Search Documents

By Wenquan Zhang

Based on the mining and geological conditions of Wadong Mine, Longkou City, Shandong Province, China, a viscoelastic model with proper creep parameters was established. The 3-D ANSYS was used to simulate surface subsidence, analyze overburden subsidence characteristics, and propose the rational mining and pillar widths for mining in weak rocks and under special mining conditions, and provide the policy makers scientific data for decision making on mining activities.

Jan 1, 2006

By Khaled Morsy

In the past two decades, high horizontal stress has been attributed to many ground control failures. Most believe that entries parallel to the high horizontal stress is most stable and least stable when perpendicular to it. Entry stability decreases when the angle between entry and horizontal stress increases. The concept of 2-D stress shadow has been proposed for selection of proper panel orientation, often with mixed results. In this paper 3-D finite element modeling was used to analyze the stress distribution at the headgate of a longwall panel subject to high horizontal stress at various angles. It was found that the directions of induced principal stresses at the longwall face and headgate are independent of the panel orientation. The induced principal stresses concentrate or relief at headgate based on the panel orientation with respect to the directions of the induced principal stresses. Accordingly, only 3-D modeling can fully account for the effects of high horizontal stress on panel orientation. The paper illustrates in details the changes in orientation and magnitude of all three principal stresses around the longwall face and T-junction area as panel orientation changes.

Jan 1, 2006

By John Ellenberger

The nature of a stone deposit is rarely defined through exploration and engineering design, but more through the actual experience encountered as the mine develops; hence, issues with ground control are often at the forefront for a new mine. Ground control problems account for over 15 percent of lost-time injuries in underground stone mines. The objective of this work is to present actions taken during early development of a stone mine to mitigate the obvious effects of high horizontal stress on ground control. The mine was developed from a box cut with relatively little cover, and high horizontal stresses were not anticipated. Early recognition of possible high horizontal stress resulted in mapping of the mine using the NIOSH-developed Roof Fall Risk Index (RFRI) to provide a baseline to objectively analyze roof conditions. A program of borescoping the mine roof provided valuable roof beam thickness data and found that the roof beam was of minimal thickness, approximately 10 percent of drift width. As the mine developed, it became apparent that ground control problems related to high horizontal stress existed. A concentrated effort was made to improve ground conditions by implemeting a number of mitigation techniques. Actions taken by the mine included systematic roof support, reorientation of mining direction, a lower roof horizon, reduced span widths and reduced mining height in crosscuts to prevent running falls. These strategies resulted in signifcantly improved ground stability.

Jan 1, 2012

By Peter Hatherly

As a discipline, geophysics covers an enormous range of scales and applications - from planetary geophysics through to the monitoring of acoustic emissions of rock samples. Although it is not a core discipline within the mining industry, geophysics has a useful role in providing information on the nature of the rock mass and the way it is responding to the mining process. For coal mining purposes, geophysical studies mainly seek to - delineate boundaries between the coal and the various layers within the surrounding strata - determine the physical properties of the rocks in-si tu, and - monitor the response of the rocks to the mining process Some of these applications may be associated primarily with mine planning, but once a mine is underway, most geophysical results can be used for the purposes of ground control. For example, insights into the nature of a geological fault mapped by a 3D seismic reflection survey will be relevant to determining support requirements while mining through it. In some instances there are parallels in the use of geophysics by the petroleum industry. Seismic reflection and wireline logging techniques have mainly been developed for petroleum exploration where their on-going development continues to provide spin-offs for the coal industry. The 3D seismic survey techniques that we now routinely employ were in their infancy 25 years ago and, almost certainly, the high quality borehole scanning tools that are now available would not have been developed without the need for petroleum well evaluation. Mining has also led to the development of specific techniques. An example is microseismic monitoring for the management of roof conditions during longwalling, and also the prediction of rock and coal bursts. The use and success of this technique have grown greatly over recent years. Another example lies with the use of geophysical wireline logs to predict rock strength and in rock mass classification. Coal seams also provide an unusual geophysical situation in that they form seismic and electromagnetic waveguides. The in-seam seismic and radio imaging methods have been developed to exploit these geological properties. In this paper I address the development and application of geophysical methods such as these with a particular emphasis on their role in ground control. We will see that there have been many developments over the past 25 years but we should also think about the future and how geophysics needs to be developed. From a miner?s perspective, one obvious area of need is in the detection of voids in the vicinity of current mine workings, be they old workings or karsts within nearby carbonate beds.

