Search Documents

By Ken W. Mills

The ground movements associated with underground coal mining and, in particular, longwall mining, are recognised to include horizontal subsidence movements, but the mechanics of the processes that cause these horizontal movements are not well understood. Over the last two decades, three-dimensional subsidence monitoring has become routine in Australia and has provided a wealth of measurements of horizontal movements caused by mining subsidence. These measurements and other sub-surface observations allow the processes that cause mining-induced horizontal movements to be inferred and, subsequently, verified. In this paper, the mechanics of the processes that cause horizontal movements, particularly those in sloping topography, are described and discussed on the basis of field observations. There are several processes recognised to generate horizontal subsidence movements. In flat terrain, systematic horizontal movements cause the surface to move initially toward the newly created goaf and, subsequently, in the direction of mining. Tectonic energy stored as horizontal stress is released by mining, and, when the horizontal stresses are high, the magnitude of this horizontal stress relief movement is large enough to be perceptible for some kilometres from the panel. In sloping terrain, there is an additional component of horizontal movement that occurs in a down slope direction. This movement, sometimes referred to as valley closure movement, has a magnitude that is typically much greater than systematic or stress relief movements.

Jan 1, 2014

By R. Karl Zipf

Highwall mining is an important coal mining method. Upwards of 60 highwall miners are presently in operation, and they may account for approximately 4% of total U.S. coal production. A review of the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) accident data over the 20 year period from 1983 to 2002 identified 9 fatalities attributable to auger and highwall mining of which inadequate ground control accounted for 1/3. In the past 5 years, 1 fatality occurred in highwall mining. Estimates of the manpower requirements in highwall mining suggest that its fatality rate is essentially the same as for surface coal mining, thus highwall mining appears to be a very safe modern mining method. Highwall stability is the major ground control related safety concern, and operators are required to develop and follow an appropriate highwall mining ground control plan. The plans usually specify the following geotechnical parameters: hole width, maximum hole depth, maximum overburden depth, seam thickness, web pillar width, barrier pillar width and number of holes between barriers. Calculated web pillar stability factor exceeded 1.3 for most designs evaluated. This study examined records from 5,289 highwail miner holes with a total completed footage of about 2,560,000 feet to understand the reasons for early pull out. Average lost footage is typically about 20% of planned footage. Only 35% of the holes reached planned depth, and 20% were short due to rockfalls. Water and adverse geology accounted for 15% of the losses. Mechanical/electrical problems, guidance, and slope stability problems accounted for the remaining 30%. Web pillar stability factor for these holes also exceeded 1.3 in 95% of cases. Trapped highwall miners present a safety hazard to workers during their recovery. Best practices to avoid trapped highwall miners include: avoid mining in stream valleys, avoid mining near outside corners, careful alignment of each hole and the use of an onboard guidance system, Several issues in highwall mining ground control require further investigation including highwall mining through old auger workings, highwall mining near old underground mines, multiple-seam and multiple lift highwall mining and finally the size and frequency of barrier pillars.

Jan 1, 2004

By Douglas Morrison

Hardrock mines in Ontario generally operate at between 3,000 and 7,500 ft below surface and generally experience significant rockburst activity below 5,000 ft. Since the introduction of bulk mining techniques around 1980, the safety record of Canadian hardrock mines has improved dramatically. However, the process of improvement was not a smooth one and, in the early years, the number of accidents and fatalities actually increased. One incident in 1984 that resulted in 4 fatalities in Ontario initiated a complete re-examination of mining practice and by the mid 1980s many changes had been introduced, driven by new non-prescriptive mining legislation. These changes affected not only the technical discipline of mining engineering but also the management of operational procedures and, together, they resulted in the significant improvements that have continued to this day. The analysis of the rock-fall related fatalities showed 5 major causes (loose, scaling, installing support, collapse and rockburst) and by the mid 1990s fatalities in all of these categories, except rockbursting, had been eliminated and even then, all these rockburst fatalities occurred in one mine which was closed shortly afterward. This paper discusses both the technical and social reasons for the initial failure and the ultimate success in improving the safety of these mines, with implications for mines in other major mining jurisdictions.

