International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of
Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrmms

Long-hole destress blasting for rockburst control during

deep underground coal mining
Petr Konicek a,n, Kamil Soucek a, Lubomir Stas a, Rajendra Singh b
a
Institute of Geonics, Institute of Clean Technologies, Academy of Sciences, Ostrava, Czech Republic
b
CSIR-Central Institute of Mining & Fuel Research, Dhanbad, India

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Article history: The Lazy Colliery in the Ostrava–Karvina Coalfield of the Upper Silesian Coal Basin adopted modern
Received 13 February 2012 longwall technology for an underground extraction of coal seam No. 504. This coal seam is located at a
Received in revised form cover depth of around 700 m. The seam thickness varied from 3.1 m to 5.0 m in the selected longwall
21 January 2013
panel. Two overlying coal seams, Nos. 512 and 530 experienced mining at average heights of 58 m and
Accepted 8 February 2013
75 m, respectively, from the planned working horizon of the seam No. 504. The proposed longwall
panel was adversely situated below goaf edges of the workings in these two overlying extracted seams.
Keywords: An analysis of the inter-burden rock mass among these coal seams showed the presence of strong,
Ostrava–Karvina Coal Basin massive strata of sandstones and conglomerates with uniaxial compressive strength values between
Longwall mining
70 MPa and 120 MPa. The stress is measured at different mining stages by Compact Conical-ended
Rockburst
Borehole Monitoring (CCBM). A simple laboratory test of the coal sample found a high value of the ratio
Destress blasting
of the elastic deformation to the total deformation ( 40.8), indicating the energy-storing characteristic
(prone to burst/bump) of the coal seam. Under the existing geo-mining conditions of the site a suitable
destress blasting (long-hole drilling and blasting) design is adopted to pre-fracture the identified
competent strata from both gate roads in advance. The total length of the panel could be extracted
without any bump/rockburst after the destress blasting. The efficiency of the adopted destress blasting
at the different mining stages is evaluated in terms seismic effect (SE), which is calculated through the
available seismic monitoring data and weight of the charged explosive. A systematic adoption of the
destress rock blasting led the 300 m long longwall panel to be smoothly extracted without any further
rockbursts.
& 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The hard coal reserve of the Upper Silesian Coal Basin (USCB) is
shared by the Czech Republic and Poland. In this coal basin,
longwall is a dominant underground mining method. The Czech
part of the USCB, known as the Ostrava–Karvina Coalfield (OKC),
lies in the northeastern part of the country (Fig. 1). Underground
mining of different coal seams took place in the OKC for more
than 200 years. The exhaustion of the upper seams due to the
continuing coal mining activity for such a long period of time has
shifted the activity to a greater depth ( 4600 m). Under the
existing mining and geological conditions of the Karvina sub-
basin of the USCB, underground extraction of the coal in this basin
is typically accompanied by rockbursts, which are also referred to
as coal bumps. The first rockbursts occurred in the coalfield in
n
Correspondence to: Department of Geomechanics and Mining Research,
Institute of Geonics, Academy of Science of the Czech Republic, Studentska 1768,
708 00 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic. Tel.: þ420 596 979 224;
fax: þ420 596 919 452.
E-mail address: petr.konicek@ugn.cas.cz (P. Konicek).
1912 [1]. Different attempts have been made to address rock-
bursts during underground coal mining in both the Czech [2–5]
and the Polish [6,7] part of the USCB.
There are various rock mechanics challenges associated with
the underground mining of a deep-seated coal seam [8–11]. By
analysing geotechnical data from different mines, Chase et al. [12]
find that the nature of the overlying strata plays a significant role
in the success of the underground mining of the deep coal seams.
Based on an examination of the geotechnical data of several
mines, rockbursts are the major problem during the underground
coal mining of deep coal seams under strong roof strata (Fig. 2).
During the different underground coalmining activities in the
OKC, rockbursts are more frequent when the mining depth
exceeds 600 m. Depth alone creates a high mining-induced stress
[10], which increases the chance of rockbursts occurrence. Under-
ground extraction of the coalfield’s bottom coal seam (No. 504)
also met two overlying worked-out coal seams, which consisted
of a number of left-out barrier pillars and ribs with high stress
concentrations. The existence of these stressed pillars/ribs over
the mining activities in No. 504 seam also became a contributing
factor for the rockbursts. As per the site’s existing stratigraphic

1365-1609/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2013.02.001
142 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153
Fig. 1. Location of the Upper Silesian Coal Basin and map of seismic networks in Karvina sub-basin.
Fig. 2. An analysis of performance of underground coal mining at deep cover and
under strong roof rock [after 12].
conditions, the present mining horizon of the OKC was confronted
with competent overlying rock strata. The presence of these rigid
overlying rock strata at this horizon resulted in dynamic loading
during their caving, which also increased the chance of a rock-
burst occurrence.
Active and passive approaches were adopted to control the
increasing frequency of rockbursts at the present working horizon.
The rockburst impact can be reduced by passive approaches such
as improvement in mining and support system. However, for a
difficult site like coal seam No. 504 of the Lazy colliery, an active
approach (destress rock blasting) is needed to reduce the rockburst
frequency. Destress rock blasting is predominantly used in the high
rockburst risk conditions of underground ore mining [13]. Destress
rock blasting has been used in underground coal mining in the
Czech part of the USCB since 1990 to prevent rockbursts [14–17
and 34]. More than 2000 destress rock blastings occurred in this
region between 1990 and 2010 [18] to control rockbursts.
This paper presents a case study dealing with a deep longwall
mining of a thick coal seam, seam No. 504, under difficult
geological and mining conditions. Successful application of the
destress rock blasting technique is done to control rockbursts
during the deep underground longwall coal mining under com-
petent overlying strata in the OKC. The performance of the
adopted destress rock blasting approach is assessed by seismic
monitoring, the seismic effect of the destress rock blasting and
in situ stress measurements, which are mentioned in this paper.
2. Site details
Lazy Colliery in the OKC adopted longwall mining to extract
underground coal from panel No. 140 914 of coal seam No. 504.
The length of the longwall panel was 300 m, and the width varied
from 109 m to 189 m. The panel was situated in the 9th mining
block, which is in the western part of the colliery. The borders of
the 9th mining block are created by the tectonic fault C on the
north, the tectonic fault Ceres on the south, the Orlova Structure
on the west and a safety shaft pillar on the east (Fig. 3). Mining in
this panel began on 2 November 2006 and was completed on 15
June 2007. The entire thickness of the panel’s coal seam was
extracted by a fully mechanised longwall face with caving.
The thickness of the panel’s coal seam varied from 3.1 m to
5.0 m. Double drum shearer KGS 445 RW (FAMUR Inc., Katowice,
Poland) was deployed to extract a 3.5 m thick portion of the coal.
The length of the longwall face varied from 109 m to 189 m,
which was supported by the self-advancing high load capacity
chock shields MEOS 17/37/05 (Ostroj Opava Inc., Opava, Czech
Republic). Ninety chock-shields, each of 82-tonne load bearing
capacity and with two legs, were erected to cover the entire
length of the face. A chain conveyor of PF 4/1032 (DBT GmbH,
Lünen, Germany) with a 2500 t hourly capacity was used to
evacuate the dislodged coal from the face.
2.1. Geology
Existing geological and mining conditions of the coal seam No.
504 at Lazy Colliery make underground extraction of this coal
 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153 143

