STRESS AND STABILITY IN COAL RIBS IDES AND PILLARS

by

A.H. Wilson, PhD, BSc, CEng, MIMechE, MIMinE

Head, Rock and Coal Mechanics Branch
Mining Research and Development Establishment
National Coal Board, UK

INTRODUCTION

Compared to the rocks encountered in, say, metalliferous mining or tunnel drivage in igneous and
metamorphic rocks, the strata associated with the coal measures are relatively soft. If excavations are made
at depths greater than one or two hundred metres, zones of fractured or yielded rock develop around the
openings. The stress which can be taken by yielded rock at the boundary of an opening is low, but because
of the friction present between the fragments or particles,the sustainable stress rises rapidly with
distance from the opening until sufficient confinement has been developed to prevent failure of the rock in
the first place . Thereafter the laws of elasticity will apply and increasing distance will reduce the stress
field until conditions consistent with the cover load are reached.

For rocks which maintain their elastic condition right to the edge of an opening, finite element analysis
and similar techniques have proved successful in determining the distribution of stress around the opening.
This approach, however, is not successful when a yield zone is introduced between the elastic zone and the
opening. Nevertheless, some estimate is required if help is to be given in the siting of roadways and in
the determination of adequate pillar sizes. This matter is of particular importance in the planning of new
mines especially if retreat faces are involved, as extensive roadway drivage must be planned and executed
before experience of the effects of face extraction is gained.

In 1977, the author published (1] a method based on 'stress balance'. The total aggregate downward load
over a large area will remain that of the cover load even after part of the coal seam has been removed.
Any rise in stress in ribs ides and pillars must be offset by an equivalent stress reduction across roadways
and other areas of extraction, and vice versa. Knowledge of one can lead to an estimate of the other,
provided the general form of the stress distribution can be postulated. It is the object of this paper to
revue the method in more detail and to give further examples of its successful application.

DEFICIENCY OF LOAD ON EXTRACTED AREAS

If the stress field on any particular section of ground is established, the total load on the section can
be obtained by calculating the volume below the stress envelope . If the general state can be represented
by a two-dimensional cross-section, the total load per unit depth of section will be the area below the
stress curve . This approach can also be used to ascertain the decrease in load below cover load of an
excavated area. If the excavation is not caved, the load deficiency will be the cover load times the plan
area in the three-dimensional situation, the cover load times the excavation width in the two-dimensional
situation. The contribution made by roadway supports will be small compared to that of the overburden and
may be ignored.

In an excavation which is caved, the overburden will tend to lower onto the caved material and will
acquire a certain degree of support depending on the amount of compression of the material. As the lowering
of the roof in the waste related to distance from a ribside, and the rise in stress of compacted material
related to decrease in height, can both be approximated [2] by logarithmic curves, viz

M M
w Kl log M-c and 0 = K2 log M-c

where w distance from the ribs ide

o stress in compacted material
M height of extraction
c closure of the excavation
and Kl and K2 are constants,

it follows that the rate of stress rise into the waste, o/w, will be approximately linear. It is now
generally accepted that 'rear abutments' (areas in the waste where the stress is above cover load) do not
exist and, therefore, provided the area of extraction is of sufficient extent, the stress will rise
linearly to cover load and thereafter remain constant.
- 1 -
 Because of the difficulties of stress measurement in the waste, the distance required to reach cover load
has not in fact been measured. However, in their research as to the width of the so called 'pressure arch',
a team of investigators in Britain [31 made detailed observations of a large number of roadways in their
effort to determine the extent of the reduction of stress below cover load . The findings of this team are
summarised in Figure 1, in which it can be seen that most of t~e values lie in a band between 0.2H and 0.3H,
where H is the depth helow surface. In subsequent calculations the value of 0.3H will be adopted, since
this throws the greater stress onto the ribside and hence will err on the side of safety .

