Search Documents

By P. A. C. Wilson

Instantaneous outbursts of carbon dioxide in coal mines have occurred in Germany only in one part of the Waldenburg-Neurode mining district.' This mining region comprises the northeastern fold of the "Innersudetian" coal basin. The basin (Fig. 1) is in the form of a geologic trough approximately 60 km. (37 miles) long and 30 to 35 km. (19 to 22 miles) broad and is enclosed on three sides by ancient truncated mountain ranges—the Riesengebirge, the Bober-Katzbachgebirge and the Eulenge-birge. Only the southeastern part of the trough is not enclosed by mountains of older rock formation. The floor of the basin before the building up of the coal measures was formed on the western, northwestern and northeastern borders by the material from Archean rocks (gneiss and mica schists); in the northern part over this was deposited the Silurian formation. The carboniferous period is represented both by the Lower ("kulm") and Upper Carboniferous, with an unconformity between the stages; that is, the kulm was tilted up and partly eroded before the Upper Carboniferous was deposited. The kulm is a salt-water formation (with marine fauna) but Upper Carboniferous rocks are nonsaline water deposits, with fresh-water flora only. The Lower Silesian coal measures were thus formed in a lime basin fed by the running water coming down from the mountains. As already indicated, the bottom series of the Upper Carboniferous formation, termed "Waldenburg strata" were laid down unconformably on the Lower Carboniferous. Over the Waldenburg strata there are the "Weisstein strata," an intermediate barren stage without coal beds, 400 to 500 m. (1300 to 1600 ft.) thick. Another unconformity followed, which is overlain by the '(Saarbrucken" series, which contain the upper coal measures, and the ('Ottweil" strata. In the last named, it is only on the southwestern fold that beds of coal are developed.

Jan 1, 1931

By Kennerley P

A significant part of the reserves of the Southern Coalfield lie beneath major water storages and their impounding dam structures. One of the functions of the NSW Government's Dams Safety Committee is to specify the particular mine layouts which can be used beneath the stored waters according to certain guidelines. A study was made of examples of the two different methods of extraction used under the stored waters as proposed by the mining company according to the guidelines and approved by the Dams Safety Committee. Using both pillar monitoring and mathematical modelling approaches it was shown that the recovery of coal from these layouts could be improved while still ensuring the long term stability of both the underground support pillars and the body of the strata. The integrity of the water storages and their impounding structures would therefore not be Affected.

Jan 1, 1986

By Axel Preusse

For the last 150 years, subsidence damage to the surface has been an unavoidable phenomenon associated with underground coal mining. In particular, the mechanization of mining methods in multiple seam mining and the concentration of mining activities in densely populated European metropolitan areas (e.g., Ruhr, Upper Silesian industrial region) have led to mining having a very strong influence on the earth?s surface. In both these regions, surface subsidence of more than 20m has been reported up to now in comparison to the original state. Underground coal mining in these regions strongly impairs all kinds of surface use, such as urban and industrial development, infrastructure (roads, waterways, and railways) and pipelines?without restricting the functionality of those objects to a greater extent. Demanding and, in some cases, globally unique engineering solutions have been developed and implemented for this purpose. The previously mentioned mining and industrial regions are still very strongly characterized by the (increasingly declining) coal industry and will remain dependent to a large extent and for an indefinite period on artificial drainage measures because subsidence that has already occurred is irreversible. This paper will primarily discuss the prediction of subsidence that is caused by intensive multiple seam mining and its influence on surface objects (e.g., underground pipelines). However, an approach for predicting ground uplifts due to rising mine water as a consequence of mine closures will also be described.

Jan 1, 2012

By M. A. Stoakes, H. D. S. Miller

Surface subsidence is becoming an increasingly important factor in the economics of mining Louisiana salt domes due to, amongst others, excessive shaft deformations and land loss to encroaching sea water. The vast majority of subsidence studies have been undertaken on bedded, tabular deposits. It is important to understand the causes of subsidence due to mining domal salt and how it can be minimized. The paper will review the major differences between subsidence caused by domal and tabular evaporite mines, the problems encountered in predicting subsidence, the factors that influence subsidence and, finally, possible alternative mining methods.

