Search Documents

By Thomas L. Vandergrift

Multiple-scam mining is becoming more common in the United States, especially in the East, where primary reserves arc being depleted, forcing mining companies to develop secondary seams, Although mine engineers and planners are aware of the basic effects of seam interaction and generally follow guidelines for columnizing entries and avoiding load abutments, mine design earn greatly benefit bum more quantitative estimates of scam interaction effects. This paper presents case studies from two eastern mines subject to seam interaction effects where pre-mining stresses were quantified: the Mingo Logan Coal Company's Mountaineer Alma A Mine, and Peabody Group's Lightfoot No. 2 Mine. In each of these mines. mining is being carried out within 60 to 90 ft of overlying longwall and pillar panels under maximum cover of about 1,100 ft As part of overall mine planning and design efforts al these mines. NSA Engineering performed numerical modeling analyses using the non-linear boundary-element code MULSIM/NL Input parameters were calibrated by modeling areas where ground conditions resulting from seam interaction were well documented. By incorporating actual cover loading based on topography and seam dip, and the integrity of remnant, gate road, arid harrier pillars in the overlying mines, the pre-mining vertical stress in the underlying scants was estimated based on the pre-mining stress, plans for mains, gate road, bleeder, and pillar panels were developed. Although mining experience in these areas has beers somewhat limited to date, she designs developed as a result of these analyses have so far proven successful.

Jan 1, 2000

By David Newman

The Southern Appalachian coalfield has a long history of coal bumps that are attributable to a unique combination of topography, geology, and multiple seam mining. The high pillar stresses that generate a coal bump result from: i. mountainous topography where the overburden commonly exceeds 1,500 feet beneath ridges, ii. multiple seam mining, iii. thin interburden between active and abandoned mines, iv. thick beds of competent sandstone and sandy shale strata throughout the stratigraphic section, v. strong coal seams, and vi. irregular pillar and mining geometry in older room-and¬pillar mines. Coal has been intensively mined for more than 100 years in Eastern Kentucky, Southwestern Virginia, and Southern West Virginia. As a result, it is commonplace to have abandoned mines above and/or below active operations. Therefore, those conditions that generate coal bumps will be more prevalent in the future, as underground mining continues in Southern Appalachia. The focus of this paper concerns two coal bumps that occurred in the Kellioka seam where both undermining and overmining had occurred. The purpose of the investigation is to determine the magnitude and distribution of vertical stress that initiated the bumps, to identify bump-prone areas in the unmined reserve, and to recommend pillar centers and mining layouts to avoid future bumps. The state of stress in three vertically adjacent seams was examined using the LAMODEL boundary element program. Large, detailed numerical models were constructed of both bump areas and of the remaining unmined reserve block. The results of the numerical analyses were compared with those obtained using analytical equations.

Jan 1, 2002

By Adrian L. Moodie

Austar Coal Mine (formerly Southlands and Ellalong Collieries) has had a long association with difficult strata control conditions associated with mining depth and a highly jointed/cleated coal seam. The conditions include poor longwall face conditions, cyclic loading, heavy tailgate (TG) roadway conditions, and difficulties in maintaining stable roadways on development at 5.2 m (17 ft), as well as the geotechnical challenges of an 8.5-m (27.9 ft) -wide roadway required for installation faces. The introduction of Longwall Top Coal Caving (LTCC) to this environment has aided in the management of some of these issues, but LTCC has also given rise to other geotechnical considerations. Additional geotechnical issues associated with LTCC not only require management during operations, but also require consideration when evaluating new mining areas at Austar Coal Mine or potential LTCC extractable resources throughout Australia and the world. In September 2006, LTCC commenced at Austar Coal Mine in longwall panel A1. Since this point the LTCC face has been increased from 147 to 216 m (482 to 709 ft)and finally to 227 m (745 ft) in width, and it has also been rehanded and modified in the three fully extracted panels to date. The application of LTCC in panels A1, A2, A3, and now A4 has been very successful, both from a coal resource recovery point of view and in the management of the principal hazards of spontaneous combustion and strata control. This paper focuses on the geotechnical aspects of the application of LTCC at Austar Coal Mine and also reviews some advances in general strata control management at the mine.

