Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Low-Wall Instabilities in Coal Mines in Indonesia From A Geotechnical Perspective (Ballantyne Et - Al., 2003)
Low-Wall Instabilities in Coal Mines in Indonesia From A Geotechnical Perspective (Ballantyne Et - Al., 2003)
ABSTRACT
1. INTRODUCTION
This paper discusses the potential reasons for coal mine low wall
instability and outlines how the probability of instability can be reduced, which
may allow established coal mines to be developed to greater depths.
Due to the difficulty of starting up new operations, many coal mines in
Indonesia are required to extend their existing mines deeper than originally
planned in order to achieve coal production targets. With greater depths,
geotechnical properties resisting instability tend to remain unchanged, while
properties driving instability only increase. By measuring the increase and
knowing the factors resisting instability, strategies for balancing the resulting
forces can be developed and transformed into practical ways of keeping the low
way stable.
Low wall failure represents a critical hazard that mines often overlook.
As many as 4 mines in Kalimantan have experienced significant low wall
problems since 2002.
This paper discusses both the geotechnical and hydrogeological
conditions that can combine to create the hazard of low wall failure.
The paper then looks at methods of evaluating the ground conditions and
emphasises the critical step that is often missed in mine geotechnics;
1
Prosiding Seminar Sehari Kemantapan Lereng di Pertambangan Indonesia III, Bandung, 16 Juni 2003
2
Prosiding Seminar Sehari Kemantapan Lereng di Pertambangan Indonesia III, Bandung, 16 Juni 2003
and then shear failure of the remaining mudstone layer due to removal of toe
support (Figure 2).
The resistance to lift off offered by the mudstone layer would be
dependent on the thickness and density of the mudstone layer and the tensile
strength between the mudstone and the underlying sandstones. Once lift off
had occurred, the entire length of the mudstone layer would develop stresses
parallel to the inclination of the layer as self load would only be supported along
the inclined layer and into the pit floor.
Mudstone Layer
Figure 1
Failure Sequence – Possibility 1
1. Hydraulic lift off (dotted arrows)
2. Layer parallel stresses increase in
the mudstone (dashed arrow)
3. Stresses cause shear failure at the
most highly stressed zone – the toe
breakout (solid arrow)
Mudstone Layer
Figure 2
Failure Sequence – Possibility 2
1. Hydraulic pressure (dotted arrows)
2. Buckling failure of the mudstone layer
(line showing exaggerated
deformation profile).
3. Shear failure of the mudstone due to
removal of toe support (solid arrow).
3
Prosiding Seminar Sehari Kemantapan Lereng di Pertambangan Indonesia III, Bandung, 16 Juni 2003
The stability of the low wall is in a state of balance between the driving
forces and the resisting forces – these are outlined below:
Forces driving low wall failure Forces resisting low wall failure
Force from the component of the Force from the component of the
weight of the low wall acting in the weight of the low wall acting across
downslope direction (dependant on the layering (dependant on height
height and inclination of low wall). and inclination).
Groundwater pressures
For groundwater pressures to lift off low wall layers due to buoyancy
alone, the groundwater pressure must first overcome the tensile strength
between layers. Based on simple Mohr-Columb theory, the force required to do
this is represented by the cohesion available between the layers.
4
Prosiding Seminar Sehari Kemantapan Lereng di Pertambangan Indonesia III, Bandung, 16 Juni 2003
3.1. Coordination
5
Prosiding Seminar Sehari Kemantapan Lereng di Pertambangan Indonesia III, Bandung, 16 Juni 2003
The answer is probably due to the way in which the existing investigation
data is analysed and used to come up with recommendations that can be
incorporated practically into mine design and operation.
Often, a mine’s idea of geotechnical investigation is to drill a couple of
holes and take some samples to send to a lab. Basing a mine design on this
information is risky business – either the mine will be developed conservatively,
or it will fall down – and there is only a fine line in between.
In many cases, mine design is then left to the contractor, who will
develop a feel for the ground and optimise the stripping ratio based on that feel.
This approach is better than taking 2 samples for UCS tests.
The best approach may be to combine a ‘real’ investigation and analyses
program with practical feedback from the contractor during mining. Truly a mind
boggling scenario in Indonesia – or any country.
6
Prosiding Seminar Sehari Kemantapan Lereng di Pertambangan Indonesia III, Bandung, 16 Juni 2003
the samples must be removed from the splits immediately and protected to
maintain original conditions.
Laboratory testing should comprise determination of bulk density,
unconfined compressive strength and perhaps some direct shear testing along
existing discontinuities within the core.
Real analyses can begin at this stage. Use of anisotropic modeling,
Hoek-Brown rock strength parameters and piezometric heads in specific layers
can avoid over-conservative results. Pit design parameters should be provided
as relationships between probability of failure and slope angle / height.
Enough drilling should have been carried out by the Bankable feasibility
stage to provide a high level of confidence to be developed in the modeling.
Analyses should be evolved to a stage to a high level of confidence in design.
During production, inpit mapping should be maintained by experienced
geotechnical personnel. Monitoring for cracking must be carried out. Good
coordination should exist between the mining contractor, the geotechnical
personnel and the pit designer.
If failures occur, then these should be used to “calibrate” existing models
and should provide a basis for possible pit design revision – or mine sequencing
revision.
A design for ground investigation and coordination is provided in the
attached table.
Knowing the factors that cause low wall failures is not enough to stop
them. In order to reduce the risk of low wall problems, we need to find practical
ways of increasing resisting forces and decreasing driving forces. If the opposite
happens, then stability is reduced.
Almost invariably the low wall will be developed parallel with the bedding.
If the bedding is undercut, then layer parallel stresses are relieved and shear
resistances along the layer interface are tested against the downslope weight of
the block. In Kalimantan (as in any place), undercutting of layers in the low wall
does happen. If this cut is not taken back up to the crest, then the layer will
often slide.
Perhaps the simplest and most cost effective method of decreasing
factors that cause sliding is to provide drainage to the low wall. Drilling into the
wall is becoming more popular in Kalimantan and high groundwater pressures
are nearly always found in the floor. Depressurisation can offer a much reduced
cost option to unloading options – however, how many and how deep? These
questions can be predicted from first principals during feasibility level work, but
really need to be reassessed based on the results of measurements made
during mining.
Piezometers need to be installed behind the footwall and far enough
back from the crest of the footwall to demonstrate that water pressures behind
the base of the low wall are less than available overburden pressures left in the
low wall (much, much less).
7
Prosiding Seminar Sehari Kemantapan Lereng di Pertambangan Indonesia III, Bandung, 16 Juni 2003
6. CONCLUSION
Both geotechnical and hydrogeological conditions behind the low wall are
the key elements in low wall stability. Low wall stability is primarily due to
elevated groundwater pressures overcoming the combination of overburden
pressure, adhesion between rock layers and a break out resistance at the toe of
the low wall. These elements are in a balance that swings towards failure as
the depth of the pit increases. The elements are simple to quantify through a
process of experienced-based visual inspection, field investigations and
laboratory testing programs.
Geotechnical analyses can model the stability balance with depth and
factors can be changed in an effort to swing the balance away from instability.
The results of the geotechnical analyses must be turned into practical
recommendations that the designer can apply and the contractor can carry out
before low wall stability can be increased.
7. REFERENCES