Search Documents

By S. D. Brady

In Monongalia County, West Virginia, the Pittsburgh and Sewickley beds lie west of the Monongahela River and underlie practically all the western end of the county. The average thickness of the Pittsburgh bed is 8 ft., where it is being mined at present, sometimes running up to 9 ft. The Sewickley bed is 4½ to 6 ft. thick and lies 90 to 100 ft. above the Pittsburgh bed. As the Pittsburgh bed had a known value, a large part of it was bought up without consideration of the Sewickley bed. When the Monongahela Railway was built up the west side of the Monongahela River, other interests bought up the Sewickley bed, as it was found to be equal in quality to the Pittsburgh, with slight local exceptions. The two beds, therefore, were owned by different people, and naturally each owner opened his mine and ran it without regard to the working of the other bed. Consequently, considerable portions of the upper bed were seriously affected for economical mining, especially on Scotts Run. In recent years there has been a tendency, influenced by the decision of the West Virginia Supreme Court, on the part of the operators in Monongalia County to try to coordinate their projections in the layout of their mines. A typical geologic section, according to the report of the West Virginia State Geological Survey on Monongalia County, agrees with Fig. 1. It is apparent that the rock above the Sewickley bed and between the Sewickley and Pittsburgh beds is of a rather friable ~lature, therefore it is easily broken in pillaring. About the only difference between this section and the geologic section in the Lowsville district is that in the latter district the rock between the coals is a denser sandstone and contains little shale and limestone and no evidence of Redstone coal. It is a laminated sandstone, and although it makes a harder mass, it is easily broken. While working in the Lowsville district, the author had an opportunity to examine a neighboring mine in the Sewickley bed, which was over a section being pillared in the Pittsburgh bed. The two mines belong to dif-

Jan 1, 1931

By Siavash Zamiran, Abdolreza Osouli

"One of the most concerns of room and pillar mining system is subsidence of the ground surface due to coal mining particularly in room and pillar mines. Subsidence of ground surface is a result of floor, pillar, or roof failure of the mine. At the same, due to many difficulties associated with surface disposal facilities of coal refuse, some mining companies are trying to use underground space as a disposal storage place. In this study, stability and subsidence analyses of an underground coal mine located in the Illinois Basin are conducted. This room and pillar mine was abandoned and later on was used as a storage place to accommodate the coal fine refuse with slurry backfilling method. The geological stratigrophy and geomechanical properties of the mine floor and roof were collected. Floor and pillar stability analyses were conducted for areas with various extraction ratios. The stability of the mine was evaluated both prior and after slurry backfilling. The floor and pillar stability analyses results of the mine due to moisture exposure after slurry backfilling are discussed. The subsidence potential due to mine failure is also evaluated.INTRODUCTIONA typical lithology of coal seams in the Illinois Basin consists of weak underclay stratum. The immediate weak underclay causes frequent floor instability problems in Illinois underground coal mines. There are two different stages in assessing floor stability of the mines where slurry backfilling is planned. The first stage is during the mining operation when weak underclay layer squeezes under pillar stress and results in punching or bearing capacity failure. The second stage is after slurry backfilling. During this stage, the slurry material soaks non-durable floor layers and causes strength reduction in floor material. Pillar stability conditions should also be taken into account during both the operational period and after the slurry backfilling."

Jan 1, 2015

By Kennerley P

A significant part of the reserves of the Southern Coalfield lie beneath major water storages and their impounding dam structures. One of the functions of the NSW Government's Dams Safety Committee is to specify the particular mine layouts which can be used beneath the stored waters according to certain guidelines. A study was made of examples of the two different methods of extraction used under the stored waters as proposed by the mining company according to the guidelines and approved by the Dams Safety Committee. Using both pillar monitoring and mathematical modelling approaches it was shown that the recovery of coal from these layouts could be improved while still ensuring the long term stability of both the underground support pillars and the body of the strata. The integrity of the water storages and their impounding structures would therefore not be Affected.

