Search Documents

By Nathaniel Schaefer, Christopher Newman, Zach Agioutantis

"As mining reserves continue to be developed in deeper and more complex geological and geometric conditions, there has been an increased demand for underground mine designs to better reflect site-specific conditions, measurements, and observations with respect to ground control safety and stability. Current ground control design software are limited to a given device and data files generated can only contain a single design. However, with the growth of cloud computing and increases in internet access, even underground where permissible, web-based software applications allow for in-the-field calculations, as well as collaborations, from multiple users. webGroundControl (webGC) utilizes a multiple-tier architecture, building upon existing NIOSH ground control design software, more specifically ARBS, ALPS, and ARMPS. By providing operators the ability to access ground control design programs from any device, given an internet connection, webGC allows for on demand calculations to ensure underground pillar and roof stabilities with respect to current site-specific parameters, geometries, and geology. Through the development of new features, which aid in design analyses, as well as project collaborations, webGC provides the modern engineer with a more versatile ground control design tool for the improvement of underground health and safety. With the completion of the ARBS, ALPS, and ARMPS modules, this paper introduces potential users within the mining industry to the navigation and operation of the webGC application, as well as its ability to facilitate collaborations between operational personnel and planning engineers. The purpose of this paper is to raise interest in the web-based application before its official launch in Summer 2018."

Jan 1, 2017

By Yun Zhang, Haijun Jiang, Shenggen Cao, Chen Wang

The distribution of front abutment pressure is closely related to the force, deformation and energy distribution of hard roof before periodic weighting. So it is necessary to carry out research on the relationship between them. According to front abutment pressure distribution feature, using the location of peak front abutment pressure as the dividing point, coal seam is divided into two parts along the direction of mining: the yield zone that is the area between the faceline and the point where the maximum front abutment pressure occurs, and the elastic zone that is the part before the point of peak front abutment pressure. The proposed mechanical model of unit width hard roof at the panel center periodic weighting consists of five parts including the yield zone. All parameters of the deflection equations for each of the five parts that satisfy the continuity conditions and natural boundary conditions are obtained by using the Matlab software. The continuous curves of front abutment pressure, deflection, bending moment and bending strain energy density distribution of hard roof are obtained by iterative approximation method. The following conclusions can be drawn through analyzing those curves: (1) The position of peak front abutment pressure is located at the transition of coal seam foundation from yield zone to elastic zone (elastoyield critical point), the distance of it to the faceline is equal to the width of yield zone. The peak front abutment pressure increases with yield zone with. (2) The peak bending moment in front of the faceline, and the distance of it to the faceline increase with the yield zone width. The deflection of hard roof at the face and midspan also increase with yield zone width. (3) As the yield zone width increases, the accumulated elastic energy of hard roof in front of the faceline increases, and the core zone of energy moves forward away from the face. (4) When the yield zone width is zero, the whole coal foundation is regarded as elastic foundation, and the peak front abutment pressure occurs at the faceline.

Jan 1, 2015

By Karsten Zimmermann, Peter Cain

"To receive regulatory approval for a new coal mining operation in North America, extensive investigations of feasibility and potential environmental impacts, including ground deformations, are required. Figure 1 shows pictures from mine sites and an example mine map with the planned panel layout for one seam of the multi-seam longwall operation considered.The cumulative mined coal thickness of 22 meters in some areas of the operation requires a comprehensive forecast of expected ground movements and subsidence impacts (e.g., subsidence, slope, displacement, curvature and strain). In the frame of the impact study, the prediction of these impact factors was conducted by DMT using the computer program SPS 4D, based on the Ruhrkohle modeling method by Ehrhardt and Sauer (1961).This paper briefly presents the modeling method and explains the benefits and possibilities for its international application. Information gathered from literature studies on subsidence in North America were incorporated into the initial model parameterization. The article shows the ways in which the observed influences of mountainous topography on surface displacements and deformations can be considered by an extension of the subsidence prediction model and integration of DEM information.SUBSIDENCE MODELFor the calculation of mining-induced subsidence and deformation, DMT has developed subsidence prediction software SPS 4D, which is built according to the stochastic prediction model by (Ehrhardt and Sauer, 1961). The model is based on the subsidence theory by (Knothe, 1953) with a specific parametrization of the stochastic influence function and includes enhancements for dynamic subsidence calculations after (Sroka, 1978). In Europe, mainly in Germany and Poland, the model is approved by the authorities as a standard model for subsidence prediction in mining areas. However, extensive research within R&D activities has shown the possibility to predict mining-induced subsidence considering the specific mining conditions in North America (Zimmermann and Fritschen, 2007)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Zhanjing Yu

