Search Documents

By Jesse Puller, Ken W. Mills, Owen Salisbury

"An underground coal mine located in New South Wales has a target coal seam located 160-180 m deep directly below a 16-20 m thick conglomerate unit that has been associated with significant periodic weighting events on the longwall face. As part of the investigations to better understand the causes of periodic weighting at the mine, inclinometers capable of measuring horizontal shear movements through the full section of the overburden strata were installed ahead of mining at two locations approximately 1 km apart above the centre of two longwall panels. These inclinometers were monitored as the longwall approached each site. This paper presents the details of the installation, the results of the inclinometer monitoring at both sites, and the insights that these measurements provide for overburden behaviour about longwall panels.Horizontal shear movements were observed to develop on shear horizons that correlate closely across the two sites suggesting a mechanism that is consistent across a large area of the mine. Shear movements were observed to develop on a single horizon near the top of the conglomerate strata that was mobilised almost immediately after initial formation of the longwall goaf at a distance of 425 m ahead of the longwall face. The direction of horizontal movement was consistent with the relief of the major principal horizontal stress. As the longwall face approached each inclinometer, other horizons within the upper part of the overburden strata begin to shear with the upper strata moving toward the approaching goaf more than the lower strata. Within the last 30 m of longwall approach, tilting of the strata associated with the increase in vertical subsidence toward the extracted goaf caused a change in the style of deformation with tilting and reverse shear offsets.INTRODUCTIONLongwall mining is recognised from subsidence monitoring, surface extensometer measurements, and various other observations to cause significant disturbance to the overburden strata directly above the extracted goaf of each longwall panel. Disturbance to the overburden strata beyond the limits of each longwall panel is not so well understood. Subsidence monitoring indicates that horizontal movements beyond the edges of the extracted longwall panel are generally greater in magnitude than vertical subsidence and horizontal movements may extend up to several kilometres from the edge of the panel in some circumstances (Reid 1998, Reid 2001, Hebblewhite et al 2000, Mills 2001, Mills 2014). The mechanics of how these movements are accommodated within the overburden strata is only poorly understood and there are few direct measurements."

Jan 1, 2015

By David F. Gearhart, Khaled M. Mohamed

"Trusses are primarily used as passive roof supports in coal mines. They are constructed of three main parts: two grouted bolts installed at opposing forty-five degree angles into the roof so that they are anchored over the ribs and a cross member that ties the angled bolts together. There is also hardware used to assemble these components. The capacities of the angled bolts are typically 30 to 40 tons and the tensile capacity of the cross member is also 30 to 40 tons. Importantly, the direction of the immediate roof loading on the cross member is unlike the direction of the loading on the angled bolts. The load on the cross member is transverse to the longitudinal axis instead of along it, and therefore the cross member is loaded in the weakest direction.Previous tests conducted on truss systems applied loads such that the increasing tension in the two diagonal bolts increased the tension in the horizontal cross member, resulting in a stiff response. By contrast, if the load is applied directly to the cross member, which then transmits those forces to the diagonal bolts, it results in a much softer response.Based on this difference, laboratory tests to apply transverse loads and measure the vertical load capacity of three different types of cross members were conducted using the Mine Roof Simulator (MRS) located at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in Pittsburgh. The length of the samples was about 16 feet. Single-point load tests, with the load applied in the center of the specimen were conducted to verify the performance of the test arrangement and the finite element models. Double-point load tests, with a span of eight feet, were also conducted. This arrangement replicates the performance of the cross members with a distributed load. Both of these test arrangements were conducted on one-inch-diameter threaded steel bars and 0.7-inch-diameter cable and 0.6-inch-diameter cable cross members.For the single-point load configuration, the yield of the one-inch bar was nominally 22 kips of vertical load, achieved at 17 inches of deflection. For both sizes of the cable cross members, yield was not achieved even after 18 inches of deflection. Peak vertical loads were about 20 kips for the 0.7-inch cables and 15 kips for the 0.6- inch cables. For the double-point load configurations, the one-inch bar cross members yielded at 33 kips of vertical load and 10 inches of deflection. The 0.7-inch-diameter cable cross members broke strands at 30 kips of vertical load and 10 inches of closure, and the 0.6-inch-diameter cable cross members broke strands at 25 kips of vertical load and 10 inches of closure. Finite element models of each of the six different configurations were developed and show the variation of the vertical capacity of the cross members and the difference of the behavior of the bar versus the cables."

