Search Documents

By George J. Karabin

The Roof Control Division of the Pittsburgh Safety and Health Technology Center, MS HA, is routinely involved in the evaluation of ground conditions in underground coal mines. Assessing the stability of mined areas and the compatibility of mining plans with existing conditions are essential elements in assuring a safe working environment at a given site. Since 1985, the Roof Control Division has successfully used the Boundary Element Method of Numerical Modeling as a tool to aid in the resolution of complex ground control problems. This paper will present an overview of the modeling methodology established and details of techniques currently used to generate coal seam, rock mass, and gob backfill input data. A summary of coal and rock properties used in numerous successful evaluations throughout the country will be included and a set of Deterioration Indices that can aid in the quantification of in-mine ground conditions and verification of model accuracy will be introduced. Finally, a case study will be detailed that typifies the complexity of mining situations analyzed and illustrates various techniques that can be used to evaluate prospective design alternatives.

Jan 1, 1994

By Mikko Ahola

This paper describes recent innovative analyses conducted by the Bureau of Mines to demonstrate the application of the boundary-element method in evaluating the effectiveness of caving chambers or sacrificial entries to relieve the stress conditions initiating cutter roof failure in underground coal mines. The analysis assumes that cutter roof failure results when the shear strength of the roof rock at an entry corner is exceeded by the applied shear stress. The applied shear stress is due to large differences between the horizontal and vertical in situ stresses known to exist in many coal mining districts experiencing cutter roof failure. The results of boundary-element analysis suggest that driving an arched lead entry in advance of adjacent rectangular entries and allowing it to cave significantly reduces the difference between the principal stresses at the corner of the rectangular entry, thereby lowering the maximum shear stress. Slippage of the immediate roof along horizontal bedding planes into the caved entry is shown to further reduce the stress conditions in adjacent entries. Practical applications of this stress control technique to longwall and room-and-pillar mining are discussed.

Jan 1, 1987

By Thomas M. Barczak

A survey of the longwall industry was conducted to examine the performance of modern shield technology. The results of this survey indicate that state-of-the-art shields perform better and last longer than ever before, but premature failures do still occur. In addition, longwalI operators are now using shields longer than ever before and a greater number of fatigue related failures on aging shields are now occurring. A generic assessment of these shield failures is provided, describing the nature of the failures and how widespread they are throughout the industry. An engineering assessment of shield design and factors that cause shield failures is made using both strength of materials and fracture mechanics principles. From this analysis, design practices to improve structural margins of safety and extend the life of the shield are proposed. The existence of unexpected shield failures indicate that current shield performance testing is at times inadequate. Recommendations are made relative to improved shield performance testing protocols including the benefits of testing in an active load frame such as the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's (NIOSH) Mine Roof Simulator. Even the most rigorous shield testing procedures, which strive to simulate in-service loading conditions, fail to consider key environmental issues, such as corrosion which is often the cause of structural fatigue failures in modern shields. The survey also indicated that hydraulic failures occur much sooner in the life cycle of a shield than structural failures, and although they can significantly degrade support capability, often go undetected for long periods of time. Methods to detect the hydraulic failures are also provided. The paper concludes with key points to maximizing shield design and life expectancy and ideas for future generation shield designs.

Jan 1, 1999

By Chris Mark

Perhaps the most significant development in coal mine ground control during the last century was the introduction of roof bolting during the late 1940's and 1950's. From an engineering standpoint, roof bolts are inherently more effective than the wood timbers they replaced. Roof bolts promised to dramatically reduce the number of roof fall accidents, which then claimed hundreds of lives each year, and they were initially hailed as "one of the great social advances of our time." Roof bolting also emerged at a time of rapid technologic transformation of the coal industry, and greatly accelerated the transition to trackless, rubber-tired face haulage. The U.S. Bureau of Mines quickly became the new roof support's strongest advocate. Some state agencies and miners were skeptical at first, but nearly everyone was soon won over. Case histories were reported showing that roof falls could be largely eliminated while productivity increased dramatically. Little wonder that, in the words of one contemporary observer, "roof bolting has been adopted more rapidly than any other new technology in the history of coal mine mechanization." Yet by the end of the 1950's, it was clear that roof fall fatality incidence rates had actually increased. It would be another decade before the superior ground support provided by roof bolts would clearly save lives, The story of how roof bolting was implemented by the mining industry, but took so long to live up to its promise, is a fascinating example of the interaction between economics, technology, regulation, and science. It still has important lessons for today.

