Search Documents

By Kourosh Shahriar

The occurrence of rock falls in underground coal mines entails detrimental effects as fatal or non-fatal injuries on workers, stoppages in mining operations and breakdown of equipment. In this paper, a risk assessment approach on the basis of a decision analysis trend is employed in order to assess the possibility of and manage roof falls. Risk is then assessed by determination of likelihood of occurrence and the cost of consequences (outcomes). In this regard, collected real roof fall data from Tabas and Kerman coal regions comprising of several underground coal mines are used. It is concluded that the annual accidents due to the roof falls occurrence in the all investigated mines are so high that it is economically feasible to improve the support systems and to implement a suitable educational program as well as an accurate supervision and other elements of safety management.

Jan 1, 2009

By A. T. Iannacchione

From 1990 to 1996, 16 states reported 92 injuries from falls of roof, rib or face in the more than 90 underground stone mines in the United States (Fig.1). Missouri, Pennsylvania and Kentucky accounted for 48% of the total number of injuries (Fig. 2). Of this total, 11 miners were killed. Of the 11 fatalities, 10, or 91%, were associated with unrecognized loose or failed rock within the roof beam. Additionally, unrecognized roof beam failures resulted in a majority of the falls of ground injuries occurring in underground US stone mines from1990 to 1996. This number is not large in magnitude. But a workforce of fewer than 2,000 miners makes for a high fatal-accident rate. The severity of the typical fall-of-ground injury is, in general, very high. About three-fifths of all roof, face and rib fall injuries were designated by the US Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) as some kind of lost time accident. MSHA assigns each accident a severity value from one to six. A one represents a fatality, a two, a permanent disability and three, a lost time accident (Fig. 3).

Jan 1, 2000

By Mark S. Dunsbier, Steven J. Schatzel

Large roof outbursts began occurring in November 1986 at Domtar's Sifto Salt Mine in Goderich, Ontario, Canada, working the bedded Salina A-2 Salt unit. The outbursts, measuring about 13-20 m in diameter, released high concentrations of methane from cavities that extended into carbonate roof units. Spontaneous ignitions of methane gas during an outburst seriously burned a mine technician. The Canadian Ministry of Labour contacted the U.S. Bureau of Mines for technical assistance to aid in mine managements1 efforts in alleviating the problem. Initial gas content determinations of salt samples from the outbursts by acoustic test methodology revealed no methane enrichment. In- mine core drilling and subsequent methane content testing indicates the main source of methane in overlying roof units. Drilling the roof units demonstrated the potential of draining methane from areas showing signs of impending outbursting and alleviating the danger. Three mechanisms are considered the most likely means by which methane was introduced to the mine environment. These are (1) hydrocarbon gases released from brines, (2) gas transport along horizontal bedding planes or gas accumulations in bedding separations, and (3) mining-induced fracturing. The abundance of higher hydrocarbons in gas yielded by non-evaporite rock samples from the Goderich mine may be indicative of a former association with liquid petroleum.

Jan 1, 1989

By Peter Zhang, Todd Minoski, Gabriel Esterhuizen, Jack Trackemas, Berk Tulu, Morgan Sears

Longwall mining is a highly productive and efficient coal mining method used in the USA. During longwall retreating, the belt entry must be maintained stable, and any roof fall in the belt entry would jeopardize mine safety and substantially interrupt the continuous production of coal in the longwall face. Past experience of longwall mining has shown that belt entry stability was the greatest challenge in longwall ground control, and the occurrence of roof falls in belt entries was largely associated with high horizontal stress. To properly support the roof in the belt entry, it is important to understand how longwall-induced horizontal stress changes affect roof stability in belt entries and to strategically install supplementary support to prevent any potential roof falls. Researchers from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) performed horizontal stress measurements in the immediate roof of the belt entries for two Pittsburgh seam longwall panels oriented unfavorably to high horizontal stress. Hollow inclusion cells (HICells) were installed in the immediate roof at the intersection in each of the belt entries, and stress changes were monitored as the longwall face was approaching and passing the intersection. Numerical models were set up to calculate the longwall-induced horizontal stress changes in the roof at the monitoring sites. With the verified model, investigations were made of how horizontal stress is concentrated and relieved in the belt entry roof near the face under different panel orientations. Both measurements and modeling results showed that high horizontal stress is concentrated in the roof in the belt entry within about 15 m outby the face when a longwall panel is unfavorably oriented to the major horizontal stress. The study demonstrated that longwall-induced differential horizontal stress can be used as an indication of the degree of horizontal stress concentration. Roof support strategies are discussed on how to maintain the stability of belt entry under high horizontal stress concentration.