Jan 1, 2003

By Donald P. Richards

West Elk Coal Company operates its Mt. Gunnison No. I mine on the western slope of the Rocky Mountains in Western Colorado. The mine is located along the north fork of the Gunnisson River near Somerset, Colorado as shown in Figure 1. The mine is designed for a sustained production of 1.4 million tons per year out of the "F" coal seam in the Mesa Verde formation. The coal seam is nominally 7 feet in thickness and dips at about 3 ½ degrees to the northeast. Mining of the seam is up dip with the entry portals on the north facing slope of Mount Gunnison. The mine is designed as a five entry system with four entries for ventilation and access and one entry for a coal-handling conveyor. The mine entry layout is shown in Figure 2. Initial mine planning began in 1979, with "permitting" complete and construction starting in the fall of 1981. A "turnkey" contract for design and construction of all five parallel mine entry tunnels was awarded by West Elk Coal Company to a Joint Venture of Jenny Engineering Corporation (design and contract management responsibility) and Affholder, Inc. (construction responsibility). The first entry access into the coal seam was completed in the early spring of 1982. The mine has been operating at full service (all five entries) for nearly 3 years.

Jan 1, 1984

By L. Munsamy

The bulk of primary mining at the Anglo Coal's Bank Colliery was carried out by drill and blast method, in a bord and pillar layout exploiting the No. 2 Seam. Secondary extraction, top/bottom coaling, also took place using both the drill and blast (D&B) method and continuous miners (CM). Extensive mining in this seam resulted in the risk of sterilising the No. 4 Seam reserves. Therefore, multiseam design guidelines established by Salamon and Oravecz (8) were re-evaluated in light of the low safety factors and the low pillar width to mining height ratios of pillars in the No. 2 Seam. Two and three dimensional (2D & 3D) numerical modelling was carried out to quantify and verify the parameters that influence the multiseam mining. The modelling was conducted primarily in two dimensions (plane strain), with 3D models to confirm the validity of the 2D results. A panel risk assessment flow chart was developed to assess the panels with respect to pillar failure and multiseam mining. This flow chart was extended into the evaluation of risk of surface subsidence using the current rock engineering knowledge. The aim of this risk assessment tool is to assess all underground workings at Anglo Coal collieries simply and rapidly. The identification of high-risk areas would warrant further investigation and possible backfilling to reduce the risk of pillar failures ensuring that reserves in the No. 4 and 5 Seams above are intact.

Jan 1, 2004

By Saeed Zhandi, Behdeen Oraee

"Rock bursts remain an important problem in longwall coal mining. These bursts are due to a sudden and severe failure of rocks from a high stress concentration in deep underground excavations that occur with the instantaneous release of strain energy stored in the rocks. They can potentially cause irrecoverable damage to equipment and personnel, thus accurate rock burst prediction and control is expected to be carried out by the mine design engineer. As a result, this can constitute major challenges for said engineer. In this paper, forensic engineering has been used to evaluate the possibility and extent of rock bursts in deep coal mining. For this purpose, established mining engineering principles, including factors influencing the severity of rock bursts, have been incorporated in the forensic engineering technique. The analyses took place in five steps:• Assessment of regional and local conditions prior to the event• Assessment of conditions after the event• Hypothesize plausible ways in which pre-event conditions can become post-event ones• Search for evidence that either denies or supports various hypotheses• Apply engineering knowledge to relate the various facts and evidence into a cohesive scenario of how the event may have occurred.The paper concludes by demonstrating a method for predicting rock bursts and preventing their reoccurrence. The methodology used in this paper, together with the results obtained, can serve as useful tools for the coal mine design engineer in the primary evaluation of rock burst potential in underground coal mines.INTRODUCTIONA rock burst is defined as the sudden and great failure of rocks due to a high stress concentration in deep underground mines. This phenomenon occurs with the instantaneous release of strain energy that is stored in the rocks, and can cause irrecoverable damages to both equipment and personnel (see Figure 1). Rock bursts pose a hazard owing to their lake of predictability; in fact, research into understanding rock burst mechanics and implementing techniques for their monitoring and prediction has been taking place for over 50 years."

