Search Documents

By David Miller

Longwall gateroad support can be supplied by a variety of methods. The system of support also needs to be flexible as conditions change. This is especially true in the complex geological conditions of the west Kentucky # 13 seam. Methods of gateroad support used in this seam will be presented along with the successes and failures of the systems as conditions changed Lodestar Energy's gateroad support progression through the seven longwall panels retreated to date will provide an insight into planning for future panels

Jan 1, 1998

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 Timothy Batchler

"Standing roof supports help to provide a stable working environment in coal mine gateroads. NIOSH participates in the development of these support systems by conducting full-scale tests in their Mine Roof Simulator. These tests have established the performance characteristics of every coal mine support system currently in use in the United States. Through these tests, mine operators and regulatory officials have acquired a fundamental understanding of the various types of support performance that guides the assessment and use of these support systems. However, some little known factors that influence support behavior can lead to misconceptions and, perhaps, a poor assessment of support behavior at times. This paper highlights several of these factors and discusses their significance. The paper also examines a current longwall tailgate support and discusses the inefficiency with this approach. Finally, the NIOSH Mine Roof Simulator (MRS) is the world’s most powerful load frame built specifically to test full-scale roof supports, including longwall shields. are addressed in this paper to provide a more in-depth assessment of the limitations of the MRS and what the MRS testing protocol is designed to do. INTRODUCTION Over the years, considerable research has been conducted to develop standing support technologies and to evaluate their performance characteristics. The load and displacement characteristics of the standing supports have been determined from full-scale testing conducted using the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Mine Roof Simulator (MRS) (Barczak and Tadolini, 2008) located in Bruceton, PA. Performance traits, installation patterns, and ground responses are observed in various geological and mining conditions and are evaluated to determine the support performance in the field (Dolinar, 2010; Campoli, 2015; Zhang et al., 2012). Despite widespread use of standing supports, not every aspect of their performance and resulting ground support capability are always well understood. This paper discusses 10 factors, several of which are surprising, that impact standing support performance."

Jan 1, 2017

By Ihsan Berk Tulu, Keith A. Heasley, Chris Mark

"The Analysis of Retreat l\.fining Pillar Stability (ARJ\1PS) and the Lal\.fodel programs have been used successfully in the U.S. for designing safe pillar recovery operations for many years. However, the recent Crandall Canyon l\.fine collapse showed that further research is required to improve the pillar design for recovery under deep cover. To this end, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the West Virginia University (WVU) l\.fining Engineering Department have been working together to improve both the ARJ\1PS and the Lal\.fodel programs.This paper compares and analyzes the overburden loads calculated by ARJ\1PS 2002, the new ARJ\1PS 2010, and the Lal\.fodel program with regard to the retreat pillar line, the gob, and the barrier pillars. The analysis shows a number of distinct differences between the ARJ\1PS and Lal\.fodel loading distributions. Ultimately, the programs, with their distinctive load distributions, are used to analyze a database of 52 deep cover pillar retreat case studies, and the ability of each program to discriminate between successful and unsuccessful retreat pillar plans is evaluated.INTRODUCTIONThe Analysis of Retreat l\.fining Pillar Stability (ARJ\.f PS) and the Lal\.fodel programs have been used successfully in the U.S. for designing safe pillar recovery operations for many years. However, the recent Crandall Canyon l\.fine collapse showed that further research is required to improve the pillar design for recovery under deep cover.Pillar recovery accounts for less than 10% of the coal produced from underground coal mines; however, in the period between 1989 and 1996, it accounted for more than 25% of all ground fatalities (l\.fark et al., 2003). In the past 15 years, the safety of retreat mining operations has greatly improved. l\.fark (2009) explains three steps promoted by l\1SHA and NIOSH for safer pillar recovery:1) Global stability through proper pillar design2) Local stability through proper roof support3) Worker safety through proper section managementThe ARJ\1PS and Lal\.fodel (Heasley, 1998) programs have been playing an important role in guiding mine operators in designing pillars to ensure the global stability of a retreat panel."