Jan 1, 2015

By Eric C. Poeck, Ryan Garvey, Ugur Ozbay, Kun Zhang

"A coal bump is characterized by the sudden failure of one or more pillars and an associated release of kinetic energy. Although the geologic conditions surrounding coal bumps are often similar, their occurrence and magnitude are difficult to predict. This paper presents the development of an approach to assess the potential for coal bumps in room and pillar mines through the use of energy concepts and special consideration of the interface properties between the coal and overlying rock. Back analyses were performed on the widespread collapse of a room and pillar mine with an associated 3.9 local magnitude seismic event. Pillar and mine-scale models were constructed using the distinct element method to simulate the mining stages leading up to the collapse. A variety of loading conditions, material properties, and interface properties were evaluated for their effect on unstable failure of single pillars, and the mine-scale model was used to study the evolution of failure during progressive mining. The extent of unstable failure was quantified in these models by calculating the total kinetic energy released during each mining stage. Through the parametric analysis of single pillar models, it was found that softening parameters in either the coal or the coal/ rock interface can individually facilitate unstable failure of pillars, but the combination of the two in a single model produced a much higher release of energy during failure. The results of the minescale model further illustrated the trend as the combination of softening parameters in the coal and coal/rock interface produced a series of failures that most accurately reflected the collapse event at the mine. The method of room and pillar stability analysis demonstrated in this study effectively explores the potential for large coal bumps.IntroductionThe analysis of coal pillar behavior is challenging because natural variability in geologic conditions requires estimation of material strengths and predicted loads for a given mining situation. Large width-to-height (w/h) ratio pillars and deep overburden present an additional challenge, as the failure behavior of such pillars is more complex and may involve unstable, sudden collapse. Empirical methods have improved the success of coal pillar design for a wide range of conditions, but, for deep cover and squat pillar (w/h > 10) geometries, pillar performance predictions are not as accurate (Mark, 2000). As with any empirical approach, more back analysis and the consideration of new variables may help improve understanding and accuracy of future designs."

Jan 1, 2015

By Arthur Miller, Andrew Weakley, Heather E. Lawson

"IntroductionDynamic failure events in an underground coal mine, or “bumps,” are defined as “the sudden, violent bursts of coal from a pillar or pillars or a block of coal, resulting in a section, the whole pillars, or the solid block of coal being thrown into an open entry” (Peng, 2008). Reports of disastrous and often fatal dynamic failure events date back over one hundred years in the United States. Mining practices and technologies have significantly evolved over the course of the last century, yet these events continue to occur. The events at Crandall Canyon, Utah (Gates et al., 2007) and Brody No. 1 Mine in West Virginia (Barker and McNeely, 2014) are two recent failure events that resulted in a total of eleven fatalities. These events testify to the fact that dynamic failure remains an imperative safety concern. Furthermore, their continued occurrences indicate that engineering controls have proven inadequate at wholly mitigating the problem.Multiple conditions have been associated with the occurrence of dynamic failure phenomena, including• thick, competent strata that can create a bridging effect, resulting in high abutment stresses (Rice, 1935; Holland and Thomas, 1954; Iannacchione and Zelanko, 1995; Agapito and Goodrich, 2000; Peng, 2008; Whyatt, 2008; Whyatt and Varley, 2010)• overburden thicknesses greater than 500–700 ft. (Rice, 1935; Peng, 2008)• a strong coal that is resistant to crushing (Rice, 1935; Peng,2008) or that is “uncleated or poorly cleated, strong…sustains high stress and tends to fail suddenly” (Agapito and Goodrich, 2000)• the presence of sandstone channels or rolls that can serve to concentrate stresses (Iannachione and Zelanko, 1995; Agapito and Goodrich, 2000)• fracturing of strong units above or below the coal seam (Whyatt and Varley, 2010)• slip along pre-existing discontinuities (Peperakis, 1958; Whyatt and Varley, 2010)• multiple seam mining interactions (Campoli, Kertis, and Goode, 1987; Iannachione and Zelanko, 1995; Newman, 2002; Peng, 2008)• mining sequences that can cause anomalously high stress concentrations (Campoli, Kertis, and Goode, 1987; Iannachione and Zelanko, 1995)"

