Search Documents

By Stanislaw Prusek

In this paper, results of underground measurements conducted in gateroad 3, seam 615, at the Bobrek-Centrum Colliery are presented. The Bobrek-Centrum Colliery is owned by Kompania Weglowa, the largest hard coal producer in the European Union. Yearly production at the colliery, including the longwall system, is about 2 million tonnes. Gateroad 3 was used simultaneously for two retreating longwall faces, No. 1 and No. 2. This working was also employed for the conveyor belt for longwall No. 1 and served as a transport road for longwall No. 2. Approximately 100 meters of gateroad 3 was maintained behind the face of longwall No.1 and then, with the progress of longwall No. 2, it was liquidated. In this paper, we present the results of underground measurements of vertical and horizontal convergence in gateroad 3. We also present the results of numerical modeling for deformation of the working. Finally, we analyse the accuracy of the numerical calculations by comparing them to the actual deformation of gateroad 3.

Jan 1, 2014

By Bingjie Huo

"China is a major coal producer and consumer. It is necessary to mine the steeply pitching coal seams due to development of the coal industry to meet the increasing needs for coal. Flexible shield supports mining is a safe and efficient mining method for steeply pitching coal seam that was first applied in HuaiNan mining area in the 1970s. The coal seams are steeply pitching in DaAnShan Colliery, so mining is mainly done by the flexible shield supports method. The roadway lay-out and extraction technology are researched in order to improve the safety, yield and work efficiency in the flexible shield supports working face. Optimization of the flexible shield supports mining method is discussed. The main optimization aspects are as follows: (1) the angle of working face and mining track roadways are increased from 23° to 28°, and (2) the technology and parameters of coal breaking are optimized. Applicable conditions, as well as advantages and disadvantages are also discussed. Finally, a comparison is made of the two different flexible shield supports mining methods, namely ""bench blasting . technology"" and ""piecewise blasting technology"".INTRODUCTIONChina is the largest producer and consumer of coal in the world and relies heavily on coal for energy production. At present, Chinese production is about 42% of the worldwide production, and coal has accounted for 76% of primary energy production. Coal plays a dominant role in the structure of energy production and consumption, which is fuel and an important industrial raw material but it is non-renewable. In recent years, the high inclined seams (35°< angle of coal seam < 45°) and steeply pitching coal seams (angle of coal seam >45°) have drawn increasing attention in the mining sector along with the growth of coal mining. There are two reasons. First, there are abundant reserves of high inclined and steeply pitching coal seams in China, which account for 15- 20% of total reserves (Xie, Dong-hai, 2007). Highly inclined and the steeply pitching coal seams are mined in more than 50% of the western mining provinces such as Sichuan, ChongQing, YunNan, GuiZhou, XinJiang, GanSu, NingXia, etc. As the mining of mineral resources continues west in the 21st century, the study of coal mining in high inclined seams and steeply pitching coal seams will be of great importance. Secondly, better quality coal has become scarcer in the eastern mining areas after years of exploitation, so steeply pitching seam mmmg is growing more prevalent. In short, carrying out research on steeply pitching seam mining technology plays an important role in sustaining the development of the Chinese coal industry."

Jan 1, 2010

By Andre Zingano

The coal seam strength and the failure criteria that represent the behavior of the coal seam are very important for mine section and pillar design. Additionally, mine section and pillar design take into account roof and floor layers, which form the roof-pillar-floor system. Therefore, underground ground control design begins, most importantly, with rock mass characterization. Another issue is the distribution or behavior of the coal seam strength for the whole mine area. Sometimes, the coal seam strength is assumed to be the same for an entire area, but this is not true because the coal seam is heterogenic and anisotropic, and also the coal strength is affected by faults and spacing between fractures. The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the use of the methodology for geomechanics characterization to determine the strength for the Bonito coal seam, and discuss the coal seam strength distribution around the entire mine area. The intact coal strength was determined by laboratory tests that were completed during the last 17 years, including triaxial and uniaxial strength tests. It was noted that there is a strong correlation between all laboratory strength tests with 90% confidence interval. The explanation for this coal seam strength variation is the presence of the discontinuities and their variation in quantity and quality at each location in the mine area, because the coal seam rock classification and its behavior will be affected by the quantity and quality of fractures.

Jan 1, 2014

By David Dye

Good morning, everyone, and thanks Syd for that fine introduction. I am honored to be here to help you celebrate 25 years of advancement and success in the important field of ground control. I would also like to recognize Dr. Peng for his significant contributions in longwall mining and ground control. His contributions have had a major impact on improving safety and reducing fatalities in America?s mines. Thank you, Dr. Peng, for the important work you have carried on throughout the years. Many miners are alive today because of your dedicated work to protect them.

