Search Documents

By Bill A. Kyslinger

"In underground mining, machine design is predominantly dictated by mine conditions and individual customer desires. In partnership with Foresight Energy, J. H. Fletcher & Company was tasked to design and manufacture a new roof bolting machine with six independent drilling apparatus on board capable of drilling and bolting the roof and ribs with material handling. This is the first Fletcher® six-head machine to be designed and built for the mines in the United States. The machine is intended to work in the Illinois Coal Basin.The objective was to produce a machine capable of drilling and installing six bolts simultaneously with a limited number of operators. The goal of the mine is to decrease the time to bolt a cut to improve the safety level of the current roof bolting method, improve efficiency and to improve the bottom line cost of entry development. The customer wanted four mast feed drills at the front of the machine dedicated to installing roof bolts and then another two mast feed drills behind them dedicated to rib bolts. This dictated the requirement of latched controls, which would allow the operator to start drilling one hole and then latch the controls to be able to move on to the next. To accomplish this, we developed a unique hydraulic latch circuit to maintain operator safety and compliance. Guarding was added to prevent an operator from coming into accidental contact with a latched drill.The result of the design is a machine with a single platform and six independent masts with drillheads: four masts strictly for drilling and installing roof bolts on the front of the platform and two masts on the back of the platform for rib bolts. The feed and rotation controls at each operator's station include a latch control for drilling. The latch control will allow the operator to lock in the feed and rotation once the hole has been collared, allowing the operator to move on to the next hole. The rear of the machine is equipped with material handling. There are two material pods with winch controls as well as a mesh rack that includes mesh lift, mesh tilt, and mesh sump.The six-head roof bolter allows fewer operators to drill and install roof and rib bolts, which in tum lowers the miners' roof exposure per cut. This design reduces the operator's exposure from the inherent pinch points and rotary hazards once he has engaged the latch drilling. Therefore, the machine will help to decrease the time to bolt a cut, improving productivity while enhancing the ability to operate the machine safely."

Jan 1, 2016

By Kewal K. Kohli, Stefanie Self

"Three cases of surface subsidence investigated over abandoned coal mines after flooding in one case and dcwatering in two cases are presented in this paper. Mining was conducted by the room and- pillar method at all the mines leaving stable pillars. This paper will discuss the background chain of events and the likely causes of the pillar failure resulting in surface subsidence.CASE NO.1BackgroundThe Pittsburgh scam was mined in 1960 by the room-and- pillar method, leaving pillars (Figure I) through Mine A. located in Monongalia County. West Virginia.The mining height in U1is area was 1.83 m (6 ft) with an average mining depth of 140 m (460 ft). The mining recovery was 62% and the safety factor of the pillars was calculated at 1.15 using the Bieniawski ( 1984) fom1ula. For stable pillar design. a 1.5 safety factor is recommended. A 1.15 safety factor is considered marginal. Pumping continued after the mine was shut down in 1960 to prevent water seeping into an adjoining mine owned by the same company. The pumping ceased on December 12. 2003, and the mine was allowed to flood. The water level rose about 17 m (55 ft) by August 3 1, 2004, based on observations in a nearby borehole. On September 3, 2004 surface subsidence occurred above this area causing damage 10 a residence (Figure 2).Summary of InvestigationThe floor of the Pittsburgh coal scam played a strong role in the pillar failure. In this area, the immediate floor of the Pittsburgh seam consists of about two feet of fireclay. Extensive damage to the surface house was an indication that a major collapse below the surface had occurred. The pillars supporting the overlying strata were evaluated to find the cause of their failure. The pillars in the Pittsburgh seam (sec Figure I) had a marginal safety factor of 1.15 before flooding and were stable for 26 years. Once the mine was flooded the water level in the Pittsburgh seam rose by 17 m (55 ft). Shortly thereafter the fireclay in the floor weakened, resulting in several pillars punching into the floor unevenly making the immediate roof unstable. The overburden strata supported by these pillars also subsided do"" n into the mine, causing damage to several house on the surface."

