Search Documents

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

Virtually all mineable Appalachian coal seams exist in a multi-seam environment. This makes it inevitable that most seams will eventually experience interaction induced ground control and mining problems. Indeed, it has been estimated that every working face will experience interaction effects from previous or current workings at least once during its lifetime (1), and that these problems are considerably exaggerated when seams are in close proximity -- a distance of less than 110 feet. The continued increase in multi-seam problems has resulted in considerable research activities over many years (2,3,4,1). Theoretical analysis, numerical and physical model studies, statistical and empirical analysis of numerous interaction related field data have been applied to multi-seam mining situations and have identified many useful trends and design criteria (4,5,6,7). To fully utilize research results and transfer multi-seam mining technology to field engineers, a design model -- USEAM was constructed (8). This model, designed for close seam under-mining situations, was computerized to facilitate utilization. In the current research, a new computer program "MSEAM" was developed to produce a model for both under- and overmining close seam situations. It is hoped that both of these software packages will aid field engineers in using important interactive design criteria to gain a better understanding of interaction mechanisms. Through advance planning with these programs, detrimental interaction may be avoided and minimized, and occasionally a design can be selected which will allow interaction effects to be utilized to the benefit of mining operations.

Jan 1, 1987

By Z. T. Bieniawski

This paper presents the results of a survey of room and pillar dimensions and design practice in U.S. coal mines aimed at improving the design procedures in room and pillar mining. A review is given of the current pillar strength formulas and suggestions are made for better utilization of research results in engineering practice.

Jan 1, 1981

By Ihsan B. Tulu, Keith A. Heasley, Aanand Nandula

"The objective of this paper is to present the development of a software tool that will assist in an area calculation of the Analysis of Roof Bolting Systems (ARBS) support intensity while incorporating more detailed geology, stress, and intersection span input. In this area ARBS tool, a detailed CMRR distribution can be determined from the available geologic database at the mine. In addition, the overburden and multiple-seam stresses, as obtained from the boundary-element program LaModel, can be converted to a “pseudo-depth” which is then used as the depth input to the area ARBS calculation. Finally, the section-specific intersection spans can be determined from the mine design for input to the calculation. All this detailed area input information for ARBS is handled by the latest version of the Stability Mapping (StabMap) program, which now outputs an area ARBS suggested support density given the required input parameters. This final ARBS grid can be plotted, analyzed and overlaid on the mine map for optimum use in support design and for presentation to production personnel.INTRODUCTIONSince the inception of roof bolts in the 1940s, there has been a lack of a universally accepted roof bolting design method (Mark, 2002; Mark and Pappas, 2012). To address this situation, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Hazard (NIOSH) developed roof support design guidelines, which were incorporated into a computer program called the Analysis of Roof Bolting Systems (ARBS). These guidelines were based on the effects of roof quality, stress, and mine geometry (Mark, Molinda and Dolinar, 2001). The roof rock quality in ARBS is represented by the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR), the depth is used as a surrogate for the stress, and the intersection span serves to represent the mine geometry (Mark, Molinda and Dolinar, 2001). These three input parameters are used in the fundamental, empirically derived equation of ARBS to calculate a required support density factor, called ARBS, (Mark, Molinda and Dolinar, 2001):"