Jan 1, 2015

By Wei Yin, Yu Wu, Xiexing Miao

"For engineering problems of “three under” coal (coal trapped under buildings, waters-bodies and railways) exploitation, environment protection and gangue separation from raw coal underground exist in Tangshan Coal Colliery. By analyzing concrete technical problems, a technical approach of closed cycle “coal mining-gangue washing-backfilling-coal mining”, i.e. integration of coal mining, gangue separation and solid backfilling, is put forward with key technologies including gangue transportation with great depth, gangue separation from raw coal underground and integration of coal mining and backfilling. Based on the specific geological conditions of Tangshan Coal Colliery, 591m vertical feeding transportation system with great depth is designed; meanwhile, for efficient gangue transportation, ancillary wear-resisting pipe size and buffer equipment are optimized. Underground gangue separation system is created to be joined with the existing production system and backfilling system; besides, as per separation characteristics of coal and gangue, buddle jig is adopted for gangue roughing of raw coal underground. By cooperation of backfilling hydraulic support and other key equipment, the designed stope backfilling system completely realizes integration of coal mining and backfilling. Engineering practice shows that, through the research and implementation of the above key technologies, integration of coal exploitation, gangue separation and solid backfilling is successfully implemented in Tangshan Coal Colliery; moreover, it completely solves the three major engineering problems and realizes waste disposal, underground washing and separation, and ground surface subsidence control.INTRODUCTIONSo far, “three under” coal (coal trapped under buildings, watersbodies and railways) and key state-owned coal resources trapped under villages in China have reached 13.7 billion t and 5.22 billion t, respectively. With the development of coal enterprises, China currently has more than 1,600 gangue dumps (Miao et al., 2010a) with accumulated stack amount of 4.5 billion t, occupying a land area of 150,000 km2; moreover, surface subsidence caused by mining activities has damaged the environments of industry, agriculture, transportation and living, while new environmental pollution sources formed by coal related industries also result in damage to ecological environment (Huang et al., 2011a). On the one hand, due to large scale coal mining, some coal collieries suffering from resource exhaustion are faced with survival problems; on the other hand, coal mining has caused and been faced with increasingly prominent environmental problems, such as “three under” coal exploitation, waste disposal and ground surface subsidence control (Miao et al., 2010b; Zhang et al., 2009)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Stephen C. Tadolini, Anthony T. Iannacchione

"Coal burst represented a major hazard for some U.S. mining operations. This paper provides an historical review of the coal burst hazards, identifies the fundamental geological factors associated with these events, and discusses mechanisms that can be used to avoid their occurrences. Coal burst are not common in most underground mines. Their occurrence almost always has such dramatic consequences to a mining operation that changes in practice are required. Fundamental factors influencing coal burst events include strong strata, abnormal strata caving, elevated stresses, critical size pillars and the lack of sufficiently sized barrier pillars during extraction. These factors interact to produce excessive stress, seismic shock and loss of confinement mechanisms. Over the 90 years of dealing with these hazards, many novel prevention controls have been developed including novel mine designs and extraction sequences, most of which are site specific in their application. Without an accurate assessment of the fundamental factors that influence coal burst and knowledge of their mechanisms of occurrence, control techniques may be misapplied and risk inadequately mitigated. INTRODUCTIONCoal burst1are violent failures of ribs, roof or floor in underground mines. They are known to occur in complex ways and often under unique sets of conditions. This has made them extremely difficult to anticipate and control. Assessing coal burst risk requires engineers, managers, and safety professionals to recognize the fundamental factors responsible for these events. This helps practitioners recognize the hazard potential and understand the context in which various controls and barriers should be used. Only then can coal burst events be anticipated andappropriate mitigation techniques deployed.Over the last 90 years, a few coal burst events have been anticipated but most have eluded prediction. The authors examined the historical record (Appendix A) and determined that an inadequate understanding of the initiating geologic factors and their associated mechanisms of occurrence have contributed to the poor predictive capability. The historic record also indicates that control techniques have typically been site specific in their application."

Jan 1, 2015

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 Joe E. Bryan, John P. McDonnell

"Underground mine rib stability is an ongoing safety issue in all mining applications. Rib-related accidents present at least as many problems as roof-related ground control. Underground coal mine rib safety is continually emphasized as a primary safety concern at every mining operation. The application of rib support materials is increasing as more difficult mining conditions are experienced due to deeper cover, more variable depositional environments, thicker seam heights, and multi-seam mining effects. As the coal seams become thicker, the need for rib control increases. A variety of rib control methodologies has been documented and research continues on mine design methods and support techniques to reduce or eliminate rib-related accidents.This paper presents an alternative rib bolting technology using proven conventional rib support systems that allows mine personnel to more efficiently install rib support during development operations. This alternative rib bolting method allows for additional rib support with a single support installation.INTRODUCTIONRib control continues to garner the watchful eye of both concerned operators and government officials due to many factors: inherent safety within entries and crosscuts, actual rib stability history, safety improvement, cost control, improved mining methods, and maintaining production goals. As demonstrated through many years of actual practice, desired outcomes can be achieved by scrutiny, innovation, and combining improved practice methodologies.Rib surface control continues to be a necessary part of the production process. However, production and safety issues persist at the point of installation using current control apparatuses and methods to install rib controls. Among others, current issues of rib control are quantity of bolts required, overall time required for installation, ease of apparatus installation, flexibility of the system for appendage installation and operator exposure. A need exists to decrease the time miners spend installing rib control apparatuses, while increasing the safety of such installation processes. At present, installing rib control devices (primary rib bolts, plates, mesh, and, in most cases, secondary rib bolts and plates) is performed in a very congested area and is time-consuming process at the primary coal-winning area: the face. The MatLok system addresses these problems."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ry Stone

