Search Documents

BUMPS in No. 2 Mine, Springhill, N. S., furnished the main feature for discussion at the morning meeting* on Ground Movement and Subsidence on Feb. 18. Walter Herd, the author of the paper by which the discussion was introduced, not being well, was unable to be present. The paper was presented by T. L. McCall, who laid stress on the presence of sand- stone as the cause of bumps, on the value of retreating longwall in eliminating such phenomena at the coal face and on the advantage of wide headings with packs on either side, leaving space behind them for any coal that bumps might dislodge. George S. Rice, who presided, referred to his visits to the Nova Scotia mines and said that bumps usually occurred only where the coal was thick and strong and the roof and floor both more than usually hard. If any of the three were weak, bumps were not likely to occur. In the Nova Scotia mine, to which Mr. Herd referred, there was no material for packwalls and for this reason as well as for safety he had been convinced that long- wall retreating with a small percentage of pack walling was the most feasible plan.

Jan 1, 1929

By Louis S. Cates

At the annual meeting of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers in February, 1923, the Chairman of the Committee on Ground Movement and Subsidence appointed a sub-committee to work out a form of questionnaire and to collect data on subsidence and ground movement resulting from underground metal and coal-mining operations, and on ground movement and safe slopes in connection with open-cut metal-mining operations. The author was requested to take charge of the collection of data and the preparation of a questionnaire in connection with the Committee's studies of open-cut metal-mining operations. This paper is a summary of the work carried on and information received therefrom up to February, 1924. The first approach to the problem of safe slopes is to gather all information that pertains to finished slopes; in other words, the steepest economic angle from the horizontal that will stand in order to uncover the ores to be mined and be safe while the extraction of the ore at the base of these slopes is in progress. Whether or not this angle is 35" or 45" depends on many factors. The number of benches maintained to take care of falling rock and their height and width are direct functions of this overall slope. The slope is here taken to mean the angle from the top edge of the pit through the edges of the respective lower benches to the bottom of the pit. If we accept this definition of the slope, it might save some confusion as there would be a difference if one took the line from the top edge of excavation to the toe of the bottom slope. This latter slope would not be constant, but would vary with the number of benches. The depth of the various ore faces will vary, of course, depending on the deposit; Table 1 shows this to range from 50 ft. to 1100 ft. The geology is an important factor, as are the climatic conditions under which one is operating. A saturated condition in some rock structure causes rock flows; in the Panama Canal excavation, slides have run on a ratio of as low as one on ten, which is a 10 per cent. grade, or a slope of less than 6' with the horizontal. Slopes as steep as 60' have been noted in the Utah Copper operations, so that a wide divergence will possibly be met. The work of securing data that will be of value to the operator or estimating engineer will be difficult and will mean little unless a detailed

Jan 1, 1927

By George S. Rice

GROUND movement and subsidence is an important matter from several points of view and it is regrettable that more papers have not been written on this subject in the past year. Damage may be done to surface buildings or to the higher workings of a mine, and a study of the subject gives valuable in- formation on hanging-wall or roof control. The latter objective is strikingly shown in a recent paper presented by Jack Spaulding on Oct. 21, 1937, before the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, of Great Britain, entitled "Theory and Practice of Ground Control in the Kolar Gold Field, India." All may not agree with some of his theories that were deduced from studies of the many violent rock bursts at depths of 5000 to 7000 ft., but the data obtained are of great value. His theories of symmetrical ring stresses and symmetrical domes which are pictured as perfect are rather hard to understand as such uniformity is un- likely in view of the irregularities in the formation due to folds and fractures of various kinds. All will agree in principle with this idea of domal effects, which have been observed in many countries, but they are generally irregular.

