Search Documents

By Xuexin Ding, Weijie Wei, Jinwang Zhang, Yi Chen, Shengli Yang

"Many ultra-thick coal seams exist in Xinjiang and the northern part of the Inner Mongolia. These coal seams are more than 30-40m thick. This kind of the thick coal seam is too difficult to extract in one slice, so the top-coal caving longwall mining method was designed for this purpose. In order to study the movement characteristics of the overburden strata and the development of the ""three zones"" in ultra-thick coal seams, the physical and numerical simulations were carried out based on the in-site condition of Baiyinhua coal mine. The result shows that, when extracting the upper part of the l 5m thick coal seams, the first weighting interval was 50-58m and the periodic weighting interval was I 8-20m. The caving zone, fractured zone and bending and sinking zone were 38m, 92m, and 50m respectively in height. The fractured zone height increased with the advancing distance of the face, but in some localities, a ladder-like distribution due to the periodic weighting existed. When extracting the lower part of the 25m thick coal seams, the roof was extremely broken and the collapse range of overlying strata continued to increase in irregular form.INTRODUCTIONThe thick coal seams occupy 44 percent of coal reserves in China and account for 45 percent of the gross domestic coal production. There are three main methods for extracting the thick coal seams: sublevel mining, large height mining, and longwall top-coal caving (LTCC) (Wang, 2009). Due to the rapid development of LTCC in the past two decades, it has become the most extensively used mining method. It possesses the advantages of high-production, high-efficiency, low development ratio, and low-cost (Yang, Zhang, Chen, and Zhengyang, 2016; Wang and Zhang, 2015). Baiyinhua coal mine's coal reserves are full of uniformly distributed thick coal seams, with the minable thickness of the main coal seam between 25 to 40m, i.e. the main coal seam is an ultra-thick coal seam. Sublevel longwall top-coal caving (SLTCC) which is an efficient method for extracting the ultrathick coal seams has led to multiple disturbances Xie, Chen, and Wang, 1999; Singh and Singh, 1999; Xie, Chang, and Yang, 2009. Therefore, using the case of Baiyinhua coal mine, the movement features of overburden strata and development characteristics of the three zones in ultra-thick coal seams were studied by physical and numerical simulations (Qian, et al, 2003; Qian, 1994)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Peter Zhang, Daniel Su, Essie Esterhuizen, Mark Van Dyke, Berk Tulu, Dave Gearhart

"Roof falls in longwall headgate can occur when weak roof and high horizontal stress are present. To prevent roof falls in the headgate under high horizontal stress, it is important to understand the ground response to high horizontal stress in the longwall headgate and the requirements for supplemental roof support. In this study, a longwall headgate under high horizontal stress was instrumented to monitor stress change in the pillars, deformations in the roof, and load in the cable bolts. The conditions in the headgate were monitored for about six months as the longwall face passed by the instrumented site. The roof behavior in the headgate near the face was carefully observed during longwall retreat. Numerical modeling was performed to correlate the modeling results with underground observation and instrumentation data and to quantify the effect of high horizontal stress on roof stability in the longwall headgate. This paper discusses roof support requirements in the longwall headgate under high horizontal stress in regard to the pattern of supplemental cable bolts and the critical locations where additional supplemental support is necessary.INTRODUCTIONLongwall mining is the primary underground coal mining method in the United States and currently accounts for more than 60% of the underground coal production. The longwall headgate, as a passageway for the longwall crew, intake air, material supplies, and coal belt transportation, is critical for both safety and continuous production of the longwall panel. A roof fall in the longwall headgate would not only result in substantial interruption of production but could potentially cause injuries or fatalities. Rehabilitation of failed roof in the headgate would also expose miners to the risk of injuries. Roof falls in the headgate, though infrequent, mostly occur in the belt entry near the face. Considerable research has been conducted to determine the effects of various factors on headgate roof stability, as well as effective measures to support the roof in longwall mines in the Pittsburgh seam (Mark, Mucho, and Dolinar, 1998; Chen et al., 1998; Su and Hasenfus, 1995; Su, Thomas, and Hasenfus, 1999; Su, Morris, and McCaffrey, 2002; Su, Draskovich, and Thomas, 2003; Hasenfus and Su, 2006; Van Dyke et al., 2015). Previous studies have demonstrated that high horizontal stress and transitional roof geology are primary factors that cause headgate roof failure. These studies also showed that panel orientation, retreat direction, pillar sizes, and roof support played an important role in the stability of a headgate.In underground coal mines located in the eastern United States, the magnitude of the maximum horizontal stress is typically three times greater than the vertical stress, and about 40% greater than the minimum horizontal stress. Mark, Mucho, and Dolinar (1998) studied seven cases of headgate failures caused by high horizontal stress in different coal seams in the United States and stated that roof stability is affected, to a large extent, by rock type, entry orientation, and longwall orientation. The effects of horizontal stress can be summarized in these statements: (1) A laminated roof is very vulnerable to high horizontal stress. (2) Entries that are aligned with the maximum horizontal stress will suffer less damage on development than those perpendicular to it. (3) Horizontal stress concentration and relief depends on panel orientation, the direction of retreat, and the sequence of longwall panel extraction."

