Search Documents

The Pike River Coal Company is set to develop the Pike River Coal Mine in the Paparoa Ranges of New ZealandÆs South Island. The mine will be developed to extract a coking coal deposit of the Brunner Seam, some 46 km north-east of Greymouth, using a combination of continuous miners and hydraulic extraction.   The mining area is located within Department of Conservation (DOC) land and is adjacent to the escarpment of the Paparoa Range and the Paparoa National Park. As such, the major restriction to planned extraction is protection of:   +        the western escarpment, +        vertical and sub-vertical rock faces, +        permanent water courses, +        significant vegetation, and +        steep slopes.   The mine will use its elevation advantage to hydraulically flume coal from the working faces to the pit bottom area where it will be slurried to approximately 35 per cent density of solids and pumps down a slurry line to the coal prep plant some 10.5 km down the Pike River Valley. The coal will be sold on the export market as a high quality coking coal for international steel making.

Jan 1, 2005

The Pike River Coalfield is located on the West Coast of the South Island of New Zealand near the top of the Paparoa Range approximately 45 km north east of the coastal town of Greymouth. The Pike River Coal Company Ltd (PRCC) is owned jointly by New Zealand Oil & Gas Limited (NZOG) and private investors.   The project has followed a long and difficult road towards project implementation which is now a reality with mine construction scheduled to commence in November 2005. The first stage of the project, the consent and land access process has been the most difficult. Resource consents for the project were first applied for, granted and appealed in 1998. A second round of modified resources consents followed a similar path in 2001. Following consultation with a range of parties including local and central government as well as the Department of Conservation, in March 2004 the Minister of Conservation granted PRCC access through Department of Conservation land. In October 2004, the Environment Court issued a Memorandum of Consent granting resource consents with conditions that had been negotiated between PRCC and the appellants.   The second stage of the project, investigation and design, commenced in December 2004 and was completed in June 2005 with the PRCC board ratifying the project capital and operating budgets. While the investigation and design work was proceeding, PRCC were also engaged in securing private equity and bank debt funding for the project. Formal Board approval to proceed with project construction was granted in September 2005 following completion of fund raising.   The project consists of a number of significant construction activities, namely: +        10.5 km of mine access road through previous logged and virgin rain forest; +        2.2 km of tunnel through metamorphic rock; +        a coal preparation plant about 8.3 km from the mine portal; +        an underground coal preparation plant; and +        a major slurry pump station, high and low pressure underground water supply systems to support hydraulic mining units and underground coal transport respectively.   Project construction is expected to be completed in April 2007 with completion of the ventilation shaft. Mine production will commence in December 2006 with coal from pit bottom development which will be carried out by the mine owner.

Jan 1, 2005

A major new mine to be developed at Pike River during 2005 has been designed to have a minimal impact upon the environment, and an overall net conservation gain. The Pike River Coalfield is located on the West Coast of the South Island of New Zealand on the top of the Paparoa Range approximately 46 km north east of the coastal town of Greymouth. Pike River Coal Company Ltd (PRCC) holds a 40 year mining permit over the coalfield.   In October 2004, the Minister of Conservation granted PRCC access through 1.25 km of Department of Conservation land via an access agreement, and the Environment Court issued a number of consents for the development and operation of the mine, in addition to some existing consents.   The underground mine at Pike River is located under land administered by Department of Conservation, and has been designed to avoid or mitigate adverse environmental effects and integrate into the natural bush surroundings. The mine process has been designed to operate within an environmentally sensitive area and will incorporate technologically advanced methods of mining and processing. The mine process involves hydro mining of the coal, and transportation via a 12 km coal water slurry pipeline, to a dewatering complex located on PRCC land. This will ensure that traffic in the Pike River Catchment up to the mine is minimised.   An extensive series of management plans and monitoring programmes will be used to ensure that the environmental effects of the mine activities are minimised, by evaluating the performance of managerial procedures, and physical mechanisms in place to avoid or mitigate the effects. Trial mining and substance management plans in conjunction with an orthophoto and surface monitoring protocol will ensure that surface features, and water ways are protected from any adverse effects. The Blue Duck enhancement, and pest and predator control programme will help ensure that an overall net conservation gain is achieved.   Developing transparent working relationships and good communication with Department of Conservation, Iwi (Ngati Waewae and Ngai Tahu), and local environment groups has been and remains very important in the development of this project.

