Search Documents

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 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 Guy Reed, Russell Frith

"Current coal pillar design is the epitome of suspension design. A defined weight of potentially unstable overburden material is estimated, and the dimensions of the pillars left behind are based on holding up that material to a prescribed or user-defined Factor of Safety. In principle, this is seemingly no different to early roadway roof support design. However, for the most part, roadway roof stabilisation has progressed to reinforcement, whereby the roof strata is assisted in supporting itself. This is now the mainstay of efficient and effective underground coal production. Suspension and reinforcement are fundamentally different in their roadway roof stabilisation approach and, importantly, lead to substantially different requirements in terms of roof support hardware characteristics and their application. In suspension design, the primary focus is the total load-bearing capacity of the installed support to ensure that it is securely anchored outside of the potentially unstable roof mass. In contrast, reinforcement recognises that roof de-stabilisation is a gradational process with an ever-increasing roof displacement magnitude leading to ever-reducing stability. In a reinforcing situation, key roof support characteristics relate such design issues as system stiffness, the location and pattern of support elements within the roadway, and mobilising a defined thickness of the immediate roof to create (or build) some form of stabilising strata beam. The objective is to ensure that horizontal stress acts across the roof of the roadway and is maintained at a level that prevents mass roof collapse. This paper presents a prototype coal pillar and overburden system representation where reinforcement, rather than suspension, of the overburden is the stabilising mechanism via the action of in situ horizontal stresses within the overburden, the suspension problem potentially being an exception rather than the rule, as is also the case in roadway roof stability. Established principles relating to roadway roof reinforcement can potentially be applied to coal pillar design under this representation. The merit of this assertion is evaluated according to documented failed pillar cases in a range of mining applications and industries found in a series of published databases. Based on the various findings, a series of coal pillar system design considerations and suggestions for bord and pillar type mine workings are provided. This potentially allows a more flexible and informed approach to coal pillar sizing within workable mining layouts, as compared to common industry practices of a single design Factor of Safety (FoS) under defined overburden dead-loading to the exclusion of other potentially relevant overburden stabilising influences."

Jan 1, 2017

By Peter Hayes

Moonee Colliery operates a longwall extraction system in the Great Northern seam of the Newcastle Coal Measures, approximately 100km north of Sydney, NSW. In the initial mine area of longwall blocks1-4a, the Great Northern seam is overlain by a massive conglomerate approximately 35m in thickness. Unanticipated sudden, blocky caving of this material has produced windblasts with associated velocities of 100m/sec and over-pressures of 35kPa. Although these events have not resulted in fatality, the potential safety risk to face personnel was such that the mine was threatened with closure. The development of a Windblast Management Plan to minimise the exposure to windblasts, a Micro-seismic Management flan to predict caving events, and the use of hydraulic fracturing to generate caving on demand, have all contributed to the salvation of the mine. Prior to the introduction of hydraulic fracturing, falls were highly variable and ranged in goaf area from 2000m2 to 30,000m2 with an average of around 7.000m2. Hydraulic fracturing has introduced consistent and far less variable falls, planned as averaging around 5000m2 and all accompanied by microseismic warning, Moonee Colliery is believed to he the only operation in the world using real-time microseismic warning and using hydrofracturing as a day-to-day operational process. These processes have enabled it to return to financial viability in an environment of strict procedural control, whilst ongoing efforts are made to optimise and enhance these systems. Moonee's story is a case study of the successful application of research and development work to the economics of a mine.

Jan 1, 2000

By Sean C. Farrell

In underground mining and tunneling, machine design is predominantly dictated by mine conditions and individual customer desires. In partnership with Australian companies WDS Limited and Cram Fluid Power, the engineering department of J.H. Fletcher & Company was tasked to design and manufacture roof bolting modules to be mounted off both sides of a roadheader, providing in-cycle bolting. The objective was to produce a boom and bolt module that would allow an operator to bolt from a remote location, eliminating the need for miner to work in unsupported ground. The bolt module needed to operate in front of the cutting boom, but retract to a parked position out of the way during the cutting cycle. Due to Australian electrical approval requirements, it was desirable to design the module with minimal use of electrical controls. The need for multiple, complex, drill steel and bolt handling steps led to the need for a custom hydraulics package to automate several of the movements. The result of the design is dual drill and bolt modules mounted to a multistage boom with over 24 feet (7.31 m) of extension. Each unit rotates and tilts to meet the bolt pattern requirements in conjunction with the stow and load requirements. The bolt module builds on previous designs incorporating a modular assembly with each sub-component designed to be replaceable and adjustable independently from other machine components. Each major component is painted a different color to help the operator make the connection visually from the module to the operator?s control valves. Hydraulic package valves were designed to automatically control several of the sub-components during the drill cycle, reducing the number of steps a drill operator would, otherwise, have to do manually. This design removes the operator from working in unsupported roof and away from other inherent hazards, putting them at a safe distance on the operator?s platform. The cutting and bolting equipment has been combined into one machine, which is advantageous in single entry drifts because there is no need to place change equipment. The hydraulic package valves eliminate the need for any electronics, thus avoiding any electrical regulations with respect to the controls. The addition of these modules to the roadheading machine increases miner safety and streamlines production while meeting the ground control support requirements.