Jan 1, 2018

By André Vervoort

In coal room and pillar, and pillar extraction panels, the sidewall conditions were investigated based on underground measurements and numerical simulations. Three-dimensional linear elastic models provided a useful and quick prediction of the amount of sidewall spalling. However, more complex constitutive models were required to simulate more accurately the extent of fracturing and its effect on the stress re-distribution. The input parameters of a Mohr-Coulomb model were determined by back-analysis of underground measurements, and the effect of the depth of the workings and the time dependent occcurrence of coal pillar fracturing were analyzed.

Jan 1, 1992

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 C. Thomas Blevins

This paper is intended to be a hands on experience account about ground control in a Southern Illinois coal mine. Its aim is to show how a combination of real world mining practices and constraints along with practical engineering theory mesh together to formulate a ground control program in adverse conditions. These conditions - your typical localized slips, splits, rolls, clay intrusions, water, changing types and thicknesses of materials, etc. - being amplified by a very strong horizontal stress field. A review will be made about the formation of the overall ground control plan and to what degree it has been successful. A presentation of the various roof control systems and their component parts, how these systems were developed, and the theory behind them will be made. The pointing out of some of the flaws that we found in the components, installations, and/or theory will be part of this presentation. A brief look at some of the efforts in the following items will be made: quality control of the roof control products; using the computer to help keep track of roof control information and soliciting help from various universities, governmental agencies and consultants to give different perspectives to the problem.

Jan 1, 1984

By Huamin Li

Mine # 8 of Pindingshan Coal Group, Henan Province, China has an annual production 2 million metric tons. But it encounters many problems, e.g. mine layout is complicated, roadway maintenance is difficult, coal and gas outbursts are severe, production cost is high, etc. The major reason was due to the additive effects of abutment pressure interaction of previous mining in D, E, and F seams. At the request of mine management, an in-depth systematic analysis including underground observation, modeling with simulated materials, and photoelastic experimentation was performed to obtain site-specific results which include the dynamic and static influence zones of mining D, E, and F seams, propagation characteristics of abutment pressure in the floor strata, interburden movement caused by undermining, etc.

Jan 1, 2000

By S. J. Mitchell

An analysis of bolting reinforcement of several large [approximately 18 m (60 ft) cube] pillars was performed. The many overcoring stress profiles in pillars at the mine were used to produce generalized stress distributions at various stages in pre- and post-failure. A complete stress-deformation curve was estimated from this data. The effect of pillar bolting on the load-deformation behavior was extrapolated from the observed unbolted behavior. Bolting can increase pillar strength by up to 10 percent. The effect of bolting on general mine stability was examined with a shoW computer analysis. The computer model was calibrated against measurements performed at the mine, and produced good agreement between measured and modeled stresses. The analysis indicated that bolting increases the bolted pillar safety factors in the event of additional pillar failure by a small amount (approximately 5 percent). Progressive pillar failure is unlikely, because arching transfers most load from yielding pillars to large unmined abutments rather than to the smaller panel pillars.

