Search Documents

By C. C. White

Much benefit can be achieved by a mining company and a manufacturer if both parties can communicate effectively with each other and assist in product development; mutually beneficial ideas and products will develop. This communication can best be achieved if both parties have the opportunity of having on their respective staffs, specialists whose function is to improve the use of products used in mine development. Although a great wealth of roof control knowledge has long existed among mine operators, until recently there was not an abundance of joint development of roof control material by manufacturers and mine operators. This was perhaps due, in past lean years, to the preoccupation of mine management with other overwhelming problems that arise in mining. Manage¬ment had little time for the lengthy process of product development. Until recently, only a few of the largest mining companies had fulltime personnel devoted to roof control. A bolt manufacturer who is invited to work with an operator's roof control people in developing new material is lucky indeed in that he learns what is wanted and he acquires the benefit of the operator's knowledge and experience. He has only to come up with a satisfactory product at an acceptable price - which is not always easy: The development of new products is usually costly and time consuming, and many new products fall by the wayside. In the case of point anchors, however, this product is here to stay. The advantage of point anchors over mechanical anchors is now a proven fact. This advantage is due to less bleed off and higher ultimate load capacity of the resin point anchors. Point anchored bolts have proven to be superior to fully grouted bolts in many areas. We at Birmingham Bolt Company are fortunate in that we have been involved in joint efforts to develop point anchors with several coal companies from whom excellent advice and direction was received. It is appropriate to mention before continuing that the use of point anchors began in the 1960's in Europe and became widespread only recently in the United States. They fall in two categories, point anchors and combination point anchors. These categories have been defined by the Bureau of Mines as follows: (1) point anchors having 24" of grouted length and (2) combination anchors having 24" or more of grouted length. In the present nomenclature, all are anchored with resin or some sort of cementing compound between the rebar or tensioned element and the wall of the hole. The latest development includes an expansion shell as well as rebar, the purpose of the expansion shell being to facilitate installation without the delay necessary in use of types that require a waiting periond for setting of the resin before tightening. (See figures #1 and #2.

Jan 1, 1982

By E. Bane Kroeger

Rib failure is a hazard that has resulted in many injuries and fatalities in underground coal mines, especially in soft coal seams. Conventional rib control methods including rib boarding, shotcreting. steel meshing and geogridding, are fairly expensive and time consuming to install. Some methods, such as rib boarding, have met with marginal success at controlling rib failure. Under this research, the Rib Strap System (RSS) introduced by Dr. Chugh in 1999, was modified and new components were added. Both bench scale and full size prototypes were tested in the labs at SIUC to determine the best materials for fabrication and easier methods for assembly and installation. This laboratory research has developed new methods of securing the strap ends to smaller rib hoards, a new device to post-tension two straps together, and a technique for replacing straps without having to drill new rib bolts or for retrofitting straps to rib hoards that are already in place. The method used to secure the strap end to rib boards developed during bench-scale testing was dubbed the wrapped staple technique. It is very simple, requiring only 10-15 staples, with the end of a strap secured to a rib board in about 45 seconds. Several different prototype designs for a new device to join the strap ends together and tension the strap were fabricated and tested in the labs at SIUC. The device, dubbed the rib strap buckle, was very easy to install and held the straps firmly. One specific buckle design worked extremely well during testing and exceeded all expectations. The laboratory research also developed a method of replacing a damaged rib strap that can also be used to add rib straps to existing rib boards. The technique uses nails, spacer blocks, and band clamps to secure the new board and strap. This technique was developed to allow one person to replace a strap using only a hammer and screwdriver, negating the need to drill and install a new rib bolt using mine equipment such as a roof bolter or scoop. In addition to the technical feasibility, the cost of materials for the rib strap system was compared to the rib boarding method currently being used at a mine in the Illinois Basin. The mine is using 20 rib boards on each pillar at cost of about $223.60. The costs for the rib strap system depend on the materials chosen for fabrication but for the base case, were about $97 per pillar.