Jan 1, 1986

By R P. Callaghan

Underground production from the low grade copper orebodies at Mount Lyell in recent years has involved surface subsidence of open cut areas. Relevant structural and lithological features of the geological environment are described. The highly mechanised underground mining system involves sublevel caving and sublevel open stoping with associated hanging wall cave. Monitoring of subsidence and caving has been made by regular visual inspection and measurement of crack development, and by surface profile surveys. These simple techniques have proved adequate in assuring management that ground movement is proceeding normally and safely.

Jan 1, 1980

By Callaghan R. P

Underground production from the low grade copper orebodies at Mount Lyell in recent years has involved surface subsidence of open cut areas. Relevant structural and lithological features of the geological environment are des- cribed. The highly mechanised underground mining system involves sublevel caving and sub- level open stoping with associated hangingwall cave. Monitoring of subsidence and caving has been made by regular visual inspection and measurement of crack development, and by sur- face profile surveys. These simple techniques have proved adequate in assuring management that ground movement is proceeding normally and safely.

Jan 1, 1980

By Alice S. Allen, James Paone

SURFACE SUBSIDENCE IN MINING The consequences of subsidence are becoming progressively more serious as the consumption of an ever- increasing quantity of minerals conflicts with the needs of an expanding population for surface land area. The inevitable result will be an increase in the amount of land area on which undermining is restricted because surface subsidence must be prevented. Designation of land areas that may be undermined, provided that subsidence is controlled and kept within specified limits, also will increase. The decisions as to which land is to be used for urban, agricultural, or other purposes clearly involve considerations that go far beyond the scope of mining technology. Under the authority assigned to the US Bureau of Mines (USBM) by the Organic Act (May 16, 1910) and its succeeding amendments and pursuant regulations (30 U.S.C. 1-1 1 ), the Bureau conducts scientific and technologic investigations concerning mining and its related problems. Subsidence-control demonstrations that have been conducted under this authority include projects in Wyoming, West Virginia, Illinois, and the Pennsylvania anthracite region. The problenls for technology arc to devise methods for extracting minerals with controlled subsidence in varying geologic settings and for calculating or predicting the amount, extent, and characteristics of the subsidence that accompanies the extraction of our principal minerals mined by high-tonnage methods so that logical choices can be made from the possible alternative approaches. Where underground minerals and fuels are mined and removed, the voids that are created underground generate strong imbalanced stresses in the surrounding and overlying rock strata. The resulting readjustments in the rock masses may cause subsidence of the ground surface. Subsidence implies vertical collapse, because the most conspicuous component of movement is downward. However, the downward component is accompanied by differential horizontal strains that may be more damaging to man-made surface structure.; than the more apparent vertical displacements. SUBSIDENCE CONTROL The most widespread method of alleviating potential subsidence problems in undermined areas has been to backfill mine voids with mine refuse or some other in- expensive material that provides lateral support to the remaining mine pillars and vertical support to the mine roof and overburden. Most USBM backfilling work has been conducted jointly with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources in the anthracite region of northeastern Pennsylvania. These joint projects were conducted under the authority of the Anthracite Mine Drainage Control Act of July 15, 1955 (Public Law 84-162, as amended), and the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-4. as amended). In addition to the Appalachian and mine-drainage projects, the Bureau has either conducted or participated in demonstration projects to develop the "pumped- slurry" method of backfilling mine voids. Three of these projects were conducted in Rock Springs, WY. The first was a field test of the pumped-slurry technique, conducted in 1970 under the combined participation of the City of Rock Springs, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Dowell Div. of the Dow Chemical Co., and USBM (Candeub, Fleissig, 1971). The objective was to demonstrate that a large quantity of sand could be hydraulically injected under pressure through a single borehole, and that filling of the mine voids would be essentially complete. In the earlier "blind-flushing" methods, involving sluicing material through boreholes by gravity, quantities per injection hole ranged from 15 to 765 m3 (20 to 1000 cu yd), and the mine voids were only partially filled. In the first test of the pumped-slurry method, approximately 14 900 m (19,500 cu yd) of sand were injected success- fully through a single borehole. Subsequent information obtained through 43 monitoring boreholes indicated that mine voids below 11 330 m2 (2.8 acres) had been filled. As a result of the successful initial test of the pumped-slurry process, USBM conducted additional backfilling demonstration projects using the new technique. The first full-scale demonstration was carried out in the Green Ridge section of Scranton, PA, between 1972 and 1974. This project proved the feasibility of using the new hydraulic-injection technique to back- fill dry mine voids, as well as flooded voids, and it demonstrated that crushed anthracite refuse could be used as easily as sand in the process. Stabilization was pro- vided for about 202 300 m2 (50 acres) of Scranton, having a population of approximately 1000. Additional demonstration projects at Rock Springs, WY, between 1973 and 1975, resulted in the stabilization of about 364 200 m2 (90 acres). The work was necessary to preserve the physical and economic well- being of the city, because there have been numerous occurrences of subsidence during recent years. A demonstration project completed in 1976 in Rock Springs brought the total stabilized area in that city to 647 500 m2 (160 acres). At a cost of about $3,000,000, a population estimated at 7000 persons and property values exceeding $18,000,000 were protected. Presently. USBM is participating in subsidence- control projects involving backfilling in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and West Virginia. Eleven demonstration projects were in progress by USBM in 1977-eight in the Pennsylvania anthracite region and three in bituminous areas of West Virginia (one) and Illinois (two). The estimated total property value is over $100,500,000, and the total cost of the projects is expected to be nearly $20,000,000. The demonstration projects are designed to adapt the pumped-slurry technique to a variety of subsurface conditions, to increase efficiency, and to reduce costs.

