Search Documents

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 Darin Cotton, Tim Burgess, Tim Martin

"As the leading US supplier of roof control drills, J. H. Fletcher and Company® has encountered an extensive set of roof strata challenges and has overcome various drilling issues by varying machine parameters and working with customers and tool manufacturers to develop solutions. Every mine wants to drill and install roof bolts as fast as possible with maximum safety at the lowest possible installation cost for their conditions. In most circumstances, the intuitive method of higher speeds and pressures can actually have a detrimental effect on the roof drill safety and performance.This paper will outline recent tests carried out at several different coal mines in the Eastern United States. The tests focused on optimizing the drilling parameters of feed pressure, feed rate, rotation speed, and drill torque.The drill feed, rotation speed, and rotation torque, as well as the type of bit selected, have a definite impact on the performance of the roof drill including drilling speed, safety, and tool life. The drilling process can be improved while also improving operator safety and reducing bolt installation costs by maintaining the appropriate roof drill settings for the specific strata conditions.The advantages of improving the drilling process includes increased bit life, increased drill steel life, reduced hanging drill steels, reduced clogging of the vacuum system, decreased whipping drill steel potential, reduced noise generation, and increased cutting size which reduces fine dust generation and dust collection system servicing.INTRODUCTIONIn recent times, the economic pressures that coal producers are facing have created an increased emphasis on controlling operating costs. Several coal operators have pointed out their dissatisfaction with low bit life, and there is a renewed interest in improving tool life and machine performance as part of an overall cost control strategy. Operators are looking for ways to reduce tooling cost, maintenance costs, and drill downtime without decreasing drill performance. This renewed interest in reducing operating costs, along with the ongoing desire to improve safety, created a perfect environment to take a fresh look at the existing fleet of machines to see what could be accomplished. The goal was to take a practical approach to reviewing machine parameters to determine what changes could be made. The emphasis was on changes that would be feasible to roll out to an entire fleet of machines in a short period of time with minimal capital expenditure. The thought process was that significant improvements could be made by simply tuning up the machine parameters to provide a more efficient and safer bolting process."

Jan 1, 2015

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 Changshou Sun

The geotechnical properties of mining zones at Leeville Underground mine (or simply called Leeville mine through this paper) are different from one zone to another. The typical ground condition is poor to very poor. Therefore, an appropriate ground control practice is the key for the successful and smooth ore production at Leeville mine. Based on the available geotechnical data, the empirical and numerical methods are used to design the right ground support systems. The main ground control practice at Leeville mine includes geotechnical data collection, evaluation of the stiffness of the support system, selection of rock bolt types, design bolt length and bolting patterns, development of the ground support standards, and performance of quality controls on bolt installation to ensure proper rock anchorage, and strength of shotcrete and backfill. Through all these activities, an appropriate ground support system has been established and applied at Leeville mine for the past four years. So far, a good result related to successful ground control and smooth ore production has been achieved, although the system is still being improved. The authors of this paper will summarize the ground control practice conducted in the last four years and will discuss the procedures and standards of establishing the appropriate ground support systems for Leeville mine.

Jan 1, 2013

By Sean C. Farrell

In underground mining and tunneling, machine design is predominantly dictated by mine conditions and individual customer desires. In partnership with Australian companies WDS Limited and Cram Fluid Power, the engineering department of J.H. Fletcher & Company was tasked to design and manufacture roof bolting modules to be mounted off both sides of a roadheader, providing in-cycle bolting. The objective was to produce a boom and bolt module that would allow an operator to bolt from a remote location, eliminating the need for miner to work in unsupported ground. The bolt module needed to operate in front of the cutting boom, but retract to a parked position out of the way during the cutting cycle. Due to Australian electrical approval requirements, it was desirable to design the module with minimal use of electrical controls. The need for multiple, complex, drill steel and bolt handling steps led to the need for a custom hydraulics package to automate several of the movements. The result of the design is dual drill and bolt modules mounted to a multistage boom with over 24 feet (7.31 m) of extension. Each unit rotates and tilts to meet the bolt pattern requirements in conjunction with the stow and load requirements. The bolt module builds on previous designs incorporating a modular assembly with each sub-component designed to be replaceable and adjustable independently from other machine components. Each major component is painted a different color to help the operator make the connection visually from the module to the operator?s control valves. Hydraulic package valves were designed to automatically control several of the sub-components during the drill cycle, reducing the number of steps a drill operator would, otherwise, have to do manually. This design removes the operator from working in unsupported roof and away from other inherent hazards, putting them at a safe distance on the operator?s platform. The cutting and bolting equipment has been combined into one machine, which is advantageous in single entry drifts because there is no need to place change equipment. The hydraulic package valves eliminate the need for any electronics, thus avoiding any electrical regulations with respect to the controls. The addition of these modules to the roadheading machine increases miner safety and streamlines production while meeting the ground control support requirements.