Jun 14, 2022

By Peter Zhang, Todd Minoski, Gabriel Esterhuizen, Jack Trackemas, Berk Tulu, Morgan Sears

Roof stability in the belt entry is critical for safe and continuous production of coal during longwall mining. Previous studies of roof falls that occurred in belt entries have shown that the roof falls were largely associated with high in situ and longwall-induced horizontal stresses [1,2,3,4]. To properly support the roof in a belt entry, it is important to understand how longwall-induced horizontal stress changes can affect roof stability in the belt entry. Monitoring of horizontal stress changes was conducted in the belt entries of two Pittsburgh seam longwall panels oriented unfavorably to the major horizontal stress. Numerical models were also set up to investigate how horizontal stress concentrates and relieves in the belt-entry roof near the face as panel orientation changes. Both measurements and modeling results show that high horizontal stress concentrates in the belt entry roof within about 15 m outby the face. The study demonstrates that longwall-induced differential horizontal stress can be used to evaluate the horizontal stress concentration factors. The horizontal stress concentration factors change with panel orientation, resulting in high stress concentrations at orientations between 20 and 110° and low stress concentrations between 130 and 180°. Roof support strategies are given for the belt entries under the influence of high horizontal stress. For unfavorably oriented panels in weak roof conditions, supplementary support should be installed during development, and cable bolts should be anchored into a stable roof horizon. The bolting pattern should be designed to cover both entry corners and the entry center to prevent potential roof cutters and sagging.

Jan 1, 2023

By Hao Zhang, Mi Zhou, Lichun Jiang, Xihong Zhang

This study investigates the roof stability of underground limestone mining in the presence of stratified joints during the excavation process. An analytical solution is derived to predict the stresses and deformation of underground tunnel structures, with the structure simplified as a double-hinge arch. The accuracy of the analytical model is validated through comparison with finite element modeling results. A parametric study is then conducted to assess the influence of different design parameters on the optimization of tunnel stability during excavation. The results indicate that the best stability of the tunnel can be achieved in engineering practices when the applied load (q) is 5 MPa and the joint inclination angle (θ) is 45°, with the roof span and thickness set at either 12 m and 8 m or 15 m and 10 m. These findings provide valuable design guidance for underground limestone mines with stratified joints.

Oct 18, 2023

By Daryl E. Radcliffe, Raymond M. Stateham

The Bureau of Mines, under a Cooperative Agreement with the Bear Coal Company, Somerset, Colorado, conducted a large scale evaluation of the effect of time lapse on roof stability. Time lapse in this study is the interval between exposure and permanent support of the mine roof. The study indicates that time lapse is not a critical factor in roof stability provided permanent support is installed before catastrophic failure begins. Concurrently with the time lapse study, investigations were made of stress distribution around resin-grouted bolts, the regional stress field, and anomalous geologic conditions. The behavior of the resin-grouted bolts, at least in the Bear mine, appears to fit the Coulomb-Navier Theory. Geologic conditions are primary factors in trends of roof stability that extend across the mine.

Jan 1, 1982

By R. Fraher

The control of mine roof is of vital interest in underground coal mining not only for reasons of safety, but also to avoid the high costs of cleanup, resupport and production losses that can result from roof falls. The difficulty in determining roof stability mine-wide is due in large part to the broad variation of geologic and structural conditions that typically exist throughout a mining area. To ensure a stable roof over the entire mine, support systems must be selected to minimize the possibility of failure. The magnitude and cost of the support selected is a trade off against the cost of the number of falls that can still occur after it is installed. Because of the large number of variables involved in analyzing and optimizing roof stability versus support, a digital computer simulation was selected to find a cost effective solution to roof support design. A total cost approach is used which includes the actual cost of the roof support as well as the cost of the roof fall in terms of resupport and loss of production (Fraher 1990a). A Monte Carlo simulation program called ROCSIM (Roof control Optimization Cost SIMulation) has been developed for determining the optimum roof control system and design layout for underground room-and-pillar mining.