Fig. 3. A plan and bore-hole section showing different mining panels around the No 140 914 longwall panel and inter-burden thicknesses among different coal seams.

Fig. 4. Deformation variation of the coal sample during a laboratory compression test.

seam challenging. Due to its inherent nature, the coal seam [19] is
also found susceptible to rockbursts. A simple compressive strength
testing of a coal sample of the coal seam in the laboratory showed
an increasing ability of strain energy accumulation. The sample’s
loading and unloading test results are shown in Fig. 4. In this figure,
the sample is loaded to nearly 60% of its compressive strength
(average 40 MPa) before unloading. It is observed that the ratio of
the elastic deformation to the total deformation of the coal sample
exceeds 0.8, which reflects strain energy accumulation characteristic
of the coal seam.
The cover depth of the coal seam in the selected panel varied
from 650 m to 720 m, and the seam has an average inclination
of 9.51 in the northeastern direction, as shown in Fig. 5. Nearly
90% of the coal seam’s overlying strata are competent rocks
such as sandstones and conglomerates (Fig. 3). Under the existing
multi-seam mining conditions of the site, overlying coal
seam Nos. 512 and 530 were worked out by the longwall method
(caving), and the goaf is supposed to be settled. However, the edges of
the workings in these overlying coal seams fall over the area of the
selected panel in coal seam No. 504. The inter-bed thickness between
coal seam No. 504 and the immediate overlying coal seam No. 512
varies from 51 m to 63 m. This inter-burden has a high proportion of
competent rock strata with thicknesses of more than 5 m and 10 m
(Fig. 6). The uniaxial compressive strengths of the sandstones and the
conglomerates range from 70 MPa to 120 MPa. The high Rock Quality
Designation (RQD) values observed in the overlying strata also
indicate the presence of compact and competent overlying rock
masses. Fig. 7 represents a typical stratigraphic section, the strength
144 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153

Fig. 5. Contour lines showing: (A) variation in coal seam thickness (in cm) and (B) depth of cover of the coal seam No. 504 (in m).

Fig. 6. Contour lines showing: (A) percentage of competent rock layers of thickness 410 m in complete overlying rock mass column (B) in inter-bed between seams No.
504 and No. 512 only.