Using a distance of 0.3H for the return to cover load distance implies a critical width of extraction of
0.6H at seam level to reach maximum closure at the centre. This is in contrast to the 1.4H critical width
found in Britain to produce maximum subsidence at the surface (41 and requires some comment . It has been
claimed that subsidence at intervening horizons below the surface can be deduced by assuming a 'free
surface' to exist at the horizon in question [51. This concept has been used, in conjunction with the
Subsidence Engineers' handbook [41, as the means of plotting Figure 2 which shows intermediate subsidences
for a face 200 m long at a depth of 500 m. Major vertical extension of the strata is implied as the face
horizon is approached in the vicinity of the ribside. Such major extension has been observed in practice
[6, 71 and will result in a greater closure rate at seam level than is implied by surface subsidence. Hence
acceptance of a critical width of 0.6H at seam level is not incompatible with the 1.4H critical width at the
surface.

It is evident from the foregoing that the reduction of stress below cover load in an extensive caved
waste greater than 0.6H across can be approximately represented by a triangular stress distribution, as
shown in Figure 3a. If the waste is less than 0.6H across, the stress in the centre will not reach cover
load and the stress reduction associated with each ribside will be trapezoidal in shape, as shown in
Figure 3b. It can be easily shown from Figure 3 that the load deficiency AW' ie the area of the stress

distance diagram below cover load associated with each ribside will be:

for W > 0.6H, ~ 0.15 Y H2

W
for W < 0.6H, AW ! W Y (H - 1.2)

where W total width of extracted area

H depth of cover

y average density of strata.

INCREASE OF LOAD ON RIBSIDES AND PILLARS

Properties of Yield Zone

If a longwall extraction is considered as an extended crack, theoretically there would be infinite stress
at the end . Soft rock is incapable of taking high stress at the boundary of an opening and a yield zone
will develop. The nature of the yielded rock will probably vary across the yield zone. Near the boundary
of the opening it will exhibit clastic properties; near the boundary of the elastic zone the behaviour may
be more plastiC in nature. The consideration of multiple zones, however, introduces intolerable complexity
into the calculations and for the purpose of this discussion it will be assumed that the material in the
yield zone possesses a single mode of behaviour, that of a granular material. This will permit the use of
concepts of soil mechanics in the yield zone, and the theories of elastiCity in the elastic zone beyond.

The states of stress and the widths of granular yield zones have been determined for circular roadways
[8,91, for ribsides where the seam is weak compared to roof and floor [1, 81. and approximately estimated
for ribsides where roof, seam and floor are of similar strength [11. By integrating the area below the
stress curve over the width of the yield zone. the load taken by the yield zone may be determined. The
appropriate formulae. simplified by the assumption that the cohesion of broken material is small compared to
the strata stresses, are set out below.

- 2 -
(a) Ribsides Weak seam between
strong roof and Roof, seam and floor
floor of similar strength

F k-l
Vertical stress

Peak abutment stress

°y k P

kq + 00
* e
l).!
°y k P
I I
* it

kq + 00
2x
+ 1

Width of yield zone x.. =!.

b F
R. n (q )
p* : [,}J' -.)
k
k-l
Load taken by yield zone F
Mk (q-p * ) M *
2"P -1

(b) Roadways (width similar to height)

Tangential stress kp *{ r
-;--
o
I k-l

2 kq + 00
Peak abutment stress
° k + 1
1

Radius of yield zone r =

where x distance from ribside, r = radius from centre of roadway

k triaxial stress factor ~ ~ sin ~ where , . = angle of internal friction

sin ~,

*
P support resistance + strength of broken material. The strength of broken
material may be taken as approximately equal to 0.1 MPa [9], ie p*o=.p + O.lMPa,
where p is the resistance offered by the support system
q stress field remote from the excavation. In the case of a virgin area, q = y H
where y is the average density of strata and H is the depth of cover
M height of extraction of opening in question
ro radius of roadway, or in the case of a roadway where width is approximately
equal to its height, the radius to give the same cross-sectional area

2 -1 -1
F k-l + (k-l) /k, where tan is in radians
/k /k tan

unconfined compressive strength of strata in situ. This may be obtained approximately

°0
by dividing the laboratory determined strength by a factor f [9] where:

f 1 for strong massive unjointed rock

f 2 for widely spaced joints or bedding planes
f 3 for more jointed but still massive rocks
f 4 for well jointed and weaker rocks
f 5 for coal and unstable seatearths
f 6 and 7 for fault zones.

