Search Documents

By Ismet Canbulat

"In order to ensure the stability of roadways, Anglo American Metallurgical Coal (AAMC) has developed a roof support design methodology that integrates analytical, numerical and empirical modelling. This methodology currently is based on a deterministic approach (a single factor of safety against failure is calculated). However, an improved methodology, based on stochastic modelling technique, has also been developed and currently being evaluated. The main advantage of this methodology is that the design is based on the probability distributions of input parameters; thus the outcome is based on a distribution of factors of safety rather than a single factor of safety. An evaluation of factors of safety may also be used to determine the likelihood of failure, which in turn may be utilized to quantitatively determine and evaluate the associated risks in decision making process. This methodology has been evaluated at Grasstree and Moranbah North Coal Mines in the designs of roof support in various critical areas and has been proven to be successful and a better way of determining the roof support requirements.This paper demonstrates the application of this methodology in a design of an install road roof support at Moranbah North Mine, where the 1,750 tonne capacity ''world's highest rated longwall"" has recently been installed.INTRODUCTIONAnglo American Metallurgical Coal Australia (AAMC) operates three longwall (LW) mines located in Central Queensland. There is an increasing emphasis on the reliability at these operations, as the longwalls are getting deeper and facing more geologically challenging conditions. In addition, the Anglo American Vision is to achieve ""Zero Harm"" through the effective management of safety at all businesses and operations. In order to accomplish this vision, AAMC has developed a proactive ground control management system for a safe and efficient production of underground reserves.Proactive ground control management involves understanding the impacts of the geotechnical environment on likely ground behavior, and it consists of approximately 15 major elements. One of the most essential fundamentals of proactive ground control management is to utilize a roof support design methodology that considers different failure mechanisms and also takes into account all important elements. The design methodology becomes even more important when the area in question is a critical area, which is defined as a high risk roadway where any failure may cause increased levels of safety and financial risks to underground workforce and operations."

Jan 1, 2010

By Rajendra Singh

Considering the importance of a fully mechanized depillaring operation, the Indian coal mining industry has introduced a number of such depillaring operations at depths of cover ranging from 60 m to 377 m. The overlying strata of these depillaring faces vary widely from highly laminated, weak and easily caveable to massive, strong and difficult to cave. Most of these mechanized depillaring operations were carried out in difficult site conditions, however, performance monitoring in the field has showed good production, productivity and safety results. Field studies have shown that the use of roof bolts as breaker line support for this technology worked well for moderate strength overlying roof strata, but experienced difficulties for both extremely weak and strong/massive overlying roof strata. It is observed that the performance of a breaker line support along the goaf edge deteriorated with an increase in depth of cover of the depillaring face. Practice of a straight line of extraction (single row of pillars) during the mechanized depillaring below competent roof strata experienced a considerably large hanging area inside the goaf, which needs to be managed either by induced caving of the roof strata or through an increase in width of the excavation. Observations of good performance of a fully mechanized depillaring face under highly laminated and weak strata at a shallow cover is mainly due to a faster rate of extraction. However, the mechanized depillaring underneath laminated and weak roof strata for a deep-seated coal seam was forced to go for partial extraction mainly due to strata control problems. Discussing the implications of main technical and operational differences between the conventional (semi-mechanized) and fully mechanized depillaring, this paper presents results of different strata control studies conducted at different mechanized depillaring sites with varying geo-mining conditions.

Jan 1, 2014

By Russell C. Frith

This paper examines the design of longwall shields, focusing on those aspects that are critical to either their successful application or contribution to failure during longwall extraction. In many instances, longwall shields are assessed and designed along lines similar to that of roadway ground support systems, namely according to typical or normal geotechnical conditions. However it will be contended that for longwall shields, this is inappropriate because unlike roadway ground support systems, longwall shields cannot be supplemented with additional or secondary support in localised areas of adverse geotechnical conditions. In other words, the longwall shield needs to be designed according to what are judged to be worst case or adverse geotechnical conditions?the outcome being that a well-designed shield will be significantly over-rated for the majority of its working life. Therefore, it will be argued that the additional capital cost of such shield design can be readily justified as a prudent riskbased outcome that is essential to minimising future business risks due to strata instability on the longwall face. Shield geometry will be discussed, including such relevant factors as leg angle, inclination of the top caving shield, canopy ratio, operating height range, and tip to face distance. These are all well-established longwall shield design considerations and, most importantly, areas whereby inadequate design can render a longwall shield as highly ineffective. The issue of tip to face distance will be considered in detail, in particular, the extent by which it is an important geotechnical design consideration, the conclusion being reached that, in fact, it is not. The critical importance of maximising set to yield ratio within practical operating limits will be justified, the wisdom of this having been subject to questioning in more recent technical literature. Overall, the aim is to provide the industry with a set of suggested guidelines for future use when designing longwall shields and, hopefully, to initiate discussion on a subject that, unlike roadway ground support design, is not well covered in its entirety in the published technical literature.

