Search Documents

By Timothy J. Matthews, Timothy J. Batchler, Ted M. Klemetti

"From 2011–2016, there were 1,511 documented injuries, including 7 fatalities, from ground falls in underground coal mines in the United States. The majority of these ground-fall injuries were not caused by a major roof collapse, but from falls of smaller rocks from the immediate roof. Roof screen can significantly reduce the number of these injuries and has been widely used in underground coal mines for surface control. Because of the potential of reducing ground-fall injuries, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is further evaluating the performance characteristics of welded wire screen as used in underground coal mines by conducting a laboratory testing program using the Mine Roof Simulator (MRS) in Pittsburgh, PA.The load-displacement characteristics of an 8-ft x 12-ft panel of 8-gauge welded screen were evaluated using a newly designed, large laboratory screen test frame with multiple load pull locations. This screen was tested in a configuration that simulates current installation practices in U.S. coal mines. In this study, the effects of varying the number and position of the load pull location on the screen performance were evaluated. Ultimately, the type of information obtained in this and similar studies can be used to aid in developing wire roof screen design criteria and to assist mine operators in the selection and use of roof screen in underground mines.INTRODUCTIONThe large majority of ground-fall injuries are caused by falls of smaller rocks from the immediate roof. Various controls are currently being used in mines to control this surface rock, including the use of wire roof screen. In mines where wire roof screen has been installed, injuries from rock falls have been reduced dramatically (Robertson and Hinshaw, 2001). Roof screen has the potential to prevent hundreds of injuries caused by the fall of small rocks between permanent roof supports (Compton et al., 2007). Because of this potential for reducing ground-fall injuries, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is evaluating the performance characteristics of welded wire screen as used in underground coal mines by conducting a laboratory testing program in the Mine Roof Simulator (MRS) in Pittsburgh, PA."

Jan 1, 2018

By Brian Daniels, James Farroni

"Draw rock (small rock that forms/falls when bolting the roof and/or rib) is the cause of numerous injuries annually. These injuries result in lost work hours and low morale. The report below explains how ""Mine Safe Draw Rock Shields"" (Pans) are used in an underground operation. This report will chronicle the application of these pans in a Southern West Virginia coal mine along with testing data that measures their effectiveness. Since the introduction of these pans in 2002 the amount of reportable accidents relating to draw rock has decreased by 80%. The report below reinforces that perimeter contact is critical to the performance of these pans. In addition the strength of these products at the perimeter will determine their effectiveness. The results of the testing data outlined in this paper, along with the physical records at the study mine, confirm that the use of pans has significantly reduced draw rock falls at this facility.BACKGROUNDSupplemental support is defined as ground control that is used in addition to required support in an underground mine. Some examples of supplemental support are:• Pans• Mesh/Geogrid• Mats• Half Headers• Boards• ChannelA typical roof condition that warrants the use of pans is when loose small rock is dislodged while bolting. If the top is very scaly (loose, thin rock) additional supplemental support can be used in conjunction with pans such as mesh or geogrid (See Figure 1). Pans will provide protection where used and approximately 12 in (250 mm) out from perimeter. This is achieved by contact with a surface which will put scale in tension up to 12 in (250 mm) from perimeter of pan.INTRODUCTIONThe ease of applying a roof support system is critical to effectively operating a deep mine. Figure 2 shows how a pan is installed in conjunction with a roof bolt and bearing plate. The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) requires that supplemental support cannot decrease the performance of required support. The goal of using all supplemental support is to provide additional safety for the miner which equates to increased productivity.The ability of skin control products to contact a surface is the single most critical characteristic (Figure 3 and Figure 4). If the material does not contact the surface it cannot be effective. Therefore, the flexibility, design and proper installation of the products are critical in determining their effectiveness. Figure 5 shows the proper installation of the roof pan.To reiterate, all skin control must be applied in conjunction with a roof bolt and ASTM approved bearing plate as shown in Figure 4."

Jan 1, 2010

By Robert B. Francini

Longwall mining and pipelines have coexisted since longwall mining was introduced into the United States. How the pipeline operator reacts to longwall mining under their line depends on many factors. This paper outlines the process the pipeline operator goes through to determine the appropriate response when their pipeline is being undermined. Typical mitigation procedures are reviewed. Finally, the paper looks at current design practices for new pipelines that are expected to be undermined during their lifetime.