Jan 1, 2014

By Rusty Mchenry, Craig Dickerson, Robin L. Oldham

"It has been proven that longwall faces can be moved safely and efficiently. However, abutment pressures and poor ground control conditions can halt operations and be hazardous to coal miners. Recently at a mine in Southwestern Pennsylvania, roof material collapsed above shields that created two large voids and caused major challenges for shield recovery. A unique, engineering solution was developed that utilized a modified concrete material to fill the voids, creating stability in the affected area. The many phases of this project included the construction phase, void pumping, cutting out, and bolting of the concrete material. This project eliminated the hazards associated with bolting the recovery face and removing shields in adverse conditions, making it possible for the mine operator to safely complete the longwall move.INTRODUCTIONFrequently in the mining process, especially during the recovery phase, voids above the longwall supports have occurred. These voids are simply roof cavities caused by falling rock strata above the longwall face. Most often, this condition slows down or halts mining operations and creates hazardous work conditions for coal miners. Numerous methods of supporting void areas on longwall faces have been attempted and utilized throughout the mining industry since the advent of the longwall mining system. These methods have utilized many different materials and processes and have included the installation of steel or wooden beams, crib blocks, and various types of roof bolts. However, these methods can be dangerous due to exposure of personnel to the mine voids, falling roof material, and the necessity to handle large amounts of heavy support materials.This paper describes a unique case study in Southwestern Pennsylvania where longwall recovery methods, through two void fills, were successfully completed, eliminating exposure of coal miners to the rock voids above. At the start of this endeavor, normal recovery operations were halted, and hazardous conditions became a concern when the voids were encountered. However, in the interest of safety, the decision was made to try a unique method to completely fill the void from the bottom of the coal seam to the top of the void with a cementitious material and then mine through it. This is in contrast to traditional methods where beams and support materials are used to stabilize the area above and in front of the mine shields, which can expose miners to the void above."

Jan 1, 2015

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 Rudrajit Mitra, Tien Dung Le, Chengguo Zhang, Bruce Hebblewhite, Joung Oh

"Geomechanical and geotechnical characteristics of coal seam are important parameters that directly affect the cavability of top coal in the longwall top-coal caving (LTCC) method. The impact of these parameters such as coal strength, coal deformation modulus, coal discontinuities and top-coal thickness on cavability has not been fully understood in previous numerical analyses. The limitation and selection of the numerical modelling codes were two of the main reasons. In this paper, detailed caving simulations are performed using a 2D distinct element method (DEM) code, UDEC, to study the effect of various critical parameters on top-coal cavability. The numerical analysis evidently shows that the coal deformation modulus, coal discontinuities, and top-coal thickness have considerable influences on cavability. Coal strength is also a factor but to a lesser extent. The results presented in this paper contribute to the understanding of top-coal cavability in different mining environments and facilitate the development of an advanced cavability evaluation criterion. INTRODUCTION The longwall top-coal caving (LTCC) method was originally developed in the 1950s in the former Soviet Union and France (Tien, 1998). The method was nearly abandoned in Europe after the mid-1980s; however, it has been significantly improved and widely applied in China since the late 1980s. A conceptual model of the LTCC method is shown in Figure 1 in which a thick coal seam is divided into two sections including the lower or cutting section, and the upper or top coal section. The lower section of coal seam is mined by conventional longwall method. Meanwhile, the upper section is recovered by caving through the face support. The LTCC method is considered to be the most viable option for mining general thick seams. Compared to the multi-slice longwall (MSL) method, LTCC has the major advantages (Zhongming, 2001; cited by Vakili, 2009):"

