Search Documents

By Anthony L. Reynolds, Clifford J. Wren

"The adoption of a significant pile testing regime, the use of Eurocode 7 as the design standard, the development of lean construction techniques, and lateral thinking in overcoming some considerable construction challenges allowed Stent Foundations to construct the foundations for the new Wembley Stadium, London, on time and within budget. In addition to the piling works for the main stadium, and after significant design development, a large number of extra piles were required to raise the new iconic roof Arch to its final position some 133 metres above the ground. A 1,400m long contiguous bored pile wall was also constructed to allow for excavation and formation of the new pitch. INTRODUCTIONHjstorjcal lntrodyctionWembley Stadium is the 'home of English football'. As long ago as the 1880's, Wembley Park leisure grounds had football pitches and running tracks.In 1918 the British Government began planning a British Empire Exhibition with a stadium as its centrepiece. The Exhibition area covered 219 acres and the area on which a former abandoned tower called Watkins Folly had stood was chosen as the site for the new stadium (http://www.wembleystadium.com).The Empire Stadium, as it was originally known, was designed by architects Sir John Simpson and Maxwell Ayerton and the engineer Sir Owen Williams. It took just 300 days to complete at a cost of £750,000 ($1.4m), and was built using 25,000 tons of ferro concrete, 1,000 tons of steel, and over half a million rivets.The Empire Exhibition was a remarkable event, containing fountains, lakes, gardens, and many pavilions, each representing the architectural style of the countries exhibiting. It was opened on 23rd April 1924 and the final attendance was over 27 million, with 4.5 million admissions to the Empire Stadium alone."

Jan 1, 2005

By D. P. Nicholson

The current phase of office development at Canary Wharf in the London Docklands includes twelve multi-storey buildings varying from eighteen to forty stories in height. The area of Canary Wharf South comprises five multi-storey buildings with low level in fill podium and garden areas. Three of these multi-storey buildings have "pile-cap" designs where the entire building load is applied to the piles. The remaining two buildings have "piled-raft" designs where allowance is made in the design for part of the building load to be transferred to the raft formation. Using a piled-raft design approach has enabled savings to be made on the number of piles used below the raft. This paper describes the calibration analysis undertaken to validate the design method. The ground conditions at the Canary Wharf site are typically fill and recent gravel deposits over the overconsolidated clay and sand of the Lambeth Group. Below these strata is the Thanet Sand. The Lambeth Group provided the founding layer for the raft and contributed to the pile shaft resistance. The Thanet Sand stratum provided the bearing layer for the 1.5m diameter base grouted bored piles. The piled-raft design required an assessment of the building load transfer through the raft to the formation layer. This load transfer led to significant increases in effective stress in the soil below the raft and thence a corresponding increased the capacity of the piles. This interaction of the raft with the prepared formation contributed to between 27% and 45% increase in total vertical load carrying capacity of the piled-raft substructure compared with the pile-cap design method. The development of the piled-raft design was carried out in three main phases: ? Development of the approach and validation analyses. ? Design work on various schemes resulting in detailed design packages. ? Validation analyses using full 3D finite element analysis (presented herein). The validation of the piled-raft design approach was initially carried out against published case histories for piled-raft interaction. To improve on the validation work a full 3D finite element analysis of a simplified pile raft and superstructure (which contributes stiffness to the raft) was undertaken; the analysis included only a quarter of the structure due to assumed symmetry of the structure and vertical loading. This 3D validation analysis is presented herein. The analysis was carried out using the Oasys LS-DYNA finite element program. Prior to carrying out the analysis of the piled-raft an initial finite element analysis was carried out to back analyse a fully instrumented field pile test providing accurate modelling of a single pile performance. This back analysis allowed confidence in the soil parameters used in the 3D model; comparisons of shaft and base resistances between the pile test and the FE model calculations for the single pile are presented. The parameters provided in this work were then carried into the full 3D model of the piled-raft. The 3D model of the piled-raft structure included 18 piles (12 full piles and 6 half piles on an axis of symmetry of the model).

