Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Long-Term Subsidence Over Longwall Chain Pillar Systems and Its Effects On Surface Structures (PDF Download Available)

    Uploaded by

    katta_sridhar
    15 views7 pages

    Original Title

    Long-term Subsidence Over Longwall Chain Pillar Systems and Its Effects on Surface Structures (PDF Download Available)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    15 views7 pages

    Long-Term Subsidence Over Longwall Chain Pillar Systems and Its Effects On Surface Structures (PDF Download Available)

    Uploaded by

    katta_sridhar

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 7
    16th CONFERENCE ON GROUND CONTROL IN MINING Long-term Subsidence Over Longwall Chain Pillar Systems and Its Effects on Surface Structures Yi Luo, Rescarch Assistant Professor ‘Syd S, Peug, Chairman and Charles T. Holland Professor HJ. Chen, Graduate Student Department of Mining Engineering College of Engineering and Mineral Resources West Virginia University “Morg: ABSTRACT ‘A research has beet conducted to study the Ioag-term subsidence and its possible effects on surface structures. In this researel, the surface movements in areas where potential far developing long-term subsidence is high have been moni tored over an extended period of time. Long-term subsidence data have also been collecied ftom other sources. The avail able data from this on-going research have been analyzed and the reals is presented inthis paper. INTRODUCTION Under the influence of underground Jongwall mining. the movement at a surfice point initiates, accelerates, devel: ates and practically stops within a normal subsiience duration which could range fom about £0 days to one months in US mining conditions. Considerable efforts have been mace bythe Senior authors in the last decade to study the dynamic subsi- dence process. A number of mathematical models have been proposed to predict the different phases of the bynamic subsi- ‘dence process associated with lonewall mining operation (Luo and Peng, 1292} However, it has been suggested that a slow surface movement process might follow this normal subsidence duration (Mehnert et al, 1992). If this subsidence process does indeed exist, it is called the long-term subsidence process ‘Thus far, very litle research has been conducted to address the issue of long-term subsidence Due to the relatively unknown nature, there is offen a seat public cancer on the fong-term subsidence and its potential effects on surface structures ‘Ameffoet has buen made C0 study the issue of long-tecm subsidence process, The subsidence data collected fiom = numberof sclected longall subsidence ates over extended ne ‘ods afler mining, including a ste still bing monitored by the authors, have been analyzed. The selected sites for this study ‘were focated inthe areas over longwall chain pillars where the tone subsidence is mast likely to occur. ‘The emphasis of town, WW" this study fs placed on: (1) existence of long-term subsidence process and the necessary condition for its occurrence, (2) he characteristics of the development process, and (3) the possible effects of long-term subsidence process on surface structures, This paper presents some results of this on-going research on the long-term subsidence. NORMAL SUBSIDENCE DURATION As stated previously, the long-term subsidence process ‘occurs after a normal subsidence duration. Therefore, the characteristics of the normal subsidence process sssacisied with longwall mining should be understood first, Normal Dynamic Subsidenee Process ‘There are the following three: distinguishable phases in the dynaniie subsidence process associated with Iongall min- ing operation (Luo and Peng, 1992): (1) subsidence initiation phase in a short period at the beginning of mining 2 fong.wal panel, (2) normal dynamic subsidence phase as the longwall face advances in the remaining length of the panel, and (3) the residual subsidence phase aflet mining in the pancl stops Phases | and 3 of the dynamic subsidence process any affect small surface areas near the panel setup and recovery enti, respectively, The major portion of the subsidence basin over & longwall panel wili experience the normal dynamic subsidence phase, In the normal dynamic subsidence process, a surface point docs not begin to subside unl the advancing fonswall fice has reached a certain distance inby the point. This dis tance is called the offsct of subsideace initiation point (,) Then the subsidence process accelerates and the sibsiéence ve locity reaches its peak when the tongwall face has passed the surface point a distance called the offset of subsidence velocity peak, £ A deceleration process is followed