Jan 1, 2004

Effective strata control, utilising fully encapsulated roof bolts, is dependent on the installed quality of the reinforcement elements. One mechanism by which fully encapsulated roof bolts may become less than fully effective is by gloving (glove fingering) and un-mixing of the resin. Following some small roof failures containing gloved bolts, investigations have been undertaken in some New Zealand coal mines to determine the extent of, and mechanisms involved in, the gloving of fully encapsulated roof bolts for a range of roof types and installation methods. Gloving, in this context, refers to the resin cartridge partially or completely enveloping a length of the bolt, typically with unmixed resin filler and catalyst/hardener remaining within the cartridge. Results have shown that gloving and un-mixing is a systematic and widespread phenomena, occurring across a range of resin and/or bolt manufacturers, and across a variety of roof types. Gloving was found in bolts installed using: hand held pneumatic and continuous miner mounted hydraulic methods, under run of mine (ROM) conditions by mine workers, and under controlled "best practice" conditions. The roofs bolts investigated are all 1800mm (6ft) long, and have shown that, on average, 485mm (-19") of the bolt length is gloved and/or unmixed. This equates to a 27 percent reduction in effective bolt length. The effected length of bolt is sufficient to impact on the load transfer/reinforcement capabilities of the bolt system, and hence impacts on the design assumptions and subsequent stability assessments. Furthermore, there is a direct relationship between the mechanism for the gloving of bolts and an increased occurrence of resin loss and reduction in encapsulations length in soft (less than 10 MPa) and/or highly fractured rock. Investigations have concentrated on developing an understanding of the mechanisms involved. This has been undertaken using both field installations and recovered bolts, as well as test bench trials. The mechanisms involved have been confirmed as being: the development of a pressure front as the bolt encounters the resin and is spun up the hole, which, in turn, leads to over-pressurisation and radial expansion of the resin cartridge, resulting in an increase in diameter of the plastic resin cartridge, which allows the bolt to be spun up into the cartridge without making sufficient contact to shred the cartridge or the hardener tube, resulting in an unmixed portion of resin.

Jan 1, 2003

By R. Karl Zipf

Highwall mining is an important coal mining method. Upwards of 60 highwall miners are presently in operation, and they may account for approximately 4% of total U.S. coal production. A review of the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) accident data over the 20 year period from 1983 to 2002 identified 9 fatalities attributable to auger and highwall mining of which inadequate ground control accounted for 1/3. In the past 5 years, 1 fatality occurred in highwall mining. Estimates of the manpower requirements in highwall mining suggest that its fatality rate is essentially the same as for surface coal mining, thus highwall mining appears to be a very safe modern mining method. Highwall stability is the major ground control related safety concern, and operators are required to develop and follow an appropriate highwall mining ground control plan. The plans usually specify the following geotechnical parameters: hole width, maximum hole depth, maximum overburden depth, seam thickness, web pillar width, barrier pillar width and number of holes between barriers. Calculated web pillar stability factor exceeded 1.3 for most designs evaluated. This study examined records from 5,289 highwail miner holes with a total completed footage of about 2,560,000 feet to understand the reasons for early pull out. Average lost footage is typically about 20% of planned footage. Only 35% of the holes reached planned depth, and 20% were short due to rockfalls. Water and adverse geology accounted for 15% of the losses. Mechanical/electrical problems, guidance, and slope stability problems accounted for the remaining 30%. Web pillar stability factor for these holes also exceeded 1.3 in 95% of cases. Trapped highwall miners present a safety hazard to workers during their recovery. Best practices to avoid trapped highwall miners include: avoid mining in stream valleys, avoid mining near outside corners, careful alignment of each hole and the use of an onboard guidance system, Several issues in highwall mining ground control require further investigation including highwall mining through old auger workings, highwall mining near old underground mines, multiple-seam and multiple lift highwall mining and finally the size and frequency of barrier pillars.

