International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrmms

Observations and classi®cation of roof strata behaviour over

longwall coal mining panels in India
S.K. Das*
Department of Mining Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, 721 302, India
Accepted 25 November 1999

Abstract

A study has been made of a number of mechanized longwall panels in various coal mines in India, concentrating on the
geology, physico-mechanical rock properties and the behaviour of the coal measure roof rocks during mining. The research has
highlighted the splitting and caving characteristics of the strata rocks and enabled the development of a roof-rock classi®cation
system. Roof rocks are classi®ed into six categories based on the: (a) mean weighted uniaxial compressive strength; (b) RQD; (c)
(i) type of rocks, (ii) presence of cracks, ®ssile beds, splitting, etc., (iii) presence of water; and (d) thickness of bed layer. The
behaviour of layers and composite layers in the immediate roof rock mass is also enumerated. Relations between the rock
strength properties and values for the bulking factor of the failed rock are included. The concepts of a `weighting zone' and
`caving zone' are proposed. The paper also clari®es the occurrence of di€erent types of failure, such as periodic falls. All these
®ndings should be helpful during calculation of the powered support capacity. 7 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction of GDK Ð 11A incline of SCCL (Pranhita±Goda-

Studies have been conducted for some years in a
number of highly mechanized longwall panels at var-
ious coal mines of India, concentrating on the geology,
rock characteristics, physico-mechanical properties and
the behaviour of the coal measure roof rocks. These
panels are:
. C2 panel (ML-VI/2 panel) in XVII bottom seam,
. D5 panel in XVI top seam,
. PS1 panel (ML-1/1 panel),
. PS2 panel (ML-1/2 panel),
. PS3 panel (ML-1/3 panel),
. PK2 panel (ML-2/2 panel) in XVII top seam and E2
panel (ML-2/7 panel) in XVI bottom seam of
Moonidih Colliery of BCCL (Jharia Coal®eld),
. A2 panel in X seam of East Katras project of BCCL
(Jharia Coal®eld),
. Panels 4A, 5 and 7 in the top section of seam no. 1
* Tel.: +91-3222-55221; fax: +91-3222-553303.
E-mail address: samirdas@mining.iitkgp.ernet.in (S.K. Das).
vari Valley Coal®eld),
. B-1 panel in seam no. V of Churcha West Colliery
of SECL (Sonhat Coal®eld),
. W2 panel in R-VII seam of section `A' of Jhanjra
Project of ECL (Raniganj Coal®eld),
. Longwall panel no. 1 and 2 in Samla seam of
Kothadih Project of ECL (Raniganj Coal®eld ) etc.
A roof-rock classi®cation system with ratings for
Indian coal measure strata has been developed for the
longwall panels. This concept emerged from the stat-
istics obtained from the ®eld study on the stability of a
number of rock layers/composite layers of the immedi-
ate roof rock mass located over the longwall panels.
Relations between the compressive strength and tensile
strength and the compressive strength and shear
strength of the Indian coal measure rock is established.
In the same way, the behaviour of various layer(s)/
composite layer(s) of the immediate roof rock mass for
various classes of roofs is also enumerated and ana-
lyzed and new strata mechanics concepts for the long-
wall panels are developed.

1365-1609/00/$ - see front matter 7 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 3 6 5 - 1 6 0 9 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 1 2 3 - 9
586 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597
This study also highlighted the clari®cation of old
concepts regarding the mode of caving of coal measure
strata, the bulk volume of the rock mass, the bulking
factor, controlled caving, the main roof, etc. [3±12]. It
must be noted that, except in the case of the East
Katras Project, all the longwall faces in the collieries
were worked out by the single pass longwall system
with the help of modern longwall machinery such as
powered roof supports, shearer, armoured ¯exible con-
veyor, stage loader, etc. In the East Katras Project, the
faces were worked out by the Sub-Level Caving and
Integral Caving mining systems, also using modern
machinery.
2. Indian coal measure rocks
Indian coal measure rocks can be broadly classi®ed
into ®ve main groups based on the type of rocks, viz.
. sandstone;
. shale;
. laminations of sandstone and shale;
. intercalation of sandstone and shale;
. clay and mottu clay.
Of the ®ve, sandstone and shale account for >90% of
Indian coal measure rocks, whereas the clay and
mottu clay beds are negligible.
Sandstone dominates in the above classi®cation.
Nearly 50% to >85% of coal measure rocks comprise
of sandstone. Beside these ®ve rock groups, burnt
coals (Jhama), siderite or pyrite bands, etc. are oc-
casionally found.
Sandstone may be classi®ed into ®ve groups based
on grain size. They are: `argillaceous', `®ne grained',
`medium grained', `coarse grained', and `gritty'. Like-
wise shale can be divided into three types: `carbon-
aceous', `sandy' and `shaly coal'. Laminations and
intercalation of various types of shale and sandstone
are frequently encountered in the Indian Coal®elds.
Hence, they constitute the two major rock groups.
Carbonaceous clay type rocks are not frequent.
The following are the various common type of rocks
which are present in Indian coal®elds:
1. argillaceous sandstone, ®ne-grained sandstone,
coarse grained sandstone, gritty sandstone, various
combinations like ®ne and medium grained sand-
stone, argillaceous and ®ne grained sandstone, med-
ium and coarse grained sandstone, coarse grained
and gritty sandstone etc.;
2. carbonaceous shale, sandy shale, shaly coal;
3. various laminations of sandstone and shale like
argillaceous sandstone and shale, ®ne grained sand-
stone and shale, medium grained sandstone and
shale, etc.;
4. intercalation of sandstone and shale, carbon-
aceous clay, etc.
It is found that the immediate roof consisting of weak
and soft carbonaceous shale, sandy shale, laminations
of shale in argillaceous sandstone, soft and fractured
intercalation, etc., caves in shortly after the roof sup-
port advances Ð whereas roof rocks of most types of
shale, weak sandstone, etc. cave in a little later after
supports are advanced, without forming any step or
overhang. If the immediate roof comprises thick and
massive sandstone, very strong sandy shale or compe-
tent ®ne grained sandstone with shale laminations, it
overhangs a large area for a longer period. In the case
of extremely massive sandstone of ®ne grained and
medium grained types, induced caving is required. It
was also observed that due to intercalation of thin
layers of clayey micaceous material, as in many thin-
bedded sandstone and in coarser rocks, ®ssility (the
ability of certain ®ne-grained sedimentary rocks to
split easily along the bedding planes) may occur. When
the roof rock is exposed, a distinct horizontally banded
lamination gives rise to exploitation of roof rocks,
whereas cross, intersecting or oblique bedding is found
devoid of such ®ssility.
Therefore Indian coal measure rocks may also be
classi®ed as:
1. laminated rock formations; and
2. massive rock formations.
Lamination depends not only on the character of the
planes of weakening but on their number. It was
observed that coarse grained sandstone with carbon-
aceous intercalation 0.05±0.1 m thick and sandy layers
0.3±0.4 m thick are very ®ssile rocks. Rocks whose
grain sizes are ®ner than sandstone but coarser than
clay, consisting of a considerable amount of carbon-
aceous material parallel to the bedding, and also
clayey rocks with carbonaceous bands thicker than
0.1 m split up and separate due to vibrations during
blasting or coal cutting by the shearer. Alternate
bands of ®ne and very ®ne grained sandstone with bed
thickness in the range of 0.1±0.3 m readily split up but
will not split up if the thickness is >0.7 m. Medium to
®ne grained sandstones are ®ssile in nature.
In the majority of the Indian coal measure strata
there are numerous cracks and fractures which
adversely a€ect the strength and stability of rockmass.
These cracks also act as conduits for water in®ltration
which, in turn, weakens the rock mass considerably. In
some of the cases, the Indian massive coal measure
strata, such as massive sandstone (®ne grained and
medium grained type), does not cave easily since bed-
ding planes in such cases are very thick. The presence
of such massive strata calls for induced caving by
blasting or hydro-fracturing. However, in some of the
 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597 587