Jan 1, 2006

By F. E. Chase

Mobile roof supports are shield-type support units mounted on crawler tracks. Mobile roof support (MRS) units are used during retreat mining, and they eliminate the setting of roadway, turn, and crosscut breaker posts which are required during pillar recovery operations. Mobiles are a more effective ground support than timbers, and their usage enhance the safety of section personnel and reduces material handling injuries. MRS usage is rapidly increasing, and approximately 40 U.S. coal mines have successfully employed this relatively new technology. This paper is in response to increasing requests from operators, State and Federal Regulatory Agencies, and others on the practical aspects of MRS usage in underground coal mines. During this investigation, nearly half of the U.S. mines which have utilized mobiles were visited. This report depicts the more common pillar extraction methods which operators have found successful. The Christmas tree and outside lift methods are illustrated and discussed. Roof control plans that do not require breaker posts or allow pillar extraction with fewer than four mobiles are also examined. In addition, operators' experiences with setting pressures, loads, and rates of loading during pillar extraction are addressed. Mining and support strategies to more effectively control hillseams, weak roof, and gob overrides which have entrapped equipment are also discussed.

Jan 1, 1996

By Dan Payne

The Crinum mine has recently completed workings in the southern area of the mine. Over the 10 years of longwall production 40 million tonnes have been extracted and the mine has experienced over 40 longwall face, 3 main gateend, and 2 tail gateend roof falls as well as 5 roadway roof falls away from the longwall. Weak roof (less than 10MPa (1450psi) in the bolted horizon) has been the principal roof control issue at the mine. However, weak, highly cleated coal, water inflow from overlying aquifers, some minor structure and a diatreme in the main headings have also contributed to the challenges at the mine. This paper describes the geotechnical experience over the 10 years, the mine?s approach to addressing the issues and the relative success of these approaches.

Jan 1, 2008

By Gregory M. Molinda

Difficult mining conditions in deep western U.S. Iongwalls have necessitated the use of novel tailgate support systems. Extreme ground movement in these yielding gate systems has caused operators to utilize secondary support systems which match yield and strength characteristics with expected ground reaction. Other benefits include ventilation and safety gains, as well as lower costs. Recently, the use of novel support has been tried at longwall mines in other U.S. coal basins. One of the main considerations is the capability of the support to maintain an adequate airway for gob ventilation in gassy eastern coal mines. In one large Pennsylvania mine working the Pittsburgh seam, a number of support configurations were monitored over a 2,300 ft tailgate test area. The test included 4-pt wood cribs, Link-N-Lock cribs, Propsetter yieldable posts, cable trusses, and vertical cable bolts. Ground reaction, and thus support performance, was documented by roof sag and convergence instruments, ventilation measurements, and photographs. Various combinations of standing support and cable truss and vertical cable bolts provided adequate support for ventilation and safe escape. A cribless configuration consisting of only cable trusses and vertical cable bolts was inadequate to provide inby gob ventilation to the next open crosscut. Instrument ground movement data and visual documentation are presented.

Jan 1, 1997

By T. P. Mucho

Mine roof failure due to excessive horizontal stress has been recognized as a major cause of hazardous roof conditions in some mines. Stress measurements gathered by the U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) at 24 different eastern mines show horizontal stress to be typically 2 to 3 times as great as vertical stress. The focus of current Bureau work is to develop detailed design parameters to assess and control the effects of horizontal stress. To facilitate the recognition of horizontal stress effects and to easily determine principal stress direction without resorting to cumbersome, expensive, and time consuming field measurements, the Bureau has developed a stress mapping methodology. Stress recognition and direction determination are required to successfully employ a number of control strategies such as mine layout, mining sequences, and support optimization to control the effects of horizontal stress, thereby increasing the safety of U.S. coal mines. This approach has been used in other major coal producing countries, most notably Australia and the UK, and has greatly enhanced the safety of their mines (1). This paper discusses horizontal stress, directional based control techniques, and provides guidelines for the use of the stress mapping technique. A case study of a mine where the technique has been used is also presented.