Jan 1, 2004

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 Joseph A. Cybulski

In response to the mining of reserves with increasingly adverse round conditions and the roof support recommendations of current rock mechanics theories, roof support systems have continued to improve. A few of these newer bolting systems. while giving improved performance, require a new method to check bolt installation. Previous1 , a torque wrench had been the sole means to check the installed torque of a roof bolt. However, due to the characteristics of soma of the newer bolting systems which can prevent a reliable manual torque check and a recent change in the federal roof control regulations, an alternative method to a manual torque check is gaining acceptance. This alternative method improves monitoring the hydraulic pressure of the roof bolting machine torque circuit and provides a safe, reliable and quick wav to check bolt installation in those instance when an accurate manual torque check cannot be made.

Jan 1, 1990

By Saeed Zhandi, Behdeen Oraee

"Rock bursts remain an important problem in longwall coal mining. These bursts are due to a sudden and severe failure of rocks from a high stress concentration in deep underground excavations that occur with the instantaneous release of strain energy stored in the rocks. They can potentially cause irrecoverable damage to equipment and personnel, thus accurate rock burst prediction and control is expected to be carried out by the mine design engineer. As a result, this can constitute major challenges for said engineer. In this paper, forensic engineering has been used to evaluate the possibility and extent of rock bursts in deep coal mining. For this purpose, established mining engineering principles, including factors influencing the severity of rock bursts, have been incorporated in the forensic engineering technique. The analyses took place in five steps:• Assessment of regional and local conditions prior to the event• Assessment of conditions after the event• Hypothesize plausible ways in which pre-event conditions can become post-event ones• Search for evidence that either denies or supports various hypotheses• Apply engineering knowledge to relate the various facts and evidence into a cohesive scenario of how the event may have occurred.The paper concludes by demonstrating a method for predicting rock bursts and preventing their reoccurrence. The methodology used in this paper, together with the results obtained, can serve as useful tools for the coal mine design engineer in the primary evaluation of rock burst potential in underground coal mines.INTRODUCTIONA rock burst is defined as the sudden and great failure of rocks due to a high stress concentration in deep underground mines. This phenomenon occurs with the instantaneous release of strain energy that is stored in the rocks, and can cause irrecoverable damages to both equipment and personnel (see Figure 1). Rock bursts pose a hazard owing to their lake of predictability; in fact, research into understanding rock burst mechanics and implementing techniques for their monitoring and prediction has been taking place for over 50 years."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ihsan Berk Tulu

In the Analysis of Retreat Mining Pillar Stability (ARMPS) program, the magnitude of the abutment loading adjacent to a gob area is calculated using an ?abutment angle? concept. The extent of the abutment loading is determined solely as a function of depth from an empirically derived equation. In the recommended calibration method for LaModel, it was believed that the empirical equations for calculating the magnitude and extent of the abutment load, as used in ARMPS, were the best available methods for determining these critical overburden loading values. Therefore, similar calculations were implemented in the LaModel calibration method. However, the latest in situ stress measurements of abutment loading performed in the United States and Australia have shown that there can be significant deviations in the measured abutment magnitude and extent as compared to the predicted values from the empirical formulas used in ARMPS and LaModel. It seems reasonable that the overburden geology, depth, extraction panel width, and mining height should have a significant effect on the extent and magnitude of the abutment load. However, the current empirical formulas do not incorporate many of these significant parameters into determining the abutment load on the pillars. In this paper, stress measurements from US and Australian mines were back-analyzed by using analytical and numerical methods to investigate the measured abutment extent and loading. Ultimately, it was determined that the original empirical abutment extent formula in conjunction with the original ALPS square-decay stress distribution function was supported by the case histories in this paper. Also, for depths less than 900 ft, the average 21° abutment angle was supported by the case histories; however, at depths greater than 900 ft, the abutment angle was found to be significantly less than 21° and should be calculated with a new proposed equation.