Jan 1, 2011

By Winton Gale

"Rock and coal fractures and micro seismic vibration are common occurrences during development mining. It is very uncommon for coal and rock to be propelled into the roadway during normal mining operations. However, such occurrences do occur and appear to require significantly more energy than is available from strain energy release during coal cutting. The sources of energy, which can contribute to the propulsion of coal from the face or ribs, are typically strain energy from the surrounding ground, seismic energy from a rapid rupture of the ground in the vicinity, or rapid expansion of gas from within the burst source area.The aim of this paper is to briefly review the bursts that could be related to strain energy or seismic energy. However, the greatest emphasis is placed on the effect that gas within the coal could play in moderate to gassy mines.It has been found that the bursts related to the expansion of gas can occur in coal and stone. The volume of gas involved in coal bursts is typically lower than in gas outbursts; however, the process is generally similar.INTRODUCTIONA coal burst is defined as a rapid expulsion of coal (and potentially gas) from the boundary of the roadway. The volume of a burst can be variable, but volumes above 10-50m3 are noted and cause significant disruption to operations.Rock and coal fracturing is common about roadways, particularly under the influence of elevated stresses, either tectonic or related to mining abutment stress. Shear fracture is very common; however, it is very uncommon that the coal is propelled from the face or ribs as a result of fracture of the material. The nature of rock fracture about roadways under elevated stress is presented in Figure 1.A burst requires energy to propel the coal or rock from the rib or face of the roadway. The depth of material impacted may vary from 0.5m to greater than 3m inside the roadway boundary. The strength of the ground in this zone is variable depending on the nature of the coal seam (or surrounding material). Typically, this material has significant residual strength as confinement increases into the ribside.The energy required to propel this material is typically in addition to that which is associated with normal fracturing about the roadway."

Jan 1, 2018

By Thomas Barczak

A new generation of hydraulic mine support prestressing devices has been developed. These thin-walled steel shells are machine-welded and can be inflated with water or any liquid to provide prestressing for a wide variety of roof support products ranging from Can supports to props and cable bolts. With an expansion capability of several inches, depending on the geometry and size of the unit, they can also establish roof contact eliminating the need for wooden wedges or crib blocks that are commonly employed with several standing roof support products. Capable of withstanding pressures from 1,000 to 6,000 psi, these cells are able to transfer roof loading into the support structure without rupturing. A recent development has been the addition of an inexpensive yield valve that provides control of the maximum pressure and load development on the support. This paper examines the performance capabilities of these inflatable prestressing units and the impact they have on the performance of various support systems, including an evaluation of the overall stiffness of the support system and the load control during yielding of the prestressing unit. Recommendations are made regarding the design requirements of the prestressing unit to optimize the support performance. A summary of mine applications using this technology is provided with general comments regarding their impact on ground control.

Jan 1, 2004

By Liang Yin-Huai

In Fuxin Coal Mines, there are more than 20 million tons of coal buried under seasonal streams. The coal seams are mostly shallow. We have mined more then 50 mining blocks distributed in 5 coal mines. Their natural conditions are different, and the consequences are also more or less different. However, no stream-water-inrush accidents under regular mining conditions are the same. There were 3 exceptions. They were caused by unexpected roof caving which made valleys or alluvia subside as funnel-like cavities and let in inrush of stream flow. The key to our success in mining shallow under-stream coal seams, according to our analysis, is that valleys or alluvia subside gently and basically evenly with contractible tension fissures and that fissures both in valleys or alluvia and in rock seams are blocked up or sealed by cohesive deposits either from alluvia or rock. This paper treats: (1) some typical illustrations of mining shallow coal seams of different occurrences under streams of different sizes, flowing capacities and valley structures, (2) observations of the height of caved and fissured zones and subsidence of valleys or alluvia, (3) observations of underground water flow before, during, and after mining and the fluctuation with respect to stream flow, (4) observations and analyses of blocking up of fissures caused by mining, and (5) feasibility of mining shallow under-river coal seams.