Jan 1, 2013

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 Thierry Lavoie, Mark K. Larson

"Engineers at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and Itasca Consulting Group, Inc., conducted a study to determine the procedure for calibrating a caving model implemented in FLAC3D. The model is calibrated to measured surface subsidence. This sedimentary caving model was developed by Itasca for NIOSH for the purpose of more closely simulating mechanical processes during caving. When a model is considered calibrated to surface subsidence, the load between the extracted panel's roof and floor is a reasonable estimate of gob loading. Such information can also provide an estimate of the amount of overpanel weight that is transferred to the abutment. This load distribution is a parameter needed, for example, to estimate loading of pillars in longwall gate roads. For the current case, a calibrated model resulted in a calculated abutment angle of 30.6°considerably higher than the assumed value used in empirical methods, but reasonable considering the presence of massive stratigraphic members in the overburden. Because of additional information available after this study that the extracted seam height was actually greater in the first panel, a corrected range of abutment angle was estimated to be from 27.7° to 30.6°, still significantly higher than the empirical assumption. The expectation is that better estimates of abutment loading profiles will result in improved evaluations of mine layout design and, therefore, reduce the number of fatalities and injuries resulting from falls of ground.INTRODUCTIONThe safety of miners in underground coal mines depends on careful consideration of the mechanisms involved in failure and transfer of load. The successful design of pillars and panels in longwall and room-and-pillar coal mining requires thorough attention to any information and measurements available that help understand these mechanisms. Although empirical methods, such as Analysis of Pillar Stability (ALPS) Mark (1987); (Mark, 1992) or Analysis of Retreat Mining Pillar Stability (ARMPS) (Mark and Chase, 1997), can provide a sense of success or failure, complex geology and failure in the roof or floor material or complex material behavior of the coal can make evaluation by an appropriate numerical modeling tool necessary. The numerical tool must simulate important mechanisms and appropriate detail that underlie the mechanism. For example, Starfield and Cundall (1988) advised using ""the simplest model that will allow the important mechanisms to occur, and could serve as a laboratory for the experiments you have in mind."" To that end, data gathering about the geology, geometry, and material behavior is very valuable. Such data facilitate selection of an appropriate model and model inputs. Moreover, this data facilitate improved assessment of risk to miners and how to minimize that risk."

Jan 1, 2016

By Guy Reed, Russell Frith

"The method of determining coal pillar strength equations from databases of stable and failed case histories is more than 50 years old and has been applied in different countries by different researchers in a range of mining situations. While common wisdom sensibly limits the use of the resultant pillar strength equations and methods to design scenarios that are consistent with the founding database, there are a number of examples where failures have occurred as a direct result of applying empirical design methods to coal pillar design problems that are inconsistent with the founding database.This paper explores the reasons why empirically derived coal pillar strength equations tend to be problem-specific and should be considered as providing no more than a pillar strength “index.” These include the non-consideration of overburden horizontal stress within the mine stability problem, an inadequate definition of super-critical overburden behaviour as it applies to standing coal pillars, and the non-consideration of overburden displacement and coal pillar strain limits. All of which combine to potentially complicate and confuse the back-analysis of coal pillar strength from failed cases.A modified coal pillar design representation and model are presented based on coal pillars acting to reinforce a horizontally stressed overburden, rather than suspend an otherwise unstable self-loaded overburden or section, the latter having been at the core of historical empirical studies into coal pillar strength and stability.INTRODUCTIONThe inspiration for this paper is founded in three statements from two eminent persons in the field of coal pillar strength research, Jim Galvin and Essie Esterhuizen, as follows:Both Salamon and Munro and [the University of New South Wales] based the derivation of their pillar strength formulae on a criteria that the diameter of a panel of pillars, W, had to at least equal the depth of mining, H. This was thought to result in full tributary loading. It is now known that there are some mining environments included in both the South African and Australian databases in which mining span must exceed depth by a considerable margin in order to achieve full deadweight loading. Hence, it is logical to conclude that these data points may have contributed to pillar strength being overestimated by Salamon and Munro and UNSW (underline added by authors). Normally, this should be of no consequence because it is reflected in the probability of design success associated with any given safety factor (Galvin, 2006)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Stephen P. Signer

A method to assist in the evaluation and selection of roof bolts using in situ measurements of roof bolt loading has been developed by researchers of the Spokane Research Center, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. Both axial and bending forces are measured by strain gauges at many locations along the length of fully grouted bolts during various stages of mining. This information is then used to ( I) predict bolt loading for variations in bolt spacing, grade, and diameter, (2) calculate the design changes necessary in zones where bending loads are high, and (3) determine if bolt length is adequate. Results from several case studies of full-column bolt loading in coal mine gate roads are used to illustrate the design method. This knowledge will give design engineers a tool for the selection of roof support systems that will improve underground safety by reducing roof bolt failures.