"There have been many design practices utilised within the coal mining industry to arrive at the minimum densities of primary ground support required during roadway development. This paper demonstrates the practical use of empirical databases, and focuses on the main drivers for ground support as demonstrated in conceptual models.Golder Associates’ empirical databases used for ground support include a Primary Roof Support Database and a Primary Rib Support Database. Both are based on successful ground support designs installed in mines in Australia, the US, the UK, South Africa, New Zealand, and Europe. The term “successful” refers to those designs that were used on a repeated basis for the purpose of roadway development.The Primary Roof Support Database indicates that the major factors influencing successful roof support designs are roof competency, expressed as the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR), and in situ stress. As roof displacement is essentially a function of horizontal stress and roof competency, in order to provide some form of measure as to the likely magnitude of roof deformation during roadway development, the depth of cover is divided by the CMRR to arrive at a “Stress Strength Ratio” (SSR). The database indicates that the higher the SSR, the greater the likelihood that the roof will require higher densities of support.In regard to the Primary Rib Support Database, it is evident from the current database that the primary factors affecting the capacity of rib support required for a successful design are roadway height and depth of cover. In order to provide some form of measure as to the likely magnitude of rib deformation during roadway development, the depth of cover is multiplied by the height of the roadway to determine a “Rib Deformation Rating” (RDR). Similar to the roof, the database indicates that the higher the RDR, the greater the likelihood that the rib will require higher densities of support.These databases have been used to help determine the minimum primary ground support designs required at many mine sites in Australasia, Europe, and the US. This paper will demonstrate the effectiveness and practicality of these databases at two selected mines in Australia and the US.In order to improve the Primary Rib Support Database, this paper will also propose a new rib deformation rating based on the addition of site specific coal strength data for the Australian mines. The proposed rating attempts to capture the main variables that define the behaviour of a buckling column."

Jan 1, 2015

By Xingkai Wang, Wenbing Xie

"To control the large deformation of soft rock around the roadway subjected to high stress, it is important to improve the stability of support structure, in addition to increasing support strength. In this study, the causes for the destabilization of U-steel frame and its loading characteristics were analyzed by theoretical analysis, laboratory experiments and field tests. The technology of constant support resistance, the principle of support structure compensation and the compensation technique are proposed. The results indicated that the main reasons for frame structure destabilization are caused by low strength of connector, irrational structure of connector, poor interaction between the surrounding rocks and support frame and structure, and unstable support structure. Thus, the corresponding technological measures, such as connector with high strength and rational structure are adopted. The bearing capacity of frame is unstable after slipping. In order to maintain the high support resistance when the frame is performing the support function, the frame connector should be retightened after slipping. Though the working resistance may be improved greatly by using the backfilling or back grouting of U-steel, the frame remains unstable because of the unstable frame structure. Therefore, according to the deformation characteristics of rocks surrounding the roadway and the structure instability of U- steel frame, the stable structure device is used to carry out the structural compensation of U-steel frame, and the whole bearing capacity of the frame and its structural stability are improved greatly.INTRODUCTIONThroughout the development of the roadway supports for coal mines in China, it can be seen that the supporting strength and supporting resistance increase continuously with increase in mining depth and supporting difficulties [1]. With respect to the ground control mechanism and supporting technology of rocks surrounding the soft rock roadways subjected to high stress, considerable research has been done both at home and abroad. The backfilling technology behind the high-resistance and yieldable U-steel wall, the new type of grout/bolt support technology and the bolting with high-strength mesh support technology were developed, and have been used widely in coal mines with notable economic benefits [2-7]. However, a large number of engineering practices show that in many cases the existing rock control technology of roadway may not control the large deformation of the soft rock roadways subjected to high stress. The reason that the large deformation of soft rock roadway occurs is mainly due to poor structure stability of existing frame bearing structure, not insufficient support strength."

Jan 1, 2015

By Dongsheng Zhang, Xufeng Wang, Wei Zhang, Gangwei Fan

"Large-scale longwall mining of shallow coal seams could cause mining-induced fractures to communicate with the surface immediately in Northwest China, leading to a series of mine safety and environmental issues, including crack formation, water loss, vegetation deterioration, land desertification, and spontaneous coal combustion. Therefore, an accurate and effective understanding of the spatiotemporal evolution law of mining-induced fractures in overlying strata and its relationship to upper aquifers is critical. In this paper, the application of the geophysical-chemical properties of radon in mining engineering is explored as a potential solution to the shortcomings of existing surveying methods. A radioactive measurement method is proposed for the detection of the development of mining-induced fractures in overlying strata in the Baoshan Coal Mine (BCM). The on-site trial indicated that the first weighting step is approximately 60 m, the average periodic weighting step is approximately 20 m, and the influence coverage of the advanced abutment pressure is approximately 30 m. The presented method could be used as an indirect technical support to increase the safety of coal mining by acting as a simple, fast, and reliable method of detecting mining-induced fractures in overlying strata.INTRODUCTIONAccording to the latest coalfield prediction results provided by China’s National Administration of Coal Geology (CNACG) (Zhou et al., 2013), China’s coal resources are mainly distributed throughout the West, e.g., Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, Shaanxi, Shanxi, Ningxia, and Guizhou. Two major coal mining areas have been established in the Northwest and the Southwest, and are typically represented by Inner Mongolia and Guizhou (Zhang et al., 2010). Northwest China is an arid to semi-arid area, where the coal seams are typically shallow and covered by a thin layer of bedrock. In its natural state, the surface’s ecological environment is fragile. Large-scale longwall mining of shallow coal seams could cause mining-induced fractures to communicate with the surface immediately, leading to a series of mine safety and environmental issues, including crack formation, water loss, vegetation deterioration, land desertification, and spontaneous coal combustion. This can propel any potential ecological fragility into a state of actual destruction (Zhang et al., 2011). Therefore, an accurate and effective understanding of the spatiotemporal evolution law of mininginduced fractures in overlying strata has become the theoretical basis of solving the above issues."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ihsan Berk Tulu, Michael Sloan, Ted Klemetti, Michael M. Murphy, Gabriel S. Esterhuizen, Jame Sumner

