Search Documents

By Khamis Y. Haramy

The U.S. Bureau of Mines installed surface and subsurface instruments at a mine site in Colorado to monitor and characterize the overburden response to longwall mining. Instrumentation included a time-domain reflectometry (TDR) cable, a multiple-point borehole extensometer (MPBX), vertical-deformation surface monuments, and in-mine pressure cells for monitoring abutment, pillar, and gob loads with respect to the longwall face position. The purpose of the study was to collect data that could be analyzed to correlate the design of the mine layout to the resulting overburden failure response. Determining the extent of caving and fracturing is important in the arid and semiarid Western United States because of the possible consequences to the fragile underground hydrologic systems upon which the land owners and users depend. This study is unique from past investigations because the overburden contains massive sandstone members that impose special conditions on the caving process and pressure redistribution above the longwall panels. This paper presents the results of this correlation study.

Jan 1, 1992

By Zhaohui Wang, Jiachen Wang

"Effective surrounding rock control is a prerequisite for realizing safe mining in underground longwall faces. In the past three decades, longwall top-coal caving mining (LTCC) and single pass large height longwall mining (SPLL) found expanded usage in extracting thick coal seams in China. The two mining methods lead to large void space left behind the working face, which increase the difficulty of ground control. Longwall face failure is a common problem in underground mining, which is induced due to low strength and high fracture density of the coal seam. Moreover, the stiffness of main components included in the surrounding rock system also greatly influences longwall face instability. Correspondingly, the surrounding rock system is developed for LTCC and SPLL faces in this paper. Mechanical conditions for simultaneous balance of roof structure and longwall face are put forward by taking the stiffness of coal seam, roof strata, and hydraulic support into account. The safety factor of the longwall face is defined as the ratio between its ultimate bearing capacity and the load imposed on it. The influence of coal strength, stiffness of the coal seam, roof strata, and hydraulic support, as well as the movement of roof structure, are analyzed. Finally, the key elements dominating longwall face stability are identified for improving surrounding rock control effectiveness in LTCC and SPLL faces.INTRODUCTIONThe concentration of coal mining in China is gradually shifting to the west region, and there are a large number of thick coal seams in the newly formed coal mining area. Therefore, the surrounding rock control problems related to mining of thick coal seams will become the focus of research in the field of mining engineering in the future. There are two kinds of mining methods for thick coal seams in China, including single pass large height longwall mining (SPLL) and longwall top-coal caving mining (LTCC). Both methods can accomplish the goal of excavating the full thickness of thick coal seams at one time. SPLL mining benefits from the improvement of the development level of associated equipment. The appearance of large hydraulic supports and high power shearers ensure that the height protected by the hydraulic supports and the height of the sheared coal are the same as the coal thickness. LTCC mining benefits from mining technology advantages. The thick coal seam is divided into two sub-layers, and the working face is normally installed in the bottom layer, while the top coal is caved under the compressive forces due to mining. Therefore, there is a scraper conveyor at the front of the hydraulic support for transporting the sheared coal and another one at the tail for transporting caved top coal. Both SPLL and LTCC methods realize one-off recovery of thick coal seams."

Jan 1, 2018

By Kent D. Mctyer

Mining commenced at Tasman Mine in late 2006. The current method of mining is bord and pillar using continuous minerbolters and shuttle cars for first workings and secondary extraction using mobile roof supports. The two stage process was chosen to accommodate irregularly shaped coal deposits, allowing adjustments to be made to extraction ratios for better management of subsidence and to maximize the efficiency of the operation. Following the completion of the first three full/partial extraction panels, the mining method was changed due to variable caving. Another partial extraction method, referred to as the Duncan Method was adopted; it involves stripping the developed square pillars on four-sides on retreat to leave a load-bearing remnant coal pillar. The system of partial extraction has been successful in meeting safety, productivity, and subsidence targets.

Jan 1, 2011

By Kent D. Mctyer

Mining commenced at Tasman Mine in late 2006. The current method of mining is bord and pillar using continuous minerbolters and shuttle cars for first workings and secondary extraction using mobile roof supports. The two stage process was chosen to accommodate irregularly shaped coal deposits, allowing adjustments to be made to extraction ratios for better management of subsidence and to maximize the efficiency of the operation. Following the completion of the first three full/partial extraction panels, the mining method was changed due to variable caving. Another partial extraction method, referred to as the Duncan Method was adopted; it involves stripping the developed square pillars on four-sides on retreat to leave a load-bearing remnant coal pillar. The system of partial extraction has been successful in meeting safety, productivity, and subsidence targets.

