Search Documents

In April, 1961, a large pillar was removed by blasthole mining methods at Inco's Murray mine. More than half a million pounds of explosives were used to break 2,120,000 tons of ore in a single underground blast. The 5, 10 2-inch boreholes, involving 435,815 feet of drilling, were loaded over a three-week period, using conventional explosives and short-period electric caps. From this blast, more than half a million tons of ore have been removed to date (April, 1962) through slusher trenches situated in the footwall of the ore body. T HE Ontario Division of The International Nickel Company of Canada, Limited, operates six underground mines and two open pits in the Sudbury district in the north-central part of the Province. This paper describes the removal of a large pillar at the Murray mine (Figure 1), where 2,120,000 tons of ore were broken in a single underground blast by the blasthole mining method. This is the largest underground blast achieved to date (April, 1962) at Inco mines.

Jan 1, 1963

By L. A. Wright

Union Carbide Corp.'s Pine Creek mine in California is the largest known tungsten deposit in the West, and the producer of well over five million tons or ore to date. Located 21 miles northwest of Bishop on the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevadas, the mine is also a source of molybdenum and copper and it was the quest for the molybdenum which caused the mine management to undertake a pillar recovery program. GEOLOGY For a full discussion on the geology of the Bishop tungsten district and the Pine Creek mine, reference is made to Special Report 47, Calif. Div. of Mines. The deposit lies along a 3000 ft segment of the contact between quartz monzonite and the marble that flanks the west side of the north portion of the Pine Creek pendant. All the components of a typical contact metamorphic tungsten deposit are developed; these consist of tactite, light colored calc-silicate rock and quartzose rock.

Jan 5, 1964

By J. Nielen van der Merwe

During the process of pillar extraction at the Welgedacht Colliery, an unexpected pillar collapse resulted in the entrapment of equipment. The area was visited soon after the event to evaluate the stability of the area for the purposes of extracting the equipment. It was found that the area had stabilised sufficiently to allow work without undue risk to the safety of workers. The equipment was reclaimed successfully. A subsequent investigation into the reasons for the collapse was conducted. It entailed detailed underground and surface subsidence observations and numerical modeling. It was found that none of the perceived negative factors that were present at the time could result in pillar loads that were sufficient to cause the collapse. It was concluded that the local pillar strengths were less than the nationally used value and that they were possibly further reduced by aging.

Jan 1, 1999

By Charles Holland

MINERS have observed for many years that as pillars are removed in mining operations the pillar adjacent to those mined out frequently shoes evidence of being compressed. Although this has been known for a long time, little or no information is available concerning how far from the mining area the pillars are affected in this manner, or how great is the magnitude of the compression, or concerning the manner or char-acteristic way in which the compression acts, as the mined-out area approaches the pillar under consideration. The writer made a study of pillar action in the Mona mine of the Arkwright Coal Co., partly to get some quantitative data on the deformation of coal-mine pillars. The study was not completed but it seems best to present the information that was obtained.

Jan 1, 1937

By Lawrence R. Artler

The North American Coal Corporation, its subsidiaries and other coal companies, have been mining the Pittsburgh #8 seam in Eastern Ohio for several decades. Underground mining by the "room and pillar" method, and more recently by longwall methods, have been practiced. This presentation deals with ground control problems and subsequent solutions to those problems for both mining methods. But first, let me briefly discuss some pertinent points about the geologic conditions of the coal seam near the southwest edge of the Pittsburgh Coal Basin. The Eastern Ohio region of the Pittsburgh Coal Basin is situated along the western edge of the unglaciated Allegheny Plateau. The local terrain is quite steep, with topographic relief of 430-500 feet being common. The coal thickness in the region ranges from 36"to 120", with the average being 60" in the areas being currently mined. Regional dip of the seam is toward the southeast in an amount of 10 to 40 feet per mile. A cross-section of the mineable seam generally consists of the main bench (60"), a rider coal (6"-12"), and a claystone parting (6"-12") for a total excavated height of 6-7 feet. Greater excavated height occurs where the fireclay floor is so soft and friable that movement of mechanical equipment breaks up the first 4-8 inches. Generally, the main bench and rider coal thin and become more variable toward the southwestern portion of the mining area. The rider coal also grades laterally into a coaly carbonaceous shale. In those areas where the roof coal can no longer be counted on to help support the immediate top, some of the main seam (6") is left to protect the overlying 8'-12' of mudstone/claystone strata. These strata are virtually non-bedded, highly slickensided units and are "hung in suspension" by roof bolts from a more competent limestone stratum above. These mudstone/claystone units are very susceptible to moisture and thus to the weathering cycles. The rider coal or 6" of the main bench is left in place to "seal" the mudstone/claystone units in Mains and Submains development. For many years, it was thought that the strength of the limestone member was detrimental in attempts to fully extract the seam by conventional means; however, longwall methods that have been more recently employed have broken the "myth" that the Redstone Limestone prevents full extraction of pillars.

