summarized.

Jan 1, 1993

By Michael Gauna

Ground fall injuries and fatalities in United States underground coal mines have shown a diminishing trend. Advances in bolting and standing support systems have led to improved safety in underground coal mines. However, the Crandall Canyon Mine disaster in 2007, in which 9 individuals were fatally injured as a result of a widespread collapse, emphasized that proper mine design is a critical issue that must be addressed. The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has instituted technical review procedures structured to facilitate the implementation of safe mine designs in underground coal mines. The technical review process and the typical information required are outlined in this paper. The range of mining situations that lead to a technical review, common design methods submitted for review, and their relevant guidelines and limitations are also discussed. Additionally, the relationship between design criteria and mine site historical experience is discussed.

Jan 1, 2011

By Michael Gauna, Christopher Mark

"Coal bursts involve the sudden, violent ejection of coal or rock into the mine workings. They are almost always accompanied by a loud noise, like an explosion, and ground vibration. Bursts are a particular hazard for miners because they typically occur without warning. Despite decades of research, the sources and mechanics of these events are not well understood, and therefore they are difficult to predict and control. Experience has shown, however, that certain geologic and mining factors are associated with an increased likelihood of a coal burst. A coal burst risk assessment consists of evaluating the degree to which these risk factors are present, and then identifying appropriate control measures to mitigate the hazard. This paper summarizes the U.S. and international experience with coal bursts, and describes the known risk factors in detail. It includes a framework that can be used to guide the risk assessment process.BACKGROUNDCoal bursts involve the sudden, violent ejection of coal or rock into the mine workings. They are almost always accompanied by a loud noise, like an explosion, and ground vibration. Bursts are a particular hazard for miners because they typically occur without warning. During the years 2012-2014, serious coal bursts occurred at three different U.S. room and pillar mines. These events resulted in three fatalities and two permanently disabling injuries (MSHA, 2014; MSHA, 2013). In all three instances, the events occurred during pillar recovery at depths exceeding 1,000 feet (300 m). None of these three mines had previously reported a burst to MSHA. Coal bursts also occurred at three longwall mines during this same time period.Despite decades of research, the sources and mechanics of bursts are not well understood, and therefore these events are difficult to predict and control. Experience has shown, however, that certain risk factors are associated with an increased likelihood of a coal burst. A coal burst risk assessment consists of evaluating the degree to which these risk factors are present. In addition, some control techniques are effective in reducing the likelihood of an event or protecting miners from their effects."

Jan 1, 2015