Jan 1, 2010

By A. M. Richardson

The significance of a massive sandstone unit in the immediate roof to longwall support weighting is well known. If the unit lies in the main roof above the zone of caving, its influence becomes more difficult to calculate using traditional methods. Much of the reserves at Cyprus Plateau's new, multi-seam Willow Creek Mine are located in the A Seam. The massive Kenilworth Sandstone is typically situated 21.3 m (70 ft) above the A Seam in the main roof and is on average 14.6-m (48-ft) thick, ranging to 29.0-m (95-ft) thick. This paper describes the application of distinct-element modeling to determination of the appropriate yield capacity for supports at Willow Creek. The modeling was determined to be useful for understanding support loading mechanisms and as an aid to engineering judgment in selecting supports.

Jan 1, 1996

By Rebecca Hardy

The escalating demand for coal, in addition to the steady depletion of reserves, has produced increasingly difficult mining conditions for coal mining companies within the United States, resulting in mining above or below previously mined areas. The safe and productive extraction of coal in a multiple seam environment requires specific design technology for effective mine planning. Presently, one of the most useful design approaches for multiple-seam feasibility analysis is using numerical modeling techniques. Therefore, numerical modeling programs LaModel 2.1 and Lam2D were used to determine the feasibility of mining the Herrin (No. 6) coal seam over an existing room-and-pillar mine in the Springfield (No. 5) coal seam in the Illinois Basin.

Jan 1, 2006

By Paul N. Freeman

This paper describes the in-situ performance of two IFS powered support installations at Betws and Penallta Collieries in the South Wales Coalfield, United Kingdom. Intensive monitoring of all powered support functions, strata movement, support/strata interaction and coal seam disturbance permitted an extensive evaluation of powered support performance for all periods of the mining cycle. The influence of support design, support rating, face design, proximate strata and scam section upon support and operating performance are discussed. In-situ performance is compared to design specification and to the requirements of Production Instruction 1982/6. Aspects which show significant variation are highlighted. Particular attention is drawn to the precise analysis of support/strata interaction in the form of canopy and base loading profiles. This illustrates the influence of support rating and configuration in determining the interaction of the canopy and base with the proximate strata. Extensometric monitoring of the coalface highlights the potential zones of disturbance within the seam which allied with support position monitoring provides an accurate basis for theoretical considerations of support loading. Conclusions are drawn, the application of which may enhance the performance and operation of IFS supports in thin to medium sections.

Jan 1, 1992

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 Jamal Rostami, Asok Ray, Samer S. Saab Jr., Wenpeng Liu

Ground instability, such as roof or rib failures, is one of the most serious and frequent safety hazards that occur in underground mining, tunneling, and underground construction. The ground-related parameters and features of interest, in assessing roof or rib failures, are location, frequency, and orientation of the joints, voids, as well as rock-strength. These parameters are the main components of rock mass characterization that offers effective strategies for ground support, which, in turn, allow one to mitigate the risks related to ground instability. The main objective of this study is to determine the location of joints and classify rock-strengths by analyzing the drilling data recorded from an instrumented roof bolter while drilling for rock bolt installation during the operational cycle. For this purpose, computer programs based on updated pattern recognition algorithms were developed for joint-detection and classification of rock types to offer an estimated strength. This paper briefly introduces ongoing research on joint detection, especially for joints with an aperture less than 0.125in (3.175mm), by employing an instrumented roof bolter in controlled environments. To improve the capability and precision of joint detection programs in detecting the joints from the drilling data and reducing the number of false alarms, many laboratory tests with various simulated joints and rock-strengths were carried out at a J.H. Fletcher & Co. facility. This paper reviews testing procedures, data analysis, updated algorithms used for joint detection, and discusses the latest round of testing in samples with simulated joints at various angles along the borehole.

Jan 1, 2017

By Christopher Mark

A coal burst is defined as the sudden, violent ejection of coal or rock into a mine opening. Coal mines in the North Fork Valley (NFV) of Colorado?s Gunnison River have a long history of coal bursts in a wide variety of settings. These have included longwall and room-and-pillar, development and retreat, and single- and multiple-seam mining. In contrast to other coalfields, where bursts are typically associated with strong, massive sandstone and extremely high stress, many bursts in the NFV have occurred beneath shale roof and some distance from the most highly stressed locations. The goal of this paper is to attempt a systematic study of the entire burst history in the NFV, in order to gain insight into their characteristics and causes. The primary sources of information are the reports of investigations conducted by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) Roof Control Division over the past 15 years. This paper provides details on the geologic mapping conducted as part of these investigations, as well as a regional plot of burst locations using a Geographic Information System. The mapping indicates that many of the NFV bursts have been associated with structural features, including low-angled faults and well-defined zones of high-density jointing that exhibit little or no displacement. Some of these features appear to extend for several miles, impacting more than one mine.