If the width of a roadway is great compared to its height, then the strata on either side may be considered
as ribsides, and the formulae in (a) above can be employed. On occasions, however, the roadway conditions
will lie somewhere between (a) and (b), and some means of interpolating between the two limits is required.
If an opening in an elastic medium in a uniform hydrnstatic stress field q is considered, i t can be shown
[10] tt.at the tangential stress at the ends of the major axis is 2R.q where R is the ratio of the major to
the minor axis.

- 3 -
Hence for peak abutment stress,

a R x 2q

R x peak abutment stress for a circular roadway.

If a similar rule can be assumed to apply to the peak abutment stress in a yield zone

; = R(2 kq + OQ) where R roadway width

k + 1 roadway height

up to the limit of 0 = kq + 0
0
, when Ribside Conditions (a) are assumed to take over. As the maximum stress

reached in the yield zone is approximately a- 0 0

[8], the corresponding values of xb may be found by

inserting (; - 0 for 0 y in (a) above, and Ab may be determined by integrating over the new width x '
0 b

Stress Decay in the Elastic Zone

Beyond the yield/elastic boundary, the stress concentration will decay until i~ eventually reaches the
cover load . This has been determined for the circular roadway [1 , 8], viz

q + o q -
r

where A
= I (k-1)q + 0
k+1
0
k-1

No such analysis exists for the stress decay in a ribs ide or a roadway where the height is not similar to
its width. Whether the decay will follow a power law, exponential law or some other law is not known, but as
an approximation an exponential law has been assumed. The stress decay curve will commence at (; and be
asymptotic to the cover load q . This requires an equation of the form

~ ~ x
(0 - q) (a - q) exp (----C--)

where 0 is the vertical stress, x is the distance from the ribside, C is a constant having the units of

distance and exp (F) = eF. The area As above the cover load line, as shown in Figure 4, will then be

A (O-q). dx
s

C (o-q)

The value of the constant C can be determined by equating the total area deficiency below the cover load
line to the total area augmentation above it. Referring to Figure 4

ie A + q.l), Ab + As
w

But A
-s
C (0 - q)

A + q.x - Ab
.. C w b
0- q -
Formula f o r all the terms on the right-hand s ide of this equation have a lready been given .
- 4 -
 REQUIRED WIDTHS OF PILLARS

Long Protection Pillars

A roadway placed in the highly stressed area of the ribside will suffer damage. As the assumed stress
decay is asymptotic to the cover load, theoretically it is not possible to go beyond the area of increased
stress. Most roadways will tolerate a small increase in stress, however, without suffering undue damage
and it is now a matter of deducing a logical position for the roadway in terms of the stress-distance
diagram. If the exponential decay curve is replaced by a triangular stress distribution of equal area as
s h own in Figure 4, the 'stress balance' will be maintained in the presentation. If the roadway is then
placed a further distance xb away, say, it would lie in an area where the stress was not much above

cover load. The advantage of taking the extra distance as xb will be apparent later.

If, as s h o wn in Figure 4, b is the base of the equivalent triangle, then

! b (a q) C (a - q)

b 2 C.

Hence a roadway should not be placed nearer to a ribs ide than 2 (C + x ), which fixes the size of the barrier
b
pillar required in order to give protection to a roadway from an excavation beyond.

In retreat mining, finger pillars are frequently left between the faces to protect the roadways. The
roadways are pre-driven and the widths of the intervening pillars must be planned in such a way that, when
a face is taken, the roadway of the next face is not seriously affected. Hence 2 (C + x ) also fixes the
b
required size of pillars in finger extraction. If the equivalent triangular stress distribution is
assumed, then (followang the extraction of both flanking faces) the stress triangles will add together
and the pillar of minimum required width will have an elastic core with an even stress distribution 0 right
across. Flanking the core on both sides will be yield zones, which retain the centre core in the elastic
state. If the average stress in the core were to rise above cr the pillar would not fail, but the width of
the yield zones would have to increase beyond that originally established when the adjacent faces were won.
In consequence, the roadways will suffer damage because of the additional strata expansion.