Jan 1, 2011

By Markus Papst, Denise Millier, Daniel Beckers, Axel Preusse

"At an open-pit lignite extraction mine in Germany, groundwater has to be pumped over a large area, which leads to subsidence at the surface. As long as the geology of the area of influence is homogeneous, the subsidence is uniform and has marginal influence on buildings.Since the geology of many regions is characterized by faults, there are different rates of subsidence along those faults, which can lead to considerable consequences. Those different rates of subsidence on both sides of a geological fault are associated with the structure of the geology and soil mechanical properties. Horizons with various thicknesses and types of soil are affected differently by the groundwater pumping because of the offset of the faults, and thus react dissimilarly to dewatering.The smaller the grain of the geological horizon, the stronger the chance of shrinking, which leads to a stronger effect at the surface; therefore, dewatering impacts on clayey soil are different to those on sand and gravel. Regions consisting of meadows with turf inclusions are endangered as well; compared to the surrounding geology, those areas react in an entirely different way to water removal, which leads to immense differences in subsidence.The differences in area and respective subsidence impacts, as well as if it is possible to localize those areas, is an issue which needs to be analyzed. Furthermore, detailed mapping can help in the development of future forecasts about those subsidence differences and can also help with monitoring geological faults. In the context of subsurface spatial planning, this mapping has to be kept under review medium- to long-term.INTRODUCTIONThe utilization of underground mining is of increasing significance and of high interest, both for the common good and for future generations. For decades, humanity has been extracting resources from the subsurface, and salt, coal, lignite and water - just to mention a few resources - have been extracted from underground (Sailer, 2013)."

Jan 1, 2016

By John C. Stankus

The 3 Right pre-developed longwall recovery entry at Signal Peak Energy?s Bull Mountain No. 1 mine was designed to prevent the abnormal roof conditions encountered in its firsttwo recovery entries. Unique geological conditions, such as the low overburden of approximately 200 feet and prevalence of roof joints in the sandstone overburden, contribute significantly to abnormal conditions during longwall recovery. The 3 Right recovery entry was 42 ft wide and developed in two stages, 21 ft wide in each stage. The entry roof was reinforced with steel wire mesh/non-metallic recovery mesh, high-capacity primary bolts and cables. After all the support was installed, the entry was completely backfilled with specially designed, cuttable, low-density cement. The roof bolting and backfilldesign were based on current practices in this mine and successful practices in other mines in the U.S. and Australia. Extensive instrumentation was installed in the recovery entry for continuous monitoring of load transfer as the face approached and cut into the recovery entries. The support design was completely successful with a smooth cut-through on January 29 and 30, 2014, significantly reducing the shield recovery time and meanwhile protecting the safety of miners. Based on actual observance and practices of the 3 Right recovery entry, recommendations on improvement and modificationsof roof support for 4 Right recovery room are presented.

Jan 1, 2014

By D. Bigby

The current British Standard on rock reinforcement components used in coal mining (BS7861:1996) employs the axial double embedment tensile PET) test to determine the main system load transfer performance criteria, in terms of bond strength and stiffbess. This test involves measurement of load/displacement characteristics of a tendon fully grouted into internally threaded thick-walled steel tubes. Part 1 of the Standard covers rock bolting systems and Part 2 covers birdcaged cable bolting systems. Both parts are highly prescriptive, defining a specific design of bar (AT) and cable bolt (birdcaged). In 2000, it was agreed by the UK Rockbolt Research Liaison Committee that Part 1 of the Standard should be revised to allow further industry innovation of bolts and resins. Amongst other aspects, it was recognised that the double embedment test was limited by its inability to examine load transfer between the bolt and the host rock and the UK Health and Safety Executive commissioned an RMT research project to develop a new test to replace the DET test. The new test, the Laboratory Short Encapsulation Pull (LSEP) test has now been incorporated into a draft revision of BS7861 Part1 which has been issued for industry wide consultation. In 2003, it was agreed to begin revision of Part 2 of the Standard to encompass the many types of long tendon reinforcement which were, by then, being used in the UK coal mining industry. These included flexible bolts, deformed strands and tensionable systems encapsulated with resin, cementitious grout and combinations of the two. A second RMT research project was funded by the HSE to examine adapting the Laboratory Short Encapsulation Pull Test for the revised long tendon Standard. This project is nearing completion and a revised Part 2 of the Standard is being drafted. This paper presents some of the results of the two research projects, describes the laboratory tests and acceptance criteria developed and discusses the implications of the research on improving the understanding of reinforcement performance and its characterisation. In particular it shows how the new test can reveal very different load transfer characteristics to the double embedment test, as it takes the load transfer at the holefrock wall into account.