Jan 1, 2017

By David P. Conover, Jake Bain, Christopher M. Ross

"Highwall mining of thick (up to 100 ft) steeply dipping (20° or more) coal seams provides many challenges, both geotechnically and operationally because seam dips near or in excess of highwall mining machine capabilities are encountered. Maximizing coal recovery while maintaining highwall stability requires innovative techniques with regard to web and barrier pillar layout, depth of penetration, and choice of mining horizon within the seam. Stability of highwall mining slopes, openings, and pillars are typically analyzed using the ARMPS-HWM program, as well as LAMODEL, UDEC, and Slope-W modeling. Highwall stability can be maintained and highwall mining production optimized by applying design criteria in creative ways, including alternating miner penetration depths and initiating mining of thick seams toward the bottom of the seam. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal requires careful planning and execution, including close cooperation between geotechnical design engineers, the mining company, and the highwall mining contractor. This paper describes the application of creative design techniques to a specific pit arrangement at the Westmoreland Kemmerer Mine, Kemmerer, Wyoming. Highwall mining was accomplished by UGM ADDCAR Systems, LLC, on a contract basis. INTRODUCTION Highwall mining is a technique for attaining additional coal recovery after the economic strip limit is reached in surface mining. It involves remote deployment of a continuous miner in openings beneath the final highwall, with no personnel entry. Many candidate areas for highwall mining have thick and steeply dipping seams. Mining downdip presents challenges related to the maximum pulling capacity of the machine, traction of the cutting head, and material conveying, all of which limit penetration depth. Maximum penetration is greater for flatter slopes and decreases for slopes nearing the threshold of the maximum machine operating angle. Most highwall mining operations are relatively flat with slight undulations within the seam; therefore, the highwall mining pillar design criteria applies fairly equally to the entire mining area. However, in steeply dipping deposits, design criteria based on higher overburden loads at the far end of the penetration are excessively conservative for the shallower portions of the openings near the highwall."

Jan 1, 2017

Researchers from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's Spokane Research Laboratory installed Split-Set rock bolts instrumented with strain gauges to document the mechanical load response of the bolts in weak ground. Short-term monitoring of the bolts immediately after installation showed that some of the gauges went into tension. It was felt that the force exerted on the bolts to drive them into the hole should have caused the gauges to show compression. The tension probably resulted from the holes having crooked sections. Long-term monitoring over the course of a year also showed that the bolts were bending at some locations and that loads as high as 98 kN (22,000 Ib) were recorded along sections of the bolts. Load cells were placed on the head end of the bolts to determine head loads. Head loads up to 14.7 kN (3,300 Ib) were generated during bolt installation. In addition, closure readings were taken across the drift to determine the convergence rate responsible for bolt loading. A Rock Mass Rating (RMR) was calculated at the site to compare with bolt response. The bolts were installed as part of the rebolting process in an area being repaired because the near-vertical beds in the walls were buckling and causing the wall to fail. The instrumented Split-Set rock bolts will provide data that will lead to greater understanding of the behavior of the rocklbolt support mechanism. It may also be possible to explain the overall performance of the bolts in situ in terms of their design effectiveness. This work showed that load at the head of a Split-Set rock bolt was less than load along the interior of the bolt.

Jan 1, 2005

By Hai Rong

EH-4 Electrical conductivity imaging system has been playing an important role in prospecting, looking for water resource, and determining coal mine gob boundary by virtue of its significant advantages such as collection of large volume of data, light weight, fast analysis, high-precision, and low cost. However, it has little application in determining the overburden failure zone and development of water flowing fractured zone and bed separation space in complex extra thick coal seam conditions. In order to confirm the overburden failure range and evolution of water flowing fractured zone and bed separations in complex extra thick coal seam conditions the panel 63005 of Laohutai coal mine in China was selected for study in this paper,. EH-4 magnetotelluric method was used to determine the overburden failure zones and bed separations in the overburden. Theoretical analysis and numerical simulation were employed to verify the EH4 survey results. The results show that the failure height in the overburden of the three coal splits was 120m to 170m before panel mining, and increased to 150m to 220m after panel mining. The overburden failure height was on average 7.4 times the equivalent mining height in complex extra thick coal seam condition of Laohutai coal mine when the sand backfilling and fully mechanized top coal caving methods were employed. After mining of panel 63005 started, bed separations were found on the hanging wall and footwall of the F18 fault where water bodies existed. The results obtained in this research not only provide a theoretical guidance for safe mining at Laohutai coal mine but also serve as a reference for predicting and preventing water inrush accidents for coal mines under similar condition in China.