Jan 1, 1984

Longwall mining has existed in Utah for more than half a century. Much of this mining occurred at depths of cover that significantly exceed those encountered by most other U.S. longwall operations. Deep cover causes high ground stress, which can combine with geology to create a coal burst hazard. Nearly every longwall mine operating within the Utah’s Book Cliffs coalfield has been affected by coal bursts.

Jan 7, 2020

By D. W. H. Su

A two-year study was conducted by CONSOL in a northern West Virginia coal mine to evaluate pillar design and support requirements to improve roof control in right-hand longwall headgates subject to high in situ horizontal stresses. Horizontal stress measurements conducted within undisturbed areas of the subject mine revealed a pre-existing regional horizontal stress field with a significant difference in magnitude between the east-west maximum and the north-south minimum stresses. Three¬dimensional stress cells installed to monitor horizontal stress concentration in the headgate roof during mining revealed that a narrow (60-foot center) headgate pillar reduces the east-west horizontal stress concentration in the roof ahead of the face such that the headgate is more stable and requires less support. This 60 foot x 140-foot pillar design, which has been employed in subsequent panels, still provides adequate stress attenuation to protect future tailgates under a maximum cover depth of 1000 feet. Roof geology derived from underground roof reconnaissance and underground bolt load and roof displacement measurements confirmed the effectiveness of 12-foot long cable bolts for controlling the headgate roof subject to high horizontal stresses. With the new headgate pillar design and the supplemental cable bolts, headgate roof conditions in the subsequent panels improved significantly, longwall production delay due to adverse headgate roof condition was totally eliminated, and record coal production was achieved by the subject mine in the subsequent years.

Jan 1, 2003

By D. F. Malan, W. J. Theron

Practical mining aspects should be considered when conducting pillar designs for bord-and-pillar layouts. The current methodology for pillar design will result in increasing pillar sizes with depth. This affects the extraction ratio and will result in onerous ventilation requirements when cutting large pillars. A holistic approach, including all mining engineering requirements, is required to ensure that the rock engineering designs are optimized to ensure efficient mining operations and sustainable production. Bord widths should not only be a function of the rock mass ratings, but should also be selected to fit the specifications of the mechanized equipment. The use of a ‘squat pillar’ formula for hard rock is discussed in the paper and the formula based on the exponents of the Hedley and Grant pillar formula, is explored. The effect of abutments and geological losses on average pillar stress is also explored. These factors must be considered when designing layouts at increasing depths.

Nov 27, 2024

By Andre Zingano

The variation in pillar behavior at underground coal mines working in the Bonito coal seam is observed in both research and mining company case studies. There is no consistency in pillar behavior, as it varies from mine to mine. In some cases, it is possible to find rib yields for both excavation modes and pillar sizes. This paper?s objective is to investigate pillar behavior for different load conditions and pillar sizes. Three-dimensional numerical simulation models considering these factors were built. A matrix was then assembled to compare pillar behavior between loading conditions, as well as between different pillar sizes with the same loading condition. The results showed some pillar rib plasticity due to vertical loading and stress relief independent of the pillar size and load. For the same load conditions, the yielding thickness is the same for different pillar sizes.