afterwards and the subsidence process practically stops nt reaches its qunsi-stable state after a period of time. Figure | shows a subsidence de velopment curve derived ffom the collected data aver a iong- ‘wall panel mining in the Pittsburgh seam. The overburden ‘depth over this panel was about 680 # and mining height was 55 The average face advance rare was about 62 fday 16th CONFERENCE ON GROUND CONTROL IN MINING = Pecmtst Fal teice aGRRR9RR5RRF a nn rc er ry ‘nenes Panapn "ig. 1 Develpanent Curve tar Normal Dy Prnset of «Langa Operation while the monitoring site was affected by the subsidence proc cess. In deriving tho subsidence development curve, the ratio of the measured subsidence on a given day to the final subsidence ata surface point is pleted against the ratio of the distance be- tnveen the advancing face and the suffice point to the overbur dden depth (LA rio), Tt shows that surface began to subside when the £7 ratio was about -0.15 (the Fiee was still about 100 finby the surface point off, ~ 100). About 30% of the final subsidence was reached when the Lk ratio was 0.31 (the face was 210 A utby the point or f= 210 8). It should be pointed out thatthe subsidence velocity at this point of time is also the highest. The surfoce appeared to became stable (r= ferred as the quasistable sate) when the fice is about 0.95 times of the overburden depth passed the poinl. Neus symmetry between the ist and the second halves of the subst ddenes development curve aver the point of the $096 of final subsidence is observed inthe figure. Thesefove, the offset of sobsidence initiation point (/,) and offet of subsidence velocity peak (fare to important parameters te: define the normal d= namic subsidence development curve. Basod on the longsall yan subsidence data collected for Pesburyh seam and for Herrin coal sears, the updated empitcal formulae for asa tivo dynamic subsidence parameters arc: 2102 40.0171 wo — @ Where: ¥- average ice advancerate, day A overburden depth tt ‘Using Eqs. | and 2, a graph for determining the normal subsidence duration for loagwall mining operations is desived as shaw in Fig, 2, Three lines are plotted in this figure. The first lines for the determination of the offset of subsidence ini tiation point and the second one for the distance between the longwall fe and the point where quasi-stable state is reached. The third i the tolal distance for a surface point to experiesce ‘the normal dynamic subsidence process, For the range of aver- age fave advance rate from 20 to 70 fAlday, the normal subsi- dence duration varies ftom 0.76 to 1.04 times of the ‘wverburden depth, The subsidence provess at a surface point reaches its quasi-stable state when the longuwall face has passed this point a distance between 0.70 and 0.94 times of the oves- burden depth based on this figure. It should be pointed out that most of the collected and published final subsidence data for bongwall opecations should be considered as the subsidence at quasisiable state because most of the monitoring programs ended after areatively short duration Diep an ‘ig. 2 NormalLongwall Subciience Duration aston Data Clic ‘om Pitibargh Seam and Minos Coal Masia LONG-TERM SUBSIDENCE ‘After the quas-stable state of the normal dynamic sub- sicoce process is reached, lang-term subsidence could also de- velop over an extended period of time The maximum Jong-term subsidence ai a surfice point ix defined to be the df= erence between the uitimate final subsidence (5,) and the sub- sidence measured when the quasi-slable stale is reached (quasi-final subsidence. 5.) at this point. The two possible souroes for inducing the long-ierm subsidence for underground longrwall ining aperations ace "© Re-compaction in the overburden strata which has beew disturbed during the normal dynamic: subs dence process Re-compaction is most likely 10 ‘cause longeterm subsidence over the eental portion ‘of the longwall panels due to the presence of caving ad fracture zones there, ** ‘Creep deformation af the esa pillar system and its floor strata located between tue successive Fong ppancls. The longterm subsidence caused by the ‘seep deformation is raost likely in the area over and ‘near the chain pila system, In a number of longwall subsidence cascs in which the collected dais appear to substantiate the exisience of long-term subsidence, the measured long-term subsidence occurred over ‘the chain pillars is generally much larger than that ower the eon 16th CONFERENCE ON GROUND CONTROL IN MINING tral portion of longwall panels, This indicates that creep defor- mation of the ehain pillar systeti contributes more to the long-term subsidence process than r&-compaction of the over~ burden stata in these cases. In