Jan 1, 2010

By Madan M. Singh

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

Jan 1, 1981

By 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 Jessica M. Wempen

Differential Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (DInSAR), a satellite-based remote sensing technique, has been demonstrated as a potentially practical method for measuring mining induced surface subsidence. Unlike traditional methods of subsidence monitoring, DInSAR has the capacity to generate subsidence data on a regional mining scale with a relatively high data density. Using DInSAR to evaluate subsidence over large regions with relatively long time scales has the potential to help quantify the impact of subsidence in the mining region, and provide a means for validating whole-mine geotechnical models. In this study, nine pairs of interferometric data from the Japanese Advance Land Observing Satellite (ALOS) were processed using DInSAR to generate displacement maps for a group of trona mines in southwest Wyoming. The data cover a time span from December 2007 to March 2011. The maximum subsidence for one of the mines totaled 1.3 meters for this period. Cumulative DInSAR displacement maps show the development of subsidence over time. In this mining region, surface subsidence is generated primarily by extraction of trona using retreating longwalls. Additionally, trona is extracted by solution mining, which also generates measurable surface subsidence.

Jan 1, 2014

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 Zach G. Agioutantis

The Illinois Basin has an extensive history with the use of mechanized longwall mining dating back to the early 1970?s. In recent times, technological advances have resulted in increased panel widths from 800 feet to over 1400 feet and daily panel advance rates have also increased significant l. The prediction and control of subsidence and surface deformation due to underground mining are important considerations in the permitting, planning, and monitoring of these coal mining operations. The prediction of mining-induced ground movements using the influence function method is a mature technology, well utilized in the Illinois basin, and widely used by researchers and planning engineers around the world. This paper utilizes subsidence data, recently measured in longwall operations in Illinois, to develop an updated ground movement prediction capability implemented by the Surface Deformation Prediction System (SDPS) software package.

Jan 1, 2014

The objective of extensive underground experimentation on three longwall coal faces was to improve the stability of mechanised longwall faces through investigation of the relations between support resistance and convergence and resultant deformation of roof and face strata. In particular the influence of high setting and yield pressures on several strata and support parameters was studied in great depth. Increased setting pressures resulting in an increase in setting load densities from 0.15 MN/m2 to O.45 MN/m2 were shown to reduce convergence, face spalling roof flaking, lateral movement of roof and floor, extrusion of the face wall and progressive failure of the coal wall ahead of the face. This was shown to result mainly from the change in roof strata deformation from a wedge shaped compression zone with tension at the face edge to an even beam shaped compression zone over the face area. Debris thickness above the support canopy and below the base was observed to be the one of the most variable parameters which influenced the support characteristics particularly the rate of load acceptance by supports and the roof to floor convergence. A setting load density of 0.4 MN/m2 to 0.5 MN/m2 was found to be optimum under soft to moderately strong sandstone roofs. The authors demonstrated that use of guaranteed set valves with powered supports contribute to good strata control, reduce face down-time and increase face productivity.

Jan 1, 1984

By Ruixiang Gu

The de-confinement mechanisms of unstable failures as they occur in deep coal mining conditions are investigated using a distinct element numerical modeling code. The Mohr-Coulomb and continuously yielding joint constitutive models were used to study the compressive failures in coal and slip behavior of coal-rock interfaces, respectively. The effect of strength variations within interfaces on the failure mechanism of mining faces is also studied. The stability of interface slip failures was found to have a significant role in the failure mode of coal sidewalls. When the interfaces experience stable slip failures, the sidewalls are more likely to fail in a stable manner. With occurrence of unstable slips at interfaces, unstable compressive failures of sidewalls are triggered. The numerical modeling results support the proposed de-confinement mechanisms and emphasize the importance of including the coal-rock interface behavior in the analyses of unstable compressive failures. The significance of the proposed mechanisms in underground mining conditions is that rock discontinuities with large cohesion drop can become potential factors, inducing unstable compressive failures at ribs and mining faces. Therefore, the de-confinement mechanisms should be taken into consideration in mine design.