Jan 1, 2002

By Denise Y. Dizon

The objectives of this study were to document the hydrologic impacts of longwall mining on streams, identify the factors affecting the extent of stream dewatering, and develop empirical trends to predict the extent of dewatering and recovery of streams in advance of mining. This study on stream impacts is a companion to a stud; conducted on ground water impacts from longwall mining, which was done as part of the same research project at the' same locations and times. The study areas are three mine sites in north- central West Virginia. Mine A, located in Upshur County, has relatively thin mine overburden under the valley streams (105-115 feet). Stream monitoring there continued the earlier work of Cifelli and Rauch (1). Stream dewatering was severe with streams often going dry over the longwall panels during baseflow conditions. The lost water was probably flowing to the mine. Dewatering began in streams over the mine entry areas adjacent to the panels and as much as 380 feet from the nearest panel edge. The angles of dewatering influence ranged 22 to 72 degrees with respect to the nearest mined panel edge. Discharge then typically increased as the streams- flowed across the panel edge, but then decreased again over the panels. These streams were often ponded by local reversals in hydraulic gradient caused by land subsidence, and often dried up after flowing a few hundred feet across the panels. This occurred over panels that were previously mined up to eight months before. Mine B, located in Monongalia County, has relatively thick mine overburden (475-485 - feet) under the major stream. Stream dewatering was severe there during warm season baseflows, with complete dewatering occurring then over the longwall panels. This dewatering occurred over mined panels up to five years old, probably in response to a major anticlinal axis lineament and fracture zone in the stream valley. Mine C. located on the West Virginia -Pennsylvania border, has relatively thick mine overburden (about 585-630 feet) under the monitored streams there. stream dewatering was only partial, and these streams typically recovered their lost discharge downstream of the mine, indicating that lost water was not recharging to the mine. Only longwall panels less than one year old were associated with stream dewatering.

Jan 1, 1990

By J. L. Condon

The Bureau of Mines, through in-house and contract research, monitored mountain bump-prone areas of the Olga #2 Mine, near Welch, WV, using microseismic techniques for 15 months during 1985 and 1986. During this period, two ground failures occurred that were considered "mountain bumps" owing to excessive stress buildups. One failure damaged the roof and 4 pillars around an intersection; the second failure, which released much greater energy, resulted in significant damage to over 100 coal pillars. Analysis of the microseismic data collected provided significant insights into the magnitude and location of each failure. The actual failure zone was clearly delineated prior to the mountain bump occurrences through analysis of source locations of each microseismicevent. Trends in cumulative rate plots indicated the onset of structural instability. Although the data could not be analyzed automatically, the significance of the data interpretation cannot be overemphasized. Microseismic monitoring of bump-prone areas can be successful in providing a means to actually observe the structural stability occurring in underground coal mines. This paper discusses data collection techniques, analysis methods, and implications of the monitoring technique, with special emphasis on actual data from two large mountain bumps in West Virginia.

Jan 1, 1987

By Chris T. Franke

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is a deep underground facility mined in bedded salt interspersed with persistent clay inter- beds. The clay seams delineate beams of salt above and below the excavations which strongly influence excavation performance. This paper reviews available rock mechanics information relevant to improving drift stability by removing the roof beam. Conceptual deformation mechanisms, relevant field data, and numerical analyses were used to investigate the effects of mining the roof of the excavations along a clay seam. Finally, a case study that applies the results of this investigation is presented.

Jan 1, 1997

By James Pile

The San Juan Coal Mine, located near Farmington, New Mexico, supplies the San Juan Generating Station with more than 6 million tons of coal annually. To replace dwindling surface mine production, San Juan installed a longwall in 2002. The roof rock in much of the underground reserve consists of interbedded coals, carbonaceous shales, and mudstones. Roof support consists of fully-grouted roof bolts, both tensioned and non-tensioned, supplemented by modified cable trusses. Short-encapsulation pull tests conducted by San Juan's geotechnical engineering department showed that some of the immediate roof layers provided variable bolt anchorage. To ensure that the roof bolts were obtaining the necessary anchorage, additional tests were conducted in a variety of locations. The results have been used to determine the optimum support design for different areas of the mine. Another series of tests evaluated the performance of several bolt and hole diameter combinations. The experience at San Juan Mine shows that short-encapsulation pull tests can provide the information necessary to improve ground control in variable roof conditions. It also illustrates how a pro¬active geotechnical engineering program can be an essential component of a state of the art underground coal mine.