Jan 1, 2005

By M Rafty, A Markham, S Atkinson, M Heyting

Over recent years there has been a significant increase in the number of miners in the Pilbara region of Western Australia targeting channel iron deposits (CID) located in valleys, intersected by ephemeral creeks and below the groundwater table. The falling iron ore price has triggered a drive to reduce cost and maximise yield. Creek diversions provide an opportunity to maximise the utilisation of orebodies and extend the life-of-mine.Creek diversions that are required during mining operations to access ore and provide flood protection have historically been constructed as uniform engineered channels designed primarily for flow conveyance while minimising earthworks costs; however, the design of diversions becomes more complex when they are required to function in a similar way to the existing creek system during operations and remain stable during more extreme events than would typically occur following mine closure, in accordance with current regulatory guidance. The design specifications for closure are often more rigorous than the operational phase, and could incur significant additional cost to implement retrospectively if not planned and designed upfront.The complexity of diversion design depends on site specific factors such as: the size of the creek to be diverted; hydrology; corridor restrictions; geomorphology; hydrogeology; geology; environmental and heritage values; potential impacts and the risk to operations and environment. The complex interactions of these factors must be well understood and hydraulic modelling undertaken to characterise the existing creek system, demonstrate the diversions, provide adequate flood protection during operations, and can function in a similar way to the existing system following mine closure. This paper presents key design considerations for Pilbara creek diversions, operational and closure requirements, mine planning considerations, risks, cost saving opportunities, and the benefits of an integrated approach to design.CITATION:S Atkinson, A Markham, M Rafty and M Heyting, 2017. ‘Back to the future’ – resilience in historical context and implications for the future, in Proceedings Iron Ore 2017, pp 367–374 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Jul 24, 2017

A co-operative research project, combining Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) research scientists findings and company iron ore geologists' expertise, resulted in new concepts about the origins, distribution and complexitie of iron ores and their parent rocks (banded iron-formation or BIF) in the Hamersley Iron Province of Western Australia. Understanding these problems was important to the efficiency of exploration, development and ultimate mining of iron ores. This genetic model, based on a detailed mineralogic background, was modified by Mt Newman geologists to obtain a user oriented classification for practical application in the field.The proposed Pilbara Iron Ore Classification (PIOC) gives iron ore geologists a basis from which to understand, identify and record the various mineralogic and physical characteristics of the many genetically different ore types occurring within and between orebodies in the Pilbara. More definitive quality control over ore products can be achieved based on the detailed understanding of ore types which the PIOC allows, compared to current classifications which deal only with the physical nature of ores. Of equal importance, the classification remains sufficiently simple to enable owners, operators and buyers to achieve a basic appreciation of ore type variations.With little modification, it is believed the classification has applications beyond the Pilbara, to iron ore worldwide.

Jan 1, 1984

Iron ore in the Pilbara Region of Western Australia varies in composition giving iron ore a range of densities. An accurate density figure of the material leads to accurate calculations of production throughput. Density studies of two separate iron ore mines were conducted in the Pilbara. Procedures and results are reported here.The Pilbara Region of Western Australia has a number of iron ore operations. Two mines have conducted density studies of their materials. The purpose for the studies was to determine an accurate in situ bulk density that could be applied to volume and tonnage calculations of the operation. It was identified that density was one culprit causing calculation variations. Density is an important figure used to estimate ore reserves, equipment requirements, production rates and indirectly costs and sales revenue. One study was conducted at Rio TintoÆs Robe River Mine based near the town of Pannawonica. Its Mesa J orebody is currently being mined and is a low-grade deposit of goethite and hematite (Burnham, 2003). A separate study was conducted at BHP BillitonÆs Yarrie Mine situated north of Newman and east of Pardoo. Its orebody consists of high grade formed by a supergene enrichment of cherty material and a burial metamorphism to produce hematite (Richardson, 2002). The method used to determine density was by large-scale samples using the pre-mining in situ volume of the material and the weight in tonnes after mining.

