Search Documents

By George K. Martin

This paper deals primarily with roof bolting in Kentucky coal mines from January 1, 1949, through December 31, 1954, a six year period. The Consolidation Coal Co? (Ky.), a division of the Pittsburgh Consolidation Coal Co., began systemmatic roof bolting in November 1948 in Mine #204, Elkhorn #3 Seam, at Jenkins, Kentucky, After the efficiency of roof bolting had been proven by the Consolidation Coal Co., this procedure was adopted by other companies throughout the state. In December 1954, approximately 46.4 percent of Kentucky's total production of coal from underground mines was obtained from roof-bolted areas. Statistics in this report will show the progress made in roof bolting during the six years, in addition to the roof bolting being done as of December 31, 1955. Significant progress has been made in the coal mines of Kentucky in reducing the roof-fall fatality, rates, during the past several years by adopting systemmatic roof bolting. The ground work by the Consolidation Coal Co, (Ky.) in cooperation with the Federal Bureau of Mines was based upon the previous experience of the St. Joseph Lead. Cc, in its Southeastern Missouri Mines and The Tennessee Coal and Iron Division of the United States Steel Corporation. The author gratefully acknowledges the cooperation and assistance given by officials of the various mining firms using roof bolts, the Kentucky Department of Mines and Minerals, and the Federal Bureau of Mines in furnishing photographs and information.

Jan 1, 1958

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 Balks AI

Systematic roof bolting in Australian coal mines began at Elrington Colliery in 19)49. Since that time the proportion of the roof supported by roof bolts has increased until, in 1970, 1.5 million were installed in Australian coal mines. This rapid growth of roof bolting has meant that the range and variety of roof bolting machines has altered also. The-number of machines now available both to bore holes and place roof bolts has increased. to the point where both rotary and per- cussive machines are used extensively. Generally, until the last four years, roof bolting machinery in Australia followed the practices in vogue in the United States. However, in -recent time the particular problems of Australian coal mining have necessitated the development of equipment primarily suitable to Australian conditions.

Jan 1, 1971

By Syd S. Peng

According to accident statistics (l, 2), roof fall accidents occur quite frequently at the intersections of underground? openings and account for up to 30% of the roof fall fatalities. But this figure will certainly go up considerably if roof falls not associated with any fatal accident are included in the analysis. Unfortunately, nonfatal roof falls are seldom documented. In the underground coal mines, there are two types of entry intersections. One is the three-way (V type) and the other is the four-way (T type) intersections. A three-way intersection occurs whenever the mainline track haulageway turns at an angle into a section haulageway. The four-way intersections by far the most common type in the U.S. under-ground coal mines are formed by the intersections of two entries which are oriented perpendicular to each other or by the intersections of entries and crosscuts. However, crosscuts are frequently driven at an angle to the entry to facilitate machine movements. The four-way intersections formed by this method of crosscut development are angled. At the intersection of two underground openings, the diagonal roof span is wider than the width of each individual opening. This is one of the major reasons why roof falls occur more likely at the intersections than in the entry between pillars. Consequently, special intersection support plans are usually employed (Figs. 1 and 2) for intersections. The most popular practices are to decrease roof bolt spacing 1 ft. less than or to increase roof bolt length 1 to 2 ft. longer than those employed in the entry between pillars (3). The increase in bolt length or decrease in bolt spacing can be applied to all of the bolts in the intersection or employed only for the strategically located bolts depending on the individual mine practices. These rather generalized practices seems to be adequate for some areas but in many cases inadequate for others. Occasionally, the neighboring two lines of chain pillars are staggered such that the crosscuts in one row of chain pillars face the centers of the chain pillars in the neigh-boring rows. This layout forms T-type three-way intersections which are also inadequate for most weak roofs (3, 4). A study was therefore initiated to develop special techniques for intersection supports. The first phase of the study was the analysis of the stress fields for the underground entry intersections. A three-dimensional stress analysis was necessary for this purpose. Unfortunately, the three-dimensional problems of complicated boundary conditions are beyond the existing analytical methods. The three-dimensional finite element method (FEM) was therefore employed in this study. In the analysis, square pillars of 40 feet wide and an entry height of 8 feet were assumed while entry widths varied at 14, 20 and 26 feet. This model was selected to simulate the mine where roof falls data were collected. The second phase of the study was the collection of field data. The sizes of the roof falls including heights, lengths and widths were collected and analyzed. In the third phase study, the results of the first and second phases were compared and discussed. The analysis of field data revealed an arching zone within which roof falls occurred. The arching zone above an entry obtained empirically was compared with the calculated stress contours. Assuming that the bolts must be anchored in the rock strata outside the arching zone, the preferable systems of bolting were proposed. Also the amount of pretension required to inhibit sliding between layers was discussed.