Jan 1, 2018

By T. J. McMahon

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

Jan 1, 1989

By Stephen C. Tadolini, John Bolton, Bre-Anne Sainsbury, Tom Meikle

"The capacity of ground support components which have been affected by corrosion is reduced and may ultimately lead to dynamic failure of the component and the strata. In order to maintain an effective, long-term ground support system, significant campaigns of rehabilitation are often required in corrosion affected areas which also expose the workers to hazardous conditions. The most common corrosion protection for steel ground support utilises sacrificial systems such as galvanising. Galvanising has previously been proven to be susceptible to some corrosion processes. Stainless steel is the most effective in resistance to corrosion, but can be cost prohibitive, and its mechanical properties often make it unsuited to use in ground support components.Providing an outer protective plastic coating to bolts has proven to be an effective means of protecting the inner steel bar from corrosion. However, these support systems tend to be susceptible to coating damage, and require post cement grouting to provide full encapsulation. In comparison to a standard bolt/resin system, they can be slow to install and expensive. These systems have also been shown to reduce overall load transfer performance of the bolting system.In order provide a higher level of corrosion protection whilst maintaining current installation practices and bolting cycle times, Minova has developed the Enduro™ Steel Ground Support Range. The Enduro™ range consists of standard Minova steel ground support components which have been treated with a unique coating process. The Enduro™ coating has been tested in the harshest of conditions, in laboratory controlled conditions and in underground trials. It has been proven to effectively resist or completely eliminate the formation of corrosion, even in the most aggressive environments. This paper explains the process and provides the details of the laboratory and underground corrosion performance testing carried out on Enduro™ ground support products.INTRODUCTIONTraditionally, the most common form of corrosion protection in steel ground support consists of a sacrificial protective coating such as galvanising (Aziz, et al., 2013). Such coatings have proven to be ineffective in extreme high and low pH conditions with corrosion of the support system commonly encountered. There is also evidence that common forms of galvanising may actually increase the rate of corrosion in certain pH environments. Figure 1 shows typical corrosion and failure of a standard re-bar roof bolt."

Jan 1, 2016

By R. Quentin Eades, Kyle Perry

"Surface mines continue to implement highwalls for several reasons, such as increasing recovery, improving margins, and justifying higher stripping ratios. Highwall stability is a complex issue that is dependent upon a variety of mining and geologic factors, and a safe design is necessary for a successful surface operation. To improve highwall stability, it is important to understand the connection between local geology and blasting.Explosives are employed throughout the mining industry for primary rock breakage. There are a number of controlled blasting techniques that can be implemented to improve highwall stability. These include line drilling, smooth wall blasting, trim blasting, buffer blasting, air decking, and presplitting. Each of these techniques have associated advantages and disadvantages. Understanding local geology is necessary for selecting the appropriate controlled blasting technique. Furthermore, understanding the limitations and conditions for successful implementation of each technique is necessary. A discussion of the impact of geologic conditions on highwall stability is provided. Additionally, discussion is provided for the successful incorporation of the controlled blasting techniques listed above, and the associated mining and geologic factors that influence the selection and design of controlled blasting plans. Finally, a new methodology is proposed.INTRODUCTIONExplosives are used throughout the mining industry as the standard for primary rock breakage, a critical part of the mining cycle. In 2015, the U.S.. consumed 2.2 million tons of explosives (Apodaca, 2015). The coal mining industry accounted for the majority of explosive consumption, accounting for approximately 63% of total explosives. The quarrying and nonmetal mining industries accounted for 12% of explosive consumption, and the metal mining industry accounted for 9% (Apodaca, 2015). This constitutes 84% of the explosives used in the U.S. However, the energy released during the detonation process is often in excess of that required to adequately fragment the surrounding rock (Jhanwar and Jethwa, 2000). This excessive energy, along with over confinement and poor blast geometry, will cause damage to the undisturbed rock mass beyond the intended boundary of the blast. This event is known as overbreak or back-break (ISEE, 2011)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Kikro Matsui

Longwall mining 1s more productive in comparison to other methods but requires particular conditions for its effective use This paper relates to longwall roof instability at Ikeshima Colliery In order to make clear the cause of the longwall roof instability, scientific investigation in terms of geomechanical factors and longwall support system was planned and carried out