Jan 1, 2011

By Bruce K. Hebblewhite

This paper provides an overview of the international ?state of the art? with respect to underground coal mining methods used in seams of thickness greater than 4.5 m, through a review of a selection of high performing thick seam mining operations around the world?both Single Pass Longwall (SPL) and Longwall Top Coal Caving (LTCC). The paper discusses the recent operational experiences from these selected faces, together with the ground control issues faced, and identifies some of the major, inherent geotechnical factors that can influence the mining method selection, design criteria, and ultimate performance, from both an operational and safety perspective. It is clear that both of these methods are developing quickly? not only from an operational and equipment perspective, but also from the understanding of critical geotechnical criteria. There is an increasing role for both methods in thick seam environments, although the higher SPL faces will only be successful in the near to mid-term under benign geotechnical environments. Regardless of the method, a thorough understanding of the critical geotechnical factors is a key to successful implementation of either method.

Jan 1, 2013

By Gabriel S. Esterhuizen

The design of support for underground excavations is a complex process in which the interaction between supports and the rock mass must be evaluated. The strength reduction method (SRM) is useful because it provides a stability factor of the supported excavation that can easily be compared between support alternatives. The method is based on numerical model analysis where the stability factor is determined by reducing the rock mass strength until collapse is indicated in the model. This paper presents the results of validation studies that were conducted using the FLAC3D stress analysis software to compare SRMcalculated stability factors to the empirically based Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) and the Analysis of Roof Bolt Systems (ARBS). The objective was to determine whether the SRM, with its basis in mechanics, would predict similar outcomes as the fundamentally different ARBS and CMRR methods with their basis in empirical observations. A total of 450 different scenarios were evaluated in which the geology, horizontal stress, depth of cover, entry width, support spacing, and support length were varied. The results showed that the SRM-calculated stability factors were able to satisfactorily capture both the ?weak bed? and ?strong bed? adjustments in the CMRR. The SRM results were found to be well correlated to the ARBS stability factors for the 450 cases considered. Further analysis showed that the SRM accurately captures the effect of bolt length, depth of cover, and entry width on the overall stability of an entry.

Jan 1, 2013

By Keith Heasley, Christopher Newman, Zach Agioutantis

"Previously, in 2013, a laboratory version of the computer code ARMPS-LAM, introduced at the 32""d International Conference of Ground Control in Mining, successfully integrated the laminated overburden model of LaModel into an ARMPS-style pillar stability analysis. The ARMPS-LAM analysis has now been fully integrated into the ARMPS program allowing users to more accurately classify the stability of a given mine design utilizing a laminated overburden model for the determination of pillar loading within theAMZ. ,This paper introduces the new Windows-based ARMPS-LAM program. The program's ease of use, output result generation, and limitations are highlighted through the parametric analysis of three hypothetical case studies where traditional ARMPS output is compared to output generated by LaModel. As mining operations continue to produce at greater depths and in more complex geometric and geological conditions, flexible and efficient analyses of mine stability for underground room and pillar mining has become more and more essential. The ARMPS-LAM program provides the mining industry with an empirically backed, numerical design tool for the evaluation of underground room and pillar mine plans.INTRODUCTIONIn the Southern Appalachian coal fields of the United States, retreat room-and-pillar methods have allowed mining operations to maintain high rates of production in the face of adverse geologic conditions and shrinking coal reserves. Over the years, research has been dedicated to understanding and mitigating mining-related dangers due to second mining practices, such as: pillar squeezes, floor heave, roof falls, pillar bumps, etc. However, as mining operations continue at deeper depths and with more complex geometric and geologic conditions, there is an inherent industry need for more accurate, flexible, and faster evaluations of stability for underground room-and-pillar mining."

Jan 1, 2016

By Holger Witthaus

The conditions of great mining depth and multi-seam¬longwalling require a special method of rockbolting, It can be described as a control loop which is based on the elements of planning, drivage and measurement. Different planning elements such as the results of the observation of physical models, numerical programmes for calculation of stress-distribution and support success, lab and underground support testing and the knowledge of strata behaviour underground including geotechnical classification are used to get best results. The increasing geotechnical information collected during drivage of roadways are used to estimate and minimise the risks of support-overload. The repeated plan/acutal comparison during the use of roadway and continuously monitoring of support and roadways provided the opportunity of optimising support design during the process of drivage and if necessary in front and after of the longwall face.