Jan 1, 1978

Present roof bolting practices in the collieries of Australian Iron and Steel Pty. Ltd. are outlined. Roof support has been improved since introducing roof bolts and it is hoped to increase the reliability of the bolts still further.Expansion-shell, and split and wedge roof bolts five to eight feet long are placed by "Atlas Falcon" and "Fletcher" roof bolters. Both anchorage and tightening have presented some problems.Good panel supervision is required if systematic roof bolting is to be properly co-ordinated with coal production without unnecessary delay to either. Successful roof bolting can only be the product of conscientious men and supervisors who are all convinced of its value. A rigid operational code should be established early and maintained.INTRODUCTIONRoof bolting is a method of support which is permanent and reduces or eliminates the need for other support; The method was pioneered in America and was first experimentally investigated in Australian collieries at Elrington in 1949 (McKensey, 1953). Pneumatic installation methods were employed. Subsequently, a method of using standard hand-held electric coal drills was developed at John Darling Colliery (Horseman, 1954). Pneumatic roof bolting equipment was first operated in the collieries of Australian Ironand Steel Pty. Ltd (A.I. &. S.) in 1951. Since then various hydraulically operated mobile machines have been installed in Australian collieries and these, together with improved pneumatic equipment, form the two present basic methods of placing ,roof bolts. Roof bolt anchorage is achieved by either split and wedge or expansion-shell bolts.The two broad types of roof bolting are 1. consolidation of strata, and 2. suspension support.

Jan 1, 1961

By Donald MacFadgen

Since 1950, a total of 164 miles of levels and rooms have been roof-bolted in the collieries of the Dominion Coal Company. Roof bolting is an efficient and economic method of sup-port where heavy timber sets or steel booms are necessary for temporary roof support, or where conventional methods of support interfere with the passage of mechanical mining equipment. This paper discusses present roof bolting practices and special bolting applications. THE practice of roof bolting in be collieries of the Dominion Coal Company dates from 1950, when preliminary studies and experiments were carried out in a mechanized room and pillar section of Dominion No. 20 Colliery. These studies were made in close liaison with members of the United States Bureau of Mines who were conducting similar studies. Following the successful application of roof bolting in No. 20 Colliery, this method of roof support was introduced into other collieries

Jan 1, 1963

By Syd S. Peng

Popular concepts of resin and conventional roof bolting The conventional roof bolt with shell anchor was first introduced for coal mine entry support in the late 1940s. The general concept of a reinforcement mechanism for this type of bolt is suspension. This means the shell anchor must be anchored well inside a competent rock stratum (such as sandstone, limestone or firm shale) so the bolt suspends the underlying weaker strata. This concept has and will continue to dominate the use of conventional roof bolts. Under this concept, the conventional roof bolt is not suitable for the stratigraphic sequences in which a strong, firm stratum is not available within the economic anchorage horizons.

Jan 1, 1994

By Jack Parker, Bert Caverson

More than 6000 resin-anchored bolts have been installed at the White Pine mine, and their performance has proven excellent in both pull tests and "beam" building. With its improved reliability, resin anchorage will permit a more scientific approach to the design of roof bolting systems, and this should ultimately result in both better support and reduced costs. The White Pine mine lies five miles south of Lake Superior in Ontonagon County. Mich. The orebody occurs in gently dipping upper Keweenawan sediments midway between the Porcupine Mountains and the Bergland Hills, both of which are ranges of steeply dipping Keweenawan extrusives and intrusives.