addition, the suice deforma- tions (ie, dope, stain and curvature) and their potential to cause structural damages in the area near the chain pill sy3- tem are normally mach higher thin those avee the central por- tion of the panels, Therefore, long-term subsidence occuring in the area near the chain pillar system and is possible elects on surface structures will be subjected to more serutinies than those in ote areas over &longwall pancl. For these two rea- sons, the emphasis oF this study is currently placed on the lone "orm subsienge over and near the chain pillar system ‘Long: Term Subsidence Cates ‘In order to study the longe-term subsidence, eight sets of subsidence data measured over and near the loagwall chain pil lar sysicms have been collected thus fur. The general informs: tio (:e, coal seam mined, overburden depth, panel width, the ‘otal width of chain pillar systera and mining height) for each of the collected cases is listed in Table 1. Langwall mitica in of the cases: was conducted in the Peisburgh seam and another four in Herrin 6 seam in the Hino coal basin ‘The subsidence data in cases 1, 3 and @ have been ‘measured over three chain pillar systems left between four suc= ‘cessive longwall panels. The measured subsidence profiles for these three eases are shown in Fig. 3. Pancl P-1 was mined! first and P-4 the last. Therefore, the chain pillar system Dbetween panels P-3 and P-4 (ease No.1) has been affested by mining for the khortest duration and that in case Na. 4 has been ‘exposed for the longest time among the three ‘The sumbers shown in the Agure legend are the days after the subsidence monument line over each chain pillar system has been under ‘mined by the longwall face for the first time. The subsidence ‘monument lines of cases |, 3 and 4-were undermined again by the longwall face in the subsequent panel 210, 227 and 277, lays aflerwards, respectively. For the surface area over 4 chain pillar system, the quasi-stuble state of the normal subsi- dence process is reached when the longwall face in the seeand adjacent panci has passed the location » normal subsidence du- durations are about 19, 18 and 14 days, respectively, ‘The ine ‘remvental subsidence after this period is considered to be the Jong-term subsidence Figure 3a dacs not show any significant long-term sub silence utderstandably due to a very short time clapsed (tbe last survey was conducted only 16 days after the quisi-stable stale had been reached), However, notable amount of long- ‘term subsidence ean be found in cases 3 and 4 where the last survey was performed 206 and 426 days after the quisi-stable state, respectively. The quasi-final subsidence and the subsi- dence: measured in the lass survey at the middle point of the chain pillar system for the each ofthe three cases are also listed in Table 1 along with the elapsed time after the quasinstable state Figure 4 shows the measured subsidence profiles in case No. 8 Although the last survey was performed 286 days after the quatstable state the incremental subsidence is stil considered very small ‘Develoomen of Lonz-Term Subsidence ‘The long-term subsidence development surves at four sure points in case No, 4 (points A, B, C and D ia Fig, 3e) are plotted in Fig, § In this Figure, the measured subsidence is plotted agains the time elapsed affer the quasitable sate has then reached. All the four points show tha the subsidence ve- locity was higher initially and decreased afterward, Similar de- velopment paticrns can also be obscrved in the other case. sed on theat observations itis reasonable to assume that the Subsidence velocity at sufice pint and ala given tim inthe long-term subsidence process is proportional ta the difference between the whimate final subsidence (S,) and the eurrent sub- Sidence atthe point, This assumption can Be expvesied inthe following ordinary differential eqution He) ~ FP = elS.—St0 o ‘where: f- time elapsed after the quasi-stable state is reached subsidence velocity at time 1 {8 coofficient characterizing the fong-term subsi- vy ration (Fig. 2). For enses 1, 3 and 4, the normal subsidence 5 lence process Table 1 General information of the Collected Long-Term Subsidence Cases and Subsidence Development at Middle Point over Chain Pillar System [Case] teal iiring | Panel | CPS Wining No. | Seam [Depth | wicthr | wiach | Hoignt |" SF [Time 9 1 Prrstuon | e7s | oso | sss | eso | 222 | -o19 2 [Pitstuh | 959 | a0 | 142 | eso | 1.93 | “sz 3 frusowyn | o77 | oa | a5 | 50 | 221 | “ase 4 femspugn | 20 | 208 | ias | 50 | 220 | “a2s 5 [Reins | 725 | 600 | 200 | eo | 162 | “aso @ |rewinge | ee | as | aso | ze | aia] are T |remnws | 386 | es | 130 | eas | 324 | “020 & |emnes | 362 | 45 | 190 | ¢17 | aap | ozs = average wieth of tne two acjacent longwall panels GPS. Chain pillar system between two adjacent loagwall panels Time Elapsed Days fier quaststable state reached afer the second panel as been mined “6 E 16th CONFERENCE ON GROUND CONTROL IN MINING sioner, a i — ‘tanec te Eg 1 (2) Case No.1 ay eae ” i sa jul Ps a eae —te Fim tron Pt cue Ned “ fs i * z..