Search Documents

By Tom Vandergritft

With advances in system design driving higher productivity, safety, and coal recovery, highwall mining is becoming an attractive option for extending reserve life at surface mines. Typically, highwall mining is performed by contract, with the system owner charging the mining company on a per ton basis, plus a mobilization fee. For this arrangement to benefit both parties, geotechnical planning is required to minimize risk to highwall mining personnel and equipment, while maximizing coal recovery. This paper discusses how highwall mining has been successfully implemented at a large surface coal mine in Colorado, including design procedures, operational factors, and productivity. The operation includes an area where four seams are mined in succession from the lowermost upward, requiring careful attention to seam interaction issues.

Jan 1, 2005

By John Ellenberger

The nature of a stone deposit is rarely defined through exploration and engineering design, but more through the actual experience encountered as the mine develops; hence, issues with ground control are often at the forefront for a new mine. Ground control problems account for over 15 percent of lost-time injuries in underground stone mines. The objective of this work is to present actions taken during early development of a stone mine to mitigate the obvious effects of high horizontal stress on ground control. The mine was developed from a box cut with relatively little cover, and high horizontal stresses were not anticipated. Early recognition of possible high horizontal stress resulted in mapping of the mine using the NIOSH-developed Roof Fall Risk Index (RFRI) to provide a baseline to objectively analyze roof conditions. A program of borescoping the mine roof provided valuable roof beam thickness data and found that the roof beam was of minimal thickness, approximately 10 percent of drift width. As the mine developed, it became apparent that ground control problems related to high horizontal stress existed. A concentrated effort was made to improve ground conditions by implemeting a number of mitigation techniques. Actions taken by the mine included systematic roof support, reorientation of mining direction, a lower roof horizon, reduced span widths and reduced mining height in crosscuts to prevent running falls. These strategies resulted in signifcantly improved ground stability.

Jan 1, 2012

By John A. Owsiany

The effect of longwall mining on streams and shallow aquifers has been the subject of numerous research studies for more than twenty years. As a result of these studies, it has become common to consider an overburden thickness of 400 feet as the lower limit at which longwall mining methods may be used with little or no effect on hydrologic systems. This paper presents the results of a study documenting the response of a large high order stream to shallow cover undermining by longwall methods in the northern Appalachian coalfield. The field site is located in a narrow stream valley where the overburden, composed primarily of limestone and sandstone units interbedded with shales and siltstones, ranges in thickness from 340 to 285 feet above the main bench of the Pittsburgh coal seam. Streamflow monitoring and monitor well measurements indicate that no significant loss zones or water table lowering resulted from undermining the stream or the adjacent valley bottom area. Additionally, hydrographs for shallow near-stream wells exhibit fluctuations related to natural seasonal variations, which are nearly identical to those observed in a non-undermined control well in the same watershed. Environmental factors affecting streamflow were monitored through the use of a control stream in an adjacent non-undermined watershed to differentiate between natural and mining induced changes in flow.

Jan 1, 2001

By Stephen C. Tadolini, Anthony T. Iannacchione

"Coal burst represented a major hazard for some U.S. mining operations. This paper provides an historical review of the coal burst hazards, identifies the fundamental geological factors associated with these events, and discusses mechanisms that can be used to avoid their occurrences. Coal burst are not common in most underground mines. Their occurrence almost always has such dramatic consequences to a mining operation that changes in practice are required. Fundamental factors influencing coal burst events include strong strata, abnormal strata caving, elevated stresses, critical size pillars and the lack of sufficiently sized barrier pillars during extraction. These factors interact to produce excessive stress, seismic shock and loss of confinement mechanisms. Over the 90 years of dealing with these hazards, many novel prevention controls have been developed including novel mine designs and extraction sequences, most of which are site specific in their application. Without an accurate assessment of the fundamental factors that influence coal burst and knowledge of their mechanisms of occurrence, control techniques may be misapplied and risk inadequately mitigated. INTRODUCTIONCoal burst1are violent failures of ribs, roof or floor in underground mines. They are known to occur in complex ways and often under unique sets of conditions. This has made them extremely difficult to anticipate and control. Assessing coal burst risk requires engineers, managers, and safety professionals to recognize the fundamental factors responsible for these events. This helps practitioners recognize the hazard potential and understand the context in which various controls and barriers should be used. Only then can coal burst events be anticipated andappropriate mitigation techniques deployed.Over the last 90 years, a few coal burst events have been anticipated but most have eluded prediction. The authors examined the historical record (Appendix A) and determined that an inadequate understanding of the initiating geologic factors and their associated mechanisms of occurrence have contributed to the poor predictive capability. The historic record also indicates that control techniques have typically been site specific in their application."