Jan 1, 2002

By V. A. Sernov

"One of the ways to increase the bearing capacity of a piled foundation is to take into account soil resistance in the base of the raft. Piled raft is similar to shallow foundation and can transfer significant part of the load into the base. It allows reducing number of piles in the foundation or shortening their length. As a result building terms and foundation costs reduce considerably. However, nowadays in Belarus there is no reliable and suitable in design practice methods of calculation of piled-raft foundations. In order to devise such methods we have analyzed the results of piled foundation tests fulfilled by various authors up to date and have carried out series of field and laboratory investigations in Minsk. The most important results of the investigations are provided in the article. Methods of analysis of piled-raft foundations are described.INTRODUCTIONPile foundations of late years are used extensively in connection with the increased number of storeys and load increment on the soil. Often pile foundations are applied in comparative favorable ground conditions at the surface of the base. In such cases the increase of the bearing capacity of foundations and the reduction of construction cost are questions of primary importance for designers. One of the ways to increase the bearing capacity of a piled foundation is to take into account soil resistance in the base of the raft. Piled raft is similar to shallow foundation and can transfer significant part of the load into the base. It allows reducing number of piles in the foundation or shortening their length. As a result, building terms and foundation costs are reduced considerably. However, nowadays there is no reliable and suitable in design practice methods of calculation pile foundations with bearing rafts. In order to devise such methods we have analyzed the results of piled foundation tests fulfilled by various authors up to date and have carried out series of laboratory and field investigations.Long before the constitution of the first piled-raft foundations in the Soviet Union there were attempts to consider soil resistance in the basis of isolated and strip grillages. Such bases can be considered as separate fragments of the piled-raft foundation. Prof. A. A. Bartolomey had tested more than 70 pile foundations of natural size in different ground conditions. The length of piles was 3 12 m (?????????? 1995). The observed results show that the raft carries about 10 12% of the total load applied when length of piles is over 9 m and space between piles is a=3d. Bearing capacity of the raft is about 35 40% when the length of piles is 5 8 m and a=6d. Prof. Golubkov has tested 2 prismatic piles (cross section: 350x350 mm, L=3800 m) and 2 pyramidal piles (cross section: head - 600x600 mm, foot – 100x100 mm, L=3000 m). One of the piles was tested with a raft and the other one without a raft. Significant influence of the raft on total bearing capacity was determined, the more the settlement was the more it influenced on the raft. Bearing capacity of the raft was 27,5% in foundation with prismatic pile and 42% with pyramidal pile (???????? et al. 1971)."

Jan 1, 2016

By G. W. Plant

This paper describes the design philosophy and construction details of piles between 25m and 32m deep to support 160m high and 110m base diameter cooling rowers for a major power station. It is sited on deep expansive soil where a vast plantation of Eucalypts had been felled. The depressed water table is expected to rise, leading to swell of the soil and uplift forces on the piles. These forces, combined with the complex loading from the cooling towers, led to design tensile loads up to 20MN (2 000 tons) per pile. When competent stable material was present hand excavated underreams 3m in diameter were constructed for the piles sup-porting the shells. However, in some areas it was not possible to form an effective underream and an innovative solution was sought. This comprised unstressed dowels in the underlying sandstone which were formed by percussion drilling through void formers cast into the piles.

Jan 1, 2010

By K. Y. C. Chung

A case study on foundation engineering through organic soils is presented. Located along the west shore of the Hudson River, site soils consist of random brick fill over a thick layer of peat and organic silts or clays. The organic layer is underlain by medium dense to dense sand with varying amounts of silt. Strong artesian pressures were measured in the sand. A pile foundation system was selected to support all structures. To avoid periodic flooding, new fill must be placed on the existing fill. Large total and differential settlements will occur due to consolidation and secondary compression of the organic soils. This settlement will reduce the allowable pile capacity due to the large negative skin friction in the organic layer; and will necessitate long-term maintenance of the final grade elevation. Pile load tests were performed to determine the allowable compression and uplift capacities, long-term capacities and pile driving criteria.