Jan 1, 2014

By Zach G. Agioutantis

The prediction of ground movements due to underground mining using the influence function method is a mature technology, widely used by researchers and planning engineers around the world. Surface strain, either tensile or compressive, is an important indicator of potential impacts on structures such as buildings, bodies of water, pipelines, railway and power lines, and tailings dams. Calculation of static or dynamic surface strains, for varying surface terrains and slopes, should be accurately predicted and be independent of the methodology applied for the calculation. This paper discusses and compares the development of horizontal and ground strains on the surface due to underground mining for different surface topologies (sloping terrain, monitoring lines, etc.) and presents the steps needed to ensure accurate calculations. Examples are given to demonstrate how ground strains can be calculated for one- and two-dimensional gridded surfaces.

Jan 1, 2013

By André Vervoort

To learn more about the fundamental roof behaviour in South African coal mines, accurate underground measurements of roof deflection were conducted in bord and pillar panels during development and pillar extraction. To conduct these measurements a survey levelling technique was adapted. The overall system reading accuracy was established as being within 0,4 mm on a 15 m sighting distance. The underground sites were modelled and, for a roadway development, similar symmetrical curvatures were calculated by a linear elastic model, as were measured underground. In a pillar extraction panel, a significant amount of bed separation was measured and the roof underwent an a-symmetric movement due to the close presence of the mined out area at one side of the roadway.

Jan 1, 1992

By Hamid Maleki

This study presents a historic overview of the role of mobile roof support (MRS) technologies in improving stability and worker safety and presents the results of recent field evaluations of the MRS load rate monitoring device and other remote deformation-monitoring techniques. Field studies were implemented at two sites in cooperation among researchers from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Maleki Technologies, Inc., and J. H. Fletcher & Co. The objective of the field programs were to (l) study the interaction between MRS's and coal mine strata and (2) develop and test suitable monitoring systems for assessing roof and pillar stability. An MRS consists of a roof canopy, four hydraulic cylinders, a caving shield canopy, and associated electromechanical systems mounted on crawler tracks. The machines are controlled by radio from a remote location and operate on self-contained power units. Typically, MRS's have capacities of 5,340 and 7,120 kN (600 and 800 tons). In comparison to posts, an MRS is capable of maintaining the yield load after significant amounts of roof-floor deformation. Because the mining cycle is accelerated, MRS's help reduce the potential for time-dependent roof falls. MRS performance has been monitored in the laboratory under controlled static loading conditions and in the field under deep, two-scam mining conditions. Laboratory studies have quantified support capacity and system stiffness as a function of machine height. Field investigations have focused on determination of optimum operating conditions and development of warning systems that indicate excessive load on the machine and/or impending roof-pillar stability problems. Analyses of field data show that roof instabilities are influenced by (1) pillar failure, (2) pillar yielding, (3) mine seismicity, (4) geologic structures, and (5) panel layout designs and mining practice. Pillar yielding and failure (unloading) and seismicity can be conveniently monitored by the load rate monitoring device, but for consistent detection of roof falls, additional deformation measurements directly within the cuts ate needed.

Jan 1, 2001

By John P. Dunford

Ground support continues to be the most important safety consideration in underground mining. The Bureau of Mines has developed a yielding steel post with a capacity of 45 tons and b c1osure allowance of 24 inches in a 6 to 7 foot seam height. The post mechanism in a three piece unit consisting of a top and bottom leg made from standard steel pipe and a separate foot bracket. It develops its load carrying ability when the lower pipe, with an attached interference ring, is forced into the larger top leg. The walls of the top leg are deformed radially and along the axis. Yield continues until the unit bottoms out. Other advantages of the post is that due to its simplicity it can be made at the mine shop level and its cost should be about one-hundred dollars. Prototype units were tested in the laboratory. Based on these results, modifications were made that would make the post perform better as a mine support. Two field tests were conducted. The first test used the units as supplemental support for the wood crib rows in a longwall tailgate. The second and larger field teat had 84 posts placed on salvaged track rails. They were installed on two foot centers in the middle of the entry. Overall the supports functioned well during use in the headgate entry, but problems with the quality of some of the pipe caused localized failures. However, these problems can be attributed to one manufacturer of pipe and through tighter specifications can be eliminated. The use of the posts with the rails is showing additional benefits as a ground support system. By providing continuous support between the posts a beam is created that has much more load bearing. The additional support can reduce floor heave and in some cases eliminate the need for the rib side crib line.