Jan 1, 2015

By Kudret Tutuk, Serkan Saydam, Sungsoon Mo

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

Jan 1, 2018

By Tulu B. Ihsan, Mark A. Van Dyke, Ted M. Klemetti

"How well do current modeling procedures calculate the rear abutment extent and loading? Does an improved understanding of the rear abutment extent warrant a change in standing support in bleeder entries? What is the optimal standing support for bleeder entries separated from the longwall startup room by a barrier pillar? To help answer these questions and to determine the current utilization of standing support in bleeder entries, four bleeder entries at varying distances from the startup room were instrumented, observed, and numerically modeled. This evaluation was intended to determine the rear abutment extent and magnitude at various locations to optimize standing support in these entries and those under similar conditions. This paper details observations made by NIOSH researchers in the bleeder entries of a deep cover longwall panel; specifically data collected from instrumented pumpable cribs, observations of the conditions of the entries, and numerical modeling of the bleeder entries during longwall extraction. The primary focus was on the extent and magnitude of the abutment loading experienced by the standing support. As expected, the instrumentation of the standing supports showed very little loading relative to the capacity of the standing supports—less than 25 tons load and 1 inch convergence. The observations of the conditions showed little to no change from before the longwall panel extraction began to when the panel was more than 50% extracted. In addition to the observation and instrumentation, numerical modeling was performed to evaluate the bleeder design. The Flac3D program was used to evaluate these four bleeder entries using previously defined modeling and input parameter estimation procedures. The results indicated only a minor increase in load during the extraction of the longwall panel. The model showed a much greater increase in stress due to the development of the gateroad and bleeder entries, with about 80% of the increase associated with development and 20% with longwall extraction. The Flac3D model showed very good correlation between expected gateroad loading during panel extraction and those expected based on previous studies. The front and side abutment extent modeled was very similar to observations from this and previous panels with similar conditions. The results of this study showed that the rear abutment stress experienced by this bleeder entry design was minimal. The convergence measured in these bleeder entries was small enough not to mandate any additional support beyond development even by U.S. or Australian standards. The pumpable crib load and convergence experienced depends on the geological setting, mining geometries, and timing. The farther away from the startup room, the lower the applied load and smaller the convergence in the entry if all else is held constant. Finally, the numerical modeling method used in this study was capable of replicating the expected and measured results near seam."

Jan 1, 2017

By Ken Barish

Jane Mine of the Keystone Coal Mining Corporation was started in 1962 and is in the Lower Freeport seas located in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania, approximately 45 miles northeast of Pittsburgh. The mine is a slope/shaft complex with the cover ranging from 100 feet at the slope to 450 feet near the back end of the property. The seam height ranges from 48 to 72 inches. A variety of roof conditions have been en¬countered, and an equal variety of roof control systems have been tried with varying degrees of success. Initially, places could be mined as deep as 100 feet without any permanent roof support. After several problems and the advent of the Health and Safety Act of 1969, roof control became more and more prevalent and predominant at the Jane Mine. It started with 4 foot conventional oolts. As the mine progressed in the northeasterly direction, roof conditions changed from the extremely good roof that was encountered initially, to bad roof; and other types of roof support were required. Sixty pound rails and 6 inch 25 pound to the foot steel I-beams were used for supplemental support in long life headings such as belt and track. Resin bolting was done in many areas for long life support due to the deterioration of the shale roof over time. Several areas had to be abandoned because of uncontrollable top.

