Search Documents

By S. Tiwary, S. Samanta, B. N. Pandey, N. C. Saxena, R. Sinha, B. P. Nandy, B. Singh

Subsidence investigations over one bord and pillar and one longwall caved panel at Dhemomain colliery showed that, although the width-depth ratio (0.82 and 0.83) and working and strata conditions were almost identical, the maximum subsidence over bord and pillar panel was 46.2 per cent of extraction thickness against only 6.9 per cent over longwall panel. The angle of draw was 13O to 210 and 66 to 95 per cent of the subsidence had taken place immediately after extraction. The subsidence profiles were not symmetrical and were of funnel like shape. There was wide variation in subsidence movements over caved faces in India mainly due to difference in the composition of supercumbent strata.

Jan 1, 1983

By J. P. Piguet, A. Hosni, J. P. Josien, H. Baroudi, R. Hadadou

"The iron ore mines in the Lorraine region of north-eastern France cover a surface area of approximately 3,900 km2 and involve more than 150 cities. A total extraction method was usually used during exploitation, but this technique was sometimes replaced by the room and abandoned pillar technique when it was necessary to protect surface buildings and infrastructure. Rooms and abandoned pillars were initially designed to ensure long-term mine stability. However, this aim was not always reached and numerous collapses occurred in the Lorraine iron basin, either during production or several years after closure. Several subsidence events were identified during a period of one century; the most recent event occurred in 2012. Two groups of events were identified. The first group represents events characterized by sudden surface movement, and the second group includes event characterized by progressive subsidence.Numerous studies conducted during the last decade helped improve our understanding the origin mechanism of spontaneous or progressive (slow) events. These studies led to identifying long-term potentially unstable underground zones (hazard zones), particularly deep zones located under buildings and infrastructure. The latest are currently monitored by microseismic networks. A similar high requirement level is needed for unstable zones without taking into account the kinetics of the subsidence, which is very important for safety. Thus, GEODERIS initiated this study, primarily to acquire a better understanding of the kinetics of the progressive events group and identify the main parameters that could explain why some pillars zones developed a maximum amplitude subsidence on surface within a few hours or days, while it took several weeks to months for others. In practice, the results of this study will facilitate adapting the requirement level of microseismic monitoring system to the kinetics of pillar collapse.To retrieve the real kinetics for each event, historical and sparse documentation was used. Firstly, archives research was conducted, especially testimonies and newspaper articles published during the events. This work helped to gather useful information that sometimes contained a precise description of subsidence duration. The archives research helped to classify some progressive events according to the subsidence kinetics. Secondly, a diagnostic of geotechnical and geomechanical parameters of historic events was realized, combined with a cross analysis of the data. The analysis took into account dimensions of underground workings (e.g., pillar lengths, widths, heights, introduction of a “pillar shape factor”, and stress amount). An original expression was highlighted to connect the pillar geometry to the stress state. The kinetics expression was calibrated to classify the historic events taken into account according to the kinetics of movements. The kinetic criterion was applied to predict subsidence kinetics for the potential unstable zones currently monitored by a microseismic system."