Jan 1, 2010

By Sanjay Gupta, Sorabh Gupta, Ravi Sundaram, Abraham Varghese

"Geotechnical investigation for the Kochi Metro revealed a critical section of the Viaduct near Ernakulam Junction Railway Station. Four piers, located over a 220 m stretch, were passing through an area with substantial thickness of soft clay. The scope of the geotechnical investigation included two boreholes and a static cone penetration test at each pier location. In the boreholes, field vane shear test was conducted at different depths in addition to the routine SPT. The design of heavily loaded piles in such strata is a challenge due to the liquefaction of the shallow sands and negative skin friction / down-drag in the soft under-consolidated clay. Bored cast-in-situ piles of 1500 mm diameter extending to 50-60 m depth were used to carry 500-600 tonnes load.INTRODUCTIONThe first phase of the rapid transit system at Kochi, Kerala (See Fig. 1) whose elevated route spans from Aluva to Thripunithura covers a total distance of about 25 kilometers. One of the more critical sections of the viaduct exists near the Ernakulam Junction Railway station where the alignment takes a sharp curve to move towards Vyttila, crossing the railway tracks and running partially over the approach of South over-bridge.In this section, four piers located on either side of the railway tracks near the Route Relay Cabin of Ernakulam Junction Railway Station pass through an area with substantial thickness of soft underconsolidated clay.The alignment is geotechincally challenging due to the presence of loose liquefiable sand and soft underconsolidated and sensitive clay.Initial investigations by the owner based on limited boreholes only yielded conservative and inconclusive pile capacities. For a thorough understanding of the soil behaviour, a detailed geotechnical investigation was carried out to assess the engineering behaviour of the soil strata.The scope of the geotechnical investigation included two boreholes and a static cone penetration test at each pier location. In the boreholes, field vane shear tests were conducted at different depths in addition to the routine SPT."

Jan 1, 2015

By David A. Hart, Barry P. Osborn, Richard J. Totty, Ana T. Carvalho, Max B. Elliott

This paper addresses the experience designing and installing bored piles for the King’s Cross area. This includes continuous flight auger and rotary bored piles, with a range of diameters between 600 mm and 1200 mm, reaching a maximum depth of 56 m below ground level. Existing Network Rail Thameslink twin bored running tunnels are located directly beneath the subject plots. These tunnels have an external diameter of 6.6 m and the crowns of the tunnels are very shallow, in some cases just 10 m below the existing ground level. Some plots needed piles to be installed in close proximity to the tunnels, which required additional control measures and contingency plans. Pile verticality was monitored as the tip of each pile advanced and in-tunnel monitoring readings were verified and are presented. Lessons learned from designing, installing and testing the piles and monitoring the tunnels are addressed in this paper.

May 1, 2022

Jan 1, 1991

Jan 1, 1994

Jan 1, 1989

By Rudolph P. Frizzi

"Abstract Pile design for building structures in the United States is typically performed by: 1) investigating and assigning engineering parameters to the respective ground bearing materials, 2) calculating ultimate pile to ground (geotechnical) capacity which is then reduced by a Safety Factor deemed appropriate by a registered Design Professional thereby arriving at an allowable pile geotechnical pile capacity, and 3) determining the required pile structural section using allowable pile section material properties. It is advantageous to use a Working Stress Design Method (WSDM) approach as one system of loads (service loads) are used in both the geotechnical and structural evaluation. There are a variety of methods used to determine the ultimate and allowable geotechnical capacity, and Building Codes often require a registered Design Professional to determine the appropriate method(s) and capacities. The International Building Code is the Code typically referenced in building design and construction in the United States. Structural design usually follows Building Code requirements and Allowable Stress Design (ASD) procedures. As design of the overlying structure typically follows a Strength Design Method (SDM) approach using factored loads, in some cases piling is first designed for pile-to-soil interaction using service loads, followed by evaluating the pile geometry for factored loads. Construction is the finalization and implementation of the designed piling. As such, project-specific technical specifications are typically developed by a registered Design Professional such that a project Owner can bid, buy, and instruct a Contractor as to the desired piling work and acceptance criteria. There are several Industry groups, including DFI, PDCA, ADSC, and ACI that provide guidance documents which the registered Design Professional can refer to in developing the piling technical specifications. It is the author’s opinion that the registered Design Professional is best suited to observe and verify the piling installation; many Building Departments require verification and documentation by a registered Professional as a condition of final acceptance.INTRODUCTIONPile design for building structures consists of: investigation, design, specification, and verification. In major metropolitan areas within the United States, Building Codes typically identify minimum requirements for each of the above steps. The International Building Code (ICC, 2012) is the Code typically referenced in building design and construction in the United States. Recognizing the ground conditions as well as piling construction means and methods can vary on a site-by-site basis, latitude is given to the registered Design Professional and Contractor to optimize the piling system for the respective project conditions. Field testing and quality control / assurance measures are typically implemented to verify the design intent is attained for the production pile elements."

