Search Documents

By Andrew Lewis, Amarit Nitaramorn, Alexander Garcia, Peter Altounyan

"Indonesia is a major coal producer, the vast majority being sourced from opencast operations. Underground production to date has been constrained by unfavorable ground conditions and limited local experience. However, an underground trial in East Kalimantan has now shown that it is possible to successfully extract coal and mine safely, despite the technical challenges.A trial drift mine has been worked to a current maximum depth of 160 m (525 ft) in a dipping coal seam. The 3 m (10 ft) thick coal seam is overlain by very weak mudstone and sandstones. The mudstone forming the immediate seam roof strata proved a particular challenge given its adverse reaction to water and overall friability.Rock bolts were used as roadway support, the system being carefully selected to optimize effectiveness. An innovative method of partial extraction was trialed, which demonstrated the potential for productive mining despite the ground conditions. Roof falls have occurred within the working area, and roadways demonstrate reasonable stability over time.Throughout the course of the trial, strata behavior monitoring has been an important aspect, and a comprehensive ground control monitoring system is in place. This has enhanced the ability to increase the level of support where required and to react to deteriorating conditions. In addition, monitoring information has allowed a quantitative assessment to be made of the technical feasibility of future full-scale mining.INTRODUCTIONWith current production at over 200 million tons, much of this destined for overseas markets, Indonesia is the second largest exporter of coal (Ritschel and Schiffer, 2007). The majority of the coal is sourced from the Kalimantan coalfields. Mining is predominately opencast, yet in recent years there have been attempts made to introduce underground operations. This move would permit continued access to good quality seams that are beyond the reach of viable opencast mining."

Jan 1, 2010

By Morgan M. Sears, Mark Van Dyke, Gamal Rashed, John Rusnak, Khaled Mohamed

"In 2016, room-and-pillar mining provided nearly 40% of underground coal production in the United States. Over the past decade, rib falls have resulted in 12 fatalities, representing 28% of the ground-fall fatalities in U.S. underground coal mines. Nine of these 12 fatalities (75%) have occurred in room-and-pillar mines. The objective of this research is to study the geomechanics of bench room-and-pillar mining and the associated response of high pillar ribs at overburden depths greater than 1,000 ft. This paper provides a definition of the bench technique, the pillar response due to loading, observational data for a case history, a calibrated numerical model of the observed rib response, and application of this calibrated model to a second site. INTRODUCTION Bench mining is a an underground mining technique typically applied to room-and-pillar mines where full seam extraction on development presents an unacceptably high risk of injury from high pillar ribs or where the mining equipment is not designed to extract the full seam thickness. To mitigate the increased risk associated with high ribs and slender pillars, a more modest thickness is extracted from the top of the seam on development. This is followed by grading the floor and recovering the bottom of the seam with or without extraction of the pillars during retreat mining. A mine located in Eastern Kentucky extracts two seams at depths ranging from outcrop to 2,000 ft. In some areas of the mine, Seam A and Seam B are close enough together to be mined simultaneously. Seam A (top) is mined on development 7 to 9 ft. high for the entire length of the panel. On retreat, as each pillar is extracted, the continuous miner is ramped down into the floor (Seam B), two pairs of Mobile Roof Support (MRS) units are set, and the pillars are extracted at the full mining height of 14+ ft. During the pillar recovery process, the floor is extracted in each entry, from a ramp initiated outby the retreat line, sequentially just prior to extracting the lifts from the pillars (see Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Jun Lu, Mark Van Dyke, Daniel W. H. Su, Greg Hasenfus

"This paper presents the geologic and ground control challenges that were encountered by CONSOL Energy’s mining operations in southwestern Pennsylvania. A sandstone-to-limestone geology transition was encountered by Mine A, where the primary 8-foot bolts were anchored in claystone. Upon experiencing roof sags and a roof fall in the return entry, 6-foot high-tension, fully-grouted primary bolts were employed along with 16-foot center cable bolts at every other strap to improve beam building and to ensure proper anchorage into the competent limestone. No longwall delay was reported within this geologic transition zone, although there was some difficulty in maintaining an open #2 entry airway behind the longwall face.The geologic encounter in Mine B was more complex, where fluvial deposits of massive sandstone channels, shale channels and pyritic-rich, green claystones were encountered on both sides of the mains, and which impacted both development and longwall ground control. In particular, poor transitional roof areas near the edges of the sandstone and shale channels often posed significant ground control challenges. In addition, hydraulic fracturing was sometimes utilized to enhance caving of massive sandstone behind the shields to relieve pressure at the face. Longwall face conditions and advance rates were documented to illustrate the effects of sandstone channels, shale channels, and green claystones on safety and productivity and to demonstrate the effectiveness of the hydraulic fracturing.Shale channels, slickensided zones, laminated roof zones, soft floor, and a regional syncline were encountered in Mine C, the combination of which posed unique ground control challenges during both development and longwall mining. The presence of soft floor, coupled with the presence of thick floor coal and deep cover, resulted in headgate convergence during retreat of the first right-hand longwall panel. Two-piece 8-foot bolts were sometimes observed to fail at the coupler within the laminated roof zone, and 6-foot, 1-piece, fully-grouted point-anchor bolts were employed as the primary bolts thereafter."

