13.08.2013 Views

Rock Mechanics.pdf - Mining and Blasting

Rock Mechanics.pdf - Mining and Blasting

Rock Mechanics.pdf - Mining and Blasting

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 16.28 Predicted <strong>and</strong> measured<br />

subsidence profiles for a case of<br />

partial extraction (after Orchard <strong>and</strong><br />

Allen, 1970).<br />

MINING-INDUCED SURFACE SUBSIDENCE<br />

of the profiles produced by the individual panels. In the UK coalfields, this method<br />

has been used to give up to 70% extraction with 30–100 m wide pillars left between<br />

panels extracted with w/h < 1/3. Depending on the layout <strong>and</strong> the extraction ratio,<br />

reductions in maximum subsidence in the order of 80% may be achieved.<br />

As indicated in section 15.3.1, in modern practice, longwall panels are mined side<br />

by side with coal pillars which are generally referred to as chain pillars, separating<br />

adjacent panels (Figure 16.29). The pillars protect the roadways which provide access<br />

to the coal faces on either side of the panel. Holla <strong>and</strong> Barclay (2000) note that in the<br />

Southern Coalfield, New South Wales, Australia, panel widths reach 220 m <strong>and</strong> chain<br />

pillars are about 40 m wide. At mining depths of 300–500 m, the individual panels<br />

are sub-critical. The shape of the subsidence profile depends upon the sizes of the<br />

pillars <strong>and</strong> panels in relation to the mining depth. Holla <strong>and</strong> Barclay (2000) provide<br />

the following illustration of the effects of these relations.<br />

If the panels are narrow (say, w/h < 0.33) <strong>and</strong> the pillars are large (pillar width to<br />

mining depth ratio > 0.2), then subsidence over both the pillars <strong>and</strong> the panel centres<br />

will be small <strong>and</strong> the final subsidence profile will be flat <strong>and</strong> shallow (Figure 16.29b).<br />

In this case, the main strata would bridge across the pillars <strong>and</strong> surface disturbance<br />

would be minimal. The same sub-critical panels but with smaller pillars (pillar width<br />

to mining depth ratio = 0.06) will develop deep, smooth subsidence profiles in which<br />

there is no visible effect of the pillars (Figure 16.29c). Wider panels (w/h > 0.6) with<br />

larger pillars (pillar width to mining depth ratio > 0.1) will produce wavy profiles as<br />

the differential subsidence between panel centres <strong>and</strong> pillars becomes larger (Figure<br />

16.29d). In general, where possible, panels should be laid out in such a way that<br />

critical surface structures are located above the chain pillars between panels.<br />

Goaf treatment by strip packing or hydraulic or pneumatic solid stowing can<br />

reduce the subsidence in a single panel by more than 50% depending on the nature<br />

<strong>and</strong> timing of the treatment. The largest reductions are obtained for solid stowing<br />

carried out immediately after mining. Stowing has been used successfully in Europe,<br />

India, the UK <strong>and</strong> the USA, for example, to control subsidence, particularly for thick<br />

seam <strong>and</strong> multi-seam extraction (Hughson et al., 1987). However, it adds to mining<br />

costs <strong>and</strong> has an impact on rates of production in highly mechanised operations.<br />

516

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!