Jan 1, 1986

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

9.1 INTRODUCTION There are approximately 70,000 abandoned coal mines nation¬wide, which is about 35 times the number of underground coal mines presently operating. The US Bureau of Mines estimates that there are over 8 million acres of undermined land due to the extraction of coal, metals, and nonmetals. Subsidence has affected more than 2 million acres, and more than 99% of the subsidence is related to underground coal mining. There is reason to believe that some of the remaining 6 million acres of the undermined land have a high potential to subside. The expansion of housing, highways, commercial structures, and other facilities has required the use of many areas that are underlain by abandoned coal mines, and this growth will continue. Many subsidence problems are derived from the collapse of aban¬doned underground coal mines. There are numerous abandoned mine workings in the anthracite fields of northeastern Pennsylva¬nia, in the Appalachian bituminous fields, the Illinois Basin, the Rock Springs, Wyoming area, and other areas of the United States (Gray et al., 1976). Various room and pillar patterns of mining have been used in the dipping anthracite seams and the nearly flat-lying bituminous seams with considerable variation in the per¬centage of coal extracted. The progressive deterioration of pillars, mine floors, and mine roofs after long exposure to air and water may later result in the collapse of strata over the mine entries, the crushing of the remaining coal pillars, or the bearing failure of the mine floor beneath the coal pillars. Subsidence then results as the collapse reaches the ground surface in the form of differential strains, depressions, cracking of the ground, and sinkhole devel¬opment. Subsidence over active longwall mines, which occurs concurrently with mining or is completed within a short period following coal extraction, has been studied extensively over the past decade. On the other hand, subsidence over abandoned coal mines receives little attention by the researchers, mainly because it is difficult to predict and takes place decades after mining has ceased. The techniques of investigating the subsidence events over abandoned coal mines are similar to those employed for active mines except that at the outset, it is necessary to determine whether or not the subsidence events are mining-related (Chugh et al., 1986; Cummings and Singh, 1986; Peng and Hsiung, 1986). This calls for the identification and confirmation of abandoned mine workings under or near the affected surface structures. Gen¬erally old mine maps, if available, are acquired, the surface bore¬holes are drilled for confirmation of the accuracy of the mine maps and determination of the potential for continued subsidence. Sub¬sidence monuments are established and periodic surveys con¬ducted to determine the amount and trends of surface movement in and around the affected surface structures; surface boreholes are used to investigate the integrity of the underground structures (i.e., roof, coal pillars, and floor) by TV camera. They are also used for monitoring the vertical and horizontal movements of the subsur¬face strata by Sondex (FPBX) and inclinometer (PFBI), respec¬tively, for determining the continuity of the subsidence events. Tape extensometers, crackmeters, etc., are used to monitor the development trends of major cracks in the structures or on the ground. These data are used to identify the causes of the subsidence events. Finally, abatement methods are selected to stabilize the structures. It must be noted that most subsidence events over abandoned coal mines are reported after the fact, and investiga¬tions are begun some time after reporting, that the subsequent measured movements are generally much smaller than that at¬tained in the active mines, and that due to lack of knowledge about the damage conditions and the exact location of the abandoned mine workings with respect to the affected surface structures, the precise causes of surface subsidence or surface structural damages are in most cases very difficult to identify. 9.2 TYPES OF SURFACE SUBSIDENCE According to Gray et al. (1977), after examining 354 incidents of subsidence above abandoned mines in the Pittsburgh metropol¬itan area, the subsidence features have a mean diameter (i.e. the average of long and short dimensions) from less than 1 ft to 1600 ft, with 84% less than or equal to 15 ft; the subsidence features have a depth ranging from less than 1 ft to 48 ft, with 89% less than 25 ft; 66% of the subsidence features are deeper than they are broad. Nearly 59% of the subsidence features occur with overbur¬den less than 50 ft thick and 81% less than 100 ft thick. No subsidence features occur with overburden thicker than 450 ft (Fig. 9.1). Occurrence of subsidence incidents varies from imme¬diately to more than 100 years after mining (Fig. 9.2). In analyzing the characteristics of approximately 3000 chim¬ney subsidence features along the Colorado Front Range, Matheson and Eckert-Clift (1986) examined historical aerial photographs on 4- to 14-year intervals between 1937 and 1967 and found that the majority of observable surface subsidence features occurred within 30 to 40 years after mining. According to Gray et al. (1977), the most prevalent subsi¬dence features over abandoned mined land are sinkholes, with depths of more than 3 ft, and troughs or sags, usually less than 3 ft deep. Sinkholes are steep-sided pits, while troughs are shallow depressions much wider in area than sinkholes. A. SINKHOLE SUBSIDENCE A sinkhole is caused by the collapse of a mine roof that works its way upward. If it is not arrested during the process it will eventually reach the surface and emerge as a sinkhole. The process is governed by the thickness and character of the overburden, the width and height of the mine openings. Sinkholes are usually 3 to 20 ft deep and may be 2 to 40 ft in diameter, although most are fewer than 16 ft across (Gray et al., 1977; DuMontelle and Bauer, 1983). Newly formed sinkholes have steep sides with straight or bell-shaped walls. At times, they appear to be conical in profile with the apex upward. If the topsoil collapses, the top portion will widen to form an hour-glass shape. Sinkhole subsidence usually occurs over abandoned mines less than 165 ft deep (Hunt, 1979). Matheson and Eckert-Clift (1986) found that chimney sink¬holes are likely to occur when the ratio of overburden thickness to mining height (h/m) is less than 4 to 5. When h/m is between 5 and 10 to 11, the potential occurrence of chimney sinkholes decreases rapidly. When h/m is more than 10 to 11, less than 10% of the mine openings that collapse will induce sinkholes on the surface.