Jan 1, 2012

By Kneisley RO

This paper presents a brief overview of current bump mechanics theories and pillar design methodologies, and relates these concepts to experiences at two mines located in a north- central Utah coalfield where different pillar designs were used to control mountain bumps. Experiences gained at the first mine demonstrated the successful implementation of a two-entry, 9.8 m (32 ft)-wide, yield-pillar design. A U.S. Bureau of Mines field study quantified the timing of chain pillar yielding and resulting load transfer from the gateroad. In-mine pillar response, although apparently sensitive to site-specific conditions, compared favorably to estimates derived using two yield- pillar design methods. A second study conducted at another mine located in the same district, but subjected to different geologic conditions, documents the unsuccessful attempts to employ progressively narrower three-entry pillar designs based on successes achieved at the first mine site. This second mine never achieved a true yield-pillar design. Use of pillar widths ranging between 9.1 m (30 ft) and 27.4 m (90 ft) always resulted in violent bumps in the tailgate pillars. The pillars were either too large to yield, or too small to support peak operational loads. Hypothetical gateroad systems were evaluated using both analytical and empirical approaches for configurations comprised of two rows of conventional pillars, and systems incorporating both yield and abutment pillars. Analysis concluded that yield pillars less than 6.1 m (20 ft) wide and abutment pillars ranging between 30.5 m (100 ft) and 39.6 m (130 ft) square would be required to achieve a stable gateroad design. However, results of a field study conducted on a two-entry, 36.6 m (120 ft)- wide abutment pillar concluded that abutment pressures from the first panel overrode the pillar, and that a still larger pillar may be required to preclude bumps in the tailgate during second panel mining. Without the benefit of a demonstrated in-mine success, it is not clear which design would ensure elimination of gateroad bumps.

Jan 1, 1992

By N. P. Kripakov

This paper presents a brief overview of current bump mechanics theories and pillar design methodologies, and relates these concepts to experiences at two mines located in a north-central Utah coalfield where different pillar designs were used to control mountain bumps. Experiences gained at the first mine demonstrated the successful implementation of a two-entry, 9.8 m (32 ft)-wide, yield-pillar design. A U.S. Bureau of Mines field study quantified the timing of chain pillar yielding and resulting load transfer from the gateroad. In-mine pillar response, although apparently sensitive to site-specific conditions, compared favorably to estimates derived using two yield-pillar design methods. A second study conducted at another mine located in the same district, but subjected to different geologic conditions, documents the unsuccessful attempts to employ progressively narrower three-entry pillar designs based on successes achieved at the first mine site. This second mine never achieved a true yield-pillar design. Use of pillar widths ranging between 9.1 m (30 ft) and 27.4 m (90 ft) always resulted in violent bumps in the tailgate pillars. The pillars were either too large to yield, or too small to support peak operational loads. Hypothetical gateroad systems were evaluated using both analytical and empirical approaches for configurations comprised of two rows of conventional pillars, and systems incorporating both yield and abutment pillars. Analysis concluded that yield pillars less than 6.1 m (20 ft) wide and abutment pillars ranging between 30.5 m (100 ft) and 39.6 m (130 ft) square would be required to achieve a stable gateroad design. However, results of a field study conducted on a two-entry, 36.6 m (120 ft)-wide abutment pillar concluded that abutment pressures from the first panel overrode the pillar, and that a still larger pillar may be required to preclude bumps in the tailgate during second panel mining. Without the benefit of a demonstrated in-mine success, it is not clear which design would ensure elimination of gateroad bumps.

Jan 1, 1992

By H. Wagner

The paper points out that bord-and-pillar mining is the most important method of coal extraction in South African underground coal mines, and advocates that pillar design procedures should be refined to make more rational allowance for the differences in strength properties between various coal seams and roof and floor strata. However, any deviations from well-established design procedures must be based on sound engineering principles and reliable data on the strength properties of the seams and strata concerned. Recent information indicates that practices for the protection of surface structures against underground mining should be revised.

Jan 1, 1980

This paper gives an overview of the difficulties associated with determining the strength of hard rock pillars. Although a number of pillar design tools are available, pillar collapses still occur. Recent examples of large scale pillar collapses in South Africa were caused by weak partings which traversed the pillars. Currently two different methods to determine the strength of pillars are used namely, empirical equations derived from the back analyses of failed and stable cases and numerical modelling tools with an appropriate failure criteria. Both techniques have their limitations and additional work is required to obtain a better understanding of pillar strength. Empirical methods are popular and easy to use, but care should be exercise that the results are not extrapolated beyond the range of the data which were used to derive them. An example is the Hedley and Grant formula (derived for the Canadian uranium mines) that has been used for many years in the South African platinum and chrome mines (albeit with some adaptation of the K-value) to design the pillar layouts. Very few collapses have nevertheless been reported and it might even be too conservative an assumption of pillar strength in these mines. As an alternative, some engineers strongly advocate the use of numerical techniques to determine pillar strength. A close examination unfortunately reveals that these techniques also rely on many flawed assumptions. An area where numerical modelling is invaluable, however, is to study specific pillar failure mechanisms, such as the influence of weak partings on pillar strength. In conclusion, it appears that neither empirical techniques nor numerical modelling currently provide a solid basis to conduct pillar design. It is therefore recommended that both these techniques be utilised when confronted with a pillar design to obtain the best possible insight into the problem.