Jan 1, 1984

By Shosei Serata

Serious floor heave of up to 2.4 m in a 2.4-m high mine entry was eliminated by applying the stress control method of mining, as a last resort, at the No. 5 coal mine of Jim Walter Resources, Inc., in the Black Warrior coal basin near Birmingham. Alabama. Underground observation of the first 3-room entry created using the stress control method is discussed here. The behavior of the test entry, which eliminated the heave problem, is analyzed in relation to similar studies conducted in a salt mine under similar ground conditions by utilizing finite element analysis.

Jan 1, 1984

By Yunqing Zhang

Weak shales refer to those with lower strength, thinly- laminated structure, sensitivity to moisture and weathering as well as significant time dependent behavior. It has been said that many future coal reserves with good quality have weak immediate roofs. Therefore their geo-mechanical properties and behavior must be known before an appropriate support plan can be designed. In this study, four types of shales collected from underground coal mines were tested in the laboratory. Their modes of failures in underground were observed and correlated with their lab behavior. The failure mechanisms of thinly-laminated weak shales were analyzed by the means of numerical modeling.

Jan 1, 2004

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 K. Haramy

Coal mine bursts or bumps involve the violent, rapid failure of coal and rock in or around a mine excavation. Failure is normally associated with high stress and brittle or brittle-elastic materials; in coal mining, bursting may also be associated with desorbing gas, and this type of failure is termed an outburst. This paper discusses factors affecting coal mine bursts and several methods to predict bursts, including microgravity, microseismic, rheological, rebound, and drilling-yield methods. Methods to avoid burst conditions using volley firing, hydraulic fracturing, and auger drilling are also discussed. A case study is presented in which the redistribution of stresses and displacements was found to be associated with a burst at a deep longwall coal mine. The research showed that stresses are redistributed following the burst.

Jan 1, 1984

By Alan Bugden

Goedehoop colliery in South Africa has experienced a number of substantial roof falls in roadways and intersections. Many of these have been associated with geological slips and/or horizontal compressive stresses. This paper describes a numerical modelling study conducted after one such fall with the objective of clarifying the roof failure mechanism associated with these falls. The fall was located at an intersection and occurred as the last cut was being made to complete the intersection. One bounding surface of the fall was formed by the geological slip; the others were formed by fresh failure surfaces. The fall took place despite the slip being identified as a hazard and additional bolts being placed by the workforce. In conjunction with the modelling work tests were conducted on samples from the roof in which the fall occurred, these gave a U.C.S. of 80 -100MPa. Several in-situ stress tests had already been conducted at the mine; a further test was conducted close to the fall site. The tests show that the largest stresses are horizontal. However, the maximum stresses of 6-12MPa are small compared to the compressive strength of the root. Computer modelling highlighted a mechanism arising from the conjunction of a geological slip and horizontal compressive stresses that could result in tensile failure of the roof leading to the fall. Sensitivity studies were conducted to identify risk factors associated with this mechanism and the modelling results used to assist in formulating a support strategy to combat falls of this nature.

Jan 1, 2003

In recent years, improvements made to the longwall system have accelerated at a faster pace than those made to the gate entry development system. As a consequence, unless planned years ahead of time, extending the panel length is nearly impossible without some innovative approach. At Cyprus Amax Coal's Emerald mine the G panel length was extended by 3,500 ft- by developing three entries across it to facilitate development of its headgate and tailgate entries simultaneously when the adjoining F panel was in operation. After evaluating alternative supporting methods and associated risks, determination was made to backfill these entries and crosscuts using a low strength flyash cement mixture prior to mining thru. Instrumentation was also used to monitor the stress change or front abutment stress in both the coal and the backfilled material ahead of the face. Longwall mining thru these three entries took about four eight-hour shifts and proved to be very successful. The designed flyash cement mixture provided adequate roof stability and caused no difficulty in the shearer's cutting while eliminating an in-panel longwall face move and minimizing the risk of roof or floor failure in the in-panel openings, or in the worst scenario loss of the face during the longwall cutting thru. This approach provided the intended result of extending G panel and recovered about one million tons of coal. This paper summarizes the engineering design of the cutting-thru project and flyash cement mixture, front abutment stress changes within the longwall coal block, backfilled material, and coal pillars ahead of the longwall face, and our underground observations