Longwall ground behavior in the Illinois Coal Basin was studied in the past (1, 2, 3). Most of the past studies, however, were concentrated on either surface subsidence or underground structural behavior. In this study, both surface and in-mine ground behaviors are considered, which include: 1) stress and deformation characteristics in the chain pillars; 2) roof and floor deformations; 3) surface subsidence characteristics, including time effect; 4) relationship between the surface subsidence and underground strata behavior; and 5) the ultimate hearing capacity underneath the chain pillars. Field measurements and tests were conducted and the data were analyzed using both analytical and statistical methods. The findings in this study can he used by mine operators in the Illinois Coal Basin for longwall ground control planning and design.

Jan 1, 1994

By Peter Cain

The Phalen Colliery in the Sydney Coalfield is extracting the 2.6 m thick Phalen Seam by the panel and pillar longwall retreat method. Abandoned workings occur in the Harbour Seam 140 m above and overlie the Phalen Colliery. Parts of these workings are flooded, and pose a number of questions relating to the safety of operations in the Phalen Colliery. In order to answer some of these questions, the Cape Breton Development Corporation re-entered an abandoned non-flooded roadway in the Harbour Seam directly above a retreat panel in the Phalen Seam to allow the deployment of instrumentation to monitor interaction effects. Fifteen monitoring sites, each 4.5 m apart, were installed in the 5 East Top Level after it had been re-entered and made safe. Each monitoring station included a vibrating wire strain gauge piezometer and a potentiometric extensometer. The piezometers were attached to rock bolts anchored into the floor and were connected by a flexible standpipe to a constant head apparatus. Variations in hydraulic head due to subsidence were monitored to determine subsidence. The extensometer units were mounted on rock bolts anchored into the floor of the roadway beneath the ribside and monitored ground strains. The instrumentation was capable of remote reading in the event that access to the site was restricted after installation. This paper describes the instrumentation, the installation programme, and some preliminary results.

Jan 1, 1993

By Gregory Molinda

Extremely difficult ground conditions were encountered in the main belt entry in a room and pillar mine in West Virginia. Several generations of supplemental support, including cable bolts, cribbing, and Heintzmann jacks and beams failed to halt roof falls that threatened workers safety and the life of the mine. Polyurethane (PUR) was injected into 27 intersections in the roof and the results were monitored by borehole video camera. The mine had averaged 2-3 falls in the beltway per year and, since the roof injection, no roof falls have occurred. Pre- and post injection monitoring of test holes showed that stability can be achieved without filling all of the existing void spaces. Video logging showed that the project goal of building a beam from 2-6 ft into the roof was successful. Pre-injection monitoring of roof fractures uphole can delineate the zones to target for reinforcement, and avoid pumping PUR into large voids to little effect. Multiple-¬injection zones can be identified, and the entire intersection drill hole array can be optimized based on knowledge of the fractured zones. In addition, pre-monitoring can prevent excessive hydrofracturing in solid zones. Polyurethane injection is a proven method of rock stabilization in even the weakest, most broken ground. Optimization of the injection design by pre-injection video diagnostics can greatly contribute to the successful and efficient roof stabilization.