Jan 1, 2015

By Alan A. Campoli

The U.S Bureau of Mines is conducting research to develop improved guidelines for selecting the type and pattern of roof support in different geologic environments (Mucho, et al., 1995). As a part of this wider research effort, a multifaceted ground control investigation was conducted at the Diamond TB Mine of RoxCoal, Inc. The study included statistical analysis of mine-wide roof bolt performance, instrumented bolt test areas, stress damage mapping, and pillar design analysis. The mine employs state-of-the-art continuous miner technology, including mobile roof supports and continuous haulage, to retreat mine the Lower Kittanning Coalbed. A herringbone section design makes the stability of the center belt entry critical to efficient retreat mining. Roof cutters formed during section development sometimes set up unstable immediate roof conditions in advance of the belt entry mobile roof supports during retreat mining.

Jan 1, 1996

By Thomas A. Bailey

Since the advent of longwall mining, various methods and materials have been used during relocation to control the intrusion of the gob in the shield/panline area. (figure 1) Controlling this gob is critical to ensuring a safe, speedy, and productive longwall move. An uncontrolled gob can cause a number of problems, from increased worker exposure to entrapment of equipment to lost production. With an eye toward worker safety and increased productivity, several different methods have been developed to minimize gob intrusion. This presentation will take a look at the history and development of longwall ?screens? and ?mesh?, from chain-link fencing to high-modulus polyester geogrids. The benefits and advantages of these developments will be defined. Since 1994, longwall coal mines have used polymer geogrids during longwall recovery to control intrusion of gob material into the shield/pan line area. As described by Brandon and Collins (1996) in their paper presented at the 15th Ground Control Conference in Golden, CO., mines had used various forms of support, such as welded wire mesh, chain-link fencing, wooden cribbing, props, and steel cable to accomplish this. These methods worked, but were labor-intensive, slow, and provided varying degrees of gob stoppage. Although a few mines still use chain-ink fencing to control the gob, longwall coal mines have generally settled on polyester geogrids to control gob and roof and these mines have been instrumental in providing input in order to develop and improve these geogrids products. he trend during the past twelve years has been to incorporate stronger grids and to eliminate auxiliary reinforcements, such as steel cables and nylon or polyester webbing. A job that once required heavy steel cables, props, and fencing is now accomplished with strong, lightweight, high-modulus polyester grids. When we discuss high-modulus grids, we refer to the ratio between load and strain, as illustrated in figure 2. These grids are woven or knitted from yarns that have been pre-stressed. When these grids come under load, they pick up the load more quickly. This allows less deformation in, in this case, the mine roof. The same principle applies when these grids are used to control the ribs. With less elongation, the grids will hold rib material tighter, thereby keeping travel ways more open.

Jan 1, 2006

By Larry Howe

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

Jan 1, 1998

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 Shu Yan

The high resolution resistivity method (HRRM) is developed specifically for detecting underground cavities and tunnels. HRRM has a special feature in that it can recognize and cancel static shift, which makes it different &om the high density resistivity method (HDRM). In searching for various means for detecting underground cavities, we found that the detecting depth of the transient electromagnetic field method (EM) depends mainly on the measurement duration, not the loop area. In addition, TEM can also be used to locate the high-resistivity bodies. In order to use them for local working site conditions, we combine HRRM with TEM to become a combined electromagnetic method. Since the late 1980's this method has been used to locate abandoned mines and air passages and burning centers of mine fires with great success. This paper cites case studies for which this technique was successfully used.