Jan 1, 2015

By Arthur Miller, Andrew Weakley, Heather E. Lawson

"IntroductionDynamic failure events in an underground coal mine, or “bumps,” are defined as “the sudden, violent bursts of coal from a pillar or pillars or a block of coal, resulting in a section, the whole pillars, or the solid block of coal being thrown into an open entry” (Peng, 2008). Reports of disastrous and often fatal dynamic failure events date back over one hundred years in the United States. Mining practices and technologies have significantly evolved over the course of the last century, yet these events continue to occur. The events at Crandall Canyon, Utah (Gates et al., 2007) and Brody No. 1 Mine in West Virginia (Barker and McNeely, 2014) are two recent failure events that resulted in a total of eleven fatalities. These events testify to the fact that dynamic failure remains an imperative safety concern. Furthermore, their continued occurrences indicate that engineering controls have proven inadequate at wholly mitigating the problem.Multiple conditions have been associated with the occurrence of dynamic failure phenomena, including• thick, competent strata that can create a bridging effect, resulting in high abutment stresses (Rice, 1935; Holland and Thomas, 1954; Iannacchione and Zelanko, 1995; Agapito and Goodrich, 2000; Peng, 2008; Whyatt, 2008; Whyatt and Varley, 2010)• overburden thicknesses greater than 500–700 ft. (Rice, 1935; Peng, 2008)• a strong coal that is resistant to crushing (Rice, 1935; Peng,2008) or that is “uncleated or poorly cleated, strong…sustains high stress and tends to fail suddenly” (Agapito and Goodrich, 2000)• the presence of sandstone channels or rolls that can serve to concentrate stresses (Iannachione and Zelanko, 1995; Agapito and Goodrich, 2000)• fracturing of strong units above or below the coal seam (Whyatt and Varley, 2010)• slip along pre-existing discontinuities (Peperakis, 1958; Whyatt and Varley, 2010)• multiple seam mining interactions (Campoli, Kertis, and Goode, 1987; Iannachione and Zelanko, 1995; Newman, 2002; Peng, 2008)• mining sequences that can cause anomalously high stress concentrations (Campoli, Kertis, and Goode, 1987; Iannachione and Zelanko, 1995)"

Jan 1, 2015

By Gautam Benerjee, Veera Reddy Boothukuri, Bhattacharjee Ram Madhav, Panigrahi Durga Charan

"India’s tryst with mechanized longwall coal mining started with the introduction of the first self-advancing powered support longwall (PSLW) face at Moonidih Colliery of Jharia Coalfield in 1978 and at Godavarikhani (GDK)7 Incline of Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL) in 1983. During the last 37 years, about 30 longwall units in Coal India, Ltd., (CIL) and 10 longwall units in SCCL have been introduced with powered roof supports of varying capacity, ranging from 280 to 800 tonnes, in many mines in India under varying geological and geotechnical conditions. The majority of the longwall faces in India have been worked under relatively shallow cover (up to 200m), and significant strata control problems have been encountered due to poor caveability of the roof, inadequate capacity of the supports, a lack of knowledge on longwall caving mechanisms, less than adequate strata monitoring systems, and the non-availability of quality spare parts, etc. This has resulted in structural damage to supports and increased downtime of the equipment, thereby making longwall mining in India a case of technology failure. Energy demand for a developing country like India with a population of 1.2 billion is huge, and the thrust on increasing coal production continues. However, the share of coal production from underground mines in India continues to decline (current share is around 6%) because of absence of successful mass production technology in underground coal mining. Under this backdrop, a high-capacity longwall with state-of-the-art technology was introduced in 2014 at Adriyala Longwall Project (ALP) of SCCL for the first time in Indian Coal Mining Industry. The first longwall panel (LWP) has been completed successfully. This paper highlights the major geotechnical challenges encountered during development of the longwall gate roads due to the presence of two overlying clay bands, significant in-situ horizontal stresses and the experience of using rigid (welded) steel wire mesh with resin-anchored roof bolts. Efforts have been made to analyze longwall weighting and caving behavior, such as main and periodic weightings, the effect of front and side abutment pressures, and the behavior of gate roadway support systems under immediate friable weak roof with overlying massive sandstone."