In practice the centre core may not have an even stress right across. Measurements made by stressmeters
have indicated stress peaks within the elastic zone [II, 12). The average stress across the pillar,
however, has still been found to be that deduced by the 'stress balance'.

Rectangular Pillars

In the long continuous pillars, the stress distance diagram can be treated two-dimensionally and the
areas above and below the cover load brought into balance. With a rectangular pillar system a three-
dimensional concept must be considered, involving volumes below the stress envelope. In this case it is
more convenient to take the total volume above the zero stress plane (which represents the total load on
the pillar) and balance the total load which the pillar will take to the total load imposed upon it.

Consider a pillar of length P and width Q at the limit of stability (ie the stress taken by the 'core'
is a ): as the equation of the stress rise in the yield zone is known, it is possible to obtain the volume
of the envelope by integration; but this leads to expressions of such complexity that their use is
impracticable, particularly in view of the other approximations already made. A close approximation to the
volume required can be obtained by adding the volume of the 'core' to the cross-sectional area Ab of the
yield zone multiplied by its mean perimeter. If this volume (or load) is represented by L , then
R

LR a (P - 2 ~) (Q - 2 ~) + 2 Ab (P + Q - 2 ~).

In a room and pillar system, the total load imposed on the pillar will be the dead weight of the ground
above the pillar and half the roadway width 2w around it. This will be

LI =y H (P + w) (Q + w) .

In a given instance the length P will usually be fixed, and the required width Q can be found by
equating LR to L ·
I
- 5 -
 APPLICATION OF FORMULAE TO SPECIFIC CASES

How to use the formulae developed for the distribution of stress and for stability of pillars is best
seen by applying them to specific cases. Where possible, situations have been chosen which give some
indication of the success or otherwise of the predictions made.

Stress Prediction ahead of a Longwall Face

In the course of development of the MRE Stressmeter [131 the change of stress ahead of a longwall
retreating face was measured at Bates Colliery in Northumberland [141. The stressmeters were placed at the
ends of long boreholes drilled parallel to and well in advance of the face, and both the stress change and
the convergence of the roadway ahead of the face were measured as the face approached. These results can be
compared to the hypothetically predicted stress change.

Known information:

height of face extraction M 1.32 m

depth of cover H 229 m
support resistance against face p 0

Typical information assumed:

triaxial stress factor for coal k 4

laboratory strength of coal 0 25 MPa
reduction factor for in-situ strength f 5.

The roof and floor were mudstone, therefore yield probably occurred in roof, seam and floor. The face
length exceeded 0.6H. The average density of strata in Britain is equivalent to 0.025 MN/m3. Hence:
*
total support resistance p p + 0.1 MPa = 0.1 MPa

0
strength of strata in situ 0 5 MPa
0 f

cover load q y H = 5.73 MPa

abutment peak & kq + 0

0
= 27.9 MPa

width of yield zone x

b
M
2
I q
(_)
p*
,~, -1 I 1.88 m

l
k
q k-l
load taken by yield zone ~ p* 14.5 MN/m
Ab ( -*) -1
2 p

load deficiency in waste A 0.15 Y H2 196.7 MN/m

w

A + q.x - A
w b b
exponential decay factor C 8.70 m
& - q

the equation for the stress decay curve in advance of the face is

xb - x
o = (0 - q) exp (----C-) + q 22.2 exp (1.88 - x) + 5.73 MPa.
8.7

This stress decay curve has been plotted in Figure 5, in which it is compared to the measured values from
the two stressmeters and to the roadway convergence. The stressmeters probably give good qualitative
information, but quantitatively they are not too reliable; hence the close agreement with the readings
from stres smeter Plug 1 is probably no more than coincidental. However, both these stressmeters and others
installed ahead of a neighbouring retreat face all began to show a stress rise about 30 m ahead of the
face. This was confirmed by the onset of measured roadway convergence.