Jan 1, 1982

By Victor V. Nazimko

Long term stability of the pillars that have been remained after R&P extraction causes postponed subsidence. To prevent unforeseen subsidence and to diminish postponed subsidence 25-50% new method for its control has been developed by the author. It supposes to use drilling and blasting technology and other original approaches. New method has been fulfilled through the holes being drilled from the surface or from the active underground openings. Explosives had been charged into the holes and were blasted. This had increased bulking factor dramatically and prevented natural caving of the strata. Physical scale modeling corroborated efficiency of the new approach. The bulking factor has grown from 0.0623 to 0.1185 and surface subsidence has been diminished from 1.1 m to 0.2 m or 5.5 times.

Jan 1, 1996

By Kewal K. Kohli, Richard E. Thill, Syd S. Peng

The results of unpublished investigations into surface subsidence from coal mining in the Northern Appalachian Coalfield are summarized. These investigations were carried out by various coal companies and the State of Pennsylvania in the sixties and seventies. Subsidence data were collected and analyzed from 10 room-and-pillar panels in 5 mines in the Pittsburgh coal seam. Results show that angle of draw ranges from 26° to 33° and subsidence factor from 0.42 to 0.72; surface heating generally occurs beyond the edges of the panel, the amount and extent of which vary; waviness occurs in the subsidence profile if a substantial number of pillar stumps are left in irregular patterns; interpanel effect is significant; time-dependent subsidence exists, but varies for different panels; and surface slope does not seem to affect the amount of subsidence.

Jan 1, 1982

Mining is taking place at increasing depths of cover on the Southern Coalfield beneath predominantly massive sandstone strata. Within the next twenty years, there will be longwall mining at depths greater than 600 m. As the Sydney Metropolitan area continues to expand and as coal mining approaches these urban areas subsidence will continue to become an increasinglY important aspect of coal mining research. Investigations, commenced in the mid 1960's, allow prediction of subsidence in the Southern Coalheld with reasonable confidence. The work is showing that the characteristics of thc subsidence troughs over the deeper mining at Appin differ from the characteristics of mine subsidence at less cover.The longwall mining at Appin Colliery has resulted in a maximum measured subsidenee of 730 mm. The maximum strains were small because of the large radii of curvature of the subsidence profiles. There was no damage to any of the buildings in the township of Appin.

