Search Documents

By Gabriel S. Esterhuizen

The design of support for underground excavations is a complex process in which the interaction between supports and the rock mass must be evaluated. The strength reduction method (SRM) is useful because it provides a stability factor of the supported excavation that can easily be compared between support alternatives. The method is based on numerical model analysis where the stability factor is determined by reducing the rock mass strength until collapse is indicated in the model. This paper presents the results of validation studies that were conducted using the FLAC3D stress analysis software to compare SRMcalculated stability factors to the empirically based Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) and the Analysis of Roof Bolt Systems (ARBS). The objective was to determine whether the SRM, with its basis in mechanics, would predict similar outcomes as the fundamentally different ARBS and CMRR methods with their basis in empirical observations. A total of 450 different scenarios were evaluated in which the geology, horizontal stress, depth of cover, entry width, support spacing, and support length were varied. The results showed that the SRM-calculated stability factors were able to satisfactorily capture both the ?weak bed? and ?strong bed? adjustments in the CMRR. The SRM results were found to be well correlated to the ARBS stability factors for the 450 cases considered. Further analysis showed that the SRM accurately captures the effect of bolt length, depth of cover, and entry width on the overall stability of an entry.

Jan 1, 2013

By Vincent A. Scovazzo

The Pennsylvania Joint Coal and Gas Committee Gas Well Pillar Study of 1956 is the bases for well protection pillar design in the US and many other countries. An update was necessary because the well construction common to the gas and coal industries as well as mine configurations, mine depth, and extraction thickness have changed considerably since 1956. As initially envisioned the update would involve a similar empirical study that formed the basis of the initial investigation. However, there are no records of any gas or oil well failures related to coal mining since 1956 when mines followed the initial recommendation, making an empirical study problematic. Thus, the study had to be more analytical, which in return required at least some fundamental research into the behavior of the interaction of coal mining and oil and gas wells. A call to industry about research they have undertaken resulted in obtaining excellent research on the subject from three companies; Alpha Natural Resources, Inc., CONSOL Energy Inc., and Range Resources. These research projects were initially undertaken for internal use and not previously published. John T. Boyd Company reanalyzed these studies and determined how their results would affect protective pillar designs. These research projects pointed to the importance of horizontal movement and shear caused by subsidence and the strength of pillars and their foundations. The importance of geology is important in understanding horizontal shear, ground movement, and floor strength. The failure modes of casing and pipe needed to be understood so the threshold of these movements and stresses could be determined.

Jan 1, 2013

By T. J. McMahon

This Bureau of Mines study describes the development of a large-scale, three-dimensional, finite-element model of a deep-vein Coeur d?Alene District mine. The three-dimensional model was prepared from combined digitized mine maps and generated levels that may also be analyzed as independent two-dimensional models. A comparison of the stress changes and displacements was made following a simulated vein excavation in both the three-dimensional and two-dimensional models. A one-cut excavation was simulated with the two-dimensional model and a multiple-cut excavation was simulated with the three-dimensional model. The compared results from the two analyses are discussed in terms of the inherent differences between the models.

Jan 1, 1989

By Marvin B. Thompson

"The depositional model for major Illinois Basin coalbeds is well documented and defined on a regional scale. The model was a driving force during past exploration for lower sulfur and thicker coal deposits. The most attractive coal reserves were known to lie along the flanks of contemporaneous sandstone filled stream channels and were overlain by thick silty gray shale roof. At various distances away from the channels, the depositional model transitioned to black shale I limestone roof, sulfur content of the coal bed increased, and the coal bed often thinned. Understanding the character of roof rock types associated with this depositional model is essential to predicting ground control factors on both a regional scale, and on resolving roof control problems at the mine-site. Additionally, horizontal stress and overburden depth are significant factors that impact roof rock quality and ground control in Illinois Basin mines.Determining the character of several rock types, and defining the primary horizontal stress direction were crucial to a recent successful project at New Future Mine, located in southern Illinois. An inclined slope was constructed from the Illinois No. 5 Coalbed up to the Illinois No. 6 Coalbed through strata that ranged from extremely weak ""stackrock"" and a weak underclay unit, to a massive sandstone unit. Engineering geology, operations management, and Jennmar technical services personnel teamedup to select and install roof support for each strata transition. The project was completed with no injuries and no roof falls.INTRODUCTIONAbundant published information concerning coal deposition, geographic distribution, quantity, quality, and mining conditions exists for Illinois Basin coal reserves. The State of Illinois, through its State Geological Survey (ISGS), has provided decades of research, record keeping, and service to the coal industry. Other excellent sources of Illinois Basin coal information include the Indiana Geologiq1l Survey and the Kentucky Geological Survey. Past research by the U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) supplemented the work by the geological surveys, especially in the area of horizontal stress and mining hazards. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) continues to produce publications focused on roof control issues common to many coal basins, including the Illinois Basin. Many of the illustrations in this paper originated in ISGS and USBM publications."