Jan 1, 1938

By George S. Rice

THE wide scope of the causes and effects of ground movement and their interrelation to various kinds of mining and geological conditions are not always understood. Minimizing of roof movement by selection of suitable mining methods is closely allied to the problem of obtaining maximum safety in mining, but there are other questions involved: for example, mechanical developments which increase the production of ore and other minerals per shift or unit of labor but which, though highly ingenious, may increase hazards. More- over, the newer mobile loaders need much space for operation with longer protecting roof spans. Another problem emphasized by mechanization is the incompleteness of extraction of mineral, as there is no governmental requirement (except for limited leases on the public domain) in this country, as in European countries, and loss of coal in pillars is accepted by mine operators rather than risking the loss of an ex- pensive loading machine from a heavy roof fall. The extent to which losses of coal in mining are now being incurred is conjectural, for it has been fifteen years since there has been a comprehensive survey. In that study a loss of slightly over one-third of the coal in both anthracite and bituminous mining was indicated.

Jan 1, 1939

The Sub-committee on Coal Mining, since its appointment, has been collecting data about subsidences in coal mines in this country, and thinks that almost all of the available data about occurrences of this sort in bituminous mines has been collected. Similar data is being compiled for the anthracite regions, which it is hoped will be ready for the 1927 meeting. As most of the bituminous seams are nearly level, the records obtained give the problem in its simplest form, without complications due to the pitch of the seam. Copies of the questionnaire, Appendix A, were mailed to all of the coal operators' associations, to most of the large operating companies and to many engineers, with the request that any data on the subject be returned to the committee, or that advice of any subsidences known be given: the replies to most of the questionnaires were general, although some specific cases were given. Many of the companies were unable to reply to all questions, as they lacked the necessary data, but in nearly every case where accuratc data was available, it was cheerfully furnished, and any additional information requested was secured. All specific cases of subsidence were followed up by correspondence, and in several cases by personal inspection. Figs. 1 to 31 were made from the information furnished. Table 1 gives measurements of elevations taken in one case at intervals from October, 1913, to May, 1918. With one exception, where the evidence cannot be released on account of a lawsuit, it is believed that the cases submitted with this report include practically all that have happened in bituminous coal mining in this country of which actual measurements were secured. Some of these have been published by Young and Stoek,l and some have been secured from other publications. In collecting these data, the subcommittee had the Engineering Societies Library extend its bibliography to date; this list is given in Appendix B. To assist in the study of the problem, all of the subsidence literature in English was examined for cases in which spccific measurements were given, and the essential data for each case are shown in Appendix C.

Jan 1, 1927

By George S. Rice

DEFINITE data on the amplitude and effect of ground movement in specific mineral formations, caused by various methods used in the mining of ores, coal, and nonmetals, or in the extraction through wells of petroleum, sulphur, and soluble salts, are increasingly needed because of legal liabilities from damage to overlying or adjacent properties, and growing concern as to the conservation of national mineral resources. Not since the committee was established in 1923 has it been so difficult to get technical papers giving ground movement and subsidence data from specific mine operators. The reasons given, as above indicated, are pending or threatening lawsuits. There are three major objectives in ground movement and subsidence studies : (1) Maximum recovery of a mineral resource. (2) Minimizing damage to surface structures, highways, railroads, and agricultural lands caused by caving or subsidence, which may in some situations, as along the Gulf of Mexico shore, cause flooding by surface waters. (3) Lessening damage to overlying or adjacent mineral by back-filling of mine excavations as completely as possible.