Jan 1, 2017

By Russell Frith

Probably the most expensive but least well understood roof falls in underground coal mining, are those that occur ahead of the powered supports in the centre of longwall face. Even small roof cavities result in the dilution of the ROM product and large cavities can stop the face for days if not weeks and the incurred cash flow losses can be catastrophic. Expensive and time-consuming remedial measures (e.g. PUR, cavity filling, removal of stone from the AFC by hand) are required and equipment wear and damage can be significant when the need to blast and convey stone is also considered. Through four major research projects within the Australian coal industry and numerous consulting assignments, the author has spent the best part of fifteen years attempting to identify and defme the various geotechnical and operational factors that determine whether a major roof cavity occurs ahead of the powered supports or a normal goaf fall occurs just behind them, the difference in operational outcome being enormous. The paper presents a condensed summary of the overall technical findings covering such issues as roof fall mechanisms, the measured influence of cover depth, periodic weighting of massive strata units and its quantification, the role of cut-throughs in chain pillars, face width and height, the role of the powered support and the influence (both positive and negative) of mine site operations. The big picture outcome is the view that high production longwall extraction is well-suited to certain geotechnical environments, is marginal in others and under certain conditions is fatally flawed and beyond the control of mine operators, although fortunately the latter category is a relatively rare situation. Various risk-based research findings in this regard will be given as a basis for future discussion.

Jan 1, 2005

By Hamid Maleki

Results of geologic investigations, in-mine instrumentation, and numerical modeling are presented for two longwall mines in which pillars with large width-to-height ratios (8 to 9) are used. These investigations revealed that wide pillars unload when subjected to sufficient stress and that pillar unloading is influenced by geologic conditions. Field measurements in mine 1 clearly indicated load transfer from the longwall area toward the gate roads, resulting in pillar failure near the margin of a fluvial channel. Loads were shown to transfer to a harrier pillar (width height ratio equal to 9), contributing to progressive failure of this pillar. Unloading of the barrier pillar was associated with significant load transfer to the two-seam submains to the north of the harrier, contributing to roof falls, floor heave, and rib spalling within the submains. Stress analysis results addressed pillar peak strength and unloading behavior that was in agreement with the measurements and underground observations. Underground observations and stress analyses were completed before and after longwall mining near a six-entry submain in mine 2. This submain was intended to he used as a temporary bleeder and tailgate for a small longwall block consisting of one to two panels, depending on the development schedule in other areas of the trine and observed ground conditions. Numerical modeling using both elastic and inelastic pillar behavior for submain pillars with a width-to-height ratio of 8 was completed before mining began. Results indicated that pillar unloading was likely. During retreat of the first longwall panel, pillars unloaded. as evidenced by progressive rib spalling along the cleats, This behavior was mostly confined to the immediate face area, an observation that was in agreement with the modeling results,

Jan 1, 2000

By Anthony T. Iannacchione

Underground bituminous coal mining is a large and significant industry within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and it has a legacy of environmental consequence. For example, in 2008, 13.5 acres (5.5 hectares) of land were undermined by longwall mining every day. Laws and regulations have been promulgated requiring companies involved in this industry to remedy mining damage caused to homes, businesses, and land; replace impaired water supplies; and repair impacts to streams and wetlands. The regulations and technical standards set by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) have been put in place to assure that coal operations comply with ACT 54 of the Bituminous Mine Subsidence & Land Conservation Act and other related legislation. These regulations and standards require operations to address impacts when a mining permit is submitted and as permits are modified and extended. One of the special provisions of ACT 54 is the requirement by the PA DEP to produce an assessment of the surface impacts of mining every five years. The University of Pittsburgh was contracted by the PA DEP to perform the 3rd assessment, which spanned from August 21, 2003, to August 20, 2008. This paper details the findings related to surface structure undermined during this period. A total of 3,735 structures were tracked. Four-hundred-fiftysix reported effects were found, and each required additional information and analysis. The majority of the reported effects were associated with eight longwall mines. Characteristics of the structures were analyzed and discussed, with special attention to those with reported effects. The number of undamaged and reportedly damaged structures (i.e., dwelling, barn, commercial building, etc.) undermined during the assessment period were listed. Lastly, the resolution status and type of resolution were analyzed for all structure reported effects.