Jan 1, 2012

By Saeed Zandi, Kazem Oraee

"Tunnels and galleries are the most important structures in coal mines. They are used for variety of purposes, such as transporting ore and people and for ventilation. A well-designed support system is necessary to stabilize structures and prevent collapse.Using rock bolts increases the strength of the rock in which tunnels are made. Rock bolts are used extensively in most underground mines today, and coal mines are no exception. Almost all galleries in a typical coal mine use some type of rock bolt, at least, as a means of partial or supplementary support.In this research, changing the support system from expensive methods to the use of rock bolts as the primary means of support is discussed, with the focus on a particular gallery in Hejdak coal mine. Visionary design methods, in conjunction with rock mass classification schedules, were used to determine an optimal rock bolt pattern. For this purpose, rock mass rating (RlVIR) and quality index (Q) classification systems were used. Several empirical methods were also used to design an optimal pattern for rock bolt installation in the particular tunnel under analysis.As such, the tunnel support system was designed using both finite element and empirical methods. Finally, the results obtained from both numerical and empirical methods were compared under different load conditions. The methodology prescribed in this paper, together with the comparison, can be a useful tool when selecting a support system. The results can also be used to design a support system in this and any other coal mine with similar conditions.INTRODUCTIONSince the advent of underground excavation techniques, one of the biggest challenges has been stabilizing tunnel walls and preventing roof collapse in tunnels and other underground openings, such as galleries. Loose rocks and layers drop into tunnels and galleries, except in very hard rock. Underground roof collapse and falling rocks can have devastating effects on the safety of operation personnel and equipment and can seriously affect production. When designing an underground coal mine, the stability of tunnels and galleries is an important parameter that should be studied carefully because it has an important role in the production process of the mine. Therefore, an appropriate and well-designed support system is necessary for preventing collapse and helping to stabilize the tunnels and galleries."

Jan 1, 2016

By Ihsan B. Tulu, Keith A. Heasley, Aanand Nandula

"The objective of this paper is to present the development of a software tool that will assist in an area calculation of the Analysis of Roof Bolting Systems (ARBS) support intensity while incorporating more detailed geology, stress, and intersection span input. In this area ARBS tool, a detailed CMRR distribution can be determined from the available geologic database at the mine. In addition, the overburden and multiple-seam stresses, as obtained from the boundary-element program LaModel, can be converted to a “pseudo-depth” which is then used as the depth input to the area ARBS calculation. Finally, the section-specific intersection spans can be determined from the mine design for input to the calculation. All this detailed area input information for ARBS is handled by the latest version of the Stability Mapping (StabMap) program, which now outputs an area ARBS suggested support density given the required input parameters. This final ARBS grid can be plotted, analyzed and overlaid on the mine map for optimum use in support design and for presentation to production personnel.INTRODUCTIONSince the inception of roof bolts in the 1940s, there has been a lack of a universally accepted roof bolting design method (Mark, 2002; Mark and Pappas, 2012). To address this situation, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Hazard (NIOSH) developed roof support design guidelines, which were incorporated into a computer program called the Analysis of Roof Bolting Systems (ARBS). These guidelines were based on the effects of roof quality, stress, and mine geometry (Mark, Molinda and Dolinar, 2001). The roof rock quality in ARBS is represented by the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR), the depth is used as a surrogate for the stress, and the intersection span serves to represent the mine geometry (Mark, Molinda and Dolinar, 2001). These three input parameters are used in the fundamental, empirically derived equation of ARBS to calculate a required support density factor, called ARBS, (Mark, Molinda and Dolinar, 2001):"