Jan 1, 2005

By David Miller

Longwall gateroad support can be supplied by a variety of methods. The system of support also needs to be flexible as conditions change. This is especially true in the complex geological conditions of the west Kentucky # 13 seam. Methods of gateroad support used in this seam will be presented along with the successes and failures of the systems as conditions changed Lodestar Energy's gateroad support progression through the seven longwall panels retreated to date will provide an insight into planning for future panels

Jan 1, 1998

By Denise Mueller, Axel Preusse

"In 2010, the fracking discussion in Germany caused a number of changes in German law, which came into force in 2016. Especially the production of gas had to be regulated. With the legislation amendment, the “Subsidence-Area Mining Regulation” (in German: Einwirkungsbereichs-Bergverordnung) has been revised, too. The changes expand the compensation of mining damages, especially to the extraction with drilling from the surface and underground storage. Although the “Subsidence-Area Mining Regulation” has been revised, the area of main influence (subsidence of 10 cm) remains to determine a relevant boundary for mining damages. The determination and prediction of this boundary above caverns are presented in this paper. In addition, further elements of ground movements and their relevance to mine damages are analyzed. The usage of the area of main influence to fix a relevant boundary for mining damages does not correspond to the relevant elements of ground movements. A limit for differences in subsidence (tilt) or horizontal changes in length should be preferred to describe the relevance of mining damages on buildings. Furthermore, this paper outlines the the meaning of using the area of main influence to fix a relevant boundary for mining damages. INTRODUCTION The “Federal Mining Act” (in German: Bundesberggesetz, short: BBergG) forms the central legal standard to cover subsidence in Germany. The mining authority refers to the following regulations (Preuße et al., 2015): the “Subsidence-Area Mining Regulation” (in German: Einwirkungsbergverordnung, short: EinwirkungsBergV; since 1982) the “Mine-Surveyor Mining Regulation” (in German: Markscheider-Bergverordnung; short: MarkschBergV) the “Deep-Drilling Regulation”"

Jan 1, 2017

By Gamal Rashed

Coal bump is a sudden manifestation of the release of strain energy stored in a coal pillar (Peng, 2008). It is a very serious mining hazard that adversely affects the safety and productivity of the mines. Several case histories in mining have described coal pillars or faces of coal failing violently with an accompanying ejection of debris and broken material into the working areas of the mine (Campoli, 1987; Osterwald, 1962; Peperakis, 1958; Garvey and Ozbay, 2013). These failures resulted in large losses of life and total collapses of entire mine panels (Chase, Zipf, and Mark, 1994; Zingano, Koppe, and Costa, 2004). There are questions in the literature about whether or not the coal itself plays a significant role in bump. Rice (1935) mentioned that structurally strong coal is one of the key factors for bump; however, the strength of the Pocahontas #3 coal seam is low, and it bumped. Moreover, it is not obvious in the literature whether the strength of the tested coal samples is the inherent strength or if it is influenced by the shape or the size of the specimen. The main objective of this paper is to answer the following question: To what extent does the mechanical properties of the coal have an impact on the potential for violent failure? The best approach to answer this question is to compare the mechanical properties of two kinds of coals from bump-prone (Utah coal-Sunnyside seam) and non-bump-prone (WV coal-Sewickley seam). This comparison includes uniaxial compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, shear strength (cohesion and friction angle), and the burst index.