Jan 1, 2011

By W. C. Smith

Over the past several years, the Bureau of Mines has conducted studies on the performance of fully grouted resin bolts In underground mines. The effectiveness of resin-grouted bolts in maintaining a competent roof, even in weak rock, has been well documented in the literature. Recent Bureau studies have evaluated the affects of shortened grout columns on bolt behavior in a variety of rock types (1, 2, 3). The application of partial grout columns to primary roof support systems has been introduced as a viable alternative to fully grouted bolt systems in some mines. The point-anchored resin bolt and combination bolt represent such alternatives. While both systems usually employ some mechanical interlocking system, their primary difference lies in the length of resin column used. Point- anchor systems rely on an anchoring device that is a short length of resin column of 2 feet or leas. Combination bolts, on the other hand, often require 3 feat or more of resin column. Resin migration into voids and fractures intersecting the borebole wall is a major problem when installing fully grouted bolts in weak roof rock and can result in a reduced column length that provides reduced anchorage. The relationship between column length and anchorage integrity deserves closer study. The Denver Research Center of the Bureau of Mines has examined the load- carrying capabilities of resin-grouted bolts in weak strata. Pull tests were performed on about 900 resin-grouted, 4- foot-long bolts with column lengths ranging from 6 to 48 inches. The practical performances of 8 different column lengths were evaluated for 10 mines under in sit" conditions using data obtained from standard pull tests. In addition criteria are discussed, including engineering properties of the host rock for designing safer and more effective grouted bolt installations.

Jan 1, 1987

By Gregory M. Molinda

Historically, miners have known that roof rocks originally composed largely of mud were prone to slaking and deterioration when exposed to water and humidity. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) records show that roof falls are more prevalent in summer and late fall. Field data shows higher bolt loads and increased room convergence in summer months. Laboratory data shows that very high internal pressures can be generated by significant strain in clay-rich rocks. In summer months humidities ranging from 70-100% can cause rock strains up to 7%, and rock pressures of 14,000 psi, more than enough to break apart weak shales and fireclays. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted wet/dry immersion cycling of clay-rich rocks. Results show that the rocks most prone to moisture deterioration are fireclays, claystones, and sandy shales, all of which have disrupted bedding. Of the 7 mudrocks with a weatherability index above 40%, none showed consistent fissile bedding. Black shales were surprisingly resistant to wet/dry water immersion cycling. Generally, mixed rocks (stackrock), typically susceptible to horizontal stress, are more resistant to moisture-deterioration. Mine roof rocks tested with moisture sensitivity ratings above 50% (moisture sensitivity index ranges from 0-100 with 100 being the most sensitive) all came from mines which had roof skin problems and used supplemental support to prevent rock fall injuries. Some roof rocks showed lateral variability of moisture sensitivity values, suggesting the need for more samples in highly varying roof rocks. Swelling strains of mudrocks showed that almost all of the swelling occurred in the first 24 hours after immersion. The wet/dry immersion cycling test used provides an accurate, quick and inexpensive method for estimating the moisture sensitivity of mudrocks. With this information mine operators can begin to anticipate hazardous ground and prepare appropriate roof support.

Jan 1, 2006

By Meagan S. Boltz

From October 2000 to April 2001 a local array of fourteen seismograph stations was deployed at the Trail Mountain Mine (TMM), an underground coal mine in Emery County, Utah, to locate mining-induced seismicity (MIS). Original analysis of the data provided epicentral locations that coincided closely with the active longwall panel. The original analysis yielded poor quality hypocenters, however, preventing a useful relation from being made between mining activity and the event depths. For the original analysis, only stations at elevations above mine level were used for locating MIS. As a result, P- and S-arrival times from four of the stations in the local array were not used: an inmine station and three stations at elevations below mine level. This study compares mine workings and active mining to a revised TMM dataset that included P- and S-arrival times from the lower elevation stations that were not used in the previous study. In the revised locations, a modified master event methodology was used to calculate station delays. These station delays correct for errors in the shallow layers of the velocity model. The resulting hypocentral locations have improved depth resolution, determined by a lower root mean square (RMS) for the locations, compared to the original study. Most of the events occur in the roof of the mine and follow the longwall panel. When located using the velocity model determined in the original study, the elevations of the events increase as the longwall panel progresses. One possible explanation for the elevation increase is that it may be related to geology or the caving process. As presented here, a 10% decrease in the shallow velocity structure results in a more plausible location for the hypocenters. Consequently, it is hypothesized that progressive development of the TMM longwall panel(s) may have resulted in a progressive change in the velocity model.