Jan 1, 1994

By Erdal Akyol

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

Jan 1, 1992

By Chris Mark

Fully-grouted roof bolts comprise more than 80% of the primary roof supports used in U.S. coal mines. However, nearly 1,500 MSHA reportable, non-injury roof falls occur each year, and most of these are attributable to failure of the roof bolt system. Anchorage failure is one failure mechanism for fully-grouted bolts. As roof deformation works its way upward, the bolts can become heavily loaded near their upper ends, If the applied load exceeds the anchorage, the bolts will simply pull out. Research dating back 30 yrs indicates that this type of anchorage failure is most likely when the roof rock is weak, just where roof support is most critical. In soft shale or coal roof, the small amount of data available in the literature indicates that 20-30 in of resin anchorage may be required to achieve the full capacity of the bolt. In other words, the "full resistance zone" of a 60 in bolt may actually be just 30-40 in. Despite its potential importance, there is no widely accepted anchorage test for fully grouted bolts. Standard pull tests have sometimes been employed, but they provide no information on the anchorage near the top of the bolt. An alternative, first described more than 25 yrs ago in the U.S., is the short-encapsulation pull test (SEPT). With this test, the bolt is installed with only a short (1 ft or less) tube of resin. In recent years variations of this test have become international standards. This paper describes recent studies using short encapsulation pull tests in the U.S. Tests were conducted in the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Safety Research Coal Mine at Bruceton and at underground mines in Pennsylvania and West Virginia. The study found that the SEPT can be used to make a simple evaluation of resin bolt anchorage. Suggested procedures for conducting SEPT are included. The study also confirmed that poor anchorage can be an issue, particularly where the roof rock is very weak. Some simple techniques for improving anchorage, and thereby the effectiveness of fully grouted bolts, are discussed.

Jan 1, 2002

By Christopher Mark

The first International Conference on Ground Control in Mining opened with the topic of pillar design. Two classic papers were presented, one by Bieniwski and the other by Wilson. Unfortunately, the two methods were so radically different from each other that it was nearly impossible to reconcile them. Adding to the confusion were the many other pillar strength formulas (such as the Salamon-Munro, the Holland-Gaddy, and the Obert-Duvall, just to name a few) that were also available. Little wonder that discussions of pillar design in those days often ended with anguished cries of ?but which formula is the right one?? The past 25 years have seen substantial progress in the science of coal pillar design. Indeed, one testament to the improvement is the relative scarcity of papers on the topic at recent Conferences. Two factors have been largely responsible for the progress that has been made. The first has been the collection of large data bases of actual case histories of pillar performance in a variety of settings, from shallow room-and-pillar mines through deep cover longwalls. These have made possible the development of empirical design procedures that are closely linked to real world experience. The second important factor is the development of sophisticated computer models that can accurately simulate pillar behavior and roof/pillar/floor interactions. Together, these two lines of research have led to a new understanding of pillar mechanics that identifies three modes of pillar failure: ? Sudden, massive collapse, accompanied by airblast, for slender pillars (width/height<4) ? Squeezing, or slow, non-violent failure, for most room and pillar applications (4<w/h<10) ? Entry failure or bumps for deep cover and longwall applications (w/h>10) It is particularly satisfying that the insights gained from numerical models broadly support those obtained from the empirical studies. While far less controversial than in the past, pillar design problems continue to arise. One recent example is pillar design for highwall mining. NIOSH has just released a software package, called ARMPS-HWM, which employs a number of modern pillar design concepts. Since highwall mining web pillars are long and slender, the greatest danger is that of a sudden collapse. ARMPS-HWM suggests two possible prevention strategies, one which concentrates on the SF of the webs, and the other which creates a ?pressure arch? using properly sized barrier pillars. The paper will close with a discussion of some current needs in coal pillar design, including: ? Updating older empirical methods, such as ALPS, where changes in technology (new types of roof support, more demanding ventilation requirements, faster retreat rates) may have made some of the original case histories obsolete. ? Methods for determining site-specific coal strengths, focusing on bedding plane strength and other factors that may effect confinement, as input for both empirical and numerical design. ? Improved methods for evaluating coal pillar performance for environmental issues, such as surface subsidence and hydrologic impacts, which consider such factors as depth, w/h ratio, water immersion/drainage, and time dependent seam strength.

Jan 1, 2006

By Gary B. Petersen

The author has developed a seven-step process called the Applied Rock Mechanics (ARM) Protocol that the author has used to solve numerous roof stability problems in mines throughout North America since 1975. It is a practical evaluation process using trained observation, innovative data collection instrumentation, video borehole cameras, analytical processes, and controlled testing methods that have become highly effective in solving ground control problems in every type of underground mine. This paper will describe each of the steps of the protocol and how the rock mechanics engineer applies them to resolve a typical ground control problem.

Jan 1, 2012

By Yemi Akinkugbe

Underground coal mining under massive sandstone can present significant challenges if the roof behavior is not well understood. This paper presents a classic cantilever bending/flexing behavior of a longwall tailgate roof caused by the weighting of structurally massive sandstone strata. Nineteen crosscuts of a longwall tailgate under massive sandstone were instrumented with position transducers connected to a data-logger to monitor roof convergence as the longwall face approached. During the monitoring program, an unusual tailgate roof divergence (uplift) was recorded. This roof behavior contradicts expected norm of roof convergence when the longwall is influenced by periodic weighting. The recorded roof movement data indicated that the roof divergence started well ahead of the longwall face. The most inby position transducer started recording progressive roof divergence when the longwall face was approximately 643 feet away. Very gradual roof convergence did not begin until the longwall face got to within 300 feet of the transducer. Recording of accelerated convergence only started after a massive caving event with the face within 280 feet of the recording transducer.