Jan 1, 2003

By R Austerberry, S Green

Highly weathered ground, limited collar options and the need to achieve a desired outcome at the lowest possible cost led to the need to adopt a construction approach that had no established design methodology. The newest ventilation shaft at Mandalay Resources’ Costerfield Operations had to be established to a depth of 30 m through poor ground best described as ‘sticky swelling clay’, some of which was contained within an old backfilled pit.The ability to excavate a traditional presink was not possible due to limited space and the introduction of men into the shaft was to be avoided due to the associated safety risks and corresponding increase in cost. Piling in conjunction with raise boring and remote fibrecrete application was identified as a possible solution that could achieve the desired outcome at an acceptable level of risk.Construction of the piles was challenging and required continual refinement until an acceptable level of productivity could be achieved. Limitations on concrete delivery was taken into consideration to ensure hole stand-up time was acceptable and re-drills were not required. The adoption of a set process from alignment, drilling, concrete placement and testing ensured the desired design was achieved. Mine operators should consider the use of piling as a method of shaft stabilisation for the portion of raise bored shaft that passes through the weathered zone.The importance of quality control and attention to detail through the entire shaft construction process cannot be underestimated as issues such as insufficient geotechnical investigation, pile and pilot hole deviation, concrete and fibrecrete quality, as well as delays in the application of fibrecrete can place the success of the project at risk.This paper outlines key learnings from a client’s perspective with regards to the concept, planning, design, execution and completion of a 3.1 m diameter raise bore shaft through both weathered and highly structured ground at the Augusta Mine.CITATION:Green, S and Austerberry, R, 2014. Piling and raise bore construction – key learnings from a client’s perspective, in Proceedings 12th AusIMM Underground Operators’ Conference 2014 , pp 35–42 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Mar 24, 2014

This paper describes the methods of constructing timber barricades against pillars of ore in the South Mine, property of Broken Hill South Limited, Broken Hill, N.S.W., and discusses the behaviour of the various types of barricade alongside trucked sand filling and hydraulic stowed sand filling.Since the introduction of hydraulic stowing, cut and fill and overhand square letting methods have been used in mining the pillars. Such methods could not be used where the pillars had failed badly. The filling used is partially deslimed concentrating millresidue containing among other gangue minerals, calcite and a small amount of pyrrhotite and pyrite.The author is indebted to the mine superintendent of Broken Hill South Limited for permission to publish this paper.OLD METHODS OF CONSTRUCTING BARRICADES.Square Set Stopes.Before filling each stope the outer row of legs was lined inside with 10 in. x 2 in. boards spaced 2 in. apart. It was usual to tie the row of legs and caps together with timber dogs. As the space between the barricade and ground varied from nil to several feet, it was general practice to fill behind the lining boards. No provision was made to retain this sand during subsequent pillar stoping, consequently a run of sand right up the barricade could cause adilution of ore and serIOUS dIstortion of the barricade.

Jan 1, 1946

By Kneisley RO

This paper presents a brief overview of current bump mechanics theories and pillar design methodologies, and relates these concepts to experiences at two mines located in a north- central Utah coalfield where different pillar designs were used to control mountain bumps. Experiences gained at the first mine demonstrated the successful implementation of a two-entry, 9.8 m (32 ft)-wide, yield-pillar design. A U.S. Bureau of Mines field study quantified the timing of chain pillar yielding and resulting load transfer from the gateroad. In-mine pillar response, although apparently sensitive to site-specific conditions, compared favorably to estimates derived using two yield- pillar design methods. A second study conducted at another mine located in the same district, but subjected to different geologic conditions, documents the unsuccessful attempts to employ progressively narrower three-entry pillar designs based on successes achieved at the first mine site. This second mine never achieved a true yield-pillar design. Use of pillar widths ranging between 9.1 m (30 ft) and 27.4 m (90 ft) always resulted in violent bumps in the tailgate pillars. The pillars were either too large to yield, or too small to support peak operational loads. Hypothetical gateroad systems were evaluated using both analytical and empirical approaches for configurations comprised of two rows of conventional pillars, and systems incorporating both yield and abutment pillars. Analysis concluded that yield pillars less than 6.1 m (20 ft) wide and abutment pillars ranging between 30.5 m (100 ft) and 39.6 m (130 ft) square would be required to achieve a stable gateroad design. However, results of a field study conducted on a two-entry, 36.6 m (120 ft)- wide abutment pillar concluded that abutment pressures from the first panel overrode the pillar, and that a still larger pillar may be required to preclude bumps in the tailgate during second panel mining. Without the benefit of a demonstrated in-mine success, it is not clear which design would ensure elimination of gateroad bumps.