Jan 1, 2018

By Stephen C. Tadolini, Robert Hawker, Peter Mills, Colin Grubb, Tom Meikle

"In unfavorable strata conditions, it is often necessary to install additional long tendon support as part of a primary support cycle. Although these support systems provide the required additional stability to the roadway installation does have a significant effect on the rate of development. To overcome the slow cure time of Portland cement-type grouts, the use of two component resin systems, such as polyurethanes and urea silicates, have become favorable. However, concerns over low modulus and creep properties has led to the development of a two-component grouting medium that displays the properties of traditional cable grouting materials with the rapid reaction times of pumpable resin systems. This paper describes product testing, application, surface trials, underground trials, and full-scale applications of the Tekthix System in a dynamic underground environment. INTRODUCTION Single-component cement grouts have been used to anchor long tendon supports for many years. They range from high- to low-slump Portland cement and can be slow-setting to fast-setting grouts. However, current cement grouting systems, which includes the grout and equipment, have some disadvantages: 1. Low-slump grouts require pumps that can handle a thick, high-viscosity grout, so choice of pumps is limited. 2. Pumping distance is limited with current cable bolt grout pumps; operators often tend to add water to allow pumping long distance, which adversely impacts the quality and strength of the material. 3. Fast-setting grouts tend to cause issues with pump and line blockages due to the reduced working life of these single-component materials."

Jan 1, 2017

By Kazem Oraee-Mirzamani, Nikzad Oraee-Mirzamani, Arash Goodarzi

"Unexpected movement of ground can potentially endanger lives, damage equipment or destroy property. Occupational accidents frequently occur with fatal consequences in developing countries with significant economic dependence on industries such as mining. Therefore, there is increasing need for miners' protection against such hazards. Slope stability and roof support accidents are two of the major causes of fatalities at surface and underground mining operations. According to national codes, employers are obligated to protect workers against accidents; however, these rules fall short of the standards in developed countries. National safety regulations should clearly specify support systems. The International Labor Organization (ILO) prepared two codes of practice, aiming to guide those responsible for improving standards of safety and to provide guidelines for drafting of safety regulations for the coal mine industry and quarry open cast mines. The practical recommendations of these codes in the ground control area have been analysed and the advantages and disadvantages of ILO codes concerning ground control are summarized.INTRODUCTIONTwo million people die every year from work-related accidents and diseases. An estimated 160 million people suffer from work-related diseases, and there are an estimated 270 million fatal and non-fatal work-related accidents per year. In economic terms, the ILO has estimated that 4% of the world's annual GDP is lost as a consequence of occupational diseases and accidents (ILO, 2009).Mining has always been dangerous due to many potential risks such as those associated with using machinery in enclosed spaces, rock falls, blasting operations and explosion of flammable gases, which endanger miners' safety and health. However, it is suggested that implementing new laws along with strict adherence would reduce such risks in the workplace.The severity and frequency of accidents are trending downward in developed countries, where the focus is on large private companies who invest heavily in mechanization and developing economies of scale. But in many parts of the world, particularly in developing countries, minerals are extracted by people working with simple tools and equipment; they work on a smaller scale, are more flexible, and can exploit irregular ore bodies and steep, dipping seams."

Jan 1, 2010

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 David A. Newman

In the 1950s, an underground limestone mine in the Camp Nelson Formation was developed from an outcrop exposure. The Camp Nelson Limestone met the requirements for DOT stone and aggregate. The mine ownership changed several times, which resulted in distinct mine designs in Level 1. Based upon the production requirements and an attempt to maximize limestone recovery from a single level, a variety of pillar dimensions and three mining heights (28 feet, 68 feet and 83 feet) were developed. This was sufficient prior to reaching the mineable extent of Level 1. Level 2 introduced previously unknown ground control challenges. These included: ??Pillar spalling and a significant back fall on the Level 1 - Level 2 decline; ??Laminated immediate back and the need to bolt the back on Level 2; ??Delamination of the back adjacent to the Level 1 - Level 2 decline resulting in bolt shearing, and floor heave in isolated areas of Level 2; ??Multiple level interaction, the need to design pillars based upon numerical modeling as columnization between Levels is infeasible: and ??Water inflow as the mine approached river. To meet the challenges, a testing program to determine rock strength and physical properties was implemented along with numerical (LAMODEL and FEM) modeling, and borescope inspections of the immediate back. The efforts to implement rock mechanics were re-focused as Level 2 approached its mineable limit and the initial attempt to drive a decline to Level 3 was unsuccessful. A second decline site was selected based on inter burden stability, a consistent shale parting for the Level 3 back horizon, results from numerical models of the immediate back and multiple level interactions, and the projected low water inflow. The mine is operating on Levels 2 and 3 with long-term planning and ground monitoring for Level 3.