Jan 1, 2005

By Thomas Barczak

Roof support systems are designed for roof control to prevent unplanned falls. It sounds logical and has been the conventional thinking in support design since supports were first installed. In order to determine which support system should be used or which would be the most effective, the degree of control provided by the support system must be known. This question embodies the concept of a ground response curve, which is a measure of support control by assessment of the convergence in the mine entry as a function of the support capacity. In this National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) study to optimize standing roof support design, ground response curves were developed for longwall tailgate conditions from numerical models of Pittsburgh Coal Seam geology. The models were calibrated against tailgate convergence measurements that were made in two Pittsburgh Coal Seam mines as the depth of cover varied during the panel extraction. Ground response curves were developed for four loading conditions: (1) development, (2) side abutment, (3) front abutment near the longwall face, and (4) full extraction inby the face. In general, the tailgate convergence and required support capacity increase through each of these loading stages. It was concluded that prior to failure of the rock mass, the support system regardless of its capacity has relatively little impact on tailgate convergence. Recognizing that the support cannot prevent much of the (pre-failure) convergence that is occurring is an important part of support design. Supports that exhibit high loading stiffness but cannot sustain that loading through a displacement compatible with the ground response curve will not provide adequate roof control because they can fail prematurely. The required capacity depends on the loading plus yielding characteristics of the support and the amount of rock failure that has occurred. The loading plus yielding character establishes where the support loading intersects the ground response curve. Design criterion for support capacity based on the identifying the onset of strain-soften rock response leading to ?damaged roof? is proposed as a foundation for assessing support design requirements. The capacity without accounting for the loading and yielding character of one support should not be used to assess the capacity requirement of an alternative support design, particularly when the loading and yielding characteristics are significantly different. A sensitivity study was made to evaluate the impact of mining height and overburden depth. As expected, the results show that convergence increases with increase in mining height and increase in overburden depth. Some specific support examples are also analyzed. Although this is a first step and the two-dimensional numerical models have limitations, these initial studies provide valuable insight into the control provided by the roof support system and will ultimately lead to optimizing support design based on specific mine site conditions.

Jan 1, 2008

By Keith A. Heasley

Exactly 25 years ago this month (August 12, 1981), IBM introduced the ?Personnel Computer? with a 16 bit operating system called MS-DOS 1.0. Since then, Moore?s Law, which essentially states that computer capability will doubled every 18 months, has been fully evident in the computer industry. As computers have advanced from main frames to initial personnel computers to the powerful graphical workstations of today, numerical modeling for ground control in mining has followed closely behind. Twenty five years ago, many numerical methods for solving ground control problems were little more than equations on a piece of paper. In the intervening years, these numerical models have grown from initial trial programs to highly-complex computational systems with numerous capabilities for different material behavior, failure criteria, gridding methods, discontinuities, etc. In some instances, the capability of the programs has quickly outstripped the geo-technical modeler?s ability to get accurate, realistic input and boundary conditions. This paper will look at: how numerical models have evolved in the last 25 years, how the models have been applied to ground control problems in that time period, and where numerical modeling is headed in the immediate future.

Jan 1, 2006

By Saeed Zandi, Kazem Oraee

"Tunnels and galleries are the most important structures in coal mines. They are used for variety of purposes, such as transporting ore and people and for ventilation. A well-designed support system is necessary to stabilize structures and prevent collapse.Using rock bolts increases the strength of the rock in which tunnels are made. Rock bolts are used extensively in most underground mines today, and coal mines are no exception. Almost all galleries in a typical coal mine use some type of rock bolt, at least, as a means of partial or supplementary support.In this research, changing the support system from expensive methods to the use of rock bolts as the primary means of support is discussed, with the focus on a particular gallery in Hejdak coal mine. Visionary design methods, in conjunction with rock mass classification schedules, were used to determine an optimal rock bolt pattern. For this purpose, rock mass rating (RlVIR) and quality index (Q) classification systems were used. Several empirical methods were also used to design an optimal pattern for rock bolt installation in the particular tunnel under analysis.As such, the tunnel support system was designed using both finite element and empirical methods. Finally, the results obtained from both numerical and empirical methods were compared under different load conditions. The methodology prescribed in this paper, together with the comparison, can be a useful tool when selecting a support system. The results can also be used to design a support system in this and any other coal mine with similar conditions.INTRODUCTIONSince the advent of underground excavation techniques, one of the biggest challenges has been stabilizing tunnel walls and preventing roof collapse in tunnels and other underground openings, such as galleries. Loose rocks and layers drop into tunnels and galleries, except in very hard rock. Underground roof collapse and falling rocks can have devastating effects on the safety of operation personnel and equipment and can seriously affect production. When designing an underground coal mine, the stability of tunnels and galleries is an important parameter that should be studied carefully because it has an important role in the production process of the mine. Therefore, an appropriate and well-designed support system is necessary for preventing collapse and helping to stabilize the tunnels and galleries."