Jan 1, 1971

By B Vorster, T Medhurst, A Huey

Roof conditions at Oaky North Mine can be prone to stress related damage and/or time dependent degradation. The ability to identify these areas prior to mining has proved challenging using traditional methods. To help alleviate this situation, a study was initiated to investigate methods for roof characterisation using geophysical logs. This involved the use of neutron log data to provide an indirect measure of the proportion of carbonaceous/micaceous laminae present in the immediate roof strata. Detailed analysis of the shale–porosity inter-relationships arising from this analysis provided a means to estimate the proportion of laminations for a given roof interval. This paper outlines the process and how it was used to improve the current GSR modelling and hazard mapping process.

Nov 29, 2022

By S. L. Bessinger

Introduction Extensive testing in the past ten years has shown that where a uniform natural gamma background is present in the strata bordering a seam, the thickness of the boundary coal left in place after mining can be determined by measuring the attenuation of that radiation (Nelson and Bessinger, 1989). Measurements made by the authors in underground mines in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Illinois and Kentucky and by others in Wyoming and New Mexico have shown the presence of such a gamma background (Nelson. 1989). Natural gamma coal-thickness sensors of several configurations have been tested in mines owned and operated by the Consolidation Coal Company (Consol) in Pennsylvania and West Virginia (Nelson and Bessinger, 1988). This paper describes the installation of a natural gamma coal-thickness sensor on an operating continuous miner. Previous tests had shown that the NGB-1000 coal-thickness sensor manufactured by American Mining Electronics, Inc., of Huntsville. AL, is an accurate, mine-worthy instrument. This large gamma detector consists of a sensing head and a control panel. The sensing head contains thallium-doped, sodium iodide scintillating crystal, which is coupled to a photomultiplier tube. The control panel contains the electronic components required for calibration, count conversion and display to the operator. Methods Conditions at a Consol mine in northern West Virginia require that 10 to 15 cm (4 to 6 in.) of coal be left at the roof boundary of continuous miner development sections. This roof coal is required because the shale of the immediate roof is friable and unstable. In the past, operators have used a dirt band that is usually visible near the top of the seam as a guide in maintaining the proper cutting horizon. However, this is not always reliable. Earlier observation showed that the actual thickness of the coal left on the roof varied widely; further, it was noted that occasional, accidental excursions into the immediate roof required supplementary roof control measures, such as installation of planks or center bolts. Thus, it was concluded that operators needed a better source of guidance for control of the cutting horizon, and a roof-coal thickness sensor was scheduled for installation. The NGB-1000 sensor was installed on a Joy 12CM10 continuous miner in June 1988. The sensing head was mounted on the cutter boom of the miner, and the control panel was mounted in the operator's cab. Power for the sensor was initially derived from an intrinsically safe battery power supply. Initial measurements with the sensor showed that the calibration was the same as that used in earlier tests at two other mines, indicating the uniformity of the natural gamma background above the Pittsburgh seam. Operating personnel were initially skeptical of the instrument's accuracy, and were hesitant to use its readings as a guide in maintaining a proper cutting horizon. Because gamma attenuation, the instrument's operating principle, is somewhat abstract, attempts to demonstrate the instrument's accuracy by explaining that principle were generally ineffective. It was found, however, that an operator could usually be convinced of the usefulness of the instrument by placing a large piece of coal of fairly uniform thickness over the instrument's sensing head and allowing the operator to see that the instrument reading increased by an amount very near his estimate of the thickness of the piece. The mine was provided with seven battery power supplies and a charging station. The charging station was kept in the lampman's office, and the mechanic on each shift was instructed that he was responsible for two battery power supplies each day: a freshly charged one to be taken in at the beginning of his shift and a depleted one to be brought out at the end. This system worked well for a few weeks, but eventually some battery power supplies were left in use so long that their batteries were discharged too deeply to allow recharging. In addition, transport and recharging of the batteries represented an additional task for the mechanics, who were already very busy. Consequently, a request was filed with MSHA to allow the sensor to be powered through intrinsic safety barriers by an electronic power supply connected to machine power. The permit was granted, and the sensor was connected to machine power. After the sensor was connected to machine power, the only operating problem experienced was occasional failure of cables. A supply of the required cables was made and delivered to the mine so damaged cables could be quickly replaced. Much of the cable damage could be eliminated by slight modifications to the miner during a rebuild, so that cables could be installed in more protected locations. After the sensor had been in operation for about two months, a survey was made to determine its effect on continuous miner operations. In previous research, coal thickness measurements made in 88 locations by the natural gamma method were compared to measurements made in the same locations by observing drill cuttings and by inspections of drill holes with a borescope. That research showed that the gamma method is at least as accurate as the other two methods (Nelson and Bessinger, 1989) and is also much easier to use. The object of the survey described here was not to assess the accuracy of the natural gamma measurements. but rather to determine the effectiveness of the sensor output as a guide for the operator in maintaining control of the cutting horizon. Thus a smaller, hand-held gamma detector