cases, the Indian massive sandstone (generally coarse new strata mechanics concepts for the longwall panels
grained type) laminates and caves in with little di- are developed.
culty. It is also observed in Indian coal mines that at a The behaviour of Indian Coal measure roof rocks
greater depth the vertical and abutment stresses con- were thoroughly studied and explained through a gen-
tribute to the formation of induced breaking in the eralized borehole lithology study as shown in Fig. 1.
roof ahead of the longwall face, which facilitates cav- Here a number of layers of rocks are either grouped
ing. Low compressive strength sandstone beds are fre- into several composite layers or simply taken as a unit
quently encountered but they are not always easily rock layer, depending upon the nature, thickness, phy-
cavable into the goaf if the stratum is thick and they sico-mechanical properties of rock, parting planes of
do not contain microscopic parting planes. weakening, etc.
In immediate contact with the coal seams, shales are For installing longwall face equipment a set-up
frequently encountered which cave in regularly into the entry of 5.5±6 m wide is driven along the face at the
goaf as soon as support advances. The contact shale starting point of the panel. Thereafter, as the winning
beds vary from very thin to thin are ®ssile and act as operation proceeds, the goaf containing the intact roof
slip planes. Weak, ®ssile and laminated shale bulks will be left open for a distance of around 10±11 m
into the goaf. Bed separation in the strong shale from the starting barrier pillar edge, depending upon
encountered in Indian coal measure rocks, normally the physico-mechanical properties of roof rock and
takes place in distinct parting planes. presence of geological disturbances. As the width of
Laminated rock formations are predominant in the the open goaf widens up, the immediate ®rst composite
Jharia and Raniganj Coal®elds, but infrequent in the roof layer will disintegrate from the second composite
Pranhita±Godavari Valley and Sonhat Coal®elds. roof layer at the middle, start to bend and sag. Shear
Most of the coal measure rocks in the Pranhita±Goda- cracks are generated into the ®rst and also in the sec-
vari Valley Coal®eld are weak massive sandstone or ond composite layers in a non-systematic manner but
low to medium compressive strength laminated rock in a curvilinear shape with the upper part bending
formations. Massive sandstones having low to medium towards the goaf. Except for the case of a massive
compressive strength are also frequent in the Sonhat sandstone roof, in Indian mining conditions, this dis-
Coal®eld. However, in the Raniganj Coal®eld, the tance generally varies from 11 to 15 m from the start-
massive sandstone rocks are infrequent and their com- ing barrier pillar edge (Fig. 2) in the case of any
pressive strengths are moderate. The compressive
strength of the laminated rock formations of the Rani-
ganj and Jharia Coal®elds are medium to high,
whereas in the case of the Sonhat Coal®eld they are of
the medium type.
Indian Coal measure rocks may also be divided into
three categories based on caving behaviour viz. weak
roof, good roof and massive roof. It has already been
mentioned that carbonaceous, weak and thinly lami-
nated shale, highly fractured sandstone or a combi-
nation of sandstone and shale constitute a weak roof.
This type of roof rock caves easily after the advance of
the roof supports. Cavities are often formed in this
type of friable roof. A good roof essentially consists of
stronger beds which always overhang a considerable
distance. Parting planes are generally weak zones of
fractured beds or macroscopic identi®able ®ssile sur-
faces in the strata constituting the roof. This type of
roof can o€er both easy and dicult caving circum-
stances. There are instances of the presence of an over-
hang at around 30 m behind the face supports.