Jan 1, 2014

By Michael Jenkins

This paper reviews the history of rock burst research in the Coeur d'Alene Mining District of northern Idaho over the last 30 years. Rock bursting is a problem because of a combination of geological factors in the region--complex structure, high horizontal stresses, and strong, brittle rock that readily stores strain energy. The Bureau of Mines has cooperated with industry to study rock burst phenomenon for many years. Early work focused on methods to mitigate bursting problems within the context of existing mining methods. In the 1970's, researchers began investigating methods for altering or controlling conditions that lead to rock bursts. These control measures become part of the stope development that precedes mining or are changes in the mining process itself. Although, researchers continue to develop microseismic techniques, the major research effort focuses on developing a new mining method to reduce the number and severity of rock bursts in order to improve safety and increase productivity in the Coeur d'Alene Mining District.

Jan 1, 1987

By Zach G. Agioutantis

The prediction of ground movements due to underground mining using the influence function method is a mature technology, widely used by researchers and planning engineers around the world. Surface strain, either tensile or compressive, is an important indicator of potential impacts on structures such as buildings, bodies of water, pipelines, railway and power lines, and tailings dams. Calculation of static or dynamic surface strains, for varying surface terrains and slopes, should be accurately predicted and be independent of the methodology applied for the calculation. This paper discusses and compares the development of horizontal and ground strains on the surface due to underground mining for different surface topologies (sloping terrain, monitoring lines, etc.) and presents the steps needed to ensure accurate calculations. Examples are given to demonstrate how ground strains can be calculated for one- and two-dimensional gridded surfaces.

Jan 1, 2013

By Murali Gadde

Numerical simulation of cutter roof failure is a daunting coal mine excavation design issue. The complex progressive failure mechanisms associated with cutter failures are extremely difficult to replicate in computer models. However, this paper shows that with a proper selection of constitute behavior and implementation of cutting sequence, it is possible to realistically reproduce cutter failure using continuum models. Strain-softening material behavior and a systematic step-by-step model solving for a four-entry-and- three-crosscut model produced results that are similar to cutter patterns noticed in field. These results show that traditional modeling with geometries created in one model-step has limited applicability and may even provide misleading conclusions under some circumstances. Most importantly, the proposed modeling methodology provided some insights into the reasons for the inconsistent spatial distribution of cutters often noticed in coal mines. The modeling also revealed the usefulness of cutter mapping to determine the directions of in situ horizontal stresses.

Jan 1, 2005

By Jun Lu

This paper presents the evaluation, enhancement and comparison of two hydraulic fracturing techniques which were employed to mitigate the impact of a massive sandstone channel on two successive longwall faces. The hydraulic fracturing technique and Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software were initially employed to mitigate the impact of thick, massive sandstoneroof during mining of longwall Panel 21. Improved longwall face conditions and productivity were observed as Panel 21 mined through the sandstone channel. However, moderate sandstone fractures and falls at the face were still present in areas where hydraulic fracture influence was not present. Such adverse conditions caused two to three weeks of production delays due to large face cavities, jammed face conveyor and subsequent face gluing. Based on the mining experience in Panel 21, and site-specific roof geology in Panel 22, a modified and more effective hydraulic fracturing program was employed. Fewer well-placed holes were drilled, and larger volume of water was pumped into each hole in order to propagate the individual horizontal pancake fractures over a larger area, thereby enhancing caving and relieving face pressure caused by overhang of the massive sandstone. Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software was also employed at Panel 22 to predict the cavity risk index and guide the longwall face crew in double-pulling shields behind the shearer drum. This helped to reduce the tip-to-face distance at the critical spots along the longwall face, which helped mitigate the formation of the roof cavities and failure of massive sandstone onto the face conveyor. Underground observations, face advance rate and face rock delay analysis confirmed that longwall face conditions and advance rate in Panel 22were significantly improved compared to those of Panel 21. Consequently, safety and productivity were improved.

Jan 1, 2014

By Dakota Faulkner

Unexpected roof falls often occur in the entries or intersections of active mining sections in underground mines. For large roof falls (greater than 20 ft in height), it becomes dangerous and impractical to clean up the rock debris and re-bolt the newly exposed roof strata. To help mine operators rehabilitate the roof fall areas in a quick, safe, and economic manner, Jennmar Corporation and Keystone Mining Services, LLC (KMS) designed, tested, and developed various impact-resistant (IR) steel set designs, as initially detailed in the proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining (ICGCM). Since then, the IR steel sets have been successfully installed in more than 100 roof falls in 43 different coal mines. Significant data has been obtained from these installations, enabling further refinement to and improvement on the design. This paper (1) updates drop test results of the IR lagging panel, (2) presents a case study of the performance of IR arch sets installed 56 months ago at a roof fall rehabilitation site, (3) demonstrates capacity evaluation of the IR steel set, and (4) outlines a preliminary applicability evaluation guideline of the IR steel set for a given roof fall condition. Field evaluation and structural numerical analysis indicate that impact capacity of the system is significantly higher than that of the IR lagging panel, as originally determined. It is concluded that, when evaluating the applicability of an IR steel set, ground control engineers should consider the IR lagging and steel set as an entire system and make a reasonable engineering decision based on actual roof fall geotechnical conditions.