Jan 1, 1940

By C. M. Young

Wherever salt is extracted from the ground as an artificial brine produced by pumping down fresh water to dissolve the salt, subsidence of the overburden is a possibility, though apparently few cases of such subsidence have been noted and detailed records are wanting. This description is intended as a record of subsidence that may permit the forcasting of similar occurrences in other cases; the data were supplied largely by R. B. Lee, city engineer of Hutchinson, Kans. About eleven years ago, ground movement occurred at a neighboring salt plant, when the surface assumed the form of a shallow funnel. Movement was probably due to a flow of sand into a well through a poor seal or a broken casing. The salt deposit increases in thickness from the east until at Hutchinson, where the subsidence occurred, it is about 310 ft. thick. The interbedded layers of shale vary in thickness from mere traces to about 7 ft. While knowledge of the shale content of the beds is not exact, the log of a shaft 3 miles east of Hutchinson indicates that shale forms about 25 per cent. of the total thickness. This shaft does not reach the bottom of the salt by about 60 ft., but there is no reason to think that the lower part of the bed is different from the upper. Logs of wells sunk to the bottom are not sufficiently detailed to be of much value. Above the salt is the shale of the well-known Red Beds. The thickness of this is variable, principally because of its eroded surface, but at the mine it is 340 ft. This shale is variable in character and strength, but contains no strong members of limestone or sandstone. If the support is removed, very probably it will subside. The Arkansas River flows across the salt district and Hutchinson is situated on the flood plain. Between the top soil, which is about 8 ft. thick, and the shale is 60 to 100 ft. of water-bearing sand and gravel. The process of removing salt, at least in the case of the earlier wells with which we are concerned, is as follows: An 8-in. hole is put down through the sand and gravel by means of a drive pipe, which is bedded in the shale. Prom the top of the shale, a 6411. hole is drilled through the shale, to, or nearly to, the bottom of the salt. Casing is put in to a depth of about 140 ft. to shut off a water-bearing layer in the shale.

Jan 1, 1927

By C. E. Mills

STUDIES of ground movement and subsidence resulting from mining operations cover a broad field. It is also a very important consideration and one that eventually affects nearly every mining operation of any extent. The damage to surface buildings, removal of mine surface plants and replacements of main hoisting shafts must reach an astounding expenditure were these cost figures available over a period of years. Were the subject one of mathematical formula and dependent only on the angle of draw of the walls or country rocks, the problem would be relatively simple. Consideration must be given to depth and extent of workings; structural conditions of the orebodies and enclosing country rock; physical properties of these same rocks, including schistosity, bedding, jointing, slips, dikes, faults, and other structural weaknesses. The method of mining, extent of openings, supporting pillars, and amount of moisture or water underground are other pertinent factors. With such a large number of variable factors, it is apparent that the subject of subsidence is one that must be based largely on experience and results at other mines where conditions are somewhat comparable. In presenting this paper, it is the intent to describe the progressive results of past ground movements at the United Verde, to bring out physical conditions largely responsible for this movement, but to refrain from theorizing on the ultimate extent of subsidence resulting from future mining operations.

Jan 1, 1934

Jan 1, 1934

By George S. Rice

MANY studies on ground movement and subsidence have been carried on by members of the Institute during the past year, but only a few papers have reached maturity. Two of the mining schools of this country have continued their interest in ground movement research. At Columbia University School of Mines, Philip Bucky has continued his investigations, employing photoelastic methods and the use of his centrifugal apparatus for testing what he termed "the strength and behavior of mining structures." Helmut Landsberg, of The Pennsylvania State College, has developed a convergence recorder similar in principle to that used by the

Jan 1, 1936

By George Rice

THE A.I.M.E. Ground Movement and Subsidence Committee, pro-posed in 1920, held its first technical meeting in February 1923, under the able chairmanship of Mr. H. G. Moulton. The following list of papers and discussions, indicating the scope of the problems and relation to various conditions and method of mining, were given at that meeting by the distinguished mining engineers: J. Parke Channing, on Subsidence at Miami, Arizona; Howard N. Eavenson, on Mining an Upper Bitu-minous Seam after a Lower Seam Has Been Extracted; J. J. Rutledge, on Subsidence in Two Oklahoma Coal Mines; Benjamin F. Tillson, on Caving Cracks at the Franklin Mine, New Jersey; Dr. F. W. McNair, on the Dome Theory; William Kelly, on disadvantageous effects in Mining and Back-filling Working Upward a Steep-Pitching Iron-ore Bed; Eli T. Conner, on the good results of Back-Filling by Hydraulic Means in Preventing Destructive Subsidence in the Anthracite District; Thomas H. Claggett, on the merit of Systematic Pillar Drawing in Preventing Cracks in an Upper Seam; Henry H. Otto, successful results in the anthracite district in Mining Lower Seams before Upper Seams; Douglas Bunting, on Leading Factors Incident to Successful Mining of an Overlying Seam; Edwin Ludlow, on there being "less damage to buildings when there was complete removal of coal with complete packing than when room and pillar is used without extracting the pillars"; Edward O'Toole on "bumps" in eastern Kentucky mines, which he thought were the result of geologic stresses: H. A. Buehler, on Upheaval of Surface in an Illinois Case in Advance of the Face; and R. Dawson Hall, on The Mechanics of Subsidence from Mining. The author of this paper discussed various kinds of problems of ground movement and subsidence in both metal mining and coal mining; the production of great landslides by workings near an outcrop, as at Turtle Mountain, Alberta, Canada; and general