"In this paper, the advantage of using numerical models with the strength reduction method (SRM) to evaluate entry stability in complex multiple-seam conditions is demonstrated. A coal mine under variable topography from the central Appalachian region is used as a case study. At this mine, unexpected roof conditions were encountered during development below previously mined panels. Stress mapping and observation of ground conditions were used to quantify the success of entry support systems in three room-andpillar panels. Numerical model analyses were initially conducted to estimate the stresses induced by the multiple-seam mining at the locations of the affected entries. The SRM was used to quantify the stability factor of the supported roof of the entries at selected locations. The SRM-calculated stability factors were compared with observations made during the site visits, and the results demonstrate that the SRM adequately identifies the unexpected roof conditions in this complex case. It is concluded that the SRM can be used to effectively evaluate the likely success of roof supports and the stability condition of entries in coal mines.INTRODUCTIONSince the introduction of roof bolts in the coal mines during the late 1940s and 1950s, roof bolts promised to dramatically reduce roof fall accidents (Mark, 2002). However, ground falls still remain a significant factor in underground coal mine injuries and fatalities. In 2013, ground falls accounted for 4 of the 14 fatalities and 166 of the 1577 reported lost-time injuries in underground coal mines (MSHA, 2015).The design of appropriate support systems requires the understanding of: 1) the variable nature of the rock mass, 2) the performance and characteristics of the roof support, 3) the interaction between the rock mass and the installed support system, and 4) the in-situ and mine-induced stress distribution around the excavation. Over the past 25 years, multiple design approaches have been used in coal mine ground control. The approaches include empirical mechanistic methods, empirical statistical analysis, rules of thumb, and numerical methods (Hebblewhite 2006). In the U.S., Analysis of Roof Bolt Systems (ARBS) can be given as an example of an empirical method. ARBS uses relatively simple equations to calculate the intensity of support provided by a roof bolt system and compares it with a suggested ARBS value (Mark et al., 2001). The suggested ARBS design equation is derived from an analysis of 100 case histories. The ARBS design equation is dependent on two parameters: depth of cover and Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR). More recently, a probabilistic design approach was developed by Canbulat and van der Merwe (2009) in South Africa. In this method, the variability of the rock mass, the mining geometry, and support characteristics are included in the analytical models. The major advantages of these two methods are: 1) they can be applied rapidly and easily, 2) complex rock mass/ roof support interaction mechanisms are represented with simple equations, and 3) they are supported by large databases. However, both methods generally ignore mining-induced stress distribution, details of the roof support system, details of the geological setting, and the interaction between the support system and the rock mass."

Jan 1, 2015

By Michael J. Castner

"INTRODUCTIONMultiple-seam mining is an ever growing concern for engineers and mine management in every portion of the mining industry and is especially true for coal mining operations. The goal of this report is to identify the location and severity of multiple-seam interactions, provide AMSS calculations performed on the worst of these locations, and follow up with a visual examination of the underground physical effects on the roof and ribs in the locations identified for analysis. Multiple-seam mining is increasingly being studied because:1. Multiple-seam mining can create a multitude of problems such as roof falls, pillar crushing, pillar failing, rib spalling, floor heave, and inundation of water, gas, or oxygen-deficient air that can disrupt mining operations and threaten the safety of the miners.2. Multiple-seam mining is becoming more prevalent due to the depletion of virgin coal reserves.Currently, coal mining in the United States has progressed to the point that a growing number of mining companies are operating in coal seams located above, below, and/or adjacent to previously mined out coal seams. As a result, the state and federal governments are enacting higher safety standards on mining operations. For example, in years past, pillars may have been properly designed to handle single seam interactions for a particular mine or mines; however, today, where mining is now being considered above or below a previously mined area, these loading conditions may not be adequate to handle the removal of additional seams above or below the previously mined reserve. Studies from 1981 estimated that two-thirds of the mineable coal reserves in the United States would be impacted by multiple-seam implications. Today, over three decades later, it is obvious that most of the remaining mineable coal reserve will be influenced by previously extracted seams. Thus, thefocus on multiple-seam mining interactions on current and future mining operations. In 2012, underground mining in the United States produced 342,287 thousand short tons of coal. Northern Appalachia accounted for over 30% (103,301 thousand short tons) of this total (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013). Rosebud Mining Company and Western Allegheny Energy (RMC and WAE) have a combined total of 23 actively producing underground mining operations and at least four new mines under or ready for development. All of these mines are located in coal seams (Upper and Lower Freeport; Upper, Middle, and Lower Kittanning) of northern Appalachia (Pennsylvania and Ohio). Currently, more than half of the RMC and WAE mines are dealing with multiple-seam interactions. Seven mines are undermining previously mined out coal seams, and five mines are overmining previously mined out coal seams. Also, between these companies, five mines have inner-seam sloping possibilities (2 completed, 3 planned), most of which will result in mining over or under previously mined areas."