Jan 1, 2007

By Nicole E. Evanek, Anthony T. Iannacchione

"Over the past 36 years, a great deal of information has been presented and discussed at the International Conference on Ground Control in Mining (ICGCM). The topic of surface subsidence engineering has resonated throughout each of the 36 conferences, producing 155 related papers. These papers have come from many countries. The major focus has been underground coal, especially longwall mining, but hard rock mining has also received attention. This impressive collection of reports presents a unique opportunity to reflect on the progress made towards understanding subsidence basin characteristics and developing methods to predict and mitigate its impact.In the initial meetings, the focus was on measuring subsidence and developing prediction methods. As understanding increased, predictive methods were developed and tested, especially in North America, China, Australia, Europe, and India. Efforts were made to understand how structures, aquifers, and surface waters were impacted by the formation of subsidence basins. As time progressed, the number of papers dropped slightly and became more focused on site-specific conditions. Most recently, advanced monitoring techniques have revealed new information, spurring a resurgence in research activity. Another recent focus has been on anomalous horizontal deformations occurring in sites with significant relief. Several reports from Australia and one from the US have brought this issue to light. In closing, all of these surface subsidence engineering papers have chronicled the maturing of this most important topic and, in the process, highlighted the importance of the ICGCM in the evolution of our current state of practice.INTRODUCTIONThe aim of this paper is to examine the role of ICGCM in 1) shaping our understanding of the mining induced subsidence phenomena, 2) developing tools to help predict its impact on the surface, and 3) evaluating controls to mitigate these impacts.This analysis involved the consideration of 155 papers available within the ICGCM conference proceedings and listed under the subsidence topic. Three of the papers where only available as abstracts and were not included in this analysis. Four other reports were focused on topics other than underground coal mining-induced subsidence issues and were also not included. It should also be noted that papers dealing with overburden behavior were not included in this analysis. As a result, 148 papers were reviewed and analyzed (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Christopher Mark

Colombia is 11th largest coal producing nation in the world, and the world?s fifth largest coal exporter. But while most of Colombia?s coal is mined at large modern surface mines located near the Caribbean coast, there are also underground mines that produce high-grade metallurgical coal. These mines employ traditional hand-loading techniques in a variety of geologic environments, and they have some of the highest accident rates of any Colombian industry. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has been collaborating with POSITIVA, the primary provider of worker?s compensation insurance to the Colombian underground coal industry, to reduce the economic and social cost of rock falls in these mines. The specific goals of the collaboration are to 1) document practices and conditions in Colombian underground coal mines, 2) identify relevant international best practices, and 3) provide recommendations for developing a national campaign to reduce fatalities and injuries associated with roof falls. NIOSH conducted a survey of seven underground coal mines in four separate coalfields. Five of the mines were characterized by steep dips and weak roof and floor rock. The coal was loaded by hand at all seven mines, though two employed partially mechanized longwall techniques. Wood posts were by far the most common ground support. Roof bolts were not observed in use at any of the mines, and they are unlikely to replace timbers any time soon. While long-term entries generally appeared to be adequately supported, the survey found that less attention was paid to the temporary support that is installed right after the coal is removed. This temporary support is critical for protecting the workers from rock falls, however, because with hand-loading mining methods most of the activity takes place between the permanent supports and face. The study concluded that improving the temporary support in the working faces would be the most effective way to reduce the number of rock fall injuries. The key principle should be that every worker is protected by planned roof support at all times. Ground Support Management Plans, consisting of specific rules about when, where, and what roof support is to be installed, should be the focus of the campaign. Each Plan should be tailored to a specific mine based on the geologic conditions and mining methods in use. The Plan provides miners with clear, simple rules that can be easily understood, while management can easily check to see if it is being followed. Ground Support Management Plans will also provide the campaign with a concrete focus for the necessary cultural change.

Jan 1, 2014

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 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 Denise Müller, Axel Preusse