Jan 1, 1992

By C. D. Elifrits, N. B. Aughenbaugh

Introduction Federal and state laws enacted to regulate coal mining and the accompanying public concern about the adverse effects that mining might have on land use have focused much attention on the subsidence of the land surfaces over underground mines. Some questions asked are • Will abandoned mines subside in the future even though they have exhibited no surface adjustment to date? If so, when will subsidence take place? • Can a specific surface area be affected by subsi¬dence more than once? • What surface form will the subsidence feature take? • Is there any way to predict when subsidence will occur and end? An attempt is made here to address these questions insofar as it is possible with available data and experience of evaluation of subcritical extraction conditions. Mining that results in subsidence features can be classified as supercritical, subcritical, and critical with respect to the minimum span lengths of the worked-out rooms (Fig. 1). A complete basin will not develop fully immediately over subcritical conditions because the span lengths of the entries are less than the critical dimension (Wardell, 1983). Passageways, entries, and room-and-pillar panels are all included in the subcritical category. Because of the short span lengths, subcritical mining conditions tend to be stable over the life of the mine unless adverse geologic conditions exist (Gray et al., 1974; Dunrud, 1976). Various roof control and support procedures are employed to maintain entry stability during mining. Little information exists concerning the time factor of subsidence over areas of subcritical extraction. Data that have been collected relate to longwall mines, whereby the cavity sizes are designed large enough to induce caving behind the working faces so that complete subsidence at the surface occurs within a short period of time. The UK's National Coal Board (1975) has reduced the enormous amount of data it has collected to empirical correlations and has published these correlations in its Subsidence Engineers Handbook. The handbook states that "None of the foregoing remarks applies to pillar and stall working," with respect to the section discussing the time factor of subsidence caused by longwall mining (National Coal Board, 1975, p. 40). To understand and evaluate how time relates to subsidence above room-and-pillar mines, one must first recognize how mine cavities deteriorate and fail. The propagation of failure to the surface must then be studied, and, finally, the failures that are manifest at the surface in the form of depressions accompanied by both compressional and tensional movements must be investigated. Failure of mine cavities Any cavity beneath the earth's surface represents a condition of nonequilibrium and tends to close with time. Failure of cavities in a subcritical mine can be classified as failure of the roof, failure of the floor, failure of the supports (pillars, cribs), and elastic rebound of the rock. One mode of failure may dominate, but generally combinations of the four will occur. Also, initial instability of geologic materials and structural features and in situ stress may be unknown factors that can contribute to cavity failure. Roof failure is the most obvious opening stability problem in most operating mines. The bridging capabilities of the roof rock are dependent on the rock's material strength, geologic discontinuities, and reaction to humidity changes in the air of the mine. This type of failure may vary in magnitude from gradual flaking to massive roof falls. Mine floor instability can be manifest in the form of a general heave over a broad area or of individual pillar punching. The weaker and thicker the immediate floor material, the more prone a mine is to experience floor problems. Water seeping into an area can soften the underclay, reduce its bearing capacity, and precipitate failure of support for the overburden.