Jan 1, 1986

By Winton Gale

"Rock and coal fractures and micro seismic vibration are common occurrences during development mining. It is very uncommon for coal and rock to be propelled into the roadway during normal mining operations. However, such occurrences do occur and appear to require significantly more energy than is available from strain energy release during coal cutting. The sources of energy, which can contribute to the propulsion of coal from the face or ribs, are typically strain energy from the surrounding ground, seismic energy from a rapid rupture of the ground in the vicinity, or rapid expansion of gas from within the burst source area.The aim of this paper is to briefly review the bursts that could be related to strain energy or seismic energy. However, the greatest emphasis is placed on the effect that gas within the coal could play in moderate to gassy mines.It has been found that the bursts related to the expansion of gas can occur in coal and stone. The volume of gas involved in coal bursts is typically lower than in gas outbursts; however, the process is generally similar.INTRODUCTIONA coal burst is defined as a rapid expulsion of coal (and potentially gas) from the boundary of the roadway. The volume of a burst can be variable, but volumes above 10-50m3 are noted and cause significant disruption to operations.Rock and coal fracturing is common about roadways, particularly under the influence of elevated stresses, either tectonic or related to mining abutment stress. Shear fracture is very common; however, it is very uncommon that the coal is propelled from the face or ribs as a result of fracture of the material. The nature of rock fracture about roadways under elevated stress is presented in Figure 1.A burst requires energy to propel the coal or rock from the rib or face of the roadway. The depth of material impacted may vary from 0.5m to greater than 3m inside the roadway boundary. The strength of the ground in this zone is variable depending on the nature of the coal seam (or surrounding material). Typically, this material has significant residual strength as confinement increases into the ribside.The energy required to propel this material is typically in addition to that which is associated with normal fracturing about the roadway."

Jan 1, 2018

By Craig Compton

The The National Institute for Occupational Safety ane Health (NIOSH) Pittsburgh Research Laboratory (PRL) is continuing to investigate the behavior of fully grouted roof bolts in the weak roof rock of the Safety Research Coal Mine (SRCM). This paper describes the results of three studies: A series of 24 pull tests of bolts installed fully grouted and overcored to leave 12 inches of grouted bolt. The tests compared the pull-out performance of offset-head roof bolts with that of standard 518-inch bolts; A second series of 24 tests that compared the pull-out loads obtained by bolts installed with 1 R of resin (a Short Encapsulation Pull Test or SEPT) to that of fully grouted bolts overcored to leave only 12 inches of grouted bolt, and An investigation into the pressures generated during the installation of fully grouted resin bolts. All of the bolts installed and pulled were overcored and removed from the roof after the pull tests to allow inspection of the resin. The first study found that there was no significant difference in pullout load between the offset-head bolts and the standard bolts. The second study, comparing the SEPT bolts and the partially- overcored fully grouted bolts, indicated that SEPT can significantly underestimate bolt anchorage grip factor, suggesting that the SEPT is a conservative measure of actual bolt performance. Significant loss of resin to cracks in the roof was observed in the bolts overcored in the SRCM. The third study explored one possible explanation for the resin loss, high pressures generated during bolt installation. These tests employed bolts installed in strain gauged steel tubes. The results confirmed that significant pressures (greater than 4,000 psi) can be generated during bolt installation. The results of the pressure tests, combined with the observations of resin loss in bolts installed in the SRCM, suggest that under some circumstances resin loss and under-encapsulation could take place and lead to degraded bolt performance. Glove fingering was observed in all recovered bolts to various degrees. The limited comparative data suggested that the effect of glove fingering ranged from slight to moderate. Complete mixing of the resin was observed on all of the 40 bolts recovered (28 fully grouted and 12 SEPT). Australian and U.S. resins were compared and the Australian resins were observed to have much smaller catalyst compartment areas and lower resin viscosities. These differences are suggested as potential explanations for occasional resin mixing problems noted in Australian resin bolt installations.