Jan 1, 2007

By Craig Compton

Falls of small pieces of rock from between roof bolts continue to cause fatalities and to injure hundreds of coal miners each year. Roof screen is the most effective way to prevent these incidents, but some mines are reluctant to use it because they believe installing screen can be awkward, expensive and time-consuming. The most common type of roof bolting machine used in mines today is the dual boom, outside-controlled roof bolter. Mines who install roof screen using these machines have developed some machine modifications and techniques to ease roof screen installation. This paper describes some successful techniques and machine modifications that are being used in productive mines to assist with roof screen installation. Since the material handling involved with roof screen installation can expose miners to an increased risk of musculoskeletal injuries, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) ergonomists, designed machine modifications and implemented a series of tests to evaluate roof screen handling procedures for outside-controlled, dual boom roof bolting machines. Roof screen installation can also have a positive economic impact on a mine by reducing the cost of injuries, workers? compensation, required spot or re-bolting, and clean-up of long term travel and belt entries.

Jan 1, 2007

By Thomas A. Bailey

Since the advent of longwall mining, various methods and materials have been used during relocation to control the intrusion of the gob in the shield/panline area. (figure 1) Controlling this gob is critical to ensuring a safe, speedy, and productive longwall move. An uncontrolled gob can cause a number of problems, from increased worker exposure to entrapment of equipment to lost production. With an eye toward worker safety and increased productivity, several different methods have been developed to minimize gob intrusion. This presentation will take a look at the history and development of longwall ?screens? and ?mesh?, from chain-link fencing to high-modulus polyester geogrids. The benefits and advantages of these developments will be defined. Since 1994, longwall coal mines have used polymer geogrids during longwall recovery to control intrusion of gob material into the shield/pan line area. As described by Brandon and Collins (1996) in their paper presented at the 15th Ground Control Conference in Golden, CO., mines had used various forms of support, such as welded wire mesh, chain-link fencing, wooden cribbing, props, and steel cable to accomplish this. These methods worked, but were labor-intensive, slow, and provided varying degrees of gob stoppage. Although a few mines still use chain-ink fencing to control the gob, longwall coal mines have generally settled on polyester geogrids to control gob and roof and these mines have been instrumental in providing input in order to develop and improve these geogrids products. he trend during the past twelve years has been to incorporate stronger grids and to eliminate auxiliary reinforcements, such as steel cables and nylon or polyester webbing. A job that once required heavy steel cables, props, and fencing is now accomplished with strong, lightweight, high-modulus polyester grids. When we discuss high-modulus grids, we refer to the ratio between load and strain, as illustrated in figure 2. These grids are woven or knitted from yarns that have been pre-stressed. When these grids come under load, they pick up the load more quickly. This allows less deformation in, in this case, the mine roof. The same principle applies when these grids are used to control the ribs. With less elongation, the grids will hold rib material tighter, thereby keeping travel ways more open.

Jan 1, 2006

By Floyd Varley

In deep and highly-stressed coal mining, advanced design practices are used to minimize the potential for damaging events to occur. Despite these design efforts, the hazard of coal mine bumps can not be completely eliminated. This paper will review current and historic work practices used internationally to minimize the hazard to miners from mining in conditions which could produce a bump. These site specific work practices have a common base in monitoring for conditions which could result in a bump and application of controls to prevent the occurrence or minimize the severity of an event where miners are working. Monitoring practices range from purely observational to semi quantitative. Control methods attempt to initiate events in a controlled manner, absorb the energy of a potential event or reduce the potential for or magnitude of an event by altering the stress conditions of the mine workings. Building from the experiences of other coal fields, an empirical framework to manage the potential hazard of coal mine bumps can be developed to enhance the level of safety provided by prudent mine design.