Jan 1, 2012

By Clifford McCartney

The PropsetterTM System has been designed and developed to cost effectively solve problems experienced with conventional underground supports used in tailgates, headgates, bleeder entries and as supplemental supports. The PropsetterTM System utilizes the strength and orthotropic properties of timber to achieve initial stiffness and controlled yield as the roof and floor converge. Utilizing a prestressing system developed in South Africa by our parent company, the PropsetterTM prestresses/preloads the roof and floor on installation. The PropsetterTM System consists of five integrated elements which are easily assembled to achieve the objectives of ? Improved support. ? Improved safety, ? Reduced cost, ? Reduced material handling, ? Improved installation productivity, and ? Improved ventilation.

Jan 1, 1995

By Christopher Mark

Coal bursts are typically associated with highly stressed coal. Most bursts occur during retreat mining (longwall mining or pillar recovery) in highly stressed locations like the tailgate corner of the longwall panel. Others are associated with multiple seam interactions. However, a small but significant percentage of coal bursts have occurred during development or in outby locations unaffected by active mining. Most development bursts have been relatively small, but some have been highly destructive. No theory of coal bursts can be complete if it does not account for this type of event. This paper focusses on the development mining coal burst experience in the US, putting it into the context of the entire US coal burst database. The first documented development coal burst occurred almost exactly 100 years ago during slope drivage at the Sunnyside Mine in Utah. Sunnyside subsequently had a long history of bursts, mainly during retreat mining but also during development. Several Colorado mines have also experienced multiple development bursts. Some, but by no means all, of the development bursts in these western US coalfields have been associated with faults. In the Central Appalachian coalfields, most development bursts have occurred in multiple seam situations. In some of these cases, however, there was no retreat mining in either seam. The paper closes with some lessons from this history, with implications for preventing such events in the future.

Jan 1, 2017

By Kewal K. Kohli, Stefanie Self

"Three cases of surface subsidence investigated over abandoned coal mines after flooding in one case and dcwatering in two cases are presented in this paper. Mining was conducted by the room and- pillar method at all the mines leaving stable pillars. This paper will discuss the background chain of events and the likely causes of the pillar failure resulting in surface subsidence.CASE NO.1BackgroundThe Pittsburgh scam was mined in 1960 by the room-and- pillar method, leaving pillars (Figure I) through Mine A. located in Monongalia County. West Virginia.The mining height in U1is area was 1.83 m (6 ft) with an average mining depth of 140 m (460 ft). The mining recovery was 62% and the safety factor of the pillars was calculated at 1.15 using the Bieniawski ( 1984) fom1ula. For stable pillar design. a 1.5 safety factor is recommended. A 1.15 safety factor is considered marginal. Pumping continued after the mine was shut down in 1960 to prevent water seeping into an adjoining mine owned by the same company. The pumping ceased on December 12. 2003, and the mine was allowed to flood. The water level rose about 17 m (55 ft) by August 3 1, 2004, based on observations in a nearby borehole. On September 3, 2004 surface subsidence occurred above this area causing damage 10 a residence (Figure 2).Summary of InvestigationThe floor of the Pittsburgh coal scam played a strong role in the pillar failure. In this area, the immediate floor of the Pittsburgh seam consists of about two feet of fireclay. Extensive damage to the surface house was an indication that a major collapse below the surface had occurred. The pillars supporting the overlying strata were evaluated to find the cause of their failure. The pillars in the Pittsburgh seam (sec Figure I) had a marginal safety factor of 1.15 before flooding and were stable for 26 years. Once the mine was flooded the water level in the Pittsburgh seam rose by 17 m (55 ft). Shortly thereafter the fireclay in the floor weakened, resulting in several pillars punching into the floor unevenly making the immediate roof unstable. The overburden strata supported by these pillars also subsided do"" n into the mine, causing damage to several house on the surface."

