Search Documents

By Stephen C. Tadolini, John P. McDonnell

"High-strength cable bolts have been used for ground support in underground coal mines for many years. Cable bolts are routinely used as secondary ground support in numerous longwall gateroad support applications, areas that possibly experience the most severe conditions in current underground coal mining. Additionally, when mining ground conditions deteriorate, engineers oftentimes recommend cable supports as a principal solution because of the established credibility for successful ground control. Nevertheless, there is still a reluctance to utilize non-tensioned cable supports as an effective primary roof support alternative.This paper provides historical and recently documented examples of non-tensioned cable supports utilized as an effective primary ground support method in a western U.S. underground coal mine, and it will continue the technical discussion between the differences of various degrees of tension in cable supports with respect to ground behavior and reactions.INTRODUCTIONResin-grouted cable supports are widely used to support difficult ground conditions throughout the world. Through the use of innovative applications and configurations they have proven to be a major paradigm shift in roof support and ground control technology in the U.S. (Tadolini and Koch, 1993; McDonnell et al., 1995; Tadolini and Gallagher, 1994; Tadolini and Trackemas, 1994)Today, the basic cable bolt support consists of a high-strength steel cable installed in bore holes that range in diameter from 25 to 50 mm (1 to 2 in) depending on the strand size and drilling equipment. Cables are offered in both bright and galvanized, for corrosion protection, and range in capacity from about 30 to 60 tons. An example of a resin-grouted cable bolt and the key components is shown in Figure 1. The steel cables are flexible and the support length is not limited by the height of the opening. Lengths of up to 10 m (32 ft) have been supported with high pattern densities when standing supports were not operationally feasible. The most common lengths are 3 to 5 m (10 to 16 ft). An important physical characteristic is that PC-strand has an ASTM minimum elongation requirement of 4%. For comparison purposes, the ASTM 432-08 Standard Specifications for Roof and Rock Bolts and Accessories specifies elongation requirements for traditional roof bolts are a minimum of 12% for grade 40, 9% for grade 60, and 8% for grade 75 materials, respectively. Traditional roof bolts can stretch and elongate twice the length that cable bolts can, which makes design considerations challenging."

Jan 1, 2010

By Morgan Sears

The LaModel program (Heasley, 1998) is a displacement discontinuity, boundary element model (BEM) for analyzing stresses and displacements in single and multiple-seam coal mines. After the Crandall Canyon mine collapse, the need for better design guidelines for LaModel was observed and a new calibration method for deep cover pillar retreat was developed (Heasley et al., 2010). However, the scope of this initial calibration was limited to single-seam mines deeper than 750 ft. This limited application of the initial calibration method lead directly to the research presented in this paper, which attempts to define appropriate LaModel calibration guidelines for pillar design where shallow cover and/ or multiple-seam mining scenarios are encountered. As part of this research, a database of shallow cover case histories has been developed, and this database is used to help validate the shallow cover calibration method. By adding the shallow cover database to the previous deep cover database, the LaModel calibration method has now been extended to the complete range of mining depths, as well as to multiple-seam cases. With this shallow cover calibration, the utility of the LaModel program continues to increase.

Jan 1, 2013

By Stephen C. Tadolini

Effective barrier pillar design is an essential component for safe and productive underground coal mining. Barrier pillar design methodologies that incorporate sound engineering judgment have been used for practical everyday usage. The next logical step is to utilize numerical modeling techniques that help combine practical experience and empirical observations into barrier pillar design analysis. A case study is presented that describes the barrier pillar design process, but also highlights the importance of considering the global mine response by evaluating: adjacent pillar stabilities, impact of intersection and entry widths, capacity of primary and secondary bolting systems and rib stabilization used for the safe and efficient removal of the longwall face equipment.