"Due to multilateral underground use, mining subsidence is discussed more and more with regard to issues other than mining, such as post-mining topics, storage, or geothermal use. These discussions and the influence of the energy policy is why the situation in Germany is described as a transition from active to abandoned mining. Many PhD theses have been written within the last 20 years—every single one with a different topic but all with the same issue—the effects and challenges of mining subsidence.These challenges start with the research regarding geological and hydrogeological conditions, which is the basis for calculations like the angle of draw or predictions of subsidence due to water table drawdown. Furthermore, the research investigates issues like risk-management and financial planning. One of these issues is post-mining calculations; others include potential hazards of storage or the use of geothermal energy.This paper outlines an overview of German mining and the consequences due to subsidence. It deals with an overview of the circumstances related to hard coal mining, lignite mining, the use of geothermal energy, gas, and opportunities regarding underground storage. Basically, it describes the essential steps of processing mining subsidence, starting with monitoring to forecast and up to safety measures.With a glance back to the applied research of the prior two decades, we compare given forecasts with experiences already gained.Even though mining decreases, ground control does not.INTRODUCTIONAfter the Second World War, an economic recovery started in Germany, during which the mining industry provided an advantage. Areas like the Ruhr District or Saarland were characterized by hard coal mining. In addition, there was lignite mining in the Rhenish mining area and the middle German coal district. In the Lausitz area, there were gravel and sand companies for the construction industry and many other medium-sized mining companies. Especially in the Ruhr District and in Saarland, where large coal fields were built, mining played a major role. The number of mines increased, and the negative effects on the terrain got bigger. While minor open pits or quarries have influences on the landscape only, large open pits and underground mining lead to significant ground movements. This results in a larger importance of mining subsidence engineering. Calculations of subsidence and forecasts have been developed and refined within the last several years. Due to the fact that the mining areas were and still are densely populated, the forecasts are getting more and more precise."

Jan 1, 2018

By Marcel0 Mondring

Transportation and the logistic requirements are set very high for the German coal mining industry. Short transportation resources, crowded quarters, and long transportation distances to destinations are some basic conditions that logistic employees of the mines have to deal with. Therefore, in the context of these processes, human effort and technology are faced with great challenges. There can be a total of 300 transport units, depending on the size of the mine. Every day, they are moved through a nearby 150-km-long transportation network of floor and monorail tracks. Of these transport units, 150 are new, and the other 150 units are split into cross traffic units that are moved only in the underground and return travel units. Beside track-bounded transports, all material transports take place in the shaft. As a result, many involuntary transports and changes in the means of transportation make the daily work more difficult. Typical transports in the shaft include the supply of new materials from above to below, as well as returnable goods from below to above. Cross traffics throughout several levels, which are rather rare, would have to be handled above the shaft. Due to limited shaft capacity, these cross traffics should be avoided when possible. Based on the gas resources in coalmine slopes, track-bounded transports using monorails (powered by diesel or rechargeable means) are preferred. This depends on the road degree, the depth, and track cross section of the shaft/slope. The variety of the material spectrum includes more than 100,000 different types of material.

Jan 1, 2014

By Thomas M. Barczak

Wood cribs have been the dominant form of supplemental support in coal mining for many years. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in prop supports as a replacement for wood cribbing due to the increasing cost of mine timber and engineering advancements in prop design to improve their stability and yield capability. Prop supports generally consume less material, can be installed in less time with less labor, and provide less restriction to mine ventilation than wood crib supports. Several prop supports are now available or under development&apos;. These include: (1) Strata Products Propsetter? Support System; (2) Heintzmann ACS and Super Prop; (3) MBK-Hydraulik MEGA prop; (4) Advanced Mining Technology Inc. (AMTI) BTS Mortar prop; (5) Dywidag Coal Post; (6) Western Support Systems YIPPI support; and (7) "The Can" support by Burrell Mining Products. A comparison of the performance and cost of these support systems to wood cribs is made to provide mine operators with information needed to assess their application potential. Examples of current underground installations are discussed. Included in this assessment are full scale tests of these supports conducted in the U.S. Bureau of Mines&apos; Mine Roof Simulator.

Jan 1, 1995

By Lorraine Kent

Excessive floor and side deformation are major problems in deep coal mine entries in Europe, and in particular in the UK where rockbolt support is used at depths of working of around 3000 ft. This has major economic and safety implications for the industry resulting in the potential for sidewall instability, disruption to mine infrastructure, (belt conveyors, floor mounted transport systems and powered supports), and the requirement to safely manage excavation of large quantities of floor material. European research aimed at improving deformation control is described. The outcomes include innovations in support systems, materials and installation practices, as well as better methods for predicting and monitoring deformation levels. As coal mines get deeper, some entry deformation is inevitable, and methods for mechanised removal of floor lift and repair of sidewalls have been developed to allow production to continue as mining clearances are re-established.