Jan 1, 1992

By Paul C. Lingo

The title of my talk today might lead you to two logical conclusions: The industry is faced with a problem that requires a solution and after discussing the problem I will offer a solution. The first conclusion is painfully accurate. One need only look at the accident statistics to be aware of the problem. During the eight-year period 1954 through 1962, the United States Bureau of Mines reports that falls of rock and coal accounted for 1,435 of the 2,516 fatal injuries that occurred in underground bituminous coal mines. Some improvement was made during 1962. For the first time since records have been kept, falls of rock and coal accounted for less than 50 per cent of the underground fatal injuries. The 105 deaths recorded in 1962 indicate that a great amount of work remains to be done in this area. As to the second conclusion, let me assure you at the outset that I have no panacean solution; however, I do propose to discuss some aspects of the problem and some possible methods of solution. What methods of solution are now, or have been employed in attempting to solve the problem? More specifically, what methods have you and your associates used? Has it been an orderly well thought out approach to the entire problem, or has it been a somewhat piecemeal approach which tackled the immediate problem and left the total problem for another day? Perhaps a new approach may be in order.

Jan 1, 1964

By C. P. Mangelsdorf

Introduction During the 13 years since C. C. White introduced the Birmingham roof truss there has been a revolution in permanent roof support technology. While not all of the emerging concepts have their origins in the truss-resin bolting is a prime example - the combinations and permutations of devices presently available to the underground mining industry reflect a well-spring of creative activity. The purpose of this report is to chronicle a number of roof support system that have same physical similarity to the Birmingham truss, and to report on their application. Definitions The application of the tern "truss" to the device developed by White of the Birmingham Bolt Company in 1967 may be derived from the classical technique of stifwood, by the attachment of an underslung, sometimes pretensioned metal strap, rod or cable. If the beam is separated from the reinforcement by a single block or vertical post it is called a "King's Post Truss". If two equally spaced blocks or posts are used it is referred to as "Queen's Post". When the immediate roof of a mine is visualized as a beam, the Birmingham device completes a structure resembling this latter form.

Jan 1, 1982

By R. Gradnik

The continuous need for infrastructure expansion forces the mining industry to develop underground structures into more sensitive and violent environments. When underground excavation enters into deep and high stress rock conditions, geotechnical designers find themselves faced with the difficult task of selecting a rock support system that will meet today's stringent requirements. Whatever support system is chosen, it is mandatory that potential rock movement be controlled. All this has intensified the development of safety systems and new, unique solutions which can enable construction companies to go both, further and deeper, without reducing the level of safety. To address these needs, Atlas Copco developed the Roofex® bolt, specifically designed to withstand large static and dynamic deformations under prespecified load conditions. The Roofex Rock Bolt acts as stiff support up to a designable load level before the sliding effect of the mechanical frictional system is triggered and allows highly controlled rock mass movement without loosing the support function.

Jan 1, 2011

By L. Alan Weakly

This paper was presented at the ‘17th U. S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics’ on August 29, 1976, at Snowbird, Utah, at the SME-AIME Fall Meeting on September 1, 1976, at Denver, Colorado, and at the Polish-American conference on Ground Control in Room-and-Pillar Mining on August 7, 1980 at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to present a viable method of reinforcing rock pillars by utilizing fully grouted reinforcing steel and a cement- fly ash mortar. Although the fully bonded bolt concept is not new as exemplified by the present widespread use of resin bolts within United States mines and by the use of cement grouted reinforcing used as back pins in the Kiruna Iron Ore Mine in northern Sweden, (1)(2)the method of stabilizing mine pillars with fully bonded reinforcing is new. This method, called the "grout-rebar system", was first incorporated at St. Joe Minerals Corporation's Fletcher Mine in December of 1972. The system was used on an emergency basis before extensive research on the mechanics of the system could be completed. Since Decmeber of 1972, however, approximately 206 pillars have been reinforced at Fletcher and the system is currently being used on a regular basis at two other St. Joe mines and at two competitor mines in the area. Basically, this paper is a case study of the efforts, research and results of utilizing the grout-rebar system, on a selective basis, at the Fletcher Mine. In addition to information about the system, this paper will explain in detail the three rock mechanics instruments developed by St. Joe and used to measure and monitor rock movement to validate the group-rebar system.