3. Analysis of roof strata behaviour

The studies and experiments enabled observations of

the behaviour of coal measure roof strata [1,2] and Fig. 1. A borehole litholog.
588 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597
composite layer(s). However, in the case of the thick
sandstone/massive sandstone layer, this distance will
vary and depend upon the thickness of the immediate
roof layer and the physico-mechanical properties of
roof rocks.
The immediate roof rocks until that time behave like
a ®xed ended beam. But as the span increases beyond
that limit, the curvilinear shear cracks will develop to
the void created by disintegration of the ®rst compo-
site layer from the second composite layer. These
cracks will then completely cut the ®rst composite
layer and the ®xed ended beam forming a smaller
simple ended beam. The location of the maximum
axial tensile stress switches over to the lower surface at
the mid-point of the simple ended beam. When the
face progresses further, this simple ended beam loses
support, falls and is broken into various sizes depend-
ing upon the height of the face, the amount of shear
cracks, number of beds in the composite layers, phy-
sico-mechanical properties of rock, etc. (Fig. 3). Until
the ®rst composite layer caves in, the former and
maybe the second composite layer will o€er loading
over the powered supports due to the de¯ection only.
Low capacity powered supports may yield and con-
verge due to this load.
Roof weighting has never been felt in longwall faces
during caving of this ®rst composite layer in Indian
Fig. 2. First and second composite roof layer disintegrated and
sagged at the centre. Cracks generated at the upper layer.
mining conditions. However, if the immediate roof
strata is strong and the generated shear cracks are not
of a perfect curvilinear shape, and also if the upper
portion does not bend towards the goaf but is inclined
towards the face, then during caving down the simple
ended beam it may o€er a slight load over the pow-
ered supports through the intact cantilever of the same
rock layer/composite layer whose one end is ®xed with
the face. Except in the case of an immediate massive
sandstone roof layer, the failure of ®rst composite
layer will occur when the longwall face moves up at a
distance of around 15±20 m from the barrier pillar
edge.
If the ®rst composite layer does not naturally fail
and caves, then induced blasting must be carried out
for its failure to avert the occurrence of air blast. After
the failure of the simple ended beam, the de¯ected can-
tilever of the ®rst composite beam over the powered
supports will shorten in size gradually by the cutting
of the shear cracks generated into it and will ultimately
either overhang behind the powered supports or cut
just behind the powered supports leaving no overhang.
The length of the overhang depends upon the physico-
mechanical properties of rock, the thickness of the
roof rock layer/composite layer, the type and nature of
roof rock, the rupturing thrust by the powdered sup-
ports, etc. The immediate roof rock cantilever there-
after starts breaking regularly with a particular caving
angle and at a particular overhang length. Except in
the case of thick and stronger sandstone rock, this im-
mediate ®rst composite roof layer, in many occasions,
Fig. 3. First composite layer failed.
 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597
detaches right from the face. Thereafter, it o€ers total
weighting of the detached rock layer instead of load
due to de¯ection by the cantilever.
It must always be presumed during the selection of
the capacity of powered roof supports that the bot-
tom-most layer/composite layer will be detached
during the coal winning process and hence its total
dead load must be taken into account. Like the ®rst
composite layer (as shown in Fig. 3), the same
phenomenon will occur in the second composite layer
too. A composite layer consisting of thinner beds will
have more cracks in it. Due to the presence of more
weak parting planes, the caving will be good in this
case, and the length of overhang will be either nil or
very small, and this type of composite layer(s) gener-
ally cannot o€er any surge weighting over the powered
roof supports except the dead load of its own detached
rockmass or load due to only de¯ection. It is not
necessary that a composite layer will detach right from
the weakest plane as demarcated and cave, but if any
layer in the envelope of the same composite layer has
a chance to fail then it may detach from the immediate
top layer and cave. If the second composite layer is
weak, then its cantilever may also detach from the
longwall face and will o€er load on to the powered
supports by its own weight. However, when the face
progresses at a faster rate, there is less probability of
such a type of composite roof layer detatching from
the face.
Caving of such a composite layer may take place at
a span distance around 18±22 m from the starting
point of the barrier pillar. The third sandstone roof
layer, as usual, will be detached from the fourth com-
posite roof layer, it will bend, sag and provide load
over the second composite layer by de¯ection. This
layer is suciently thick (see Fig. 1) and strong, and
may fail and cave at a span distance of 023±35 m
from the starting point of the barrier pillar. During
caving, the sandstone beam will be broken into pieces
throughout its length. The ®rst cave causes the for-
mation of a large length of overhang cantilever beam
behind the face supports. In the course of time, when
this larger length cantilever beam fails and if the
detached strata edge near to the face side enters into
the `weighting zone' then the face supports will experi-
ence a roof weighting Ð otherwise no weighting will
be felt by the supports. In general, weak to moderately
stronger rock beams always break beyond the `weight-
ing zone' and hence no roof weighting is felt by the
face supports. After the caving of the third layer, the
fourth composite layer will fail in a similar manner as
has happened in the case of the ®rst and second com-
posite layers.
In this way, layer after layer of superincumbent
strata will be disturbed. But if any of the layers is very
strong and suciently thick, then it will o€er sucient
589
resistance against self breaking, the caving angle will
be less and the `weighting zone' will tend towards the
goaf side in a fourth degree parabolic manner. The
next layer most likely will not play any signi®cant role
to o€er load over the powered supports. All the com-
posites layers or layers will cave down successively one
after another within a short time span for a consider-
able height depending upon the type, nature and
strength of the immediate roof rockmass. A sudden
weighting may be felt in the face if some of the super-
incumbent strata layers are strong and thick but, if the
superincumbent rocks are very weak, then such
phenomena will never be felt in the face.
The failure of the thick, competent rockmass in the
`weighting zone' occurs after a sucient de¯ection has
occurred. If a number of thick competent rock layers
are present in close succession, and if they break one
after another in the `weighting zone' after sucient
de¯ection, then the longwall face will also feel surge
pressure but at a lower intensity. In other words, as
the caving height increases, the intensity of weighting
to be o€ered by the thick and competent stratum over
the longwall face will decrease proportionately. Above
the outer fourth degree parabolic curve (Fig. 4) the
rockmass is stable, intact and does not play any role,
except in the case of an abnormal situation. However,
it is better if this rockmass is termed a `stable superin-
cumbent roof'. The rockmass below the inner fourth
degree parabolic curve is the caved rockmass and the
rockmass in between these two outer and inner fourth
degree parabolic curves is the active rockmass which
mainly o€ers load over the longwall face. The face
supports mainly withstand the load by the `weighting
zone' caused as follows:
1. the load caused by the de¯ection of strata, only if
the immediate roof strata layer is thick and very
stable;
2. the combination of load o€ered by the detached
roof rockmass of the lower layer(s)/composite
layer(s) and load o€ered by the de¯ection of the
upper layer(s)/composite layer(s);
3. the load totally o€ered by the detached roof rock-
mass if the strata layer(s) are very unstable.
Therefore, load o€ered by the immediate superincum-
bent strata over the longwall face solely depends upon
the site-speci®c conditions. So, the capacity of powered
roof supports must be determined accordingly after
studying thoroughly the physico-mechanical properties
of the roof rock, borehole lithology, geology, geo-tech-
nical environment of the site, etc.
Cracks are always present inside the rock beams.
More cracks are also generated and widen up
during the de¯ection process which may cut the
layer after a certain amount of de¯ection and ulti-
mately the central portion of the beam may fail.
590 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597
Fig. 4. Shearing envelope of superincumbent strata over a longwall face.
However, since the length of the cantilever after the
®rst failure of the lowest beam near to the face is
longer, a higher weighting compared to the periodic
weighting (because of the failure of the cantilever of
the same beam) may be felt in the face provided
that detachment occurs inside the `weighting zone'.
This somewhat higher load should be taken into
consideration and should be included in the safety
factor during calculation of the capacity of the
powered roof support.
Therefore, the failure of strata from the top of the
support is governed in a chronological sequence. Thick
and stronger strata may be present or may not be pre-
sent. There is no `main roof' as commonly quoted. In
the absence of thick stronger strata, the so-called main
and periodic weighting may never be felt at the face
[3,5,7]. Hence the main and periodic weighting termi-
nology is limited only to site-speci®c conditions, i.e. it
is valid for the case of thick and stronger strata being
present within the caving height (Table 1).
4. Failure of the rock mass
It is observed that the caving curve is in the form of
a fourth degree parabola, which is curved near to the
face and then gradually straightens in the goaf area. It
is distinct in the case of a weaker strata condition. In
this case, the curvilinear line of the fourth degree para-
bola will coincide with the line of caving angle. But as
the strength of the strata increases, this curvature will
appear distinctly. The formation of this curvature also
depends upon the presence of a number of layers, frac-
ture plane, water condition, geological disturbances,
etc.
Since the roof strata were very weak in the case of
the W2 panel of Jhanjra Project, Panel 4A, Panel 5
and Panel 7 of GDK Ð 11A incline and A2 panel of
East Katras Colliery, no such curvature was found in
them. Their `curvature' coincided with the straight line
of the respective caving angles. However, the curvature
was seen distinctly over the strong roof stratum of the
C2 panel, the D5 panel and the PS3 panel (ML-1/3
panel) of the Moonidih colliery. Within the curvature,
 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597 591