Jan 1, 1984

By Kevin J. Ma, John Stankus, Dakota Faulkner

"Expandable rock bolts are widely used in hard rock mines as an efficient ground control product. However, capacity and service life can be significantly reduced if the metallic body is subjected to corrosion. In some hard rock mines in the U.S., highly corrosive ground conditions exist, and it has been reported that inflatable rock bolts have corroded within a few months after installation. To provide mining industry a cost-effective inflatable bolt and combat the corrosion issues, Jennmar Corporation, Inc., and its subsidiary Keystone Mining Services, LLC (KMS), analyzed corroded bolt samples, identified root causes, evaluated properties of various coating materials, and developed a new inflatable rock bolt, Python M3TM, that is protected with an innovative PyFlexU2TM coating. The new generation Python M3 features improved steel chemistry for reliable performance, modified profile for better inflation, and surface preparation and coating application. The PyFlexU2 is impervious to liquid and air, durable, and UV resistant. With a flexible adhesive, and highly corrosion-resistant undercoating, and a very hard sacrificial surface coating, the PyFlexU2 coating system provides the Python M3 superior protection against chemical corrosion and physical scratch damage. The under-coating has exceptional flexibility and adhesion to prevent coating micro-cracks or fractures after bolt inflation and possesses excellent corrosion resistance to acids (pH <3), alkalis (pH >11), fuels, and salt solvents. The corrosion and scratch resistant PyFlexU2 coating offers very effective bolt protection for extra longevity in highly corrosive environments. The Python M3 coated with PyFlexU2 has been tested in the most challenging conditions, including laboratory corrosion tests in extreme acidic and basic solvents, rock slurry, and borehole scratch insertion tests. With demonstrated corrosion and scratch resistance, the product has been greatly welcomed by hard rock mines in the West and is currently installed in large scale. This paper identifies the root causes of the bolt corrosion, discusses the analysis process, and details laboratory and underground tests carried out on the Python M3 coated with PyFlexU2. The Python M3TM and PyFlexU2TM are subjects covered by pending U.S. Patent Applications assigned to FCI Holdings Delaware, LLC."

Jan 1, 2017

By Enguang Zhu, Kangning Zhang, Yang Li

"Due to the use of outdated mining technology or room and pillar mining process in small coal mines, the coal recovery ratio is only 10% - 25%. In many regions of China: the damage area caused by the small coal mines amounted to nearly one hundred square kilometers. Therefore, special mining techniques must be taken to reclaim the wasted resource in disturbed coal areas. This paper focuses on the different mining methods by analyzing the longwall panel layout and abandoned gateroad (AG) distribution in in the abandoned area of Cui Jiazhai Coal Mine in northwestern China. On the basis of three-dimensional geological model, FLAC- 3D numerical simulation was employed. The abutment pressure distribution was simulated when the panel face passed through the disturbed areas. The proper angle of the inclined face was analyzed when the panel face passed through the abandoned gateroads. The results show that the head end of the face should be 13-20m ahead of the tail end. The pillars on both sides of abandoned gateroads had not been damaged at the same time, and no large-area stress concentration occurred above the main roof. Therefore, the coal reserves of disturbed areas can be successfully recovered by using underground longwall mining. INTRODUCTIONDuring the 70-90's, there were a lot of small coal mines in China. Due to their disordered mining, most of the small coal mines left a great many abandoned gateroads (defined as AG in this paper) and a large area of damage coal seam. In these type of coalfields, there exist many mining risk issues, including nonuniform stress in the overburden, flooding and hazardous gases accumulated in the gob. So how to lay out a longwall panel and successfully mining under this type of abandoned small mines is a big issue nowadays in China.As mentioned above, longwall panel is being performed in the damaged coal seams in order to increase recovery of coal reserves (Wang, 2009). However, the abandoned geteroads intersect to each other all around the area. So a series of production issues arose while the panel face is passing through these AG. Gang and Gong (2015) analyzed the roof stability and abutment pressure distribution during the face was passing those AG that were parallel and inclined to the faceline. Xie, et al. (2015) proposed the ground control mechanism by passing the AG in top-coal caving longwall mining. He recommended to stop the face advance until the roof is over, using high strength bolts and cable bolts, and grouting consolidation. This paper studies the different mining methods by analyzing the longwall panel layout and AG distribution in damage coal seams. Theoretical analysis and field observation were conducted to determine the overburden movement when the face was advancing under the AG. The pillar between face and parallel AG changes from elastic to plastic and eventually to the residual supporting status. All these three status was combined with the roof structure to establish the theoretical model to calculate the shield support capacity. Numerical modeling was employed to simulate the pillar stability and determine the abutment pressure distribution as the face inclined to the AG during longwall mining."