and the RQD profile of the overlying rock strata up to a 25 m height
from the coal seam horizon.
2.2. Mining
Panel No. 140 914 was the first longwall working in the 9th
mining block of the seam No. 504 (Fig. 3). The mining in this panel
was near the tectonic fault Ceres and the edge of a previously
extracted neighbouring longwall panel of the adjacent mining block,
No. 1 (sequence No. 15 in Fig. 3). The existence of this close goaf is
also a source of high mining-induced stress. As mentioned above, the
goaves of two overlying coal seams at average heights of 58 m and
75 m, respectively, are also likely to influence the development and
the concentration of the stress during the longwall mining in coal
seam No. 504. The position and the orientation of the extracted
panels in both of the overlying coal seams were not superimposed or
symmetrical, mainly, to protect the safety shaft pillars, located close
to these excavations. Particularly, the working in overlying coal seam
No. 512 experienced an irregular mining, as a number of pillars were
left to protect the safety pillars (Fig. 8) of the main Lazy shafts.
2.3. Rockburst prognosis
Rockburst prognosis was done as per natural and mining
conditions of the site and according to valid rockburst legislation
of the country [20]. The adopted rockburst prognosis for the site is
a three-tiered approach, consisting regional, local and current
categories.
2.3.1. Regional prognosis
The first step of a site’s rockburst hazard assessment is the
regional prognosis, in which the rockburst potential is assessed
through the natural danger of stress concentrations in large
geological units of the rock mass. This assessment uses geological
data and the rock mass properties. Parameters considered for this
assessment include physical and mechanical properties of the
rock, lithology, depth below the surface, changes in the coal seam
thickness, abnormalities in the lithology, tectonic structure and
the ability of the coal seam to store elastic energy. Based on the
regional prognosis results, the mine area is tectonically divided
into different mining blocks, each of which belongs to either an
area prone or not prone to rockbursts. The area along the tectonic
 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153
Fig. 7. Rock quality designation and uniaxial compressive strength in roof strata
above the seam No 504 (data from borehole log).
Fig. 8. Overlapping of different workings seams Nos. 530, 512 and 504 showing
area of additional stress concentrations.
fault Ceres is believed to be at a high risk for rockbursts [21]. Also,
according to the collected geological information (Fig. 3) and the
physico-mechanical properties (Figs. 5–7) of the surrounding rock
mass, the mining in panel No. 140 914 of coal seam No. 504 at the
Lazy Colliery is found to be at a high risk for rockbursts.
2.3.2. Local prognosis
The second step of the rockburst hazard assessment is the local
prognosis, in which the possible effects of the mining-induced
stresses due to the planned mining activity under the existing
geo-mining conditions are analysed. The planned working in
panel No. 140 914 is examined for the amount of mining induced
stress. Considering the presence of the competent overlying rock
strata (Figs. 3 and 7); the asymmetry of the workings in the
overlying coal seams, Nos. 512 and No. 530 (Fig. 8); and the close
vicinity of the earlier mined-out panel in seam No. 504, this
examination found that there was a high risk for rockbursts in the
longwall face No. 140 914.
During the planning stage of the mining work, an individual
mining work is classified into three different degrees of rockburst
risk [4]. As per the existing geo-mining conditions around the
panel, above-mentioned two prognoses were conducted before
145
the actual mining activity in the panel. According to the above
regional and local prognoses of the Czech mining legislation,
panel No. 140 914 of coal seam No. 504 is likely to face a 3rd
degree (the most severe) rockburst hazard.
2.3.3. Current prognosis
The current prognosis is conducted during the actual advance-
ment of the longwall face. It mainly consists of the drilling yield
test and geophysical monitoring, both of which are used to detect
increased stress conditions around the operating mining face [21].
The drilling-yield test [22] was conducted daily (regularly) on the
face through 11 m long boreholes with a diameter of 42 mm. The
typical spacing between these holes was kept to be 30 m. These
tests were conducted at least twice in a week at the gate-roads in
the mining-induced stress zone and at the coalface of the long-
wall. The dimensions and the spacing of these boreholes in the
gate-roads were kept similar to those of the boreholes along the
coalface. All other works that could influence the stability of the
rock-mass were prohibited during the drilling-yield tests.
The second part of the current prognosis is geophysical
monitoring, which consisted of seismo-acoustic observation in
the working panel and seismological observations through the
local and the regional seismological networks (Fig. 1). Four
geophones, two in each gate-road, were placed for the seismo-
acoustic observations. The two geophones in each gate-road were
initially placed 30 m and 100 m ahead of the extraction face.
During the advancement of the face, the positions of these
geophones were regularly moved ahead to maintain the given
distance of these geophones with respect to the face.
2.4. Preventive measures
Active and passive preventive measures were taken during the
longwall mining in panel No. 140 914 of coal seam No. 504 to
control rockbursts. The active measures decrease the probability
of a rockburst occurrence, while the passive measures limit the
impacts of a rockburst, even if it occurs during the mining
activity.
The first step of the passive preventive measure is to define the
endangered area ahead of the longwall face. According to the
site’s geo-mining conditions, the area up to 93 m ahead of the face
was influenced by the mining-induced stress. Therefore, the 93 m
zones in both of the gate-roads, including the coalface, were
considered to be an endangered area. No operational work in this
area was permitted only according to the nature of the drilling-
yield test results. The maximum number of employees deployed
for a particular work in the endangered area is also restricted.
Even under normal conditions, all parallel works in the gate roads
were prohibited during the coal cutting and the support advance-
ment/adjustment operations. Furthermore, the active preventive
measure is decided according to the observed situation by the
drilling-yield test in the endangered zone of the longwall face.
The active preventive measure consists of several different
approaches. Each approach of this measure is initiated according
to the condition of the coalface in the panel. The ‘wetting of the
coal bed’ and ‘the destress blasting in the overburden rock strata’
approaches are adopted under normal endangered zone condi-
tions. To wet the coal bed, parallel horizontal boreholes with a
length ranging from 45 m to 90 m and a diameter of 75 mm are
drilled in the uppermost horizon of the seam from both of the
gate-roads. All of these boreholes were fitted with a suitable
water infusion system, which was connected to a water pipe line
system. An average of 420 l of water per unit length (m) was used
for the infusion in a borehole of the panel. The technical details of
the adopted destress blasting in the overburden rock strata are
146 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153
discussed in Section 3. If the drilling-yield test indicated an
adverse situation in the endangered area, then destress blasting
in the coal seam from the gate-roads or the longwall face is
adopted. For this destress blasting, horizontal parallel boreholes
with a diameter of 42 mm and a length of 11 m to 15 m were
drilled at a spacing of 5 m in the middle horizon of the coal seam.
Each borehole was charged with 7 kg to 9 kg of explosive and
blasted without any delay in time.
3. Destress rock blasting
The main goal of the destress blasting was to weaken the
strength/massiveness of the overlying competent rock strata
before the underground mining began. First, the horizon of the
competent overlying strata was identified through the procured
core samples. Then, different sets of predefined, long boreholes
were drilled from the gate-roads targeting these competent strata
and the existing mining activity in and around the panel.
A schematic diagram (of both the section and the plan) of the
adopted design for the long borehole drilling for the destress rock
blasting in the panel is shown in Fig. 9. All of these boreholes
were drilled upwards at angles between 121 and 371 from both of
the longwall gate-roads. The borehole lengths varied from 40 m to
100 m. In view of the calculated amount of explosive required for
the destress rock blasting, the diameter of these boreholes was
93 mm and the spacing of the boreholes was 10 m. With suitable
length and angle combinations for these boreholes, the bottoms
(end) of all of the boreholes were situated at a similar horizon
inside the roof, nearly 20 m above coal seam No 504.
All of these upward-drilled boreholes were charged pneuma-
tically by the gelatine type of explosive Perunit 28E (heat of
Fig. 9. Scheme of destress rock blasting and in situ stress measurement.
explosion 4100 kJ/kg), and sand is used for the stemming. The
length and the amount of explosive in each borehole varied
according to the surrounding geo-mining conditions. According
to the condition of panel No. 140 914, the lengths of the charge in
the different holes varied from 26 m to 75 m, the length of the
sand stemming varied from 14 m to 25 m and the percentage of
the loaded lengths of these boreholes ranged from 63% to 85%
(Table 1). An individual group of loaded boreholes, typically
ranging from 3 to 6 boreholes, was fired in advance according
to the predefined firing order. All of the charged boreholes in a
certain group were fired simultaneously, without any delay. The
weight of the explosive charged in different holes varied accord-
ing to the adopted length of the borehole. The amount of the
explosive charged in a hole of panel No. 140 914 varied from
245 kg to 780 kg. The total amount of explosive (for the three to
six boreholes in a group) blasted at a time in the panel varied
from 1550 kg to 3450 kg.
According to the site conditions, borehole Nos. 1–8, 101–112
and 151–153 (Fig. 9) were adopted to create a network of fissures
in the competent strata, lying over the commencement area of
longwall panel No. 140 914. Borehole Nos. 101–112, 121–136 and
21–23 were adopted to dilute the influence of the edges between
the mined and the un-mined parts of the seams in the over-
burden. The competent strata over the left out pillars, lying
between tailgate No. 40915 and tectonic fault Ceres, were
managed through borehole Nos. 201–213 and 221–232. Blasting
in borehole Nos. 41–45 and 141–145 were used to isolate the
mining in longwall panel No. 140 914 and the safety shaft pillar.
These borehole bastings were designed to develop continuous
fractures in a rock mass, which is likely to be responsible for the
generation and the accumulation of stress concentrations due to
the mining. The competent overlying rock strata, which are
 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153 147