Jan 1, 2016

By Jeff Whyatt

Deformation of underground salt, trona and potash mines is generally time dependent, providing for gradual adjustment of strata to mining induced stresses. Time dependence can allow for higher extraction ratios provided eventual failure can be tolerated. However, this eventual failure can be violent if creep deformation can shift stress and potential energy to strong, brittle geologic units. The mine failure case studies reviewed here illustrate this process. Yield pillars and defects in bridging strata figure prominently in these cases. Yield pillars provide local and temporary support to the roof, temporarily delaying the cave; and allowing extraction ratios and overburden spans to increase beyond the long term capacity of overlying strata. Defects (faults, voids, thinning) of strong overburden strata reduce the critical span, sometimes to less than panel width. Analyses of many of these cases have focused on a cascading pillar failure mechanism, but recent work and this review point to failure of strong overburden strata as the essential element. The suddenness of failure and attendant seismic events pose hazards to miners and, in some cases, to those on the surface. Characterizing these failures is a first step towards recognizing and managing the risk of catastrophic collapse in underground mines.

Jan 1, 2008

By Peter Zhang, Gary Deemer, Rod Lawrence, Scott Peterson, Scott Wade, Mike Mishra, Rick Smith, Robert Bottegal, Ed Zeglen

"Thinly-laminated silty shale that falls like ""stack rock"" is always difficult to support in underground coal mines. With thin laminations of 2.5 to 52 mm (0.1 to 2 in) thick and weak bonding between laminations, the roof is much weaker under horizontal stress than under vertical load. Buckling of thin laminations and cutters are common signs of initial failure for this type of roof. When a roof fall occurs, it is mostly above the primary bolted horizon with a fiat top and steep breaking angle above the pillar ribs. Because silty shale is brittle, roof falls mostly develop without significant roof sagging. With thick, laminated silty shale, it is difficult to build a strong solid beam with short primary bolts. Longer bolts, straps, and supplementary cable bolts are required. Since installation of longer primary bolts in low seam mining is operationally inefficient, supplementary bolting is important to maintain overall roof stability. The bolting plan should also be chosen based on the geologic hazard map, which indicates the distribution and thickness of laminated silty shale, as well as the transition areas.To effectively support the thinly-laminated silty shale roof, an area with the same type of roof in a low seam mine was monitored for approximately four months. The mine had experienced roof falls while using different bolting systems and mine orientations in past years. The roof support in the area was studied through geologic mapping, roof scoping, and testing of different bolting plans. This paper presents the roof failure characteristics of the thinly-laminated silty shale, the correlation between failure and geologic condition, an evaluation of different bolting plans, and the requirements for primary and supplementary bolting for the silty shale roof.INTRODUCTIONThinly-laminated silty shale that falls like ""stack rock"" is always difficult to support in underground coal mines (Peng, 2007). With thin laminations of 2.5 to 52 mm (0.1 to 2 in) thick and weak bonding between laminations, the roof is much weaker under horizontal stress than under vertical load. Buckling of thin laminations and cutters are common signs of initial failure for this type of roof. When a roof fall occurs, it is mostly above the primary bolted horizon with a fiat top and steep breaking angle above the pillar ribs. Because silty shale is brittle, roof falls mostly develop without significant roof sagging. In low seam mining, it is difficult to install longer primary bolts, so supplementary bolts have to be installed to maintain overall roof stability. To effectively support the thinly-laminated silty shale roof, an area with the same type of roof in a low seam mine in western Pennsylvania was studied for approximately four months."