Jan 1, 2014

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

The U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) has developed the coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) to aid in ground control. This paper describes the application of the CMRR at four coal mines operated by a major U.S. coal company. The mines are widely separated geographically, and cover a wide variety of geologic conditions and mining methods. The study found that the CMRR was a useful predictor of roof performance. In mines where the CMRR varied, and other parameters held constant, roof falls were associated with low CMRR values. Important similarities in roof performance were found in mines with similar CMRR values, despite radically different geologic environments. The analyses also indicated that statistics can be used to evaluate ground control performance. For these mines, a "roof fall probability" can be estimated from the CMRR and the intersection span. A spreadsheet program has been developed to facilitate treatment of CMRR data, and it is briefly describe

Jan 1, 1994

By Robert C. Speck

Floor heave or deformation of the mine floor into the mine opening is a problem which has plagued coal mines in this country and others. In mining areas where room and pillar mining is practiced, floor heave generally occurs when the stress applied to the floor material by a coal pillar exceeds the bearing capacity of the floor strata. When the floor strata beneath the coal pillar fail, the pillar moves downward and displaces the material under it. This material, in turn, moves outward and upward into the mine opening (Figure 1). As the underlying materials fail, the load supported by the coal pillar may be transferred to adjacent pillars. If these are marginally stable, they too may become overloaded and push into the floor. Thus, floor heave can spread through a large portion of the mine in a progressive manner. As the pillars push into the floor, differential movement and flexure of the roof strata may cause them to weaken and fail, resulting in subsidence of the ground surface above the mine. This paper describes the problem as it was manifested in the Zeigler Coal Company No. 5 and Murdock room and pillar coal mines near Murdock, Illinois, and reports the results of a U. S. Bureau of Mines- sponsored study conducted by the University of Missouri-Rolla. During the course of the study, floor heave in the two mines hindered the transportation of men, machines, and coal to and from the working mine-face, interrupted ventilation plans, drastically increased roadway maintenance costs, intensified safety and strata control problems, destroyed large pieces of equipment, and, several times, pre- vented access to otherwise minable coal resources. The ultimate objective of the study was to develop one or more simple procedures to allow detection of a potential floor heave problem during the exploration phase of mine design--before initiation of production mining.

Jan 1, 1981

By Zach Agioutantis, Christopher Mark

"Thirty years ago, the Analysis of Longwall Pillar Stability (ALPS) inaugurated a new era in coal pillar design. ALPS was the first empirical pillar design technique to consider the abutment loads that arise from full extraction, and the first to be calibrated using an extensive database of mining case histories. ALPS was followed by the Analysis of Retreat Mining Stability (ARMPS) and the Analysis of Multiple Seam Stability (AMSS). These methods incorporated other innovations, including the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR), the Mark-Bieniawski pillar strength formula, and the pressure arch loading model. They also built upon ever larger case history databases and employed more sophisticated statistical methods.Today, these empirical methods are used in nearly every underground coal mine in the US. However, the piecemeal manner in which these methods have evolved resulted in some weaknesses. For example, in certain situations, it may not be obvious which program is the best to use. Other times the results from the different programs are not entirely consistent with each other. The programs have also not been updated for several years, and some changes were necessary to keep pace with new developments in mining practice.The Analysis of Coal Pillar Stability (ACPS) now integrates all three of the older software packages into a single pillar design framework. ACPS also incorporates the latest research findings in the field of pillar design, including an expanded multiple seam case history data base and a new method to evaluate room and pillar panels containing multiple rows of pillars left in place during pillar recovery. ACPS also includes updated guidance and warnings for users and features upgraded help files and graphics.INTRODUCTIONPillar design is one of the fundamental elements of mining engineering. Pillars are necessary to control the great weight of the overburden during all phases of underground mining. Without stable pillars, ground control is impossible."