- 6 -
Roadway Closure in the Blackshale

Whittaker and Singh have published measurements of closure of roadways protected by pillars of various
widths in the Blackshale Seam of Nottinghamshire (15). Since the amount of roadway closure will be
associated with the degree of stress produced by the face on the other side of the pillar, the pattern o f
roadway closure should follow a similar pattern to the hypothetical stress curve .

Typical average values for the conditions investigated were depth of cover H = 500 m, length of face
W = 230 m, and roadway height 3 m. The measured triaxial stress factor for this particular seam was k = 3 . 3
By employing the method outlined above, the hypothetical stress decay was calculated, giving

10.7 - x
cr 28.8 exp( 30 . 2 ) + 12.5 MPa .

This curve is shown in Figure 6.

The data presented by Whittaker and Singh involved various depths of cov e r and various lengths of face.
Corrections were made to accommodate these variations to a standard depth o f 500 m and a standard face width
of 230 m by multiplying the measured roadway convergence per metre of heigl~ c/ h by the ratio a s /a , where a
is the calculated stress using the actual depth and face length, a s is the c alculated stress using the
standard depth and face length. The roadway closures have been plotted against pillar width in Figure 6.
The tail of the arrow indicates the original measured value, the head of the arrow the modified value.
Apart from sites 4 and 13, the fit is reasonable and is improved by the correction for depth and face
length. In the publication, site 4 was reported as having a 'successful inner ring', presumably
additional support, and at site 13 wood chocks had been used in place of the normal stone packs. There
were no comments about the other sites.

Comparison with the 'One Tenth Depth plus 15 yd' Rule

A rule of thumb frequently used in Britain for fixing pillar sizes between wide areas of extraction is to
make the width equal to 'one tenth the depth plus 15 yd'. This rule is based on many years of experience.

The average laboratory strength of coal in Britain is 20 MPa, giving an approximate in-situ value of
about 4 MPa. In general, although the sides of an opening are well shielded, there is little positive
resistance to sideways closure and a value of p* = 0.1 MPa can be assumed . The average height of a
roadway is about 3 m. By inserting these values in the vari0us equations for wide areas of extraction, it
can be shown that:

width of yield zone xb

exponential decay factor C ~ 0.15~~ m

. (k-1) + 160
H

The minimum required pillar width is Q

For the average coal, the triaxial stress factor k varies from 3 . 5 t o 4.0. Values of Q f o r both these
values of k were calculated for various values of H and are shown in Figure 7. Very occasionally values
of k as low as 3.0 are also found and this lower limit of k has been shown for completeness. The graph o f
the 'one tenth depth plus 15 yd' is shown by the dotted line. For the average coal (k = 3.5 to 4.0), the
correlation with the hypothetical pillar size is good.

- 7 -
Pillar Sizes at Kellingley Colliery, Yorkshire

A recent publication [16] outlines experience with pillar sizes in the Beeston Seam at Kellingley Colliery.
This allows the hypothetical calculated pillar size to be compared with the actual observed behaviour of
the pillars.

Information supplied in publication:

depth of cover H 650 m

total width of extraction W 285 m
roadway height M 3.66 m

Information assumed:

in-situ strength of coal o 4 MPa

o
resistance of roadway side p * 0.1 MPa
triaxial stress factor k 3.75

Insertion of these values in the relevant formulae gives

xb = 9.8 m, C = 29.6 m

hypothetical pillar size Q =2 (C + x )

b
= 78.8 m.

To quote from the publication (p 400) as to the actual behaviour of the pillars: "working the Beeston Seam
at a depth of about 650 metres has established empirical pillar dimensions which have influenced design:

45 metres - impossible to maintain the roadway

60 metres - severe roadway distortion necessitating replacement of arches
80 metres - limited roadway distortion requiring dinting and occasional back ripping
over 80 metres - dinting only required".