Jan 1, 2016

By Peter Zhang, Dan Neilans, Scott Peterson, Scott Wade, Joe Pugh, Ryan Mcgrady

"A coal outburst is a severe safety hazard in room-and-pillar mining under deep cover. It is more likely to occur during pillar retreating. Multi-seam mining dramatically increases the risk of coal outburst within the influence zones created by remnant pillars and gob-solid boundaries. Though coal outburst is generally associated with heavy loading of coal pillars, its occurrence is difficult to predict. Risk management provides a proactive tool to minimize coal outburst in room-and-pillar mining under deep cover. Risk assessment is the first step in identifying and quantifying outburst risk factors. The primary risk factors for coal outburst are overburden depth, roof and floor strength, geological anomalies, mining type, multi-seam mining, and panel width. A risk assessment chart can be used to proactively screen out mining sections with high risk of coal outburst for further analysis. Gob-solid boundaries and remnant pillars are critical factors in evaluation of the coal outburst risk of multi-seam mining. Risk identification, risk assessment, geologic influence mapping, geotechnical evaluation, risk analysis, risk mitigation, and monitoring are essential elements of coal outburst risk management process. Training is an integral part of risk management for risk identification and communication between all the stakeholders including management, technical and safety personnel, and miners.INTRODUCTIONA coal outburst is a sudden violent burst of coal from a pillar with broken coal or blocks of coal forcibly ejected into open entries. A coal outburst is a severe safety hazard as the mining crew is highly exposed at the site when the event occurs. Though deep cover and strong roof and floor are underlying geologic conditions of a potential burst incident, its real occurrence is also the result of additional mining factors. In room-and-pillar mining, a coal outburst could occur during both development and pillar retreating, but the latter greatly increases the risk of outburst. The other risk factors of coal outburst also include mining layout, multi-seam mining, presence of adjacent gob, cutting sequence, and local abnormal geologic conditions. Over the years, the cases of coal outbursts have been studied by many researchers and mining practitioners(Peng, 2008; Newman, 2008; Iannacchione and Tadolini, 2008; Gauna and Phillipson, 2008; Hoelle, 2008; and Newman, 2002). It is commonly believed that the coal outburst is the result of a sudden release of elastic strain energy stored in coal pillars and is highly associated with cutting into heavily loaded coal pillars, but its occurrence is a rare event and is difficult to predict. A number of engineering controls have been recommended to mitigate outburst potential. For room-and-pillar mining, sufficient pillar sizes have been the primary control for coal outburst prevention. The pillar design tools such as ARMPS and AMSS developed by NIOSH have played an important role in the design of stable pillars to prevent pillar collapse and squeezing as well as coal outbursts. In fact, with the implementation of pillar design using proper stability factors, pillar collapse and squeezing have been almost eliminated, and the number of coal outbursts has been greatly reduced in the US over the past decade. However, after a few outbursts occurred during pillar retreating in the US over the past a few years (MSHA, 1996; MSHA, 2014; MSHA, 2013), it has been realized that sufficient pillar size is still not enough to prevent coal outbursts. The investigations of the incidents showed that other factors such as multi-seam mining, panel layout, cutting sequence, and local geologic factors also seemed critical in causing the events. Therefore, it has become imperative that additional proactive measures beyond proper pillar design be implemented to prevent coal outbursts."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ismet Canbulat, John Naylor, Jason Emery, Peter Craig, Andy Sykes

"Longwall mining is by far the most common method of underground coal extraction in Australia. The industry trends and expectations are placing increasing emphasis on the reliability and productivity of these operations. The longwalls are becoming wider and longer while retreat rates are continuously increasing due to significant improvements achieved in longwall equipment reliability and automation. This increased longwall productivity is placing significant emphasis on the reliability of longwall panel development.Although there have been significant improvements in the reliability of continuous miners and hydraulic drill rigs, the traditional resin encapsulated bolt installation is still the principal method used in all major coal-producing countries around the world. Anglo American realised an opportunity existed to introduce an alternative roof bolt installation technique called “spin to stall” in Australia. Spin to stall was first introduced in Anglo American Coal in South Africa where it has been successfully used for over a decade, though implementation of South African spin to stall resin in Australia has proven to be near impossible due to a significant difference in geotechnical conditions, mining method, and, subsequently, roof bolting equipment. Therefore, a new spin to stall development project was initiated between Anglo American Coal and Jennmar Australia (SPIN2STALL®). This paper summarises the journey of this project, the results, and the successful implementation of spin to stall achieved at Grasstree Mine.INTRODUCTIONThe Anglo American Coal business unit operates Grasstree and Moranbah North underground longwall mines in the Bowen Basin of Central Queensland, with a third longwall mine, Grosvenor, currently being developed, and two more (Aquila and Moranbah South) in the project pipeline. The vision for Anglo American is to achieve “Zero Harm” through the effective management of safety at all operations, while for the coal business unit, at the same time to achieve industry-leading operational performance. Currently, both Grasstree and Moranbah North longwalls are operating at industry best practice rates. This is placing increased pressure on the development process to allow such high productivity levels to be sustainable."