Jan 1, 1982

By G. Krogman, C. Walla, B. Wood

The Gebo Mining District (District) is located in the Bighorn Basin of Wyoming. Commercial underground coal mining began in 1906 with the arrival of the railroad in Thermopolis, which is located approximately 11 miles to the south. Mining in the District ceased by the early 1970’s. In Fall of 1999, Lidstone and Associates, Inc. (LA) and their subcontractors were retained by the Wyoming Abandoned Mine Land Division (WyAML) to perform an inventory of over 500 abandoned mine sites across Wyoming. During the summer of 2000 field inventory, a 30-foot deep headcut (Figure 1) and sink-hole were noted in the West Fork of Sand Draw (WFSD), immediately west of the Town of Gebo. The headcut and sink-hole were located at the culvert outfall associated with a stream crossing of a relatively well traveled county road. Upon further investigation, it appeared that underground mine workings had been exposed at this location. This resulted in a condition whereby water would be conveyed directly into the mine workings during a runoff event. The exposed mine workings as well as stream capture created a very hazardous condition. The WyAML implemented mitigation measures in the summer of 2000 by constructing a temporary stream crossing upstream of the existing failed crossing. To address this hazardous situation as well as a number of other hazards identified in the District during the field inventory, the WyAML retained PHC Reclamation, Inc. (PHC). PHC was directed to perform a field investigation and develop a Reclamation Plan to address all existing abandoned mine hazards in the District. Federal, state, and private parties own lands within the District. Hazards identified during the investigation included an underground mine fire, open adits, open shafts, subsidence, drainage problems, and coal slack. A Report of Investigation (ROI) was submitted to various regulatory agencies that documented the existing conditions and conceptual reclamation plans to remediate the hazardous conditions. After review of the ROI by the US Department of Interior - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) an on-site meeting was conducted. BLM Cultural Resource personnel declined to approve a District reclamation project until a historical overview of the entire District was prepared. Due to the hazardous situation associated with the WFSD stream crossing, Hot Springs County Road and Bridge Department convinced various state and federal regulatory agencies to allow reclamation of the stream crossing to occur. A decision was made to allow reclamation on privately owned lands within the WFSD drainage. This decision limited the amount of channel that could be subjected to reclamation upstream of the crossing to privately owned lands. PHC contracted LA to perform a geologic, geomorphic, hydrologic, and hydraulic investigation of the drainage to assist in the development of a WFSD reclamation plan. LA’s investigation consisted of four parts: Delineate the extent of mine workings in the area; Identify all drainage structures that required mitigation; Survey a series of channel cross-sections and a longitudinal profile of the impacted channel; and, Develop basin hydrology to assist in the design of a stable reclaimed stream channel.

Jan 1, 2006

By J. P. Piguet, A. Hosni, J. P. Josien, H. Baroudi, R. Hadadou

"The iron ore mines in the Lorraine region of north-eastern France cover a surface area of approximately 3,900 km2 and involve more than 150 cities. A total extraction method was usually used during exploitation, but this technique was sometimes replaced by the room and abandoned pillar technique when it was necessary to protect surface buildings and infrastructure. Rooms and abandoned pillars were initially designed to ensure long-term mine stability. However, this aim was not always reached and numerous collapses occurred in the Lorraine iron basin, either during production or several years after closure. Several subsidence events were identified during a period of one century; the most recent event occurred in 2012. Two groups of events were identified. The first group represents events characterized by sudden surface movement, and the second group includes event characterized by progressive subsidence.Numerous studies conducted during the last decade helped improve our understanding the origin mechanism of spontaneous or progressive (slow) events. These studies led to identifying long-term potentially unstable underground zones (hazard zones), particularly deep zones located under buildings and infrastructure. The latest are currently monitored by microseismic networks. A similar high requirement level is needed for unstable zones without taking into account the kinetics of the subsidence, which is very important for safety. Thus, GEODERIS initiated this study, primarily to acquire a better understanding of the kinetics of the progressive events group and identify the main parameters that could explain why some pillars zones developed a maximum amplitude subsidence on surface within a few hours or days, while it took several weeks to months for others. In practice, the results of this study will facilitate adapting the requirement level of microseismic monitoring system to the kinetics of pillar collapse.To retrieve the real kinetics for each event, historical and sparse documentation was used. Firstly, archives research was conducted, especially testimonies and newspaper articles published during the events. This work helped to gather useful information that sometimes contained a precise description of subsidence duration. The archives research helped to classify some progressive events according to the subsidence kinetics. Secondly, a diagnostic of geotechnical and geomechanical parameters of historic events was realized, combined with a cross analysis of the data. The analysis took into account dimensions of underground workings (e.g., pillar lengths, widths, heights, introduction of a “pillar shape factor”, and stress amount). An original expression was highlighted to connect the pillar geometry to the stress state. The kinetics expression was calibrated to classify the historic events taken into account according to the kinetics of movements. The kinetic criterion was applied to predict subsidence kinetics for the potential unstable zones currently monitored by a microseismic system."