Jan 1, 2010

By John Rusnak

The Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) is a practical rock mass classification system for use in design of mine openings. Data can be obtained for this purpose from exploration drill cores if simple geotechnical logging and rock mechanics testing is conducted. The CMRR is an excellent method to quantify rock characteristics for engineering purposes. It bridges the gap between geologic description and engineering design. The CMRR was utilized in the design of a 10,000 fl. long coal belt conveyor tunnel connecting an Eastern Associated Coal Corp. mine and preparation plant in Boone County, West Virginia. Data gathering and analysis techniques are discussed involving the calculation of the CMRR and its application in the design of the tunnel, which was driven through a thin coal bed zone. The preliminary findings have correlated well with actual roof and mining conditions encountered during driving the tunnel and it is concluded the CMRR is an effective method to utilize geologic data from exploration core holes for engineering analysis and design.

Jan 1, 1998

By K. Biswas

So far, all pillar design methods or approaches consider the coal seam as a uniform structure From some mine visits in northern Appalachian Region. it is found that some coal seams have binder or parting material within the coal scan with varying thicknesses and numbers- And it has also been found that these kinds of hinder materials tire prone to weathering when exposed to ambient mine moisture In this paper an attempt has been made to study the weathering susceptibility of parting materials and coal when exposed to moisture and a two dimensional finite element analysis has been carried out to study the effect of the presence of partings on the structural integrity of the coal pillar in terms of short-term and long-term stability.

Jan 1, 1995

By F. Ziaie

Line electrical resistivity method using physically infinite distance between current line electrodes is proposed to determine the location of mine workings. In this method at least three line electrodes are used. One of the current electrodes is used as a sinkhole electrode while the other two are used for different activiations of line electrodes when the survey area is between one of the line electrodes and outside the other one. The resistivity profiles perpendicular to the current line electrodes for different activation of electrodes is plotted versus the distance of the midpoint of the measuring potential electrodes. The anomaly due to presence of any locally lateral resistivity variation (e.g. mining cavity) will represent itself as peak or trough depending on resistivity contrast between the source of the anomaly and surrounding medium. Physical simulation of the proposed model was conducted by using a tank model in the laboratory. The results of experiments appear to be consistent with the theoretical model. Experiments for different depths and different spacial locations of the simulated cavities appeared to be successful for locating the depth and size of the cavity.

Jan 1, 1989

By A. Grenoble

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

Jan 1, 1984

By Axel Preusse

In the Ruhr district, pipelines of public and private infrastructure are made of cast iron, steel, plastics or asbestos cement. Legal framework, technical regulations and normative standards define which pipeline materials may be used for the transmission of which kind of product Thus ground water endangering substances as well as inflammable or explosive products are only permitted to be transported in steel-made pipelines. Ground movements, due to underground mining, are transmitted via the soil to the pipeline and cause extra strain within the steel pipeline (Figure I). In extreme cases durable deformations may occur, characterized by an oval profile or a fold in the pipeline. To avoid or minimize damages, balancing elements are installed into the concerning pipeline, reducing the ground movements which might otherwise cause damages. [ ] The distance between the balancing elements is not arranged by random, but by a calculation method developed in a doctoral thesis [Spielberg, 1999] which represents the actual available standards in science and technology. The calculation method considers all relevant influencing variables with impacts on the movement behaviour of steel pipelines in mining areas, such as technical data of pipeline design (e.g. steel grade, wall thickness, weld seam quality), soil conditions (e.g. friction), laying depths of the pipelines, the operational impacts (working pressure, corrosion) and the mining impacts. As of today, mining has caused no damages to steel pipelines protected by this calculation method.

Jan 1, 2004

By Anthony T. Iannacchione

This study, funded by the Appalachian Research Initiative for Environmental Science (ARIES), examines how mine layout, mining method, and geology interacted to allow water from the Grove No.1 mine pool to discharge into local surface waters. Federal and State regulations prohibit the discharge of acid or iron-producing waters from underground coal mines. Mining companies design barriers around their operations to prevent mine waters from discharging to the surface. The Grove No.1 represents one mine where these designs proved inadequate. Unique geologic conditions at the Grove No.1 mine pool, combined with retreat room-and-pillar mining, contributed to a discharge that required passive water treatment.

Jan 1, 2013