Jan 1, 2014

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 Christopher Mark

Dr. Christopher Mark serves as Team Leader of the Rock Mechanics Section in the Rock Safety Engineering Branch of the NIOSH - Pittsburgh Research Laboratory. In this position he leads a multi-disciplinary team and conducts individual research directed towards fundamental ground control safety issues affecting miners. Dr. Mark is recognized as one of the country?s leading authorities on coal mine ground control. Through his research, he has made numerous important contributions to mine safety that have been widely adopted into mining practice. He is a highly original researcher, and has often developed new and innovative methods to tackle extremely complex problems in his field. In recent years Dr. Mark has also achieved wide international recognition. Five research projects in Canada, Australia, and South Africa have been based largely on his work.

Jan 1, 2007

By Syd Peng

"As the International Conference on Ground Control in Mining (ICGCM) enters its 35th year in 2015, it is time to look back and identify the areas that need to be emphasized and to look forward to see what areas need to be researched in the future. In the past three decades, ground control has made a tremendous advancement, and many case studies published in the 36 volumes of proceedings have demonstrated its important role in the daily mining operations. However, there is still plenty of room for improvements. This paper discusses the research needs in 12 subject areas, including mine geology, rock property, zones of disturbance in overburden, computer modeling, underground stress measurements, research method, roof bolting, coal pillars, failures, subsidence, shield supports, and coal bumps.INTRODUCTIONThe International Conference on Ground Control in Mining (ICGCM) was founded in 1981. Since then, 1,546 papers have been published in the 36 conference proceedings, including the three surface subsidence workshops held in the 1981, 1986, and 1992. All types of topical areas regarding mining, from geotechnical core loggings in the exploration phase through backfilling after mining to finally spoil piles stability on the surface, have been addressed. A review of these papers, and other related literature as well, indicate that ground control has developed to become an inseparable part of mine design and a problem-solving tool for safe production.After 34 years, it is time to look back and identify the areas that need to be emphasized and to look forward to see what areas need to be researched in the future. There is no doubt that the conference series has achieved the goal for which it was originally designed: to provide an annual forum for the exchange of information among the researchers, government regulators, equipment manufacturers, consultants, service providers, and—above all—mine operators. There have been many papers addressing the application of ground control techniques for successful mine design and safe production, and, without these papers, many projects would have failed. In fact, the conference emphasis on application types of papers may have steered too far toward the application side. A review of the conference papers shows that papers have been leaning mostly toward the applied side, leaving most, if not all, fundamental issues behind in nearly every topical area. This paper addresses research needs in 12 topical areas: mine geology, rock property, zones of disturbance in overburden, computer modeling, underground stress measurements, research method, roof bolting, coal pillars, failures, subsidence, shield supports, and coal bumps."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ben Mirabile

Over the past three decades, the U.S. coal mining industry has widely used cable supports to supplement traditional primary bolting systems, especially in difficult ground conditions. However, increased mining activity in adverse conditions has underscored the limited effectiveness of the non-tensioned, partially grouted cable supports used to supplement primary bolts. Roof failures in conditions such as corrosive environments, highly laminated strata, low overburden depth and water intrusion have demonstrated that the need for cable technology has reached beyond the traditional non-tensioned, partially-grouted cable tendon. Furthermore, declining market conditions and increased competition for coal customers has demanded that new cable bolt technology be costeffective and readily adaptable to the mining cycle. Jennmar Corporation has developed several cable bolt technologies that can be used as stand-alone solutions or in concert with one another to mitigate adverse conditions. These technologies include rapid tensioning of cable supports, structural surface control and polyurethane injection. The case studies presented in this paper use one or more of these technologies to address adverse mining conditions or special ground control problems.