Jan 1, 1987

By N. B. Aughenbaugh

Subsidence due to abandoned coal mines has received copious attention recently. This is a result of many factors such as the enactment of new mining laws and the effect subsidence has on land use over the mines. Prediction of subsidence features and the time aspects over supercritical extraction (i.e., longwall and high extraction ratio pillaring) is relatively accurate. However, predicting when subsidence will occur and the surface features' size and shape above subcritical extraction of room and pillar mining is not yet possible. This paper will discuss the factors that influence the time aspects of subsidence in room and pillar mining.

Jan 1, 1983

By Axel Preusse

For the last 150 years, subsidence damage to the surface has been an unavoidable phenomenon associated with underground coal mining. In particular, the mechanization of mining methods in multiple seam mining and the concentration of mining activities in densely populated European metropolitan areas (e.g., Ruhr, Upper Silesian industrial region) have led to mining having a very strong influence on the earth?s surface. In both these regions, surface subsidence of more than 20m has been reported up to now in comparison to the original state. Underground coal mining in these regions strongly impairs all kinds of surface use, such as urban and industrial development, infrastructure (roads, waterways, and railways) and pipelines?without restricting the functionality of those objects to a greater extent. Demanding and, in some cases, globally unique engineering solutions have been developed and implemented for this purpose. The previously mentioned mining and industrial regions are still very strongly characterized by the (increasingly declining) coal industry and will remain dependent to a large extent and for an indefinite period on artificial drainage measures because subsidence that has already occurred is irreversible. This paper will primarily discuss the prediction of subsidence that is caused by intensive multiple seam mining and its influence on surface objects (e.g., underground pipelines). However, an approach for predicting ground uplifts due to rising mine water as a consequence of mine closures will also be described.

Jan 1, 2012

By W. T. Jr. Thom

INTEREST naturally attaches to fissuring and subsidence of the earth's surface, whatever the cause may be, and the induced movement and fissuring of the impervious strata overlying an oil sand is of even greater practical importance because of its bearing upon the recoverability of the portion of the oil not already extracted or extractable by ordinary production methods. It is probably true that significant ground movement induced by oil production occurs only in oil fields in relatively young formations, where the oil comes from incoherent or only slightly cemented sands and oil-soaked clays, but inasmuch as a great proportion of our "gusher" wells produce from "running" sands and yield a large part of the total oil output, it seems worth while to make an effort to inspire the collection and recording of data indicating the nature and magnitude of oil-field subsidence, both surface and subsurface.