Jan 1, 1982

By L. Alan Weakly

The purpose of this paper is to present a viable method of reinforcing rock pillars by utilizing fully grouted reinforcing steel and a cement - fly ash mortar. Although the fully bonded bolt concept is not new, as exemplified by the present widespread use of resin bolts within United States mines and by the use of cement grouted reinforcing used as back pins in the Kiruna Iron Ore Mine in northern Sweden, (1) (2) the method of stabilizing mine pillars with fully bonded reinforcing is new. This method, called the "grout-rebar system", was first incorporated at St. Joe Minerals Corporation’s Fletcher Mine in December of 1972. The system was used on an emergency basis before extensive research on the mechanics of the system could be completed. Since December of 1972, however, approximately 206 pillars have been reinforced at Fletcher and the system is currently being used on a regular basis at two other St. Joe mines and at two competitor mines in the area. Basically, this paper is a case study of the efforts, research and results of utilizing the grout-rebar system, on a selective basis, at the Fletcher Mine. In addition to information about the system, this paper will explain in detail the three rock mechanics instruments developed by St. Joe and used to measure and monitor rock movement to validate the grout- rebar system.

Jan 1, 1977

By L. Alan Weakly

The purpose of this paper is to present a viable method of reinforcing rock pillars by utilizing fully grouted reinforcing steel and a cement - fly ash mortar. Although the fully bonded bolt concept is not new as exemplified .by the present widespread use of resin bolts within United States mines and by the use of cement grouted reinforcing used as back pins in the Kiruna Iron Ore Mine in northern Sweden, (1)(2) the method of stabilizing mine pillars with fully bonded reinforcing is new. This method, called the "grout-rebar system", was first incorporated at St. Joe Minerals Corporation's Fletcher Mine in December of 1972. The system was used on an emergency basis before extensive research on the mechanics of the system could be completed. Since December of 1972, however, approximately 206 pillars have been reinforced at Fletcher and the system is currently being used on a regular basis at two other St. Joe mines and at two competitor mines in the area. Basically, this paper is a case study of the efforts, research and results of utilizing the grout-rebar system, on a selective basis, at the Fletcher Mine. In addition to information about the system, this paper will explain in detail the three rock mechanics instruments developed by St. Joe and used to measure and monitor rock movement to validate the grout-rebar system.

Jan 1, 1976

By Summers D. A.

A mining machine has been designed and fabricated to mine coal from room and pillar operations combining high pressure waterjet cutting and mechanical fragmentation. Waterjets are used to slot the coal face with an advancing plow wedge then breaking out larger coal pieces. The machine has the following advantages: - simply built around a disassembled longwall chock and gathering arm loader apron; - few moving parts which are simply and inexpensively maintained; provides immediate roof support in the face working area; - coal produced is larger, with resulting lower preparation cost; - no dust is generated; - risk of spark generation is virtually eliminated.