Table 1
Analysis of destress rock blasting conducted in longwall No. 140 914 of Lazy Colliery.

Stage Numbers of boreholes Percentage of load length of boreholes Explosive charge Seismic energy Seismic effect evaluation Seismic effect
(–) (%) (kg) (J) (–) (–)

1 1–4, 51 63 1625 1.61Eþ 04 4.7 Very good

2 101–104, 151 64 1550 1.39Eþ 04 4.3 Very good
3 201–206 69 1725 2.40Eþ 04 6.6 Extremely good
4 5–8, 52 72 2000 3.19Eþ 04 7.6 Extremely good
5 105–108, 152 70 1775 3.03Eþ 04 8.1 Extremely good
6 109–112, 153 73 2150 3.31Eþ 04 7.3 Extremely good
7 207–210 73 1700 1.29Eþ 04 3.6 Very good
8 211, 212, 213 79 1850 2.50Eþ 04 6.4 Extremely good
9 121–124, 154 67 2500 4.40Eþ 04 8.4 Extremely good
10 125, 126, 127 82 2125 5.00E þ 04 11.2 Extremely good
11 221–227 59 1635 1.80Eþ 04 5.2 Very good
12 41–45 74 3450 2.40Eþ 05 33.1 Excellent
13 141–145 74 3450 3.80Eþ 05 52.4 Excellent
14 128–130 85 2250 6.20Eþ 04 13.1 Excellent
15 131–133 83 2250 1.50Eþ 05 31.7 Excellent
16 228–232 70 1850 1.90Eþ 04 4.9 Very good
17 134–136 81 2350 7.80Eþ 04 15.8 Excellent
18 21–23 80 2350 1.40Eþ 05 28.4 Excellent