Jan 1, 1997

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 Ross Seedsman

Discussion on the design of roof support in tailgates has often been conducted without a clear statement of the stress and failure conditions acting. There is general agreement that in the tailgate the vertical stresses above the chain pillar increase. Within the stress 'bulb' associated with this vertical stress increase there will be an increase in horizontal stress. This does not mean that the horizontal stresses acting across the roof line increase. In retreat longwalling, the proximity of the tailgate to the adjacent goof results in a substantial reduction in the horizontal stress field acting in the immediate roof. Furthermore, at the face/tailgate corner the onset of significant compression of the chain pillar. if it is designed to yield, will result in a further reduction in the horizontal stresses in the immediate roof. It is suggested that this latter mechanism can cause the horizontal stresses in the immediate roof to go to zero. Whatever, the horizontal stress acting across the roof in the face/tailgate corner will be significantly lower than in the face/maingate corner. The implication of the model is that support design in tailgates should be based on the assumption of zero horizontal (in fact tensile) stresses. How the roof behaves in a tensile stress environment is a function of joint spacing and orientation compared to excavation width and direction. It is speculated that the empirical relationship between support density and roof rating results from the relationship between joint spacing and bedding spacing. The onset of stress reductions has major implications to the design of cable and bolt anchorages in the tailgate environment.

Jan 1, 2001

By Thomas M. Barczak

Roof support systems are necessary to provide stable mine openings and much research has been conducted to design a variety of roof support systems that will function in various manners to ensure that stable ground conditions are achieved. Despite these advancements in technology, mistakes continue to be made in the evaluation and/or installation that significantly degrade the support capability or lead to erroneous determinations of support expectations. The purpose of this paper is to discuss misconceptions about how roof supports perform and factors that impact their performance. The goal is to present practical information that will assist mine operators and engineers in selecting, installing, and evaluating roof support systems properly, and help them to avoid mistakes that can lead to erroneous expectations and potentially catastrophic results that may lead to roof falls. The paper is limited to a discussion of secondary roof support systems and powered roof supports such as longwall shields.

Jan 1, 2001

By Yingzin Zhou

Partial backfilling can be used to reduce and control surface subsidence damage caused by longwall mining or pillaring operations in room-and-pillar mines. The use of partial backfill as opposed to total backfill minimizes the cost associated with such efforts. By com- paring surface subsidence, strains, and slopes, the effectiveness of partial backfilling including the amount, geometry, and location of backfill are demonstrated. Results show that it is possible to arrange a given volume of backfill in its geometry and location so that optimum effects are achieved in controlling vertical movement, surface slope, and curvature.

Jan 1, 1990

By Thomas M. Barczak

The initial Support Technology Optimization Program (STOP), Version 1.0, was released at the 19th Gmund Control Conference. This original program has since been updated to Version 2.3 which was released in May, 2001. This paper describes the additional features of Version 2.3, focusing primarily on the following three aspects: (I) including uncontrolled convergence into the design requirements for standing roof supports, (21 the addition of design procedures for cable bolts as an alternative secondary roof support, and (3) the addition of new standing roof support technologies. Another new feature which should facilitate the development of design criteria for standing roof support is the capabilily to define ground reaction curves through convergence measurements alone wthout having to make support loading measurements. There are several other new features provided in Version 2.3 which are only briefly addressed in the paper. These include: (I) additional graphics capabilities to facilitate rapid assessment of support comparisons. (2) an East-West designation for support selection to more accurately provide cost and support availability data, (3) additional safety measures including a safety factor to identify support design near the peak support capacity, checks to see if the support dimensions comply with aspect ratio requirements, and measure of roof coverage for the design layout of the support system These new features of STOP provide more capabilities to design and analyze secondary roof support systems for conditions whlch could not be fully analyzed in the original version of the program.