Jan 1, 2000

By D. G. Lynch, M. R. Martin, R. J. Coutts

"Broadmeadow Mine is an underground longwall mine located in Central Queensland, Australia. The mine introduced a top coal caving (TCC) longwall face in 2013 but since then has experienced severe convergence events at the start of each panel after 60–70m of retreat, resulting in equipment damage and the longwall almost becoming iron bound. A significant geotechnical monitoring effort during LW10 and LW11 to characterise the caving mechanics and operational changes during LW11 were successful in mitigating the risk posed by these initial convergence events. This paper describes the geotechnical monitoring programme undertaken during LW11, the operational methods used to mitigate these initial convergence events, and the contribution to these events of the TCC technique.A thick sandstone unit close to the extraction roof was likely the cause of the convergence events at the start of each longwall panel. However, stress change monitoring cells, surface extensometers, an inclinometer, and the blockage of holes designed for pre-conditioning using hydraulic fracturing indicated that the convergence events were not caused by the sudden collapse of sandstone bridging across the goaf. Rather, they were caused by the propping action of strong units within the overburden strata. Equipment design modifications were made to allow the longwall to remain operational during the convergence events and an operational strategy was implemented to mitigate convergence in LW11. The initial convergence event was successfully negotiated, and Broadmeadow went on to be the highest producing longwall for CY16 in Australia.INTRODUCTIONBroadmeadow Mine is an underground longwall mine located in Central Queensland, Australia, owned and operated by BHP Mitsubishi Alliance (BMA). The mine is a punch longwall mine using open cut pit access provided by Goonyella/Riverside Mine. Broadmeadow commenced longwall operations in 2005 using a conventional high reach longwall, but later changed to the top coal caving (TCC) method of extraction. Broadmeadow extracts the easterly dipping 5.5–7.5m-thick Goonyella Middle Seam in ranging in depth from 90m to 330m. The coal is washed and blended at the adjacent Goonyella/Riverside open cut mine to produce a premium coking coal product for export."

Jan 1, 2018

By Bruce Hebblewhite, Jim Galvin

"A coal burst occurred on 15 April, 2014 at the Austar Coal Mine, located west of Newcastle, NSW, Australia. The burst resulted in fatal injuries to two men working as part of the mining crew at the development face. At the time, a continuous miner was being used to mine a longwall development gate road through heavily structured coal, at a depth of approximately 550m. A number of pre-cursor bumps had occurred on previous shifts, emanating from the coal ribs of the roadway, in proximity to the coal face.This paper reviews the geological, geotechnical and mining conditions and circumstances leading up to the coal burst event; and presents and discusses the available evidence and possible interpretations relating to the geomechanical behaviour mechanisms that may have been critical factors in this incident. The paper also discusses some key technical and operational considerations of ground support systems and mining practices and strategies needed for operating in such conditions in the future.INTRODUCTIONAustar Coal Mine is an underground longwall coal mine located near Cessnock in the Hunter Valley of New South Wales (NSW), Australia and is the only underground mine still extracting the Greta Seam in this region. The mine was the first in Australia to adopt the Chinese-developed Longwall Top Coal Caving (LTCC) method for thick seam extraction. Typically seam thickness ranges from 4m to 7m and depth of mining from 480m to 560m, with future mining planned down to depths of up to 700m, making it one of the deepest operating coal mines in Australia.On 15 April 2014, a pressure burst occurred in the left hand rib at the active mining face of B Heading, 2 to 3 cut-through, Maingate A9 panel, during development of the gateroads for the ninth longwall top coal caving panel. Strata in the general vicinity was affected by disturbed geology and multiple geological structures. Figure 1 shows a section of the mine plan as at October 2014 (six months after the accident), indicating the current longwall extraction panel (AS) and the development panel A9 where the accident occurred. (Note: Neither development nor longwall face positions changed significantly between the time of the accident and the date of this plan). At the time of the accident the current longwall face was in excess of 1,000m away from the Maingate A9 development panel face position."