Jan 1, 2014

By Kevin Andrews, Scott Nelson, Terry Hamrick

"In the process of Geologic Hazard Mapping (GHM) for underground coal mining, geologists evaluate the effects of various geologic and geotechnical conditions to assist with optimization of mine productivity and with selection of more favorable areas for future development. The methodology involves correlation of multiple geologic factors (such as overburden depth, proximity to sandstone channels, and areas with weak immediate roof strata) with conditions encountered during mining (roof falls, floor heave, pillar spalling, etc.). Such studies yield maps that identify areas where mining is likely to be difficult and allow mining engineers to foresee favorable and unfavorable mining areas when planning new or expanding mines. To expand the benefits of GHM, work has been done to correlate geologic factors with room-and-pillar mining advance rates. Average mining advance rates are mapped and then correlated to different areas, as characterized by GHM. This process exposes the geological characteristics that have a material impact on mining rates of advance, improving the rates of advance into future mining areas with similar geological conditions. The final result of the work allows mine planners to not only design the mine qualitatively accounting for areas of unfavorable conditions, but also allows the mine planner to more accurately apply rates of advance for mine timing and production sequencing. The use of GHM to predict mining advance rates in unmined areas enhances the benefits of traditional hazard mapping and provides quantitative data that can be incorporated into mine sequencing models.INTRODUCTIONThe role of a geologist in the coal mining industry has evolved significantly over the last 30 to 40 years. Geologic Hazard Mapping (GHM) mapping for coal mines began in the late 1970s and early 1980s (Chase, Newman, and Rusnak, 2006). Since its beginnings, the GHM process has evolved significantly and continues to take on new levels of sophistication. Numerous case studies of GHM application to predict future mining conditions exist in the literature. For example, Artrip, Nelson, and Newman (1993), documents the geotechnical characterization of roof and floor for mining in the Imboden Seam in Virginia where previous mining efforts had been abandoned due to adverse mining conditions. In addition, Keim and Miller (1999) summarize evaluation of geological influences on a longwall mine in West Virginia. In both examples, significant geotechnical and geological information was available, including the opportunity to compare predicted mining conditions against actual conditions as mining progressed."

Jan 1, 2018

By Jessica M. Wempen

Differential Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (DInSAR), a satellite-based remote sensing technique, has been demonstrated as a potentially practical method for measuring mining induced surface subsidence. Unlike traditional methods of subsidence monitoring, DInSAR has the capacity to generate subsidence data on a regional mining scale with a relatively high data density. Using DInSAR to evaluate subsidence over large regions with relatively long time scales has the potential to help quantify the impact of subsidence in the mining region, and provide a means for validating whole-mine geotechnical models. In this study, nine pairs of interferometric data from the Japanese Advance Land Observing Satellite (ALOS) were processed using DInSAR to generate displacement maps for a group of trona mines in southwest Wyoming. The data cover a time span from December 2007 to March 2011. The maximum subsidence for one of the mines totaled 1.3 meters for this period. Cumulative DInSAR displacement maps show the development of subsidence over time. In this mining region, surface subsidence is generated primarily by extraction of trona using retreating longwalls. Additionally, trona is extracted by solution mining, which also generates measurable surface subsidence.