Jan 1, 1992

Extensive testing in the past ten years has shown that where a uniform natural gamma background is present in the strata bordering the seam, the thickness of the boundary coal left in place after mining can be determined by measuring the attenuation of that radiation (Nelson and Bessinger, 1989). Measurements made by the authors in underground mines in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Illinois, and Kentucky, and by others in Wyoming and New Mexico, have shown the presence of such a gamma background (Nelson, 1989). Natural gamma coal thickness sensors of several configurations have been tested in mines owned and operated by the Consolidation Coal Company in Pennsylvania and west Virginia (Nelson and Bessinger, 1988).

Jan 1, 1990

By Frank L. Gaddy

Falls of roof account for over 50% of the fatalities that occur in coal mines in the U.S. Thus, roof control is one of the more important phases of underground mining. In reality, the control of roof influences the system of mining and is a major determinant of the width and spacing of working places, operations at the mining face, ventilation control, and surface subsidence. Frequently, the control of roof is the largest single cost item. Roof control is a never-ending task, not only at the working face and throughout sections where men are working, but along haulways and airways that must be maintained for the life of the mine. This is because roof, even the best of roof, slowly deteriorates, so it must be frequently examined, with corrective support applied when needed. As coal is excavated, stresses are set up in the roof became the previous equilibrium is upset, resulting in pressures that cause fractures and slight, movements that are, frequently, hard to detect. Unless the immediate roof, in the excavated area, is given support by artificial means, it might fall or there might be a succession of falls, varying from a thin scale to several feet, depending on the nature of the top. Exceptions to this are those rare mines, or sections of mines, with hard, strong, nonweathering roof that requires no support. GENERAL CLASSIFICATION OF ROOF There are two broad types of roof as far as support is concerned, the immediate roof above the coal and the main roof. Artificial support for mining purposes is only concerned with the immediate roof as nothing except large blocks of solid coal, or massive concrete, will support the main roof. The immediate roof is generally a few feet thick but can vary from inches to 20 ft or more. There are examples of where there is no immediate roof as the massive main roof lies directly on the coal bed, but this is rare. Impossibility of supporting the main roof and all of the cover

Jan 1, 1973

By Frank L. Gaddy

Falls of roof account for over 50% of the fatalities that occur in coal mines in the US. Thus, roof control is one of the more important phases of underground mining. In reality, the control of roof influences the system of mining and is a major determinant of the width and spacing of working places, operations at the mining face, ventilation control, and surface subsidence. Frequently, the control of roof is the largest single cost item. Roof control is a never-ending task, not only at the working face and throughout sections where men are working, but along haulways and air- ways that must be maintained for the life of the mine. This is because roof, even the best of roof, slowly deteriorates, so it must be frequently examined, with corrective support applied when needed. As coal is excavated, stresses are set up in the roof because the previous equilibrium is upset, resulting in pressures that cause fractures and slight movements that are frequently hard to detect. Unless the immediate roof, in the excavated area, is given support by artificial means, it might fall or there might be a succession of falls, varying from a thin scale to several feet, depending on the nature of the top. Exceptions to this are those rare mines, or sections of mines, with hard, strong, nonweathering roof that requires no support.