continuously fractured due to these blastings, were also observed after destressing, Uc is the increased strain energy in the sur-
to be caving friendly. The decision to blast different individual rounding rock, We is the explosion energy, Wf is the energy that is
groups of boreholes at different stages was made according to the not consumed in the fracturing of the rock and Wk is seismic
surrounding workings and the strata, the development of seismic energy (all in J).
activity during mining and the advancement of the longwall face. Knotek [23], who established evaluation of stress release by
As per geo-mechanical properties of the overlying rock strata and destress blasting due to seismic effect (SE) calculation in OKC,
existing legislations [24], positions of the fired boreholes were describes energy balance of destress blasting by following equations:
kept in range of 30 m to 93 m ahead of the longwall face. The E1 ) E2 ð3Þ
amount of explosive to be charged in each borehole is derived
from dimensions of the selected boreholes for firing. Finally, the E1 ¼ EVT þ Epr þ Epot þEkin ð4Þ
selection of boreholes depends on the existing mining conditions,
natural conditions and agreement of the registered seismic E2 ¼ Er þ Ekin þESeis þ ENM ð5Þ
activity with the legislations. where E1 is initial energy, E2 is resulting energy, EVT is explosive
energy, Epr is released deformation energy, Epot is change in potential
energy, Ekin is kinetic energy, Er is fragmentation energy, ESeis is
4. Evaluation of the destress rock blasting seismic energy and ENM is other energy forms—not measured (all in
J).
Theoretical and practical aspects of blasting are well devel- Total explosive energy (EVT) of the blasting stage (several
oped and often practiced by the mining industry. An account of boreholes) can be written as a sum of explosive energy for each
stress, displacement and energy released during a blasting is also borehole:
explained in detail by various authors e.g., [25–27]. Most of the
authors have studied some components of the energy balance X
N
EVT ¼ EjVT j ¼ 1,2,3,. . .,N ðnumber of boreholesÞ ð6Þ
during a rock blasting. Destress blasting is also successfully j¼1
practiced in various underground mines around the world [25].
There is a general consensus that destress blasting softens the Knotek [23] supposes that change of potential energy (Epot)
rock and reduces its effective elastic deformation modulus. There and kinetic energy (Ekin) approximate to zero and derives follow-
are conflicting views over the importance of the destress blasting ing equation:
for reducing the stress and the stored strain energy from the rock. Er þ EVT þ ENM ¼ ð1KÞE1 ð7Þ
The energy balance of the destress blasting is studied by a limited
He defines a coefficient K, which represents natural conditions
number of authors [25–27]. However, the conclusions of these
of the rock mass. He describes irreversible energy dissemination
studies about reducing the rock mass stress due to destress
process of destress blasting and arrives at following equation after
blasting are not unanimous. Sanchidrian [27] proposed the
considering Eqs. (4)–(7):
following energy balance equation for blasting:
EVT þ Epr ¼ ð1KÞðEVT þ Epr Þ þ ESeis ð8Þ
EE ¼ EF þES þ EK þ ENM , ð1Þ
Seismic energy is thus given as:
where EE is the explosive energy, EF is the fragmentation energy,
ES is the seismic energy, EK is the kinetic energy and ENM is other ESeis ¼ KðEV T þEpr Þ ð9Þ
energy forms—not measured (all in J). Explosive energy is determined according to
The following energy balance equation for destress blasting is
EVT ¼ eE Q ð10Þ
given by Sedlak [25]:
where eE is heat of explosion in J/kg, and Q the is mass of
W t þU m1 þ W e ¼ U c þ U m2 þ W f þ W k , ð2Þ
explosives in kg.
where Wt is the change in the potential energy, Um1 is the stored As coefficient K and deformation energy (Epr) are difficult
strain energy before destressing, Um2 is the stored strain energy to be determined together, Knotek [23] recommends statistic
148 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153
determination of coefficient K. It is assumed that the explosive is
charged and blasted in a highly confined state, where the rock
displacement is nearly zero. For a number of measurements, K is
measured when no deformation (elastic) energy is released during
the blasting i.e., a minimum obtained value from all Ki set. As per
above discussions, it is found that a correct value of the coefficient
K is acquired in case Epr-0. Accordingly K may be written as
K ¼ minðK i Þ
ESeisi
Ki ¼
EV T i
where the suffix i denotes an individual set of measurements. Based
on the aforementioned assumptions, the efficiency of the stress
release (elastic deformation energy release) is defined in term of the
‘‘seismic effect’’ (SE), which is given as
ESeis
SE ¼
KEVT
Knotek [23] concluded that, if there is no extreme energy
release, seismic energy is directly proportional to the explosive
weight. According to his conclusion we can calculate seismic
effect (SE):
ESeis c  EOKC EOKC
SE ¼ ¼ 
K eE Q K eE Q K OKC Q
where c( ¼ESeis/EOKC) is a coefficient considered for efficiency of
seismic monitoring in OKC, EOKC is seismic energy calculated from
seismic monitoring in OKC, KOKC is a combined coefficient (KeE/c),
characterized by natural and mining conditions in OKC and Q is
weight of explosives in kg (see Section 5 and the following
paragraphs).
The aforementioned relationship is validated through field
studies of the registered seismic energy during underground
destress rock blasting in carboniferous rock mass. Constant KOKC
was originally determined by the in situ monitoring of ten cases
[23] of destress rock blasting in coal measure formations in the
Czech part of the USCB. The observed value of KOKC from these
data was 2.6.
The aforementioned number of field studies to estimate the
value of KOKC is insufficient for a coal measure formation. There-
fore, a large-scale field study was conducted in the Czech part of
the USCB during the destress rock blasting. This study covered
Fig. 10. Diagram of dependence of transformed data of registered seismic energy on the weight of the charge.
nearly 1000 cases, and the results are published by Konicek [24].
The obtained data are statistically analysed to determine the
value of KOKC. The values of both of the parameters, the registered
seismic energy and the weight of explosive, were transformed to
suit a linear regression (Fig. 10). From this study, the obtained
value of KOKC is 2.1 for the coal measure formations in the Czech
part of the USCB.
ð11Þ A simple regression approach is adopted to determine value of
the coefficient KOKC [24]. Statistical transformation is used for
normality validation of the obtained data. Here, logarithmic
ð12Þ transformation (i.e., lnEOKC) is used for the seismic energy and
power transformation (i.e., Q1/3) is used for the weight of
explosive. An observed linear dependence between the trans-
formed data of the registered seismic energy (lnEOKC) and the
weight of charge (Q1/3) is represented by a regression line
 lnEOKC ¼4.6153þ0.3981Q1/3. Observed standard deviation of
the transformed registered seismic energy is 1.0653 in this
ð13Þ
relationship. The data located under a straight line, parallel to
the regression line and shifted by the standard deviation of the
transformed seismic energy, were selected as depicted in Fig. 10.
Mean value of these selected data were used to determine the
coefficient KOKC.
Based on numerous field investigations, Konicek [24] pub-
lished a different approach for determining the constant KOKC
ð14Þ
along with a system for evaluating SE. A classification is intro-
duced (Table 2) to evaluate the calculated SE based on criteria,
obtained from the distribution of the data probability from the
calculated seismic effects according to Eq. (14). The obtained
value of constant KOKC ( ¼2.1) is used for this classification.
According to this approach, if the SE of the destress blasting is
1.7, then it released only 1.7 times more energy than the energy
from the explosive. If the released energy by a destress blasting is
Table 2
A classification for evaluation of the seismic effect.
Seismic effect Evaluation of seismic effect
SEo 1.7 Insignificant
1.7r SE o3 Good
3r SE o6 Very good
6r SE o12 Extremely good
SEZ 12 Excellent
 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153
less than 1.7 times of the explosive energy, then the destress
blasting effect is insignificant from the stress release point of
view. Similarly, when the SE of the destress blasting is 12, then it
released 12 times more energy than the energy from the explo-
sive. For this condition, the destress blasting effect is excellent
from the stress release point of view.
The stress release assumptions made by Knotek [23] are not
considered in relationships (1) and (2). When the assumptions
made by Knotek [23] are introduced in these two relationships,
and the obtained results are compared with Knotek’s Eqs. (4) and
(5); the same conclusions are arrived at. Although seismic energy
is fundamental for the stress release effect and the SE calculations,
it only represents a small portion of the energy coming from the
total energy of the blasting. A considerable amount of the seismic
energy is observed through the rock mass stress release.
5. Seismic monitoring
Geophysical methods are established tools for continuously
evaluating the development of stress–strain conditions due to an
underground excavation. Thus, extensive seismic monitoring was
carried out during the mining in longwall No. 140 914 using a
local seismic network (that of the Lazy Colliery), a regional
seismic network (that of the Karvina sub-basin) and geophones
in each gate-road. The basic scheme of the adopted seismological
network is presented in Fig. 1 and the geophone arrangements at
Fig. 11. Seismic activity registered during longwall advance-localization map of registered seismic events (longwall advance: (A) 0 m to 85 m, (B) 85 m to 100 m,
(C) 100 m to 165 m, (D) 165 m to 280 m.
149
the gate-roads are mentioned in Section 2.3.3. Holečko [29]
provides the details of the seismic networks and the networks’
role in improving the seismic events localisation in the OKC.
Following formula [28] has been adopted for energy (EOKC)
calculations:
Z T
EOKC ¼ u2 dt ð15Þ
0
where A is a constant to be defined by the characteristics of
transmission conditions, u is a particle velocity, T( ¼1.5 s) is the
time interval accepted for the area of OKC.
The seismic monitoring in longwall No. 140 914 provided a
map of the registered seismic events and a weekly line of the
slope, along with a summary graph of the registered seismic
energy in the area of the longwall. Figs. 11 and 12 show plots of
the registered seismic activity with respect to the longwall
advance and the destress rock blasting in panel No. 140 914.
The seismic activity is predominantly registered from an area
outside of the mined out seam (No. 512), lying in the overburden.
The registered seismic activity is sensitive to the face advance in
the panel, and the behaviour of the registered seismic energy is in
tune with the rate of the face advance of the longwall face.
However, in some cases, the registered seismic activity is rela-
tively more than the face advance, possibly due to the adopted
destress rock blasting. Continuous observations of the registered
seismic activity with respect to the mining progress in the panel
150 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153