Nov 25, 2010

Pillars are used in various forms in underground mining. For several decades pillar design has been an issue in both soft and hard rock underground mining. The major use of pillars is in room-and-pillar type mining. Pillars are critical structures in the production levels of block cave mines. With most mines leaning towards the use of block caving for ore extraction today, pillar design has become even more important. Empirical pillar design is popular. The use of numerical modeling is becoming more common in the design of underground mine pillars. A critical review of both the empirical and numerical modeling approaches to the design of underground mine pillars reveal some fundamental flaws. In general, pillar design approaches often assume the pillars are vertical, and are subjected to pure compression. Pillar failure criteria are then based on this assumption. Most papers on numerical modeling for pillar stability assessment use vertical pillars. This paper shows that where pillars are not subjected to pure compression the empirical pillar design approaches are inadequate, and that when using numerical models for the assessment of pillar performance, more care is needed in the determination of the average pillar stresses. The practice of relating field scale pillar strength to laboratory scale intact rock strength determined from conventional laboratory compression tests in empirical design equations is misleading when pillars are inclined or subjected to compressive and shear stresses. New data is added to the hard rock empirical pillar stability chart, and it is shown that it is misleading to conclude that failure of pillars with width to height ratios greater than 2.3 should not be anticipated. New empirical pillar design charts are presented for pillars at various degrees of inclination for different ko-ratios.

Aug 1, 2013

By A. T. Iannacchione

Underground stone mining represents an emerging sector for the U.S. mining industry. As this expansion takes mines under deeper cover and as more efficient mining methods are utilized, adequate stone pillar design methods will become more important. It is the purpose of this paper to examine current design practices and to discuss issues for safe mine layouts so that a rational first approach towards balancing the demands for increased production can be weighed against increased risk to worker safety from rib instabilities and pillar failures. Seventy-two stone mine pillar designs were examined. Pillars with width-to- height ratios below 1.5 and subjected to excessive stress levels appear more likely to fail. When width-to- height ratios fall below 1 .O, defects in the pillars, such as through-going discontinuities, can have a significant influence on stability. Discontinuity persistence, dip, material properties, and orientation are important factors controlling pillar strength. The influence of discontinuity dip, a characteristic easily identified in the field, was examined so that its presence could be accounted for in developing generalized guidelines for pillar design.

By A. T. Iannacchione

Underground stone mining represents an emerging sector for the U.S. mining industry. As this expansion takes mines under deeper cover and as more efficient mining methods are utilized, adequate stone pillar design methods will become more important. It is the purpose of this paper to examine current design practices and to discuss issues for safe mine layouts so that a rational first approach towards balancing the demands for increased production can be weighed against increased risk to worker safety from rib instabilities and pillar failures. Seventy-two stone mine pillar designs were examined. Pillars with width-to- height ratios below 1.5 and subjected to excessive stress levels appear more likely to fail. When width-to- height ratios fall below 1 .0, defects in the pillars, such as through-going discontinuities, can have a significant influence on stability. Discontinuity persistence, dip, material properties, and orientation are important factors controlling pillar strength. The influence of discontinuity dip, a characteristic easily identified in the field, was examined so that its presence could be accounted for in developing generalized guidelines for pillar design.