Jan 1, 2010

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 Kevin W. Harris

Multiple-seam coal mining is a major issue in underground coal mining that adds additional complexity to the practice of ground control. As reserve exploitation is driven by economics, it is now difficult to mine coal without the existence of previous workings above and/or below the active seam; this is particularly true in the Appalachian coalfields. The frequency in which problematic multiple-seam interactions are now encountered has resulted in significant research regarding the underlying mechanisms of the problems and methods of mitigation. In the last few decades, a great deal has been learned about these interactions and the ability to minimize problems associated with these hazards has greatly advanced, resulting in better economics and improved safety. Minimizing the adverse effects of stress interactions often requires a thorough understanding of site-specific geotechnical parameters and previous mining geometry. This is especially evident in bump-prone ground, where pillar behavior is highly dependent on local conditions. This paper presents a case study in a deep cover, Central Appalachian coal mine where three bump events occurred. Initially, empirical design software was used in an effort to analyze the situation and prevent further instability. The empirical study proved ineffective. A detailed investigation of the bump events using the boundary element software LaModel 3.0 was then performed. This study resulted in a site-specific calibration standard that will be applied in numerical pillar design for the remaining reserve.

Jan 1, 2014

By Sheng Zhang

The compressive strength of coal in Yanlong mine area of China is less than 3 MPa. Basically, it is powdery. The roof and floor rocks are mudstone. Therefore this coal seam is a typical ?three soft? coal seam. Roof bolting cannot be used due to the very soft strata. When the conventional U-steel support was used, roadways deformation exceeded 30% of its original dimensions in some sections one half month after development. The required repair work was huge, seriously affecting the daily mine production. This paper describes how to support the soft coal roadways. The deformation characteristics of soft coal roadway were investigated. The conventional U-steel support is not subjected to uniform load, so the whole supporting structure must be strengthened. In addition, drilling holes in the coal seam can transfer high stress from near the ribs to the deeper parts of the surrounding strata, which is beneficial to the stability of the roadway. This new support method is to combine the strengthened U-steel support with pressure-relieving drill holes, providing an economic and efficient way to support the very soft coal roadways.

Jan 1, 2013

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 Morgan Sears

The LaModel program (Heasley, 1998) is a displacement discontinuity, boundary element model (BEM) for analyzing stresses and displacements in single and multiple-seam coal mines. After the Crandall Canyon mine collapse, the need for better design guidelines for LaModel was observed and a new calibration method for deep cover pillar retreat was developed (Heasley et al., 2010). However, the scope of this initial calibration was limited to single-seam mines deeper than 750 ft. This limited application of the initial calibration method lead directly to the research presented in this paper, which attempts to define appropriate LaModel calibration guidelines for pillar design where shallow cover and/ or multiple-seam mining scenarios are encountered. As part of this research, a database of shallow cover case histories has been developed, and this database is used to help validate the shallow cover calibration method. By adding the shallow cover database to the previous deep cover database, the LaModel calibration method has now been extended to the complete range of mining depths, as well as to multiple-seam cases. With this shallow cover calibration, the utility of the LaModel program continues to increase.