Jan 1, 1990

By John D. VandeKraats

Yielding rock bolt systems have been developed to provide ground support while accommodating shifting, creeping, or swelling ground movements. The Dywidag Systems, Inc. (DSI) Slip Nut System is one such system. It has been tested in the laboratory and installed and monitored in the interbedded halite and anhydrite at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) since 1994. The Slip Nut System is installed on a point anchored threaded bar or on a threaded bar coupled to a cable bolt. At a pre-engineered load the nut acts as a die and cuts through the thread on which it rests, thereby reducing the load and coming to rest on the next thread where the process repeats. Two types of laboratory tests were performed using slip nuts on DSI's threaded bars and their Tensionable Cable bolts. Straight pull tests exceeding 0.3m (1 ft.) of displacement were performed on the systems. Also, offset tests were performed on these bolt systems in a test frame designed to simulate WIPP geologic conditions. A room scale test area consisting of 186 threaded bars began in 1994. Select bolts were instrumented to track bolt load. All bolts were tracked through time for operation. Through three complete years since installation over twelve slips, corresponding to approximately 0.15m (6 in.) of ground movement, have been observed in some areas. Since installation strata offset has exceeded 0.08m (3 in.) at a supported clay layer in the roof. No bolt failures have been observed. Slip loads observed underground generally approximate those observed in the lab. To date, the slip nut systems tested and installed have performed as expected.

Jan 1, 1998

By D. Newman

An underground limestone quarry, developed in the 1940's, transitioned from a surface quarry to an underground room-and-pillar operation. The quarry expanded to a second underground level when the reserves on the first level reached the property boundaries. The historical basis for the sill pillar thickness between the first and second level, pillar dimensions, and mining height was lost during the course of several changes in ownership. When reserves on the second level reached a five-year life, and plans were initiated for a third level, quarry management embarked upon a thorough evaluation of i. current ground control practices for the support of the immediate roof, ii. roof support in the declines between the surface, Level 1, and Level II, iii. pillar centers and pillar safety factors, iv. pillar alignment between levels, v. mining height within a level, and vi. the locations of declines to access future reserves on level three. The evaluation began with detailed mapping of the location and orientation of calcite veins, joints, fractures, and ground conditions in the immediate roof of Level II. The orientation and location of calcite veins, joints, and fractures on Level II were compared with similar mapping on Level 1, completed in the 1970's to establish whether these features were continuous and would be expected to affect conditions on Level III. Rock strength, physical properties, and fracture spacing were obtained from two (2) diamond core holes drilled from Level I to Level II and two (2) holes drilled from Level II to define the vertical extent of future reserves on Level III. The effort to characterize geological conditions was expanded to a rock mechanics investigation of the: i. performance of the current roof support, ii. optimization of roof and rib scaling, iii. calculation of safety factors for 416 pillars on Level II, iv. evaluation of future pillar centers and mining height within a level based upon pillar strength and pillar geometry, v. development of beam safety factors for the immediate roof on Level II, vi. identification of the most suitable strata for the roof in the future level three, and vii. use of LAMODEL to develop a large numerical model of overburden, inter-level, and total stress on the pillars in levels one and Level II with a stress "footprint" on the proposed level three. The characterization of engineering parameters and geological conditions resulted in changes to the: ? active operations in Level II regarding scaling ? equipment and scaling practices, ? pillar centers, ? mining height, ? raising the immediate roof horizon to avoid ? laminated strata in the current roof, and ? a change in rock bolts from a friction based system ? to active tensioned rebar. The planning and design of level three is ongoing and relies heavily upon the geological and engineering investigations conducted during the past year and one-half.