Jan 1, 1939

By George Rice

THE A.I.M.E. Ground Movement and Subsidence Committee, pro-posed in 1920, held its first technical meeting in February 1923, under the able chairmanship of Mr. H. G. Moulton. The following list of papers and discussions, indicating the scope of the problems and relation to various conditions and method of mining, were given at that meeting by the distinguished mining engineers: J. Parke Channing, on Subsidence at Miami, Arizona; Howard N. Eavenson, on Mining an Upper Bitu-minous Seam after a Lower Seam Has Been Extracted; J. J. Rutledge, on Subsidence in Two Oklahoma Coal Mines; Benjamin F. Tillson, on Caving Cracks at the Franklin Mine, New Jersey; Dr. F. W. McNair, on the Dome Theory; William Kelly, on disadvantageous effects in Mining and Back-filling Working Upward a Steep-Pitching Iron-ore Bed; Eli T. Conner, on the good results of Back-Filling by Hydraulic Means in Preventing Destructive Subsidence in the Anthracite District; Thomas H. Claggett, on the merit of Systematic Pillar Drawing in Preventing Cracks in an Upper Seam; Henry H. Otto, successful results in the anthracite district in Mining Lower Seams before Upper Seams; Douglas Bunting, on Leading Factors Incident to Successful Mining of an Overlying Seam; Edwin Ludlow, on there being "less damage to buildings when there was complete removal of coal with complete packing than when room and pillar is used without extracting the pillars"; Edward O'Toole on "bumps" in eastern Kentucky mines, which he thought were the result of geologic stresses: H. A. Buehler, on Upheaval of Surface in an Illinois Case in Advance of the Face; and R. Dawson Hall, on The Mechanics of Subsidence from Mining. The author of this paper discussed various Winds of problems of ground movement and subsidence in both metal mining and coal mining; the production of great landslides by workings near an outcrop, as at Turtle Mountain, Alberta, Canada; and general

Jan 1, 1939

By George Rice

THE A.I.M.E. Ground Movement and Subsidence Committee, pro-posed in 1920, held its first technical meeting in February 1923, under the able chairmanship of Mr. H. G. Moulton. The following list of papers and discussions, indicating the scope of the problems and relation to various conditions and method of mining, were given at that meeting by the distinguished mining engineers: J. Parke Channing, on Subsidence at Miami, Arizona; Howard N. Eavenson, on Mining an Upper Bitu-minous Seam after a Lower Seam Has Been Extracted; J. J. Rutledge, on Subsidence in Two Oklahoma Coal Mines; Benjamin F. Tillson, on Caving Cracks at the Franklin Mine, New Jersey; Dr. F. W. McNair, on the Dome Theory; William Kelly, on disadvantageous effects in Mining and Back-filling Working Upward a Steep-Fitching Iron-ore Bed; Eli T. Conner, on the good results of Back-Filling by Hydraulic Means in Preventing Destructive Subsidence in the Anthracite District; Thomas H. Claggett, on the merit of Systematic Pillar Drawing in Preventing Cracks in an Upper Seam; Henry H. Otto, successful results in the anthracite district in Mining Lower Seams before Upper Seams; Douglas Bunting, on Leading Factors Incident to Successful Mining of an Overlying Seam; Edwin Ludlow, on there being "less damage to buildings when there was complete removal of coal with complete packing than when room and pillar is used without extracting the pillars"; Edward O'Toole on "bumps" in eastern Kentucky mines, which he thought were the result of geologic stresses: H. A. Buehler, on Upheaval of Surface in an Illinois Case in Advance of the Face; and R. Dawson Hall, on The Mechanics of Subsidence from Mining. The author of this paper discussed various kinds of problems of ground movement and subsidence in both metal mining and coal mining; the production of great landslides by workings near an outcrop, as at Turtle Mountain, Alberta, Canada; and general