Fig. 12. Seismic activity registered during longwall advance-weekly slope of registered seismic energy and longwall advance (longwall advance from A to D as per Fig. 11).

showed that the destress blasting affected the radiated seismic Table 3
energy from the rock mass. Position of different stress measurement probes installed in and around the panel.

Name of Vertical position above Horizontal position above long wall

probe coal seam (m) pillar from gallery (m)
6. Monitoring of the in-situ stress changes
L1 15.6 2.4
The variations in the mining-induced stress during the long- L2 11.6 10
L3 10.7 3.9
wall mining of panel No 140 914 is monitored by instruments L4 8.6 1.5
that were installed in the overburden of the coal seam No 504.
The Compact Conical-ended Borehole Monitoring method (CCBM)
[30,32] is used for the long-term monitoring of the stress changes relevant gate-roads (from where it is installed) are given in
during the underground mining of the coal seam. Four CCBM Table 3.
measuring probes were installed in boreholes that were drilled
from the main and the tailgates of the longwall panel. The 6.1. CCBM methodology
positions of these CCBM probes in the plan are shown in Fig. 9.
The vertical distances with respect to the coal seam and the Long-term strain measurement at the bottom of a borehole is
horizontal distances of these CCBM probes with respect to the the basic principle of a CCBM method for monitoring stress
 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153 151