Jan 1, 2014

By Saieb Haddad, Henry Pate

"Building retaining walls in an urban area is becoming more difficult due to right-of-way restraints. Using standard concrete cantilever walls requires a construction easement behind the walls for installation, which for the most part is unavailable. To install these types of walls in a limited right-of-way requires extensive temporary walls to minimize the construction easement. Top-down construction walls utilizingtie-back anchors for support require either the purchase of the right-of-way or underground easements in the area of the anchors.These problems faced the Department on Interstate 75 widening in Knoxville, TN in an area of a large cut. A multi-story Insurance Building and a large commercial Retail Center were located at the top of the cut. To prevent any impact on the buildings, the walls had to be placed within a limited area. The option of buying the properties was prohibitively expensive. Due to the height of the two walls and the variability of the underling rock line, contiguous caisson pile cantilever walls were contemplated as the only wall type that would be appropriate. The cost of the two walls was estimated to be very close or even higher than the cost of purchasing the two buildings. The Department believed that there must be a better way to deal with the problem. A vertically tied-down pile frame wall constructed from the top-down with a concrete facing was developed. This allowed the construction of the walls to be restricted to the available limited area and provided substantial savings for the State.INTRODUCTIONThe widening of I-40/75 has been a major transportation project in the Knoxville area which is being constructed by the Tennessee Department of Transportation. The project includes 18 Retaining Walls and 13 Bridges.Two of the 18 Retaining Walls, refer to Figure 1, are to support two valuable properties, one being an insurance company housed in a multi-story office building and the other a suburban shopping center which were appraised at $13.0 million and $5.0 million respectively. Due to the 31 ft. (9.5m) maximum height of each of the two Retaining Walls and the limited Right-of- Way of 15.0 feet (4.6m), a contiguous caisson pile cantilever wall was proposed for each of the two retaining wall sites with an estimated cost of $12.0 million each. The contiguous pile cantilever Wall is comprised of a line of caisson piles socketed into underlying competent bedrock. The design required that 4 ft. (1219mm) dia. piles be installed at 6 ft. (1.83m) centers, socketed into rock in order to provide lateral stability and restrict lateral wall movement to acceptable limits. The line of caissons would be fronted with a cast-in-place concrete face wall"

Jan 1, 2007

By Saieb Haddad, Henry Pate

"Building retaining walls in an urban area is becoming more diffi cult due to right-of-way restraints. Using standard concrete cantilever walls requires a construction easement behind the walls for installation, which for the most part is unavailable. To install these types of walls in a limited right-of-way requires extensive temporary walls to minimize the construction easement. Top-down construction walls utilizing tie-back anchors for support require either the purchase of the right-of-way or underground easements in the area of the anchors.These problems faced the Department on Interstate 75 widening in Knoxville, TN in an area of a large cut. A multi-story Insurance Building and a large commercial Retail Center were located at the top of the cut. To prevent any impact on the buildings, the walls had to be placed within a limited area. The option of buying the properties was prohibitively expensive. Due to the height of the two walls and the variability of the underling rock line, contiguous caisson pile cantilever walls were contemplated as the only wall type that would be appropriate. The cost of the two walls was estimated to be very close or even higher than the cost of purchasing the two buildings. The Department believed that there must be a better way to deal with the problem. A vertically tied-down pile frame wall constructed from the top-down with a concrete facing was developed. This allowed the construction of the walls to be restricted to the available limited area and provided substantial savings for the State. INTRODUCTIONThe widening of I-40/75 has been a major transportation project in the Knoxville area which is being constructed by the Tennessee Department of Transportation. The project includes 18 Retaining Walls and 13 Bridges. Two of the 18 Retaining Walls, refer to Figure 1, are to support two valuable properties, one being an insurance company housed in a multi-story offi ce building and the other a suburban shopping center which were appraised at $13.0 million and $5.0 million respectively. Due to the 31 ft. (9.5m) maximum height of each of the two Retaining Walls and the limited Right-of- Way of 15.0 feet (4.6m), a contiguous caisson pile cantilever wall was proposed for each of the two retaining wall sites with an estimated cost of $12.0 million each. The contiguous pile cantilever Wall is comprised of a line of caisson piles socketed into underlying competent bedrock. The design required that 4 ft. (1219mm) dia. piles be installed at 6 ft. (1.83m) centers, socketed into rock in order to provide lateral stability and restrict lateral wall movement to acceptable limits. The line of caissons would be fronted with a cast-in-place concrete face wall."