Jan 1, 1927

By C. M. Young

WHEREVER salt is extracted from the ground as an artificial brine produced by pumping down fresh water to dissolve the salt, subsidence of the overburden is a possibility, though apparently few cases of such subsidence have been noted and detailed records are wanting. This description is intended as a record of subsidence that may permit the forcasting of similar occurrences in other cases; the data were supplied largely by R. B. Lee, city engineer of Hutchinson, Kans. About eleven years ago, ground movement occurred at a neighboring salt plant, when the surface assumed the form of a shallow funnel. Movement was probably due to a flow of sand into a well through a poor seal or a broken casing. The salt deposit increases in thickness from the east until at Hutchinson, where the subsidence occurred, it is about 310 ft. think. The interbedded layers of shale vary in thickness from mere traces to about 7 ft. While knowledge of the shale content of the beds is not exact, the log of a shaft 3 miles east of Hutchinson indicates that shale forms about 25 per cent. of the total thickness. This shaft does not reach the bottom of the salt by about 60 ft., but there is no reason to think that the lower part of the bed is different from the upper. Logs of wells sunk to the bottom are not sufficiently detailed to be of much value. Above the salt is the shale of the well-known Red Beds. The thickness of this is variable, principally because of its eroded surface, but at the mine it is 340 ft. This shale is variable in character and strength, but contains no strong members of limestone or sandstone. If the support is removed, very probably it will subside. The Arkansas River flows across the salt district and Hutchinson is situated on the flood plain. Between the top soil, which is about 8 ft. thick, and the shale is 60 to 100 ft. of water-bearing sand and gravel.

Jan 2, 1926

By M. A. Stoakes, H. D. S. Miller

Surface subsidence is becoming an increasingly important factor in the economics of mining Louisiana salt domes due to, amongst others, excessive shaft deformations and land loss to encroaching sea water. The vast majority of subsidence studies have been undertaken on bedded, tabular deposits. It is important to understand the causes of subsidence due to mining domal salt and how it can be minimized. The paper will review the major differences between subsidence caused by domal and tabular evaporite mines, the problems encountered in predicting subsidence, the factors that influence subsidence and, finally, possible alternative mining methods.

Jan 1, 1986

By R P. Callaghan

Underground production from the low grade copper orebodies at Mount Lyell in recent years has involved surface subsidence of open cut areas. Relevant structural and lithological features of the geological environment are described. The highly mechanised underground mining system involves sublevel caving and sublevel open stoping with associated hanging wall cave. Monitoring of subsidence and caving has been made by regular visual inspection and measurement of crack development, and by surface profile surveys. These simple techniques have proved adequate in assuring management that ground movement is proceeding normally and safely.

Jan 1, 1980

By Callaghan R. P

Underground production from the low grade copper orebodies at Mount Lyell in recent years has involved surface subsidence of open cut areas. Relevant structural and lithological features of the geological environment are des- cribed. The highly mechanised underground mining system involves sublevel caving and sub- level open stoping with associated hangingwall cave. Monitoring of subsidence and caving has been made by regular visual inspection and measurement of crack development, and by sur- face profile surveys. These simple techniques have proved adequate in assuring management that ground movement is proceeding normally and safely.

Jan 1, 1980

By F. W. Newhall

DURING the latter part of the year 1931, the Republic mine of the Republic Steel Corporation, at Republic, about 4 miles south of Browns-ville, Pa., was mining coal along four rib or fracture lines. One of these lines, the west butt rib line, was retreating towards a concrete-lined air shaft, 320 ft. deep, which had been sunk in 1911 for ventilation purposes. With the normal rate of mining at that time, it was expected that this rib line would pass the shaft in three or four months and the shaft would then be abandoned and allowed to cave. Realizing the opportunity presented for the study of an unusual case of ground movement, the question of conducting the study was presented by the junior author to the chairman of the Institute's committee on Ground Movement and Subsidence, Mr. George S. Rice, who presented the matter to Mr. G. H. Morse, General Manager of the Northern Mines, Republic Steel Corpora-tion, and he agreed to cooperate with the Bureau of Mines in making the study, the results of which are presented in this paper. Acknowledg-ments are due to Mr. Morse for his full cooperation in this work and to Mr. G. S. Rice and Mr. J. W. Paul, both of the U. S. Bureau of Mines, for their advice and guidance during the course of the work. The authors are indebted to Mr. B. F. Herbert, mining engineer, Northern Coal Mines, Republic Steel Corporation, who assisted in all the surveys, and Mr. W. H. Smith, draftsman, U. S. Bureau of Mines, who prepared all illustrations for publication.