Jan 1, 2003

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 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 James H. Fletcher

Much data and experience has been accumulated, especially in the last 5 or 6 years, to show that modern roof trusses, both of the Birmingham type and the bolt-and-channel type, perform well to support certain kinds of coal mine roof. For some time now, roof trusses of the Birmingham type have been effective in controlling thick shale roof, which tends to sag and fall over a period of about eight weeks. These falls leave dame-shaped cavities which are reminiscent of the pressure arch theory of roof failure. Lately there has also been significant interest in supporting some longwall panel entries with channel and-bolt systems. These systems utilize two vertical center bolts and two 45 degree end bolts through a heavy gage channel. Both types of truss systems have long bolts, which require 8 to 9 Foot holes on a 45 degree angle, and point anchor resin bolts, which utilize a 2 or 3 foot rebar grouted in a thin annulus of polyester resin. Consequently, many coal mining people have been impressed with the very good anchorage characteristics and tensionability features of these systems. However, the same people have been proportionately dismayed to find that very often the most difficult part of introducing a trussing program to a mine is deciding on the machine specifications which determine the truss installation rate. The purpose of this paper is to indicate aspects of truss bolter design and use which are not shared by roofbolter design and its vertical pattern of bolts. Of the two types of drill units conventionally accepted, arm feed units and mast units, only one 15 judged suitable. While the arm feed unit offers low collapsed height with a long drill feed length, a great attribute for low seam use, it has not lent itself to being rolled over to a 45 degree angle. One reason for this inability is that many items which are conventionally mounted on the arm feed unit cannot be allowed to rotate with the unit. These items include drilling controls, tool Cray, lights, canopy or safety post, panic bar, and stab jack(s). If these items were independent of the arm feed drilling unit, they would have to be out of the way of the boom arms, links, and feed cylinder as the unit moves. To ease this problem, the arm feed unit can be made very short and even mounted across the machine. However, the resulting short feed length is undesirable. Several short drill steel extensions are required to drill a relatively long hole, making this procedure time-consuming as well as increasing the likelihood of drilling a crooked hole. Another reason for abandonment of the arm feed unit is that a very stiff drill guide (or "centralizer") is required to start the hole. Using the mast tilt control, the roof bolter operator will force the bit against the roof and will rotate the bit without feeding to cut sideways into the roof to form a hole face. Omission of this step often results in the skidding of the bit toward the rib. To date, no such sturdy drill guide has been designed for an arm feed drill unit. The mast style unit has been the most successful design for angle drilling. It is easily rolled over to a 45 degree angle or to 90 degrees and, on single head models, often has been made to roll through 180 degrees. The mast style is compact, in plain view and is easily fitted with heavy duty manual or hydraulically operated drill guides. It can be mounted directly on a machine chassis, or onto a swinging boom, or onto a slider arrangement in a broad variety of configurations which will accommodate controls, tool trays, stab and roof support jacks, lights, canopies, and panic bars. The only significant difficulty with mast drilling units occurs in lower mining heights when desirable low mast height is accompanied by undesirable short feed length. While the lead extension in the drill string can be as large as the mining height will allow, a short feed length will permit only the use of shorter middle extensions and drivers, and perhaps will. require the use of two different length wrenches. The associated problem is the relatively short distance from the drillhead to the drillguide. This distance is further shortened when raising the drillhead to get the bit to the roof. One might keep longer lead extensions on the machine; drill a vertical pocket for the bit, starting the angle hole at this pocket; or modify the mast. If the mast is made so that the distance from the drillhead to the drillguide remains constant while the mast extends, after which the drillhead travels up the mast, the shorter mast can be made to start the hole more easily. However, short teed length will still result in longer drilling time. It is obvious from these points that a proper choice of mast is simply the highest one which will be moved easily in the given mining height. This, of course, goes against the grain of most experienced coal mining people who realize that a relatively small decrease in mining height can create a problem correctable only with the purchase and installation of shorter masts. If the mining