Jan 1, 2005

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 William B. Beerbower

When full length resin grouted bolts were introduced into U. S. coal mines some 11 years ago, it was assumed that safety would be the primary benefit. There is ample testimony to substantiate the safety factor as an important reason for using resin roof bolts. More recently, it has been determined that many coal operators not only concur with the safety consideration but also benefit economically from the safer working conditions resulting from a reduction in roof falls. IMPROVED SAFETY Some typical roof fall reduction experiences with resin bolting follow: ? Western Kentucky Mine - Resin bolting reduced roof falls by 80%. ? Southern West Virginia Mine - Experienced 141 roof falls between 1971 and 1972. In 1973 with resin bolting, roof falls were reduced 85%. ? Western Pennsylvania Mine - In 1973 had 59 roof falls with mechanical bolts. During the same period of 1974 with resin, only 19 falls were experienced - a reduction of 66%. The overall experience with resin bolted roof support has been an average 50% reduction in roof falls. Long term, this can translate into improved worker morale. As a matter of fact, a general mine foreman at the same Southern West Virginia mine mentioned above commented that improved miner morale was noticeable following the introduction of resin bolting. HOW GREATER SAFETY CAN BE COMBINED WITH INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY IN COAL MINING OPERATIONS Experience has also shown that a reduction of roof falls with resin bolting has resulted in increased production for many coal operators. Some typical examples with mines using resin bolting follow: ? Western Kentucky Mine - Resin bolting contributed to increasing production from 7000 to 11,000 tons per day, due to a 80% reduction in roof falls. This was accomplished in part by a reduction of 50% in timbering requirements and the reassignment of three roof fall cleanup crews to coal production. ? Pennsylvania Mine - Following resin bolting introduction the section showed a 50% increase in production. ? Central West Virginia Mine - Continuous miner production averaged 6 cuts per unit shift prior to resin bolting. Reduction of cleanup time, resulting from improved roof support with resin bolting, increased production to an average of 9 cuts per unit shift. PROPERTIES OF RESIN BOLTING SYSTEMS Several of the important properties of resin bolting systems which contribute to its improved performance are listed below: ? Full length anchored resin bolts and many resin anchored, point anchored bolts provide effective resistance to changing rock strata stresses throughout their length, thereby improving stabilization of rock strata over long periods of time. ? Individual layers of rock are anchored into a single high strength beam providing excellent resistance to vertical and lateral strata movement, the most common cause of roof failure. ? Moisture cannot corrode the fully grouted bolt. ? Has twice the pull strength of mechanical bolts (See Figure 1)

Jan 1, 1982

By D. G. Lynch, M. R. Martin, R. J. Coutts

"Broadmeadow Mine is an underground longwall mine located in Central Queensland, Australia. The mine introduced a top coal caving (TCC) longwall face in 2013 but since then has experienced severe convergence events at the start of each panel after 60–70m of retreat, resulting in equipment damage and the longwall almost becoming iron bound. A significant geotechnical monitoring effort during LW10 and LW11 to characterise the caving mechanics and operational changes during LW11 were successful in mitigating the risk posed by these initial convergence events. This paper describes the geotechnical monitoring programme undertaken during LW11, the operational methods used to mitigate these initial convergence events, and the contribution to these events of the TCC technique.A thick sandstone unit close to the extraction roof was likely the cause of the convergence events at the start of each longwall panel. However, stress change monitoring cells, surface extensometers, an inclinometer, and the blockage of holes designed for pre-conditioning using hydraulic fracturing indicated that the convergence events were not caused by the sudden collapse of sandstone bridging across the goaf. Rather, they were caused by the propping action of strong units within the overburden strata. Equipment design modifications were made to allow the longwall to remain operational during the convergence events and an operational strategy was implemented to mitigate convergence in LW11. The initial convergence event was successfully negotiated, and Broadmeadow went on to be the highest producing longwall for CY16 in Australia.INTRODUCTIONBroadmeadow Mine is an underground longwall mine located in Central Queensland, Australia, owned and operated by BHP Mitsubishi Alliance (BMA). The mine is a punch longwall mine using open cut pit access provided by Goonyella/Riverside Mine. Broadmeadow commenced longwall operations in 2005 using a conventional high reach longwall, but later changed to the top coal caving (TCC) method of extraction. Broadmeadow extracts the easterly dipping 5.5–7.5m-thick Goonyella Middle Seam in ranging in depth from 90m to 330m. The coal is washed and blended at the adjacent Goonyella/Riverside open cut mine to produce a premium coking coal product for export."

Jan 1, 2018