Search Documents

By Christopher Mark

The Bureau of Mines has recently completed a comprehensive study of coal strength. More than 4000 individual test results from over 60 seams were extracted from the literature and combined in the most complete data base of the uniaxial compressive strength of coal ever assembled. In addition, more than 100 case studies of in-mine pillar performance were available in the Analysis of Retreat Mining Pillar Stability (ARMPS) data base. Statistical analysis of this wealth of data has yielded valuable results. The data shows clearly that the "size effect" is related to coal structure. The widely-used Gaddy formula, which predicts a significant strength reduction as the specimen size is increased, was found to apply only to "blocky" coals. For friable coals, the size effect was much less pronounced or even non-existent. Case histories of failed pillars are the best available data on in situ coal strength. This study found no correlation between the ARMPS stability factor of failed pillars and coal specimen strength. Pillar design was much more reliable when a uniform coal strength was used in all case histories.

Jan 1, 1996

By J. R. Koehler

Although two-entry yield pillar-based gate roads supported by wooden cribs have been commonly used throughout longwalling in the Wasatch PlateadRoan Cliffs coalfield of central Utah, a three-entry yield-abutment gate road configuration was recently trialed in the Hiawatha Seam at the Genwal Resources (GRI) Crandall Canyon No. 1 Mine, near Huntington, UT. Pillar, entry, and cable bolt performance were monitored through second panel mining using a fairly extensive array of geomechanical instruments installed over a span of four crosscuts. Ground pressure and entry closure measurements confirmed that the 9.1-m-wide (30-ft) yield pillar was partially shielded from first panel longwall loads by the 36.6-m-wide (120-ft) abutment pillar, and consequently, experienced only minor yielding until the approach of the second panel face. Complete yielding of the 9. I-m-wide (30-ft) pillar occurred when the second panel was approximately 6.1 m (20 ft) inby the instrumentation site. Average cable bolt loads and differential roof sag remained low through second panel mining and tailgate entry ground conditions were excellent; however, very high ground pressures in the abutment and yield pillars, and second panel rib strongly suggest a high potential for coal bumps utilizing this gate road configuration at mining cover depths in excess of 396 to 457 m (1300 to 1500 ft). This conclusion is supported by the suspected occurrence of small coal bumps along the abutment pillar ribs, observed indirectly as fresh debris in the middle entry just behind the second face. This paper presents a case history developed from the geotechnical measurements and on-site observations of this unique application of a yield-abutment gate road configuration and cable support system in the Hiawatha Seam.

Jan 1, 1996

By Lewis Dr. Wade

It is really an honor and pleasure to be here at the 231d International Conference on Ground Control in Mining. My name is Lew Wade. Until recently I served as the Associate Director of Mining for NIOSH. That's a position that I recently moved out of and that position is now filled by Dr. Jeffery Kohler. I now serve as the Sr. Science Advisor to the NIOSH Director. The topic of my talk today will be coal mine ground control, a look back at the last 30 years, and then a brief look forward. I will start by talking about coal mine ground control statistics and with just a brief look, those statistics clearly show that you people are making a difference and there have been tremendous improvements. I'll then look at reasons for those improvements and those will include people working together (this conference being a prefect example of that), as well as technology development. In the area of technology development, I will give you my top-ten list of technology developments in the area of coal mine ground control. Then I'll end with a look towards the future and point to some possible future developments. Then, I will be so bold as to issue some challenges to the participants of this conference. Again, if you take the broad look back at underground coal mine roof falls and ground fatalities, you see this tremendous improvement that we have all come to appreciate. We have all been a part of improving the safety conditions for our underground miners and the number of fatalities is orders of magnitude less than what it was at the turn of the previous century. We have every reason to be pleased and proud of what we have been able to accomplish. Now, the question is why. What are the reasons for those improvements? Just look around this room. You see evidence of what I think are one of the principle reasons: miners, mine operators, government workers and researchers, equipment suppliers, people in research and academia working together. Coming together and sharing at a Conference like this over the last 23 years.

Jan 1, 2005