Jan 1, 2018

By Michael Gauna, Christopher Mark

"Underground coal mining in the U.S. is conducted in numerous regions where previous workings exist above and/or below an actively mined seam. Miners know that overlying or underlying fully extracted coal areas, also known as gob regions, can result in abutment stresses that affect the active mining. If there was no full extraction, and the past mining consists entirely of intact pillars, the stresses on the active seam are usually minimal. However, experience has shown that in some situations there has been sufficient yielding in overlying or underlying pillar systems to cause stress transfer to the adjoining larger pillars or barriers, which in turn, transfer significant stresses onto the workings of the active seam. In other words, the overlying or underlying pillar system behaves as a ""pseudo gob."" The presence of a pseudo gob is often unexpected, and the consequences can be severe. This paper presents several case histories, summarized briefly below, that illustrate pseudo gob phenomenon:• Pillar rib degradation at a West Virginia mine at 1100-foot (335 m) depth that contributed to a rib roll fatality.• Pillar rib deterioration at a Western Kentucky mine at 570-foot (175 m) depth that required pillar size adjustment and installation of supplemental bolting.• Roof deterioration at an eastern Kentucky mine at 1300- foot ( 400 m) depth that stopped mine advance and required redirecting the section development.• Coal burst on development at an eastern Kentucky mine at 1700-foot (520 m) depth that had no nearby pillar recovery.• Coal burst on development at a West Virginia mine at the relatively shallow depth of 1100 feet (335 m) that also had no nearby pillar recovery.The paper provides guidance so that when an operation encounters a potential pseudo gob stress interaction the hazard can be mitigated based on an understanding of the mechanism encountered.INTRODUCTIONThe U.S. underground coal mining industry has conducted mining in multiple seam environments, where the active mining has underlying or overlying old workings at varying interburden distances, throughout its history. Often no serious consequences arise from the multiple seam mining. However, sometime mines have been confronted with hazards from underlying or overlying workings that include localized roof and rib failure, pillar system failures through propagating roof falls and floor heave, and also pillar bursts."

Jan 1, 2016

By Ben Mirabile, Alan Campoli, Rodney Poland

"The majority of U.S. underground coal mines use some form of cable bolt as supplemental support to a primary roof bolting system. Many coal operators employ the high load capacity of non-tensioned cable bolts, cable roof trusses, or solid bar trusses in an attempt to suspend the primary bolted horizon to overlying strata. However, in cases where many discontinuities exist in the roof strata or where pre-existing fractures are present, these passive supplemental support systems often cannot adequately control roof deflection. This paper examines the application of tensioned cable systems to minimize roof deflection in very laminated and fractured strata. Three underground case studies are presented to demonstrate the application of tensioned cable bolts. The first case study involves the rehabilitation of a longwall head gate in the Eagle Seam with highly laminated and fractured sandstone. The second case study examines the recovery of a longwall face in the Alma Seam. The final case study addresses rehabilitation of a longwall head gate in the Pittsburgh No. 8 Seam that was developed in a sandstone channel margin area and subjected to horizontal stress concentration.INTRODUCTIONDuring the previous decade, Jennmar Corporation has recognized coal operators' increasing interest in tensioned cable bolts. The majority of these tensioned cable bolt systems have been applied in adverse roof conditions including broken ground, high horizontal stress areas, and highly laminated roof strata. In most cases, qualitative data on roof conditions after application of tensioned cable bolt support indicate successful implementation of these systems. The qualitative evidence suggests that the combination of high load' capacity and applied tension provides superior supplemental roof support in adverse roof conditions. This research aims to quantify the effects of applied tension to cable bolts. This paper will review the types and installation of tensioned cable bolt systems, present initial laboratory test data, discuss successful case studies, and propose an instrumentation system for quantification of tensioned cable bolt performance."