Jan 1, 1997

By Adam Mackenzie, Dan Payne, Yass-Marie Rutty

"Historically, the Crinum mine has experienced significant falls of ground when longwall production slowed to prepare for recovery in weak roof areas. These conditions continue through the recovery process and result in both safety concerns and delays. When mine plans and exploration revealed that most of the mine's future longwall recoveries were located in weak roof areas, a decision was made to try pre-driven recovery roads as a solution to the problem. After completing eight pre-driven recovery roads with varying degrees of success and numerous lessons, the Crinum North mine now utilizes a modified Pre-driven Recovery Roadway (PDRR) to improve the longwall take-off process in weak roof areas. During mine development, a standard roadway is driven where the final recovery location of each longwall is planned. After the installation of secondary support, the PDRR is backfilled with a cement-flyash mix to provide support to the roof, and confinement to the ribs and floor of the roadway. The method has been refined over the last four years to provide greater strata stability and improved operational and safety performance compared with conventional take-offs at Crinum, and has resulted in a site record of longwall relocation in 11.5 days (pull mesh to picks in coal). This paper describes the evolution of the PDRRs from Crinum East to Crinum North, including lessons from initial attempts and changes to the secondary support regime, the operational approach during the final stages of retreat, the backfill strategy and plans for the future.INTRODUCTIONThe Crinum mine is the underground component of BHP Billiton Mitsubishi Alliance's (BMA) Gregory Crinum mine, located northeast of Emerald, Queensland (Figure 1).The Crinum mine has a history of roof control problems coming into and during longwall recoveries. Weak roof, combined with the slow mining, which is a consequence of preparing for equipment recovery, pulling mesh (which also creates tip-to-face issues), and the lengthy bolt-up process, often results in loss of immediate roof and subsequent roof falls. In fact, approximately 50% of the first 13 longwall recoveries (which were at depths of 180 to 200m) experienced roof fall delays, the longest of which took four months to mine the last pillar and recover the longwall. This recurring problem prompted the mine to investigate options to reduce or eliminate the problem."

Jan 1, 2016

By Alan Bugden

Goedehoop Colliery produces 8 million tonnes of coal a year, principally from room and pillar mining, and is situated in the Witbank Coalfield in the Republic of South Africa. The mine has a long and successful record of producing export quality coal from the 2,4 and 5 seams at depths ranging from 20 to 100 metres using modem mining equipment. Following a number of fatalities caused by large and unexplained roof falls in roadways and intersections of supported ground, a review of the roof control system at Goedehoop was carried out. This led in turn to a programme of underground measurements and surveys. This included detailed investigation of the roof falls, horizontal stress mapping, stress measurement and short encapsulation pull testing on roofbolts. These investigations led to a number of important conclusions in relation to the state of stress in the ground, the roof failure mechanisms, standard of rootbolt installation and performance of the roofbolt system. As a result of the work Goedehoop Colliery has made a number of substantive changes to the roof control management system at the mine. These include: 1. A recognition of the importance of horizontal stress as the main factor responsible for roof falls. 2 The forward planning of roof support based on known features which cause the stresses to be elevated. 3. The introduction of a more effective roofbolt system, which can be more easily installed to a high standard. 4. A response system based on risk assessment and monitoring roof movement on a routine basis. The paper describes the knowledge acquired, the conclusions drawn, the changes made and progress to date.

Jan 1, 2001

By Anton Sroka

The German hard coal production predominantly derives from underground multiseam mining activities. Beside common surface damages, ?inner mine damages? on underground infrastructures (i.e. main roads, cross cuts and shafts) due to mining excavations occur to an increasing extent. As these "inner mine damages" dramatically increased because of the development towards high performance longwall mining technologies, this matter raised to be a severe problem concerning mining economics. To protect durable and long lasting underground infrastructures, precautionary measures such as suitable mine layouts, adapted planning of mining operations and moderate face advances have to be considered. Some examples of "inner mine damages" recorded by means of mine surveying methods are given in this paper. An empirical-mathematical model based on the principles of mining subsidence engineering methods will be introduced. This model allows to minimize ?inner mine damages? and helps to support and optimize mining processes.

