NONLINEAR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

PROJECT 2: MODELING DEER CREEK MINE SUBSIDENCE

By:

Marcor G. Platt

Submitted to:

Dr. Steven E. Benzley

BYU CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

CEEN 608 – NONLINEAR STRUCTURES

SPRING SEMESTER 2009

 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 1
BACKGROUND ............................................................................ 1
MODELING ................................................................................... 2
ANALYSIS ..................................................................................... 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................... 5
REFERENCES............................................................................... 7
 1

INTRODUCTION
Ground subsidence due to underground mining is an area of study that has
received considerable attention within the last 40 years. This is mainly due to the fact
that underground mining—particularly longwall coal mining—can often result in
undesirable ground movement. This movement may cause significant changes to the
hydrological conditions in the surrounding areas, or can cause damage to structures in the
vicinity due to differential ground movement. However, an often overlooked aspect of
ground subsidence due to undermining is the potential to use subsidence data to calculate
stresses on remaining coal pillars, and thus perhaps have a clearer idea of conditions in
the mine.
This study explores using knowledge of surface topography and mine layouts to
model mining-induced subsidence. This is accomplished using a finite element mesh of
the mine workings and overlying strata. The mine studied is Deer Creek Mine, located in
central Utah about 12 miles west of Huntington, near the mouth of Huntington Canyon,
in Emery County.

BACKGROUND
The methods of predicting and modeling subsidence due to underground mining
can be divided into two general categories: geometric methods and analytical methods
[1]. Both methods are found extensively in the literature (see, for example,[2] and [3]).
Geometric methods do not directly consider the geological characteristics of overlying
strata, and focus on cases of measured subsidence.
Analytical methods, which mainly consist of the finite element method (FEM),
require knowledge of the in-situ rock properties. In practice, these characteristics are
approximated by “idealizing the rock mass by a continuous medium…that satisfies
compatibility and equilibrium considerations” [4]. Generally, FEMs do not rely as
heavily on empirical data (i.e. data obtained from subsidence of similar mines), and thus
can be more site-specific than geometric methods [5].
 2

MODELING
The Deer Creek Mine is located underneath a large rock mass known as
Castlegate Sandstone. The portion of the mine studied consists of two seams, known as
the Hiawatha and Blind Canyon Seams. The Hiawatha Seam is located at an elevation of
approximately 7600’, with the Blind Canyon seam 80’ above it. Both seams vary in
thickness from 5’ to over 10’; the maximum overburden over the seams is about 1700
feet. An elevation profile running north to south was taken across both seams. The
location of this profile, as well as the layout of the seams in relation to the surrounding
topography, is given in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Cross Section and Mine Layout

As mentioned in the introduction, the properties of the sandstone and coal layers
must be approximated in order to create a continuum for the FEM. The properties of the
sandstone and coal layers were assumed based on the Drucker-Prager material model,
and are given in Table 1.
 3

Table 1. Material Properties

Properties
Material
E, psf ν ρ, lb-s^2/ft C0 , lbs T0 , lbs φ, ° c, psf
Sanstone 8.50E+08 0.22 4.35 3.50E+06 2.20E+05 30 581904
Coal 8.66E+07 0.37 2.48 2.60E+05 4.00E+04 30 581904

In addition to the material properties given in Table 1, the Drucker-Prager

material model requires additional input parameters based on cap yield functions and cap
hardening. The yield cap is the point where the mean value of the shearing stresses
reaches a critical value that is correlated linearly with the hydrostat. An ellipsoidal
surface crosses the hydrostat at this point, which surface makes up the yield cap. Several
input parameters based on this model were obtained directly from [6] and are given in
Table 2.

Table 2. Additional Input Parameters

Parameter
Material Initial Cap
Position, psf Cap Ratio W D
Sanstone -2.51E+06 4 -1.50E-01 -1.37E-06
Coal -2.51E+06 4 -1.50E-01 -1.37E-06

Finally, the mesh was created based on data obtained from aerial surveys, and
made available by Deer Creek Mine. The mesh is finer near the Goaf boundaries and
remaining pillars, as well as near the ground surface. This refinement at these locations
was necessary due to large strain and large displacements in these areas. The initial mesh
for the overburden and mine workings is given in Figure 2, wherein the green mesh
represents the sandstone, and the red mesh represents the remaining coal pillars and
seam. The mesh was set up as a plain strain model with contact conditions between the
ceiling and floor of the Goaf.
Figure 2 Meshed Mountain and Mine Workings

4
 5

ANALYSIS
One advantage of the Drucker-Prager model is that it allows large-strain/large-
displacement relations. The rock and coal is undergoing large strains and displacements
as it enters the Goaf, and thus the Drucker Prager model was well suited to this analysis.
The analysis was run in twice under different conditions. It was first run with a single
time step wherein the load from overburden was applied to the remaining coal seams.
Automatic time step correction was applied to the model to account for lack of
convergence.
Secondly, the model was run with multiple time steps, wherein the total load from
overburden was applied gradually. This model served to generate plots wherein
displacement (subsidence) was more evident.
Contact surfaces were set up at the tops and bottoms of the Goafs for both models,
but each model would diverge when surfaces came into contact. Thus, caving into the
Goaf was substantial, but the ceiling did not actually come in contact with the floor of the
Goaf. However, effective stress concentrations built up in remaining pillars and
mountain, and were plotted on an effective stress plot, along with the accompanying
displacements.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The resulting effective stress plot is given in Figure 3 below. Interestingly, the
stresses are shown to be greatest near the edges of the mine workings, where the
overburden less. Also, stress concentrations are built up over the lower Hiawatha seam,
as shown in Figure 4, which is an enlarged portion of this seam.
The displacement plot is given in Figure 5. As shown by the negative z-values,
the subsidence is at its maximum in the center of the mountain, while at the edges of the
mountain, the elevation actually rises slightly. This phenomenon of elevation rise a
certain distance from the edge of the longwall panel is consistent with observed
subsidence behavior.
 6

Figure 3 Effective Stress Plot

Figure 4 Enlarged View of Effective Stress Plot

Figure 5 Displacement Plot

References
 7

References
[1] C. Y. Chen and S. S. Peng, "Underground Coal Mining and Attendant Subsidence
Control: Some History, Technology, and Research," Min Eng (Littleton Colo), vol. 38,
pp. 95-98, 1986.

[2] H. J. Siriwardane, "Numerical modelling of the behavior of overburden rock masses

associated with longwall mining." in Research & Engineering Applications in Rock
Masses, Proceedings of the 26th US Symposium on Rock Mechanics. 1985, pp. 171-177.

[3] G. Brauner, "Subsidence due to underground mining. 1. theory and practices in

predicting surface deformation," United States, Tech. Rep. 1, 03, 1973.

[4] H. J. Siriwardane and J. Amanat, "Prediction of subsidence in hilly ground terrain

using finite element method." in Second International Conference on Stability in
Underground Mining. 1984, pp. 554-575.

[5] R. E. Bischke and P. S. Getty, "A method for assessing the potential of mine
subsidence at abandoned mine sites through the assistance of finite element modeling." in
Proceedings - 25th Symposium on Rock Mechanics: Rock Mechanics in Productivity and
Protection. 1984, pp. 722-726.

[6] V. A. Lubarda, S. Mastilovic and J. Knap, "Brittle-Ductile Transition in Porous Rocks

by Cap Model," Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol. 122, pp. 633-642, 1996.