Two to six times the extracted

stronger strata layers/composite layers were de¯ected
and a void was always noticed in between the de¯ected
caving height to extracted
Caving height (caves within short time after Ratio between immediate

strata layer/composite layer and the top intact strata

layer/composite layer. Therefore, weaker strata caves
quickly with or without any distinct de¯ection,
8.22/2.5=3.288

16.62/2.8=5.93

12.62/3.5=3.60
4.75/1.4=3.39

4.01/1.8=2.22

5.5/3.2=1.718
8.8/2.4=3.66
whereas the stronger strata de¯ects ®rst before its
5/1.95=2.56

shear failure. If two curved planes are drawn from the

thickness

thickness
face edge (Figs. 4 and 5) and the other from the over-
hang edge in the goaf by connecting the points of
intersection of the caving angle lines of various layers/
composite layers, then the rock stratum which will fall
under the envelope of the two curved planes will pro-
vide load over the powered supports located in the
longwall face.
The rockmass bounded by the two curves is termed
supports are advanced) (m)

the `weighting zone'. The rock mass outside this

`weighting zone' generally does not play any role in
o€ering load over the powered supports, except in the
case of any geologically disturbed area, faulted area,
etc. Because of the geologically disturbed zone in the
Panel 5 of GDK Ð 11A incline, the roof stone used to
4.75
8.22

4.01

16.62

12.62
8.8

5.5

¯ow out from the face side and fall freely through the
5

gap in between the face and canopy tip of the chock-

Four to 8.5 times the extracted

shield supports. In this case, the `weighting zone' was

Ratio between total a€ected

enlarged and the outer loading zone curve shifted

roof height to extracted

towards the face side. The strata inside the `weighting

zone', which o€ers load over the powered supports,
12.95/1.95=6.635

17.62/3.5=5.034

depends on the physico-mechanical and geotechnical

10.40/1.8=5.77

23.27/2.8=8.31

12.4/3.2=3.875
9.77/1.4=6.97
11.25/2.5=4.5

14.40/2.4=6

parameters of the rock mass. But the lower most rock

thickness

thickness

layer/composite layer always becomes very weak due

to frequent rupturing by the powered supports during
the numerous setting and re-setting of the latter. So
this bottom-most roof layer/composite layer generally
Total height of roof a€ected
above the powered supports

caves easily instead of de¯ecting.