Jan 1, 1934

By George Dials

Good morning gentlemen. My name is George Dials, and I am [vice] president of the Mining and Reclamation Council of America (MARC). The Council is composed of various companies, individuals, and affiliated state and regional trade organizations representing nearly 3,000 companies directly and indirectly involved with surface coal mining in the United States. I am very glad to be here today to address the Society of Mining Engineers of AIMS. While I do not pretend to be an expert in either geological or geotechnical engineering, I am infinitely familiar with the provisions of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-87) and the Federal regulations that have been promulgated pursuant to that Act. The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) was created by P.L. 95-87 within the responsibility for implementing the provisions of the Act and "to ensure that society and the environment are protected from the adverse effects of surface and sub-surface coal mining operations."

Jan 1, 1979

By Alice S. Allen, James Paone

SURFACE SUBSIDENCE IN MINING The consequences of subsidence are becoming progressively more serious as the consumption of an ever- increasing quantity of minerals conflicts with the needs of an expanding population for surface land area. The inevitable result will be an increase in the amount of land area on which undermining is restricted because surface subsidence must be prevented. Designation of land areas that may be undermined, provided that subsidence is controlled and kept within specified limits, also will increase. The decisions as to which land is to be used for urban, agricultural, or other purposes clearly involve considerations that go far beyond the scope of mining technology. Under the authority assigned to the US Bureau of Mines (USBM) by the Organic Act (May 16, 1910) and its succeeding amendments and pursuant regulations (30 U.S.C. 1-1 1 ), the Bureau conducts scientific and technologic investigations concerning mining and its related problems. Subsidence-control demonstrations that have been conducted under this authority include projects in Wyoming, West Virginia, Illinois, and the Pennsylvania anthracite region. The problenls for technology arc to devise methods for extracting minerals with controlled subsidence in varying geologic settings and for calculating or predicting the amount, extent, and characteristics of the subsidence that accompanies the extraction of our principal minerals mined by high-tonnage methods so that logical choices can be made from the possible alternative approaches. Where underground minerals and fuels are mined and removed, the voids that are created underground generate strong imbalanced stresses in the surrounding and overlying rock strata. The resulting readjustments in the rock masses may cause subsidence of the ground surface. Subsidence implies vertical collapse, because the most conspicuous component of movement is downward. However, the downward component is accompanied by differential horizontal strains that may be more damaging to man-made surface structure.; than the more apparent vertical displacements. SUBSIDENCE CONTROL The most widespread method of alleviating potential subsidence problems in undermined areas has been to backfill mine voids with mine refuse or some other in- expensive material that provides lateral support to the remaining mine pillars and vertical support to the mine roof and overburden. Most USBM backfilling work has been conducted jointly with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources in the anthracite region of northeastern Pennsylvania. These joint projects were conducted under the authority of the Anthracite Mine Drainage Control Act of July 15, 1955 (Public Law 84-162, as amended), and the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-4. as amended). In addition to the Appalachian and mine-drainage projects, the Bureau has either conducted or participated in demonstration projects to develop the "pumped- slurry" method of backfilling mine voids. Three of these projects were conducted in Rock Springs, WY. The first was a field test of the pumped-slurry technique, conducted in 1970 under the combined participation of the City of Rock Springs, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Dowell Div. of the Dow Chemical Co., and USBM (Candeub, Fleissig, 1971). The objective was to demonstrate that a large quantity of sand could be hydraulically injected under pressure through a single borehole, and that filling of the mine voids would be essentially complete. In the earlier "blind-flushing" methods, involving sluicing material through boreholes by gravity, quantities per injection hole ranged from 15 to 765 m3 (20 to 1000 cu yd), and the mine voids were only partially filled. In the first test of the pumped-slurry method, approximately 14 900 m (19,500 cu yd) of sand were injected success- fully through a single borehole. Subsequent information obtained through 43 monitoring boreholes indicated that mine voids below 11 330 m2 (2.8 acres) had been filled. As a result of the successful initial test of the pumped-slurry process, USBM conducted additional backfilling demonstration projects using the new technique. The first full-scale demonstration was carried out in the Green Ridge section of Scranton, PA, between 1972 and 1974. This project proved the feasibility of using the new hydraulic-injection technique to back- fill dry mine voids, as well as flooded voids, and it demonstrated that crushed anthracite refuse could be used as easily as sand in the process. Stabilization was pro- vided for about 202 300 m2 (50 acres) of Scranton, having a population of approximately 1000. Additional demonstration projects at Rock Springs, WY, between 1973 and 1975, resulted in the stabilization of about 364 200 m2 (90 acres). The work was necessary to preserve the physical and economic well- being of the city, because there have been numerous occurrences of subsidence during recent years. A demonstration project completed in 1976 in Rock Springs brought the total stabilized area in that city to 647 500 m2 (160 acres). At a cost of about $3,000,000, a population estimated at 7000 persons and property values exceeding $18,000,000 were protected. Presently. USBM is participating in subsidence- control projects involving backfilling in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and West Virginia. Eleven demonstration projects were in progress by USBM in 1977-eight in the Pennsylvania anthracite region and three in bituminous areas of West Virginia (one) and Illinois (two). The estimated total property value is over $100,500,000, and the total cost of the projects is expected to be nearly $20,000,000. The demonstration projects are designed to adapt the pumped-slurry technique to a variety of subsurface conditions, to increase efficiency, and to reduce costs.

