Professional Documents
Culture Documents
VENKATA RAMAYYA*
LOLLA SUDHAKAR**
M.V.RAMANA RAO***
India has a long history of commercial coal mining covering nearly 220 years
starting from 1774 by M/s Sumner and Heatly of East India Company in the Raniganj
Coal field along the western bank of river Damodar. The Singareni Collieries Company
Limited (SCCL) is one of the biggest public sector companies in India fulfilling the coal
need of South India since 1945. The different technologies are adopted for extracting
coal from underground dealing with many problems. One of the major problems in every
technology is ‘Subsidence’.
The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kothagudem – 507 119, Andhra Pradesh,
INDIA.
INTRODUCTION :
Padmavathi Khani (PVK) mine is the part of No.5 Incline, opened mainly for
coal extraction by Long wall method in Top seam of 9.75m thickness. Till now 8 Long
wall panels are extracted successfully with 150m face length and 9th panel with 60m face
length is under extraction, the face length is reduced from 150m to 60m due to shallow
depth of the panel. (worked out longwall panels and presently working panel is shown in
PLAN-1).
Since from the beginning of the PVK project, lot of study has been conducted by
the mine management and different scientific agencies in predicting the surface
subsidence. NIRM has studied extensively and arrived at some empirical relation to
calculate the maximum subsidence value for different regions of SCCL. But the predicted
subsidence profile using NIRM formula for Kothagudem region is giving different results
than the actual, is due to the existence of caved and stowed goaves of King seam beneath
the longwall panels of Top seam.
The empirical theories are principally based on observations and experience from
field subsidence studies. Some of the empirical methods have proved sufficiently reliable
for subsidence prediction, at least for a given region. Many of these have been
successfully applied in a number of countries, especially in Europe.
After collection and study of subsidence data from 111 previous worked out
panels (both longwall and bord & pillar panels) of Kothagudem region, NIRM scientists2
has suggested a Non-Linear equation relating the width to depth ratio (W/H) and
subsidence factor (Maximum subsidence/ height of extraction) of the following type.
S = h x a /(1+ ((W/H)/b)-c)
Where,
S = Maximum subsidence, m
h = Effective height of Extraction ( height of extraction x % of extraction), m
W = Width of the panel, m
H = Depth of the panel, m
The results obtained by applying the above formula to the already worked out
longwall panels at different W/H ratios are showing different profiles than the actual
profiles (predicted and actual profiles in detail form is given in Annexure-II). The
starting part of the profile is somewhat co-in siding with the actual profile but there
onwards it is showing incorrect value and at the end it is not closing with the ground
profile.
PREDICTION MODEL :
(for Kothagudem Area)
1. Surface subsidence profiles of different worked out longwall panels are drawn
from the survey results conducted on the surface over them.
2. For each profile the subsidence values are co-related with different W/H ratios of
that particular panel by marking W/H ratio along the horizontal axis.
3. The polynomial equation with the relation between W/H ratio and subsidence for
each of the subsidence profile is obtained by using the computer.
4. The combined statistical average of all the polynomial equations is calculated to
arrive at a final equation.
5. Thus obtained equation gives the relation between subsidence and W/H ratio and
can be used for predicting the maximum subsidence.
By following the above mentioned method, the following equation is obtained, which is
specific to Kothagudem area, because it covers the geological conditions of this area
only.
Where,
S = Maximum subsidence, m
W = Width of the panel, m
H = Depth of the panel, m
The subsidence profiles obtained for different panels using the above formula
(shown in Annexure-III) are more or less co-in siding with the actual profiles, but at
some points the variation is more and it is observed from the working plan of the mine,
the difference is due to the presence of goaves in King seam beneath the longwall panels
of Topseam.
The percentage of goaf area present beneath each sub part of the panel or between
the two consecutive subsidence stations present on the surface is calculated as shown in
above figure. The variation between the predicted subsidence (using Eq.1) and the actual
subsidence of worked out panels is co-related with the percentage of goaf areas present
beneath the panels and arrived at a solution (Variance Vs Goaf percentage curve is shown
in Annexure-IV) given below.