Jan 1, 2015

By W. M. Ma, Daniel W. H. Su, K. Centofanti, Yi Luo, W. L. Zhong, Syd S. Peng

7.1 INTRODUCTION Subsidence measurements include surveys of surface and sub- surface movements and measurements and monitoring of surface structural damages. In this chapter the most commonly employed methods are discussed. 7.2 MEASUREMENT OF SURFACE MOVEMENT Surface movements involve two basic components, subsidence and displacement. The other five components (i.e., slope, curvature, strain, twisting, and shearing) are derived from the two basic components. Since all measurements are geometrical, they can be measured by common surveying techniques. 7.2.1 MONUMENTS The first step is to select the types of monuments or surveying stations. Various types of monuments have been employed. The simplest one is a paint mark on the pavement or concrete slab, although this should be discouraged because it is easily affected by artificial or environmental factors. Others use steel or wooden rods, 2 to 3 in. in diameter or square by 2 to 5 ft long, driven all the way down, flush with the ground. Both types of-monuments have no provision for frozen ground heave and both are tampered with easily. A more elaborate type is shown in Fig. 7.1 (O'Rourke et al., 1982). A rebar or iron pipe, 2 in. in diameter by 6 ft long is driven down to nearly flush with ground surface. The top 4-ft section of the hole around the pipe is enlarged to 1 ft in diameter and grouted with concrete. The most sophisticated type of monument is shown in Fig. 7.2 (Conroy and Gyannaty, 1983a). It consists of two hollow steel pipes. The inner I-in. pipe, 10 ft. long is enclosed by a 2-in. pipe at the upper 5-ft. interval. The gap between pipes is filled with foam to isolate the inner pipe from external environmental effects. The bottom of the inner pipe can either remain open or be sealed with a cap, depending on whether the ground is dry or wet. 7.2.2 MONUMENT ARRANGEMENT AND SURVEY LINES The monuments are installed strategically to form survey lines. Three basic types of monument arrangements are shown in Fig. 7.3. Figs. 7.3a and 7.3b are for single and multiple panels respectively; Fig. 7.3~ is mainly for research purposes with multiple survey lines both in longitudinal and transverse directions. This is extremely useful for defining the distributions of ground deformation, as shown in Figs. 2.10 and 2.11. Basically there are two types of survey lines: the whole basin survey line which extends across the panel width or length (e.g., lines R, R, in Fig. 7.3 a&b), and the half basin survey line which covers approximately half of the panel width or length (e.g., lines R, F in Fig. 7.3 &b). Survey lines are generally straight and linear. They should be located on the major crosssections of the subsidence basin. Survey lines must extend beyond the edge of the opening for a sufficient distance so that the edges of the subsidence basin can be determined accurately. The minimum distance from the edge of the opening must be [ ] where h = mining depth, [ ] = angle of draw, and [ ] = 5 to 7 times monument spacing for whole basin surveys, or 8 to 10 times the monument spacing for half basin surveys. There must be at least two controlling monuments at each end of each survey line. Controlling monuments must be located beyond the influence of underground mining. The spacing of the monuments ranges from 15 to 200 ft. The UK National Coal Board (NCB, 1975) recommended a spacing equivalent to 0.20 of the mining depth. Peng and Geng (1982) recommended that the maximum monument spacing be dependent on mining depths as follows:

Jan 1, 1992

By Richard E. Gray

Subsidence due to coal mining is poorly understood by non-specialists. This has led to numerous misconceptions and myths based on limited observations and lack of knowledge. The three most common are: 1. Mine maps are inaccurate. 2. Deep mines are not a problem. 3. If no subsidence has occurred for many years after mining, there is no risk of future subsidence. Maps are important during mining and most are carefully prepared. Future use to evaluate conditions at mine level often includes drilling to confirm what the map shows. Usually, little or no effort is made to tie the surface survey of the property to the mine survey, to conduct a well designed drilling program to confirm the mine map, or to drill test borings vertically. When a mine entry is encountered rather than a coal pillar, or vice versa, and conditions at mine level appear different than anticipated, the first reaction is the mine map is inaccurate. The idea of a safe depth from subsidence is often based on the false premise that mining results in sufficient breakup of the overlying rock strata that bulking compensates for the coal extracted. The safe depth idea first appeared in the literature about 1880 and remained prevalent well into this century. Sadly, it is still encountered. The modern understanding of fragmentation of the immediate mine roof with the overlying beds sagging down on the broken roof rock was first described in 1900. With full extraction mining, either longwall or retreat room and pillar, surface subsidence occurs regardless of the depth of the mine. Subsidence over longwall mines at depths of 2000 feet can be 90 percent of the mined seam thickness. Numerous studies of undermined sites conclude that mining occurred many years ago and since no subsidence has occurred, there is no risk of future movement. This is true if sufficient coal pillars have been left to support the overlying strata. However, every year subsidence occurs over mines that have been closed for 100 years or more. In a study of subsidence incidents over the Pittsburgh Coal, the senior authors found that 50 percent of the incidents occurred above mines that had been closed for at least 50 years and 10 percent over mines closed for at least 80 years.