Jan 1, 2001

By Rodger Fry

All coal deposits contain anomalous geologic conditions which have an impact on roof control, Run-Of--Mine (ROM) coal quality and production costs. To remain competitive in today's coal market and provide a safe working atmosphere, mine operators need to know in advance of mining the geologic conditions which prevail in the coal deposit. In order to identify geologic anomalies within a coal seam and surrounding roof rock in advance of mining, the Radio Imaging Method (RIM) survey procedure has been developed. This paper describes the RIM procedure and how it is used to predict various geologic conditions within a coal deposit. Figure 1 illustrates the RIM in-mine and surface surveys which can be used in an underground mine. [ ] RIM is an electromagnetic (EM} wave process which consists of in-mine and surface survey techniques. Both techniques are used in underground coal mines to detect faults, interbedding, sandstone channels, and thinning coal. Thesurface survey can also be used to determine seam correlation and continuity in strip and underground mining. In-mine and surface surveys work by propagating EM waves along straight paths through the coal. As the RIM signal travels along a ray path, it interacts with the seam material and surrounding rock. This interaction causes the signal to lose energy thereby decreasing its strength along the path. The amount of energy loss per unit path length depends upon the coal seam height and type of surrounding roof and floor rock. A reading of the signal level is taken at the end of the ray path at the receiver location. This reading is used to determine the loss (attenuation) rate of the signal along the path. The signal level data is compiled and analyzed through computerized algorithms which construct images of any anomaly present. This graphical depiction of the coal provides a basis for further geologic interpretation. By comparing the images reconstructed by the RIM analysis to in-mine geologic mappings made while mining through RIM study zones, it has been confirmed that RIM can help detect the following; Rapidly Thinning Coal Incompetent Roof Rock Poor Floor Lithology

Jan 1, 1984

By W. C. Smith

Over the past several years, the Bureau of Mines has conducted studies on the performance of fully grouted resin bolts In underground mines. The effectiveness of resin-grouted bolts in maintaining a competent roof, even in weak rock, has been well documented in the literature. Recent Bureau studies have evaluated the affects of shortened grout columns on bolt behavior in a variety of rock types (1, 2, 3). The application of partial grout columns to primary roof support systems has been introduced as a viable alternative to fully grouted bolt systems in some mines. The point-anchored resin bolt and combination bolt represent such alternatives. While both systems usually employ some mechanical interlocking system, their primary difference lies in the length of resin column used. Point- anchor systems rely on an anchoring device that is a short length of resin column of 2 feet or leas. Combination bolts, on the other hand, often require 3 feat or more of resin column. Resin migration into voids and fractures intersecting the borebole wall is a major problem when installing fully grouted bolts in weak roof rock and can result in a reduced column length that provides reduced anchorage. The relationship between column length and anchorage integrity deserves closer study. The Denver Research Center of the Bureau of Mines has examined the load- carrying capabilities of resin-grouted bolts in weak strata. Pull tests were performed on about 900 resin-grouted, 4- foot-long bolts with column lengths ranging from 6 to 48 inches. The practical performances of 8 different column lengths were evaluated for 10 mines under in sit" conditions using data obtained from standard pull tests. In addition criteria are discussed, including engineering properties of the host rock for designing safer and more effective grouted bolt installations.

Jan 1, 1987

By Thomas M. Barczak

The initial Support Technology Optimization Program (STOP), Version 1.0, was released at the 19th Gmund Control Conference. This original program has since been updated to Version 2.3 which was released in May, 2001. This paper describes the additional features of Version 2.3, focusing primarily on the following three aspects: (I) including uncontrolled convergence into the design requirements for standing roof supports, (21 the addition of design procedures for cable bolts as an alternative secondary roof support, and (3) the addition of new standing roof support technologies. Another new feature which should facilitate the development of design criteria for standing roof support is the capabilily to define ground reaction curves through convergence measurements alone wthout having to make support loading measurements. There are several other new features provided in Version 2.3 which are only briefly addressed in the paper. These include: (I) additional graphics capabilities to facilitate rapid assessment of support comparisons. (2) an East-West designation for support selection to more accurately provide cost and support availability data, (3) additional safety measures including a safety factor to identify support design near the peak support capacity, checks to see if the support dimensions comply with aspect ratio requirements, and measure of roof coverage for the design layout of the support system These new features of STOP provide more capabilities to design and analyze secondary roof support systems for conditions whlch could not be fully analyzed in the original version of the program.