Jan 1, 2016

By Peter Zhang, Dan Neilans, Scott Peterson, Scott Wade, Joe Pugh, Ryan Mcgrady

"A coal outburst is a severe safety hazard in room-and-pillar mining under deep cover. It is more likely to occur during pillar retreating. Multi-seam mining dramatically increases the risk of coal outburst within the influence zones created by remnant pillars and gob-solid boundaries. Though coal outburst is generally associated with heavy loading of coal pillars, its occurrence is difficult to predict. Risk management provides a proactive tool to minimize coal outburst in room-and-pillar mining under deep cover. Risk assessment is the first step in identifying and quantifying outburst risk factors. The primary risk factors for coal outburst are overburden depth, roof and floor strength, geological anomalies, mining type, multi-seam mining, and panel width. A risk assessment chart can be used to proactively screen out mining sections with high risk of coal outburst for further analysis. Gob-solid boundaries and remnant pillars are critical factors in evaluation of the coal outburst risk of multi-seam mining. Risk identification, risk assessment, geologic influence mapping, geotechnical evaluation, risk analysis, risk mitigation, and monitoring are essential elements of coal outburst risk management process. Training is an integral part of risk management for risk identification and communication between all the stakeholders including management, technical and safety personnel, and miners.INTRODUCTIONA coal outburst is a sudden violent burst of coal from a pillar with broken coal or blocks of coal forcibly ejected into open entries. A coal outburst is a severe safety hazard as the mining crew is highly exposed at the site when the event occurs. Though deep cover and strong roof and floor are underlying geologic conditions of a potential burst incident, its real occurrence is also the result of additional mining factors. In room-and-pillar mining, a coal outburst could occur during both development and pillar retreating, but the latter greatly increases the risk of outburst. The other risk factors of coal outburst also include mining layout, multi-seam mining, presence of adjacent gob, cutting sequence, and local abnormal geologic conditions. Over the years, the cases of coal outbursts have been studied by many researchers and mining practitioners(Peng, 2008; Newman, 2008; Iannacchione and Tadolini, 2008; Gauna and Phillipson, 2008; Hoelle, 2008; and Newman, 2002). It is commonly believed that the coal outburst is the result of a sudden release of elastic strain energy stored in coal pillars and is highly associated with cutting into heavily loaded coal pillars, but its occurrence is a rare event and is difficult to predict. A number of engineering controls have been recommended to mitigate outburst potential. For room-and-pillar mining, sufficient pillar sizes have been the primary control for coal outburst prevention. The pillar design tools such as ARMPS and AMSS developed by NIOSH have played an important role in the design of stable pillars to prevent pillar collapse and squeezing as well as coal outbursts. In fact, with the implementation of pillar design using proper stability factors, pillar collapse and squeezing have been almost eliminated, and the number of coal outbursts has been greatly reduced in the US over the past decade. However, after a few outbursts occurred during pillar retreating in the US over the past a few years (MSHA, 1996; MSHA, 2014; MSHA, 2013), it has been realized that sufficient pillar size is still not enough to prevent coal outbursts. The investigations of the incidents showed that other factors such as multi-seam mining, panel layout, cutting sequence, and local geologic factors also seemed critical in causing the events. Therefore, it has become imperative that additional proactive measures beyond proper pillar design be implemented to prevent coal outbursts."

Jan 1, 2015

By T. L. Dobecki

As a means of demonstrating the effectiveness of reflection seismology in determining continuity of coal seams, three U. S. field projects are reviewed. The three projects involve coals of varied thickness (2-14m) and age (Pennsylvanian to Eocene) from three coal areas of the U. S. (Pennsylvania, Wyoming, and Washington). Each project also employed its own particular seismic technique, recording system, and seismic energy source although all are considered state-of-the-art, high resolution, digital seismic surveys. Project 1 (thin, Pennsylvania coal) sought detection of sand channels using dynamite and standard in-line (2-D) seismic technique. Project 2 (thick, Wyoming underground coal gasification) involved a gas-explosion (Dinoseis) source with areal (3-D) acquisition methods. Project 3 (thick, Washington underground coal gasification) employed a shotgun-type source and standard in- line methods. Data processing was handled by different contractors for each project. Each project was successful in accomplishing its own particular objective; however, data quality and interpretation seem to be more a function of thickness of the target seam, complexity of the overburden, and processing contractor than a seismic source, acquisition scheme (2-D versus 3-D), or recording instrumentation.

Jan 1, 1981

By John Stankus

Accurate evaluation of stress and geological conditions is critical to ground control design in underground openings. For a mine slope entry, the problem becomes more complicated because a slope transverses through many different types of strata. Mine slope ground control has traditionally been practiced based on trial and error and prior experience. There is currently no well-accepted slope and support design methodology available for an economical and technically sound ground control plan. Over the last few years, Keystone Mining Services, LLC (KMS), the engineering affiliate company of Jennmar Cooperation, has developed a ground support design methodology called the ?Stress, Geologic, and Support design system? (SGSSM). This patent pending method enables accurate analysis of actual geo-technical conditions and stress; identifies strong, fair, and weak sections along the slope; formulates primary and supplemental roof bolting systems, designs optimal long-term steel structure support; and verifies the adequacy of the developed support. The method has been successfully utilized on various new slope projects and has been well received by state and federal regulatory agencies during the approval process. This paper details the concepts of the methodology using an actual case study of a slope project in the Midwest.