Jan 1, 1996

By Peter J. Conroy, Julianne H. Gyarmaty

INTRODUCTION The current study is part of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) on-going subsidence research program. The long-term objective of the DOE program is to develop analytical methods of subsidence prediction applicable over a broad range of geologic and mining conditions encountered in the United States. The DOE currently has several contracts in progress to develop a sound data base that can be used in the development of predictive models. Dames & Moore is currently under contract to DOE to collect and analyze detailed subsidence and hydrologic data from a coal mine employing longwall mining methods in the Eastern Coal Province. Work under Contract No. DE-AC22-80PC 30335 began in October of 1980 and will continue through September of 1984. The contract includes monitoring of two adjacent longwall panels. This paper summarizes the surface monitoring work that was performed through February of 1982. Mining of the first of the two panels (3 off 3 north) was completed on February 3, 1982. Results of the surface monitoring through completion of this panel are presented and discussed. SITE DESCRIPTION The mine being studied is located in eastern Ohio. The site is west of the Ohio River, approximately 56 km (35 miles) south of Wheeling, West Virginia. The topography of the unglaciated region

Jan 1, 1982

By Dr. Peter J. Conroy

The current study is part of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) on-going subsidence research program. The long-term objective of the DOE program is to develop analytical methods of subsidence prediction applicable over a broad range of geologic and mining conditions encountered in the United States. The DOE currently has several contracts in progress to develop a sound data base that can be used in the development of predictive models. Dames & Moore is currently under contract to the DOE to collect and analyze detailed subsidence and hydrologic data from a coal mine employing longwall mining methods in the Eastern Coal Province. Work under Contract No. DE-AC22-80PC 30335 began in October of 1980 and will continue through September of 1984. This paper summarizes the work that has been completed through September of 1981 and presents the results that have been achieved during this period. Technical difficulties encountered during both the installation and monitoring phases are discussed, and recommendations for future work are presented.

Jan 1, 1982

By Yoginder P. Chugh

Subsidence may be observed above partial extraction shallow room-and-pillar mines where the coal seam(s) is associated with weak and thick claystone in the floor. This paper presents results of subsidence studies at such a mine. During the 26-month study period, a time dependent subsidence causing a maximum vertical movement of 50 mn was observed. After a subsidence rate of 6.0-6.5 m/month for the first two months after development of mine workings, the rate decreased to 0.8-0.9 mm/month after 17 months. However, presumably due to settlement of barrier pillars, it increased therafter to 1.7 mm/month for the next 9 months. Angle of draw, based on zero subsidence, was calculated to be about 29 degrees. Maximum tensile strain and compressive strain values observed were 0.040 pct and 0.039 pct respectively. A hypothesis was fomlated to correlate surface subsidence movements with observed underground movments. The data collected to date fits reasonably well within the formulated hypothesis.

Jan 1, 1989

By Frederick K. A1lgaier

The Bureau of Mines' Denver Research Center initiated a subsidence research program in 1978. The short ten goals of the program were to determine practical methods and equipment for measuring subsidence and demonstrate these methods by monitoring subsidence at several mines having mining, geologic and topographic variables typical of those encountered in the western United States. Data from the monitoring program would be supplied to cooperating mining companies and used by the Bureau to accomplish the long term objective of developing and validating subsidence prediction techniques applicable to mines in the West. Subsidence monitoring is being conducted at five mines in Colorado and Utah with substantially different mine plans, mining methods, depths of cover, and topography. The monitoring procedures used at each site are similar and include designing the monitoring network layout, installing the subsidence monuments, initial and periodic surveying of the monuments, and processing the survey data. The network layout, surveying methods, and types of monuments vary according to the conditions at the individual sites and the type of data being collected.

Jan 1, 1982

By James E. Kolesar

An essential prerequisite to expanding the application of longwall mining techniques in the United States is the development of a better understanding of the mechanics of rock mass deformation near the mined seam, in the inter- burden and at the surface. The results of studies of this type will provide a basis for the development of empirical and/or numerical modeling techniques to predict the rock mass response to mining both near and far from the mined seam. This will lead to improved gate and panel design, resulting in maximum recovery, increased productivity, as well as provide a mechanism for assessing likely surface effects induced by long- wall mining. Presented here is the instrument plan to be used at Kitt Mine No. 1 in the study of rock mass response to two adjacent longwall panels.

Jan 1, 1982

By Collin L. Stewart

Published subsidence data for the western United States is limited in comparison with data for the east. This paper summarizes the results of a subsidence monitoring program above two longwall panels at the Foidel Creek Mine located in northwest Colorado. The monitoring area is characterized by overburden ranging from 1000 ft to 1100 ft in thickness. The surface slope parallels the dip of the bedding at approximately 5 deg. Average mining height is 9 ft. Smax averaged 3.4 ft. Draw angles averaged 15 deg for up-dip ribsides and 19 deg for down-dip ribsides. A site-specific profile function is developed from the data.