changes. Stress tensor observations are typically derived using the

Compact Conical-ended Borehole Overcoring (CCBO) technique,
which is based on the observation of relief deformation of the
conically shaped borehole bottoms during overcoring [31]. The
conical surface of the measuring probes provides a suitable
physical location to place a sufficient number of independent
strain sensors. Entire rock stress tensors can be estimated based
on the theoretical dependence of the stress distribution around
the cone-shaped borehole bottom and the relief strain responses
of the strain gauges during the overcoring. The dependence of the
corresponding gauge sensor strain on the stress tensor has been
formulated in Obara and Sugawara [33]. Once the overcoring is
completed, the measuring location cannot be used for further
observation of the stress state.
The CCBM method is based on a similar principle, except for
the ‘destructive’ overcoring of the CCBO technique. This modifica-
tion in the approach provides an opportunity to continue repeat-
Fig. 13. Mining induced stress development; expressed for directions of the
ing the strain measurements on all of the probe sensors over a principal stresses S1, S2 and S3 at long wall face stoppage—probes L1 and L2.
long period of time. However, this measurement arrangement
provides only changes in the stress tensors with respect to the
stress state at the time of probe installation (i.e., to the reference
state). This is the principal difference between the CCBO and the
CCBM methods. Derivations of the stress tensors in the CCBM
approach from the multi-epoch measurements of the strain
gauges follow the same calculations as those for the derivations
in the CCBO technique [31].
First, the locations of the different instruments (Fig. 9) in the
panel were finalised according to the available number of instru-
ments and the conditions of the site. Different upward boreholes
of 8 m to 16 m length and 76 mm diameter were drilled from the
gate-roads into the overburden sandstone (Table 3) at these
selected locations. Long-term CCBM measuring probes, which
were designed and developed by the Institute of Geonics [30],
were cemented into these boreholes by resin glue (epoxy type).
The spatial arrangement and the orientation of the probes were
noted. To investigate the stress changes based on the measured
strains, Young’s modulus and the Poisson ratio for each probe Fig. 14. Development of the vertical mining induced stress component due to the
location were determined. The values of these parameters were longwall mining.
determined in the laboratory using core samples, which were
procured through coring drill in the vicinity of the borehole face. Once the longwall face began progressing, the response of
bottom, where the conical measuring probes are installed. The the progress was noticeable through the CCBM probe readings.
stress state observations are discussed in the next section, where Fig. 14 shows a plot of the vertical component of the induced
the negative stress values represent compressive stress and the stress with respect to the distance from the face. The first notice of
positive stress values represent tensile stress. change (insignificant) in the mining-induced stress in almost all of
the measuring probes was recorded when the face distance varied
6.2. Mining-induced stress development between 100 m and 140 m. The observations of probes L1, L2 and
L4 showed that a well-marked change in the mining induced stress
According to the rockburst legislation [20] of the Czech occurred when the distance of the probe was 50 m from the
Republic, the range of influence of the mining-induced stress in longwall face. Therefore, 50 m is the range of influence of the
front of the long wall face needs to be determined. This range of mining induced stress in front of the longwall face. This observed
influence is typically determined from a nomogram based on range of influence is considerably less than that estimated from the
physical modelling [20]. The main input data for determining the conventional nomogram. A considerable overestimate of the range
extent (range) of the induced stresses are the depth and the of the well-marked mining induced stress by the conventional
thickness of the coal seam. The calculated range of influence of nomogram may be due to the adopted approach of destress rock
the induced stress is 93 m for the longwall panel No. 140 914. blasting. The results of the mining induced stress development,
The development of the mining induced stress ahead of the obtained from probe L3, were not taken into consideration for the
longwall face can also be described through in situ observations above conclusion. According to the adopted destress rock blasting
of the installed probes. Changes in the vertical component of the scheme and the position of probe L3, the results of this probe are
induced stress at the different positions of the longwall face are of influenced by the strata dynamics due to the destress rock blasting.
interest and were evaluated through the installed probe readings. Probe L3 was intended to monitor the stress changes in the
Fig. 13 shows the development of the mining induced stress overlying beds due to the mining of the coal seam. However, the
measured by probes L1 and L2 during the stoppage of the position of this probe was kept outside of the vertical projection of
longwall face advance for 5 days due to some technical reasons. the longwall panel to monitor the induced stress developing over a
The distances of the face from instrumented sites L1 and L2 at this residual pillar, lying between the working panel and the fault Ceres.
point were 13.5 m and 9 m, respectively (horizontal projection). This probe was placed in an upward borehole inclined at an angle of
The change in stress is negligible for the stagnant condition of the 701 to the fault. In addition to the original purpose of the stress
152 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153
Fig. 15. Measured in situ stress by L3 probe; (A) induced principal stresses, (B) orientation of principle stress axes, (C) development of rate of stress changes on L3 gauge
probe commensurate with time (after the destress rock blasting—stage 9; see Table 1).
change monitoring with the advancement of the longwall coal face,
the probe recorded the impact of the destress blasting. The entire
area of the longwall panel adjacent to the fault Ceres was succes-
sively treated by a series of destress blasting operations. These
destress blastings were conducted in sequence within the above
prescribed distance from the foreground of the longwall face.
The observations of probe L3 provided some interesting infor-
mation, as shown in Fig. 15. It is evident that the destress rock
blasting on 28th January caused significant redistribution of stress
at this location. At this point, the distance of the destress blasting
(stage 9) was 80 m to 105 m from the position of probe L3. The
stress redistribution in the overburden after the blasting operation
(expressed as an oval shape in Fig. 15) continued for approximately
3 to 4 weeks. During this time, the distance of probe L3 from the
long wall face varied from 169 m to 128 m, which is a significantly
greater distance than the observed and estimated values of the
range of influence of the mining induced stress at this site.
Therefore, the observed phenomenon of stress redistribution after
destress blasting is likely caused by the loss of competency of the
overburden strata. The rock mass fracturing by the blasting
operation in the area of the residual pillar near fault Ceres and
the extension of the longwall panel introduced the observed
phenomenon of stress redistribution. The observed gradual loading
of the rock mass (Fig. 15) is mainly due to the stable orientation of
the induced stress tensor axes during the mining period.
7. Conclusions
A systematic planning and designing of destress rock blasting
resulted in safe longwall mining in a rock-burst prone area. The
amount of explosive used at different stages of the destress rock
blasting varied from 1550 kg up to 3450 kg. A simple statistical
analysis of nearly 1000 field data (consisting amount of explosive