Jan 1, 2011

By Thomas L. Hutchinson

The mechanical design of a roof support is basically a matter of a statics and dynamics problem, assuming of course, that the imposed loads and mining conditions are known. Here in the Appalachian coal fields the general conditions are known well enough to allow the majority of the proposed new faces of longwall to be furnished with standard commercially available supports equipped with suitable variants and options. While not trying to negate the primary importance of thoroughly investigating a potential face and the selection of the correct equipment for that face, it still becomes clear that an equally important aspect of the design of an adequate ground control program has in the past too of ten been overlooked, having been overshadowed by the ?endless? selection process of the roof supports proper. The equally important aspect which this paper discusses is the overall design of a mining system, which design incorporates not only the size and capacity of the equipment but the following points as well, namely: Equipment adaptability to mining scheme, Equipment va. human constraints, Operation at the designed levels, and Coordination of operation, maintenance and support design. Unless the coordination of these factors is considered in the design and selection of the equipment, a lopsided and inefficient operation is possible. How can we afford to put an 8-10 million dollar investment up to chance as to whether it will yield optimum results or not?

Jan 1, 1981

By A. H. PH. D Wilson

Compared to the rocks encountered in, say, metalliferous mining or tunnel drivage in igneous and metamorphic rocks, the strata associated with the coal measures are relatively soft. If excavations are made at depths greater than one or two hundred metres, zones of fractured or yielded rock develop around the openings. The stress which can be taken by yielded rock at the boundary of an opening is low, but because of the friction present between the fragments or particles, the sustainable stress rises rapidly with distance from the opening until sufficient confinement has been developed to prevent failure of the rock in the first place. Thereafter the laws of elasticity will apply and increasing distance will reduce the stress field until conditions consistent with the cover load are reached. For rocks which maintain their elastic condition right to the edge of an opening, finite element analysis and similar techniques have proved successful in determining the distribution of stress around the opening. This approach, however, is not successful when a yield zone is introduced between the elastic zone and the opening. Nevertheless, some estimate is required if help is to be given in the siting of roadways and in the determination of adequate pillar sizes. This matter is of particular importance in the planning of new mines especially if retreat faces are involved, as extensive roadway drivage must be planned and executed before experience of the effects of face extraction is gained. In 1977, the author published [I] a method based on 'stress balance'. The total aggregate downward load over a large area will remain that of the cover load even after part of the coal seam has been removed. Any rise in stress in ribsides and pillars must be offset by an equivalent stress reduction across roadways and other areas of extraction, and vice versa. Knowledge of one can lead to an estimate of the other, provided the general form of the stress distribution can be postulated. It is the object of this paper to revue the method in more detail and to give further examples of its successful application.

Jan 1, 1981

By D. W. H. Su

Following a roof fall in the B12 headgate of a CONSOL Pennsylvania Coal Company (CCPC) underground coal mine in February 1998, CONSOL R&D and Exploration initiated an underground roof geology reconnaissance program along the B13 and B14 developments to define potential roof instability areas and to recommend appropriate supplemental headgate support. This reconnaissance program revealed the presence of a thick, massive Pittsburgh sandstone channel overlying the B13 and B14 panels. Surface and underground core holes confirmed the close proximity and the very massive, nonlaminated nature of the sandstone. To mitigate anticipated adverse conditions at the B 13 and B 14 longwall faces due to delayed caving of the massive sandstone behind the shields, a task force consisting of Operations, Exploration, and R&D personnel was formed in May 1998. Several operational adjustments were made by mine management, including repairing damaged lemniscate links, maintaining immediate forward shield support, and implementing measures recommended by the task force intended to boost the shield set load density at the face. After reviewing available geotcchnical information, the task force also recommended fracing of the massive sandstone over the B13 and B14 panels to enhance caving characteristics and further reduce the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone near the face. Horizontal fracs were created at a horizon about 25 feet above the Pittsburgh seam main bench over the two panels in June and November 1998, respectively. To evaluate the effect of sandstone fracing and operational adjustments on the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone, three finite element models were constructed and analyzed. Results from the finite element analyses indicate that one horizontal frac, 25 feet above the Pittsburgh seam, would reduce the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone by approximately 50 percent, maintaining them at a level below the ultimate strength of the sandstone. Operational adjustments to increase the support set load density and support stiffness could reduce the bending-induced stresses in the sandstone by a maximum of an additional 10 percent. Shield pressure monitoring at the B14 midface confirmed the presence of a lower roof pressure zone inby and outby the 1314 frac holes. This lower face pressure significantly contributed to improving the B13 and B14 longwall productivity and safety. The total production downtime due to bad top at the B 12 face within the interval of channel influence was 30,600 minutes compared to about 3,500 minutes each for the B13 and B14 faces. The average longwall advance per machine shift for the B13 and B14 faces within the channel was about 70 percent higher than that for the B 12 face.