Jan 1, 1982

By S. J. Jung

The goal of this research is to demonstrate how optimization methodology can be coupled with the finite element method for greater stability of underground mine openings. As a result of increasing mining depth and intersection of geologic discontinuities, mining environments are becoming more complex. Current design procedures are rapidly becoming inadequate. In this research, the finite element method has been coupled with optimization criteria to design more stable and safe underground openings

Jan 1, 1993

By C. P. Mangelsdorf

The success of the Birmingham roof truss (Figure 1) in supporting some difficult roof conditions, particularly in the Illinois coal basin, has given impetus to the development of a number of alternate schemes. These schemes attempt to alleviate two major problems with the Birming-ham truss, namely, the time required for installation and the cost of material. Because of the difficulty of drilling angled holes and the number of different pieces of hardware which must be handled manually, most operators have been unable to install Birmingham trusses in the cycle and have had to schedule truss crews during the maintenance shift or whenever they would not impede production. Due to this delay the truss has traditionally been viewed as a supplemental form of roof support. In fact, the truss might qualify as primary support and replace at least two bolts if it could he installed in the cycle (and MSHA would accept it as an alternate in the roof plan.) [ ] Figure 1. The Birmingham truss. Two attempts to deal with the first difficulty have sought to streamline the truss hardware while preserving the essential character of the Birmingham truss. One of these, by Peabody Coal, is reported elsewhere in these proceedings by C. Bollier. Another is a contract issued by the Bureau of Mines to Bendix Corporation for the development of a machine, particularly suited for use in low coal, which will automate many of the operations currently executed manually. This machine is expected to be ready for field testing by fall of 1982. Once in place, a truss installed by either of these schemes will interact with the roof in the same way as a conventional Birmingham truss. An alternate approach has been proposed by several different manufacturers independently. Although the hardware details differ. the essential idea consists of two angle bolts, the heads of which are connected by a horizontal chord tightened to some pre-determined tension. Figure 2 shows the generalized concept and does not depict any one of the four systems proposed. The advantage of this scheme is that the angle bolts can be installed and tightened in the cycle, and as bolts, immediately satisfy the roof control plan. The horizontal chord can be added later to achieve almost any initial desired roof loading, the limits of which are defined below this scheme is referred to here as the angle-bolt truss. Because of a fundamental difference in the way in which load is transferred between chords, this design does not interact with the roof under subsequent loading in the same manner as a Birmingham truss. The purpose of this paper is to examine this fundamental difference and its consequences. [ ]

Jan 1, 1982

By Richard G. Burdick

The Bureau of Mines', Denver Research Center has been conducting research for the past few years on the use of resistivity methods to locate abandoned mine workings. As this work has progressed, it is apparent that in some cases, in addition to detecting the old workings; stoping, precursive to surface subsidence has also been detected. This paper describes the Automated Resistivity method and discusses sites in Colorado. Wyoming. and Illinois where the subsidence phenomenon has been observed.

Jan 1, 1982

By William D. Gallant

This paper presents the results of a joint cooperative research project between the CANMET Cape Breton Coal Research Laboratory and the Cape Breton Development Corporation to observe the subsidence profile over the stopline of 2 West panel, Phalen Mine. A novel technique was designed and Implemented to determine vertical displacements of the overlying strata from within a near horizontal borehole drilled over the 2 West panel. Restrictions on data collection techniques due to the submarine nature of the coalfield are discussed. Development and implementation of the borehole technique using a piezometer and inclinometer Is described. Performance of the instruments and profiles obtained by them are presented and compared. Recommendations for design improvements are made to Improve the efficiency of the technique.

Jan 1, 1990

By Thomas Lautsch

After a short description of geology and gateroad roof support technology in the German coalfields the development of roof bolting as primary roof support is presented. Based on geotechnical parameters, different strategies used for roof support at depths of 3,300-4,600 ft. are explained. Strict quality management and a strict monitoring program are part of the entry development. A number of recently finished developments are described such as the introduction of standardized bolts and accelerated resin systems. An outlook of future goals is presented. The paper concludes with a comparison of roof control systems at RAG's mines in the US and Germany.