Jan 1, 2007

By Rick Piovesan, Pramod Rao, Nihal Bohra, Mark Wahler

"This paper discusses the approach followed for the geotechnical design of 355 mm and 457 mm diameter driven open-ended steel pipe piles used for a gas plant at a green field site in Pilbara region in Australia. The principal bearing layer at the site comprises of calcareous Red Bed soils and weak rock, which is the typical geology along a significant length of the northern Western Australian coastline with carbonate content up to 70%. The uncertainty associated with the mechanical behavior of the calcareous soils and cemented soils (weak rocks) presented design challenges in the selection of appropriate pile design method and design parameters for pile capacity estimation during Front End Engineering Design (FEED). The American Petroleum Institute (API)-based design methodology was adopted. The representative design parameters for the Red Bed weak rock were established by treating the weak rock as clay with undrained shear strength as one-half of the characteristic unconfined compressive strength (UCS) value. Both statically load tested and CAPWAP (Case Pile Analysis Wave Program) estimated ultimate axial pile capacities on 25 early pre-production indicator piles demonstrated that the API design methodology for siliceous soils provides reasonable prediction of axial pile capacity in the red bed soils/weak rock and no reduction to API computed axial capacity due to carbonate content is warranted. The results also demonstrated that penalizing axial pile capacity solely based on carbonate content is not appropriate.IntroductionA gas processing facility was proposed to commercialize the gas reserves located 130 km offshore from the north-west coast of Western Australia (WA). The project site is a green field site located in the Pilbara region along the northwest coast of WA. Specific information regarding the site has been withheld due to confidentiality reasons. The site layout is shown in Figure 1.The site comprises low-lying tidal flats, clay pans and sand dunes covered with low scrub. The onshore site levels vary from elevation 1 m to 10 m AHD (Australian Height Datum), with the largest proportion of the area (excluding sand dunes) between elevations of 1 m and 3 m.The onshore facilities are to comprise a liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant site, a construction camp, the land-based portion of the materials offloading facility (MOF), roadways, and borrow pit areas.The existing ground levels within the process train area, where pile load testing was performed, vary from over 7 m AHD where the summits and peaks of the central dune exist to typically 1 m to 2 m AHD towards the east and west edges of the dune. The proposed finished grade for the process train is set at 7 m AHD."

Jan 1, 2015

By Colin Curtis

The City of Manchester is hosting the 2002 Commonwealth Games. A world class Stadium with a 38,000 capacity was commissioned for a site located close to the City Centre. The Stadium location is in an area that was derelict and in need of regeneration and it is envisaged that the Stadium will be the spur for this. The industrial and residential history of the site has left a legacy of buried foundations together with chemically contaminated soils. This Made Ground deposit overlies Glacial Deposits which in turn overlie bedrocks of the Central Manchester Coalfield. Coal mining has taken place from at least 1761 leaving several worked seams and shafts. In order to support the stadium, 1159 conventional augured piles of 600 to 1200mm diameters were used. This paper will deal primarily with the piling operations and testing, but will also discuss the coal seam treatment with respect to piling. A substantial trial pile test programme was carried out together with 11 static load tests on contract piles. The results of the pile tests will be discussed and conclusions drawn.

Jan 1, 2002

By Derek J. Lennon

Ground conditions in central Glasgow generally comprise loose granular deposits overlying stiffer soils. CFA piling would normally be preferred for urban sites in these ground conditions, but flighting of the superficial deposits has on occasions resulted in building damage. Over the last five years rotary bored piling with vinyl polymer support fluid has proved to be an economic alternative to bentonite slurry. Two case histories in central Glasgow are described in this paper, one for piles founding in granular soils and one for piles founding into bedrock. A comparison is made between the methods required for disposal of the liquid waste from bentonite and vinyl polymer slurries.

Jan 1, 2006

By Howard Roscoe

Linking Ashford International Station to the new Channel Tunnel Rail Link required over 5000 rotary bored and CFA (continuous flight auger) piles to form tunnel walls and viaduct foundations and to support overbridges and trackside barriers.. Much of the work was carried out close to the existing railway infrastructure. Plunged columns were used to maintain traffic flows over the tunnel site during construction. The results of an extensive programme of vertical and lateral load tests on bored and CFA piles in heavily overconsolidated Weald Clay are compared to illustrate the relative importance of stress relief and of prolonged exposure to bentonite. The completion on schedule of this major piling and ground engineering contract (value £30 million) demonstrates that collaborative working in partnership produced cost effective solutions to a series of challenging technical and logistical problems.