Jan 1, 2014

By Adrian L. Moodie

Austar Coal Mine (formerly Southlands and Ellalong Collieries) has had a long association with difficult strata control conditions associated with mining depth and a highly jointed/cleated coal seam. The conditions include poor longwall face conditions, cyclic loading, heavy tailgate (TG) roadway conditions, and difficulties in maintaining stable roadways on development at 5.2 m (17 ft), as well as the geotechnical challenges of an 8.5-m (27.9 ft) -wide roadway required for installation faces. The introduction of Longwall Top Coal Caving (LTCC) to this environment has aided in the management of some of these issues, but LTCC has also given rise to other geotechnical considerations. Additional geotechnical issues associated with LTCC not only require management during operations, but also require consideration when evaluating new mining areas at Austar Coal Mine or potential LTCC extractable resources throughout Australia and the world. In September 2006, LTCC commenced at Austar Coal Mine in longwall panel A1. Since this point the LTCC face has been increased from 147 to 216 m (482 to 709 ft)and finally to 227 m (745 ft) in width, and it has also been rehanded and modified in the three fully extracted panels to date. The application of LTCC in panels A1, A2, A3, and now A4 has been very successful, both from a coal resource recovery point of view and in the management of the principal hazards of spontaneous combustion and strata control. This paper focuses on the geotechnical aspects of the application of LTCC at Austar Coal Mine and also reviews some advances in general strata control management at the mine.

Jan 1, 2011

By Gregory E. Smith

"Tensionable headed roof bolt systems are common in the U.S. mining industry. In the last 15 years or so, they have made a comeback as a hybrid system where a mechanical anchor is used in conjunction with resin. When such a system is used, it is common to use a spherical washer to comply with the requirements of 30 CFR Part 75.204(f)(8). This standard requires an angle-compensating device be used in installations where the bearing plate is offset from the roof bolt axis by an angle greater than five degrees. This paper evaluates system performance of four different traditional angle-compensating device/plate combinations including a new patented extruded plate/extruded washer system that improves overall load capacity and stretch.INTRODUCTIONA large western U.S. underground coal mine was using a fully grouted headed rebar system as their primary support. They had developed their component specifications over many years of working with suppliers to improve and optimize these components to integrate well as a system. As shown in Figure 1, the components included a patented 7 /8"" -diameter Grade 60 headed rebar bolt with a flange capable of full bar load (Walker, 2009) and a patented 8 in x 8 in Grade 3 extruded hole bearing plate manufactured by DieMatic Corporation.The mine decided to pursue a fully grouted tensionable system using a mechanical anchor as the tensioning device. Their primary goal was to eliminate the need for the roof bolt operator to secure (hold) the bolt during resin set time. An additional benefit was the increased initial tension on the bolt. To comply with the requirements of 30 CFR Part 75.204(f)(8), regarding tensioned roof bolts, they were required to include an angle-compensating device because a share of the bolt population would be installed at angles greater than five degrees from the perpendicular to the bearing plate. Also, to improve cycle time and torque/tension consistency, the mine desired to have the washers and anchors assembled at the factory. This required the use of a bearing plate with a center hole large enough to accommodate the 1-3/8-in-diameter mechanical anchor to pass though it during assembly by the roof bolt operator. The mine wanted to continue to use an extruded hole bearing plate in the tensionable system, and EMS was asked to propose a plate and angle-compensating device."

Jan 1, 2016

By Denise Mueller, Axel Preusse

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

Jan 1, 2017

By Sandin Phillipson

During the course of ground control evaluations conducted by the Mine Safety and Health Administration's Roof Control Division, a number of surface and underground coal mines were visited that exhibited instances of ground failure associated with joints. The evaluations were conducted over a broad geographic area, including the Appalachian Basin from Pennsylvania to Tennessee, and they documented that joints occur in a wide variety of mining conditions and exhibit a wide variety of characteristics. Despite minor local variability in orientations, the joints fit into a cohesive pattern when evaluated on a regional scale in context with the system of thrust faults that define the Alleghany Front. Joints documented for this study, together with joints in sandstone and coal and the trends of drag folds compiled from other studies, were plotted on regional maps using GIS software. The trends of joints, including those that could be described colloquially as "hill seams," were not only parallel to regional fault systems and local trends of drag folds, but were also parallel to the regional patterns of previously mapped joints in sandstone and coal. These observations indicate that the features referred to informally as "hill seams" are in fact joints formed in response to tectonic processes associated with regional deformation of the Cumberland-Allegheny Plateau. The 286-266 million-year-old age of regional deformation significantly pre-dates the time when the Cumberland-Allegheny Plateau was subjected to deeply incised stream valley erosion, which began 25 million years ago. This challenges an existing interpretation that "hill seams" represent local ·stress relief joints that formed when stream valley erosion removed confinement and allowed tensile failure of the rock. Although relaxation of confining stress can reasonably be expected to occur near outcrop, observations indicate that this results in the dilation of existing joints. This paper presents instances of ground failure associated with joints, discusses methods of mitigation, and recommends that the term "hill seam" be abandoned in technical communication because it simply refers to a kind of joint that may exhibit certain weathering and aperture characteristics.