Jan 1, 2013

By Kudret Tutuk, Serkan Saydam, Sungsoon Mo

"This paper presents an overview of the floor heave management at the Glencore Bulga Underground Operations and investigates the contributing factors to the behaviour of the floor. The mine experienced a number of major floor heave events in gateroads on development. As the longwall face approached the roadways, the magnitude of floor heave frequently increased, while new floor heave also developed. Furthermore, severe floor heave events took place along the longwall face. The most observed failure mode was buckling. While regular floor measurements were conducted to better understand the nature of the phenomenon, and various measures were considered to control the deformation of floor, the mining height was increased for the predicted floor heave domains, which facilitated effective management of the floor issues. The experience in the mine indicates that mainly high horizontal stresses with greater depths of cover and certain types of floor lithology configuration are likely to contribute to the failures of floor strata.INTRODUCTIONThe Glencore Bulga Underground is located in the Southwest of Singleton in the Hunter Valley of New South Wales, Australia. Blakefield South, part of Bulga Underground, commenced longwall mining in 2010, extracting coal from the Blakefield seam, while the overlying longwall panels were previously mined from the Whybrow seam. The coal seam ranges from 4.5 m to 8.0 m thick with the mining heights varying from 2.9 m to 3.5 m. The longwall panels are 320 m and 400 m wide and up to 3.5 km long.The mine experienced a wide range of floor issues around longwall panels LW7 and LW8, both 400 m wide. For instance, the concrete floor in the travel road failed and lifted as the longwall retreated in close proximity as can be seen in Figure 1. Figure 2 shows the beam stage loader (BSL) buried into the lifted floor, and Figure 3 shows a timber prop distorted due to the movement of the floor. In addition, severe deformation of the floor along the longwall face impeded the longwall operation, as shown in Figure 4."

Jan 1, 2018

By D. G. Lynch, M. R. Martin, R. J. Coutts

"Broadmeadow Mine is an underground longwall mine located in Central Queensland, Australia. The mine introduced a top coal caving (TCC) longwall face in 2013 but since then has experienced severe convergence events at the start of each panel after 60–70m of retreat, resulting in equipment damage and the longwall almost becoming iron bound. A significant geotechnical monitoring effort during LW10 and LW11 to characterise the caving mechanics and operational changes during LW11 were successful in mitigating the risk posed by these initial convergence events. This paper describes the geotechnical monitoring programme undertaken during LW11, the operational methods used to mitigate these initial convergence events, and the contribution to these events of the TCC technique.A thick sandstone unit close to the extraction roof was likely the cause of the convergence events at the start of each longwall panel. However, stress change monitoring cells, surface extensometers, an inclinometer, and the blockage of holes designed for pre-conditioning using hydraulic fracturing indicated that the convergence events were not caused by the sudden collapse of sandstone bridging across the goaf. Rather, they were caused by the propping action of strong units within the overburden strata. Equipment design modifications were made to allow the longwall to remain operational during the convergence events and an operational strategy was implemented to mitigate convergence in LW11. The initial convergence event was successfully negotiated, and Broadmeadow went on to be the highest producing longwall for CY16 in Australia.INTRODUCTIONBroadmeadow Mine is an underground longwall mine located in Central Queensland, Australia, owned and operated by BHP Mitsubishi Alliance (BMA). The mine is a punch longwall mine using open cut pit access provided by Goonyella/Riverside Mine. Broadmeadow commenced longwall operations in 2005 using a conventional high reach longwall, but later changed to the top coal caving (TCC) method of extraction. Broadmeadow extracts the easterly dipping 5.5–7.5m-thick Goonyella Middle Seam in ranging in depth from 90m to 330m. The coal is washed and blended at the adjacent Goonyella/Riverside open cut mine to produce a premium coking coal product for export."

Jan 1, 2018

By Guorui Feng, Min Zhang, Yi Luo, Jian Yang, Yujiang Zhang, Junwen Bai

"Safe mining of coal seam sandwiched between abandoned upper and lower room-and-pillared mines (ULPM) ·is increasingly becoming the focus of attention in recent years, which is closely related to the damage intensity of the upper and lower interburdens. The #7 seam with ULPM in Baijiazhuang coal mine was selected for this research. According to the mining and geological conditions, the vertical stress and plastic zone distributions were determined first by numerical simulation. Then, a theoretical model based on the elasti-plasticity theory was developed. The stress distribution and failure zone created in the interburden by mining the upper and lower seams were determined. Finally the feasibility of mining #7 seam between the abandoned upper and a lower seam was evaluated. The results show that: (1) the distributions of abutment pressure and plastic zone coincide, both of which can be used to evaluate the failure zone in ULPM. The failure zone penetrates the whole upper interburden, while only parts of the lower interburden fail. (2) the theoretical failure zone coincides with the maximum distribution zone of abutment pressure and plastic zone obtained by numerical simulation: the failure zone height in the lower interburden is less than its thickness, while that in the upper interburden is larger than its thickness. (3) the #7 seam is located in the failure zone created by the upper seam room-and-pillar mining, which leads to well-development fractures and blocky fragments in the roof, thereby it is unstabled. (4) when mining the #7 seam in the interburden, the key is to control the roof strata and proper support measures should be taken timely to ensure safe mining.INTRODUCTIONMany coal mines in China mine the thick, superior and easily mineable resources preferentially, while the thin, inferior and difficult-to-mine resources were abandoned (Chappells and Trentrnann, 2015; Zhenfu, 2012; Xu, et al., 2015; Guorui, 2009). As the results of deficient geological data and shortage of investment capital, the residual coal resources distributes in many mining areas in China.In recent years, many residual coal seams sandwiched between the abandoned upper and lower room-and-pillar mines (ULPM) were explored in Shanxi Province, especially in the mining area of Datang, Xishan and Luan (Figure.1). The reserves of residual coal seams in ULPM are considerable, increasingly becomes the focus of attention among scholars and engineers."