Jan 1, 2013

By Mark Van Dyke, Gamal Rashed, Khaled Mohamed, Timothy Barton, Morgan Sears

"The unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of coal is an important parameter that controls the stability of coal ribs in underground mines. Estimation of the UCS of coal units composing the rib is required for conducting the rib stability assessment technique. This technique requires conducting large numbers of conventional UCS tests in a laboratory, which are expensive and time consuming. The research work outlined in this paper examines the use of indirect strength estimation methods—the point load test (PLT) and the in-situ Schmidt hammer test (ISHT)—for evaluating the intact strength of coal. The conventional UCS test was conducted on 80 coal specimens from 10 different coal seams for eastern coals. For each coal seam, the PLT and the ISHT were compared with the UCS test results to establish a correlation between the strength indices from the PLT or ISHT and the UCS. Moreover, to simplify the estimation of the UCS, a correlation between the megascopic coal lithotype and UCS was established.INTRODUCTIONBased on Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) reports, rib failures have resulted in 17 fatalities, representing 52% of the ground-fall fatalities in underground coal mines in the United States over the past decade (MSHA, 2018). In an attempt to control rib failures in underground coal mines, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is working on developing a coal rib stability rating technique to provide a quantitative means to characterize the stability of coal ribs and to provide guidelines for early selections of rib support. The unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of coal units composing the ribs is one of the key input parameters required to estimate coal rib stability. The UCS of coal is an important parameter that controls the resistance of coal ribs to fracturing and slabbing. Direct determination of the UCS is time-consuming and expensive. Moreover, the UCS may be limited to testing only the strong coal samples since the weak or highly cleated samples might not survive the transportation and the preparation process (cutting and grinding). Therefore, alternative methods have been tested to indirectly find the intact strength of coal, such as the point load test (PLT) and the in-situ Schmidt hammer test (ISHT). The acronym ISHT refers to Schmidt hammer tests that were conducted in-situ on coal pillar ribs, while the acronym SHT refers to tests that were conducted on small scale blocks of coal."

Jan 1, 2018

By Ross W. Seedsman

The logical framework recognises that a coal mine roof can be intrinsically stable or may collapse in one of four ways. Suspension of the immediate roof is one of fundamental ground control strategies available to a coal mine engineer and is recommended for three of the four collapse modes. Correctly implemented suspension offers the greatest improvement in roof stability and greatest reduction in longwall risk. For the control of maingates ahead of retreating longwall faces the ideal suspension support (if required) consists of angled, partially debonded, medium-length tendons installed as far behind the development face as practical. For situations where the roof may be subjected to tensile horizontal stress, immediate support by equally spaced short vertical tendons is required. The step away from fully-grouted tendons improves their survivability during the onset of compressive failure in the roof, minimises the risk of isolated loading, and allows a more robust TARP for roof movement. All suspension systems require a strap, sling or truss between the suspension elements.

Jan 1, 2014

By Ted Klemetti, Gabriel Esterhuizen, John L. Ellenberger

"Advanced numerical models can be used to evaluate entry support systems in coal mines. However, these methods require specialized software and specialized skills to create the models and evaluate the results. Practicing support design engineers require a method to rapidly assess a proposed support system for a given geotechnical scenario. A prediction equation that can be used to assess roof support systems has been developed from the results of hundreds of FLAC3D analyses that were conducted during recent research. These models were validated against field cases and empirical design approaches and were found to adequately predict entry stability in coal mines. The understanding developed from the model outcomes was used to develop an equation to predict entry roof stability against large roof falls. Least-squares error analysis was conducted to find appropriate parameters for the nonlinear equation. The developed equation can be solved using spreadsheet software, allowing for rapid assessment of alternative support system performance in variable geological conditions. The performance of the prediction equation is evaluated against empirical design methods and against selected case histories of support practices at currently operating mines. Examples are presented that demonstrate the performance of the equation in variable geological settings. The stability factor (SF) prediction equation can be used as an assessment tool to assist in the design of coal mine roof support systems.IntroductionGround falls represent a significant proportion of injuries and fatalities in underground coal mines in the US. During 2013, ground falls were responsible for 4 of the 14 fatalities and 16.6 % of the 1,577 reportable lost-time injuries (MSHA, 2015). In addition, each year about 400 to 500 large roof falls are reported that can extend up to or above the bolted horizon. Large roof falls and associated ground fall hazards can be mitigated through improved support design.The research presented here particularly addresses the problem of large roof falls that extend more than 90 cm (3 ft) above the roof line of an entry and may extend above the bolted horizon. Smaller roof falls that fall out between supports or extend less than 90 cm (3 ft) above the roof line are excluded. These smaller roof falls can be controlled by appropriate surface support such as roof screen or other skin control methods. Also excluded are roof falls that are associated with an individual geological structure such as a slip of fault. Structure-related instabilities can be controlled by strategically locating individual roof bolts or other supports appropriate for the local situation."