Jan 1, 2015

By Hongwei Zhang, Sen Yang, Shimin Liu

"This laboratory study investigates the damage evolution of sandstone specimens under two types of cyclic loading conditions through monitoring and analyzing the variations of elastic moduli and ultrasonic velocities. We adopted the rigidity degradation method for evaluating the damage accumulation through the rock dynamic ultrasonic velocity measurements. Compared to the ultrasonic test, the method of rigidity degradation shows deficiencies in the detection of damage development. The cyclic loading within the elastic limit led to a stiffening trend for the loading process but a softening trend for unloading process. The method of rigidity degradation was unable to describe the damage accumulation in this situation, while P-wave velocity clearly reflected the damage development. Moreover, a simplified model is established for interpreting the behaviors of the modulus variations and ultrasonic velocity. The cyclic loading within elastic limit enhances the anisotropy of rock, which causes a denser packing pattern in the direction of axial stress. The persistent damage accumulation under the cycling with an increasing upper limit is the consequence of the tensile failure in the microstructure of sandstone. INTRODUCTION The damage accumulation due to dynamic (cyclic) loading is highly detrimental in many engineering structures, such as mine openings, petroleum and natural gas boreholes, tunnels, rock foundations, and underground chambers. The sources of cyclic or repetitive loadings can be roughly divided into two types: (1) periodic operation, including drilling, blasting, and mining; (2) random vibration, including earthquakes and traffic loads. The repetitive loading-unloading process opens and closes the micro-pores and micro-cracks within the rock, further inducing the growth of cracks. As expected, the accumulating damage becomes a potential factor to trigger the rapid and violent failures of large-scale engineering rock structure."

Jan 1, 2017

By David F. Gearhart

A cooperative study was conducted between Signal Peak Energy and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to evaluate the behavior of a pre-driven recovery room under less than 200 ft of cover. The design of the support systems for a pre-driven recovery room must provide control of the roof and ribs during the changing stress environment experienced throughout the final advance of the longwall into the recovery room. It must also provide a stable area where mine personnel are not exposed to undue hazards during shield recovery operations. This recovery room was constructed in two phases; each phase mined a 21-ft-wide room that was heavily supported, and subsequently fully backfilled with 800-psi, cellular concrete. Instrumentation to monitor the recovery room performance included borehole pressure cells (BPCs) placed in the head gate and tailgate pillars, at four locations across the longwall panel, in the fill material, and in the first row of outby pillars near the center of the panel. Four roof-to-floor convergence sensors were installed in the back fill material and a vertical, multipoint borehole extensometer (MPBX) measured the displacement of the strata above the recovery room. Surface surveys were conducted to measure MPBX collar movement. The data show that the front abutment load was transferred onto the recovery room backfill and the out by pillars as the longwall panel was extracted. As the longwall approached the recovery area, the fender and shields yielded, but the backfill provided enough support to keep the room stable as the longwall advanced to its final position. The system worked as planned and the face was recovered in record time.

Jan 1, 2014

By Pinnaduwa H. S. W. Kulatilake

To exploit an underground mine effectively and safely, it is important to have a good understanding of the geotechnical behavior of the rockmass surrounding the underground mine excavation. The aim of this study was to investigate, at the threedimensional level, the geotechnical behavior around a tunnel excavated in a metal mine in China. A three-dimensional numerical model was built by using the 3DEC software package to simulate a tunnel excavation under a high in situ stress condition and by relying on the information available on lithology, geological structures, in situ stress measurements, physical and mechanical properties of intact rock, discontinuities, and interfaces between different rocks. The authors also investigated the effect of the discontinuity network, possible intact rock and discontinuity parameter variability, representation of rock masses as discontinuum or equivalent continuum material and rock support system on the deformation, and stability around the tunnel. A very good agreement was obtained between the collected field deformation monitoring results and the results of the conducted numerical stress analyses with appropriate geomechanical property values.