Jan 1, 1939

By George S. Rice

THE A.I.M.E. Ground Movement and Subsidence Committee, pro- posed in 1920, held its first technical meeting in February 1923, under the able chairmanship of Mr. H. G. Moulton. The following list of papers and discussions, indicating the scope of the problems and relation to various conditions and method of mining, were given at that meeting by the distinguished mining engineers: J. Parke Channing, on Subsidence at Miami, Arizona; Howard N. Eavenson, on Mining an Upper Bituminous Seam after a Lower Seam Has Been Extracted; J. J. Rutledge, on Subsidence in Two Oklahoma Coal Mines; Benjamin F. Tillson, on Caving Cracks at the Franklin Mine, New Jersey; Dr. F. W. McNair, on the Dome Theory; William Kelly, on disadvantageous effects in Mining and Back-filling Working Upward a Steep-Pitching Iron-ore Bed; Eli T. Conner, on the good results of Back-Filling by Hydraulic Means in Preventing Destructive Subsidence in the Anthracite District; Thomas H. Claggett, on the merit of Systematic Pillar Drawing in Preventing Cracks in an Upper Seam; Henry H. Otto, successful results in the anthracite district in Mining Lower Seams before Upper Seams; Douglas Bunting, on Leading Factors Incident to Successful Mining of an Overlying Seam; Edwin Ludlow, on there being "less damage to buildings when there was complete removal of coal with complete packing than when room and pillar is used without extracting the pillars"; Edward O'Toole on "bumps" in eastern Kentucky mines, which he thought were the result of geologic stresses: H. A. Buehler, on Upheaval of Surface in an Illinois Case in Advance of the Face; and R. Dawson Hall, on The Mechanics of Subsidence from Mining. The author of this paper discussed various kinds of problems of ground movement and subsidence in both metal mining and coal mining; the production of great landslides by workings near an outcrop, as at Turtle Mountain, Alberta, Canada; and general

Jan 1, 1939

By George S. Rice

THE year 1929 has shown a surprising growth in the attention given by mining men to the subject of ground movement and subsidence from mining, as evidenced by the large number of articles that have appeared in technical journals, also papers and discussions in mining societies in the leading mining countries of the world. These have not been confined to consideration of the narrower limits of the subject but in application have extended to many of the fundamental questions involved in mining. The papers and discussions have been concerned with .ground movements resulting from mining of a great variety of minerals, metallic and lion-metallic. Examples of the former are: the mining of gold ore at Johannesburg, South Africa, and in the Kolar field, India; mining copper ores in Arizona and Utah; and lead and zinc in the Joplin region. Examples of ground movement resulting from mining non-metallic minerals are found in: the mining of. coal in many countries; potash mining in Germany; the mining of- common salt in several parts of the' United States; and the mining of sulfur in Texas and Louisiana; and examples of subsidence in the non-metallics are found exceptionally in the extraction of petroleum by wells, as in the Goose Creek field, on the Gulf Coast,' and recently in the Sour Lake field' of Texas

Jan 1, 1930

By George S. Rice

STUDIES of ground movement and subsidence caused by mining necessarily chiefly deal with causes and effects of making extensive excavations underground with spans beyond the strength of the un- supported or temporarily timbered roof or hanging wall. Perhaps no other phase of engineering is so de- pendent for results upon the assemblage of what may be called "experience data." That this is the case is cot surprising when one considers the number of variables involved in any at- tempted mathematical formula to determine the angle of draw or the angle of permanent slope of the rocks in any particular case. It is not like dealing with construction materials in which, through testing of. small specimens, in conjunction with the tests of large built- up specimens, relative stresses and strains may be deter- mined and formulas closely approximated for still larger constructions.