Jan 1, 1992

This paper gives an overview of the difficulties associated with determining the strength of hard rock pillars. Although a number of pillar design tools are available, pillar collapses still occur. Recent examples of large scale pillar collapses in South Africa were caused by weak partings which traversed the pillars. Currently two different methods to determine the strength of pillars are used namely, empirical equations derived from the back analyses of failed and stable cases and numerical modelling tools with an appropriate failure criteria. Both techniques have their limitations and additional work is required to obtain a better understanding of pillar strength. Empirical methods are popular and easy to use, but care should be exercise that the results are not extrapolated beyond the range of the data which were used to derive them. An example is the Hedley and Grant formula (derived for the Canadian uranium mines) that has been used for many years in the South African platinum and chrome mines (albeit with some adaptation of the K-value) to design the pillar layouts. Very few collapses have nevertheless been reported and it might even be too conservative an assumption of pillar strength in these mines. As an alternative, some engineers strongly advocate the use of numerical techniques to determine pillar strength. A close examination unfortunately reveals that these techniques also rely on many flawed assumptions. An area where numerical modelling is invaluable, however, is to study specific pillar failure mechanisms, such as the influence of weak partings on pillar strength. In conclusion, it appears that neither empirical techniques nor numerical modelling currently provide a solid basis to conduct pillar design. It is therefore recommended that both these techniques be utilised when confronted with a pillar design to obtain the best possible insight into the problem.

Nov 25, 2010

After some 50 years of worldwide research in relation to coal pillar mechanics and design as well as numerous workshops and technical papers related to these issues there is still some significant disagreement as to the approach one should adopt in the assessment and design of a coal pillar. Of course there are many different types of coal pillars that fulfil a wide range of roles at any particular mine and in this instance it is appropriate to have a 'tailored' approach for each pillar type in relation to the role it fulfils. However where it can become very difficult for the mine operators is when various researchers or consultants use or recommend significantly different approaches for the same type of pillar fulfilling the same role. By 1999 two pillar design techniques had been developed specifically for the Australian underground coal mining industry (ie The University of New South Wales Pillar Design Procedure, UNSW PDP and Analysis of Longwall Tailgate Serviceability, ALTS) and several other pillar design techniques were being practiced by individual consultants. The Australian industry hoped to resolve the issue of what technique to use for each pillar type and role, when it funded UNSW in 2000 to develop a 'Systems Approach to Pillar Design'. The findings of the abovementioned project were published in 2005 and while every attempt was made by UNSW to include the views of various local and overseas researchers and consultants it would be fair to say that a unified approach to pillar design in Australia was not adopted as a result of that project. This is the experience of one country where there has never been one central group solely undertaking such research in relation to pillar design (such as the Chamber of Mines in South Africa). This paper explores the Australian experience in terms of pillar research and what that experience may offer to researchers in Australia and other countries. At the First Australasian Ground Control in Mining Conference (2003) the first 'update' of the ALTS Design Methodology (ie ALTS II) was presented. In subsequent years the ALTS database was continually updated and significantly expanded such that it now includes detailed information in relation to both the tailgate (148 cases) and maingate belt road (58 cases). In addition to tailgate roof support and chain pillar design, the current version of ALTS (referred to as ALTS 2009) includes a maingate belt road roof support design module. This paper is also intended to update and summarise the development and application of the ALTS Design Methodology for longwall gateroad design over the last decade both directly and in the context of coal pillar research conducted in Australia over the last 15 years.