Jan 1, 2001

By Charles D. Albright

FMC built its first angle bolter in 1969. This was a single mast unit which could drill holes for conventional bolts or angle holes for installing roof trusses. From this drill we learned very quickie that the mast design was an important factor to the success or failure of any angle bolter. The first mast installed on this machine (EXHIBIT 1) was fixed in length with endless chain and hydraulic motor feed. It took less than a shift underground to determine that the fixed length was not going to work. The undulating top created conditions where the mast was too long to be positioned at a 450 angle. Several mast designs were tried and discarded before we felt we had the answer to our problems. (EXHIBIT 2} We developed a mast that would extend or retract without moving the position of the drill unit. This allowed the operator to "wedge" the mast between the floor and roof before starting his drill feed. This arrangement worked exceptionally well, but unfortunately the demand, as perceived by our Sales Department, for angle bolters did not materialize. This unit became an "orphan" and was used by many coal mines until it died a natural death. FMC did not decide to re-enter this market again until 1979. At this time many coal producers were contacted to determine what features should he incorporated into a dual mast angle bolter. From this information we were able to arrive at three main areas of concern that we should consider when designing a new machine. 1. Eliminate overturning moment on drill unit. 2. Provide some sort of steel support near roof line to aid in starting a 15° hole. 3. Dual mast units need a method of raising center of mast rotation to facilitate various mining heights and still maintain a 45° angle and proper distance from rib. I would now like to discuss each of these individually. EXHIBIT 3 indicates the overturning moment resulting from the feed cylinder thrust and the reaction of the drill hit against the roof. To eliminate this moment a mast was designed using two feed cylinders mounted in the plane of the drill center line, thus removing all overturning moments on the drill unit carriage. This mast has been used extensively in vertical drilling with no downtime attributed to wear on mast guides and drill unit supports. The cylinders are designed to provide uniform thrust and feed speed throughout the total stroke. For manufacturing and economic reasons, the final mast design on the first drill was not used for this new drill. A drill steel support mounted on the mast, and positioned by a hydraulic cylinder provides the needed guidance near the roof for starting a hole at a 45° angle. (EXHIBIT 4) This support does not surround the drill steel but simple cradles the drill steel for "collaring" the hole. Once the hole is started, the support can he lowered. The support plate is hinged to allow the drill mast to pass. The advantage of having vertical motion of the center of rotation on a dual mast drill is shown in EXHIBIT 5. Following the criteria recommended by Birmingham Bolt Company, the truss bolts should he at a 45° angle and one fifth of the width of the entry from the rib. Therefore, in an entry 20 ft. wide, the hole should be drilled 4 ft. from the rib and at the 45° angle previously mentioned. With the limitations inherent to dual boom drills, that is, the masts cannot pass each other nor can one mast pass the center line of the machine even if the other is positioned out of the way, it is impossible to accommodate much variation in seam height and maintain the recommended criteria. As shown in EXHIBIT 5, a center of rotation 17 inches above the floor will start a hole 4 ft. and 45°angle at a height of 67 inches. Any height above 67 inches

Jan 1, 1982

By Mark G. Colwell, Russell Frith

"An Analytical Model for Coal Mine Roof Reinforcement (AMCMRR) has been developed. AMCMRR utilizes a Factor of Safety (FOS) approach, which is commonly used in all forms of engineering. The starting point in the development of AMCMRR was an existing analytical roof behavior and roof support design methodology/model, originally developed by Colwell. This technique was used successfully in the Australian underground coal industry for roof support evaluation and design prior to and during the course of the research project, and when used, it was essentially calibrated on a site by site basis.It has long been recognized that bolts and longer tendons can modify the behavior and load bearing capacity of the reinforced roof via the concept of beam building. The break-through in developing AMCMRR was combining the original analytical model with a comprehensive database (associated with Australian collieries) to effectively quantify this reinforcing effect, and this in turn provided the ""platform"" by which this analytical model can be calibrated for the entire Australian underground coal industry.This paper focuses on the application and use of AMCMRR and the analyses undertaken to quantify the reinforcement beam building offers to the immediate roof. Furthermore, this paper demonstrates that a combined empirical and analytical approach is currently the most practical way of developing credible geotechnical design tools for the Australian or any other underground coal industry.BACKGROUNDBy the start of 2006 the ALTS (Analysis of Longwall Tailgate Serviceability-Colwell et al., 2003) and ADRS (Analysis and Design of Rib Support-Colwell, 2006) design methodologies were being routinely and widely used within the Australian underground coal industry. As a result of their success, Colwell Geotechnical Services commenced a research project entitled, ""The Future Development and Integration of ALTS & ADRS for Improved Underground Roadway Design. "" The project (which became known as the ALTS 2006 Project) was funded directly by several of the major coal producers as well as individual Australian collieries."

Jan 1, 2010