Jan 1, 2015

By Richard E. Gray

Subsidence due to coal mining is poorly understood by non-specialists. This has led to numerous misconceptions and myths based on limited observations and lack of knowledge. The three most common are: 1. Mine maps are inaccurate. 2. Deep mines are not a problem. 3. If no subsidence has occurred for many years after mining, there is no risk of future subsidence. Maps are important during mining and most are carefully prepared. Future use to evaluate conditions at mine level often includes drilling to confirm what the map shows. Usually, little or no effort is made to tie the surface survey of the property to the mine survey, to conduct a well designed drilling program to confirm the mine map, or to drill test borings vertically. When a mine entry is encountered rather than a coal pillar, or vice versa, and conditions at mine level appear different than anticipated, the first reaction is the mine map is inaccurate. The idea of a safe depth from subsidence is often based on the false premise that mining results in sufficient breakup of the overlying rock strata that bulking compensates for the coal extracted. The safe depth idea first appeared in the literature about 1880 and remained prevalent well into this century. Sadly, it is still encountered. The modern understanding of fragmentation of the immediate mine roof with the overlying beds sagging down on the broken roof rock was first described in 1900. With full extraction mining, either longwall or retreat room and pillar, surface subsidence occurs regardless of the depth of the mine. Subsidence over longwall mines at depths of 2000 feet can be 90 percent of the mined seam thickness. Numerous studies of undermined sites conclude that mining occurred many years ago and since no subsidence has occurred, there is no risk of future movement. This is true if sufficient coal pillars have been left to support the overlying strata. However, every year subsidence occurs over mines that have been closed for 100 years or more. In a study of subsidence incidents over the Pittsburgh Coal, the senior authors found that 50 percent of the incidents occurred above mines that had been closed for at least 50 years and 10 percent over mines closed for at least 80 years.

Jan 1, 1996

By Dr. Peter J. Conroy

The current study is part of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) on-going subsidence research program. The long-term objective of the DOE program is to develop analytical methods of subsidence prediction applicable over a broad range of geologic and mining conditions encountered in the United States. The DOE currently has several contracts in progress to develop a sound data base that can be used in the development of predictive models. Dames & Moore is currently under contract to the DOE to collect and analyze detailed subsidence and hydrologic data from a coal mine employing longwall mining methods in the Eastern Coal Province. Work under Contract No. DE-AC22-80PC 30335 began in October of 1980 and will continue through September of 1984. This paper summarizes the work that has been completed through September of 1981 and presents the results that have been achieved during this period. Technical difficulties encountered during both the installation and monitoring phases are discussed, and recommendations for future work are presented.

Jan 1, 1982

By Yoginder P. Chugh

Subsidence may be observed above partial extraction shallow room-and-pillar mines where the coal seam(s) is associated with weak and thick claystone in the floor. This paper presents results of subsidence studies at such a mine. During the 26-month study period, a time dependent subsidence causing a maximum vertical movement of 50 mn was observed. After a subsidence rate of 6.0-6.5 m/month for the first two months after development of mine workings, the rate decreased to 0.8-0.9 mm/month after 17 months. However, presumably due to settlement of barrier pillars, it increased therafter to 1.7 mm/month for the next 9 months. Angle of draw, based on zero subsidence, was calculated to be about 29 degrees. Maximum tensile strain and compressive strain values observed were 0.040 pct and 0.039 pct respectively. A hypothesis was fomlated to correlate surface subsidence movements with observed underground movments. The data collected to date fits reasonably well within the formulated hypothesis.

Jan 1, 1989

By James E. Kolesar

An essential prerequisite to expanding the application of longwall mining techniques in the United States is the development of a better understanding of the mechanics of rock mass deformation near the mined seam, in the inter- burden and at the surface. The results of studies of this type will provide a basis for the development of empirical and/or numerical modeling techniques to predict the rock mass response to mining both near and far from the mined seam. This will lead to improved gate and panel design, resulting in maximum recovery, increased productivity, as well as provide a mechanism for assessing likely surface effects induced by long- wall mining. Presented here is the instrument plan to be used at Kitt Mine No. 1 in the study of rock mass response to two adjacent longwall panels.

Jan 1, 1982

By Robert A. Bauer

Investigations of bedrock within subsided areas over abandoned coal mines reveal) very little disturbance of the bedrock. In areas that have surface subsidence of .3 to 1 m (1.0 to 3.25 ft), examination of cores from exploration drilling and investigations of the boreholes by means of closed circuit television have shown that fractures are spaced at least .9 to 3.6 m (3 to 12 ft) apart and are located within a zone 6 to 15 m (20 to 50 ft) above the collapsed area in coal mines 42.6 to 112.7 m (140 to 370 ft) deep. The dip of the fractures ranges from 25 to 60 degrees, cutting across nearly horizontal sedimentary bedding planes. Typical core recovery is 80 to 95 percent within the subsided areas and 100 percent outside the subsided areas.