Jan 1, 2016

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 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

By Yvette Heritage

"The risk of fatalities from rib failure is still prevalent in the coal mining industry. This risk has prompted further research to be conducted on rib deformation in order to understand the mechanisms of rib failure, with the long-term objective being to improve rib support design. This paper presents the results of ACARP research project C25057, which investigated the mechanics and drivers of rib failure. The results of rib deformation monitoring at three different mines in Australia provides rib deformation characteristics for overburden depths ranging from 160 m to 530 m. Monitoring includes deformation during development drivage conditions and during the longwall retreat abutment stress environment. The rib deformation monitoring covered three different seams: the Goonyella Middle Seam, Ulan Seam, and Bulli Seam in the Bowen Basin, Western Coalfield, and Southern Coalfield, respectively. The observed mechanisms driving the rib deformation ranged from bedding shear failure along weak claystone bands to vertical shear fractures to kinematic failures driven by shear failure dilation. The variation in mechanisms of rib failure, together with the seemingly consistent method of rib support design, prompts the question: What exactly is the role of rib support?INTRODUCTIONThe current risk of rib fatalities in the coal mining industry has prompted further research into understanding the mechanisms of rib failure. Three Australian mines assisted further research by providing sites for rib deformation studies as part of the Australian Coal Association Research Program (ACARP) project C25057. The mines included in this study were Moranbah North Mine, Ulan West Mine, and Appin Mine. This paper provides key results of the rib deformation monitoring relevant to assessing the mechanisms of rib deformation.The approach of monitoring rib deformation and rib support loads was used to measure and characterise the dynamic rib deformation present in both development and longwall retreat stress environments. The characterisation of rib deformation, together with rock failure modelling, was used to determine the mechanisms for failure within the rib and to assess the interaction of rib support with the failure process. The mechanisms of rock failure are considered an important factor in understanding the drivers for the failure. Consideration of the site-specific failure mechanisms can provide for a more tailored support design."

Jan 1, 2018

By Kazem Oraee-Mirzamani, Nikzad Oraee-Mirzamani, Arash Goodarzi

"Unexpected movement of ground can potentially endanger lives, damage equipment or destroy property. Occupational accidents frequently occur with fatal consequences in developing countries with significant economic dependence on industries such as mining. Therefore, there is increasing need for miners' protection against such hazards. Slope stability and roof support accidents are two of the major causes of fatalities at surface and underground mining operations. According to national codes, employers are obligated to protect workers against accidents; however, these rules fall short of the standards in developed countries. National safety regulations should clearly specify support systems. The International Labor Organization (ILO) prepared two codes of practice, aiming to guide those responsible for improving standards of safety and to provide guidelines for drafting of safety regulations for the coal mine industry and quarry open cast mines. The practical recommendations of these codes in the ground control area have been analysed and the advantages and disadvantages of ILO codes concerning ground control are summarized.INTRODUCTIONTwo million people die every year from work-related accidents and diseases. An estimated 160 million people suffer from work-related diseases, and there are an estimated 270 million fatal and non-fatal work-related accidents per year. In economic terms, the ILO has estimated that 4% of the world's annual GDP is lost as a consequence of occupational diseases and accidents (ILO, 2009).Mining has always been dangerous due to many potential risks such as those associated with using machinery in enclosed spaces, rock falls, blasting operations and explosion of flammable gases, which endanger miners' safety and health. However, it is suggested that implementing new laws along with strict adherence would reduce such risks in the workplace.The severity and frequency of accidents are trending downward in developed countries, where the focus is on large private companies who invest heavily in mechanization and developing economies of scale. But in many parts of the world, particularly in developing countries, minerals are extracted by people working with simple tools and equipment; they work on a smaller scale, are more flexible, and can exploit irregular ore bodies and steep, dipping seams."