Jan 1, 1997

By Naj Aziz, Peter Craig

"Double shearing tests were carried out on the 28 mm (1 in) hollow strand Jennmar TG cable bolt to gain a better understanding of the shearing behavior of the cable. The first test was limited to a 50 mm (2 in) travel on the testing machine and produced a shear load of 900 kN (92 t) at the maximum 50 mm (2 in) displacement. The axial load generated on the cable bolt was 238 kN (24.3 t). In the second test, the machine travel was increased to 75 mm (3 in), and first strand failure of the cable, due to shear loading, occurred at 1,354 kN (138 t) vertical load at a vertical displacement of 59 mm (2.3 in). The cable axial load was in the order of 385 kN (39.3 t). Analysis of the failure mode and loads achieved showed that the cable strands bent and the concrete crushed along the shear plane; the shear loading across the concrete and grouted cable then reached the tensile strength of the steel wires.INTRODUCTIONCable bolts were introduced to the mining industry around 1970, initially to surface mining and underground metalliferous mining and then to coal mining in the early 1980s, mainly for roadway reinforcement as a secondary means of support. Cable bolts have since been used as both primary and secondary supports. As primary support, Fuller et al. (1994) described the application of cable bolts, known as FLEXIBOLT, for strata reinforcement in both Angus Place and Ellalong Collieries, in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. As secondary support, cable bolts have also been used as cable trusses, which act to support the immediate roof in a sling-like manner (Fabjanczyk and Tarrant, 1988; Fuller, et al., 1991; O'Grady and Fuller, 1992), and for reinforcement at higher stratification and beyond the rebar bolt length, mainly for anchoring lower strata layers immediately above the coal seam to the higher, competent bedding formation above. Initially cable bolt anchorage was by cementatious grouting and, since the 1990s, by chemical resin. The dominant type of cable bolts used for secondary support in Australian underground coal mines are 588 kN (60 t) capacity cables which are point anchored, pre-tensioned and post-grouted. Point anchored refers to a cable resin anchor. The cables are tensioned on the resin anchor; then the same cable is grouted by cementatious grout pumped to ·fin the annular gap around the cable from the collar of the hole to the resin anchor. Bulbs are located within the resin anchor section for mixing of the resin chemical components and efficient anchorage. The installation of these typically 8 m long cable bolts involves a lot of manual handling of the cables, lifting of heavy hydraulic tensioners, and exposure to resin grouts. Table 1 shows the specification of various cable bolts currently marketed and installed in Australian underground coal mines."

Jan 1, 2010

By Ed D. Doney

Based on the subsidence data collected through a comprehensive subsidence monitoring program con: ducted over two longwall panels in an Illinois coal mine, mathematical models have been proposed for predicting final and dynamic subsidence in the Illinois coal basin.

Jan 1, 1990

By Claude A. Goode

Large quantities of high grade coal exist in thick seams in the United States. Many of these thick seams are too deep to be surface mined and do not lend themselves readily to underground extraction. To develop the new mining technology required to effectively mine thick seams, the Department of Energy has entered into a Cooperative Agreement with Mid- Continent Resources, Inc. to demonstrate the multilift longwall mining technique in a 28 foot-thick seam at their L.S. Wood No. 3 mine near Redatone, Colorado. The seam will be extracted in two lifts, with a 5-foot natural partition of coal left between the upper and lower lifts. Proper selection of face supports is critical to the success of this project. Specifications were defined for the roof supports, and it was concluded that the supports selected must provide full coverage, yield at the legs, and have a 60-inch push- out cantilever that can be set at any position under full load. A Hemscheidt two-leg shield was judged as the best qualified candidate and was selected for the multi-lift trial.

Jan 1, 1981

By John G. Oldsen

Passive cable bolting and active cable trusses have been used in roof support for more than two years Excellent roof control has been experienced by many coal operations. This paper covers the new and innovative developments in cable support systems and their application in mines. Multiple cable bolts, tensioned cable bolts, coal rib wrapping, and other cable applications will be covered.

Jan 1, 1997

By J. R. Stoltz

To date, there has been limited formal research dealing with the use of Mobile Roof Supports (MRS) for pillar recovery. This paper, which is a portion of a larger project, presents convergence data from 4 different mine case studies. MULSIM was used to create a numerical model. The resulting information from this model was then compared to the actual measured values. MULSIM was also employed to analyze the industry-accepted pillar/barrier layout for mining underground reserves with the Joy Highwall Mining System. This layout was examined for both a low cover and a high cover extreme,

Jan 1, 1999

By Fangting Dong

The broken rock zone (BRZ) and the tunnel support theory are investigated. The relationship between the BRZ and the related factors, the interaction between the BRZ and supports, and the function of supports are analyzed in detail based on the authors' underground observations and model taste. A summary of the application of the BRZ theory in the past is also presented.