Jan 1, 2014

By Peter Zhang

Room and pillar mining under shallow depth is usually conducted with a high extraction ratio, which leaves small pillars with a low safety factor in some old workings in abandoned mines. Pillar sloughage, squeezing or even collapse may have occurred in those old workings with small pillars, either at the time of mining or later. The conditions of the pillars in abandoned mines can affect mining above them. Subsidence fractures and abutment pressure are indications of multi-seam interaction caused by squeezing or collapse of small pillars. To mine over areas with potentially unstable small pillars, the panel layout in the upper seam should be such that multi-seam interaction can be minimized and proper roof and rib support should be installed in the influence zones. This case study presents an example of multi-seam mining above small pillars under a shallow depth of cover. Though the interburden is relatively thick and competent, interaction is still present over the influence zones. Pillar stability and multi-seam interaction analysis, numerical modeling and in-situ monitoring are presented to demonstrate how the upper seam can be mined safely over the small pillars.

Jan 1, 2014

By Kevin W. Harris

Multiple-seam coal mining is a major issue in underground coal mining that adds additional complexity to the practice of ground control. As reserve exploitation is driven by economics, it is now difficult to mine coal without the existence of previous workings above and/or below the active seam; this is particularly true in the Appalachian coalfields. The frequency in which problematic multiple-seam interactions are now encountered has resulted in significant research regarding the underlying mechanisms of the problems and methods of mitigation. In the last few decades, a great deal has been learned about these interactions and the ability to minimize problems associated with these hazards has greatly advanced, resulting in better economics and improved safety. Minimizing the adverse effects of stress interactions often requires a thorough understanding of site-specific geotechnical parameters and previous mining geometry. This is especially evident in bump-prone ground, where pillar behavior is highly dependent on local conditions. This paper presents a case study in a deep cover, Central Appalachian coal mine where three bump events occurred. Initially, empirical design software was used in an effort to analyze the situation and prevent further instability. The empirical study proved ineffective. A detailed investigation of the bump events using the boundary element software LaModel 3.0 was then performed. This study resulted in a site-specific calibration standard that will be applied in numerical pillar design for the remaining reserve.

Jan 1, 2014

By Kristine L. Pankow, Keith D. Koper, Michael K. McCarter, Jared R. Stein

"The Wasatch Plateau region of central Utah contains a number of active underground coal mines in an area of well-documented natural seismicity. As a result, there are several hundred seismic events recorded in this region every year that may or may not be attributed directly to mining activity. Previous studies have linked the majority of this seismicity to mining activity through various means, but have not attempted to develop a method for categorizing individual events within a seismicity catalog. This study uses both relative relocation and waveform cross-correlation to separate events based on hypocentral depth and waveform similarity, respectively, in the area surrounding a single longwall coal mine within the Wasatch Plateau. We conclude that relative relocation can help with depth discrimination, but there are some unavoidable limitations caused by sparse seismic network coverage. The cross-correlation technique is more promising, with the ability to group events by waveform similarity and track mining progress over both space and time. With cross-correlation based clustering, we confirm that the vast majority (97.6%) of events in the study area are directly related to mining activity, but that a small population of natural seismicity is present as well. Eliminating this natural seismicity from the catalog of seismic events, leaving only those events related to mining, can give operators valuable information about the changing conditions as mining progresses and eliminate concern over events unrelated to mining activity.INTRODUCTIONA number of underground coal mines are located in the Wasatch Plateau region of central Utah, and have been in operation since the late 1800s. This activity has resulted in a well-known history of mining induced seismicity (MIS) (Wong, 1985). Additionally, this area is situated near the border of the Basin and Range and Colorado Plateau physiographic provinces, where naturally occurring tectonic earthquakes also occur (Arabasz et al, 1980). Seismicity separating these physiographic provinces is part of a larger band of seismic activity known as the Intermountain Seismic Belt (ISB) that runs from Montana to Arizona and cuts through the western boundary of the central Utah coalfields (Smith and Arabasz, 1991) (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2015

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