Jan 1, 2015

By Dakota Faulkner

Unexpected roof falls often occur in the entries or intersections of active mining sections in underground mines. For large roof falls (greater than 20 ft in height), it becomes dangerous and impractical to clean up the rock debris and re-bolt the newly exposed roof strata. To help mine operators rehabilitate the roof fall areas in a quick, safe, and economic manner, Jennmar Corporation and Keystone Mining Services, LLC (KMS) designed, tested, and developed various impact-resistant (IR) steel set designs, as initially detailed in the proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining (ICGCM). Since then, the IR steel sets have been successfully installed in more than 100 roof falls in 43 different coal mines. Significant data has been obtained from these installations, enabling further refinement to and improvement on the design. This paper (1) updates drop test results of the IR lagging panel, (2) presents a case study of the performance of IR arch sets installed 56 months ago at a roof fall rehabilitation site, (3) demonstrates capacity evaluation of the IR steel set, and (4) outlines a preliminary applicability evaluation guideline of the IR steel set for a given roof fall condition. Field evaluation and structural numerical analysis indicate that impact capacity of the system is significantly higher than that of the IR lagging panel, as originally determined. It is concluded that, when evaluating the applicability of an IR steel set, ground control engineers should consider the IR lagging and steel set as an entire system and make a reasonable engineering decision based on actual roof fall geotechnical conditions.

Jan 1, 2014

By Yun Zhang, Haijun Jiang, Shenggen Cao, Chen Wang

The distribution of front abutment pressure is closely related to the force, deformation and energy distribution of hard roof before periodic weighting. So it is necessary to carry out research on the relationship between them. According to front abutment pressure distribution feature, using the location of peak front abutment pressure as the dividing point, coal seam is divided into two parts along the direction of mining: the yield zone that is the area between the faceline and the point where the maximum front abutment pressure occurs, and the elastic zone that is the part before the point of peak front abutment pressure. The proposed mechanical model of unit width hard roof at the panel center periodic weighting consists of five parts including the yield zone. All parameters of the deflection equations for each of the five parts that satisfy the continuity conditions and natural boundary conditions are obtained by using the Matlab software. The continuous curves of front abutment pressure, deflection, bending moment and bending strain energy density distribution of hard roof are obtained by iterative approximation method. The following conclusions can be drawn through analyzing those curves: (1) The position of peak front abutment pressure is located at the transition of coal seam foundation from yield zone to elastic zone (elastoyield critical point), the distance of it to the faceline is equal to the width of yield zone. The peak front abutment pressure increases with yield zone with. (2) The peak bending moment in front of the faceline, and the distance of it to the faceline increase with the yield zone width. The deflection of hard roof at the face and midspan also increase with yield zone width. (3) As the yield zone width increases, the accumulated elastic energy of hard roof in front of the faceline increases, and the core zone of energy moves forward away from the face. (4) When the yield zone width is zero, the whole coal foundation is regarded as elastic foundation, and the peak front abutment pressure occurs at the faceline.