Jan 1, 2010

By Jun Lu

The Pittsburgh seam is the most extensively mined coal bed in the Appalachian Basin. Unlike most other prominent coal seams, the Pittsburgh seam typically includes a sequence of immediate roof coals and intervening rock binders (or ?draw slate?), most of which are within mineable horizons. Furthermore, unlike the main bench, the thickness of the overlying roof coals and their intervening rock binders can vary significantly. For instance, in southwestern Pennsylvania, the Pittsburgh seam main bench typically ranges from about 5.0 to 6.0 feet thick with minimal variation over short distances. On the other hand, the Pittsburgh seam roof coals and immediate roof binder typically range from a few inches to several feet, and in certain geologic settings can vary significantly over short distances. Additionally, in some locations, very thick draw slate can totally replace the roof coals. Since the draw slate, which typically consists of claystone or clayladen shale, is relatively weak, the presence of thick and variable draw slate in the roof and rib can significantly affect mine safety and productivity. This paper presents the adverse effect of thick draw slate on a 1500-foot-wide longwall face in a southwestern Pennsylvania coal mine. Mapping of the thick draw slate, numerical models which illustrate stress distribution and failure associated with thick draw slate, and operational adjustments instituted to mitigate the negative impact of thick draw slate will be discussed in detail.

Jan 1, 2013

By C. A. Vining, J. R. Nopola

"Evaporites, such as salt and potash, pose unique problems to ground-support designs not encountered in other rock types. Evaporites are subject to continual creep and no amount of ground support can successfully arrest this process. Common ground-support techniques that are useful for most rock types may reduce the effective life of bolts in evaporite mines and can create unseen hazards. A different approach to ground support must be applied to provide long-term support in areas where high creep rates are present. The goal of effective ground-support designs in these situations is not to contain the rock and prevent it from moving; rather, the ground-support design must be able to move along with the rock and contain any fully detached slabs until additional remediation measures can be undertaken. The most appropriate ground-support designs will consider both the expected movement of the rock and the duration that the area needs to remain accessible.INTRODUCTIONEvaporites, such as salt and potash, pose unique problems to ground-support designs not encountered in other rock types. The factors that must be considered in design stem from the deformation behavior of salt, which can fail in a brittle manner, akin to most rocks, but can also deform in a slow, ductile manner, resembling the stretching and elongation of steel. The deformation behavior of salt has been well established in technical circles where it has been studied for decades (Hardy and Langer, 1984). Much of the research in salt mechanics is related to repository science, specifically at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in southwest New Mexico. RESPEC has been continually involved in the WIPP from the initial design considerations (Gnirk, Grams, and Zeller, 1977) to the current day (Keffeler, 2016) and has been able to leverage cutting-edge research of salt mechanics into practical solutions for mining operators. While a detailed description of salt mechanics is not provided in this document, Fossum and Fredrich (2002) include a fine overview of salt mechanics. The following list paraphrases their chapter on basic facts about salt to provide some context for the reader unfamiliar with salt mechanics:"

Jan 1, 2018

By Ben Fahrman

The classical approach to engineering design involves the purely deterministic calculation of the factor of safety, the ratio of strength to stress. The factor of safety is an easy calculation to perform in many circumstances, and it is very easy to interpret the results. The simplicity of the method is both a strength and a weakness. The results of the deterministic factor of safety calculation are simple to determine and interpret, but they have no ability to account for the uncertainty present in the inputs or outputs. Uncertainty is prevalent in geotechnical engineering applications. This uncertainty can stem from spatial variability, poor sampling, a dynamically changing environment, etc. Probability analyses allow input parameters to take the form of a distribution rather than a single value, making them uniquely equipped to handle the uncertainty inherent in geotechnical engineering design considerations. A stochastic approach also has the benefit of providing results as a probability of failure, which is more meaningful than a factor of safety. Though stochastic modeling is becoming more common in many geotechnical applications, it is still not widely used for coal pillar design. The objectives of this study are to justify the concept of using a stochastic approach to coal pillar design and to compare the results of a simple stochastic analysis to those of standard industry practice. A simple synthetic study was performed to compare the results of a probabilistic analysis of coal pillar design to the results obtained from running ARMPS, which is published by NIOSH. Normal distributions were assigned to each input parameter that is required to determine the factor of safety of a single coal pillar. The probability of failure resulting from the synthetic study was found to be more conservative than the ARMPS stability factor. A probabilistic approach to coal pillar design is discussed in comparison to the traditional deterministic approach. The greatest strengths of the probabilistic approach were determined to be the effective handling of uncertainty and the increased meaning of the inputs and outputs inherent to a probabilistic approach.

Jan 1, 2013

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