Jan 1, 1982

By Peter J. Huck, Yoginder P. Chugh, M. Jennings

INTRODUCTION Large areas of the United States coal reserves have been undermined by room-and-pillar mining over the past century. These abandoned mines generally cause subsidence of the ground surface many decades after mining. Reports from England (1) where there is a longer history of room-and-pillar mining indicate that mines abandoned two centuries ago may still be causing subsidence, and causing surface destruction to urban areas or farm lands that have been developed in the interim. The devastation wrought by subsidence, both in terms of property loss and societal disruption is enormous. The authors discuss here the methods by which subsidence in abandoned mines may be controlled. Two distinctly different subsidence control technologies have been developed in the U.S. for abandoned coal mines. These are referred to as (1) Point Sup- port methods, and (2) Areal Backfilling. As the names imply, point support methods are used to protect individual structures, or even individual foundation elements of structures, whereas areas backfilling techniques may be applied to protect entire neighborhoods or urban districts hundreds of acres in extent. Both point support methods and areal backfilling have specific sub-categories of techniques that may be applied under different conditions as appropriate. POINT SUPPORT METHODS Point support methods are characteristically employed by civil engineers chartered with the design of a new structure or the protection of an existing structure. The subsidence control measures are only a part of a larger project, the safety of which must be assured to a degree of near certainty. The costs of point support methods involve a large number of bore-holes and the use of expensive materials in relatively small quantities. There exist several dozen point support methods, which operate either to support the underground cavities, controlling subsidence, or to isolate the structure from the effects of subsidence if it should occur. The latter methods usually involve deep foundations through the mine opening supporting the structure on the underlying strata. Our concern will be with the former method to support underground cavities to prevent subsidence. Gravel Columns and Associated Methods Gravel columns may be placed in the mine opening using the methods shown in [Figure 1]. Boreholes are drilled through the mine strata, and gravel poured down the borehole to form a pile on the mine floor. When the tip of the pile contacts the mine roof, it is rodded down to spread the pile, and permit additional gravel to be placed. The objective is to place as much gravel as possible in the mine opening, and to achieve firm contact with the mine roof. The gravel pile acts to reduce subsidence by three mechanisms. The filling of a significant fraction of the open mine volume reduces the amount of potential subsidence simply by killing open volume within the mine. In effect, the extraction ratio has been reduced by introducing the volume of gravel. The toe of the gravel pile abuts against nearby pillars, providing lateral support and protection against pillar deterioration. In effect, the height of the pillars has been slightly reduced by burying their lower portions. Finally, some direct support is provided to the roof strata, reducing the roof span and enhancing stability. The gravel column method may be used in a variety of applications, and with materials other than gravel. For example, gravel columns may be placed in a close line around the perimeter of the building to form a continuous gravel wall. The interior of the site may then be completely filled with sand, slurry or other material. Alternatively, a lean concrete may be used in place of gravel, so that the piles achieve significant structural capacity. The grout column, shown in [Figure 2], begins with the installation of a conventional gravel column which is placed around a grout pipe that extends through the borehole into the mine opening. When the gravel column is in place, portland cement grout is injected in stages. At each stage, sufficient grout is injected to fill the interstices in the gravel to build a column perhaps two meters in diameter and a meter tall. The group pipe is then raised one meter, and after the previously injected grout has set, the next stage of grout is injected. The process builds a column of grouted gravel to the