Jan 1, 1999

By Bruce K. Hebblewhite

This paper provides an overview of the international ?state of the art? with respect to underground coal mining methods used in seams of thickness greater than 4.5 m, through a review of a selection of high performing thick seam mining operations around the world?both Single Pass Longwall (SPL) and Longwall Top Coal Caving (LTCC). The paper discusses the recent operational experiences from these selected faces, together with the ground control issues faced, and identifies some of the major, inherent geotechnical factors that can influence the mining method selection, design criteria, and ultimate performance, from both an operational and safety perspective. It is clear that both of these methods are developing quickly? not only from an operational and equipment perspective, but also from the understanding of critical geotechnical criteria. There is an increasing role for both methods in thick seam environments, although the higher SPL faces will only be successful in the near to mid-term under benign geotechnical environments. Regardless of the method, a thorough understanding of the critical geotechnical factors is a key to successful implementation of either method.

Jan 1, 2013

By Taghi Sherizadeh, Pinnaduwa H. S. W. Kulatilake

"This paper examines the effect of different geological and mining factors on roof stability in underground coal mines by combining the field observations, laboratory testing, and numerical modeling. Observations at an underground coal mine that uses the room-and-pillar mining method showed several failures of the immediate roof, and is used as a case study. Three-dimensional distinct element analyses were performed to study the intrinsic roof failure mechanisms and to evaluate specifically the effect of in-situ stress magnitudes and directions, discontinuity mechanical properties, and variation of pillar to room size on roof stability.INTRODUCTIONThe lithology of the immediate roof with respect to the underground openings plays an important role in stability of the roof in underground excavations. Laminated, or thinly bedded shale, is one of the most frequently seen overlaying strata above the coal deposits. The bedding planes and interfaces have very low or close to zero tensile strength in the direction perpendicular to the bedding planes, and their shear strength is much lower than of the rock layers. As a result, the bedding planes are much weaker than the rock layers. Therefore, due to the stress concentrations caused by excavations, slippage and separation can easily happen along the bedding planes before initiation of failure within the rock layers.In the past, several attempts have been made to understand the mechanism behind the roof failure in underground coal mines. Most of these earlier attempts were based on empirical techniques and continuum based numerical methods that have limited capability in simulating the response of discontinuum rock mass behavior to excavation. Different factors such as the magnitude and direction of the horizontal in-situ stresses, type and mechanical properties of roof rock, surface topography, geological anomalies, gas pressure, slippage and separation of bedding planes at the roof and floor, entry width and excavation sequences are identified as key factors that could significantly impact the stability of the roof. Among all the aforementioned factors, in spite of its importance, the impact of slip and separation of bedding planes on roof stability has not received enough attention from researchers. In a few available numerical modeling studies, the bedding planes are modeled using the continuum based numerical codes such as ABAQUS (Chen, 1999) and FLAC3D (Ray, 2009). However, since the bedding planes among the roof layers become discontinuous during the numerical analysis, this behavior is most likely not be accurately captured by the continuum based numerical models. Chen (1999) conducted finite element analysis to study the impacts of the roof and coal interface slip and the bedding planes slip in the roof on the stress distribution in the roof strata by using the finite element analysis software named ABAQUS. To avoid the complications associated with the finite sliding between two deformable bodies, he limited his study to the two-dimensional finite element analysis (plane strain). He concluded that the slip and separation of interfaces and bedding planes have significant impact on the behavior of the roof strata and without considering the interfaces, the roof bolt functions cannot be simulated properly by using the numerical analysis methods. Gadde and Peng (2005) performed three-dimensional finite difference analysis using FLAC3D software with strain softening material behavior to simulate the cutter roof in an underground coal mine. Their numerical model was fully continuum and no bedding plane was included in the model. They suggested that the strain softening material model can help to simulate the cutter roof failure up to a satisfactory level (Gadde and Peng, 2005))."