Jan 1, 2013

By Jun Lu

This paper presents the evaluation, enhancement and comparison of two hydraulic fracturing techniques which were employed to mitigate the impact of a massive sandstone channel on two successive longwall faces. The hydraulic fracturing technique and Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software were initially employed to mitigate the impact of thick, massive sandstoneroof during mining of longwall Panel 21. Improved longwall face conditions and productivity were observed as Panel 21 mined through the sandstone channel. However, moderate sandstone fractures and falls at the face were still present in areas where hydraulic fracture influence was not present. Such adverse conditions caused two to three weeks of production delays due to large face cavities, jammed face conveyor and subsequent face gluing. Based on the mining experience in Panel 21, and site-specific roof geology in Panel 22, a modified and more effective hydraulic fracturing program was employed. Fewer well-placed holes were drilled, and larger volume of water was pumped into each hole in order to propagate the individual horizontal pancake fractures over a larger area, thereby enhancing caving and relieving face pressure caused by overhang of the massive sandstone. Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software was also employed at Panel 22 to predict the cavity risk index and guide the longwall face crew in double-pulling shields behind the shearer drum. This helped to reduce the tip-to-face distance at the critical spots along the longwall face, which helped mitigate the formation of the roof cavities and failure of massive sandstone onto the face conveyor. Underground observations, face advance rate and face rock delay analysis confirmed that longwall face conditions and advance rate in Panel 22were significantly improved compared to those of Panel 21. Consequently, safety and productivity were improved.

Jan 1, 2014

By John R. Poland, Benjamin Mirabile

"There are significant ground support hazards to both personnel and equipment when longwall equipment must mine through cross-panel entries. Backfilling support strategies are often cost prohibitive. Additionally, it is often very difficult to install backfill material in full contact with the mine roof in backfilled entries. This paper will demonstrate the use of fiber-reinforced concrete crib material as a method for standing support in longwall cut-through entries. Despite conceptions of poor performance in potentially high convergence environments, fiber-reinforced concrete crib material can be used in longwall support environments subject to high abutment loads and convergence. Central to the proper design of these supports is the use of yield material between crib layers and at the mine roof/crib interface. The placement location of cribs within the cut-through entry has a significant effect on the main roof behavior and associated ground conditions in the longwall abutment zones. It is particularly important to engineer the proper load displacement characteristics of the installed crib to support expected ground conditions. The cost of fiber-reinforced crib supports is less than 50% of backfilling methods.INTRODUCTIONThe design and execution of a longwall cut-through is perhaps one of the most difficult and risky endeavors in the field of ground control. The magnitude of abutment loads and potential for ground failure present a significant safety hazard to underground personnel. In addition, there is significant financial risk, with replacement costs of face equipment exceeding $200 million. Faced with these consequences, it is both advisable and common for an engineer to design ground support with a significant margin of safety. This paper outlines a robust support system that possesses a significant margin of safety along with significantly lower costs than most other support systems employed in similar conditions.SITE PARAMETERSThe mine site described in this study operates in the Herrin No. 6 seam in southern Illinois. The seam height is typically 76- 84 inches. Mining height in gateroads and mains is typically over 96 in, and typical mining height on the longwall face is 82 in. The overburden depth is 950-970 feet in the area of the longwall cutthrough."

Jan 1, 2016

By Andy L. Shaffer

A novel liquid settlement system (LSS) was installed in advance of mining at a western United States (U.S.) longwall mine to measure total roof sag from the time of cutting to days after mining during gate road development. The system was used to compare differences in roof sag between conventional place-change mining using a Joy continuous miner and a Fletcher roof bolter and mining using a miner-bolter. The LSS was installed with an intrinsically safe, miniature data acquisition system (MIDAS) to record roof response at four locations in the same gate road. The system utilized pressure transducers to measure roof sag by the principle of falling head (fluid pressure) in fluid-filletubes installed in the immediate roof. Details of the LSS design, installation, data collection, post-processing, and future applications are discussed.