Jan 1, 1981

By Frank L. Gaddy

Falls of roof account for over 50% of the fatalities that occur in coal mines in the US. Thus, roof control is one of the more important phases of underground mining. In reality, the control of roof influences the system of mining and is a major determinant of the width and spacing of working places, operations at the mining face, ventilation control, and surface subsidence. Frequently, the control of roof is the largest single cost item. Roof control is a never-ending task, not only at the working face and throughout sections where men are working, but along haulways and air- ways that must be maintained for the life of the mine. This is because roof, even the best of roof, slowly deteriorates, so it must be frequently examined, with corrective support applied when needed. As coal is excavated, stresses are set up in the roof because the previous equilibrium is upset, resulting in pressures that cause fractures and slight movements that are frequently hard to detect. Unless the immediate roof, in the excavated area, is given support by artificial means, it might fall or there might be a succession of falls, varying from a thin scale to several feet, depending on the nature of the top. Exceptions to this are those rare mines, or sections of mines, with hard, strong, nonweathering roof that requires no support. GENERAL CLASSIFICATION OF ROOF There are two broad types of roof as far as support is concerned: the immediate roof above the coal and the main roof. Artificial support for mining purposes is only concerned with the immediate roof as nothing except large blocks of solid coal, or massive concrete, will support the main roof. The immediate roof is generally a few feet thick but can vary from inches to 6.1 m (20 ft) or more. There are examples of where there is no immediate roof as the massive main roof lies directly on the coal

Jan 1, 1981

By Dawes S

Efficient roof control in colliery operation is a factor that must be maintained for· the maximum reQovery and economic extraction of the mineral. It must be carefully considered in each of the following stages in the life of a mine.1. The primary development and the first working of the mine.2. The maintenance of access roads, intake and return airways.3. The extraction of pillars.FACTORS IN ROOF CONTROLThe main objects of roof control are: The support of the roof in working places, the relief of roof pressure from the workings during pillar extraction, and in some instances the prevention of subsidence of the surface.The support of the roof during development operations and first working, and the subsequent maintenance of these is influenced by:-1. The depth of the seam below the surface.2. The thickness of the seam.3. The dip of the seam.4. The condition of the roof and floor.5. The method of extraction-mechanical or by hand.6. The method of. working-Iongwall or bord and pillar.7. The availability of material.As a general rule, the pressure exerted by the superincumbent strata may be taken as one pound per square inch for each foot of cover, and the crushing strength of coal as 1,500 to 2,000 lb. per square inch; this, of course, varies, but from these figures it may be assumed that seams below 2,000ft. in depth are liable to crush. If any part of the seam is removed, added weight is thrown onto the remaining coal. It is therefpre essential that for effective working this extra weight must be removed or supported as soon as possible.The outstanding principle in the support of mining excavations is to ensure that the supports are set as soon as possible after the natural support has been removed.Where a system of bord and pillar is applied, the early setting of supports reduces the extent to which the roof bends, thereby reducing the liability to ·tension fractures at the centre of the road.

Jan 1, 1947

By Frank L. Gaddy

Falls of roof account for over 50% of the fatalities that occur in coal mines in the US. Thus, roof control is one of the more important phases of underground mining. In reality, the control of roof influences the system of mining and is a major determinant of the width and spacing of working places, operations at the mining face, ventilation control, and surface subsidence. Frequently, the control of roof is the largest single cost item. Roof control is a never-ending task, not only at the working face and throughout sections where men are working, but along haulways and air- ways that must be maintained for the life of the mine. This is because roof, even the hest of roof, slowly deteriorates, so it must be frequently examined, with corrective support applied when needed. As coal is excavated, stresses are set up in the roof because the previous equilibrium is upset, resulting in pressures that cause fractures and slight movements that are frequently hard to detect. Unless the immediate roof, in the excavated area, is given support by artificial means, it might fall or there might be a succession of falls, varying from a thin scale to several feet, depending on the nature of the top. Exceptions to this are those rare mines, or sections of mines, with hard, strong, nonweathering roof that requires no support. GENERAL CLASSIFICATION OF ROOF There are two broad types of roof as far as support is concerned: the immediate roof above the coal and the main roof. Artificial support for mining purposes is only concerned with the immediate roof as nothing except large blocks of solid coal, or massive concrete, will support the main roof. The immediate roof is generally a few feet thick but call vary from inches to 6.1 m (20 ft) or more. There are examples of where there is no imrncdiate roof as the massive main roof lies directly on the coal