Jan 1, 2010

By D. S. Choi

This paper describes an improved source location technique for microseismic events related to coal mining. A system of non- linear distance equations is solved with the use of the Newton-Raphson method. This computational method is- advantageous when the number of geophones is limited. In addition, this paper includes the results of the analysis of data from several instruments which characterize both mine seismicity and environmental noise such as vehicle traffic. Analysis of the mine seismicity has contributed to a better understanding of caving above a longwall gob and of what constitutes stable ground conditions.

Jan 1, 1990

By Xinxian Zhai

Jining No. 3 Coal Mine, a subsidiary of Yanzhou Coal Company Limited. China, is a super-large modern mine. The coal mine is not only the first one constructed with five-million tons of designed production capacity in China, but also a modern underground coal mine with coal transportation systems by trains and ships, and with a power plant. Based on the hard roof conditions of the sublevel caving coal face in the fault-affected zone, the authors designed rebar and cable bolts for supporting the tailgate that is separated from the gob by a narrow pillar. With extensometers and borescope, strata behavior was systematically studied during tailgate development: (1). Roof convergence is much smaller as well as roof strata separation between inside and outside the anchored zone. (2). The affected zone during tailgate development is approximately 50 m. (3). Because of serious floor heave and obvious rib convergence, the tailgate finally turned into a reversed-trapezoid from the original rectangular shape. (4). There being many joints and fractures in the pillar, coal is crushed from the elastic bedded structure into loose blocky materials. But the tailgate met the service requirements during longwall retreat mining, and demonstrated that the method of roof support was a success. Since then, roof bolting has been widely used for the tailgate of longwall panels at Jining No. 3 Coal Mine. Keywords: coal mine; bolt supporting; tailgate; convergence of surrounding rock; ground control; strata behaviors.

Jan 1, 2007

By Gregory E. Smith

"Tensionable headed roof bolt systems are common in the U.S. mining industry. In the last 15 years or so, they have made a comeback as a hybrid system where a mechanical anchor is used in conjunction with resin. When such a system is used, it is common to use a spherical washer to comply with the requirements of 30 CFR Part 75.204(f)(8). This standard requires an angle-compensating device be used in installations where the bearing plate is offset from the roof bolt axis by an angle greater than five degrees. This paper evaluates system performance of four different traditional angle-compensating device/plate combinations including a new patented extruded plate/extruded washer system that improves overall load capacity and stretch.INTRODUCTIONA large western U.S. underground coal mine was using a fully grouted headed rebar system as their primary support. They had developed their component specifications over many years of working with suppliers to improve and optimize these components to integrate well as a system. As shown in Figure 1, the components included a patented 7 /8"" -diameter Grade 60 headed rebar bolt with a flange capable of full bar load (Walker, 2009) and a patented 8 in x 8 in Grade 3 extruded hole bearing plate manufactured by DieMatic Corporation.The mine decided to pursue a fully grouted tensionable system using a mechanical anchor as the tensioning device. Their primary goal was to eliminate the need for the roof bolt operator to secure (hold) the bolt during resin set time. An additional benefit was the increased initial tension on the bolt. To comply with the requirements of 30 CFR Part 75.204(f)(8), regarding tensioned roof bolts, they were required to include an angle-compensating device because a share of the bolt population would be installed at angles greater than five degrees from the perpendicular to the bearing plate. Also, to improve cycle time and torque/tension consistency, the mine desired to have the washers and anchors assembled at the factory. This required the use of a bearing plate with a center hole large enough to accommodate the 1-3/8-in-diameter mechanical anchor to pass though it during assembly by the roof bolt operator. The mine wanted to continue to use an extruded hole bearing plate in the tensionable system, and EMS was asked to propose a plate and angle-compensating device."