Jan 1, 2004

By Gennaro Marino

Documented case histories are studied where data were found on the initial collapse of the overburden above the longwall panels. Under this scenario, the most controlled conditions exist for assessing the span capacity of the overburden (i.e., before failure the roof spans to fin coal abutments on two to all four sides). In an attempt to correlate theory to field observations, data are used on the overburden lithology, and the depth, width, and face advance of the panel, as well as, the subsidence conditions noted on the surface. The subsidence measured on the surface is used to determine when complete failure in the over- burden rock has occurred.

Jan 1, 1987

By Ihsan B. Tulu, David F. Gearhart, Gabriel S. Esterhuizen

"Ground deformation and support response was monitored in a longwall gateroad as part of a research project into gateroad stability under changing loading conditions. In this study, instrumentation was installed in a gateroad located between two active longwall panels. The first panel to pass was the second panel in the district, and the second panel to pass the instrumentation sites was the third panel in the district. All of the panels in the district were right-handed. All of the instrumentation was installed in the number one entry, the tailgate, the second panel to pass the instrumentation sites at a mid-pillar location, and at an outby intersection location under about 600 feet of cover. The instrumentation included roof extensometers, cable bolt load cells, hollow inclusion cells, borehole pressure cells, standing support load cells, and convergence sensors, and a multipoint borehole extensometer. The roof extensometers measured roof convergence and sag. The cable bolt load cells measured the roof load applied to the cable bolts in the secondary support array. Hollow inclusion cells measured the magnitude and direction of the principal and shear stresses. The borehole pressure cells measured the stress on a pillar in the entry nearest to the second panel to pass the instrument site. The instrumented wood cribs in the entry nearest the second panel recorded the closure and load on the cribs, and the multipoint borehole extensometer in a pillar closest to the second panel recorded the location and width of cracks that occurred and total expansion of the pillar. This paper describes the effects of the changing stress caused by the first panel as it approached and passed the locations of the instruments on the opposite side of the gateroad system and the later effect caused by the second panel as it approached and passed the mid-pillar instrument location. The first panel passing caused significant loading at the mid-pillar instrument location, but not at the intersection location, while the second panel had passed the mid-pillar location and just arrived at the intersection location when the dataloggers needed to be removed."

Jan 1, 2017

By Anthony T. Iannacchione

The Solar No. 7 and Solar No. 10 mines were designed to prevent mine waters from directly discharging to the surface. In January of 2004, a discharge occurred as the Solar No. 7 mine was in its final stage of flooding through a barrier averaging 456-ft in width over a 1,600-ft length (No. 1). Another barrier (No. 2) was designed to protect four municipal water wells operating 1,800- ft away and producing from within or slightly below the Upper Kittanning coalbed from the adjacent Solar No. 7 and No. 10 mine pools. These two barriers were selected for this study because of varied mine layouts, mining methods, and geology factors affecting their performance. Analysis was aided by the collection and georeferencing of 6-month mining maps from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP). A structure contour map of the Upper Kittanning coalbed was constructed from mine map elevation points. These data and 2-ft surface contour maps were used to measure the precise location of the coal outcrop. The actual discharge point was as little as 425-ft away from a thinpillar section and 475-ft away from a pillar recovery section. The discharge point was found to be located slightly above the coal, indicating that the drainage path was at least partially through the strata directly above the Upper Kittanning coalbed. Hydraulic conductivities and potential discharge pathways are analyzed and discussed. The possible factors influencing the performance of the down-dip barriers at Solar No. 7 and Solar No. 10 are: a) the width of the barrier, b) the applied hydraulic gradient, c) the type of mining adjacent to the barrier, d) the overburden, e) the pattern and characteristics of fractures, and f) the quality of waters contained within the mine pools. This study, part of a larger effort funded by the Appalachian Research Initiative for Environmental Sciences (ARIES), is tasked to determine the key factors responsible for the successful design of down-dip coal barriers.