Therefore, the loads o€ered over the powered sup-
ports by the roof layers are due to a combination of
both simply detaching and caving (bottom layer(s)/
composite layer(s)) and the de¯ection of roof strata
Roof height above the powered supports a€ected near the face

above this bottom layer(s). The fourth degree para-

bolic curve may be drawn from a distance of around
11.25
12.94
10.40

14.40

23.27

17.62
9.77

12.4
(m)

2±3 m away from the face and from the top of the
lower freely detached roof blocks. It has been seen
Average height

that an average 3±4 m length rock cantilever skirt

of extraction

always overhangs by the side of the gate roads and

hence it is expected that the same amount of rock can-
1.95

tilever will also overhang in the longwall face. A height

(m)

1.4
2.5

1.8

2.4

2.8

3.2

3.5

of up to 5 m of the de¯ected roof layer/composite

Scale for searching for the total
a€ected roof height and caving

layer may impose its full de¯ected load over the pow-
ered supports; whereas the rest rockmass above that
3. XVI Bottom Seam

de¯ected roof layer/composite layer may not provide

GDK Ð 11 A Incline
1. XVII Top Seam

4. XVII Top Seam

2. XVI Top Seam

any load. In other words, the load due to the de¯ected

roof layer/composite layer will gradually decrease from
Jhanjra Project
R-VII Seam
Churcha West

the bottom to top.

East Katras

V Seam
Moonidih

Beyond this weighting envelope on the goaf side, i.e.

1 Seam
X Seam
Colliery
Table 1

in the `caving zone', the roof will cave freely under

height

gravity without o€ering load over the powered sup-

592 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597
ports (except in the case of some abnormal situations).
The roof rocks beyond this `weighting zone' and near
to the face, i.e. in the `stable superincumbent roof
zone', will remain intact and will not generally provide
any load over the powered supports. From the ®eld
study, it is con®rmed that the bulk volume of the
caved rock never ®lls the total void near the face, nor
is the de¯ected rock layer/composite layer likely to
touch the caved rock near the face. But during failure
and caving, some thrust is applied over the bottom
layer(s)/composite layer(s) of the roof causing some
weighting in the face area. If this stronger strata is
thick, it breaks periodically and hence some periodic
weighting may be felt in the face. The fourth degree
parabolic-shape roof stratum far behind the face
bends, sags, and caves layer after layer to a particular
height, and then will touch one after another in a sag-
ging condition generating upward moving voids which
ultimately can cause surface subsidence.
Fig. 5. Failure of fourth composite layer after the failure of third layer which will fail after delaying a little. Fifth layer a€ected by cracks, sagged
and imparting pressure over the face and powered supports.
A ®eld study was conducted in a number of mining
blocks of a number of coal mines at various coal®elds
in India, viz. Moonidih colliery and East Katras Pro-
ject of BCCL of Jharia Coal®eld, Jhanjra Project of
E.C.L. of Raniganj Coal®eld and GDK Ð 11A incline
of SCCL of Pranhita Ð Godavari Valley Coal®eld for
a number of years. The study enabled a new approach
towards the concepts regarding the bulk volume and
bulking factor controlled caving. These ®ndings are
based on the measurement of the surface subsidence.
All the ®eld observations con®rmed that the ultimate
bulk volume ®lls around 45±60% of the total caving
height and the remaining 40±55% caving height
remains void causing surface subsidence. Based on the
®eld study and calculation, it is found that the ultimate
in situ bulking factor of coal measure strata at a long-
wall face is less than 1.05. The value of bulking factor
starts with 1.05 and its value decreases exponentially
with the increase of caving height of the superincum-
 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597
bent strata (Fig. 6). This is because the caved strata
does not have much space to extend itself. Besides this,
at higher caving height, the superincumbent strata
only fractures and subsides in a larger mass in
sequence. Therefore the surface subsidence is inevitable
over the caved longwall workings of the coal seam(s)
which are situated deeper. However, the time lag to
disturb totally the superincumbent strata after ®nishing
a longwall panel depends upon the geo-technical par-
ameters of the roof rocks viz. types, nature, strength,
thickness and dip of the strata, depth of workings, the
presence of fractured strata, geological disturbances,
water condition, superincumbent strata pressure, etc.
In Fig. 6 it is shown that the zone:
. within the curvature MN represents the caving zone
(caving height 00±25 m or 00±8.5 H);
. within the curvature NP represents larger crack for-
mation and a mass caving zone (caving height from
025 m or 08.5 H to 60 m);
. after P on the curvature represents a crack for-
mation and mass sagging (caving) zone which ulti-
mately reaches to the surface causing surface
subsidence;
where H is the height of extraction in metres.
Fig. 6. Curve for ultimate in situ bulking factor.
593
5. Components of force
The load o€ers by the roof over the powered sup-
ports causes two components of force viz: (1) vertical
and (2) horizontal.
The horizontal force which is to be withstood by the
powered supports is generated for the following
reasons:
1. If the immediate roof layer/composite layer is very
weak, there may not be any overhang and even the
immediate roof layer may break over the powered
support causing a small void in between the roof
and canopy of the powered support near to the
goaf side. If the roof is detached from the face and
if the distance between the face and the centre of
gravity of load becomes less, compared to the dis-
tance from the face to the centroid of resistance
o€ered by the powered supports, then the horizon-
tal force by the immediate roof will act from face to
goaf. The design of the powered support also plays
an important role in this regard.
2. If the immediate roof rock is moderately strong or
very strong, then there will be a large overhang
behind the powered supports. The distance from the
face to the centre of gravity of either the de¯ected
load (due to the de¯ection of strata) or the load of
the detached rock mass will be higher compared to
the distance between the centroid of resistance
o€ered by the powered supports and the face. In
such a case, the horizontal component of force will
act from goaf to face side. The mechanics of the
powered roof support also plays an important role
in this regard.
3. If the distance between the face and the centre of
gravity of the roof load is equal to the distance
between the face and the centroid of resistance
o€ered by the powered support, the powered sup-
port will experience only the vertical load.
Therefore evaluation of the horizontal force is clearly
de®ned and is due mainly to the in¯uence of the over-
hang and centre of gravity of the detached layer/com-
posite layer of the immediate roof rock mass. Due to
this component of load of the detached rockmass, a
horizontal force develops. The horizontal force is also
due to the component of de¯ection force and ultimate
failure of the de¯ected rockmass above the detached
layer/composite layer. The total horizontal force is a
combination of these two main forces and the other
component is the vertical force.
6. General characteristics and physico-mechanical
properties of the roof rocks
A relation between the ratio of compressive
594 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597