Jan 1, 2015

By Nan Zhou, Jixiong Zhang, Qiang Zhang

"Mining activities under hard roof could easily induce rock burst. Based on the geological conditions of widespread hard roof in China, this paper discusses the type, mechanism of occurrence and prevention of rock burst caused by hard roof from energy evolution point of view. It analyzed the interaction between the solid backfilled body and roof under different backfilling ratios. And by establishing and applying the mechanical model, the deformation of hard roof and energy evolution of the panel under different backfilling ratios were determined, revealing the control effect of solid backfilling on disaster-causing energy. As a result, an innovative method using the solid backfilling method was proposed as a solution to the hard-roof-induced rock burst hazards. Moreover, mine trial was conducted in Panel 6304-1 of Jisan Mine. The result shows that the stress concentration factor of the front abutment stress was only 1.44; the coal dusts in drill holes didn’t exceed the limits and microseism of large energy didn’t occur during mining mining, indicating that solid backfilling mining could be applied as an effective method for preventing rock burst caused by hard roof.INTRODUCTIONSHard roof refers to the thick strata above the coal seam or thin immediate roof. It is strong with poor joint development. After mining, instead of immediate caving, it will overhang for a large area in the gob, resulting in high stress in front of the face and difficulty in gas dispersion. As a result, the face spalls, the roof exposes and the gas accumulates in the gob. With the continuing advance of the face and increase in area of overhang, the stress in the hard roof will eventually exceed its ultimate strength and cause a large area of caving, followed by quick release of energy concentrated in the roof and coal seam, which may cause rock bursts and other dynamic disasters in the mine as well as serious equipment damage and casualties. Therefore, the hard roof becomes one of the main factors causing rock bursts at the face.Hard roofs in China varies in conditions. It ranges from dozens of meters to hundreds of meters in thickness. However, coal reserve under hard roofs accounts for about 1/3 of the total reserve; moreover, nearly 40% of the fully-mechanized coal mining panels are those with hard roofs and more than 50% of the mining areas are associated with problems of hard roofs. Aiming at this problem, researchers at home and abroad have proposed many solutions, e.g. coal pillar support, strength weakening and forced caving, to prevent rock bursts caused by hard roof. These solutions have been employed in some cases with good results. However, due to the variability in geological conditions of mining and hard roofs, the application of the above solutions is limited."

Jan 1, 2015

By Keith Heasley

This paper is a retrospective on the development, application, and enhancement of the LaModel program from a personal perspective. The narrative starts with an explanation of the objectives behind the original development of the program and then introduces some of the unique and very practical features of the program. Next, a demonstration of how LaModel was advantageously used to model stresses and displacements in a multiple-seam mining situation with highly variable topography is presented. This is followed by the details of a number of the major enhancements and expansions of the program over the years. A back-analysis of the Crandall Canyon Mine collapse is then briefly presented, along with the associated development of a recommended calibration procedure for the critical input parameters to LaModel. Finally, some of the present research areas are briefly described, and future enhancements are introduced.

Jan 1, 2011

By Zhaohui Wang, Jiachen Wang

"Effective surrounding rock control is a prerequisite for realizing safe mining in underground longwall faces. In the past three decades, longwall top-coal caving mining (LTCC) and single pass large height longwall mining (SPLL) found expanded usage in extracting thick coal seams in China. The two mining methods lead to large void space left behind the working face, which increase the difficulty of ground control. Longwall face failure is a common problem in underground mining, which is induced due to low strength and high fracture density of the coal seam. Moreover, the stiffness of main components included in the surrounding rock system also greatly influences longwall face instability. Correspondingly, the surrounding rock system is developed for LTCC and SPLL faces in this paper. Mechanical conditions for simultaneous balance of roof structure and longwall face are put forward by taking the stiffness of coal seam, roof strata, and hydraulic support into account. The safety factor of the longwall face is defined as the ratio between its ultimate bearing capacity and the load imposed on it. The influence of coal strength, stiffness of the coal seam, roof strata, and hydraulic support, as well as the movement of roof structure, are analyzed. Finally, the key elements dominating longwall face stability are identified for improving surrounding rock control effectiveness in LTCC and SPLL faces.INTRODUCTIONThe concentration of coal mining in China is gradually shifting to the west region, and there are a large number of thick coal seams in the newly formed coal mining area. Therefore, the surrounding rock control problems related to mining of thick coal seams will become the focus of research in the field of mining engineering in the future. There are two kinds of mining methods for thick coal seams in China, including single pass large height longwall mining (SPLL) and longwall top-coal caving mining (LTCC). Both methods can accomplish the goal of excavating the full thickness of thick coal seams at one time. SPLL mining benefits from the improvement of the development level of associated equipment. The appearance of large hydraulic supports and high power shearers ensure that the height protected by the hydraulic supports and the height of the sheared coal are the same as the coal thickness. LTCC mining benefits from mining technology advantages. The thick coal seam is divided into two sub-layers, and the working face is normally installed in the bottom layer, while the top coal is caved under the compressive forces due to mining. Therefore, there is a scraper conveyor at the front of the hydraulic support for transporting the sheared coal and another one at the tail for transporting caved top coal. Both SPLL and LTCC methods realize one-off recovery of thick coal seams."