Jan 1, 2012

By Wouter Hartman

Xuandong Coal Mine is mining coal in one of the most challenging underground environments in the world. This work has found that it is not only challenging but it also has the composition for some interesting rock mechanics and ground control conditions. The paper highlights the extreme mining and rock mass behavior conditions encountered when mining coal at 900 m below surface. It was found that the ground control environment associated with geological weakness, low coal material strength and stiffness, was reasonably well controlled; however, the chain pillar geometry and design did not take these geological weaknesses into consideration. Some of the chain pillars employed were quite large, which resulted in floor punching and secondary floor heave, which causes extreme difficulty for production. No barrier pillar has been employed except for the center 164-m-wide main headings pillar with a w/h ratio in excess of 40. After assessing the location and geometry of a 200-m-thick dolerite sill overlaying the coal measures, we found the probability of it breaking up into to smaller fragments and producing a larger goaf to be low. Therefore, the influence of the dolerite sill on chain pillar loading is considered small compared to the low coal, immediate floor and roof rockmass strength. It is further recognized that horizontal stresses could be locked up within the dolerite sill, which would likely result in regional bending that would be distributed through the chain pillars. This has, to some extent, already occurred, and the effects have been seen and felt through excessive floor heave, pillar punching, and coal bumps (seismicity). We?ve also found that there was a need to employ basic rock mechanics principals in assessing the stability of future multiple seam mining layouts.

Jan 1, 2012

By J. R. Koehler

Although two-entry yield pillar-based gate roads supported by wooden cribs have been commonly used throughout longwalling in the Wasatch PlateadRoan Cliffs coalfield of central Utah, a three-entry yield-abutment gate road configuration was recently trialed in the Hiawatha Seam at the Genwal Resources (GRI) Crandall Canyon No. 1 Mine, near Huntington, UT. Pillar, entry, and cable bolt performance were monitored through second panel mining using a fairly extensive array of geomechanical instruments installed over a span of four crosscuts. Ground pressure and entry closure measurements confirmed that the 9.1-m-wide (30-ft) yield pillar was partially shielded from first panel longwall loads by the 36.6-m-wide (120-ft) abutment pillar, and consequently, experienced only minor yielding until the approach of the second panel face. Complete yielding of the 9. I-m-wide (30-ft) pillar occurred when the second panel was approximately 6.1 m (20 ft) inby the instrumentation site. Average cable bolt loads and differential roof sag remained low through second panel mining and tailgate entry ground conditions were excellent; however, very high ground pressures in the abutment and yield pillars, and second panel rib strongly suggest a high potential for coal bumps utilizing this gate road configuration at mining cover depths in excess of 396 to 457 m (1300 to 1500 ft). This conclusion is supported by the suspected occurrence of small coal bumps along the abutment pillar ribs, observed indirectly as fresh debris in the middle entry just behind the second face. This paper presents a case history developed from the geotechnical measurements and on-site observations of this unique application of a yield-abutment gate road configuration and cable support system in the Hiawatha Seam.