Table 2
Ratio of compressive strength to tensile strength and compressive strength to shear strength of coal measure rocks at various coal®elds in India

Sl. Name of mine Name of the coal®eld Mean compressive strength to tensile Mean compressive strength to shear
Number strength ratioa strength ratio

1. Moonidih Colliery, Jharia Coal®eld 8.43 (SD=7.78) 8.15 (SD=2.9)

BCCL
2. East Katras Coalliery, Jharia Coal®eld 10.9 (SD=1.54) 9.83 (SD=1.94)
BCCL
3. Churcha West Sonhat Coal®eld 9.8 (SD=0.9) ±
Colliery, SECL
4. Churcha Colliery, Sonhat Coal®eld 7.68 (SD=1.89) 4.537 (SD=0.7)
SECL
5. GDK Ð 11A Incline, Pranhita and Godavari valley 12.45 (SD=4.79) 4.55 (SD=0.84)
SECL Coal®eld
6. Dhemomain Colliery, Raniganj Coal®eld 10.68 (SD=1.98) 10.43 (SD=1.25)
ECL
7. Chinakuri Colliery, Raniganj Coal®eld 13.68 (SD=3.78) ±
ECL
Mean compressive strength to tensile strength and mean 10.51 (SD=1.95) 7.499 (SD=2.52)
compressive strength to shear strength ratio, total coal®eld as a
wholeb

a
SD=Standard deviation.
b
Therefore, for India Coal Measure rock Ð compressive strength=10.51  tensile strength=10.5  tensile strength, and compressive
strength=7.499  shear strength=7.5  shear strength.

strength and tensile strength and between the com-
pressive strength and shear strength of the Indian
Coal measure rocks has been established as shown
in Table 2. The collected rock cores were in stan-
dard sizes and thereafter tested by the standard test
procedure for uniaxial compressive strength, tensile
strength (by Brazilian test) and shear strength (by
punch shear test as well as by triaxial testing).
Similarly, based on the ®eld study and statistical
analysis, a relation between the strata formation, cav-
ing angle and mean compressive strength has been
established, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3
Relation between strata formation, caving angle and mean compressive strengtha

Strata formation Caving angle Mean compressive strength (kgf/cm2) CTRATb

Extremely weak strata including very weak composite layer, very weak > 81±858 Less than 100 0±20.5
sandstone layer, etc., for example, extremely cavable strata.
Very weak sandstone, weak and soft carbonaceous shale, very soft and > 75±818 > 100±200 > 20.5±36
fractured intercalation, etc., for example, highly cavable strata
Most of the type of shale, shale sandstone, weak sandstone, intercalated > 65±758 > 200±300 > 36±52
shale and sandstone, etc., for example, moderately stronger very good
cavable strata
Hard, grey shale, medium strength sandstone, etc., for example, for > 50±658 > 300±450 > 52±67
good cavable strata.
Quite strong sandstone, medium strength massive sandstone, etc., for > 35±508 > 450±600 > 67±79.1
example, for poorly cavable strata.
Very thick massive sandstone, very strong sandy shale, competent ®ne > 30±358 > 600±800 > 79.1±93.3
grained sandstone with shale lamination i.e., example, for highly
uncavable strata.
Very thick strong massive sandstone i.e., for extremely uncavable strata. R 308 > 800 > 93.3±100

a
However, it is observed that the massive sandstone or thick moderately massive sandstone behaves peculiarly. In a very weak sandstone roof,
the caving angle was found around 75±908 whereas in a moderately stronger massive sandstone roof the caving angle was only between 27 and
358. Therefore, the caving angle in the case of a massive sandstone roof varies in a indistinct manner. But the composite layer beam consisting of
various strata has some consistency regarding the formation of the caving angle and the angle is generally in higher order compared to a single
layer of strata of the same thickness. The major factor to determine the caving angle is the mean weighted compressive strength, tensile strength,
thickness of strata, presence of fractured plane, density or rock etc.
b
CTRAT: Converted total rating into 100 under a given condition. For more simpli®cation when MWREC (Mean weighted rating of total
composite layer or layer) is considered then the equivalent value of CTRAT shall be considered against it.
Table 4
Roof rock classi®cation and ratings of Indian coal measure rocks in longwall panels based on concept of stability of various roof layers or composite layers