Jan 1, 2014

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 Morgan M. Sears, Gamal Rashed, Jim Winfield, Brent Slaker

"Over the past decade, ground falls have resulted in five fatalities, representing over 40% of all fatalities occurring in underground stone mines in the United States. In conjunction with recent high-profile pillar collapses, the need for further ground control research in the nation’s stone mines is evident. Ground conditions are growing more difficult. Therefore, this research is focused on deep cover, steeply dipping, and multi-level underground nonmetal mines. The objective of this paper is to introduce a geomechanical study of pillar development in a steeply dipping limestone deposit. To accomplish this, a numerical model was developed using input from modified laboratory test data and in situ stress measurements provided by the mine to simulate the development of a pillar under these conditions. The model was then verified against field observations and stress mapping. The calibrated model was then used to calculate the estimated stresses in the pillar and immediate roof as development progresses around an instrumented pillar.INTRODUCTIONGround falls represent a significant hazard in the nation’s underground stone mines. In response to recent large-scale pillar collapses, as well as stakeholder interactions, researchers from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) are currently conducting detailed investigations into the complex loading conditions at mines operating in challenging operational environments. These include deep-cover, steeply dipping, and multi-level mines where there is the potential for an increased risk of ground failure. The Pleasant Gap Mine, shown in Figure 1, operates in the Valentine Formation, which is typically light grey, extremely fine-grained limestone, and approximately 21.3 m (70 ft.) thick. The Centre Hall Formation makes up the immediate and main roof members and is approximately 9.1 m (30 ft.) thick, consisting of medium-dark-gray limestone (Murphy et al., 2018). Situated in a syncline, the top of the Valentine Formation dips at approximately 19° with a strike of approximately N54E in the area of interest (see Figure 2)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Jun Lu, Greg Hasenfus

"In this paper, the mining experience and challenges for the first right-handed longwall panel in the Pittsburgh seam are introduced. The longwall headgate T-junction experienced very high face convergence (up to 2 feet), accompanied by roof sag, floor heave, and rib loading. The headgate convergence was so large that, in a few places, it threatened longwall retreat and ultimately required the bottom to be re-graded.Different underground instruments, such as a roof scope, de-gas drill, tell-tale, laser meter, and Borehole Pressure Cell (BPC), were employed to explore the roof geology and to monitor the entry convergence and the stress changes in the pillar. In addition, the impact of other geologic factors, such as large overburden depth, laminated sandstone roof geology, soft floor, and large headgate equipment, were also analyzed. Subsequently, geotechnical solutions were provided to avoid or mitigate the impact of these challenging geologic factors.INTRODUCTIONIt is well known that high horizontal stress will affect the stability of roof, floor, and ribs within underground mines. In general, the headgate entries will experience stress concentration for the right-handed longwall face. On the contrary, the stress concentration will be in the tailgate entries for the left-handed longwall face (Hasenfus and Su, 2006). Without the stress shadow, the stress concentration in the headgate for the first longwall panel may be more significant (Figure 1).A mine in the CONSOL Pennsylvania Operation was extracting the first right-handed longwall panel in the Pittsburgh seam, which created high horizontal stress concentrations at the longwall headgate. Because of concern over soft wet floor within the syncline, floor coal had been left in place on development. Early on, upon retreat, the longwall headgate T-junction experienced very high face convergence, accompanied by roof sag, floor heave, and rib loading. The floor heave was exacerbated by the presence of floor coal, which buckled upward near the center of the beltline. Roof movement was occasionally aggravated by laminated roof conditions, but was kept in check by aggressive supplemental support including cable bolts, yielding props, cribbing, and roof mesh. Rib bolting and rib mesh helped to further maintain the entryway stability by keeping sloughage at a minimum. Nevertheless, despite the heavy support, headgate convergence was so large that, in a few places, it threatened longwall retreat and ultimately required the bottom to be re-graded."

