13.07.2015 Views

Handbook for Methane Control in Mining - AMMSA

Handbook for Methane Control in Mining - AMMSA

Handbook for Methane Control in Mining - AMMSA

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.

102Figure 7–2 shows a m<strong>in</strong>e entry approach<strong>in</strong>g a normal fault on the “footwall” side. The rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>gcoal reserve ahead of (and below, due to the fault) the approach<strong>in</strong>g entry often poses anemission hazard, i.e., although the normal fault may potentially be a gas conduit, until m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>gredistributes stresses, it is not generally an open conduit <strong>for</strong> gas flow as is the normal coal cleatsystem. There<strong>for</strong>e, when the entry is ramped downward to m<strong>in</strong>e the rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g reserve, hazardousconditions may occur when the gas trapped beh<strong>in</strong>d the fault is suddenly released <strong>in</strong>to them<strong>in</strong>e entry. Optimum degasification of such potential hazards is best accomplished via verticalmethane dra<strong>in</strong>age boreholes drilled from the surface (Figure 7–2, borehole B). Alternatively,directional methane dra<strong>in</strong>age boreholes from the m<strong>in</strong>e entry (Figure 7–2, borehole A) couldbe used.If a normal fault is encountered from the lower “hang<strong>in</strong>g” wall side (Figure 7–3), verticalmethane dra<strong>in</strong>age boreholes drilled from the surface (Figure 7–3, borehole A) are probably theonly viable method to remediate the hazard due to the geometry of this condition.Figure 7–2.—<strong>Methane</strong> dra<strong>in</strong>age of a normal fault from the“footwall” side.Reverse faults tend to <strong>for</strong>m bycompressional <strong>for</strong>ces and there<strong>for</strong>emay often act as barriers to flow,caus<strong>in</strong>g gas buildup beh<strong>in</strong>d them.Figure 7–4 shows a m<strong>in</strong>e entryapproach<strong>in</strong>g a reverse fault on the“hang<strong>in</strong>g” wall side. In mostcases, but especially if the fault<strong>in</strong>gis large-scale, vertical methanedra<strong>in</strong>age boreholes drilled from thesurface (Figure 7–4, borehole C)are probably the most viableoption to alleviate potential emissionhazards. Other options<strong>in</strong>clude vertical <strong>in</strong>-m<strong>in</strong>e boreholes(Figure 7–4, borehole A) ordirectional <strong>in</strong>-m<strong>in</strong>e boreholes(Figure 7–4, borehole B). Reversefaults, where m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g approachesfrom the “footwall” side, are optimallyaddressed with <strong>in</strong>-m<strong>in</strong>ecross-measure-type boreholes(Figure 7–5, borehole A) orvertical methane dra<strong>in</strong>age boreholesdrilled from the surface(Figure 7–5, borehole B).Figure 7–3.—<strong>Methane</strong> dra<strong>in</strong>age of a normal fault from the“hang<strong>in</strong>g” wall side.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!