Nov 25, 2010

Surface subsidence caused by coal mining operations was the subject of a very successful symposium organised by the Illawarra Branch of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy in February, 1973. This symposium dealt with the principles of subsidence and overseas experiences arising out of underground mining. Since that time the New South Wales Department of Mineral Resources and Development (formerly the Department of Mines) has incorporated in the approval for pillar extraction certain conditions related to the monitoring of surface movement. Surveys and plans are required to be kept at mines where total or partial extraction of coal takes place. This paper traces the monitoring of surface movement in the Northern Coalfields of New South Wales over the past ten years. Reference is made to the National Coal Board's Subsidence Engineers' Handbook (1975) and how the guidelines expressed therein have been beneficial. Mining engineers in Australia are able to plan underground workings where minimum subsidence is allowable and are in a position to foreshadow the surface effects where total pillar extraction is carried out. In certain cases such surface effects can be minimised by structural design in buildings or pipelines.

Jan 1, 1980

Surface subsidence caused by coal mining operations was the subject of a very successful symposium organised by the Illawarra Branch of the Australas- ian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy in February, 1973. This symposium dealt with the principles of subsidence and overseas experiences arising out of underground mining. Since that time the i eew South Wales Department of Mineral Resources and Development (formerly the Depart- ment of Mines) has incorporated in the approval for pillar extraction certain conditions related to the monitoring of surface movement. Surveys and plans are required to be kept at mines where total or partial extraction of coal takes place. This paper traces the monitoring of surface movement in the Northern Coalfields of New South Wales over the past ten years. Reference is made to the National Coal Board's Subsidence Engineers' Handbook (1975) and how the guidelines expressed therein have been Beneficial.

Jan 1, 1980

By W L. Lane, T R. Yanske

The Doe Run Company and its predecessors have been mining for over 130 years utilising the room and pillar mining method. This method has left approximately 20 per cent of the orebody in the remaining pillars. The original design and planning for the mines did not include extensive pillar extraction. This paper summarises the introduction of the pillar extraction and backfill techniques which have been implemented since 1991. These techniques include the use of low cost fill walls up to 20 m in height and the use of slinger trucks for topping off the fill. In conjunction with these accomplishments, much experience and confidence has been gained in the use of numerical modelling as a method of predicting pillar stability as the mining of pillars progresses. These advances have led to pillar extraction becoming a major portion of the overall production and have added to the mine life of Doe RunÆs six operating mines.

Jan 1, 1998

By Yanske TR, Lane WL

The Doc Run Company and its predecessors have been mining for over 130 years utilising the room and pillar mining method. This method has left approximately 20 per cent of the orebody in the remaining pillars. The original design and planning for the mines did not include extensive pillar extraction. This paper summarises the introduction of the pillar extraction and backfill techniques which have been implemented since 1991. These techniques include the use of low cost fill walls up to 20 in in height and the use of stinger trucks for topping off the fill. In conjunction with these accomplishments, much experience and confidence has been gained in the use of numerical modelling as a method of predicting pillar stability as the mining of pillars progresses. These advances have led to pillar extraction hecoming a major portion of the overall production and have added to the mine life of Doe Run's six operating mines.

Jan 1, 1998

By Ross J. F

A pillar 'is a block of coal left in the first working of a coal seam for the purpose of supporting the superincumbent strata in such a manner that the winning out roadways will be safe to traverse by men and by the coal transport system.PRINCIPLES OF PILLAR EXTRACTION.The size of a pillar is chiefly dependent on the depth of cover, and in a lesser degree on the nature of the coal, or the condition in which the seam has been laid down. In a seam at 1,100ft. depth of cover, and assuming a spec'ific gravity of 2.5 overall for the cover strata, a pressure of 1,200lb. per sq. in. is the loading on the top surface of the coal seam before mining begins.When mining commences, and as the pillars are formed, an increased load is imposed on the coal left in the pillars, according to the percentage of coal extracted in the first working. Thus, if 25% extraction is taken in the first working, the load on the pillars is theoretically increased from 1,200lb. per sq. in. to 1,600lb. per sq. in. over the area mined. If this state of things went on indefinitely it would not be possible wholly to extract a pillar because of the extreme pressure tliat would be thrown on the diminishing portion; but, fortunately, another element, that of time, enters into and assists the process of extraction.If the superimposed strata were of an entirely plastic nature, this time factor could not operate, as the cover weight would settle instantly on the remaining portion of the p'illar and finally overwhelm it. The cover strata above a pillar generally have a certain rigidity which does not allow the superimposed weight to settle instantly on the pillar fraction, and it requires a period of time to elapse before the extra weight is felt by the pillar.The time factor varies widely, and is governed entirely by local conditions; it can only be determined by experience gained on the spot or in close proximity to the area of operations. It is dependent on the strength of the strata and its characteristics under bridging conditions.It is, therefore, logical to assume that the more rapidly a pillar can be extracted the greater will be the safety factor and also the percentage of recovery of coal.Up to the present time, the operation of the extraction of pillars in this country has been, with a few exceptions, a manual one, and before mechanization of Collieries can be fully accomplished, the process will have to be performed mecharrically.