Jan 1, 2018

By Daniel W. Su

This paper presents the implementation and evaluation of the hydraulic fracturing technique and Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software to mitigate the impact of a 1,000-ft (305-meter) widemassive sandstone channel on a 1,500-ft-wide (457-m-wide) longwall face. Based on a underground roof geology reconnaissance program, four frac holes were drilled and fraced along the center axis of the sandstone channel. To further provide detailed monitoring of the longwall face, the Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software was installed to track the face pressure and cavity formation index. In mid-December 2011, the longwall face approached and entered into the western edge of the sandstone channel. The longwall face mined through the center axis of the sandstone channel in mid-January 2012 and advanced outby the eastern edge of the sandstone channel in early February 2012. Results from daily underground observations and production delay analysis confirmed the effectiveness of the hydraulic fracturing program and the validity of the LVA Software.

Jan 1, 2012

By Elizabeth Holley, Meriel Young, Gabriel Walton

"The coal mine roof rating (CMRR) was developed by Chris Mark and Greg Molinda to bridge the gap between geological variation in underground coal mines and engineering design. The CMRR accounts for the compressive strength of the immediate roof, the shear strength and intensity of any discontinuities present, and the moisture sensitivity of the immediate roof. The CMRR has been widely used and validated in Eastern US coal mines, but it has seen limited application in the Western US.This study focuses on roof behavior at a Western coal mine. Mine A shows significant lateral geological variation, along with localized faulting and a laterally extensive sandstone channel network. The CMRR is not used to predict roof instability at the mine.It is, therefore, hypothesized that there are other factors that are correlated with roof instability in underground coal mines that could potentially also be included in the CMRR.This hypothesis was tested by collecting 30 CMRR measurements at Mine A. At each measurement location, a binary record of the roof condition (stable or unstable) was made along with parameters, such as depth of cover, thought to also correlate with roof stability. A statistical analysis of the data was performed to determine the parameters in addition to those included in the CMRR, which can be correlated to roof stability.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDRoof fall is one of the greatest hazards facing underground coal miners (Barczak et al., 2000). In 2017, 91 lost-time injuries occurred due to roof fall in US underground coal mines. A further 48 roof falls occurred with no lost days (MSHA, 2018).The coal mine roof rating (CMRR) classification was developed by Molinda and Mark (1994) to quantify the geological description of mine roof into a single value that could indicate mine roof stability and be used in engineering design. It is widely used in the Eastern US as an input for the analysis of longwall pillar stability (ALPS) in underground coal mines. It provides an excellent start; however, it is arguably not fully comprehensive, nor is it widely used in the Western US."

Jan 1, 2018

By Andre Zingano, Anderson Weiss

"The objective of this paper is to study the behavior of a low thick and low depth coal seam and the overburden rock mass. The mining method is room and pillar in retreat and partial pillar recovery. The excavation method is conventional drill and blast because of the small production. The partial pillar recovery is about 30% of the previous pillar size, 7m x 7m. The roof displacement was monitored during retreat operation; the surface movement was also monitored. The effect of the blasting vibration on the final pillar strength had been considered. Due to blasting, the pillar reduced about 20%. The consequence is more pillar deformation and roof vertical displacement. The pillar retreat and ground movement were simulated in a three-dimensional numerical model. This model was created to predict the surface subsidence and compare to the subsidence measured. This study showed that the remaining pillar and low seam reduce the subsidence that was predicted with conventional methods.INTRODUCTIONMining low coal seams (less than 1 meter) with the room-and-pillar mining method implies the excavation of part of the roof or floor to maintain adequate entry height for equipment and compliance with labor regulations with respect to ergonomic issues. The direct consequence of this is an increase in coal contamination and the increased cost of transportation and preparation at the plant. Traditional room-and-pillar mining only uses a development operation, even with a continuous miner or drill-and-blasting. Therefore, all the run of mine (ROM) coal is carried out with part of the roof or floor. However, if the retreat mining method were to be considered, the quality of the coal could increase because only the coal seam is excavated from the pillar recovery. The quality of ROM coal will increase, and the cost will decrease proportionally to the amount of coal produced from the retreat operation.However, the retreat mining with partial or total pillar recovery implies greater subsidence. This is particularly true if the coal seam depth is shallow, under 100m depth. Subsidence prediction in room-and-pillar retreat mining is complex; it depends upon the remaining pillar (stump pillar) size, as well as the pillar height, and the behavior of the pillar after retreat. This is related to the strength of the remaining pillar, which is related to the excavated method (drill-and-blast or mechanical)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Jonathan Duncan, Tim Burgess, William Kendall, Jens Lange