Jan 1, 2001

By André Vervoort

In coal room and pillar, and pillar extraction panels, the sidewall conditions were investigated based on underground measurements and numerical simulations. Three-dimensional linear elastic models provided a useful and quick prediction of the amount of sidewall spalling. However, more complex constitutive models were required to simulate more accurately the extent of fracturing and its effect on the stress re-distribution. The input parameters of a Mohr-Coulomb model were determined by back-analysis of underground measurements, and the effect of the depth of the workings and the time dependent occcurrence of coal pillar fracturing were analyzed.

Jan 1, 1992

By C. P. Mangelsdorf

Between June of 1975 and November of 1978 Stateham and Radcliffe of the Denver Research Center of the Bureau of Mines in cooperation with officials of the Bear Coal Company of Somerset. Colorado Conducted extensive studies of the roof conditions in the Bear Mine. The purpose of the investigation was to determine the relationship if any between the length of time the roof was left unbolted and the subsequent stability of the roof. Using the comprehensive information available from Stateham and Radcliffe (1), (2), (3), (4) the author has proposed a design for a roof truss installation which might have been used in lieu of some of the bolting in the areas where bad roof was encountered. Historically roof truss installations like bolting patterns have been applied rather than designed. The purpose of the present paper is to demonstrate how with the information available, one might proceed through a semi-rational design. In spite of the very extensive documentation by Stateham and Radcliffe, it was still necessary to make some working assumptions. It is, therefore, not intended that the process here illustrated be used without modification in any other mine nor is there any criticism implied or otherwise, of the way in which Bear Coal Company conducted its operations. The author has never visited the mine in question. This paper is meant to be an encouragement award a more rational use of roof trusses in situations where it is economically and structurally reasonable to do so.

Jan 1, 1984

By Alan Bugden

Goedehoop colliery in South Africa has experienced a number of substantial roof falls in roadways and intersections. Many of these have been associated with geological slips and/or horizontal compressive stresses. This paper describes a numerical modelling study conducted after one such fall with the objective of clarifying the roof failure mechanism associated with these falls. The fall was located at an intersection and occurred as the last cut was being made to complete the intersection. One bounding surface of the fall was formed by the geological slip; the others were formed by fresh failure surfaces. The fall took place despite the slip being identified as a hazard and additional bolts being placed by the workforce. In conjunction with the modelling work tests were conducted on samples from the roof in which the fall occurred, these gave a U.C.S. of 80 -100MPa. Several in-situ stress tests had already been conducted at the mine; a further test was conducted close to the fall site. The tests show that the largest stresses are horizontal. However, the maximum stresses of 6-12MPa are small compared to the compressive strength of the root. Computer modelling highlighted a mechanism arising from the conjunction of a geological slip and horizontal compressive stresses that could result in tensile failure of the roof leading to the fall. Sensitivity studies were conducted to identify risk factors associated with this mechanism and the modelling results used to assist in formulating a support strategy to combat falls of this nature.

Jan 1, 2003

By Ken Mills

Dartbrook Mine (Australia) works the Wynn seam, which has a moderate propensity for spontaneous combustion. Prior to any mining a commitment was made to place a segregation barrier pillar between longwall blocks 4 and 5. This was to segregate goaves and improve management controls in the event of a spontaneous combustion event within previous longwall goaves. An alternative to the segregation barrier known as a Consolidated Barrier was developed; firstly as a concept, then computer modelled and finally field tested. It consists of a wider than normal chain pillar with concrete Mega-Seals placed in cut-throughs. Permeability and stress measurements were conducted in the surrounding coal of the seal. Remote monitoring took place as the longwall face approached and then passed by the seal. Results indicate that as the longwall retreats past the seal, horizontal stress increases. The additional stress leads to an increase in confinement and a subsequent reduction in permeability.

Jan 1, 1999