Jan 1, 2015

By Boqiang Wu, Ganggang Xu, Xiaodong Wang, Hai Wang, Shibin Zhu

"Using a paste-like slurry as a filling from the ground surface to the goaf, artificial pillars can be built in the cavity goaf to support the goaf roof to prevent roof collapse and ground subsidence. If the accumulation laws of paste-like slurry are known well, the filling technology can be optimized. The laws can establish the foundation for finding out the best methods for building artificial pillars and filling technology. In order to understand the accumulation laws of paste-like slurry in the cavity goaf, Aeolian sand with wide distribution in northwestern China was selected as aggregate, and Portland cement was used as cementitious material to prepare a paste-like slurry. A test model of the cavity goaf was built to simulate the filling process by pump from the ground surface to the goaf to study accumulation laws of the paste-like slurry. The results show that the whole process of expansion and accumulation of the paste-like slurry could be divided into stages: free expansion, fill tightening expansion, and stable expansion. The angle of repose of the accumulation body of the paste-like slurry is constant in the stage of stable expansion, and it is the final angle of repose of the accumulation body. The angle of repose of the accumulation body is highly relevant to the slump of the paste-like slurry, and it is unrelated to the distance between the floor and roof. Under certain conditions of the cavity goaf, reducing the slump of paste-like slurry is one of the effective ways to obtain cost-effective pillars.INTRODUCTIONA large number of cavity goafs of coal mines were left in northwestern China; they were formed in the mining process by room-pillar or strip mining. Safety coal pillars were used to support the roof to keep long-term stability in the goaf, so the ground subsidence was not obvious (Fu, Deng, and Zhang, 2011; Xie, 2014). With gradual weathering, destruction of coal pillars, or additional load from ground surface buildings and structures, there could be a risk of instantaneous collapse of the roof in the goaf. This would affect the safety of existing structures on the ground and adjacent mines (Qu et al., 2017; Li, Xiang, and Jia, 2011; Tan, Guo, and Zhao, 2016; Tan et al., 2017). For disaster prevention of the falling cavity goaf, the current common practice is full filling (Hu et al., 2008; Liu, Zhu, and Huang, 2015; Pan and Wu, 2010). However, for buildings and structures with lower deformation requirements, full filling is excessive. For example, it is acceptable for goaf treatment under general roads and industrial sites to control the maximum deformation and keep the deformation continuous (Liu, 2011; Liu, 2012)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Chris Mark

Fully-grouted roof bolts comprise more than 80% of the primary roof supports used in U.S. coal mines. However, nearly 1,500 MSHA reportable, non-injury roof falls occur each year, and most of these are attributable to failure of the roof bolt system. Anchorage failure is one failure mechanism for fully-grouted bolts. As roof deformation works its way upward, the bolts can become heavily loaded near their upper ends, If the applied load exceeds the anchorage, the bolts will simply pull out. Research dating back 30 yrs indicates that this type of anchorage failure is most likely when the roof rock is weak, just where roof support is most critical. In soft shale or coal roof, the small amount of data available in the literature indicates that 20-30 in of resin anchorage may be required to achieve the full capacity of the bolt. In other words, the "full resistance zone" of a 60 in bolt may actually be just 30-40 in. Despite its potential importance, there is no widely accepted anchorage test for fully grouted bolts. Standard pull tests have sometimes been employed, but they provide no information on the anchorage near the top of the bolt. An alternative, first described more than 25 yrs ago in the U.S., is the short-encapsulation pull test (SEPT). With this test, the bolt is installed with only a short (1 ft or less) tube of resin. In recent years variations of this test have become international standards. This paper describes recent studies using short encapsulation pull tests in the U.S. Tests were conducted in the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Safety Research Coal Mine at Bruceton and at underground mines in Pennsylvania and West Virginia. The study found that the SEPT can be used to make a simple evaluation of resin bolt anchorage. Suggested procedures for conducting SEPT are included. The study also confirmed that poor anchorage can be an issue, particularly where the roof rock is very weak. Some simple techniques for improving anchorage, and thereby the effectiveness of fully grouted bolts, are discussed.