Jan 1, 1992

By L. Alan Weakly

Page one is missing from book

Jan 1, 1982

By Richard L. Bullock

OPEN STOPING An open stope is an underground cavity from which the initial ore has been mined. Caving of the opening is prevented (at least temporarily) by support from the unmined ore or waste left in the stope, in the form of pillars, and the stope walls (also called ribs or abutments). In addition to this primary support system of open stoping, some secondary support may also be required using rockbolts, reinforcing rods, split pipes, or shotcrete to stabilize the rock surface immediately adjacent to the opening. The secondary reinforcement procedure does not preclude the method classified as open stoping. There are many forms of open-stope mining used to extract the initial material from a mine. Having once established that the mineral and waste rock are competent enough to use an open-stoping method, and assuming that the reserve is not classified as gassy, the Form which the method will take is primarily determined by the dip and thickness of the reserve. How these two factors affect the selection of the open-stope mining is discussed in a later chapter. At this point it will suffice to say that the classification of the open-stopes mining system which follows is based on whether dry' broken materials flows by gravity or whether it must be moved by nongravity methods where energy must be supplied to move the material. Room-and Pillar-Mining Room-and-pillar mining is an open-stoping method where mining progresses in a nearly horizontal or low angle direction by opening multiple stopes or rooms, leaving solid material to act as pillars to support the vertical load. Since the direction of excavation (angle of dip) is below that which would cause the dry material to flow by gravity to a drawpoint or gathering point, the material must be loaded in the room where it was extracted and transported to a point where it will flow, either by gravity or mechanical means, to a central gathering point to be taken out of the mine. This is an important aspect of room-and-pillar mining which differentiates the system from other open-stope mining methods which rely heavily upon gravity to transport ore from where it was broken to a lower elevation, usually through a drawpoint. There are many variations of the method which go by a number of names in local districts: breast stoping, breast-and-bench stoping, board-and-pillar, stall-and-pillar, and panel-and-pillar are all basically open-stope room-and-pillar mining. In some instances detailed stope planning is almost nonexistent; i.e., the operator simply follows the visual pay values, leaves pillars only where necessary, and tries to locate them in the zones of lower value. This method of mining is as old as the beginning of underground mining itself, dating back thousands of years. Early in the history of mining in this country, the term "gophering" was used to describe this method (Peek 1941). The term is appropriate, for it brings to mind the exact results of this type of system-a random and irregular room-and-pillar mine. In other instances where the mineral values are consistent both in physical dimensions and quality, the mine layout can be planned to the last detail, resulting in a uniform room-and-pillar mine. Coal, trona, gilsonite, potash, oil shale, salt, limestone, and sandstone mines can usually follow such a system. Today, most metal mines using a room-and-pillar operation try to mine as regular a pattern as possible but deviation in height, width, thickness, dip, and grade of the ore results in comparable deviation in the mine plan. Variations of the Room-and-pillar System It is necessary to briefly describe some of the many variations of the room-and-pillar system of mining, enabling the reader to fully explore the concepts and become familiar with the terminology used before going on to the details of mine design. Full-Face Slicing: If in the process of opening the rooms the total vertical extent of the mineral values of the particular seam or strata are extracted from the advance of one vertical face, the term used to describe this is full-face slicing. This face is also known as the "breast." There is no mineral of economic value intentionally left either in the floor or the roof (back) to be mined later. To be able to extract the full-face height in one pass, the mining equipment must obviously be designed to reach as high as the back. In an Appalachian coal mine, this may be all of 660.4 mm (26 in.); for a future oil shale property it might be 15.24 m (50 ft). Normally, however, in a majority of mines where the mining face gets over 6.09 to 6.7 m (20 to 22 ft), the tendency is to divide the face into more than one pass. Over this height, it becomes difficult to properly see and remove loose rock from the back with a hand "mining bar." Where the process of taking down loose rock has become mechanized, higher full-face mining can be safely practiced. Most eastern and midwestern coal seams and western uranium, trona, and potash seams in the United States are easily reached in a single face; many limestone, lead, and zinc mines must resort, at least in part, to "multiple-slicing" to remove all the minerals of value. Multiple Slicing (also known as multiple-pass mining): In many cases it is not practical to carry the full vertical height of the mining horizon as a full face. The face is divided into parts known as the breast, bench, and/or brow. Ideally, if the operator knows the vertical extent of the mineralized zone, he will drill and blast the first pass at the top of the zone, thereby

Jan 1, 1982

By R. V. Ramani, C. J. Bise

INTRODUCTION Classification of coal seams as thin, medium, and thick is both subjective and relative and is more a reflection of the statistical mode of the thicknesses en- countered in a mining region. A geological factor more precisely understood as defined than thickness is the inclination of the seams to the horizontal, commonly referred to as the pitch or the dip of the seam. Thick and steeply pitching seams present far more challenges to the ingenuity of the mining men to devise methods for their extraction than the thick and less steeply inclined ones. In a marginal case, where a thick coal seam may be minable by surface or underground methods, the decision bears a close relationship to the technological developments in the mining scene. Near surface thick coal seams are a special gift of nature and are not as wide- spread as the ones that call for the application of under- ground methods. Recent advancements in surface mining equipment have made it possible to surface mine to great depths. Stripping ratios of 30: 1 (cu yd of over- burden removed per ton of coal) have been achieved. The extraction of thick seams which preclude the use of surface methods is the concern of this chapter. Specifically, the objective here is to outline the special technological factors in underground mining of thick coal seams and to illustrate through several case histories the methods that are practiced in the North American continent. For the purposes of this chapter, a thick seam is defined as one which is not readily minable with currently available equipment without modifications to the extraction method or the equipment. At the present time, a thickness of 4.8 m (16 ft) can be considered as the lower limit, although developments in equipment and methods can be expected to push this limit upwards. The data for the case histories were collected from two extended mine visits in 1975 and 1978, and from other published accounts of the mines visited. Reference is drawn particularly to reports by Bise, Ramani, and Stefanko (1976) and Rarnani and Kenzy (1979). THICK SEAM MINING METHODS The various methods of mining thick seams can generally be grouped into three major categories: full face methods, where the entire thickness of the seam is re- covered in a single pass; slicing methods, where the seam is extracted to its full thickness by horizontal or inclined slices either in an ascending or descending order; and caving methods, where the seam is undercut and the en- tire coal seam is recovered by caving the top coal into the excavated cut, or some variations of the basic sub- level caving method. As shown in Table 1, in each of these methods, the coal is removed by either room-and-pillar or longwall methods. Hydraulic mining and transport of the coal in open flumes or in pipelines are also practiced. Addition- ally, the void created by the removal of coal may be filled with a packing material (stowing) except in the caving methods. The pitch (dip) of the seam, particularly when it is greater than 0.26 rad (150), imposes severe operational limitations on mobile equipment. A more detailed general discussion of the methods can be found in Bise et al. (1976) and Vorobjev and Deshmukh (1964). Specific discussion on the many variations of the three basic methods can be found in the papers presented at the international symposia that were held in