Jan 1, 2018

By Gabriel S. Esterhuizen

"Cable bolts are sometimes used in low-seam coal mines to provide support in difficult ground conditions. This paper describes cable bolting solutions at two low-seam coal mines in similar ground conditions. Both mines used support systems incorporating cable bolts as part of the primary support system. Two original cable bolt based support systems as well as two modified systems are evaluated to estimate their ability to prevent large roof falls. One of the support systems incorporated passive cable bolts, while the other used pre-tensioned cable bolts. The results and experience at the mines showed that the modified systems provided improved stability over the original support systems. The presence of the cable bolts is the most important contribution to stability against large roof falls, rather than the details of the support pattern. It was also found that a heavy steel channel can improve the safety of the system because of the ‘sling’ action it provides. Additionally, the analysis showed that fully-grouted rebar bolts load much earlier than the cable bolts, and pre-tensioning of the cable bolts can result in a more uniform distribution of loading in the roof.INTRODUCTIONCable bolting is sometimes used as primary support in coal mines experiencing difficult roof conditions. In low-seam mines the flexibility of the cable bolts allows greater length supports to be installed near the advancing face without the use of couplers. When used as primary support, the cables are typically installed in the same row as fully grouted bolts, replacing two or more of the bolts in each support row. A heavy steel channel may be used as a strap to spread the support load over a greater portion of the roof. Historically, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has not allowed widespread use of partially grouted un-tensioned bolts (e.g., passive cable bolts) for primary support; however, pretensioned cable bolts have been accepted.Various solutions using cable bolts as primary support were attempted at two low-seam coal mines in Western Pennsylvania that were experiencing difficult roof conditions. Both mines originally used fully grouted rebar bolts as primary support and cable bolts as supplementary support. It was found that when a large roof fall occurred, the cable bolts may be contained within the dome of fallen rock. As problematic roof conditions continued to exist, both mines decided to use cable bolts as part of the primary support system. The cable bolts were located near the ribs of the entry, to increase the likelihood that they would be anchored outside the dome of potentially unstable roof. The cable and rebar bolts were installed on a heavy steel channel that acts as a ‘sling’ to distribute the load across the width of the entry. At the first mine, Mine A, pre-tensioned cable bolts were used while at Mine B, un-tensioned cables were used. The two support systems consist of essentially the same support components installed in different patterns and with varying degrees of pre-tension."