Jan 1, 2013

By Bob J. MacDonald

The Cape Breton Development Corporation is a federally owned Crown corporation in Canada that operates two coal mines the Prince and Phalen Colliery in the Province of Nova Scotia. Retreat longwall mining was first introduced to the shallower workings (I 80m) of Prince Colliery in the early 1980's. Phalen Colliery started longwall retreating in 1987 and since that time has extracted twelve panels. In 1993 there had been a total of eight longwalls varying in widths from 140-230m mined in Phalen Colliery that is on the Phalen Seam. Up to this point there were only minor ground control problems on the faces except for one of the earlier longwalls that was mining a split seam. There is some interaction on Phalen workings from remnant structures in the overlying Lingan and No. 26 Collieries which worked the Harbour Seam. Induced abutments loads along pillar edges have been observed and resulted in poor face conditions when mining the Phalen Seam. The ninth panel, 6 East was the first panel to suffer a major roof fall from the First Major Weighting. This was also the first panel to undermine a paleo sandstone river channel named the Lower Sandstone Unit (LSU). For the first time in Phalen's history subsequent longwalls began to experience periodic weighting events. The 6 East panel suffered a number of periodic weightings and on two occasions had to use foam cement to fill the cavities that resulted. On the next east side panel, 7 East, there were numerous periodic weighting events, but interestingly there was no significant First Major Weighting. 7 East was the first 260m wide panel and all others were 230m or less. This longwall was 3,400m long and began producing in December of 1994 and was still cutting coal in May of 1997. There were five significant roof fall events on this panel, three of which required foam cement to fill the cavities. Of these three the interruption to production varied from four days to seven months. There were definite precursors to each of the weightings including: 1) an increase in audible noise (termed bumping) on the face, 2) supports went rapidly into yield, 3) roof convergence increased, 4) water percolated from the face roof strata, and 5) severe spalling of the coal occurred resulting in increased tip to face distance. Longwall face weightings are a result of geomechanical factors and cannot be avoided However, the loss of roof control is a different matter and highly subjective to operational procedures. The causes of weightings, their magnitude and impact on the mining at Phalen have been investigated. The following factors have been identified as relevant to these occurrences. 1. The influence of pillars in the overlying Harbour Seam workings. 2. Location of the LSU relative to the Phalen Seam. 3. Thickness of the LSU. 4. Pressure arch effect from the adjacent gobs. 5. Poor operational practices on the longwall including: a) slow rate of retreat; b) inadequate supply of pump pressure to the hydraulic supports; c) premature yielding of the yield valves; and d) poor face alignment practices. This paper will review the events that took place on the 7 East longwall and show that the Lower Sandstone Unit is the primary cause of the weightings. However, other factors contributed to the loss of roof control and the formation of the roof cavities.

Jan 1, 1997

By J. B. Lizak

This paper is not available for inclusion in the Proceedings at the time of printing, but it will be included as an insert.

Jan 1, 1984

By Kewal K. Kohli, Stefanie Self

"Three cases of surface subsidence investigated over abandoned coal mines after flooding in one case and dcwatering in two cases are presented in this paper. Mining was conducted by the room and- pillar method at all the mines leaving stable pillars. This paper will discuss the background chain of events and the likely causes of the pillar failure resulting in surface subsidence.CASE NO.1BackgroundThe Pittsburgh scam was mined in 1960 by the room-and- pillar method, leaving pillars (Figure I) through Mine A. located in Monongalia County. West Virginia.The mining height in U1is area was 1.83 m (6 ft) with an average mining depth of 140 m (460 ft). The mining recovery was 62% and the safety factor of the pillars was calculated at 1.15 using the Bieniawski ( 1984) fom1ula. For stable pillar design. a 1.5 safety factor is recommended. A 1.15 safety factor is considered marginal. Pumping continued after the mine was shut down in 1960 to prevent water seeping into an adjoining mine owned by the same company. The pumping ceased on December 12. 2003, and the mine was allowed to flood. The water level rose about 17 m (55 ft) by August 3 1, 2004, based on observations in a nearby borehole. On September 3, 2004 surface subsidence occurred above this area causing damage 10 a residence (Figure 2).Summary of InvestigationThe floor of the Pittsburgh coal scam played a strong role in the pillar failure. In this area, the immediate floor of the Pittsburgh seam consists of about two feet of fireclay. Extensive damage to the surface house was an indication that a major collapse below the surface had occurred. The pillars supporting the overlying strata were evaluated to find the cause of their failure. The pillars in the Pittsburgh seam (sec Figure I) had a marginal safety factor of 1.15 before flooding and were stable for 26 years. Once the mine was flooded the water level in the Pittsburgh seam rose by 17 m (55 ft). Shortly thereafter the fireclay in the floor weakened, resulting in several pillars punching into the floor unevenly making the immediate roof unstable. The overburden strata supported by these pillars also subsided do"" n into the mine, causing damage to several house on the surface."