Thus the performance confirms the hypothetical calculation.

Pillars in a Canadian Coalmine

In a Canadian coalmine, experience has been gained of mining at depths between 100 m and 600 m. During
the course of this extraction, pillar sizes were fixed using a formula

H
- - = 7000
1-R

where H is the depth in feet and R the fraction of extraction. This is a common type of formula used in
North America and is based on the assumption that there is an even stress across the pillar and that the
area between the pillars takes no load. Mining to a depth of 1400 m was planned, and at such depth the
minimum pillar size of 414 m (between 217 m longwall faces - the standard in the mine) predicted by this
formula was obviously far too wide.

The mine was visited, and the following information obtained:

laboratory strength, roof 48 MPa, seam 17 MPa, floor 67 MPa (ie seam was weak compared to roof and floor)

in-situ strength of seam 00 17/5 = 3.4 MPa

triaxial stress factor k 3.0
face width W 217 m
roadway height M 2.4 m
degree of total side resistance p* 0.3 MPa.

Using the formulae given in the previous sections, hypothetical minimum pillar sizes were calculated over
a range of depth from 100 m to 1400 m. The results are plotted in Figure 8. For comparison, pillar sizes

H
based on the formula 1-R 7000 and Q 0.1 H + 15 yd have also been indicated. Over the depth range 100 m

to 600 m (the range over which the previously used formula had been confirmed), all three methods provide
similar results. Thereafter they diverge, the hypothetical formulae giving the lower value. Below about
400 m the wastes formed between the pillars can no longer be considered wide compared to their depth
(W < 0.6 H), hence the rapid fall away of the hypothetical pillar width .
- 8 -
Coal Pillars in the USA

In 1964, C.T. Holland published data on the stability of coal pill~s in the USA [17] , and Table III of
this publication is reproduced below:
Table III.
IIlFOICATIOlT Oli PILLARS VllICH HAVE BttN LEFT FOR OVERBURDIN SUPPORT

IT AHE OF SUI·: A B C D I: , G H

Overburden Thickne3s (ft) 500-700 700-1000 100-300 50-225 120-380 555 avg. 300-600 140-265
Coal Thickness (ft) 6 .3 3.7 5.0 4.0 6.5 2.75 ~ 60·
Pillar lIidth (rt) 37t 37 14-25 16-40 20-35 20-30 30 avg. 10
Opening 1Iidth (rt) 26 25 16 25-50 15-17 35-45 35 16
Percent Recovery 40 45 57 6a 50 6a 62 70
Compressive Strength
3-in cube 30n 51)8 3420 1606 3221 4728 3700 3420
stress in Pillars

A.verag e 830-1170 1270-1820 240-700 156-700 240-760 1740 790-1580 470-890

Maximum by PE 2760-3860 5400-7700 575-1730 600-2750 370-1100 6000
Estimated Ultimate Strength
of Coal in 0. Cube HaTing
Edge Dimensions Equal to
Bed Thi cknes. psi 600 1340 780 406 630 1450 910-750 780
Estimat ed Ultimate Strength
in Pillars psi 1470 4) 00 1)10-1750 1000 nOO-1440 )900-4800 2020 avg. noo
Safety Factor of Pillara 1.8-1.) 3.5-2.4 7.)-1.9 6.4-1.4 6.0-1.5 2.2-2.8 2.6-1 .) 2.4-1.2
Length or Time Pillars have SeYeral Shortly after
Supported OTerburden )4 yrs
(1956 )
30 yro
(1956)
6-12
(1964
fS 25-)0 yr.
(1956)
4 yrs
(1960)
yr.
(1960)
4 yr.
(1964)
section
finished it
failed

There is much practical information of use in the Table, but no indication is given why the pillars of
Seam H failed, while the other pillars remained stable for many years.

Using the maximum depths of cover and widths of room, the hypothetical widths of stable pillars were
calculated using the methods detailed previously, and are listed below.