Jan 1, 2013

By Juan J. Monsalve, Nino Ripepi, Richard Bishop, Jon Baggett

"Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) is a useful technology for rock mass characterization. A laser scanner produces a massive point cloud of a scanned area, such as an exposed rock surface in an underground tunnel, with millimeter precision. The density of the point cloud depends on several parameters from both the TLS operational conditions and the specifications of the project, such as the resolution and the quality of the laser scan, the section of the tunnel, the distance between scanning stations, and the purpose of the scans. One purpose of the scan can be to characterize the rock mass and statistically analyze the discontinuities that compose it for further discontinuous modeling. In these instances, additional data processing and a detailed analysis should be performed on the point cloud to extract the parameters to define a discrete fracture network (DFN) for each discontinuity set. I-Site Studio is a point cloud processing software that allows users to edit and process laser scans. This software contains a set of geotechnical analysis tools that assist engineers during the structural mapping process, allowing for greater and more representative data regarding the structural information of the rock mass, which may be used for generating DFNs. This paper presents the procedures used during a laser scan for characterizing discontinuities in an underground limestone mine and the results of the scan as applied to the generation of DFNs for further discontinuous modeling.INTRODUCTIONAccording to the Mine Health and Safety Administration (MSHA), between 2006 and 2016, the underground stone mining industry had the highest fatality rate in 4 out of 10 years, compared to any other kind of mining (MSHA, 2016). Additionally, during that same time, 40% of the fatalities were due to ground control issues, such as roof and rib collapses and pillar bursts. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) developed guidelines for designing underground stone mines (Esterhuizen, Dolinar, Ellenberger, and Prosser, 2011). However, these guidelines do not apply to all underground stone mines.Monsalve, Baggett, Bishop, and Ripepi (2018) present a case study of an underground limestone mine experiencing a structurally controlled mode of failure. The authors analyze different methods to study that type of instability. They conclude that the integration of terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) with discrete element modelling (DEM) can be used to prevent rock falls in underground excavations to enhance worker safety. However, an adequate rock mass characterization and structural mapping must be performed in order to generate reliable models that allow the engineer to have a better understanding of the rock mass behavior."

Jan 1, 2018

By David Bigby, Tim Ross, David Conover

"Extensive arrays of telltale roof monitoring instruments were recently installed in a Mexican copper mine and a large underground mined storage facility in the eastern U.S. The data were used to evaluate roof stability during development and retreat mining and after installation of supplemental supports. Both manual-reading and automated systems were employed and consisted of up to 64 instruments. This paper will discuss the practical issues involved with installation and monitoring, including reliability and maintenance. Examples will be given for telltale response in relation to known events affecting roof stability, including nearby pillar extraction roof caving, installation of supplemental cable bolts, and separation of the immediate roof layer. The strategy for processing the large quantity of data, presenting the data for review, monitoring the system remotely, and identifying and reporting critical events will be described.INTRODUCTIONTelltales have been used for many years with many varied applications. They are relatively inexpensive, easy to install and interpret, robust, and adaptable. The term ""telltale"" generally denotes a strata extensometer that incorporates a visual indication (and warning) of strata movement. The most common dual-height telltale (Figure 1) was developed by British Coal in the early 1990s as roof bolting was replacing steel arch support (Bigby, 2001). Dual-height telltales provide immediately visible measurements, distinguish between movements above and below the bolted height, and are an established means for providing preemptive warnings of roof falls.Many improvements and modifications on the basic design have been developed to adapt to different mining conditions. For example, triple-height telltales are commonly used where roof bolts of different lengths are installed. The standard manuallyread telltales are limited by the difficulty of obtaining frequent, consistent, and accurate readings, especially in high openings. The instruments may also be located in unstable or inaccessible areas. Consequently, an intrinsically safe electronic telltale system was developed that combines high accuracy and both local and remote reading options. The system supports a network of up to 100 dualheight telltales on each of four separate branches. The instruments are connected with a two-conductor cable and can be read both underground, using a portable readout, and on a surface computer (Figure 2). The automated system still provides the visual warning indication underground."