Jan 1, 2001

By Madan M. Singh

Mining under bodies of water such as oceans, lakes, rivers, streams, ponds, and other impoundments, is not a new technique. However, in the United States it has been fairly restricted to date. In order to recover the maximum amount of the nation's reserves, in the future, it is important that further mining under such bodies of water be planned. However, it is imperative that this is not done at the expense of danger to the nation's miners or appreciable property damage. If all the bodies of water are considered large, and it is assumed that these constitute a hazard when mining in their vicinity irrespective of their size and geometry, a significant percentage of the coal reserves are likely to be sterilized. How- ever, by adopting special mining plans and procedures, it may be possible to release reserves for exploitation that would otherwise be unmineable since the surface of bodies of water below which they lie are relatively small in size. In 1977, the Bureau of Mines issued Information Circular (IC) 8741, entitled "Results of Research to Develop Guidelines for Mining Near Surface and Underground Bodies of Water". This document was based on the work done by Skelly and Loy (under Contract No. H0252083) and K. Wardell and Partners (under Contract No. H0252021). How ever, these guidelines have limited application, because these did not (1) define the bodies of water of concern, and (2) take into account the nature of the strata being encountered. These guidelines assumed that all bodies of water which would be undermined were large. For the purposes of this discussion, water bodies may be divided into three categories, depending upon their potential to cause damage to the underlying mining activity: ? catastrophic ? major ? limited Bodies of water which pose the threat of catastrophic destruction in the mine, should there be an inrush, include oceans, large lakes, big inland reservoirs, and rivers that could flood the mine complete- ly in a short period. Those with major potential for damage would include lakes and streams which might present a danger to both life and property if not considered in the mining plans. Finite bodies of water which have a volume considerably smaller than the mine volume offer a limited potential for damage in the case of an inrush. These include flowing streams which have a relatively small rate of replenishment and which can be dealt with by pumping or isolation in the event of a breakthrough into the mine. Such bodies of water may be inconvenient and cause a temporary disruption of production, and could even cause some damage to equipment, but only in rare instances would personal injuries occur. The scope of this paper is limited to the exploitation of stratified mineral deposits with overlying -face bodies of water. Vein and dessiminate ore deposits are not discussed, nor are breakthroughs into adjacent mines in the same horizon. Overlying, water-logged strata also pose a serious threat to mining, but are not treated in this discussion. Pending further investigation these strata may be considered as bodies of water with catastrophic potential for damage, with the base of the strata being considered the bottom of the water body. When the body of water is large, so that it may cause catastrophic damage to the mine in the event of an inrush, the guidelines suggested in IC 8741 are applicable. In order to develop criteria and procedures for mining under smaller bodies of water, however, it is necessary that the nature of the strata disturbance due to underground mining be examined.

Jan 1, 1981

By Saeed Zhandi, Behdeen Oraee

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

Jan 1, 2015

By Andrew J. Hyett

The ISRM commission on testing methods has recently presented Suggested Methods for rock stress determination (Kim & Franklin, 1987). This proposes that even if the magnitude of in situ stress is not sufficient to cause significant ground problems, the optimum shape, orientation, and layout of underground structures can be significantly affected by it. In the design of underground excavations, the engineer often requires a knowledge of the average in situ stress tensor in the rock mass. However, attempts to measure a stress state applicable to design have proved frustrating, and a high degree of uncertainty is introduced by the variability in results. In the belief that deduced fluctuations are random in nature, many separate measurements are often made, so that a more reliable stress tensor average, and some indication of the associated variance (see Dyke et al., 1986) can be calculated. Unfortunately, this approach is limited by economic considerations and, as with any sampling procedure, it is imperative to understand the sources of measured variability, in order to design an optimum measurement programme. Cundall(1987) itemised the main causes of stress variability as a. Instrument and measurement errors, and b. Natural fluctuations of stress from point to point, induced by the action of a boundary stress on the internal rock structure. At least four categories exist: i. inhomogeneous rock, bedding, intrusions etc.; ii. differential contraction, creep, or changes in rock properties with time; iii. proximity to faults or discontinuities; iv. cycles of tectonic activity that cause movement on joints. The latter was successfully investigated using the distinct element programme UDEC. In this paper, the contribution of items (iii) and (iv) (i.e. the items related to discontinuities) to the total stress variability will be discussed, for the kind of rock mass shown in Figure 1. Although many authors have concluded that rock joints have an influence on the stress in their vicinity, a more analytical approach is required if the stress distribution associated with different jointed rock masses is to be (i) compared, and (ii) related to routinely measured joint parameters. If this can be achieved then, prior to any attempt to measure stress in a jointed rock mass, a consideration of joint geometry, joint deformability, and the geological kinematics of joints (e.g. the magnitude and direction of previous movements), can place valuable `common sense' constraints on the expected stress system for minimal extra cost.