(A) Rock parameters Class

I II III IV V VI
2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Mean weighted uniaxial 0±100 > 100±200 > 200±300 > 300±500 > 500±800 > 800
compressive strength (kg/
cm2) Ratings: (Maximum
rating 25)
0±3 > 3±6 > 6±9 > 9±15 > 15±24.9 > 24.9±25
Mean weighted RQD (%) 0±30 > 30±40 > 40±50 > 50±70 > 70±85 > 85±100
Ratings: (Maximum rating
25)
0±6 > 6±8 > 8±10.5 > 10.5±16 > 16±20.5 > 20.5±25
Type of rocks Weak and soft Sandy shale, ®ssile rocks, Most of the types of shale, Hard shale, Medium strength Quite strong sandstone, Very strong
carbonaceous shale, weak and soft carbonaceous weak sandstone. Alternate sandstone, etc. hard shale etc. sandy shale,
lamination of shale in shale, very soft and fractured layers of various kinds of competent ®ne
argillaceous sandstone, intercalation coal, etc. rocks at a close succession. grained
very soft fractured Intercalated sandstone and sandstone with
intercalation, splinter shale. shale
shale, etc. laminations,
thick massive
sandstone,
dolerite etc.
Ratings: (Maximum rating 0±3 > 3±5.5 > 5.5±7.5 > 7.5±8.5 > 8.5±9.5 > 9.5±10
10)
Absence of severe cracks, Presence of very high Presence of moderate cracks, Presence of moderate Cracks may be present but Slight cracks may be Not present
®ssile beds, splitting, slip density cracks, coarse ®ssile beds like carbonaceous cracks, ®ssile beds like can not do any adverse a€ect. present if ®ssile beds of
planes etc. (presence of a grained sandstone with material bed thicker than carbonaceous material, bed If ®ssile beds of very ®ne very ®ne grained
minor fault of >0.5 m carbonaceous 0.1 m, clayey rocks, etc. thicker than 0.1 m, clayey grained sandstone are present sandstone are present
average throw in a longwall intercalation around >0.2 m thick, zone near to rocks, etc. moderately then their (rarely) their thickness
panel in case of seam 0.05±0.08 m or less in the minor fault. thickness may vary in the may vary in the range
thickness of >2.0 m should thickness and ®ssile range 0.1±0.3 m. 0.3±0.6 m
be avoided. There shall not sandy layer of less than
be any fault in a seam of 0.15 m thick, zone near
less than 2 m thick.) to the minor fault
Ratings (Maximum rating 0±3 > 3±5.5 > 5.5±7.5 > 7.5±8.5 > 8.5±9.5 > 9.5±10
S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597

10)
Absence of groundwater Severe water problem Water under moderate Water under less pressure Moist only About completely dry Completely dry
pressure
Ratings (Maximum ratings 0±4 > 4±6 > 6±7 > 7±8 > 8±9 > 9±10
10)
Thickness of prominent bed 0.0±0.35 > 0.35±1.0 > 1.0±2.0 > 2.0±3.0 > 3.0±4.0 Above 4.0
layer (m)
Ratings (Maximum ratings 0±1.5 > 1.5±5.0 > 5.0±10.5 > 10.5±16.0 > 16.0±19.9 > 19.9±20
20)
Total ratings 100 0±20.5 > 20.5±36 > 36±52 > 52±72 > 72±93.3 > 93.3±100
595
 596
Table 5
Behaviour of layers/composite layers of immediate roof rock mass in longwall panels (face length: 100±150 m)

SL. number Parameters Class

I II III IV V VI

1. Stability nature Extremely unstable Highly unstable Stable Good stable Very good stable Highly stable
2. Caving nature Extremely cavable Highly cavable Very good cavable Good cavable Poor cavable Highly uncavable
3. Caving angle > 85±908 > 75±858 > 65±758 > 50±658 > 35±508 358 and less
4. Overhang length (m) 0 > 0±0.5 > 0.5±1.5 > 1.5±3.0 > 3.0±6.0 six and more
5. Longwall system Caving system Caving system Caving system Caving system Induced caving or Stowing system
favourable (induced blasting may stowing
sometimes be
necessary for initial
caving)
6. Support requirement Composite layer/layers Composite layers/layer Composite layers/ Composite layers/ For regular caving of Tremendous amount
of rock mass may be of rock mass may be layers of rock mass layers of rock mass immediate roof of load will be
dislocated right from dislocated right from will o€er more or less will o€er more loading induced method of generated by the roof
the face edge which (near to) the face edge equilibrium loading condition over the roof fracturing like strata at the time of
will o€er higher which will o€er higher over the powered rear side of the blasting, etc. may be failure in the case of
pressure at the front pressure at the front supports. I.F.S powered supports practised which is not caving system of
rows of the legs of the rows of the legs of the working mode support particularly those only time consuming, longwall mining which
powered supports. powered supports. system (in case of thin which are installed in cumbersome, costly may be the far beyond
I.F.S working mode I.F.S working mode seam) and the middle of the face. and less productive the highest capacity of
support system (in support system (in combination of For other cases the process but also it will the powered supports
case of thin seam) and case of thin seam) and conventional and higher pressure will be not give any guarantee so far developed in
combination of combination of I.F.S working mode felt in the rear rows of of caving of upper the world market.
conventional and conventional and along with powered the legs due to higher layers/composite Longwall method can
I.F.S working mode I.F.S working mode forepoling should be overhang. layers which may be practised along
along with powered along with powered selected in all other Conventional working cause severe loads on with the combination
forepoling should be forepoling should be cases. All legs of the mode (in case of thin the powered supports. of stowing.
selected in all other selected in all other chock shield powered seam) and High pressure will be
cases. All legs of the cases. All legs of the supports shall be combination of generated in the rear
powered supports powered supports either in `V' conventional and row of the chock
shall be inclined shall be inclined orientation fashion or I.F.S working mode shield supports. Very
towards the face. towards the face. shall be kept slightly along with powered compact conventional
inclined towards the forepoling should be design four-leg chock
face. selected in all other shield supports with
cases shall be used. all the legs inclined
S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597