Jan 1, 1996

By James H. Fletcher

Much data and experience has been accumulated, especially in the last 5 or 6 years, to show that modern roof trusses, both of the Birmingham type and the bolt-and-channel type, perform well to support certain kinds of coal mine roof. For some time now, roof trusses of the Birmingham type have been effective in controlling thick shale roof, which tends to sag and fall over a period of about eight weeks. These falls leave dame-shaped cavities which are reminiscent of the pressure arch theory of roof failure. Lately there has also been significant interest in supporting some longwall panel entries with channel and-bolt systems. These systems utilize two vertical center bolts and two 45 degree end bolts through a heavy gage channel. Both types of truss systems have long bolts, which require 8 to 9 Foot holes on a 45 degree angle, and point anchor resin bolts, which utilize a 2 or 3 foot rebar grouted in a thin annulus of polyester resin. Consequently, many coal mining people have been impressed with the very good anchorage characteristics and tensionability features of these systems. However, the same people have been proportionately dismayed to find that very often the most difficult part of introducing a trussing program to a mine is deciding on the machine specifications which determine the truss installation rate. The purpose of this paper is to indicate aspects of truss bolter design and use which are not shared by roofbolter design and its vertical pattern of bolts. Of the two types of drill units conventionally accepted, arm feed units and mast units, only one 15 judged suitable. While the arm feed unit offers low collapsed height with a long drill feed length, a great attribute for low seam use, it has not lent itself to being rolled over to a 45 degree angle. One reason for this inability is that many items which are conventionally mounted on the arm feed unit cannot be allowed to rotate with the unit. These items include drilling controls, tool Cray, lights, canopy or safety post, panic bar, and stab jack(s). If these items were independent of the arm feed drilling unit, they would have to be out of the way of the boom arms, links, and feed cylinder as the unit moves. To ease this problem, the arm feed unit can be made very short and even mounted across the machine. However, the resulting short feed length is undesirable. Several short drill steel extensions are required to drill a relatively long hole, making this procedure time-consuming as well as increasing the likelihood of drilling a crooked hole. Another reason for abandonment of the arm feed unit is that a very stiff drill guide (or "centralizer") is required to start the hole. Using the mast tilt control, the roof bolter operator will force the bit against the roof and will rotate the bit without feeding to cut sideways into the roof to form a hole face. Omission of this step often results in the skidding of the bit toward the rib. To date, no such sturdy drill guide has been designed for an arm feed drill unit. The mast style unit has been the most successful design for angle drilling. It is easily rolled over to a 45 degree angle or to 90 degrees and, on single head models, often has been made to roll through 180 degrees. The mast style is compact, in plain view and is easily fitted with heavy duty manual or hydraulically operated drill guides. It can be mounted directly on a machine chassis, or onto a swinging boom, or onto a slider arrangement in a broad variety of configurations which will accommodate controls, tool trays, stab and roof support jacks, lights, canopies, and panic bars. The only significant difficulty with mast drilling units occurs in lower mining heights when desirable low mast height is accompanied by undesirable short feed length. While the lead extension in the drill string can be as large as the mining height will allow, a short feed length will permit only the use of shorter middle extensions and drivers, and perhaps will. require the use of two different length wrenches. The associated problem is the relatively short distance from the drillhead to the drillguide. This distance is further shortened when raising the drillhead to get the bit to the roof. One might keep longer lead extensions on the machine; drill a vertical pocket for the bit, starting the angle hole at this pocket; or modify the mast. If the mast is made so that the distance from the drillhead to the drillguide remains constant while the mast extends, after which the drillhead travels up the mast, the shorter mast can be made to start the hole more easily. However, short teed length will still result in longer drilling time. It is obvious from these points that a proper choice of mast is simply the highest one which will be moved easily in the given mining height. This, of course, goes against the grain of most experienced coal mining people who realize that a relatively small decrease in mining height can create a problem correctable only with the purchase and installation of shorter masts. If the mining

Jan 1, 1982

By Eric Keller, Jamal Rostami, Wenpeng Liu

"Roof and rib instability is an important issue in underground mining. To optimize ground support design, enhance ground stability, and reduce the possibility of roof or rib failure with minimal use of artificial ground support, it is essential to have an accurate understanding of ground conditions. This includes the location of voids, cracks, and discontinuities, as well as information about the different strata in the immediate roof. This paper briefly introduces ongoing research on void detection by using the roof bolter feed and rotation pressure. The goal of this project is to improve the sensitivity of detection programs to locate smaller joints and reduce the number of false alarms. This paper has presented a brief review of the testing procedures, data analysis, logic, and algorithms used for void detection. In addition, this paper has discussed the results of preliminary laboratory tests and statistical analysis of the data from these two drilling parameters used for void detection.INTRODUCTIONRoof falls are one of the most serious and frequent accidents in underground mining. Each year, personnel are injured or killed because of roof falls. Equipment can also be damaged when this occurs. According to Mine Safety and Health Administration statistics collected from 1999 to 2008, ground falls were the largest cause of fatal accidents in underground coal mining, causing around 40% of all fatalities (NIOSH, 2015a). Out of 8 to 10 fatalities and over 800 injuries are recorded each year in underground mines, there are nearly 2,000 reportable non-injury ground falls every year (NIOSH, 2015b).Certain features in the ground, such as voids, cracks, and discontinuities, are significant factors that cause roof support failures and roof fall accidents. Currently, several manufacturers provide smart roof bolters with limited capabilities for void detection. While successful in many instances, in laboratory experiments, the existing void detection systems have limited success in detecting void openings that are less than 1/8 inch This limited success was observed in testing concrete blocks with gaps in between, simulating a rock medium with voids. Detection programs have missed some voids, while, in some cases, they have shown false detection. These algorithms need to be more accurate in sensing voids to improve the capabilities of these programs."

