Discussions of Papers Published Prior to July 1960 - The Shear Strength of Rocks; AIME Trans, 1959, vol 214, page 1022

Charles T. Holland (Head, Dept. of Mining Engineeri*, Virginia Polytechnical Inst., Blacksburg, Va.) Mr. Wuerker has presented a very interesting discussion of the use of triaxial test methods for investigating the strength properties of rocks. Such methods, no doubt, eventually will develop considerable information of interest to those concerned with the design of mine layouts, particularly in the field of pillar design. From his discussion of my recent article, "Cause and Occurrence of Coal Mine Bumps" (Holland Mining Engineering 1958, p. 933-1002), it is evident that in one place at least I did not make my meaning clear to him and perhaps others. To clear the matter up I think it best to quote from the article, somewhat more fully than did Mr. Wuerker, as follows: "4) In actual operations — because rocksare not perfectly elastic, homogeneous, nor isotropic and because local yield does occur — the maximum stress as demonstrated by Phillips (Ref. 22, pp. 64, 65) and indicated by much experience in mining, does not occur at the walls of the opening but at a short distance inside the pillar. Furthermore, the maximum stress does not reach as great a value as theoretical considerations and laboratory experimental methods indicate.* Actual distance inside the pillar, measured from the wall, at which the maximum stress exists, has not been determined. Observations in many mines, however, indicate that this distance could have a mini-value of one to six or eight times the bed thickness and that it is probably affected by width and height of the opening, depth of cover, and relative values of the elasticity and plasticity of materials comprising the roof, floor, and coal seam. The actual value of the stress produced probably lies between the theoretical maximum and the average stress concentration that would be produced if the weight of the strata above the unsupported opening were evenly distributed over the pillars for a distance equal to the opening width." The footnote reference in the above quotation referred to the following: "*For example, the Pocahontas No. 4 coal bed in southern West Virginia is mined under cover up to 1800 ft thick. Development openings are driven 18 to 20 ft wide, and the bed is about 6 ft thick. According to the work of Panek, the tangential wall stress at mid-bed height under these conditions would reach values between 4000 and 5000 psi. Actual tests of 3-in. cubes of this coal show its compressive strength would be much less than this, perhaps as low as 400 psi. Yet the pillars usually show no evidence of failure in these headings. In this same bed at a depth of 800 ft, the author has seen an opening 225 ft between supports lying between two old groves approximately 1100 ft apart. According to the theoretical considerations, the stress in the pillar walls would have been about 18,000 psi, yet the pillar showed little or no evidence of weight. In view of these observations, it is clear that the wall stress does not attain the maximum values indicated by theory." (Underlining added to original wording.) By referring to Fig. 2A of my paper it will be noted that theoretically the maximum pillar stress would occur at the pillar wall, i.e., at the passageway surface of the pillar. Obviously this cannot be correct in the cases of stress ranging from 4000 to 18000 psi since the coal at the surface of the pillar is under no constraint and cannot have a strength much greater than 400 or 500 psi. Hence, my conclusion that the maximum stress does not occur at the wall but back in the pillar some distance from the wall. Since these stresses are pushed back in the pillar from the wall, it is also obvious that the loads transferred to the pillar from the opening will be spread over a greater area and hence Pillar stresses will not rise to the values postulated by theory and photoelastic experiment. Further since to visual inspection the coal along the pillar wall did not appear to be failed the conclusion was reached that the stress shift was caused by local elastic or plastic yield and by difference in the elastic modulus of the rocks composing the mine floor, mine roof, and coal bed. Later on under the heading "Strength of Mine Pillars" (pages 1000-1002) the effects of constraint is briefly described. Also a formula taking into account constraint is developed relating pillar strength to the uniaxial strength of coal and the L/T ratio of the pillar. Since my paper was written, reports of experiments conducted in South Africa (Denkhaus, et. al., 1959), in Sweden (Hast 19581, and in Canada (McInnes, et.al., 1959) reveal that the conclusion expressed relative to the existence of a low stress area existing around the edges of pillars and solid faces as described above is generally correct. But it seems possible that where the wall stress developed is less than the unconfined strength of the rock composing the pillar and where the roof, floor, and pillar