and observed seismological monitoring results) was used to derive
the coefficient KOKC, which represents natural conditions of the
overlying rock mass. Efficacy of the blasting for the stress release
from the overburden strata is evaluated through a parameter called
seismic effect (SE). A proposed classification of the destress blasting
on the basis of the value of the seismic effect is also validated
through different field observations. Out of total eighteen stages of
the destress blasting in the longwall panel, five stages experienced
very good (SE varied from 3.6 to 5.3), 7 stages experienced
extremely good (SE varied from 6.4 to 11.2) and the remaining six
cases experienced excellent (SE varied from 13.1 to 52.4) categories
of the stress release.
Adopted design of the destress blasting also reduced the range
and amount of mining induced stress concentration ahead of the
longwall face. As per the existing nomogram, the range of
influence of the induced stress for the site is calculated to be
93 m, but the actual field measurement by the CCBM method
found it to be only 50 m. The observed reduction in the range of
the influence is mainly due to dilution of competency of the
overlying strata by the blasting. Field observations of mining
induced stress by the probe L3 also showed the stress releasing
characteristic of the destress blasting.
Acknowledgements
This article is written in connection with project Institute of
clean technologies for mining and utilisation of raw materials for
 P. Konicek et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 61 (2013) 141–153
energy use, reg. no. CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0082, which is supported by
the Research and Development for Innovations Operational Pro-
gramme financed by the Structural Founds of the Europe Union
and the state budget of the Czech Republic.
References
[1] Pelnář A. Rockbursts in Ostrava–Karvina Coalfield (in Czech), Hornický
věstnı́k. hornické a hutnické listy 1938:25–58 XX.
[2] Straube R, Brothánek J, Harášek V, Košťál Z, Kovács Z, Mikeska J, et al.
Rockbursts in carboniferous rock mass (in Czech). Praha: SNTL; 1972.
[3] Holecko J, Ptacek J, Takla G, Konecny P. Rockbursts in the Czech part of the
Upper Silesian Coal Basin—features, theoretical models and conclusions for
practice. In: Proceedings ninth international congress on rock mechanics,
Paris; 25–28 August 1999. p. 1101–4.
[4] Takla G, Ptacek J, Holecko J, Konicek P. Stress state determination and
prediction in rock mass with rockburst risk in Ostrava–Karvina coal basin.
In: Proceedings international symposium of international society rock
mechanics: EUROCK 2005, Brno; 18–20 May 2005. p. 625–8.
[5] Holub K, Rušajová, Holečko J. Particle velocity generated by rockburst during
exploitation of the longwall and its impact on the workings. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 2011;48:942–9.
[6] Dubinski J, Konopko W. Rockbursts – assessment, prediction and control –
working rules (in Polish). Katowice: Central Mining Institute; 2000.
[7] Drzwiecki J, Kabiesz J. Dynamic events in roof strata—occurrence and
prevention. Coal Sci Tech Mag 2008;221006:55–7.
[8] Mark, C. Deep cover pillar recovery in the US. In: Proceedings 28th interna-
tional conference on ground control in mining. Morgantown; 28–30 July
2009. p. 1–9.
[9] Singh R, Mandal PK, Singh AK, Kumar R, Sinha A. Coal pillar extraction at deep
cover: with special reference to Indian coalfields. Int J Coal Geol 2011;86(2–
3):276–88.
[10] Singh AK, Singh R, Maiti J, Kumar R, Mandal PK. Assessment of mining
induced stress development over coal pillars during depillaring. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 2011;48:794–804.
[11] Yang W, Lin B, Qu YA, et al. Stress evolution with time and space during
mining of a coal seam. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2011;48:1145–52.
[12] Chase FC, Mark C, Heasley KA. Deep cover pillar extraction in the U.S.A. In:
Proceedings of the 21st international conference ground control in mining.
Morgantown; 28–29 July 2002. p. 68–80.
[13] Comeau W, Mitri HS, Marwan MM, Baoyao T. World-wide survey of destress
blasting practice in deep hard rock mines. In: Proceedings of the 25th annual
conference on explosives and blasting technique. Nashville; 10–13 February
1999. p. 189–205.
[14] Dvorsky P, Konicek P, Morkovska E, Palla L. Rock blasting as a rockburst
control measures in the safety pillar of SW crosscuts at Lazy Colliery in
Orlová. In: Proceedings of the 10th international scientific-technical
conference-rockbursts 2003. Ustroń; 21–24 November 2003. p. 37–45.
[15] Dvorsky P, Konicek P. Systems of rock blasting as a Rockburst measure in the
Czech part of Upper Silesian Coal Basin. In: Proceedings of the sixth
153
international symposium on rockburst and seismicity in mines. Perth; 9–11
March 2005. p. 493–6.
[16] Przeczek A, Dvorsky P, Konicek P. System of rock blasting in boreholes
diameter more than 100 mm as a rockburst measure. In: Proceedings of the
12th international scientific-technical conference-rockbursts 2005. Ustroń;
24–24 November 2005. p. 253–69.
[17] Konicek P, Przeczek A. Study of selected cases of local stress reduction due to
rock blasting. In: Proceedings of the 15th international scientific-technical
conference GZN 2008. Targanice; 3–7 November 2008. p. 143–61.
[18] Konicek P, Konecny P, Ptacek J. Destress rock blasting as a rockburst control
technique. In: Proceedings of the 12th international congress on rock
mechanics. Bejing; 18–21 October 2011. p. 1221–6.
[19] Zhao Y, Jiang Y. Acoustic emission and thermal infrared precursors associated
with bump-prone coal failure. Int J Coal Geol 2010;83:11–20.
[20] OKD, DPB, as. Working rules of rockburst control in OKR (in Czech). OKD,
DPB, a.s. Paskov; 2005.
[21] Palla L. Project of rockburst prevention (in Czech). Lazy Colliery; 2006 non
published.
[22] Sheorey PR, Singh B. Studies on bump proneness of Dishergarh seam at
Barmondia colliery. In: Proceedings of the conference rockbursts-global
experiences. New Delhi; 27–28 February 1988. p. 131–43.
[23] Knotek S, Matusek Z, Skrabis A, Janas P, Zamarski B, Stas B, et al. Research of
geomechanics evaluation of rock mass due to geophysical methods (in
Czech). VVUU Ostrava; 1985.
[24] Konicek P. Evaluation of effectivness of rock blasting for stress release in rock
mass (in Czech).Ústav geoniky AV ČR, v.v.i.; 2009.
[25] Sedlak V. Energy evaluation of destress blasting. Acta Montanistica Slovaca
1997;2:11–5.
[26] Hinzen KG. Comparison of seismic and explosive energy on five smooth
blasting test rounds. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35:957–67.
[27] Sanchidrián JA, Segarra P, López LK. Energy components in rock blasting. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 2007;44:130–47.
[28] Holub K, Rusajova J, Holecko J. Particle velocity generated by rockburst
during exploitation of the longwall and its impact on the workings. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 2011;48:942–9.
[29] Holečko J. Improvement of the seismic events localization in Ostrava–Karviná
Coal Basin (in Czech). In: Proceedings of the second traditional international
colloquium on geomechanics and geophysics. Ostravice; 22–23 May 2008. p.
107–20.
[30] Staš L, Souček K, Knejzlı́k J, Waclawik P, Palla L. Measurement of stress
change tensor by conical gauge probe. In: Proceedings of the international
conference IACMAG-12. Goa; 1–6 October 2008. p. 1397–404.
[31] Stas L, Soucek K, Knejzlik L, Waclawik P, Palla L. Measurement of stress
changes using a compact conical-ended borehole monitoring. Geotech Test J
2011;34:685–93.
[32] Staš L, Knejzlı́k J, Rambouský Z. Conical strain gauge probes for stress
measurement. In: Proceedings of EUROCK 2005. Brno; 18–20 May 2005. p.
587–92.
[33] Obara Y, Sugawara K. Updating the use of CCBO cell in Japan: overcoring case
studies. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2003;40:1189–203.
[34] Konicek P, Saharan MR, Mitri H. Destress blasting in coal mining—state-of-
the-art review. In: Proceedings of the first international symposium on mine
safety science and engineering. Beijing; 27–28 October 2011. p. 158–73.