Jan 1, 1981

By Mike Watts

Since the first longwall panel development started in the new mining, (Southern) area, a number of roof falls have occurred in L1 and L2 gate-entries. The longwall was delayed for a total of two months due to roof falls in the gate-entries. To prevent roof falls in future gate-entries, an extensive ground control analysis has been conducted which incorporated regional horizontal stress and panel orientation, tectonic stress, roof strata, surface stream valleys, etc. Results of the analysis indicate that a combination of these factors caused the roof falls. Therefore, a Roof Instability Rating (RIR) system was constructed to predict the roof condition and identify areas where supplemental support should be implemented. The L3 gate-entries, supported by the prediction using the RIR system, have not experienced any roof problems.

Jan 1, 2000

By Yundong Ma

In this paper the dynamic process of rock deformation and failure in the roadways of the #9 coal seam, Wuhushan Coal Mine by was simulated using the software "Rock Failure Process Analysis System (REPA)" [I]. Based on the simulation results, this paper analyzes the failure process, characteristics and weighting of the overburden as the longwall retreat mining proceeds. The roadway's behavior including deformation characteristics, failure mechanisms, stress distribution in the surrounding rocks and the effects of various support systems on roadway stability were analyzed and studied. While simulating the rock failure process with REPA, the model stresses can be obtained through two approaches: (1) the stress is reflected by the grayscale of pictures in the model failure process and (2) the model stress can be obtained by muti-element information, which is one of the commands in RFPA system. Data files of stress can automatically be created, and curves of stress and displacement of each element can be displayed in each step of computation. Keywords: Rock Failure Process Analysis System (RFPA); roof control; roof to floor convergence; combined support

Jan 1, 2005

By Holger Witthaus

Various seam conditions had been examined during longwall production at RAG German hard coal mines. Based on the field data a prediction method was developed considering separation planes as influencing factors for roof falls at the face. The characteristics, orientation, and density of separation are important factors on the occurrence of roof falls. In addition to geological influences, the performance parameters and geometry of support must be considered and optimized for the prediction and prevention of roof falls in a longwall face. Based on detailed macro- and microscopic investigations of e coal seams considering various ranks of carbonization, the origin and characteristics of separation planes are determined and a strata-specific influence on roof fall is interpreted. It was assessed that the coal face fracturing and displacement caused by the stress depend on the floor and roof strata conditions due to activation of the existing separation planes. Field studies are shown giving an idea of influences by advance rates of the longwall face, support delay and hydraulic pressure to the roof control in longwall faces in depth of more than 3000 ft. The analysis includes the application of specific software developed for longwall roof fall prediction as a result of a European research project. The software allows a laminar graphic display of roof fall probability, which is used for recognition of risk areas and risk management.

Jan 1, 2009

By Holger Witthaus

Various seam conditions had been examined during longwall production at RAG German hard coal mines. Based on the field data a prediction method was developed considering separation planes as influencing factors for roof falls at the face. The characteristics, orientation, and density of separation are important factors on the occurrence of roof falls. In addition to geological influences, the performance parameters and geometry of support must be considered and optimized for the prediction and prevention of roof falls in a longwall face. Based on detailed macro- and microscopic investigations of e coal seams considering various ranks of carbonization, the origin and characteristics of separation planes are determined and a strata-specific influence on roof fall is interpreted. It was assessed that the coal face fracturing and displacement caused by the stress depend on the floor and roof strata conditions due to activation of the existing separation planes. Field studies are shown giving an idea of influences by advance rates of the longwall face, support delay and hydraulic pressure to the roof control in longwall faces in depth of more than 3000 ft. The analysis includes the application of specific software developed for longwall roof fall prediction as a result of a European research project. The software allows a laminar graphic display of roof fall probability, which is used for recognition of risk areas and risk management.

Jan 1, 2009