Jan 1, 2010

By Zhang Hongzhen

The fast convergence of boundary is a major problem of probability integral method, especially for the prediction of mining under thick alluvium, abandoned mine goaf, etc. To solve this problem and improve the accuracy of probability integral method, a modified model is constructed for surface movement and deformation based on theoretical analysis. In which, three weighted values i.e. 1, -1/t1, 1/t2 are set for the mining movement and deformation of three different major influence radius i.e. r1, R1, R2, respectively, then the parameters are selected as following: (1) Parameters are inversed based on the observation data, in which the subsidence factor q, deviation of inflection point s, displacement factor b are considered as generic parameters, the tangent of major influence angle tanß is modified as tanß2, that is the major influence radius r is modified as r2. (2) Inversion parameters of tangent of major influenceangle tanß or major influence radius r, based on the observation station edge data which beyond major influenc eradius distance from work-face mining boundary. The inversed tanß and r will be used as tangent of major influence angle tanß1 and major influence radius r1, respectively. (3) Other relevant parameters i.e. t1, t2, R1, R2, are calculated with the algorithm of this paper. A comparison experiment between the traditional and modified models has been conducted using the observation data from a observation station, the results show that in its central area, 58.6 percent of observation points accuracy is improved and 36.6 percent is decreased, while in its edge area, 61.5 percent is improved and 15.4 percent is decreased, totally, 68.6 percent is improved and 30 percent is decreased. Therefore, we can draw the conclusion that our modified model can improve the prediction predication accuracy, in particular, the boundary region.

Jan 1, 2014

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 John D. VandeKraats

Yielding rock bolt systems have been developed to provide ground support while accommodating shifting, creeping, or swelling ground movements. The Dywidag Systems, Inc. (DSI) Slip Nut System is one such system. It has been tested in the laboratory and installed and monitored in the interbedded halite and anhydrite at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) since 1994. The Slip Nut System is installed on a point anchored threaded bar or on a threaded bar coupled to a cable bolt. At a pre-engineered load the nut acts as a die and cuts through the thread on which it rests, thereby reducing the load and coming to rest on the next thread where the process repeats. Two types of laboratory tests were performed using slip nuts on DSI&apos;s threaded bars and their Tensionable Cable bolts. Straight pull tests exceeding 0.3m (1 ft.) of displacement were performed on the systems. Also, offset tests were performed on these bolt systems in a test frame designed to simulate WIPP geologic conditions. A room scale test area consisting of 186 threaded bars began in 1994. Select bolts were instrumented to track bolt load. All bolts were tracked through time for operation. Through three complete years since installation over twelve slips, corresponding to approximately 0.15m (6 in.) of ground movement, have been observed in some areas. Since installation strata offset has exceeded 0.08m (3 in.) at a supported clay layer in the roof. No bolt failures have been observed. Slip loads observed underground generally approximate those observed in the lab. To date, the slip nut systems tested and installed have performed as expected.

Jan 1, 1998

By G. J. Hasenfus

There are no known published methods of estimating the degradation of coal measure rocks by water that are simple and efficient, yet still provide a quantitative, meaningful value for assessing the stability of coal mine floor, roof, and rib. The slake durability test, the standard index method for estimating the durability of rock subject to wetting, can provide misleading results for floor stability assessment. Additionally, slake durability testing is time consuming and requires specialty equipment. Methods based on humidity cycling have been demonstrated to be very effective for assessing coal mine roof, but require specialty equipment and do not address floor stability concerns. Visual observation techniques, such as that developed for the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) method, adequately qualify rock degradation, but lack quantitative rigor. This paper will describe an alternative method, coined the water sensitivity test, originally developed for floor stability analyses, but also found applicable for roof and rib stability assessment. The test was developed by CONSOL in the early 1990&apos;s, and in its current form, has been in use for approximately twelve years. The method is based on the basic slake durability principle of measuring the mass of the rock retained on a screen after submersion in water. The new test employs two screens of different sizes, and also uses modified submersion, drying, and data processing procedures. The method is relatively efficient and can be geared toward batched testing. As with the slake durability test, the resulting index value provides a quantitative measure of the susceptibility of rock to water degradation. In addition to discussing the test method and its development, this paper provides a comparison of results with those fiom standard slake durability tests, and tabulated results for various types of coal measure rocks. Examples of the technique&apos;s utility are provided, including assessment of longwall and development floor conditions, roof and rib rock weathering and stability, and drum-bit cutability.

Jan 1, 2005