Jan 1, 2015

By Gabriel S. Esterhuizen

"Cable bolts are sometimes used in low-seam coal mines to provide support in difficult ground conditions. This paper describes cable bolting solutions at two low-seam coal mines in similar ground conditions. Both mines used support systems incorporating cable bolts as part of the primary support system. Two original cable bolt based support systems as well as two modified systems are evaluated to estimate their ability to prevent large roof falls. One of the support systems incorporated passive cable bolts, while the other used pre-tensioned cable bolts. The results and experience at the mines showed that the modified systems provided improved stability over the original support systems. The presence of the cable bolts is the most important contribution to stability against large roof falls, rather than the details of the support pattern. It was also found that a heavy steel channel can improve the safety of the system because of the ‘sling’ action it provides. Additionally, the analysis showed that fully-grouted rebar bolts load much earlier than the cable bolts, and pre-tensioning of the cable bolts can result in a more uniform distribution of loading in the roof.INTRODUCTIONCable bolting is sometimes used as primary support in coal mines experiencing difficult roof conditions. In low-seam mines the flexibility of the cable bolts allows greater length supports to be installed near the advancing face without the use of couplers. When used as primary support, the cables are typically installed in the same row as fully grouted bolts, replacing two or more of the bolts in each support row. A heavy steel channel may be used as a strap to spread the support load over a greater portion of the roof. Historically, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has not allowed widespread use of partially grouted un-tensioned bolts (e.g., passive cable bolts) for primary support; however, pretensioned cable bolts have been accepted.Various solutions using cable bolts as primary support were attempted at two low-seam coal mines in Western Pennsylvania that were experiencing difficult roof conditions. Both mines originally used fully grouted rebar bolts as primary support and cable bolts as supplementary support. It was found that when a large roof fall occurred, the cable bolts may be contained within the dome of fallen rock. As problematic roof conditions continued to exist, both mines decided to use cable bolts as part of the primary support system. The cable bolts were located near the ribs of the entry, to increase the likelihood that they would be anchored outside the dome of potentially unstable roof. The cable and rebar bolts were installed on a heavy steel channel that acts as a ‘sling’ to distribute the load across the width of the entry. At the first mine, Mine A, pre-tensioned cable bolts were used while at Mine B, un-tensioned cables were used. The two support systems consist of essentially the same support components installed in different patterns and with varying degrees of pre-tension."

Jan 1, 2015

By Jun Lu, Mark Van Dyke, Daniel W. H. Su, Greg Hasenfus

"This paper presents the geologic and ground control challenges that were encountered by CONSOL Energy’s mining operations in southwestern Pennsylvania. A sandstone-to-limestone geology transition was encountered by Mine A, where the primary 8-foot bolts were anchored in claystone. Upon experiencing roof sags and a roof fall in the return entry, 6-foot high-tension, fully-grouted primary bolts were employed along with 16-foot center cable bolts at every other strap to improve beam building and to ensure proper anchorage into the competent limestone. No longwall delay was reported within this geologic transition zone, although there was some difficulty in maintaining an open #2 entry airway behind the longwall face.The geologic encounter in Mine B was more complex, where fluvial deposits of massive sandstone channels, shale channels and pyritic-rich, green claystones were encountered on both sides of the mains, and which impacted both development and longwall ground control. In particular, poor transitional roof areas near the edges of the sandstone and shale channels often posed significant ground control challenges. In addition, hydraulic fracturing was sometimes utilized to enhance caving of massive sandstone behind the shields to relieve pressure at the face. Longwall face conditions and advance rates were documented to illustrate the effects of sandstone channels, shale channels, and green claystones on safety and productivity and to demonstrate the effectiveness of the hydraulic fracturing.Shale channels, slickensided zones, laminated roof zones, soft floor, and a regional syncline were encountered in Mine C, the combination of which posed unique ground control challenges during both development and longwall mining. The presence of soft floor, coupled with the presence of thick floor coal and deep cover, resulted in headgate convergence during retreat of the first right-hand longwall panel. Two-piece 8-foot bolts were sometimes observed to fail at the coupler within the laminated roof zone, and 6-foot, 1-piece, fully-grouted point-anchor bolts were employed as the primary bolts thereafter."