Jan 1, 2016

By Shuangsuo Yang

Based on field observations and physical modeling of simulated materials, the dynamic equilibrium principle on the whole interaction process between the surrounding rocks and support of large deformation roadways in coal mines has been developed. It explains the methods of forming the bolted strata and its changing load capacity with deformation. It also points out the factors and conditions for forming the bolted strata as follows: (1) many entries in coal mines are subject to large deformation. During their service life, it goes through the following process, elastic > plastic > fiacture > broken > loosening, etc. During this dynamic process, the mechanisms of supporting structure are changing and therefore the interaction between support and rocks experiences a process of dynamic equilibrium. Furthermore, the required supporting force for stabilizing the surrounding rocks shows overall decreasing trend; (2) the bolted strata is a special supporting structure consisting of bolt, rock skin protection devices and rock strata within the bolted horizon. As deformation increases, the supporting structure of the broken strata within the bolted horizon experiences a process of periodic change, from equilibrium > not equilibrium > equilibrium. Corresponding to this change, the supporting capacity of the bolted strata also fluctuates and gradually decreases; (3) under the bolted strata, the stability of a large deformation roadway is dynamic and step-wise; and (4) the formation of bolted strata, especially bolted broken strata depends on the existence of compressive force. Supporting the bolted strata is not constrained by the quality of the surrounding rocks. It has broad range of application.

Jan 1, 2005

By William Blake

Mining induced rock bursts have been a severe operational hazard associated with the deep silver mines of the Coeur d'Alene mining district for over 30 years. Recent studies during the past fm years have led to a better understanding of the different types of rook bursts and their causative mechanisms. This has resulted in ground control measures that more effectively minimize burst occurrences as well as contain burst damage. Case histories of burst incidences and examples of control measures are presented.

Jan 1, 1987

By Michael Gauna, Christopher Mark

"Coal bursts involve the sudden, violent ejection of coal or rock into the mine workings. They are almost always accompanied by a loud noise, like an explosion, and ground vibration. Bursts are a particular hazard for miners because they typically occur without warning. Despite decades of research, the sources and mechanics of these events are not well understood, and therefore they are difficult to predict and control. Experience has shown, however, that certain geologic and mining factors are associated with an increased likelihood of a coal burst. A coal burst risk assessment consists of evaluating the degree to which these risk factors are present, and then identifying appropriate control measures to mitigate the hazard. This paper summarizes the U.S. and international experience with coal bursts, and describes the known risk factors in detail. It includes a framework that can be used to guide the risk assessment process.BACKGROUNDCoal bursts involve the sudden, violent ejection of coal or rock into the mine workings. They are almost always accompanied by a loud noise, like an explosion, and ground vibration. Bursts are a particular hazard for miners because they typically occur without warning. During the years 2012-2014, serious coal bursts occurred at three different U.S. room and pillar mines. These events resulted in three fatalities and two permanently disabling injuries (MSHA, 2014; MSHA, 2013). In all three instances, the events occurred during pillar recovery at depths exceeding 1,000 feet (300 m). None of these three mines had previously reported a burst to MSHA. Coal bursts also occurred at three longwall mines during this same time period.Despite decades of research, the sources and mechanics of bursts are not well understood, and therefore these events are difficult to predict and control. Experience has shown, however, that certain risk factors are associated with an increased likelihood of a coal burst. A coal burst risk assessment consists of evaluating the degree to which these risk factors are present. In addition, some control techniques are effective in reducing the likelihood of an event or protecting miners from their effects."

Jan 1, 2015

By M. Karmis

Underground mining will disturb the natural equilibrium of the rock mass, causing significant stress redistributions in the vicinity of the excavation with corresponding horizontal and vertical displacements. Subsidence of the ground occurs when these displacements propagate from the mine opening, through the overlying strata, to the surface. Such ground movements may take either of two general forms: a sudden and sometimes violent collapse, or a more gradual and progressive ground movement. The former, characterized by localized failure of roof or pillar in old, shallow room and pillar workings, is rather unpredictable and difficult to analyze. As a result, most control measures are directed toward the latter type of movement, which is associated with the fracture and flow of the strata overlying longwall and high-extraction room and pillar systems, resulting in horizontal and vertical strains in the affected area. Such ground movements can often cause considerable surface disturbances ranging from simple land settlement to severe structural damage. Due to the increasing incidence of this phenomenon in more populated areas and the rising awareness of the problem, it has become necessary to establish a balance between the development of mineral resources and the protection of the environment and society. This paper presents a summary of the major findings derived from a substantial research effort on mining subsidence carried out, during the past few years, in the southern Appalachian coalfield. The research program encompassed the following major tasks: identification of the most significant factor influencing ground movements above mined openings, collection of subsidence case studies for the southern Appalachian coalfield, development of subsidence and strain prediction techniques for that region and initiation of a subsidence monitoring program in southwestern Virginia.

Jan 1, 1984