Jan 1, 2015

By Khaled M. Mohamed, Michael M. Murphy, Ted M. Klemetti, Heather E. Lawson

"The design of rib support systems in U.S. coal mines is based primarily on local practices and experience. A better understanding of current rib support practices in U.S. coal mines is crucial for developing a sound engineering rib support design tool.The objective of this paper is to analyze the current practices of rib control in US coal mines. Twenty (20) underground coal mines were studied representing various coal basins, coal seams, geology, loading conditions, and rib control strategies.The key findings are: (1) any rib design guideline or tool should take into account external rib support as well as internal bolting; (2) rib bolts on their own cannot contain rib spall, especially in soft ribs subjected to significant load—external rib control devices such as mesh are required in such cases to contain rib sloughing; (3) the majority of the studied mines follow the overburden depth and entry height thresholds recommended by the Program Information Bulletin (PIB) 11-29; (4) potential rib instability occurred when certain geological features prevailed—these include draw slate and/or bone coal near the rib/roof line, claystone partings, and soft coal bench overlain by rock strata; (5) 47% of the studied rib spall was classified as blocky—this could indicate a high potential of rib hazards; and (6) rib injury rates of the studied mines for the last three years emphasize the need for more rib control management for mines operating at overburden depths between 500 ft and 1,000 ft.IntroductionEfforts to improve the stability of underground mine ribs have continued for decades. These efforts by mining professionals around the world persisted throughout the 1990s and 2000s as well, though much of this work focused on rib support methodology and selection of proper support for a specific location. Despite these efforts, it is unfortunate that there has been a continual occurrence of rib-related fatalities in underground coal mines. While overall improvements in rib safety have been achieved, the average fatality rate is still about 1.3 fatalities per year over the last 18 years (Jones, 2014).To manage and control the rib hazard, rib support is used in U.S. coal mines. The current rib support methods for U.S. mines fall into two main categories: rib control based on intrinsic support systems and those based on external support systems. Intrinsic or rib-bolt support requires a roof bolting machine that can install a bolt fixture into the rib. Furthermore, the appropriate level of support needed to control the ribs with an intrinsic-based support system as well as the design parameters for those support systems for various mine conditions have not been established in U.S. coal mines. Furthermore, surface control systems are often an integral part of these support systems and must be considered in the system design."

Jan 1, 2015

By P. Oliver

Rockburst conditions were first encountered at Inco's Sudbury area operations in the mid 1930's when mining advanced to below the 610 m (2000 ft.) horizon. Now, mining is being carried out at depths down to 2130 m (7000 ft.) at Inco'a Creighton Mine. While rockburst potentials have increased with depth. improvements in mine planning, methods, support systems and developments in destressing have alleviated the condition to where it is less of a problem now than it was in the early years. Hang of the improvements were developed, of necessity. through observation and reasoning because these were the only tools available at the time. Now, we are making use of stress - measurements, numerical modelling and microseismic source location technology to - help further reduce rockburat hazards.

Jan 1, 1987

By Stephen C. Tadolini, Anthony T. Iannacchione

"Coal burst represented a major hazard for some U.S. mining operations. This paper provides an historical review of the coal burst hazards, identifies the fundamental geological factors associated with these events, and discusses mechanisms that can be used to avoid their occurrences. Coal burst are not common in most underground mines. Their occurrence almost always has such dramatic consequences to a mining operation that changes in practice are required. Fundamental factors influencing coal burst events include strong strata, abnormal strata caving, elevated stresses, critical size pillars and the lack of sufficiently sized barrier pillars during extraction. These factors interact to produce excessive stress, seismic shock and loss of confinement mechanisms. Over the 90 years of dealing with these hazards, many novel prevention controls have been developed including novel mine designs and extraction sequences, most of which are site specific in their application. Without an accurate assessment of the fundamental factors that influence coal burst and knowledge of their mechanisms of occurrence, control techniques may be misapplied and risk inadequately mitigated. INTRODUCTIONCoal burst1are violent failures of ribs, roof or floor in underground mines. They are known to occur in complex ways and often under unique sets of conditions. This has made them extremely difficult to anticipate and control. Assessing coal burst risk requires engineers, managers, and safety professionals to recognize the fundamental factors responsible for these events. This helps practitioners recognize the hazard potential and understand the context in which various controls and barriers should be used. Only then can coal burst events be anticipated andappropriate mitigation techniques deployed.Over the last 90 years, a few coal burst events have been anticipated but most have eluded prediction. The authors examined the historical record (Appendix A) and determined that an inadequate understanding of the initiating geologic factors and their associated mechanisms of occurrence have contributed to the poor predictive capability. The historic record also indicates that control techniques have typically been site specific in their application."