Jan 1, 2002

By D. F. Malan, W. J. Theron

Practical mining aspects should be considered when conducting pillar designs for bord-and-pillar layouts. The current methodology for pillar design will result in increasing pillar sizes with depth. This affects the extraction ratio and will result in onerous ventilation requirements when cutting large pillars. A holistic approach, including all mining engineering requirements, is required to ensure that the rock engineering designs are optimized to ensure efficient mining operations and sustainable production. Bord widths should not only be a function of the rock mass ratings, but should also be selected to fit the specifications of the mechanized equipment. The use of a ‘squat pillar’ formula for hard rock is discussed in the paper and the formula based on the exponents of the Hedley and Grant pillar formula, is explored. The effect of abutments and geological losses on average pillar stress is also explored. These factors must be considered when designing layouts at increasing depths.

Nov 27, 2024

By Kneisley RO

This paper presents a brief overview of current bump mechanics theories and pillar design methodologies, and relates these concepts to experiences at two mines located in a north- central Utah coalfield where different pillar designs were used to control mountain bumps. Experiences gained at the first mine demonstrated the successful implementation of a two-entry, 9.8 m (32 ft)-wide, yield-pillar design. A U.S. Bureau of Mines field study quantified the timing of chain pillar yielding and resulting load transfer from the gateroad. In-mine pillar response, although apparently sensitive to site-specific conditions, compared favorably to estimates derived using two yield- pillar design methods. A second study conducted at another mine located in the same district, but subjected to different geologic conditions, documents the unsuccessful attempts to employ progressively narrower three-entry pillar designs based on successes achieved at the first mine site. This second mine never achieved a true yield-pillar design. Use of pillar widths ranging between 9.1 m (30 ft) and 27.4 m (90 ft) always resulted in violent bumps in the tailgate pillars. The pillars were either too large to yield, or too small to support peak operational loads. Hypothetical gateroad systems were evaluated using both analytical and empirical approaches for configurations comprised of two rows of conventional pillars, and systems incorporating both yield and abutment pillars. Analysis concluded that yield pillars less than 6.1 m (20 ft) wide and abutment pillars ranging between 30.5 m (100 ft) and 39.6 m (130 ft) square would be required to achieve a stable gateroad design. However, results of a field study conducted on a two-entry, 36.6 m (120 ft)- wide abutment pillar concluded that abutment pressures from the first panel overrode the pillar, and that a still larger pillar may be required to preclude bumps in the tailgate during second panel mining. Without the benefit of a demonstrated in-mine success, it is not clear which design would ensure elimination of gateroad bumps.

Jan 1, 1992

By N. P. Kripakov

This paper presents a brief overview of current bump mechanics theories and pillar design methodologies, and relates these concepts to experiences at two mines located in a north-central Utah coalfield where different pillar designs were used to control mountain bumps. Experiences gained at the first mine demonstrated the successful implementation of a two-entry, 9.8 m (32 ft)-wide, yield-pillar design. A U.S. Bureau of Mines field study quantified the timing of chain pillar yielding and resulting load transfer from the gateroad. In-mine pillar response, although apparently sensitive to site-specific conditions, compared favorably to estimates derived using two yield-pillar design methods. A second study conducted at another mine located in the same district, but subjected to different geologic conditions, documents the unsuccessful attempts to employ progressively narrower three-entry pillar designs based on successes achieved at the first mine site. This second mine never achieved a true yield-pillar design. Use of pillar widths ranging between 9.1 m (30 ft) and 27.4 m (90 ft) always resulted in violent bumps in the tailgate pillars. The pillars were either too large to yield, or too small to support peak operational loads. Hypothetical gateroad systems were evaluated using both analytical and empirical approaches for configurations comprised of two rows of conventional pillars, and systems incorporating both yield and abutment pillars. Analysis concluded that yield pillars less than 6.1 m (20 ft) wide and abutment pillars ranging between 30.5 m (100 ft) and 39.6 m (130 ft) square would be required to achieve a stable gateroad design. However, results of a field study conducted on a two-entry, 36.6 m (120 ft)-wide abutment pillar concluded that abutment pressures from the first panel overrode the pillar, and that a still larger pillar may be required to preclude bumps in the tailgate during second panel mining. Without the benefit of a demonstrated in-mine success, it is not clear which design would ensure elimination of gateroad bumps.

Jan 1, 1992