Jan 1, 1986

By Collin L. Stewart

A summary of the results of a limited subsidence monitoring program at Cyprus Amax Coal Company's Shoshone Mine No. 1 in the Hanna Basin of south central Wyoming is presented. The monitoring program was designed to meet regulatory requirements for confirmation of subsidence predictions made in the mining permit. The longwall panels were 380 ft to 600-ft wide. Mining heights varied from 11 ft to 13.5 ft. Gate road development included three-entry and two-entry head and tail gates. Overburden depth varied from 150 to 945 ft. The coal seam and overburden dip at approximately 11 degrees. The overburden is very low to low strength mudstone and carbonaceous shale with low to moderate strength, silty sandstone interbeds. Panel W/h ratios varied from subcritical to supercritical. Smax was 0.9 of the mining height. The subsidence ratio was about 0.6 for subcritical width. The draw angle on the up-dip side averaged 20 deg. The draw angle on the down-dip side averaged 12 deg.

Jan 1, 1995

By Peter J. Conroy

Introduction Most subsidence monitoring to date has been surface monitoring to develop empirical relationships of the magnitude and extent of subsidence effects. Federal regulations are forcing a better understanding of subsidence. Empirical methods of subsidence prediction may not be adequate, since the empirical relationships may not be valid between or even within coal fields. A better understanding of the mechanics of subsidence is required in order to develop and verify analytical models. This paper presents some of the results of surface and underground monitoring in longwall faces of a coal mine. The seam thickness in these mines ranges from 5 feet to 6 feet at depths of 600 to 1100 feet.

Jan 1, 1982

By R. A. Bauer

Investigations of bedrock within subsided areas over abandoned coal mines in Illinois reveal very little disturbance of the bedrock. In areas that have surface subsidence of 0.3 to 1 m (1 to 3.25 ft), examination of cores from exploration drilling and investigations of the boreholes by means of closed circuit television have shown that fractures are spaced at least 0.9 to 3.6 m (3 to 12 ft) apart. They are located within a zone 6 to 15 m (20 to 50 ft) above the collapsed area in coal mines 42.6 to 112.7 m (140 to 370 ft) deep. The dip of the fractures ranges from 25° to 60°, cutting across nearly horizontal sedimentary bedding planes. The amount of fracturing found in the collapsed area decreased as the amount of soft, weak materials increased in the immediate overburden of the mine.

Jan 1, 1987

By Robert A. Bauer

Investigations of bedrock within subsided areas over abandoned coal mines reveal) very little disturbance of the bedrock. In areas that have surface subsidence of .3 to 1 m (1.0 to 3.25 ft), examination of cores from exploration drilling and investigations of the boreholes by means of closed circuit television have shown that fractures are spaced at least .9 to 3.6 m (3 to 12 ft) apart and are located within a zone 6 to 15 m (20 to 50 ft) above the collapsed area in coal mines 42.6 to 112.7 m (140 to 370 ft) deep. The dip of the fractures ranges from 25 to 60 degrees, cutting across nearly horizontal sedimentary bedding planes. Typical core recovery is 80 to 95 percent within the subsided areas and 100 percent outside the subsided areas.