All legs of the chock towards the goaf shall

shield supports shall be used. Capacity of
be either oriented in the powered supports
`V' fashion or shall be should be very high as
kept slightly inclined far as practicable.
towards the goaf. Single telescopic legs
should be used.
However, longwall
with stowing method
will be the best in this
case.
 S.K. Das / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37 (2000) 585±597
Strata formations, thickness etc. were found from
the study of a number of borehole lithologs and the
caving angle was determined by the caving method
developed by the author. Based on the ®eld statistics,
a formula has been derived to ®nd the length of over-
hang of the immediate roof rock layer behind the pow-
ered supports. The length of overhangs were
determined by a telescopic scale in both the gate-roads
and also in between the powered supports throughout
the length of the face.
All the investigations helped the development of a
simple, realistic roof rock classi®cation system with
ratings for Indian coal measure rocks around the long-
wall panels. Roof rocks are classi®ed into six cat-
egories based on:
1. mean weighted uniaxial compressive strength;
2. RQD;
3. (a) type of rocks, (b) presence of cracks, ®ssile beds,
splitting, etc., (c) presence of water; and
4. thickness of bed layer (Table 4).
The behaviour of various layers/composite layers of
immediate roof rock mass for various classes of roof
are also enumerated (Table 5).
7. Conclusions
Sandstone dominates the Indian coal measure rocks
and accounts for nearly 50% to >85% of the coal
mining rocks, depending upon the coal®eld. Sandstone
together with shale account for >90% of Indian Coal
measure rocks. A detailed study of the mechanical
behaviour of the strata around the longwall coal
mining panels was made. After identifying the type of
coal measure rock formations, their splitting capabili-
ties, formation of parting planes in the strata, caving
characteristics, strata mechanics, etc. are identi®ed and
correlated with the physico-mechanical properties. It
has been found that the average relation between the
uniaxial compressive strength, tensile strength and
shear strength of coal measure rock is sc=10.5 st=7.5
ts. The value of the bulking factor is 1.05 or less which
is much less than the value which has been assumed
before. The bulk volume ®lled up around 45±60% of
the total caving height leaving the remaining 40±55%
caving height void, causing surface subsidence.
In a moving face, the ratio between the immediate
caving height and the extracted thickness of coal seam
varies from 2 to 6 and the ratio between the total
597
a€ected roof height and the extracted thickness of the
coal seam varies from 4 to 8.5.
A roof-rock behaviour classi®cation system was
developed with ratings for longwall panels and incor-
porating the characteristics and behaviour of various
layer(s)/composite layer(s) of immediate roof rock
mass. The new concept of the `weighting zone'
bounded between the two fourth degree parabolic
curves was introduced, and estimated the development
for loading by the de¯ected roof rockmass, the length
of the overhang (cantilever), the caving angle in re-
lation to the strata formation and the mean compres-
sive strength. These will be helpful for the calculation
of the powered roof support capacity and also for the
determination of other criteria relating to the roof
rock mass at the time of coal mine and panel plan-
ning.
References
[1] Das SK. Optimized selection of powered supports in mechan-
ized coal mines in India, PhD Thesis, Indian School of Mines,
Dhanbad, 1995.
[2] Das SK. Caving longwall system in Indian coal mines Ð an
enquiry into ground control and economic aspects, M. Tech.
Thesis, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad, 1983.
[3] Peng SS, Chiang HS. Longwall mining. New York: Wiley, 1984.
[4] Peng SS, Hsiung SM, Jiang YM. Method of determining the
rational load capacity of shield supports at longwall faces. The
Mining Engineer 1987;147(313):161±7.
[5] Wilson AH. Support load requirement on longwall faces. The
Mining Engineer 1975;134(173):479±91.
[6] Wilson AH. The stability of underground workings in the soft
rocks of the coal measures. International Journal of Mining
Engineering 1983;1(2):97±187.
[7] Peng SS, Chiang HS. Longwall ground control Ð US experi-
ence. Journal of Mines Metals and Fuels 1983;xxxi(9):397±406.
[8] Smart BJD, Aziz NI. The in¯uence of caving in the Hirst and
Bulli seams on powered support rating. In: Proceedings of the
Australian. IMM Illawarra Branch, Ground Movement and
Control Related to Coal Mining Symposium, 1986. p. 182±93.
[9] Song ZC, Deng TL. Manifestation of mine pressure and its re-
lation to overlying strata movement. In: Proceedings of the
Second Conference on Ground Control in Mining. West
Virginia University, 1982. p. 22±35.
[10] Unrag KF. Longwall support requirements. Journal of Mines
Metals and Fuels 1983;xxxi(9):334±44.
[11] Joisen JP, Gouilloux C. Present and future roof control and
support in longwall faces in French coal mines. Colliery
Guardian International 1978;226(11):49±58.
[12] Christigens P. Proposed calculation model for powered support
on a longwall face. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International
Strata Control Conference, Liege, 1982.