Jan 1, 2000

By Raymond M. Stateham

The Bureau of Mines has developed a portable, lightweight device for determining the integrity of resin-grouted roof bolts. The instrument functions by sending a known pulse of ulstrasonic energy into the bolt and comparing the amount of energy reflected hack with the original measured pulse. Where the bolt is properly bonded or coupled with the rock, the energy passes through the bolt-resin-rock interface and dissipates in the rock. Where the bolt is not properly coupled, the energy is reflected back along the bolt to the instrument. The ratio of reflected energy to the pulse approximates the fraction of the bolt's surface that is improperly bonded. The instrument is easy to use. The operator holds the sensor head of the device firmly over the head of the bolt to be tested, causing the pulse of ultrasonic energy to be imparted to the bolt. The device then listens for reflected energy. This cycle is repeated about 200 times per second until an evaluation of the bolt installation is made and indicated by colored lights in the display window. Bolts having 50% or less of their surface bonded are considered had and cause a red light to he illuminated. Bolts with 50% to 75% of their surface bonded cause a yellow light to be lit and are considered marginal. Bolts having more than 75% of their surface bonded are considered good and cause a green light to be lit. The indicator lamp remains on for about 4 seconds and then goes off, indicating that the instrument is ready for another test.

Jan 1, 1982

By Lewis A. Martin

Instrumented cable bolts developed at the Spokane Research Laboratory of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health were used in conjunction with existing ground control systems to monitor rock mass loads at Tg Soda Ash's trona mine, Granger, WY. Axial and shear loads were determined to levels of strain gauge accuracy of ±5 N or ±5 microstrain. These gauges were embedded in a remanufactured king wire that replaced the conventional king wire. Cable bolt performance, quality of grout, and installation techniques were also assessed. By using instrumented cables, a mine operator can determine axial load along the cable at predefined gauge locations. These data provide necessary input for an operator to design a safer working environment for miners.

Jan 1, 2001

By Tom Barczak

Early in my career, while giving a presentation on shield design for longwall mining at one of the International Conferences on Ground Control in Mining, the late Jim Scott told me that I was finally getting it, because ?I was starting to think like a rock!? Although I didn?t realize it at the time, those few words changed my career forever. At the start of my career, I did a lot of laboratory testing, taking advantage of the unique capabilities of the Mine Roof Simulator to study the performance and design characteristics of longwall shields. I had a pretty good handle on what made shields work and what made them fail, but I was still struggling with how and why they develop their in-service loads and what they were actually controlling as opposed to being passive bystanders in a world beyond their control. It became clear to me that the simplistic models of dead weight loading could not explain the behavior I saw and measured underground. The problem did not go away when I started studying standing support systems. Again, I learned much about the strength, stiffness, and stability of these supports and helped the industry develop several new support products that attempted to provide more efficient support designs. But here, too, the simplistic models of dead weight loading did not seem to fit for me. That?s when I began to incorporate the ground reaction concept as a way of integrating the support response and the ground behavior into a cohesive design methodology. The concept has its limitations, no doubt, but I believe some form of it will be the future of not only designing supports but also, in the broader sense, enhancing the engineering aspects of ground control. The paper presented at the International Conference on Ground Control last year by Esterhuizen (2010) on pillar behavior is evidence of this. Think like a rock. Jim Scott was right. It takes two to dance. You can?t dance alone and you will never understand ground control by thinking like a support! ?Dumb as a box of rocks?? I don?t think so. The answer lies in the rocks!

Jan 1, 2011

By Robert A. Stansbury

The No. 14 Mine of United States Steel Corp- oration is located at Munson, West Virginia, in &Dowell County. The mine was originally assigned 7,530 acres of Pocahontas 3, 4 and 5 Seams. Production began in 1948 with a listed reserve of 64,500,000 in place tons. It was originally intended to superimpose the 4 Seam workings with the 3 Seam and mine the two simultaneously to minimize the effects of one seam on the other. Roof control problems and economic conditions led to the discontinuance of 4 Seam workings in 1958 and again in 1980, after reopening in 1972. With room and pillar mining continuing in the 3 Seam, the majority of the 4 Seam reserves have been undermined. The mine began operation using track mounted conventional equipment. Off-track conventional equipment was next used, and in 1957 continuous miners were introduced. Since this tie, continuous miners on room and pillar work have been exclusively used with the exception of a brief shortwall trial in the 4 Seam in 1975. By mid 1982, 3 Seam mining will have been completed, leaving an estimated 42 million in place tons of 4 and 5 Seam coal as the focus of mining efforts. Plans for the subsequent reopening of the 4 and 5 Seam workings have been scheduled for June of 1981. With the resumption of mining, management is faced with solving the roof support problems caused by both the inherent physical conditions and undermining.

Jan 1, 1981