Jan 1, 2014

By Michael Gauna, Christopher Mark

"Coal bursts involve the sudden, violent ejection of coal or rock into the mine workings. They are almost always accompanied by a loud noise, like an explosion, and ground vibration. Bursts are a particular hazard for miners because they typically occur without warning. Despite decades of research, the sources and mechanics of these events are not well understood, and therefore they are difficult to predict and control. Experience has shown, however, that certain geologic and mining factors are associated with an increased likelihood of a coal burst. A coal burst risk assessment consists of evaluating the degree to which these risk factors are present, and then identifying appropriate control measures to mitigate the hazard. This paper summarizes the U.S. and international experience with coal bursts, and describes the known risk factors in detail. It includes a framework that can be used to guide the risk assessment process.BACKGROUNDCoal bursts involve the sudden, violent ejection of coal or rock into the mine workings. They are almost always accompanied by a loud noise, like an explosion, and ground vibration. Bursts are a particular hazard for miners because they typically occur without warning. During the years 2012-2014, serious coal bursts occurred at three different U.S. room and pillar mines. These events resulted in three fatalities and two permanently disabling injuries (MSHA, 2014; MSHA, 2013). In all three instances, the events occurred during pillar recovery at depths exceeding 1,000 feet (300 m). None of these three mines had previously reported a burst to MSHA. Coal bursts also occurred at three longwall mines during this same time period.Despite decades of research, the sources and mechanics of bursts are not well understood, and therefore these events are difficult to predict and control. Experience has shown, however, that certain risk factors are associated with an increased likelihood of a coal burst. A coal burst risk assessment consists of evaluating the degree to which these risk factors are present. In addition, some control techniques are effective in reducing the likelihood of an event or protecting miners from their effects."

Jan 1, 2015

By Andre Zingano

An underground mine using room and pillar and retreat mining methods was developed during the 1950?s. In 2009 an open cast mine was opened in the same reserve with the objective of mining five coal seams including the one previously mined. Recently, a series of slope failures were detected at the open cast mine. The surface mine map was overlain on the underground mine map, and it was observed that the slope failures were located above a retreat mined area where the overburden had caved and the ground subsided. The deformation and displacement attributable to subsidence caused a loss of strength in the overburden strata. The objective of this paper is to study the causes of slope sliding (or failure) due to the ground subsidence of rock layers above oldmined out areas. A map was created to overlay the two mines -- the abandoned underground mine and the active surface mining. Two- and three-dimension numerical modeling was conducted to simulate the slope behavior and to verify whether the mine subsidence was the cause of slope instability. This study indicated that the subsided rock layers were the cause of slope instability and sliding.

Jan 1, 2013

By Russell C. Frith

This paper examines the design of longwall shields, focusing on those aspects that are critical to either their successful application or contribution to failure during longwall extraction. In many instances, longwall shields are assessed and designed along lines similar to that of roadway ground support systems, namely according to typical or normal geotechnical conditions. However it will be contended that for longwall shields, this is inappropriate because unlike roadway ground support systems, longwall shields cannot be supplemented with additional or secondary support in localised areas of adverse geotechnical conditions. In other words, the longwall shield needs to be designed according to what are judged to be worst case or adverse geotechnical conditions?the outcome being that a well-designed shield will be significantly over-rated for the majority of its working life. Therefore, it will be argued that the additional capital cost of such shield design can be readily justified as a prudent riskbased outcome that is essential to minimising future business risks due to strata instability on the longwall face. Shield geometry will be discussed, including such relevant factors as leg angle, inclination of the top caving shield, canopy ratio, operating height range, and tip to face distance. These are all well-established longwall shield design considerations and, most importantly, areas whereby inadequate design can render a longwall shield as highly ineffective. The issue of tip to face distance will be considered in detail, in particular, the extent by which it is an important geotechnical design consideration, the conclusion being reached that, in fact, it is not. The critical importance of maximising set to yield ratio within practical operating limits will be justified, the wisdom of this having been subject to questioning in more recent technical literature. Overall, the aim is to provide the industry with a set of suggested guidelines for future use when designing longwall shields and, hopefully, to initiate discussion on a subject that, unlike roadway ground support design, is not well covered in its entirety in the published technical literature.