Jan 1, 1984

By W. M. Ma, Daniel W. H. Su, K. Centofanti, Yi Luo, W. L. Zhong, Syd S. Peng

8.1 INTRODUCTION Under room and pillar mining if the extraction ratio is low, (i.e., < 50%) a pillar can support the overburden without collapse and there will be no surface subsidence whatsoever. In other words, if the pillar sizes are properly determined to support the overburden weight, the roof strata cannot cave and there will be no surface subsidence, provided the entry width is small and properly reinforced so that a continuous roof fall leading to piping or the total collapse of the roof does not occur. Under the prevailing mining conditions in the US if only development mining is em¬ployed in room and pillar mining (i.e., no pillar extraction), the extraction ratio is usually less than 50% and generally no surface subsidence will occur. If pillar mining is employed, surface subsidence may occur, depending on the extraction ratio and the size of the remnant pillars (or stumps) left in the gob. The higher the extraction ratio, the smaller the stump pillars left behind in the gob. As the size of the stump pillars becomes smaller, the possibility of their support¬ing the roof without collapse is smaller. If all stumps are crushed completely, the roof will collapse and surface subsidence will occur. Again, whether surface subsidence occurs, it depends on whether the remaining stumps can support the overburden or not. Therefore, since the weight of the overburden which the stump pillars have to support is proportional to the mining depth, a fixed¬size stump pillar can support the overburden at a shallow depth, but will collapse under greater depths. In this context extraction ratio is not the only parameter for determining whether surface subsidence will occur. Furthermore, during pillar mining a pillar can be cut away in many ways to finally reach the same extraction ratio. Therefore, the safest way to determine whether or not sur¬face subsidence will occur in room and pillar mining is to compare the strength of all stump pillars in the panel of interest with the weight of the overburden that the pillars have to support. If they are too small to support the overburden, surface subsidence will occur. Under normal mining practices the characteristics of surface subsidence profiles vary with methods of mining. In the US there are two types of coal mining methods, i.e., longwall and room and pillar mining. Longwall mining is indisputably a total extraction method, but different percentages of coal recovery are achieved in room and pillar mining. Recovery is much higher for sections with pillar extraction than those without pillar extraction. For those without pillar extraction, coal recovery increases with increasing entry width or decreasing pillar size. For those with pillar extrac¬tion, the total coal recovery depends on the amount of coal ex¬tracted from each pillar which is in turn dependent on the roof conditions and methods of pillar extraction. Bauer and Hunt (1981) analyzed the characteristics of the subsidence profiles due to the three types of mining methods in Illinois. Fig. 8.1 shows the range of locations associated with the following profile features: profile edge, maximum tensile curvature, maximum slope, maxi¬mum compressive curvature, and maximum subsidence. The scat¬ter of the data increases with decreasing percentages of extraction. The profile is much sharper for longwall mining and becomes milder as percentage of extraction decreases; for longwall mining the profile edge is always beyond the opening, while in room and pillar mining it may fall within. The location of maximum tensile strain moves outward, while that of the maximum compressive strain moves inward as the percentage of extraction decreases and the maximum subsidence decreases with decreasing extraction ra¬tio. The general concepts discussed in this chapter may not apply to the entry development sections between two longwall panels where roof caving in both panels are very severe and overlap each other. Consequently, it must be treated differently. 8.2 CASE STUDIES Kohli et al. (1982) described several case studies on surface subsidence due to room and pillar mining with pillar extraction. In one case, the seam was 6 ft thick and ranged from 650 to 800 ft deep. The panel was 720 ft wide (Fig. 8.2) and was developed with seven entries. Each entry was 18 ft wide and the pillars were driven at 88 ft center-to-center between entries and crosscuts. Dur¬ing retreating, two additional pillars (pillars J and K) were devel¬oped, two blocks ahead of the pillar line, to take the barrier pillar, 160 ft wide, between panel No. I and No. 2. Pillar extraction began by taking a central slice across the whole panel, beginning from pillar 0 through J. After that, each pillar was sliced by 6 wing-slices, 3 on each side, leaving 4 stumps, 2 on each side. One of each pair was triangular shaped approximately 6 ft wide by 26 ft long. The other was trapezoidal, 26 ft long by 16 ft and 10 ft wide at the upper and lower bases, respectively. This resulted in a total extraction ratio of 85% within the panel. Obviously the stump pillars were not large enough to support the overburden and col¬lapsed completely. The final subsidence profiles were rather smooth, just like those under total extraction (Fig. 8.3). The max¬imum subsidence on Lines A and B was about 3 ft for an average mining height of 6 ft, but the locations of the maximum subsidence were skewed toward panel No. 1. Along Line D, the central por¬tion was flat-bottomed, but the maximum subsidence was only 2 ft, mainly because Line D was only two blocks from the right-side edge. Notice in every profile there was heaving of as much as 0.3 ft, beyond the edges above the solid coal. In another case (Fig. 8.4), the seam was 6 ft thick under 650 to 850 ft cover. Three panels, 710, 400, and 350 ft wide, respec¬tively, were extracted side by side. The entries were 18 ft wide and the pillars at 88 ft center-to-center between entries and crosscuts. Pillar extraction was practiced the same way as described previ¬ously. According to the mine maps, there was no barrier pillar left between the adjacent panels. Thus after extraction the three panels formed a common gob of more than 1460 ft wide. This was re¬flected in the development of the subsidence profile along the county road. After Panel No. I was mined, the maximum subsi¬dence of 1.2 ft occurred at Monument No. 1. This was increased to 1.6 ft after the extraction of Panel No. 2 and went to a further 1.8 ft after the extraction of Panel No. 3. The final maximum subsidence of 4.3 ft occurred at Monuments No. 6 through No. 8, while the remaining portion of the county road showed rebound. However it must be noted that the subsidence profiles were rather bumpy and fluctuated, perhaps an indication of the irregular stump pillars that were left and crushed at various time after mining. Moebs (1982) surveyed the subsidence profiles of four room