Jan 1, 2010

By Kanaan Hanna

Abandoned mines pose a serious threat to public health and safety, as well as the environment. When active workings approach old mine workings, miners could encounter significant hazards. Additionally, the presence of mined-out areas or voids underlying residential/commercial properties, transportation, and infrastructure systems can cause subsidence issues ranging from differential settlements and sinkholes to catastrophic collapse. All these features can result in adverse impacts in terms of cost and public safety. Traditionally, mine void detection and related engineering investigations for mine subsidence risk assessment and mitigation have been greatly dependent on systematic drilling and grouting backfill programs. The unknown location and condition of abandoned underground mines represent significant challenges to geologists and engineers in accurately evaluating subsidence hazards and developing appropriate mitigation measures. A comprehensive, multi-phase mine subsidence investigation was conducted at an abandoned western U.S. mine site. The mine operated in an approximately 8-ft (2.4-m) -thick coal seam using room-and-pillar extraction from 1919 to 1922. The mine lies at depths ranging from 50 to 100 ft (15 to 30 m), and it is overlain by critical pipeline and utility corridors. Any future subsidence/ sinkhole that occurs beneath or adjacent to the corridors could pose a significant threat, specifically to the structural integrity of the pipeline corridor. Therefore, the engineering geophysical investigation was initiated to determine the potential subsidence risk. This paper describes a recent success achieved by using integrated engineering geophysics in subsidence risk evaluation. A summary of significant results with emphasis on subsurface characterization, mine workings and voids delineation, modeling analysis, and high risk zones identification and mitigation strategy is presented.

Jan 1, 2011

By Brian E. Perrine

Underground mining requires a variety of specialized equipment. With ever-changing mining conditions and methods, some mines have had to resort to purchasing existing industrial equipment and adapting it for underground use. Since this equipment is not made for underground mining or their specific task, the result is often lost time, money, and sometimes an unsafe working condition. One such application is the setting of a CAN. A CAN is a type of cylindrical secondary roof support made from a cement composite and encased in steel. The CAN has become popular because of its simple one-piece design that can handle heaving and sagging better than other available designs. ?Because of this exceptional ability to sustain load through extended convergence and displacement, the CAN is one of the most robust and stable standing supports in use today.?It also promotes better air flow due to the size and shape of the CAN. CAN size and weight have increased over time to handle more difficult mining conditions. Significant down time and inefficiencies with existing CAN setting machines at Twentymile Coal were directly due to the item in use not being designed to be task-specific. They were undersized with very limited movement. The miners had to take extra steps and precautions when setting CANs. Maintenance delays were significant. Twentymile Coal Company realized that they required a safer, more reliable and more efficient machine to handle and set CANs, and looked for a partner to develop a new design-specific machine. They worked jointly with J.H. Fletcher® engineering and sales to design and manufacture a machine specifically made for setting CANs. The objective was to produce a machine that would handle the conditions and methods that the mine required for setting CANs during longwall retreat. The resulting design had to be safe, stable, have a wide range of motion, be ergonomic, simple to use, and easy to maintain. The machine also had to improve efficiency. The resulting machine has been operating for approximately one year at Twentymile Coal and has been proven to improve safety, reliability, and efficiency. In conclusion, with the task-specific CAN Manipulator, the mine is able to better plan daily tasks with the knowledge that the machine will be available throughout a shift, and the employees will be safer because of the machine?s ergonomics, stability and safety. This has resulted in better productivity and a safer environment.