Jan 1, 2015

By Anthony Iannacchione

A Major Hazard Risk Assessment (MHRA) was developed in Australia after a series of mine disasters in the 1990?s. A MHRA is used to help prevent major hazards, i.e. fire, explosion, wind-blast, outbursts, spontaneous combustion, roof instability and chemical and hazardous substances, from injuring miners. A MHRA is a structured process that identifies the characteristics of major hazards, assesses and ranks the risk they present, and evaluates engineering and administrative controls to mitigate them. These controls typically consists of a broad spectrum of prevention, monitoring, first response, and emergency response techniques and helps to move an operation from a reactive to a proactive approach towards safety. This paper documents a MHRA performed at an underground mine where strata instabilities and fire hazards may threaten the condition of its escapeways. The objective of this MHRA is to 1) identify what hazards could affect the egress through the mine?s escapeways, 2) determine what unwanted events pose the greatest threat for the mine, and 3) recommend a plan to prevent or recover from the potential disruption of egress through the escapeway. The plan provides information on the key existing controls that should be monitored and audited, and makes recommendation of new potential controls to further reduce related risks. By documenting the use of MHRA to this specific ground control issue, this paper provides a framework for others to judge the merits of this approach and to help design and perform these activities.

Jan 1, 2007

By Victor Nazimko

A new technique for reaming the holes has been tested. This technique is available for reaming a hole at its deep end creating an enlarged cavity that has helicoidal grooves oriented at less than 40 degrees to the hole axis. This technique increases bolt resistance by a factor 1.3-1.62; its bearing capacity by 3 times and enhances underground roadway stability. This technique is suitable for great depth (1000m and greater) and weak wet rocks.

Jan 1, 2008

By Keith A. Heasley

The LaModel program has been used successfully in the United States for many years to design pillars to ensure global stability of pillar recovery operations. However, the recent Crandall Canyon Mine collapse showed that further research was required to improve the design of pillar recovery under deep cover. Toward this end, a new calibration procedure was implemented in LaModel. This calibration procedure prescribes techniques for calibrating the critical LaModel input parameters based on empirical abutment loading and pillar strength, as utilized in the time-tested ALPS and ARMPS programs. The calibration procedure is intended to help guide a novice modeler in choosing calibrated input parameters that produce a standard model that fits within the verification database. However, the rigid parameter specification incorporated in the calibration procedure also removes most of the flexibility in LaModel for specific calibration to the unique conditions at a given mine site. In this paper, a number of the LaModel input parameters are varied outside the bounds of the suggested calibration and the effects on the model results are analyzed. Ultimately, it is shown how the LaModel user might vary certain input parameters to adjust the model to site-specific conditions, while still maintaining the general accuracy and philosophy of the recommended calibration.

Jan 1, 2012

By Khaled Morsy

In the past two decades, high horizontal stress has been attributed to many ground control failures. Most believe that entries parallel to the high horizontal stress is most stable and least stable when perpendicular to it. Entry stability decreases when the angle between entry and horizontal stress increases. The concept of 2-D stress shadow has been proposed for selection of proper panel orientation, often with mixed results. In this paper 3-D finite element modeling was used to analyze the stress distribution at the headgate of a longwall panel subject to high horizontal stress at various angles. It was found that the directions of induced principal stresses at the longwall face and headgate are independent of the panel orientation. The induced principal stresses concentrate or relief at headgate based on the panel orientation with respect to the directions of the induced principal stresses. Accordingly, only 3-D modeling can fully account for the effects of high horizontal stress on panel orientation. The paper illustrates in details the changes in orientation and magnitude of all three principal stresses around the longwall face and T-junction area as panel orientation changes.

Jan 1, 2006

By Brijes Mishra

This paper presents a correlation of acoustic emission (A.E.) with physical and mechanical properties of different types of rock and coal specimens which were tested under aegis of a consultancy project from a Columbian Mining Company. In this study, three types of rocks which are sandstone (Arneisca), siltstone (Arciolita) and claystone (Limolita) and two different types of coal were tested. The tests were carried out under constant loading rates according to ASTM Standards for determining Young?s Modulus and Poisson?s Ratio. In both cases a MTS electro-hydraulic loading system was used. Mode of failure in each material was characterized by the acoustic emission and the results were substantiated by the deformation characteristics of the materials during failure.

Jan 1, 2006