Jan 1, 2002

By Ry Stone

"There have been many design practices utilised within the coal mining industry to arrive at the minimum densities of primary ground support required during roadway development. This paper demonstrates the practical use of empirical databases, and focuses on the main drivers for ground support as demonstrated in conceptual models.Golder Associates’ empirical databases used for ground support include a Primary Roof Support Database and a Primary Rib Support Database. Both are based on successful ground support designs installed in mines in Australia, the US, the UK, South Africa, New Zealand, and Europe. The term “successful” refers to those designs that were used on a repeated basis for the purpose of roadway development.The Primary Roof Support Database indicates that the major factors influencing successful roof support designs are roof competency, expressed as the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR), and in situ stress. As roof displacement is essentially a function of horizontal stress and roof competency, in order to provide some form of measure as to the likely magnitude of roof deformation during roadway development, the depth of cover is divided by the CMRR to arrive at a “Stress Strength Ratio” (SSR). The database indicates that the higher the SSR, the greater the likelihood that the roof will require higher densities of support.In regard to the Primary Rib Support Database, it is evident from the current database that the primary factors affecting the capacity of rib support required for a successful design are roadway height and depth of cover. In order to provide some form of measure as to the likely magnitude of rib deformation during roadway development, the depth of cover is multiplied by the height of the roadway to determine a “Rib Deformation Rating” (RDR). Similar to the roof, the database indicates that the higher the RDR, the greater the likelihood that the rib will require higher densities of support.These databases have been used to help determine the minimum primary ground support designs required at many mine sites in Australasia, Europe, and the US. This paper will demonstrate the effectiveness and practicality of these databases at two selected mines in Australia and the US.In order to improve the Primary Rib Support Database, this paper will also propose a new rib deformation rating based on the addition of site specific coal strength data for the Australian mines. The proposed rating attempts to capture the main variables that define the behaviour of a buckling column."

Jan 1, 2015

By Bo-Hyun Kim, Steve Berry, Mark K. Larson

"When coal pillar bursts occur, they involve the sudden expulsion of coal and rock into the mine opening. These events occur when relatively high stresses in a coal pillar, which serve as support in underground workings, exceed the critical capability of the pillar. This causes the pillar to rupture without warning. A cleating is a type of naturally occurring joint system unique to coal seams. However, cleatings are pervasive throughout the coal seam and are much more tightly spaced than joints occurring in other rock types. In this study, researchers from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) investigated 84 coal samples obtained from a Utah coal mine by conducting both unconfined and triaxial compressive tests in order to examine the response to stress as a function of both confinement and orientation between cleat and loading direction. The results of the study show that the confining pressure dictated not only the peak compressive strength but also the brittleness as a function of the major-to-minor principal stress ratio. The spalling limit of the coal estimated by the s-shaped brittle failure criterion appears to be very dependent on the angle between the cleat and the loading direction, particularly at lower confinement.INTRODUCTIONCoal pillar bursts, or bumps, remain a most critical safety concern in underground coal mining, despite significant advancements in engineering controls. As shown in Figure 1, between 1983 and 2014, there were nearly 400 cases of reportable dynamic failure accidents in coal and nonmetal mines, resulting in 20 fatalities, 155 lost-time accidents, and an estimated 48,000 lost man hours (MSHA, 2015). These types of events have been documented for well over 100 years within the American underground coal mining industry. During this time, mining practices and support technologies have evolved considerably, resulting in an overall decrease in the rate of dynamic failure-related injuries and fatalities. Although techniques and practices of mining are highly advanced, coal pillar bursts, or bumps, continue to occur (Mark and Gauna, 2015). If coal is expected to fail in a brittle manner, behavior changes associated with relatively low tensile strength, such as the transition from tensile to shear failure, have to be considered and reflected in the adopted failure criteria. Rock failure in tension takes place at low confinement around excavations due to tensile failure in heterogeneous rocks (Diederichs, 2007). The prospect of tensile-dominant brittle failure diminishes as the confinement increases away from the excavation boundary. Therefore, it is expected that the transition from tensile to shear mode in the failure mechanism occurs as the confinement level changes and conditions for tensile failure are prevented or strongly diminished. In addition, many uncertainties remain because of the highly anisotropic characteristics of coal seams associated with geologic structure and the mining-induced spatial redistribution of stress in coal pillars. Thus, to prevent fatalities in underground coal mining, continuous effort is required to better understand the catastrophic failure mechanisms in coal mines."