Jan 1, 1982

By G. D. Bates

INTRODUCTION The Magmont mine is a joint venture of Cominco American Inc. (operator) and Dresser Minerals, Inc. The mine-mill operation is located approximately 160 km (100 miles) southwest of St. Louis, MO, in what is commonly referred to as the "Viburnum Trend.” The Magmont mine is designed for a production rate of 3810.2 t/d (4200 stpd) on a 5-day week, three shifts per day basis. Initial production began in 1968. The mine is open stope, room-and-pillar, and essentially horizontal along the trend of the ore body. Briefly, the main geological structure can be described as a brecciated graben bounded by reverse faults. The ore body in cross section is shaped like a bell curve with some lateral extension at the lower part. Presently outlined ore is 609.6 to 762 m (2000 to 2500 ft) in width and 2133.6 m (7000 ft) in length. The ore varies in thickness from 4.87 m (16 ft) on the fringes to an average of 27 m (90 ft) in the high ore areas bounded by the reverse faults. Lead is the primary metal with zinc and copper secondary. MINE DESIGN The basic design of open stope, room-and-pillar mines has been described by several writers and need not be repeated here. (Anon., 1970; Bullock, 1973; Casteel, 1972; Christiansen et a]., 1970; and Lane, 1964) This discussion covers the mining sequence as applied to the particular problems at the Magmont mine, the use of equipment, and deployment of the work force. In the upper portion of the Magmont ore body is a layer locally called the False Davis shale. This layer lies below the true Davis shale, is normally interbedded with dolomite, is of varying thickness, and if mineralized, is included in the top pass of the mining sequence. In thick ore areas this layer will be 2.13 to 2.43 m (7 to 8 ft) in thickness and will occur in the upper portion of the pillars. Due to its incompetency the presence of this False Davis layer is of primary concern in mine planning and operation. Mining areas are divided into three basic groups by ore thickness. First are areas of ore up to 6.09 m (20 ft) in thickness. These areas are below the False Davis shale and are mined single pass with drill jumbo. Second are those areas up 13.71 to 15.24 m (45 to 50 ft) in height. The first 4.87-111 (16-ft) Pass is taken at the top of the ore and the back and pillars secured. Benching the lower portion(s) in 4.57 to 4.87-m (15 to 16-ft) passes is then done with either a drill jumbo drilling horizontally or a crawler drill drilling vertically. Normally these areas are below the Table 1. Productivities per Manshift False Davis shale. These areas may also be mined by back slashing, or overhand benching, where the first 4.87-m (16-ft) pass is taken at the base of the ore and successive 4.87- m (16-ft) passes are taken upward. A minimum amount of back slashing is done at Magmont since it requires repetition of roof control on each pass and roof control is the single largest stoping cost at Magmont. Ore left to provide a working platform oxidizes and is coated by oil spills thus reducing metallurgical recoveries. The third mining area is over 15.24 m (50 ft) in height UP to a maximum of 40.23 m (132 ft) and will encompass the False Davis shale. These areas are mined by first driving +15% inclines to the top of the ore body. The top pass is mined and the back is bolted and roof mats installed as a matter of standard practice to minimize roof problems as mining progresses downward. Once the back and pillars on the top pass are secured, benching begins on successive passes with either the drill jumbo or crawler drill. Pillars on all successive passes below the top pass are secured as necessary. While benching progresses below the top pass, the pass at the base of the ore body is mined leaving a sill of 4.57 to 7.62 m (15 to 25 ft) in thickness to be removed with the crawler drill in a retreating manner. Rooms are mined on a 1.57 rad (90") grid pattern to insure alignment of pillars where multiple passes are taken. Pillars are designed on a 17.98-m (59-ft) spacing with rooms up to 10.66 m (35 ft) in width. Heading widths are wide enough for the mobile equipment to turn without additional allowance for curves. The result is a flexible layout which provides a maximum number of headings available for high extraction rates and grade control. PRODUCTION Incentive Bonus Incentive bonuses play an important part in the mine production at Magmont. Production crews are trained to perform only one of the mining functions of drilling, blasting, mucking. or roof bolting. This specialization, or functionalization, is augmented by development to open all possible stoping areas as early as possible in the life of the mine. This insures that each crew will have enough headings to perform its specialty. The incentive bonuses increase exponentially as output increases. The lucrative incentive bonus coupled with the specialization of the production crews and proper mine development have combined to give the high productivities shown in Table 1. Development crews perform all mining functions in their area. The incentive bonus is paid on a per foot basis, Crews on different shifts working the same heading share equally in the bonus proportional to their contract hours worked.