Jan 1, 2010

By Tobias U. Papst

The German Ruhrgebiet is slowly transitioning into a post-mining state. It has been subjected to industrial-grade hard coal mining operations for more than 150 years. Due to a political decision, German hard coal mining will come to an end in 2018. By then the surface will have subsided up to 20 meters. After all mining activities in the area have ended, there will be no need to maintain the current mine water level. Accordingly, the company operating the last remaining coal mines has decided to let the water level rise to an as yet undetermined level. Alongside other issues that may be caused by rising groundwater levels, the protection of the area?s drinking water supply is of utmost importance. This notion is also represented by European and German law. The primary intent of the applicable laws is to protect the health of the citizenship. This means protecting ground water that may be used by humans from being contaminated by the mine water. This paper outlines the consequences of European and German legislature on mining aftercare using the example of one of Europe?s largest agglomerations.

Jan 1, 2014

By G. R. Corbett

Between 1977 and 1984, No. 26 Colliery, at Glace Bay in the Sydney Coalfield, suffered from a series of 37 rock/gas outbursts. These events were characterized by the complete pulverization of a sandstone which was propelled into the mine roadway and an associated release of methane gas. The events began to appear at a depth of 700 m and increased in intensity and damage to the excavation as the mining depth increased. At the time of the closure of No. 26 Colliery (as a result of an unrelated fire), these outbursts were the subject of intensive investigation. Although No. 26 is now closed, there is concern that similar events could appear at Phalen Colliery where current development work is proceeding at a depth close to the 700 m threshold. Past investigations into rock/gas outbursts included studies of in situ stresses, the simulation of outburst events in the laboratory, investigations into the potential for destressing an& degassing of problem sandstone and the development of numerical models to assist in the design of openings in outburst prone ground. However, despite this work, methods of predicting outburst conditions are presently limited to examination of probe hole cores for core discing, and methods of working under such conditions are limited to boring and firing and using volley firing techniques to initiate any outbursts while workers are safely out of the heading. During this investigation of worldwide occurrences of this phenomena, literature obtained suggested that outbursts might generate microseismic precursors. An intrinsically safe (IS) microseismic monitoring system was designed and developed based on CANMET's rockburst monitoring system currently in use in hardrock mines, and installed in a development roadway at the deepest extent of the Phalen Colliery. The system will record microseismic activity associated with development work to try to identify characteristic precursors of outburst-prone conditions. This paper describes the steps taken to identify a microseismic system suitable for use at Phalen colliery, of which part of the requirement was that it be IS and approved for use in the Sydney Coalfield. The modifications to the selected system are described, along with its capabilities and the preliminary results of its performance over the first few months of use.