Jan 1, 1999

After some 50 years of worldwide research in relation to coal pillar mechanics and design as well as numerous workshops and technical papers related to these issues there is still some significant disagreement as to the approach one should adopt in the assessment and design of a coal pillar. Of course there are many different types of coal pillars that fulfil a wide range of roles at any particular mine and in this instance it is appropriate to have a 'tailored' approach for each pillar type in relation to the role it fulfils. However where it can become very difficult for the mine operators is when various researchers or consultants use or recommend significantly different approaches for the same type of pillar fulfilling the same role. By 1999 two pillar design techniques had been developed specifically for the Australian underground coal mining industry (ie The University of New South Wales Pillar Design Procedure, UNSW PDP and Analysis of Longwall Tailgate Serviceability, ALTS) and several other pillar design techniques were being practiced by individual consultants. The Australian industry hoped to resolve the issue of what technique to use for each pillar type and role, when it funded UNSW in 2000 to develop a 'Systems Approach to Pillar Design'. The findings of the abovementioned project were published in 2005 and while every attempt was made by UNSW to include the views of various local and overseas researchers and consultants it would be fair to say that a unified approach to pillar design in Australia was not adopted as a result of that project. This is the experience of one country where there has never been one central group solely undertaking such research in relation to pillar design (such as the Chamber of Mines in South Africa). This paper explores the Australian experience in terms of pillar research and what that experience may offer to researchers in Australia and other countries. At the First Australasian Ground Control in Mining Conference (2003) the first 'update' of the ALTS Design Methodology (ie ALTS II) was presented. In subsequent years the ALTS database was continually updated and significantly expanded such that it now includes detailed information in relation to both the tailgate (148 cases) and maingate belt road (58 cases). In addition to tailgate roof support and chain pillar design, the current version of ALTS (referred to as ALTS 2009) includes a maingate belt road roof support design module. This paper is also intended to update and summarise the development and application of the ALTS Design Methodology for longwall gateroad design over the last decade both directly and in the context of coal pillar research conducted in Australia over the last 15 years.

Nov 25, 2010

By J. L. Jobe

In planning the operation of a new mine or new sections of an operating mine, due provision must be made for the ultimate recovery of as much of the seam as is consistent with safety and economic principles. Each mining district and, indeed, each seam, especially in mining under submarine conditions, has individual problems which render hard and fast rules under all conditions of mining impossible. However, certain basic principles can be applied to all seams under specific conditions. In all mines, the two basic methods of mining, 'longwall' and ?room-and-pillar? or their variations, can be adopted, but certain fundamental factors must be analyzed before either method is finally applied to the extraction of the seam. The factors which enter into the successful, safe, and economic extraction of all seams are, briefly stated, as follows: (1) Character and thickness of the seam. (2) Character of the floor and immediate roof of the seam. (3) Composition, strength, and thickness of the overlying beds to the surface. (4) The depth of cover to the surface or sea bottom. (5) Conditions under which the seam is mined (land or submarine area). (6) Pitch of the seam. (7) Economic value of the seam. (8) Mining laws.

Jan 1, 1947

By G. B. Pryde

IN laying out a new mine, provision should be made for the ultimate recovery of as much coal in any given bed as is consistent with safety and economic mining. Though each mining district, if not each individual mine, has problems that make the adoption of any hard and fast rule impossible, certain basic principles are adapted to practically all conditions. One of the most vital is the provision for barrier pillars of ample dimensions to protect all haulage and permanent airways during the life of the property. Where conditions permit, room or butt entries should be driven on the strike or slightly to the raise and rooms turned at right angles to said entries. The width of rooms and room pillars is governed by conditions prevailing in the mines under consideration. A safe rule is: In advancing, extract not more than 25 to 35 per cent. of the entire seam; in exceptionally thick seams, considerably less than 25 per cent. should be taken. Rooms usually vary in length from 250 to 350 ft. (76 to 106 m.) with a barrier pillar of not less than 80 ft. between the last crosscut in rooms, and entry and room crosscuts should be driven on sights; room crosscuts should be driven at right angles to the direction of the rooms. In mines under excessively heavy cover or where roof conditions are bad, rooms should be driven narrow and a barrier pillar left at every fifth to tenth room. This barrier should be of such dimensions that one or more rooms, with pillars of usual dimensions, may be turned through it when the barrier is no longer required. Two of the advantages of such a barrier are the protection of the panel against peaking of roof load during pillar extraction and the easy closing of the entry in case of fire.

Jan 2, 1921

By D. Krzyszton, P. Czaja

Mining explosions in rocks originate stress waves of great intensity, which crush the surrounding rocks and are then propagated as a seismic wave. Seismic waves are the cause of dynamic loading of pillars and their subsequent destruction. In calculating safe dimensions for inter-room pillars, not only the stresses conditioned by overburden pressures should be taken into consideration, but also the dynamic stresses caused by explosion. This is of particular importance for pillars with great specific acoustic impedance which have been destroyed mainly by the reflected seismic wave. It is possible to take dynamic loading into consideration in the calculation of pillars when the parameters of the propagation wave, the dynamic elastic constants of rocks, the strength properties of rocks, the strength properties of rocks subjected to dynamic loads and the parameters of the blasting charge are known. An example of the calculation for the safe width of an inter-room pillar subjected to the seismic effect of an explosion is given and the possibilities of reducing the dynamic loading of pillars are discussed.

Jan 1, 1982