Gf = 0.0001(P)2-0.0128(P)-0.3265 --------- (Eq. 2)
Where,
Gf = Goaf Factor.
P = Percentage of Goaf area.
After calculating the goaf factor, just add it to the predicted subsidence (using Eq.1) to
get the actual subsidence, which almost co-in sides with the original subsidence value.
Thus,
Subsidence = Eq.1 +Eq.2
Subsidence = [0.1508(W/H)2-0.8248(W/H)-0.5292]+[0.0001(P)2-0.0128(P)-0.3265]
In case of a stowed goaf, add 1-(P/100) to the final subsidence. The corrected profiles
after applying the goaf factor and the original profiles of worked out panels are given in
Annexure-V.
ACCURACY / VALIDITY:
Since the predictions are made based on a vast data available with wide
variations, it is not possible to accurately predict any value, but can be predicted with in
the permissible limits. Mining is such an activity that is affected by different factors and
these factors takes part in accuracy also. Some of the factors affecting subsidence
prediction are given below.
CONCLUSION:
As these curves are site specific, they cannot be applied to the other regions of
coal mining having different geo-mining conditions, but the similar study can be done
with the available large data and empirical formulae can be developed for predicting the
surface profiles above the future working panels.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
REFERENCES:
4. Holla L., (1991), Reliability of Subsidence prediction methods for use in Mining
Decisions in New South Wales.
PLAN –1
ANNEXURE –I
Panel no.2
0
6 5 4 W/H 3 2 1 0
-0.5
-1
Subsidence (m)
-1.5
-2
-2.5
-3
Panel no. 3
0
6 5 4 3 2 1 0
W/H
-0.5
Subsidence (m)
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
Subsidence (m)
-0.8
-1
-1.2
-1.4
-1.6
-1.8
-2
Panel no.5
0
6 5 4 3 2 1 0
W/H
-0.5
Subsidence (m)
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
ANNEXURE-II
OBSERVED SUBSIDENCE Vs PREDICTED SUBSIDENCE
WITH NIRM FORMULA
PANEL NO.2
0
7 6 5 4 W/H 3 2 1 0
-0.5
-1
Subsidence (m)
-1.5
-2
-2.5
NIRM-Formula
Actual Subsidence -3
ANNEXURE-III
OBSERVED SUBSIDENCE Vs PREDICTED SUBSIDENCE WITH EQ.1
Panel no.2
0
6 5 4 W/H 3 2 1 0
-0.5
-1
Subsidence (m)
-1.5
-2
act.sub -2.5
Pr.Sub
-3
Panel no. 3
0
6 5 4 3 W/H 2 1 0
-0.5
Subsidence (m)
-1
-1.5
act.sub -2
pr.sub
-2.5
Subsidence (m)
-0.8
-1
-1.2
-1.4
-1.6
act.sub
-1.8
pr.sub
-2
Panel no.5
0
6 5 4 3 W/H 2 1 0
-0.5
Subsidence (m)
-1
-1.5
-2
act.sub
-2.5
pr.sub
ANNEXURE-IV
CURVE FOR FINDING THE GOAF FACTOR
0.4
0.2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
goaf%
Goaf Factor
-0.2
y = 0.0001x2 - 0.0128x - 0.3265
-0.4
-0.6
Goaf.fact
Poly. (Goaf.fact)
-0.8
ANNEXURE-V
OBSERVED SUBSIDENCE Vs PREDICTED SUBSIDENCE AFTER
APPLYING GOAF FACTOR
Panel no.2
0
6 5 4 W/H 3 2 1 0
-0.5
-1
Subsidence (m)
-1.5
-2
-2.5
act-sub
pred-sub -3
Panel no. 3
0
6 5 4 3 2 1 0
W/H -0.5
-1
Subsidence (m)
-1.5
-2
-2.5
p3
pred -3
Subsidence (m)
-1
-1.5
-2
p4
pred -2.5
Panel no.5
0
6 5 4 3 2 1 0
W/H
-0.5
Subsidence (m)
-1
-1.5
p5 -2
pred
-2.5