Jan 1, 1931

By George Rice

A PROBLEM of possible subsidence of the surface from mining opera-tions, which might have had disastrous results, arose in 1913 at the Brier Hill mine, of the Penn Iron Mining Co., near Norway, Mich., now managed by Pickands, Mather & Co. for the Bethlehem Steel Co. A double track and sidings of the Chicago & North Western Railroad passed over part of the mine, and if subsidence had reached the surface it might have affected the stability of the tracks. The chief purpose of this paper is to record the facts disclosed by investigations of underground movement from 1913 to 1919, when the tracks were moved, and subsequently at intervals, as engineering data of value from mining carried on below the tracks in the steeply pitch-ing lenses. A secondary purpose of this paper is to describe a novel method for determining the rate of speed of upward breaking above the mine excava-tions. This method was found effective and might be used elsewhere under similar conditions. The mine workings under consideration were developed from the Brier Hill shaft, which was circular, concrete-lined, 14 ft. in diameter, and about 900 ft. deep. They extended about 800 ft. westward from the shaft, and nearly parallel to a corresponding length of the railroad tracks. The highest part of these workings was at a depth of 400 ft. below the tracks (Figs. 1-12). The mining company had the right to remove the ore, the railroad assuming that the surface would be sup-ported. Finally, without legal controversy, an amicable adjustment was reached as to what should be done to lessen or obviate the hazard of subsidence.

Jan 1, 1934

By Harry G. Poulos

Ground movements can arise from a large number of sources and can have a significant effect on nearby piles and deep foundations. The loading of the piles by ground movements is a different mechanism to that arising from direct applied loading to the pile head, and consequently it is not generally possible to adequately analyze the effects of ground movements simply by applying some type of equivalent loading to the pile head. The main effects of ground movements are the development of additional movements, axial forces and bending moments in the piles, and thus the key design aspects are related to movements and to the structural integrity of the pile. However, the ultimate geotechnical load carrying capacity is generally not affected by the ground movements themselves. This paper will describe an approach to the analysis of ground movement effects on piles, considering axial and lateral movements separately. Some of the main features of pile response will be discussed for three specific problems involving ground movements: piles near and within embankments, piles near an excavation for a pile cap, and piles subjected to seismic ground motions.

Jan 1, 2006

By Harry G. Poulos

Ground movements can arise from a large number of sources and can have a significant effect on nearby piles and deep foundations. The loading of the piles by ground movements is a different mechanism to that arising from direct applied loading to the pile head, and consequently it is not generally possible to adequately analyze the effects of ground movements simply by applying some type of equivalent loading to the pile head. The main effects of ground movements are the development of additional movements, axial forces and bending moments in the piles, and thus the key design aspects are related to movements and to the structural integrity of the pile. However, the ultimate geotechnical load carrying capacity is generally not affected by the ground movements themselves. This paper will describe an approach to the analysis of ground movement effects on piles, considering axial and lateral movements separately. Some of the main features of pile response will be discussed for three specific problems involving ground movements: 1. Piles near and within embankments; 2. Piles near an excavation for a pile cap; 3. Piles subjected to seismic ground motions.

Jan 1, 2007

By Robert W. Bruhn

An investigation was made of ground response to pillar retreat mining in a 1.7 meter thick seam at 108 meter depth at a site in northern West Virginia. This paper describes mining-related stress changes and movements at mine level, displacements within the overburden, ground surface subsidence and groundwater level variations. Subsidence approached 40 per cent of the mine height and continued more than a year after mining. Water levels declined in certain deep-lying strata.

Jan 1, 1984