Jan 1, 1984

By W. M. Ma, Daniel W. H. Su, K. Centofanti, Yi Luo, W. L. Zhong, Syd S. Peng

8.1 INTRODUCTION Under room and pillar mining if the extraction ratio is low, (i.e., < 50%) a pillar can support the overburden without collapse and there will be no surface subsidence whatsoever. In other words, if the pillar sizes are properly determined to support the overburden weight, the roof strata cannot cave and there will be no surface subsidence, provided the entry width is small and properly reinforced so that a continuous roof fall leading to piping or the total collapse of the roof does not occur. Under the prevailing mining conditions in the US if only development mining is em¬ployed in room and pillar mining (i.e., no pillar extraction), the extraction ratio is usually less than 50% and generally no surface subsidence will occur. If pillar mining is employed, surface subsidence may occur, depending on the extraction ratio and the size of the remnant pillars (or stumps) left in the gob. The higher the extraction ratio, the smaller the stump pillars left behind in the gob. As the size of the stump pillars becomes smaller, the possibility of their support¬ing the roof without collapse is smaller. If all stumps are crushed completely, the roof will collapse and surface subsidence will occur. Again, whether surface subsidence occurs, it depends on whether the remaining stumps can support the overburden or not. Therefore, since the weight of the overburden which the stump pillars have to support is proportional to the mining depth, a fixed¬size stump pillar can support the overburden at a shallow depth, but will collapse under greater depths. In this context extraction ratio is not the only parameter for determining whether surface subsidence will occur. Furthermore, during pillar mining a pillar can be cut away in many ways to finally reach the same extraction ratio. Therefore, the safest way to determine whether or not sur¬face subsidence will occur in room and pillar mining is to compare the strength of all stump pillars in the panel of interest with the weight of the overburden that the pillars have to support. If they are too small to support the overburden, surface subsidence will occur. Under normal mining practices the characteristics of surface subsidence profiles vary with methods of mining. In the US there are two types of coal mining methods, i.e., longwall and room and pillar mining. Longwall mining is indisputably a total extraction method, but different percentages of coal recovery are achieved in room and pillar mining. Recovery is much higher for sections with pillar extraction than those without pillar extraction. For those without pillar extraction, coal recovery increases with increasing entry width or decreasing pillar size. For those with pillar extrac¬tion, the total coal recovery depends on the amount of coal ex¬tracted from each pillar which is in turn dependent on the roof conditions and methods of pillar extraction. Bauer and Hunt (1981) analyzed the characteristics of the subsidence profiles due to the three types of mining methods in Illinois. Fig. 8.1 shows the range of locations associated with the following profile features: profile edge, maximum tensile curvature, maximum slope, maxi¬mum compressive curvature, and maximum subsidence. The scat¬ter of the data increases with decreasing percentages of extraction. The profile is much sharper for longwall mining and becomes milder as percentage of extraction decreases; for longwall mining the profile edge is always beyond the opening, while in room and pillar mining it may fall within. The location of maximum tensile strain moves outward, while that of the maximum compressive strain moves inward as the percentage of extraction decreases and the maximum subsidence decreases with decreasing extraction ra¬tio. The general concepts discussed in this chapter may not apply to the entry development sections between two longwall panels where roof caving in both panels are very severe and overlap each other. Consequently, it must be treated differently. 8.2 CASE STUDIES Kohli et al. (1982) described several case studies on surface subsidence due to room and pillar mining with pillar extraction. In one case, the seam was 6 ft thick and ranged from 650 to 800 ft deep. The panel was 720 ft wide (Fig. 8.2) and was developed with seven entries. Each entry was 18 ft wide and the pillars were driven at 88 ft center-to-center between entries and crosscuts. Dur¬ing retreating, two additional pillars (pillars J and K) were devel¬oped, two blocks ahead of the pillar line, to take the barrier pillar, 160 ft wide, between panel No. I and No. 2. Pillar extraction began by taking a central slice across the whole panel, beginning from pillar 0 through J. After that, each pillar was sliced by 6 wing-slices, 3 on each side, leaving 4 stumps, 2 on each side. One of each pair was triangular shaped approximately 6 ft wide by 26 ft long. The other was trapezoidal, 26 ft long by 16 ft and 10 ft wide at the upper and lower bases, respectively. This resulted in a total extraction ratio of 85% within the panel. Obviously the stump pillars were not large enough to support the overburden and col¬lapsed completely. The final subsidence profiles were rather smooth, just like those under total extraction (Fig. 8.3). The max¬imum subsidence on Lines A and B was about 3 ft for an average mining height of 6 ft, but the locations of the maximum subsidence were skewed toward panel No. 1. Along Line D, the central por¬tion was flat-bottomed, but the maximum subsidence was only 2 ft, mainly because Line D was only two blocks from the right-side edge. Notice in every profile there was heaving of as much as 0.3 ft, beyond the edges above the solid coal. In another case (Fig. 8.4), the seam was 6 ft thick under 650 to 850 ft cover. Three panels, 710, 400, and 350 ft wide, respec¬tively, were extracted side by side. The entries were 18 ft wide and the pillars at 88 ft center-to-center between entries and crosscuts. Pillar extraction was practiced the same way as described previ¬ously. According to the mine maps, there was no barrier pillar left between the adjacent panels. Thus after extraction the three panels formed a common gob of more than 1460 ft wide. This was re¬flected in the development of the subsidence profile along the county road. After Panel No. I was mined, the maximum subsi¬dence of 1.2 ft occurred at Monument No. 1. This was increased to 1.6 ft after the extraction of Panel No. 2 and went to a further 1.8 ft after the extraction of Panel No. 3. The final maximum subsidence of 4.3 ft occurred at Monuments No. 6 through No. 8, while the remaining portion of the county road showed rebound. However it must be noted that the subsidence profiles were rather bumpy and fluctuated, perhaps an indication of the irregular stump pillars that were left and crushed at various time after mining. Moebs (1982) surveyed the subsidence profiles of four room