+— ae x £ - salcolbatt Fs or otnn tae Ee) O8 Not ig. Measured Subsidence Profiles over Three Chain Paar Systeme Fetween Four Sucsesve Longyrll Panels in the Pittsburgh Seas, Panel Pol wat lined Fiat aed Pot te Last Sy ultimate final subsidence Si) subsidence at time ¢ [Ry calving the differential equation with the initial con dition of 5/0) = S, 4S, is the quasifinal subsidence at the ‘point, the matheruatical expression for subsidence at & surface point and at time rean be wbiained as the flowing n= Se Sa) @ “6 nne m Pe em Fit. Menuared Subsidence Pres over the Chain Pillar System Merween Two Langwall Pale Hern Searn (Case No 8) ay er hint Sine lg, $ Long-term Sebsionse Develipment Curves ‘at Four Points for Care Nod In this equation, S, and c, and sometimes S, are un- known terms but can be hack-calculated From a measured de- velopment curve: of the long-term subsidence process as those shown in Fig 5, Mathematically, anly theee data points are re- quired to define the development curve. However, since the change in subcidence during the process is nocmally small, the measurement errors, which could be very significant compared to the magnitude of the long-term subsidence, could make the determination using back-caleulation method very unveliable. Redundancy in data points are needed in order to produce are liable relation using non-linear regression techrique. Chain Pillar Stabitity Factor vs, Long-Term Subsidence “The data presented in Figs. 5 and 4.and in Table I show ‘that a significant long-term subsidence can be observed in sorne ses while in other canes its eximence is deubeful in terms of the absolute increments, In search for the possible causes for such uncertainty, the stability factar for each of the longwall chain systems for the collested eases is calculated using the ALPS method (Mark, 1992). The determined ALPS stsbility factors (SF) as listed in Tablet range from 1.53 t0 3.48. The ALPS stability factor isan indicator for the loading intensity to which the chain pillar system is subjected. ‘The smaller the si bility factor is, the sore intensely the chain pillar is loaded. 16th CONFERENCE ON GROUND CONTROL IN MINING ‘The measured long-term subsidence at the middle point of the chain pillar system for each of the cases is alsa normal- ied by the measured quasi-final subsidence and shown in Ta- ble I The normalized long-term subsidence (Le, “25 ) is Plotted against the elapsed timne after the quasi-stable state in Fig, 6 Its interesting to note that there is no discemible dis ‘wibution pattern and the long-term subsidence is insignificant for the three cases with APLS SF larger than 3. However, those cases with ALPS SF less than 3 (Caution: do not regard SF’= 3 as a critical value for cnusing long-term subsidence) show a much clear distribution pattern as the dashed line in the figure suggests, This phenomens agree well with the creep de- formation characteristics in roek mechanics, The larger is the applied load, the higher will be the creep rate and the faster ‘could be the long-term subsidence process ‘The shape of the suggested curve in Fig. 6 also agrees well with the following transferred form af Eq 4, an exponen tial decaying function dle) (4) This agreement indicates that Fy, 4 cam be used to reprenent the long-term subsidence development process once the une knowns. c and §,, in the equation can be reliably determined ‘The coefficient ¢ is most possible a function of the ALPS sts- bility factor. However, due to the limited amount of daia col Vested 0 fa, a reliable relationship tetween © and ALPS stability Factor can mbt be established, yet f Sem a |= onsen | a ers CS cee amecaacach sim Fig, § Pert ot Inersnental Subsidence ve, lasped Time “Alter the Chnsi-Seable State seach! EFFECTS OF LONG-TERM SUBSIDENCE (ON SURFACE STRUCTURES: It has been a well known fact that uniform surface movements (ic, subsidence and horizontal displacement) will ot cause problems to mast surface structures. The integsty. siabilty and fanctionality problems developed on most of the subsidence influenced structures are caused by surface defor mations (je, slope, strain and curvature). This section wil as seas the possible effects of long-term subsidence on exist and structures constructed after mining of the longwall panels Deformations derived from the measured subsidence data in case No. 4 are