Jan 1, 1989

By Joseph Hirschi, Naga S. Y. Tirumalaraju, Aditya Mishra, Anthony (Sam) J. S. Spearing

"Primary roof support in underground coal mines in the USA consists mostly of fully grouted passive rebar or grouted (partially or fully) tensioned rebar. Research conducted at two room-and pillar coal mines in the Illinois Basin and one longwall mine in Colorado monitored the performance of these passive and active rock bolts under similar geologic and mining conditions and found no significant initial loads in either passive or active rock bolts (Spearing et al., 2011). Active rock bolts showed significant loss of initial pre-load, although the exact reasons for this were not fully investigated. Subsequent laboratory testing has also shown that in weak rock, resin creep occurs, caused by slippage of the mechanical key between resin column and rock interface. These creep tests were studied in the laboratory in an effort to quantifythis phenomenon.INTRODUCTIONResin-grouted rock bolts are the first and main line of defense to counter roof and rib falls in underground coal mines of the United States. Rock bolts are categorized as active or passive. Active bolts are tensioned during installation whilst no (or limited) tension is applied to passive bolts, which need subsequent strata movement to generate reactive loads. During installation of passive bolts, some reactive pre-load may be generated by a significant up-thrust from the rock bolter boom.The selection of active or passive bolts is critical and is mostly dependent on the conditions and properties of the immediate roof (Unrug, 2009). This decision is frequently made based on personal experience, bias, and most recently cost. Active bolts are generally used in cases of highly laminated roof rock. When active bolts are tensioned, they develop compressive forces between these layers forming a beam, which helps to stabilize weak individual layers thereby increasing frictional forces between layers and decreasing effects of horizontal stresses. The fully grouted tensioned rebar system is high in stiffness as compared to mechanical bolts and provides higher surface area of contact along the length of the bolt due to the grout, which permits it to develop a strong anchorage mechanism."

Jan 1, 2015

By Alan Campoli

The Eclipse System was developed by Minova USA Inc. formerly Fosroc Inc. to improve the performance of 5/8-inch deformed rebar fully grouted into a one inch borehole. An 1/8-inch offset bolt head combined with specially formulated Eclipse Lokset resin cartridge results in reduced gloving and increased mixing efficiency. The benefits of the Eclipse System have been demonstrated, under the supervision of MSHA, in Kentucky, West Virginia and Illinois coal mines in partnership with Excel Mining Systems, a leading roof bolt manufacturer. Over 100,000 units have been installed to date. Eclipse system bolts exposed during overcast construction at the Panther Mine of Cumberland Resources displayed an extremely well mixed, uniform resin anchorage over the entire bolt length.

Jan 1, 2003

By Liang Yinhuai

The hydraulic-stowing mining method is most effective for mining thick coal seams. It is superior to the sliced cover-caving and artificial mining method and the fully mechanized sublevel-caving mining method for the following reasons - a much higher recovery rate is achieved, there is much less surface subsidence and roof pressure, there is no hidden danger of gob fire, and much less methane emission and coal dust problems, etc.. However, its superiority is overshadowed by its backward stowing technique which makes mechanisation of mining and stowing difficult, causes bleed water interference to production and to the environment and is uneconomic because of the high cost of stowing material. These disadvantages limited its application to coal seams that are difficult and not suitable to be mined by other mining methods. The remedy is in reforming it thoroughly to permit mining of otherwise unminable seams and this paper presents the reformation.