Jan 1, 2016

By William Kendall

INTRODUCTION Stillwater Mining Company, with its two underground, hard rock mines in South Central Montana, is the largest primary producer of palladium and platinum in the Western Hemisphere. Platinum Group Metals (PGMs) are mined from a specific zone within the Stillwater Complex, a layered mafic/ultramafic igneous intrusion, named as the J-M Reef. Over much of the J-M Reef, the economically minable, mineralized horizon is contained at typical horizontal widths of 6.5 ft to 8 ft wide. This feature of narrow mining widths has made it challenging to safely and effectively mine these areas of the J-M Reef using mechanized cut and fill and sublevel sill development mining methods. Mechanization of most or all of the steps of the mining process is important to Stillwater in the continuous pursuit of high standards in safety and health. Mechanized bolting within the J-M Reef ore production headings is an important piece of reaching these objectives. In general, metal/non-metal mining requires varied mining techniques, as compared to more traditional bedded mineral/resource deposits. Narrow vein mining is a selective mining technique that generates a minimal amount of waste material while obtaining the more valuable ore deposits. Drilling and bolting in narrow vein mining has traditionally been performed with air-powered, hand-held ?jackleg? equipment because mechanized equipment is, typically, too large for the selective narrow vein techniques. In addition, traditional hand-held pneumatic equipment provides significant flexibility for small-opening, narrow-vein developments, reducing waste rock handling and improving ore recovery management. The hand-held equipment is also relatively inexpensive to purchase. Due to its simplicity, it is also relatively easy to train operators to use hand-held equipment. Hand-held equipment has been routinely used to safely install ground support and to develop production faces in hard rock mines for many years. Although it is effective, the hand-held equipment requires operator exposure to certain inherent hazardous conditions in the active face/development mine areas. These include falling rock, tripping hazards, bending/twisting/lifting hazards, high noise levels, and chemical fumes from the hammer exhaust. Based on health and safety statistics from the Stillwater mines, operation of the rotary-percussive hand-held equipment adversely affects the long-term health of the operator?continual jackleg operation frequently results in long term damage to hearing, shoulders, arm and wrist joints, and back injuries. This reduces the quality of life for the operator and also results in higher personnel turnover rates for the mining company.

Jan 1, 2014

By Peter Zhang, Todd Minoski, Mark Van Dyke, Daniel W. H. Su

"This paper presents the results of a 2017 study conducted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Pittsburgh Mining Research Division (PMRD), to evaluate the effects of longwall-induced subsurface deformations within a longwall abutment pillar under deep cover. The 2017 study was conducted in a southwestern Pennsylvania coal mine, which extracts 1,500-foot-wide longwall panels under 1,185 feet of cover. One 650-foot-deep, in-place inclinometer monitoring well was drilled and installed over a 150-foot by 275-foot center abutment pillar. In addition to the monitoring well, surface subsidence measurements and underground coal pillar pressure measurements were conducted as the 1,500-foot-wide longwall panel on the south side of the abutment pillar was being mined.Prior to the first longwall excavation, a number of simulations using FLAC3D™ (Itasca, 2017) were conducted to estimate surface subsidence, increases in underground coal pillar pressure, and subsurface horizontal displacements in the monitoring well. Comparisons of the pre-mining FLAC3D simulation results and the surface, subsurface, and underground instrumentation results show that the measured in-place inclinometer casing deformations are in reasonable agreement with those predicted by the 3D finite difference models. The measured surface subsidence and pillar pressure are in excellent agreement with those predicted by the 3D models. Results from this 2017 research clearly indicate that, under deep cover, the measured horizontal displacements within the abutment pillar are approximately one order of magnitude smaller than those measured in a 2014 study under medium cover.INTRODUCTIONDue to a recent shale gas boom, approximately 1,400 unconventional shale gas wells have been drilled through active and future coal reserves in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio over the past 15 years. These shale gas wells have penetrated many coal seams, such as the Sewickley, Pittsburgh, Upper Freeport, and Kittanning seams. These unconventional gas wells, whether tapped into the Marcellus or Utica formations, contain very high gas pressure. Strata deformations associated with longwall and other high extraction techniques could induce high stresses and deformations in the shale gas well casings. This could seriously compromise the mechanical integrity of the production, intermediate, and coal protection casings (Figure 1). Damaged well casings could potentially introduce high-pressure, explosive gas into underground mine workings, particularly during an extended well shut-in period, which could seriously jeopardize underground miners’ safety and health."