Jan 1, 1992

By Andre Zingano, Anderson Weiss

"The objective of this paper is to study the behavior of a low thick and low depth coal seam and the overburden rock mass. The mining method is room and pillar in retreat and partial pillar recovery. The excavation method is conventional drill and blast because of the small production. The partial pillar recovery is about 30% of the previous pillar size, 7m x 7m. The roof displacement was monitored during retreat operation; the surface movement was also monitored. The effect of the blasting vibration on the final pillar strength had been considered. Due to blasting, the pillar reduced about 20%. The consequence is more pillar deformation and roof vertical displacement. The pillar retreat and ground movement were simulated in a three-dimensional numerical model. This model was created to predict the surface subsidence and compare to the subsidence measured. This study showed that the remaining pillar and low seam reduce the subsidence that was predicted with conventional methods.INTRODUCTIONMining low coal seams (less than 1 meter) with the room-and-pillar mining method implies the excavation of part of the roof or floor to maintain adequate entry height for equipment and compliance with labor regulations with respect to ergonomic issues. The direct consequence of this is an increase in coal contamination and the increased cost of transportation and preparation at the plant. Traditional room-and-pillar mining only uses a development operation, even with a continuous miner or drill-and-blasting. Therefore, all the run of mine (ROM) coal is carried out with part of the roof or floor. However, if the retreat mining method were to be considered, the quality of the coal could increase because only the coal seam is excavated from the pillar recovery. The quality of ROM coal will increase, and the cost will decrease proportionally to the amount of coal produced from the retreat operation.However, the retreat mining with partial or total pillar recovery implies greater subsidence. This is particularly true if the coal seam depth is shallow, under 100m depth. Subsidence prediction in room-and-pillar retreat mining is complex; it depends upon the remaining pillar (stump pillar) size, as well as the pillar height, and the behavior of the pillar after retreat. This is related to the strength of the remaining pillar, which is related to the excavated method (drill-and-blast or mechanical)."

Jan 1, 2018

By S. S. Peng

In this paper, the precise definitions for a number of commonly used subsidence parameters are given. The subsidence parameters have been determined using an integrated approach for 110 subsidence cases collected in the major US coal fields. Attempts have been made to establish empirical formulae for the parameters. The results of this study indicate that some traditionally-held concepts should be changed.

Jan 1, 1995