used in this assessment, This case is chosen be- cause a fiirly long time has elapsed after mining and the rel tive increase in subsidence is the maximum among, the eases The largest changes in surface: deformations are expected in this case Surface Sloe Three derived surface slope prafiles ae showa in Fig, 7 for the following three time stages: (1} subsidence process duc +o mining of pane! P-1 has reached quasiatable state, (2) subs dence process duc (o mining of panel P-2 has reached quasi stable state, and (3) last survey which was eonducted 426 day's Mier stage 2 The dlference in surface slope between stages 2 and 3 is caused by the long-term subsidence xe 7 shows varying amount of reduction of the sur- face slope from stage 2 10 stage 3 along this entire monument line. Thecefore, the long-term subsidence process actully re- duces the slope on an existing stmcture located in this area Te maximum reduction in slope i ubout 0.2%, For struc ture constructed afer stage 2, iis structure will experience = surface slope equal ta the difference berween stages 2 and 3 with the maximum being about 0.2%, A slope less than 1% would have no effect oa the Living condition of any residential structures and his very litle influence om the other types of stevetures. Therefore, effects of the slope caused by the long term subsidence process on new structures will be very minor, itany Bom & Fig, 7 Measured Surface Slope at Different Time Stages ase No 4 wurface Cary The derived surfice curvature profiler for the sume three time stages are shown in Fig. 8 A positive curvature ine dicates that the surface is in convex bending. Figure 8 shows that the peak curvatures at stage 2 are 6.810" and 90x10" Ut on panels PU and P-2 spectively. Since the mess lwred surface curvatures near the edges of the chain pillar sys tem at stage 2 are larger than the criticl value of 6x10" 1 (Luo and Peng, 1991), the surface curvatere bas potential 10 ‘cause problems to residential structures located around these 46th CONFERENCE ON GROUND CONTROL IN MINING locations at that time. However, due to the development of long-term subsidence, the surface curvatures at the same two locations have decreased to- 5 8x10 and 73x10° Lift, respece ‘ively. Although the surface curvature near the tailentry of pane! P-2 is sill capable of causing problems to sinscures, the magnitudes of curvature has reduced as a result of develop ment of long-term subsidence. Figure @ alse shows aa increase in surface curvature from stage 2 1 stage 3 over the middle portion of the chain pillar system, ‘The maximum increase is about 3 1x10* 1/M Such amount of curvature will nat pro- duce any noticeable effocs on new sructures constructed there aller stage 2. i ‘ase Chan ar ge Fig. 8 Meacured Surface Curvature at Different Time Stages in Case No.4 face Strain ‘Among the three types of deformations, surfice strain, particulary the tensile strain, is often the No. | cause for prob- lems developed an most structures or structural pars that have direct contact with ground. Previous studies on subsidence effects on residential cructures (Luo and Peag. 1991) have shown that critical strain for brick or block house walls is 2x10 fit while that for stone walls is ‘10° @UA, ‘The derived surface strain profiles for east No. 4 are shown in Fig. 9. A pasitive value is for tensile strain ‘The sirain profiles For stages 1 and 2 indicate that structures focated, ear the strain peaks could be seriously impacied After the development of long-term subsidence, though the surface strain, is sill capable of causing problems to structures, the severity ccould be reduced significantly. For a structure built ever the chain pillar system after stage 2, it cauld experience the stfer cntial strain between stages 2 and 3 as shown in Fig. 10. Tt shows thatthe strain caused by long-term subsidence process is, insufficient. to influence most structures to any noticeable Segree CONCLUSIONS Hight sets of subsidence data measured over and near chain pillar systems between longwall panels for extended peri- 8 [ita an Chan Pe a Fig.9 Measured Surface Strain at Different ‘Time Stages Case No.4 ‘inno rae ra 10 Incremental Surface Strain Cansed by Long-Term ‘Subsidence Process in Case No. $ ods aller mining have been studied dor long-term subsidence, ‘The following conclusions can be made fiom this study. + Longaterm sabsidence process appears to exist based on the collected cases Some of the cases showed significant amount of long-term subsidence ‘while other cases indicated very minor amount Possible factort contributing 10 long-term subsi- dence include seam depth, pillar width, coal strength and overburden sirata property, aor bearing

    You might also like