Jan 1, 1988

By Richard J. Perin

Subsidence monitoring was conducted in proximity to the 1-A and 2-A longwall panels at Consol Pennsylvania Coal Co.'s (CPCC) Bailey Mine slurry impoundment. Monitoring fullfills federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) mandated requirements. Construction of the monitoring network was completed between May and June, 1986. Monitoring was conducted before, during, and after mining of the panels between June, 1986 and February, 1987. The embankment was not deleteriously impacted by longwall mining.

Jan 1, 1988

By Yi Luo

The severity of disturbances caused by longwall mining subsidence to various residential structures can be re¬duced. The success of such mitigation efforts depends on accurate subsidence prediction, correct assessments of the subsidence influences, and careful design and implementa¬tion of the proper mitigation measures. This paper presents the systematic approach involved in the subsidence mitiga¬tion efforts with a case demonstration.

Jan 1, 2003

By Erdal Unal

In underground mining today, safety and economical aspects demand a better understanding of the rock-mass conditions, particularly for design of underground mine openings excavated in weak and stratified rock mass. The rock mass classification systems, in essence, are empirical approaches utilized during preliminary design stage. These systems have been developed for specific purposes and rock mass types, therefore, direct utilization of the classification systems in their original form, for characterization of complex rock-mass conditions is not always possible. This is probably one of the main reasons why designers continue to originate new systems, or modify and extend the ones already existing. RMR and Q systems, for example, although widely used in mining and tunnelling, can not fully describe the specifications of the weak, stratified and flay bearing rock mass. Consequently, the engineering applications that would be carried out based on original RMR and Q ratings could be inadequate for making design decisions even during the preliminary design stage.

Jan 1, 1990

By John M. Karhnak

The Bureau of Mines has a long history of research in Ground Control. For many years, this work was done at Bureau facilities by Bureau researchers. As the tiles changed, however, the area of research interest broadened, and additional methods of implementation, such as con- tracts, were added. 'Ibis paper outlines the organization, goals, and methods of implementation of the Bureau Ground Control Program, along with procedures for project selection. This program organization is followed by several specific examples of Bureau research that will be soon ready for use in the mines.

Jan 1, 1981

By Deno M. Pappas

The purpose of this U.S. Bureau of Mines study was to determine the material stiffness properties of the gob for use in numerical models of rock mass response to longwall mining. Photographs of actual mine gob were used to approximate particle size gradations of gob material. The gradation curve was shifted down to a laboratory scale, and 20 uniaxial compression tests were conducted on simulated gob material from 3 different rock types. The study found that the nonlinear stress-strain curves obtained from the three materials were similar, and could be represented in terms of moduli as follows: Es = 2.36s + 1,360 (1) Et = 0.00181s2 + 9.33s + 294 (2) where Es = secant modulus, psi Et = tangent modulus, psi and, s = stress level (due to overburden), psi. These curves correlated well with the theoretical solution curves developed by Salamon. Other effects on gob behavior were attributable to these studied factors including void ratio, thickness-to-width shape ratio, and rock compressive strength. The generated equations should provide numerical modelers with a practical means of estimating gob modulus as a function of stress level.

Jan 1, 1993

By A. Grenoble

The mining of seams in close proximity can greatly accentuate interaction problems. At distances of less than 110 feet vertically interaction can occur for both over and under mining. Research into ground control problems resulting from undermining a previously mined seam has been carried out using finite element and body-loaded photoelastic modeling methods in conjunction with numerous case studies. Analysis of field data was used to validate and expand the model results. Research findings demonstrate situations under which the worst ground control conditions can be expected to occur for a specified geologic environment, depth, innerburden spacing and mining geometry. Special emphasis has been placed on the effects of pillar load transfer on the lower seam in terms of pillar and floor stability and roof control. Roof and floor condition indexes are used to summarize structural and lithologic conditions in the affected seam. The effects of joint orientation and continuity are incorporated in the analysis and the research results have been compiled into a software package for application by the field engineer.

Jan 1, 1984

By Larry Howe

Second, or retreat mhng with Mobile Roof Supports (MRS) has now been part of coal mining in the United States for a decade Their utilization has evolved into mining applications which vary in seam heights from 38 inches to 170 inches, and overburden depths from outcrop to beyond 1200 feet This paper will detail the pillaring plans, lift sequences, and mnchky utilized in these operations and the rational for the plans A comparison of the current productivities achieved will be outlined

Jan 1, 1998