Jan 1, 2008

By M. Craig Miller

As the trend continues in the U. S. toward inceased capital investment in longwall mining equipment and wider panels. the risk also increases for gotential financial and production loses due to undetected geologic anomalies. This paper describes how RIM Sm (Radio Imaging Method) is utilized in conjunction with more traditional exploration and interpretive methods to delineate fluvial channels. displacement faults and poor roof conditions in a Southeastern Ohio coal mine

Jan 1, 1990

By Frank E. Chase

Sacrificial entries, roof slotting, and other tactics have been used to combat high horizontal stresses during roadway development in U.S. coal mines. In Australia, the "pillar extraction on the advance" mining method has been successfully employed as a horizontal stress control technique. The concept of advancing and relieving mine workings through pillar extraction developed from observations that some mines experience difficult ground conditions when advancing and retreating the first panel in a new reserve. However, conditions dramatically improve in subsequent panels. Apparently, the creation of a gob area stress relieves the adjacent panel workings. After much debate and close scrutiny, the first U.S. roof control plan to advance and relieve was approved in 1998, for the Sargent Hollow Mine in Wise County, VA. The major concern was that this mining practice places section personnel inby of the gob. The tentative approval permitted barrier pillar slabbing and removal of the adjacent development pillar during panel development. The intent of the plan was to provide a "stress shadow" for the advancing faces and outby workings to reduce the excessive number of roof falls. Sargent Hollow successfully extracted their first panel by pillaring on advance and retreat mining using posts. Mobile roof supports were employed to extract pillars while advancing the second panel. This paper summarizes Sargent Hollow Mine&apos;s experiences with the advance and relieve mining method.

Jan 1, 1999

By Christopher Mark

Severe dynamic multiple seam interactions can occur when active mine workings are subsided by underlying mining activity. The most dramatic events are usually caused by longwall mining or pillar recovery beneath open, overlying entries. But pillars in abandoned workings can also fail and cause subsidence and damage an overlying mine. This paper describes a case history in which an apparent ?pillar squeeze? in the abandoned workings of a lower seam was initiated during retreat mining in an upper seam. The event subsequently extended more than 1,500 ft and ultimately closed the upper seam mine. Analysis indicated that the pillars in the lower mine were adequately sized for the lower seam mining and were not affected by the initial development above them. When retreat mining in the upper seam had progressed several hundred feet, however, the pillars located directly beneath the pillar line were overloaded, and an extensive squeeze initiated in the underlying workings. The squeeze, in turn, subsided the overlying workings, causing widespread rib falls and roof instability. Previous examples of dynamic multiple seam interactions resulting from delayed subsidence of underlying workings have been reported in the literature. This is, apparently, the first recorded incident in which pillar recovery in an active mine triggered pillar failure in an underlying mine, which then triggered a dynamic interaction that impacted the active overlying seam.

Jan 1, 2012

By A. T. Iannacchione

Recent fatal injuries occurring during pillar retreat coal mining call for better identification of the hazards and recognition of risks. Ground control hazards associated with room-and-pillar retreat mining tend to intensify with depth, requiring extra precautions in the form of additional controls. In many locations these activities are further complicated by local complexities often associated with unique or novel circumstances, such as over-mining or under-mining. One technique recently studied by NIOSH, Major Hazard Risk Assessment (MHRA), may help mine operators to mitigate the risks associated with pillar recovery operations. The approach was trialed at two underground coal mines in southern West Virginia that are currently practicing pillar recovery. The first step in the MHRA process involved reviewing the segments or parts of the pillar extraction mining system and identifying associated hazards and threats to the operation. Some of the high risk hazards at these two sites included: ? Rock fall during pillar extraction covers equipment and injury ? occurs during recovery operations, Rock fall above the roof bolt horizon, potentially injuring ? workers and/or requiring recovery action,Rib fall under deep cover, potentially injuring workers, and; ? Strata instabilities associated with subsidence of the ? interburden due to simultaneously mining two seams in close vertical proximity to one another. The mines? risk assessment teams then considered each threat individually in order to systematically identify potential unwanted events. The top unwanted events were examined individually using structured risk analysis tools. The output from the process includes a list of priority existing controls for monitoring and auditing, and a second list of potential new controls. These controls consisted of: ? Examples of best practices, ? Enhanced communication, ? Implementing standard operating procedures (SOP), ? Protocols for emergency response actions, ? Effective layouts, ? Efficient monitoring, and; ? Successful audits. This paper documents the process as it unfolded at the two mines, and analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the MHRA technique as it applies to pillar recovery operations. This work was part of a larger NIOSH research project. NIOSH was responsible for: 1) facilitating the risk assessment process known as Major Hazard Risk Assessment (MHRA), 2) documenting the risk assessment process, and 3) providing mine management with a written draft summary of the risk assessment process. The results of the risk assessment represent the thoughts and opinions of the individual risk assessment teams and should in no way be construed as an endorsement of the risk assessment output by NIOSH or the University of Pittsburgh.

Jan 1, 2009