Jan 1, 1992

By Thomas Barczak

Longwall shields provide essential ground control in Iongwall mining, yet a high percentage of shields are operating at less than peak capacity and many at well below the rated support capacity due to defective hydraulic cylinders or malfunctions in other hydraulic components. Leg pressure data are currently collected on state-of¬the-art longwall shields, but typically are not analyzed to evaluate shield performance. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Shield Hydraulics Inspection and Evaluation of Leg Data (SHIELD) program is a Visual Basic software system that is designed to analyze leg pressure data and identify shields that are not performing to rated specifications. The program analysis is configured to detect the following conditions: (I ) loss of leg pressure, (2) imbalance in leg pressure, (3) low set pressure, (4) low yield pressure, and (5) full extension of the bottom stage. Other performance assessment measures include the percentage of the support capacity utilized (ratio of peak load to yield load), the percent of time that a shield operates at yield load, the ratio of the set load to the yield load, and the amount of support capacity that is lost due to leaking cylinders. Historical record keeping will allow the user to select a particular shield and review the performance record as developed by the program for that shield. In addition to these performance assessment measures, the software will include an animated description of shield hydraulic systems that will describe the operation and significance of each hydraulic component and the impact of component failures on the shield's capability to provide the required roof support. A general overview of the SHIELD program is provided in the paper together with an example analysis of a 2.5-year-old Australian longwall face.

Jan 1, 2002

By Dennis R. Dolinar

A room and pillar coal operation in central Pennsylvania was experiencing roof cutters and long running roof falls caused by high horizontal stresses. The roof conditions created hazards for the miners, and caused several production panels to he abandoned prematurely. The mine requested assistance from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in applying the "advance and relieve" mining to reduce the affects of the horizontal stress during panel development. The "advance and relieve" plan that was developed called for removing a pillar on one side of the panel as it was being advanced, thus creating a cave. The caving then relieved a portion of the horizontal stress across the panel. Because the horizontal stress direction is key to the success of this method, stress mapping as well as mining experience was used to establish the direction of the horizontal stress. Subsequent field measurements provided an estimate of the stress magnitude. Three panels were mined using this technique, and good roof conditions were achieved in all these panels. Instrumentation was used to monitor the stress changes in the roof created by the cave. Stress relief of over 1.000 psi was measured 120 ft from the cave and to depths of 20 ft into the roof. The lateral extent of the stress relief zone across the panels appears to be about 400 to 500 ft. This case history has provided much insight into the practical application of the "advance and relieve" method discussed in this paper.

Jan 1, 2000

By R. Kaund

"Quantifying the rockburst consequence is of critical importance to reduce the hazards with preventative measures in underground mines and deep tunnels. Contours of energy components within a pillar model are plotted at different rockmass damage stages, and plastic strain work and released energy are proposed as indicators of rockmass damage consequence. One pillar model under different loading stiffness is simulated to assess indicators of pillar burst and the resulting damages. The results show the rockmass damage under soft loading stiffness has larger magnitude of plastic strain work and released energy than that which is under stiff loading stiffness, indicating the rockburst consequence can be quantified with plastic strain work and released energy in numerical models. With the quantified rockburst consequence, preventative measures can be taken to avoid severe hazards to mine safety.INTRODUCTIONWith the increasing demand of mineral resources and depletion of near-surface ores, the depths of underground mines have made the mining activities one of mankind’s most dangerous types of work (Ortlepp, 2005). The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) defines rockburst as “a sudden and violent failure of overstressed rock resulting in the instantaneous release of large amounts of accumulated energy.”The types of rockburst can be classified into three types: (1) strain burst, (2) pillar burst, and (3) fault slip (Müller, 1991). Strain burst is the most common type of unstable rock failure in underground openings, where the intensity and scale are usually smaller than pillar burst and fault slip (White and Whyatt, 1999; White, Williams and Whyatt, 2002; Ortlepp, 2005). The cause of strain burst can range from shattering of rock under high stress concentration to buckling of discontinuities parallel to underground openings. The occurrence of pillar burst also depends on the stress and discontinuity conditions in the rockmass, but pillar burst usually involves the sudden loss of strength in the core or foundation of a pillar (Whyatt and Blake, 2002; Kias and Ozbay, 2013; Khademian et al., 2016). Fault slip or slip burst can be either slip along pre-existing discontinuities or shear failure in the rockmass, when the shear stress is larger than shear strength in the fault (Rice, 1983; White and Whyatt, 1999; Sainoki and Mitri, 2014). The consequence of fault slip can vary from very small rockmass damage to consequential rockmass damage, but large seismic magnitude does not always result in large rockmass damage (White and Whyatt, 1999; Whyatt and Blake, 2002)."

Jan 1, 2018