Jan 1, 1947

Total extraction is a misnomer and invariably some coal losses occur in the mining of pillars. "Fulls" pillar extraction is by the pocket and fender method, the splitting method or the open end method, with extraction in the pillar, and in rows of pillars in planned sequence, using combinations of coal and timber and roof-bolts for support. Where circumstances dictate, partial extraction is used, leaving behind portions of pillars in large blocks for support. The use of such extraction plans and supports as minimum guidelines has contributed greatly to safety in United States Coal Mines.

Jan 1, 1974

By D P. Sainsbury, J Western, B L. Sainsbury, V Mutton, P E. Petrie

Remnant rib pillars at Castlemaine Goldfields Ltd’s Ballarat Gold Project have been sterilised by the placement of loose rock fill in production stopes. The application of selectively injecting low-viscosity grout into the backfilled stopes to form a stabilised material has enabled recovery of the previously sterilised pillars. This paper outlines the engineering design, quality control and quality assurance program implemented to ensure the safe and efficient recovery of the rib pillars. The successful program included laboratory testing, numerical exposure stability modelling and in situ monitoring.CITATION:Sainsbury, B L, Sainsbury, D P, Western, J, Petrie, P E and Mutton, V, 2014. Pillar recovery adjacent to stabilised rock fill at the Ballarat Gold Project, in Proceedings AusRock 2014: Third Australasian Ground Control in Mining Conference , pp 77–86 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Nov 5, 2014

By V Mutton, L Potts, D Joyce

This paper describes the method of extracting sill pillars within the underground operation from under unconsolidated mullock fill at the Cracow Gold Mine. This pillar recovery method was initially successfully used to recover sill pillars at Crusader Mine, Western Australia in 2001. Globally significant resources have been sterilised due to the placement of loose rock fill above crown pillars and within adjacent stopes. The method described here offers significant opportunities to increase recovery of sill pillar recoveries.The royal orebody sill pillars at Cracow Gold Mine form a significant resource. Extraction of these pillars needed to be undertaken with minimal ore dilution and maximum ore recovery. The application that was selected to consolidate the loose mullock fill above each pillar used an injection grouting process (Minova FB200).Cracow Gold Mine mining method is bottom up bench mining. The pillars were left within the orebody to allow for stoping to commence whilst the decline was being developed. Due to the remainder of the orebody being extracted the only access to consolidate the backfill was from the sill pillar extraction level. Numerous problems were encountered and overcome from product selection and trial, system of injection to extraction.This pillar recovery process achieved a 95 per cent recovery of the sill pillar compared with an estimated 60 per cent typical for other mining options.CITATION:Potts, L, Mutton, V and Joyce, D, 2012. Pillar recovery at Cracow gold mine using grouted consolidated mullock, in Proceedings Narrow Vein Mining 2012 , pp 179-184 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Mar 26, 2012

Sublevel open stoping was introduced at Rosebery in 1972; most of the stoping prior to this was horizontal cut and fill. Sublevel open stoping presently accounts for 65% of the Rosebery underground production of 560 000 tonnes per year. This primary stoping technique leaves 50% of the ore in the crown and transverse pillars. The methods used in pillar recovery to date are reviewed and comments made on the success of these operations.

Jan 1, 1982