Jan 1, 2015

By Syd Peng, Gamal Rashed

"Bumps in coal mines have been recognized as a major hazard for many years. These sudden violent failures around mine openings have compromised safety, ventilation and access to mine workings. Previous studies showed that the violence of coal specimen failure depends on both the interface friction and width-to-height (W/H) ratio of a coal specimen. The mode of failure for a uniaxially loaded coal specimen or a coal pillar is a combination of both shear failure along the interface and compressive failure in the coal. Unstable interface failures provide a sudden de-confinement to coal rib, thus triggering uns and compressive failure in the sidewalls. The compressive failure of a coal specimen or a coal pillar can be controlled by changing its W/H ratio. As the W/H ratio increases, the ultimate strength increases. With a proper combination of interface friction and the width-to-height (W/H) ratio of pillar or coal specimen, the mode of failure will change from sudden violent failure, which is brittle failure to non-violent failure, which is ductile failure. The main objective of this paper is to determine at what W/H ratio and interface friction the mode of failure changes from violent to non-violent. In this research, coal specimens of width-to-height ratio ranging from 1 to 10 were uniaxially tested under two interface frictions of 0.10 and 0.25. The results are presented and discussed.INTRODUCTIONCoal mine bumps are sudden, violent bursts of coal from a pillar or pillars or a block of coal, resulting in a section, the whole pillar, or the solid block of coal being thrown into an open entry. These bursts are accompanied by very loud noises (Peng, 2008). Several case histories in mining have long described coal pillars or coal faces failing violently with an accompanying ejection of debris and broken material into the working areas of the mines (Campoli et al., 1987; Osterwald, 1962; Peperakis, 1958; Garvey et al., 2013). Because of the catastrophic nature of these sudden failures, understanding the causes of coal mine bumps is essential to create a safe underground working environment. This phenomenon has motivated many ground control researchers to conduct extensive field investigations throughout the past century. Rashed and Peng (2014) compared the mechanical properties of two kinds of coal, one from bump and the other from non-bump-prone mines. They found that coal itself does not play any significant role in coal bumps and recommended that future research should focus more on the local variation of geological conditions such as the interface friction between pillar and roof and between pillar and floor."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ted Klemetti, Gabriel Esterhuizen, John L. Ellenberger

"Advanced numerical models can be used to evaluate entry support systems in coal mines. However, these methods require specialized software and specialized skills to create the models and evaluate the results. Practicing support design engineers require a method to rapidly assess a proposed support system for a given geotechnical scenario. A prediction equation that can be used to assess roof support systems has been developed from the results of hundreds of FLAC3D analyses that were conducted during recent research. These models were validated against field cases and empirical design approaches and were found to adequately predict entry stability in coal mines. The understanding developed from the model outcomes was used to develop an equation to predict entry roof stability against large roof falls. Least-squares error analysis was conducted to find appropriate parameters for the nonlinear equation. The developed equation can be solved using spreadsheet software, allowing for rapid assessment of alternative support system performance in variable geological conditions. The performance of the prediction equation is evaluated against empirical design methods and against selected case histories of support practices at currently operating mines. Examples are presented that demonstrate the performance of the equation in variable geological settings. The stability factor (SF) prediction equation can be used as an assessment tool to assist in the design of coal mine roof support systems.IntroductionGround falls represent a significant proportion of injuries and fatalities in underground coal mines in the US. During 2013, ground falls were responsible for 4 of the 14 fatalities and 16.6 % of the 1,577 reportable lost-time injuries (MSHA, 2015). In addition, each year about 400 to 500 large roof falls are reported that can extend up to or above the bolted horizon. Large roof falls and associated ground fall hazards can be mitigated through improved support design.The research presented here particularly addresses the problem of large roof falls that extend more than 90 cm (3 ft) above the roof line of an entry and may extend above the bolted horizon. Smaller roof falls that fall out between supports or extend less than 90 cm (3 ft) above the roof line are excluded. These smaller roof falls can be controlled by appropriate surface support such as roof screen or other skin control methods. Also excluded are roof falls that are associated with an individual geological structure such as a slip of fault. Structure-related instabilities can be controlled by strategically locating individual roof bolts or other supports appropriate for the local situation."