Jan 1, 1992

By Andre Zingano, Anderson Weiss

"The objective of this paper is to study the behavior of a low thick and low depth coal seam and the overburden rock mass. The mining method is room and pillar in retreat and partial pillar recovery. The excavation method is conventional drill and blast because of the small production. The partial pillar recovery is about 30% of the previous pillar size, 7m x 7m. The roof displacement was monitored during retreat operation; the surface movement was also monitored. The effect of the blasting vibration on the final pillar strength had been considered. Due to blasting, the pillar reduced about 20%. The consequence is more pillar deformation and roof vertical displacement. The pillar retreat and ground movement were simulated in a three-dimensional numerical model. This model was created to predict the surface subsidence and compare to the subsidence measured. This study showed that the remaining pillar and low seam reduce the subsidence that was predicted with conventional methods.INTRODUCTIONMining low coal seams (less than 1 meter) with the room-and-pillar mining method implies the excavation of part of the roof or floor to maintain adequate entry height for equipment and compliance with labor regulations with respect to ergonomic issues. The direct consequence of this is an increase in coal contamination and the increased cost of transportation and preparation at the plant. Traditional room-and-pillar mining only uses a development operation, even with a continuous miner or drill-and-blasting. Therefore, all the run of mine (ROM) coal is carried out with part of the roof or floor. However, if the retreat mining method were to be considered, the quality of the coal could increase because only the coal seam is excavated from the pillar recovery. The quality of ROM coal will increase, and the cost will decrease proportionally to the amount of coal produced from the retreat operation.However, the retreat mining with partial or total pillar recovery implies greater subsidence. This is particularly true if the coal seam depth is shallow, under 100m depth. Subsidence prediction in room-and-pillar retreat mining is complex; it depends upon the remaining pillar (stump pillar) size, as well as the pillar height, and the behavior of the pillar after retreat. This is related to the strength of the remaining pillar, which is related to the excavated method (drill-and-blast or mechanical)."

Jan 1, 2018

By Z. M. Zhang, Y. Luo, S. S. Peng

This paper presents the precise definitions of a number of commonly used subsidence parameters. Using an integrated approach, the parameters were determined for 110 subsidence cases collected from major US coal fields. Attempts were made to establish empirical formulae for the parameters. The results of this study indicate that some traditionally held concepts should be changed.

Jan 1, 1997

By S. S. Peng

In this paper, the precise definitions for a number of commonly used subsidence parameters are given. The subsidence parameters have been determined using an integrated approach for 110 subsidence cases collected in the major US coal fields. Attempts have been made to establish empirical formulae for the parameters. The results of this study indicate that some traditionally-held concepts should be changed.

Jan 1, 1995

By George W. Luxbacher

The inclusion of a new term "planned subsidence" in the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1977 has lead the U.S. coal mining industry into a new aspect of engineering: subsidence planning. Subsidence planning has necessitated the integration of geotechnical, civil, and mining engineering disciplines. Although much of the foundation and application work has been completed, subsidence planning is still a developing area. This paper discusses the application of subsidence planning in several brief case studies (a high voltage transmission tower, a sewage treatment plant, and a slurry impoundment), emphasizing the risk assessment aspects necessary to account for some of the uncertainties that may exist.

Jan 1, 1986

By C. A. Johnson, K. F. Unrug

The identification of the major subsidence areas in the Eastern Kentucky Coal Field has been made to distinguish the subsidence phenomena on the basis of geographical location. Further, this identification process is based upon selected critical geological, topographical, and mining features in the coal fields. The proposed identification of the regions is derived from a comparison of the subsidence potential in a particular area. The most likely severe subsidence areas are compared to those with the probable low subsidence severity. The combination of certain geological and mining parameters involved allows for the derivation of a classification of the subsidence potential.

Jan 1, 1986