Name of Seam A B C D E F G H

Max. overburden (ft) 700 1000 300 225 380 555 600 265

Coal thickness (ft) 6. 3 3.7 5.0 4.0 6. 5 2.75 6.0 5.0

Max. room width (ft) 26 25 16 50 17 45 35 16

2
Lab. strength (lb/ in ) 3011 5138 3420 1606 3221 4728 3700 3420

Hypothet i cal pillar size (Q ft) 28.6 19.8 17.5 22.4 23.3 18.9 28.5 16.8

Actual pillar size (Q ' ft) 37 . 5 37 25 40 35 30 30 10

Safety Factor ~' 1.3 1.9 1.4 1.8 1.5 1.6 1.1 Failure
Q

Failures of the pillars in Seam H are now predicted, and even if the minimum value of depth of cover,
140 ft . is taken a minimum hypothetical pillar size of 14 ft will be required in this seam, compared to the
10 ft actually lef t .

- 9 -
 CONCLUSION

A set of formulae which allows the calculation of the minimum pillar width for roadway protection has been
developed. Although to a large extent built up from concepts difficult to prove in practice, the overall
deductions fit the observed facts. The formulae have already been quite widely used, but quoted examples
have been limited to cases where some form of verification was possible. Further examples may be found in
reference [ll. The triaxial stress factor (or its equivalent, the angle of internal friction) plays a
dominant r o le in the calculation, a parameter hitherto ignored.

The author thanks the Director of Mining Research and Development, National Coal Board, Mr P G Tregelles,
for permission to present this paper. The opinions expressed by the author are his own, and do not
necessarily represent the views of the National Coal Board. Some of the research work mentioned was carried
out with financial aid from the European Coal and Steel Community.

REFERENCES

1. WILSON, A.H. 'The Effect of Yield Zones on the Control of Ground'. Sixth International Strata Control
Conference, September 1977, Banff, Canada.

2. WILSON, A.H. 'Research into the Determination of Pillar Sizes, Pt 1: An Hypothesis Concerning Pillar
Stability' . Mining Engineer, Vol. 131, June 1972, pp 409-417.

3. THE NORTH OF ENGLAND SAFETY IN MINES RESEARCH COMMITTEE. Seventh Progress Report of an Investigation
into the Causes of Falls and Accidents due to Falls. Trans. Inst. Min. Eng., Vol. 108, 1948-49,
pp 489-504.

4. NATIONAL COAL BOARD MINING DEPARTMENT. Subsidence Engineers' Handbook, 1975.

5. NATIONAL COAL BOARD MINING DEPARTMENT. Design of Mine Layouts: Working Party Report, 1972, Appendix E.

6. POTTS, E.L.J. 'Current Investigations in Rock Mechanics and Strata Control'. 4th Int. Conf . on Strata
Control, Columbia University, New York, 1964, pp 29-45.

7. FARMER, I.W . and ALTOUNYAN, P.F . R. Private communication (to be published).

8. AIREY, E.M. 'A Study of Yield Zones Around Roadways'. NCB Final Report on ECSC Research Project
6220-AB/8/802, Brussels 1977, Appendix 1.

9. WILSON, A.H. 'A Method of Estimating the Closure and Strength of Lining Required in Drivages
Surrounded by a Yield Zone'. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. SCi., Vol. 17, pp 349 to 355.

10. OBERT, L. and DUVALL, W.I. 'Rock Mechanics and Design of Structures in Rock'. Wiley, 1967,
pp 82 and 501 .

11. ASHWIN, D.P. 'Research into the Determination of Pillar Size, Pt 2: Measurements of Stress in Two
Pillars at Lea Hall Colliery' . Mining Engineer, Vol. 131, June 1972, pp 417-430.

12. KELLET, W.H. Private communication, NCB MRDE, October 1974.

13. WILSON, A.H. 'Laboratory Investigation of High-Modulus Borehole Plug Gauge for Measurement of
Rock Stresses' . 4th Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Pennsylvania State University, March/ April 1961.