Jan 1, 2015

By Peter Zhang, Dan Neilans, Scott Peterson, Scott Wade, Joe Pugh, Ryan Mcgrady

"A coal outburst is a severe safety hazard in room-and-pillar mining under deep cover. It is more likely to occur during pillar retreating. Multi-seam mining dramatically increases the risk of coal outburst within the influence zones created by remnant pillars and gob-solid boundaries. Though coal outburst is generally associated with heavy loading of coal pillars, its occurrence is difficult to predict. Risk management provides a proactive tool to minimize coal outburst in room-and-pillar mining under deep cover. Risk assessment is the first step in identifying and quantifying outburst risk factors. The primary risk factors for coal outburst are overburden depth, roof and floor strength, geological anomalies, mining type, multi-seam mining, and panel width. A risk assessment chart can be used to proactively screen out mining sections with high risk of coal outburst for further analysis. Gob-solid boundaries and remnant pillars are critical factors in evaluation of the coal outburst risk of multi-seam mining. Risk identification, risk assessment, geologic influence mapping, geotechnical evaluation, risk analysis, risk mitigation, and monitoring are essential elements of coal outburst risk management process. Training is an integral part of risk management for risk identification and communication between all the stakeholders including management, technical and safety personnel, and miners.INTRODUCTIONA coal outburst is a sudden violent burst of coal from a pillar with broken coal or blocks of coal forcibly ejected into open entries. A coal outburst is a severe safety hazard as the mining crew is highly exposed at the site when the event occurs. Though deep cover and strong roof and floor are underlying geologic conditions of a potential burst incident, its real occurrence is also the result of additional mining factors. In room-and-pillar mining, a coal outburst could occur during both development and pillar retreating, but the latter greatly increases the risk of outburst. The other risk factors of coal outburst also include mining layout, multi-seam mining, presence of adjacent gob, cutting sequence, and local abnormal geologic conditions. Over the years, the cases of coal outbursts have been studied by many researchers and mining practitioners(Peng, 2008; Newman, 2008; Iannacchione and Tadolini, 2008; Gauna and Phillipson, 2008; Hoelle, 2008; and Newman, 2002). It is commonly believed that the coal outburst is the result of a sudden release of elastic strain energy stored in coal pillars and is highly associated with cutting into heavily loaded coal pillars, but its occurrence is a rare event and is difficult to predict. A number of engineering controls have been recommended to mitigate outburst potential. For room-and-pillar mining, sufficient pillar sizes have been the primary control for coal outburst prevention. The pillar design tools such as ARMPS and AMSS developed by NIOSH have played an important role in the design of stable pillars to prevent pillar collapse and squeezing as well as coal outbursts. In fact, with the implementation of pillar design using proper stability factors, pillar collapse and squeezing have been almost eliminated, and the number of coal outbursts has been greatly reduced in the US over the past decade. However, after a few outbursts occurred during pillar retreating in the US over the past a few years (MSHA, 1996; MSHA, 2014; MSHA, 2013), it has been realized that sufficient pillar size is still not enough to prevent coal outbursts. The investigations of the incidents showed that other factors such as multi-seam mining, panel layout, cutting sequence, and local geologic factors also seemed critical in causing the events. Therefore, it has become imperative that additional proactive measures beyond proper pillar design be implemented to prevent coal outbursts."

Jan 1, 2015

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

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

Jan 1, 2015

By Keith D. Koper, Kris L. Pankow, Derrick J. A. Chambers, Michael K. McCarter

"In a mining environment, high quality seismic event catalogs are often useful in interpreting local stress states and identifying areas with elevated ground control risk. Installation, operation, and maintenance of local/in-mine seismic networks, however, may be prohibitively expensive, and mine operators may not anticipate the need for seismic data until unusual mining conditions arise. If regional, generally public, seismic instrumentation could be used to reproduce the results generated by local/in-mine instrumentation to an acceptable degree of fidelity, it would be a valuable and inexpensive tool for mine planners and ground control engineers.In this study we apply subspace detection—a non-traditional seismic event detection technique—to data from a sparse, regional network. The process is employed to identify mining induced seismicity (MIS) from an underground coal district. The results are compared to a seismic event catalog produced by a local seismic array operating within the permit boundaries. Additionally, we analyze the performance of two different stations of the same sparse, regional network in identifying blasts at a surface coal mine for which we have a detailed blasting log. In both cases data from stations between 10 and 60 km away from mining activity are used. We also explore the trade-offs between the number of detections and the number of false positives, which is influenced heavily by detection thresholds and the number of stations used in the process.For the surface mine we are able to identify more than 90% of the production blasts documented in the blasting log. We also find that the detected blasts from each of the four active pits produce waveforms similar to one another. The results are not dependent on source-receiver distance, and by requiring detections to occur on both stations the number of sure false positives is reduced to zero. In the underground mining district we identify between 30% and 75% of the events detected by the local array, depending on the acceptable number of false positives and the source-receiver distance. We also find many events that were missed by the local array, showing that regional subspace detection can usefully augment traditional local catalogs. Moreover, subspace detection can provide an estimate on event location and classification using data from as little as one seismic station."

Jan 1, 2015