Jan 1, 1982

By Richard L. Bullock

At the beginning of the previous chapter, variation in the types of room-and-pillar stopes were briefly identified so that the reader could begin to understand the extensive application of this mining system. These same variations will be reviewed and elaborated upon in this chapter while discussing the methods by which the material is extracted. FULL-FACE SLICING BY DRILLING AND BLASTING When the entire mineralized thickness is taken in one pass of mining, it is known as full-face slicing. There is no mineral of economic value intentionally left either in the floor or the back. Theoretically, there is no limit as to how high the face could be in a single pass. But there are practical limitations to equipment size, pillar stability, and control of local loose slabs on the face, roof, and pillars that dictate current practices. The range of face height of the 15 typical room- and-pillar mines covered in Table 8 (Sec. 1, Subsec. 7) from the Dravo report, 1974 was 1.7 m (5.5 ft) to 9.8 m (32.1 ft), the average being 5.2 m (17.1 ft). In the Gaspe copper mine, Murduchville, Que., the drill jumbos were constructed with an extendable tower for full-face mining up to 15.2 m (49.9 ft) if necessary. However, a more common practice at that mine is to take the ore in multiple slices (Hall, 1959). In many metal mines the normal practice when starting stoping is to drive a single development drift into the ore zone a distance that will allow at least four or five rooms to be opened on each side of the initial drift. Since this opening will probably serve as the main haulage drift, it should be kept as straight and as level as possible. As to the other criteria for the stope developments, it might be well at this point for the mine planner to review the remarks presented earlier (Sec. 1, Subsec. 7) on drifts, entries, and crosscuts for production. After the initial drift is driven, it should be slabbed to the full room width if it is not that wide already. Next, the future pillars should be marked on the ribs and the rooms driven between them. If the ore extends beyond the length of the initial drift and is to be mined in the normal sequence of mining, care should be taken in a random room-and-pillar system to see that the extension of the initial roadway remains straight. If pillar "spotting" is left to the shift foreman or to the miners, they probably will not realize the importance of maintaining a uniform pillar line next to the roadway, and of keeping the line straight. Invariably, a pillar will end up in the middle of the future drift extension resulting in a "dogleg" in a possible main haul- age road. While this error is not catastrophic, too much weaving in and out of pillars will certainly slow down future production haulage and needlessly increase costs. Face or Breast Drilling and Blasting Practices To drill and blast the initial advances into the rock, usually some form of cut pattern must be used. In room-and-pillar mining, when a pattern is drilled in a face and that face is the only exposed surface to which all of the rock must be broken, the pattern is known as a "face round" or "swing." The face to which the rock must be broken is referred to as a "free face." Thus the most common way to advance a room into virgin rock with only one free face is by drilling swings. If, after breaking around a pillar, taking down back, or taking up bottom, there is a second (or third) face exposed, a group of holes drilled nearly parallel to a free face and breaking to it is known as a "slab round" or "slabbing." In some mining districts it is also known as "slashing." Obviously, because two faces exposed offer less resistance to fragmentation than a single face, slabbing requires less drilling and fewer explosives than required to break the same tonnage with the same degree of fragmentation with swings. Therefore, it behooves the driller (or supervisor) to plan the combination of

Jan 1, 1982