Jan 1, 2018

By Christopher Newman, Zach Agioutantis, Gabriel S. Esterhuizen

"As conventional underground deposits are continuing to be depleted, mining operations have been forced to produce at greater depths and in more geologically and geometrically challenging conditions. Over the past decade, there has been a global increase in the application of cemented paste backfill (CPB) material as a means of ground support in open stope mining operations. Although CPB has been extensively used within the industry, there are many fundamental factors affecting the design of safe and economical fill structures that are still not well understood. A critical design issue with respect to backfilled stopes is determining the stress state within the fill material as well as the surrounding rock.This paper details the development of a reliable numerical model for the simulation of stress distributions around the excavated stope area, as well as through the backfill material. Through discussions on modeling parameters and output results, one is provided with insights into the mechanisms of stress redistribution allowing for further accuracies in simulating the behavior of the CPB material as well as its interaction with the surrounding rockmass.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDModern technological innovations with respect to material processing, cementitious composition and chemical additives, and material transportation have provided the mining industry with a ground support material that greatly reduces mine waste costs, while, when used appropriately, increases reserve production and mine stability. As mining operations continue to produce in more complex geologic and geometric conditions, cemented paste backfill (CPB) has become commonly employed within primary-secondary excavation-support sequencing allowing for total extraction of the mining reserve. As shown in Figure 1, primary stopes are initially excavated and then backfilled in a two-staged pour: plug and final pours. The plug (initial pour), is initially placed at the bottom of the stope with a CPB material of heightened cementitious material. While the plug provides a strong foundation on which to build the rest of the CPB structure, it also provides protection against barricade breakthroughs (Li and Aubertin, 2009), as well as providing operations a means of underhand stope-and-fill mining through the use of an artificial sill pillar (Hughes, et al., 2011). Following placement, the plug is allowed to cure to a designated design strength. Upon completion of the plug, a less cementitious “final” pour material is used to backfill the rest of the excavated area."

Jan 1, 2018

By Stephen C. Tadolini, John Bolton, Bre-Anne Sainsbury, Tom Meikle

"The capacity of ground support components which have been affected by corrosion is reduced and may ultimately lead to dynamic failure of the component and the strata. In order to maintain an effective, long-term ground support system, significant campaigns of rehabilitation are often required in corrosion affected areas which also expose the workers to hazardous conditions. The most common corrosion protection for steel ground support utilises sacrificial systems such as galvanising. Galvanising has previously been proven to be susceptible to some corrosion processes. Stainless steel is the most effective in resistance to corrosion, but can be cost prohibitive, and its mechanical properties often make it unsuited to use in ground support components.Providing an outer protective plastic coating to bolts has proven to be an effective means of protecting the inner steel bar from corrosion. However, these support systems tend to be susceptible to coating damage, and require post cement grouting to provide full encapsulation. In comparison to a standard bolt/resin system, they can be slow to install and expensive. These systems have also been shown to reduce overall load transfer performance of the bolting system.In order provide a higher level of corrosion protection whilst maintaining current installation practices and bolting cycle times, Minova has developed the Enduro™ Steel Ground Support Range. The Enduro™ range consists of standard Minova steel ground support components which have been treated with a unique coating process. The Enduro™ coating has been tested in the harshest of conditions, in laboratory controlled conditions and in underground trials. It has been proven to effectively resist or completely eliminate the formation of corrosion, even in the most aggressive environments. This paper explains the process and provides the details of the laboratory and underground corrosion performance testing carried out on Enduro™ ground support products.INTRODUCTIONTraditionally, the most common form of corrosion protection in steel ground support consists of a sacrificial protective coating such as galvanising (Aziz, et al., 2013). Such coatings have proven to be ineffective in extreme high and low pH conditions with corrosion of the support system commonly encountered. There is also evidence that common forms of galvanising may actually increase the rate of corrosion in certain pH environments. Figure 1 shows typical corrosion and failure of a standard re-bar roof bolt."

Jan 1, 2016

By Gamal Rashed

Coal bump is a sudden manifestation of the release of strain energy stored in a coal pillar (Peng, 2008). It is a very serious mining hazard that adversely affects the safety and productivity of the mines. Several case histories in mining have described coal pillars or faces of coal failing violently with an accompanying ejection of debris and broken material into the working areas of the mine (Campoli, 1987; Osterwald, 1962; Peperakis, 1958; Garvey and Ozbay, 2013). These failures resulted in large losses of life and total collapses of entire mine panels (Chase, Zipf, and Mark, 1994; Zingano, Koppe, and Costa, 2004). There are questions in the literature about whether or not the coal itself plays a significant role in bump. Rice (1935) mentioned that structurally strong coal is one of the key factors for bump; however, the strength of the Pocahontas #3 coal seam is low, and it bumped. Moreover, it is not obvious in the literature whether the strength of the tested coal samples is the inherent strength or if it is influenced by the shape or the size of the specimen. The main objective of this paper is to answer the following question: To what extent does the mechanical properties of the coal have an impact on the potential for violent failure? The best approach to answer this question is to compare the mechanical properties of two kinds of coals from bump-prone (Utah coal-Sunnyside seam) and non-bump-prone (WV coal-Sewickley seam). This comparison includes uniaxial compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, shear strength (cohesion and friction angle), and the burst index.

Jan 1, 2014