Jan 1, 1982

Mines in the Lake Macquarie region of New South Wales, Australia, are faced with the dilemma of having to introduce longwall mining techniques at a time when increasingly large areas of the surface are being used for urban development. Increasing pressures on safety, costs and productivity performance dictate that longwall mining is the method for the future. Construction of surface structures is controlled by a statutory body known as the Mine Subsidence Board (MSB). All surface structures have to be designed to MSB criteria. All mining plans involving secondary excavation also have to be submitted to the MSB for approval. The Board acts as risk assessor in evaluating acceptable levels of surface subsidence vs. the value of the coal resource. Surface repairs are paid for by a levy on all coal producers.

Jan 1, 1995

By C. Y. Chen

Public Law 95-87, the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA), Section 516 (b), requires the underground coal mining operator to "adopt measures consistent with known technology in order to prevent subsidence cawing material damage to the extent technologically and economically feasible, maximize mine stability, and maintain the value and reasonably foreseeable we of such surface lands, except in those instances where the mining technology wed requires planned subsidence in a predictable and controlled manner.. . ." Congress also directed the Secretary of the Interior to promulgate regulations to implement the law. As a result, the control of subsidence from underground coal mining to minimize surface damage has become the mandate of a federal law. This paper discusses the mechanics of subsidence and the effects of subsidence on ground features. This paper also summarizes some measures used to minimize the possibility of damage to structures as a result of subsidence due to underground coal mining.

Jan 1, 1984

By C. Y. Chen

Public Law 75-87, the Surface :mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA), Section 516(b) requires the underground coal mining operator to "adopt measures consistent with known technology in order to prevent subsidence causing material carnage to the extent technologically and economically feasible, maximize mine stability, and maintain the value and reasonably foreseeable use of such surface lands, except inn those instances where the mining technology used requires planned subsidence in a predictable and controlled manner . . .?. The Congress also directed the Secretary of the Interior to promulgate regulations to implement the law. As a result, the control of subsidence from underground coal mining to minimize surface damage has become the mandate of a Federal law. This paper discusses the mechanics of subsidence and the effects of subsidence on ground features and also summarizes some of the measures which have been used to minimize the possibility of damage to surface structures as a result of subsidence due to underground coal mining.

Jan 1, 1981

By Victor V. Nazimko

Long term stability of the pillars that have been remained after R&P extraction causes postponed subsidence. To prevent unforeseen subsidence and to diminish postponed subsidence 25-50% new method for its control has been developed by the author. It supposes to use drilling and blasting technology and other original approaches. New method has been fulfilled through the holes being drilled from the surface or from the active underground openings. Explosives had been charged into the holes and were blasted. This had increased bulking factor dramatically and prevented natural caving of the strata. Physical scale modeling corroborated efficiency of the new approach. The bulking factor has grown from 0.0623 to 0.1185 and surface subsidence has been diminished from 1.1 m to 0.2 m or 5.5 times.

Jan 1, 1996