Jan 1, 2010

By R. Kaund

"Quantifying the rockburst consequence is of critical importance to reduce the hazards with preventative measures in underground mines and deep tunnels. Contours of energy components within a pillar model are plotted at different rockmass damage stages, and plastic strain work and released energy are proposed as indicators of rockmass damage consequence. One pillar model under different loading stiffness is simulated to assess indicators of pillar burst and the resulting damages. The results show the rockmass damage under soft loading stiffness has larger magnitude of plastic strain work and released energy than that which is under stiff loading stiffness, indicating the rockburst consequence can be quantified with plastic strain work and released energy in numerical models. With the quantified rockburst consequence, preventative measures can be taken to avoid severe hazards to mine safety.INTRODUCTIONWith the increasing demand of mineral resources and depletion of near-surface ores, the depths of underground mines have made the mining activities one of mankind’s most dangerous types of work (Ortlepp, 2005). The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) defines rockburst as “a sudden and violent failure of overstressed rock resulting in the instantaneous release of large amounts of accumulated energy.”The types of rockburst can be classified into three types: (1) strain burst, (2) pillar burst, and (3) fault slip (Müller, 1991). Strain burst is the most common type of unstable rock failure in underground openings, where the intensity and scale are usually smaller than pillar burst and fault slip (White and Whyatt, 1999; White, Williams and Whyatt, 2002; Ortlepp, 2005). The cause of strain burst can range from shattering of rock under high stress concentration to buckling of discontinuities parallel to underground openings. The occurrence of pillar burst also depends on the stress and discontinuity conditions in the rockmass, but pillar burst usually involves the sudden loss of strength in the core or foundation of a pillar (Whyatt and Blake, 2002; Kias and Ozbay, 2013; Khademian et al., 2016). Fault slip or slip burst can be either slip along pre-existing discontinuities or shear failure in the rockmass, when the shear stress is larger than shear strength in the fault (Rice, 1983; White and Whyatt, 1999; Sainoki and Mitri, 2014). The consequence of fault slip can vary from very small rockmass damage to consequential rockmass damage, but large seismic magnitude does not always result in large rockmass damage (White and Whyatt, 1999; Whyatt and Blake, 2002)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Keith A. Heasley, Jian Yang

"LaModel uses a laminated overburden boundary-element model and can calculate not only seam-level stresses and displacements but also surface subsidence for thin tabular deposit such as coal seams (Heasley, 1998). Up to this point in time, the material property wizards in LaModel have primarily been designed for calculating accurate stress distributions in single- and multipleseam situations, and for investigating and optimizing pillar sizes and layouts in relation to overburden, abutment, and multipleseam stresses. However, the critical input parameters that will give the most accurate seam-level stress distribution do not necessarily produce the best surface subsidence prediction. The objective of this paper is to develop a methodology for calibrating the critical input parameters in LaModel to optimize surface subsidence prediction.For optimum surface subsidence prediction, it was found that the gob convergence (as defined by the final gob modulus) and the overburden stiffness (as defined by the lamination thickness) were the two most critical parameters that needed to be calibrated (Heasley, 2016). By calibrating numerous panels with various widths and depths, a formula that provides the optimum final gob modulus to use for subsidence prediction was developed. Also, three different empirical formulas for optimizing the lamination thickness as a function of overburden depth and/or the panel width to- depth ratio were determined for the three cases: supercritical panels, and subcritical panels with and without offsets. Further, if the user has measured data for subsidence factor and angle-of draw, the optimum final gob modulus and lamination thickness can be determined from the measured data. These new subsidence prediction formulas are being implemented into new material wizards in LaModel.INTRODUCTIONIn the past few decades, with the increased need for highly productive mining techniques, full extraction mining methods have been increasingly employed in the U.S. coal mining industry. These total extraction mining methods, which include both longwall mining and room-and-pillar retreat mining, normally cause immediate roof caving and the associated surface subsidence. These methods can be highly productive and cost-effective, but the associated surface subsidence can cause damage to surface structures and negatively impact the surface environment (Peng, 2008). Therefore, a reliable program for predicting the surface subsidence associated with full extraction mining is required for appropriately engineering and managing the surface subsidence impacts of full extraction mining."

Jan 1, 2016