"Steel wire mesh is the accepted standard for roof and rib skin control at most coal mines in the United States. Wire mesh is delivered to the mine in bundles that are heavy and awkward to handle. The large size, stiffness, and weight of the wire mesh can present a safety hazard in transporting underground and storing on the roof bolter. Installing wire mesh on the roof and ribs with the roof bolter can be a challenge as well.Synthetic mesh is lighter than wire mesh and can be folded and rolled into a safe, manageable size. A single synthetic mesh roll large enough to cover the roof and ribs in a deep cut can be safely handled by two men. The roof bolter is designed to carry and dispense the roll as it advances and installs primary roof support, resulting in a single pass roof and rib ground control solution. This paper focuses on the design and implementation of the roof bolter synthetic mesh handling system developed by J. H. Fletcher & Co., Huesker, Inc., and Oxbow Mining.INTRODUCTIONRoof and rib skin control in some coal mines has been an issue since mining first began. Roof and rib skin problems vary from mine to mine. The type of roof rock material exposed after mining; the mine atmosphere; and stresses from depth of cover, over mining, and/or undermining are some of the variables that can contribute to roof skin problems from mine to mine.Potential roof and rib skin problems can be time dependent as well. Some mines have roof skin rock, sometimes called draw rock, that falls when drilling the hole for the roof bolt as the initial roof support is installed. Some roof skins are more stable but can fail over time. The failure of roof skin can even be between properly installed roof bolts with roof plates (Figure 1).Mines have most commonly used a wire mesh that comes in individual panels anywhere from 5 ft x 5 ft (1.5 m x 1.5 m) all the way up to 5 ft x 16 ft (1.5 m x 4.9 m) in size. They are typically constructed of 8- or 9-gauge wire welded on a 4 in (102 mm) square pattern. A 5 ft x 16 ft (1.5 m x 4.9 m) panel weighs approximately 35 lbs (16 kg). These steel wire mesh panels can make it a difficult and sometimes dangerous task to deliver them from the surface to the roof bolter and then store on the machine. Manipulating the mesh panels from the storage area on the machine to the final installation position on the roof or rib can also be a daunting task (Figure 2)."

Jan 1, 2010

By John C. Stankus

The 3 Right pre-developed longwall recovery entry at Signal Peak Energy?s Bull Mountain No. 1 mine was designed to prevent the abnormal roof conditions encountered in its firsttwo recovery entries. Unique geological conditions, such as the low overburden of approximately 200 feet and prevalence of roof joints in the sandstone overburden, contribute significantly to abnormal conditions during longwall recovery. The 3 Right recovery entry was 42 ft wide and developed in two stages, 21 ft wide in each stage. The entry roof was reinforced with steel wire mesh/non-metallic recovery mesh, high-capacity primary bolts and cables. After all the support was installed, the entry was completely backfilled with specially designed, cuttable, low-density cement. The roof bolting and backfilldesign were based on current practices in this mine and successful practices in other mines in the U.S. and Australia. Extensive instrumentation was installed in the recovery entry for continuous monitoring of load transfer as the face approached and cut into the recovery entries. The support design was completely successful with a smooth cut-through on January 29 and 30, 2014, significantly reducing the shield recovery time and meanwhile protecting the safety of miners. Based on actual observance and practices of the 3 Right recovery entry, recommendations on improvement and modificationsof roof support for 4 Right recovery room are presented.

Jan 1, 2014