14. KENNY, P. Private communication, NCB MRE, December 1967.

15. WHITTAKER, B.N. and SINGH, R.N. 'Evaluation of the Design Requirements and Performance of Gate
Roadways'. Mining Engineer, Vol. 138, February 1979, pp 535-548.

16. MITCHELL, E. '49's ATM Face, Kellingley Colliery'. Mining Engineer, Vol. 139, November 1979,
pp 399-409 .

17. HOLLAND, C.T . 'The Strength of Coal in Mine Pillars'. Sixth Symposium on Rock Mechanics ,
University of Missouri at Rolla, 1964 , pp 450-466.

- 10 -
 FIGURE 1 ~'l
600

/
7.
500
O~/
;; /
FIGURE 3

E 400 / --/
w
u /-- - /
<l:
U.
300 1_,)'/ t •
u.
0 /-/ DISTANCE

a. FACE LENGTH> O' 6H

:I:
200
Iy
IL- - -
I-
a.
w
0
1/- 1-1"---- 1 O'3H

- T--~~:.:--- .....d.--------......::--r-
100 1/ I -.............. e COVER LOAD
1/ I
I .--...--"
_-- ~
~
IJH

0
P' I --
~
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2

WIDTH OF PRESSURE ARCH (m) b. FACE LENGTH < O' 6H

OBSERVED WIDTHS OF MAXIMUM PROBABLE STRESS DEFICIENCY IN THE WASTE

PRESSURE ARCH

Om FIGURE 2
z
Q
I-
~ 0 ' 2m
a:
l-
x
UJ
u. 0'4m
o
(/)

~ 0'6m
UJ
I-

~ 0 ' 8m
UJ
()
Z
UJ
o 1' Om +--...---..-----.--~--__._--...,....-__.
iii
III
o 20 40 60 80
L I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. . . . 100 120 140
:::J

t
(/)

DISTANCE FROM FACE CENTRE LINE (m) Q = 2(C + xb)

SUBSIDENCE LINES FOR 200 m FACE IDEALISED STRESS AREA BALANCE

AT DEPTH OF 500 m ACROSS RIBSIDE

- 11 -
 30
FIGURE 5
IV
a.

HYPOTHETICAL
. 20
:E
en
en
0 FIGURE 7

STRESS INCREASE w 100

n::
I-
en
FOR a0 = 4MPa

z
200 M = 3m
• 10
= 0'1MPa
• •
p+p'
300
W
en
a: ] 400
:I:
0 500
40 30 10 Ii.
w
PLUG lx PLUG 2- >
0 600
U
E LL
0
E :I:
700
W
U
Z
...w
~
800
W c
200 C!l
900
,/ n::
w
,/./ >
Z 1000
./
./ 100 0
U
.... " " "
1100

--------- ...... 0
~
:;
C
1200
40 30 20 10 0 <{
0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
DISTANCE FROM FACE (m) n::
REQUIRED PILLAR SIZE , Q(m)
MEASUREMENTS AHEAD OF 10 WEST FACE ESTIMATE OF PILLAR SIZES REQUIRED BETWEEN
WIDE EXCAVATIONS
AT BATES COLLIERY

0 FIGURE 8

200

400

200 FIGURE 6 !
:I:
600

~\l
40 1£
w
160 &. >
:E
0 800
II!:::l u
UI 30 UI u.
UI 0
9
u
120 w
a: 1000
..J
c(
I 20
~
UI
:I:
l-
ll.
U
~w .. /.. ''-'1-__ J W
0
1200
> -------J..-
t t 10
HYPOTHETICAL
~ 40
1400

O+-----~--_r----~--~----_r--__, o 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1& 1~
o 40 80 120 160 200 240
MINIMUM PILLAR WIDTH, aIm)
RIB PILLAR WIDTH x (m)
QATEROAD CLOSURE IN BLACKSHALE SEAM MINIMUM PILLAR WIDTH REQUIRED BETWEEN
NOTTINGHAM SHIRE 217m WIDE FACES IN A CANADIAN MINE
( Point of arrow shows modified value
for H-5OOm, W=230m )
- 12 -