Jan 1, 1994

By Josh Johnson, Stephen Tadolini, Mark Ferster, Curt Jacobs

"Stillwater Mining Company is the only U.S. producer of platinum group metals (PGMs) and the largest producer outside of South Africa and Russia. The Company controls a considerable portion of the J-M Reef and is currently developing the ""Blitz Project,"" which will provide a main haulage level, ore pass systems, backfill plants, and flow-through ventilation to increase production and ensure sustainable extraction of this critical strategic mineral. While driving two sub-parallel footwall laterals to about 8,125 m (26,000 ft) long, one of the development drifts experienced a massive fall in a geologically disturbed area created by a dike intrusion. Combinations of a void fill material (Tekseal), polyurethane injection, fore poling coupled with steel arches, and supplemental bolting allow safe and efficient advance through this geologically disturbed zone. This paper presents the details of this project.INTRODUCTIONStillwater Mining Company is the only U.S. producer of platinum group metals (PGMs) and the largest producer outside of South Africa and Russia. The Company controls a considerable portion of the J-M Reef and is currently developing the ""Blitz Project,"" which will provide a main haulage level, ore pass systems, backfill plants, and flow-through ventilation to increase production and ensure sustainable extraction of this critical strategic mineral.Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs), shown in Figure 1, have been used extensively at both the Stillwater Mine and the East Boulder Mine to develop access to the J-M Reef. The J-M Reef is a PGMbearing reef deposit located in the Stillwater Complex near NyeMontana. The mining property and location are shown in Figure 2.The Blitz Project is named after the Blitz mining claims and is developing the Eastern extent of the J-M Reef Project., This consists of a 5.5 m (18 ft) diameter TBM drive on the SOE (1,562 m (5,000 ft) above sea level and east of the shaft collar) and a 4.7 x 4.7 m (15 x 15 ft) drill and blast heading on the 5,600E (1,750 m (5,600 ft) above sea level and east of the shaft collar). The Benbow Decline will be completed running perpendicular to the TBM by drilling and blasting methods. The TBM drift will be used for exploration drilling, ventilation, and will serve as the main haulage level. The 56E will be used for ventilation and exploration drilling. The Benbow decline will serve as the exhaust drift."

Jan 1, 2016

By Freddie Hunter

An underground mining method for extracting an eight metre (26') coal horizon, containing a sandstone layer. A decrease in the thickness of the rock strata between the number two and number three seams of the Sasolburg Coal Field, has resulted in a total mining horizon approximately eight metres (26') thick. This parting varies in thickness and competency and in some areas is impractical to cut with a continuous miner. In addition, the general mining area is highly jointed. The top seam is first mined to a normal bord and pillar plan with a continuous miner. The bottom seam is then mined by selectively undercutting the stone parting constituting the floor of the top seam. In areas where this parting is between 0.75 - 2.50 metres (29.5" - 98") thick, it is suspended from the primary roof support installed when mining the top seam. Secondary, high extraction retreat mining is then undertaken in the coal pillars adjacent to the suspension supported headings in the bottom seam. Left in-situ, the parting provides lateral support to the pillar sidewalls in both the top and bottom seams, enabling high percentage extraction rates in what was previously thought an uneconomically mineable area. The paper proposed, presents the challenges and practical implications of executing the mining method, including the primary roof control of the top seam and the stone parting between scams.

Jan 1, 2003

By Jesse L. Craft

Field investigation of surface subsidence events associated with both active and abandoned underground coal mines in the United States has established criteria that enable the prediction and classification of mine-related subsidence. The key was establishing the role of geology in all types of subsidence and the recognition of beam subsidence in specific geologic settings. The classification is based on overburden thickness, variations in stratigraphy, topography and mine plan. Types of subsidence are Pit, Room, Sag, and Beam. Pit subsidence is associated with three geologic settings: shale overburden, seasonally wet unconsolidated overburden, and perched water table in unconsolidated overburden. Room subsidence occurs where the roof across the width of the room fails to the surface and a shallow depression develops. Sag subsidence develops where the pillars are failing in conjunction with roof failure. Overburden thickness is generally greater than 150 feet. Beam subsidence can occur in all terrains. It is associated with retreat mining and room and pillar mining where pillar crushing or pillar compression has taken place and barriers are left inplace. They occur as beam arch or one-sided beam subsidence. Beam arch failure occurs where mining has taken place on both sides of a coal barrier. One-sided beam failure is associated with retreat mining moving from a barrier towards the entry in hilly topography. This type of subsidence occurs where a hard, thick, rock unit is acting as a bridge supporting the overburden and outcrops on the hill side.