Jan 1, 2013

By Anthony Spearing

There are approximately 68 million rockbolts installed annually in underground coal mines in the USA (Tadolini and Mazzoni, 2006). The most utilized is the passive fully grouted resin rebar bolt, which constitutes almost 90% of the primary support in US underground coal mines. Resin-grouted rockbolts are a very effective and safe support, but their performance still needs to be further optimized and improved. This paper investigates their performance and suggests operating conditions to optimize the performance of resin-grouted rockbolts. In addition, this paper discusses a small-scale test that can also be used to evaluate the performance of rockbolts that is quicker, easier, and less costly than short encapsulation tests.

Jan 1, 2014

By Frank Schmidt

Due to changing geology, rib bolting is an ever-changing problem in ground control. With the economic status of the coal market, the need for safely increasing productivity in rib bolting is at an all-time high. The current solutions used in the market often require a long installation time (e.g. if collapsed holes have to be redrilled) or result in poor quality installations that can lead to insufficient ground control. A new bolting product based on the simple screw principle has been developed to bolt ribs faster and with a more repeatable, higher level of installation quality. The paper covers the product invention and development, the fastening principle and its advantages over current systems and first experiences in the market. The first underground trials have shown that the screw anchors can be installed safely and efficiently, often faster than traditional methods. The screw anchor does not suffer from conventional bolting issues such as collapsed holes due to bad ribs. The screw anchors are designed to obtain steel failure and load testing underground shows consistent fastening in all types of conditions.

Jan 1, 2013

By Jun Lu, Greg Hasenfus

"In this paper, the mining experience and challenges for the first right-handed longwall panel in the Pittsburgh seam are introduced. The longwall headgate T-junction experienced very high face convergence (up to 2 feet), accompanied by roof sag, floor heave, and rib loading. The headgate convergence was so large that, in a few places, it threatened longwall retreat and ultimately required the bottom to be re-graded.Different underground instruments, such as a roof scope, de-gas drill, tell-tale, laser meter, and Borehole Pressure Cell (BPC), were employed to explore the roof geology and to monitor the entry convergence and the stress changes in the pillar. In addition, the impact of other geologic factors, such as large overburden depth, laminated sandstone roof geology, soft floor, and large headgate equipment, were also analyzed. Subsequently, geotechnical solutions were provided to avoid or mitigate the impact of these challenging geologic factors.INTRODUCTIONIt is well known that high horizontal stress will affect the stability of roof, floor, and ribs within underground mines. In general, the headgate entries will experience stress concentration for the right-handed longwall face. On the contrary, the stress concentration will be in the tailgate entries for the left-handed longwall face (Hasenfus and Su, 2006). Without the stress shadow, the stress concentration in the headgate for the first longwall panel may be more significant (Figure 1).A mine in the CONSOL Pennsylvania Operation was extracting the first right-handed longwall panel in the Pittsburgh seam, which created high horizontal stress concentrations at the longwall headgate. Because of concern over soft wet floor within the syncline, floor coal had been left in place on development. Early on, upon retreat, the longwall headgate T-junction experienced very high face convergence, accompanied by roof sag, floor heave, and rib loading. The floor heave was exacerbated by the presence of floor coal, which buckled upward near the center of the beltline. Roof movement was occasionally aggravated by laminated roof conditions, but was kept in check by aggressive supplemental support including cable bolts, yielding props, cribbing, and roof mesh. Rib bolting and rib mesh helped to further maintain the entryway stability by keeping sloughage at a minimum. Nevertheless, despite the heavy support, headgate convergence was so large that, in a few places, it threatened longwall retreat and ultimately required the bottom to be re-graded."

Jan 1, 2018