Jan 1, 2018

By Christopher Mark

Coal bursts are typically associated with highly stressed coal. Most bursts occur during retreat mining (longwall mining or pillar recovery) in highly stressed locations like the tailgate corner of the longwall panel. Others are associated with multiple seam interactions. However, a small but significant percentage of coal bursts have occurred during development or in outby locations unaffected by active mining. Most development bursts have been relatively small, but some have been highly destructive. No theory of coal bursts can be complete if it does not account for this type of event. This paper focusses on the development mining coal burst experience in the US, putting it into the context of the entire US coal burst database. The first documented development coal burst occurred almost exactly 100 years ago during slope drivage at the Sunnyside Mine in Utah. Sunnyside subsequently had a long history of bursts, mainly during retreat mining but also during development. Several Colorado mines have also experienced multiple development bursts. Some, but by no means all, of the development bursts in these western US coalfields have been associated with faults. In the Central Appalachian coalfields, most development bursts have occurred in multiple seam situations. In some of these cases, however, there was no retreat mining in either seam. The paper closes with some lessons from this history, with implications for preventing such events in the future.

Jan 1, 2017

By Jun Lu

This paper presents the evaluation, enhancement and comparison of two hydraulic fracturing techniques which were employed to mitigate the impact of a massive sandstone channel on two successive longwall faces. The hydraulic fracturing technique and Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software were initially employed to mitigate the impact of thick, massive sandstoneroof during mining of longwall Panel 21. Improved longwall face conditions and productivity were observed as Panel 21 mined through the sandstone channel. However, moderate sandstone fractures and falls at the face were still present in areas where hydraulic fracture influence was not present. Such adverse conditions caused two to three weeks of production delays due to large face cavities, jammed face conveyor and subsequent face gluing. Based on the mining experience in Panel 21, and site-specific roof geology in Panel 22, a modified and more effective hydraulic fracturing program was employed. Fewer well-placed holes were drilled, and larger volume of water was pumped into each hole in order to propagate the individual horizontal pancake fractures over a larger area, thereby enhancing caving and relieving face pressure caused by overhang of the massive sandstone. Longwall Visual Analysis (LVA) software was also employed at Panel 22 to predict the cavity risk index and guide the longwall face crew in double-pulling shields behind the shearer drum. This helped to reduce the tip-to-face distance at the critical spots along the longwall face, which helped mitigate the formation of the roof cavities and failure of massive sandstone onto the face conveyor. Underground observations, face advance rate and face rock delay analysis confirmed that longwall face conditions and advance rate in Panel 22were significantly improved compared to those of Panel 21. Consequently, safety and productivity were improved.

Jan 1, 2014

By Frank E. Chase

Sacrificial entries, roof slotting, and other tactics have been used to combat high horizontal stresses during roadway development in U.S. coal mines. In Australia, the "pillar extraction on the advance" mining method has been successfully employed as a horizontal stress control technique. The concept of advancing and relieving mine workings through pillar extraction developed from observations that some mines experience difficult ground conditions when advancing and retreating the first panel in a new reserve. However, conditions dramatically improve in subsequent panels. Apparently, the creation of a gob area stress relieves the adjacent panel workings. After much debate and close scrutiny, the first U.S. roof control plan to advance and relieve was approved in 1998, for the Sargent Hollow Mine in Wise County, VA. The major concern was that this mining practice places section personnel inby of the gob. The tentative approval permitted barrier pillar slabbing and removal of the adjacent development pillar during panel development. The intent of the plan was to provide a "stress shadow" for the advancing faces and outby workings to reduce the excessive number of roof falls. Sargent Hollow successfully extracted their first panel by pillaring on advance and retreat mining using posts. Mobile roof supports were employed to extract pillars while advancing the second panel. This paper summarizes Sargent Hollow Mine's experiences with the advance and relieve mining method.

Jan 1, 1999