Jan 1, 2013

By C. P. Mangelsdorf

The success of the Birmingham roof truss (Figure 1) in supporting some difficult roof conditions, particularly in the Illinois coal basin, has given impetus to the development of a number of alternate schemes. These schemes attempt to alleviate two major problems with the Birming-ham truss, namely, the time required for installation and the cost of material. Because of the difficulty of drilling angled holes and the number of different pieces of hardware which must be handled manually, most operators have been unable to install Birmingham trusses in the cycle and have had to schedule truss crews during the maintenance shift or whenever they would not impede production. Due to this delay the truss has traditionally been viewed as a supplemental form of roof support. In fact, the truss might qualify as primary support and replace at least two bolts if it could he installed in the cycle (and MSHA would accept it as an alternate in the roof plan.) [ ] Figure 1. The Birmingham truss. Two attempts to deal with the first difficulty have sought to streamline the truss hardware while preserving the essential character of the Birmingham truss. One of these, by Peabody Coal, is reported elsewhere in these proceedings by C. Bollier. Another is a contract issued by the Bureau of Mines to Bendix Corporation for the development of a machine, particularly suited for use in low coal, which will automate many of the operations currently executed manually. This machine is expected to be ready for field testing by fall of 1982. Once in place, a truss installed by either of these schemes will interact with the roof in the same way as a conventional Birmingham truss. An alternate approach has been proposed by several different manufacturers independently. Although the hardware details differ. the essential idea consists of two angle bolts, the heads of which are connected by a horizontal chord tightened to some pre-determined tension. Figure 2 shows the generalized concept and does not depict any one of the four systems proposed. The advantage of this scheme is that the angle bolts can be installed and tightened in the cycle, and as bolts, immediately satisfy the roof control plan. The horizontal chord can be added later to achieve almost any initial desired roof loading, the limits of which are defined below this scheme is referred to here as the angle-bolt truss. Because of a fundamental difference in the way in which load is transferred between chords, this design does not interact with the roof under subsequent loading in the same manner as a Birmingham truss. The purpose of this paper is to examine this fundamental difference and its consequences. [ ]

Jan 1, 1982

By Jay Hilary Kelley

This paper proposes a modification of longwall roof support to meet new difficult mining conditions that are anticipated in the future. A gob canopy is a movable appendage attached on the rear of a longwall shield to counterbalance the troublesome forward downward force couple (FDFC). The gob canopy can be swung in both vertical and horizontal directions, powered by hydraulic cylinders. Several functions and applications are de- scribed

Jan 1, 1997

By Ke Yang

"Engineering practices have shown that the skip-fault longwall mining is frequently used when faults with offsets larger than 1 Om are present. Since the skip-fault longwall mining not only reduces the recovery rate of coal reserves, but also increases the cost due to developing another setup room on the opposite side of the fault and moves the longwall into it. The coal pillar so created induced residual stress in and thus affects the safe mining of adjacent coal seams. In order to investigate the influence on panel layout and retreat by a l 6.5m offset normal fault, the similar material simulation model was constructed based on the geological and engineering conditions of No.13 coal seam in the western district of Liuzhuang coal mine employing the down-dip longwall mining. The characteristics of deformation, movement and failure of the overlying strata and abutment pressure when the face cut through the hangingwall and footwall of a normal fault were obtained. There were significant differences between the hangingwall and footwall as conformed by the equilibrium structure model. The results showed that superposition of the tectonic stress from a normal fault of large offset and that induced by mining is one of key factors that lead the severe pressure difficult to control during panel retreating from the hangingwall to footwall. Accordingly, the technical solutions for a fully mechanized mining face directly cutting through the fault are presented and optimized, and the applications of the technical solution in Panels 171301and171303 of Liuzhuang mine enabled them to complete the mining safely and efficiently. INTRODUCTIONFaults have been one of the important technical factors in underground coal mining l1-2i. Engineering practice has shown that the methods of mining through the faults depend on the seam thickness, seam dip angle, offset of fault throw, equipment height, rock strength, and advancing direction l3-5l. In the fully-mechanized longwall mining, the face normally proceeds to cut through the fault directly if the offset of the fault less than 5m, and to skip Uump) the fault if the offset is larger than 5m. In the former case, the most important problem is to efficiently control or avoid roof fall accidents (i.e., crushing, falling, pushover, and rock burst). In the latter case, the most important problem is very expensive to drive a new setup room and move the face equipment to it. The skipped coal pillar may poses problems for mining in adjacent seams."

Jan 1, 2016