Jan 1, 1992

By Denise Weber, Jürgen Kateloe, Marku Papst, Laurenz Preusse, Axel Preusse

"The angle of draw (in Germany, referred to as Limit Angle) plays a significant role in the field of mining subsidence engineering. This applies both to the assessment of the affected area by underground mining activities as well as applied methods for the prediction of ground movements.Recent observations using remote sensing show that ground movements outside the affected area defined by the angle of draw have been detected in German hard coal mining. Since the affected area by underground mining activities also plays an essential role regarding claims of landowners with damages to their houses and infrastructures, possible solutions for limiting the size of the affected area will be presented in this paper.Ground movements which exceed the affected area of an underground coal mine, as defined by the angle of draw will be shown in an exemplary manner. Present knowledge indicates an expectation that ground movements outside the affected area will not cause damage of major significance.This paper outlines the consequences for all affected parties regarding ground movements due to underground coal mining that exceed the extent of the area defined by the currently assumed angle of draw. This will be visualized in a case study.INTRODUCTIONGermany has a long tradition of coal mining, especially in the mining area of the Ruhr district. Following a long period of mining activity, the area is now highly populated and densely developed. In such an environment, it is of utmost importance to calculate and predict ground movements initiated by mining activities; therefore, the research here focused on the prediction of ground movement for the last decades. Special attention was given to the development of accurate ground movement models, which can be utilized in all mining areas. These models are based on different influencing factors such as depth of mining, worked thickness and the angle of draw.Depending on these models, the mining companies calculate the area of land subsidence; the predicted results are used for financial calculations and planning. For structures on top of zones with a high risk of deformation, structural measures can be applied, construction warnings can be given and, in cases of damage, compensation can be planned. The technical and economic planning was performed for all areas of mining subsidence. The most important factor for the outer limits of mining subsidence is the angle of draw (Ger. Grenzwinkel), which plots the border of the area of mining subsidence."

Jan 1, 2015

By Michael Gauna, Christopher Mark

"For decades, pillar recovery accounted for a quarter of all roof fall fatalities in underground coal mines. Studies showed that a miner on a pillar recovery section was at least three times more likely to be killed by a roof fall than other coal miners. Since 2007, however, there has been just one fatal roof fall on a pillar line. This paper describes the process that resulted in this historic achievement. It covers both the key research findings and the ways in which those insights, beginning in the early 2000s, were implemented in mining practice.One key finding was that safe pillar recovery requires both global and local stability. Global stability is addressed primarily through proper pillar design, and became a major focus after the 2007 Crandall Canyon mine disaster. But the most significant improvements resulted from detailed studies that showed that local stability, defined as roof control in the immediate work area, could be achieved with three interventions:• Leaving an engineered final stump, rather than extracting the entire pillar;• Enhancing roof bolt support, particularly in intersections, and• Increasing the use of Mobile Roof Supports (MRS)A final component was an emphasis on better management of pillar recovery operations. This included a focus on worker positioning, as well as on the pillar and lift sequences, MRS operations, and hazard identification. As retreat mines have incorporated these elements into their Roof Control Plans, it has become clear that pillar recovery is not ""inherently unsafe.""The paper concludes with a discussion of the challenges that remain, including the problems of rib falls and coal bursts.INTRODUCTIONPillar recovery has always been an integral part of underground coal mining in the US. When room-and-pillar methods are employed, large blocks of coal in the form of pillars are initially left in place to support the weight of the overburden. Unless these pillars are subsequently recovered, the coal they contain will never be mined."

Jan 1, 2016

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