Natural Resources Research ( 2020)

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11053-020-09664-w

Original Paper

Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking

in Deep Mines

Qiming Zhang,1,2 Enyuan Wang,1,2,4 Xiaojun Feng,1,2,4 Yue Niu,1,2 Muhammad Ali,3
Song Lin,1,2 and Hao Wang1,2

Received 28 December 2019; accepted 19 March 2020

Mining operations continue to advance to greater depths to address the demand and supply
of coal. However, deep mining occurs in complex and dangerous environments where mines
are often subject to rockbursts induced by high-hard roof breaking (HHRB). Here, we use
the #2233 working face of the Hengda coal mine as a case study to investigate the mechanism
of HHRB-induced rockbursts by means of stress, electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and
hydraulic support resistance. We propose an elastoplastic plate theory model to study the
relationship between impact load energy and maximum roof deformation and verify the
dynamic evolution of rockbursts generated by HHRB by FLAC3D numerical modeling. The
results show that rockbursts are more likely to occur when the coal-rock mass under high
static stress conditions is subjected to superposition of continuous dynamic stress. This is
accompanied by an abrupt increase in stress, increase in hydraulic support resistance,
accumulation of strain energy that is not easily dissipated and a decrease in EMR intensity.
The peak dynamic stress value determines the deformation mode of the elastoplastic plate
model, and the impact damage behavior of the coal-rock mass is the most apparent, whereas
the maximum deformation displacement lags slightly behind the arrival time of the peak
stress. The occurrence of rockbursts is accelerated by long-term and high-amplitude dynamic
disturbances.
KEY WORDS: Rockburst, High-hard roof breaking, Dynamic–static stress, Elastoplastic model,
Numerical simulation.

INTRODUCTION
Rockbursts pose a serious threat to the safety and
efficiency of coal mining (Wang and Park 2001; He
et al. 2010; Li et al. 2012; Keneti and Sainsbury 2018;
1 amount of time in the future (Konicek et al. 2013; Li
Key Laboratory of Gas and Fire Control for Coal Mines, China
University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China.
2
School of Safety Engineering, China University of Mining and
Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China.
3
Department of Mining Engineering, Balochistan University of
Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sci-
ences, Quetta, Pakistan.
4
To whom correspondence should be addressed; e-mail:
weycumt@cumt.edu.cn, xiaojun.feng@cumt.edu.cn
Wang et al. 2018; Feng et al. 2019; Niu et al. 2019).
Previous studies have addressed the rockburst pro-
cess and its prevention; however, the rockburst
mechanism remains poorly understood and dynamic
rockburst disasters are anticipated to threaten the
safety of coal mine production for an unforeseeable
et al. 2019a, b; Faradonbeh and Taheri 2019). In
addition, increased mining depth and intensity affect
clearly the evolution of rockbursts by dynamic dis-
turbances, such as high-hard roof breaking (HHRB).
In HHRB, the roof is located high above the mining
coal seam, the rock stratum is thick and of high
strength (Fig. 1), and the process of rockburst devel-

 2020 International Association for Mathematical Geosciences


Figure 1. Schematic diagram of rockburst process caused by HHRB.
opment and its appearance show significantly non-
linear dynamic characteristics (Feng et al. 2016; Dong
et al. 2019). Understanding the influence of dynamic
stress generated by HHRB on rockbursts in deep
mining is, therefore, of tremendous importance.
Extensive research from a variety of perspectives
has sought to understand the rockburst mechanism
and process. Bagde and Petroš (2009) studied the ef-
fect of field disturbance stress on the dynamic insta-
bility of rock strata. Xia et al. (2010) used a split
Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) experimental system
to conduct dynamic tensile tests on coal, shale and
sandstone and analyzed the deformation and failure
characteristics of coal-rock mass under impact loading.
Jiang et al. (2012) and Wang et al. (2013, 2015) used
FLAC3D numerical simulation software to analyze
the impact of periodic weighting on the rock pressure
distribution in deep mining. Li et al. (2008, 2015) used
an SHPB experimental system to investigate rock
impact damage characteristics under combined dy-
namic and static loading conditions. They analyzed the
dynamic mechanical properties, deformation and
failure characteristics, relationship between damage
and stress and damage and energy dissipation of dif-
ferent rock types under different impact loads, as well
as the strain energy density criterion and catastrophe
theory of rock failure under these conditions. Pan
(2018) simplified rockbursts as an instability of coal-
rock deformation system determined by control, dis-
turbance and response. They proposed the mechanism
and criterion of rockburst disturbance instability and
applied it to rockburst prediction and prevention.
Wang et al. (2011, 2014) and Dou et al. (2012, 2015)
Zhang et al.
studied the frequency characteristics of blasting seis-
mic wave propagation attenuation in coal seams using
a dynamic sound-electricity monitor and micro-seis-
mic monitor. Their results show that the primary
seismic wave frequency is the main reason for varia-
tion of the attenuation coefficient of seismic wave
velocity. However, the mechanism of induced rock-
bursts and their associated disasters are very compli-
cated (Li et al. 2018a, b; He et al. 2015; Yuan et al.
2018) especially for rockbursts induced by dynamic
stress caused by HHRB in deep mines. Therefore,
further analysis of the evolution process and disaster
mechanism of rockbursts is necessary.
Here, we use the #2233 working face of the
Hengda coal mine as an example to understand the
mechanism of HHRB-induced rockbursts by moni-
toring stress, electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and
hydraulic support resistance. We propose an elasto-
plastic plate model to study the dynamic elastic–
plastic response characteristics of the roof, and
FLAC3D simulation is performed to analyze the
failure process of dynamic stress on coal-rock mass.
The results presented here provide a theoretical basis
for study of the mechanism of rockbursts induced by
dynamic stress and their prediction and prevention.
CASE STUDY
Geological Background
The Hengda coal mine is located in the city of
Fuxin in Liaoning Province, China. It consists of six
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines
coal seams. This study focuses on the #2233 working
face at the Sunjiawan #3 coal seam. The burial depth
of the coal seam is about 900 m, its average thick-
ness is 5 m, and its dip angle is 4. The mining area
of the working face is 700 9 200 m with inclination
of 3. Goaf #2232 is to the north of this working face,
coal is to the south, an uphill system is in the west,
and the PingÕan No. 2 fault is located to the east. The
lower section is coal, the roof is relatively thick and
hard glutenite, and the #5 and #7 coal seams of
Sunjiawan are successively above the roof. The
average thickness of the #5 coal seam is 5 m, the
open–off cut of the #2132 goaf is 20 m out of the
open–off cut of the #2232 goaf, and the left and right
roadways are 10 and 75 m out of the open–off cut,
respectively. The top is the #1362 goaf in the Sun-
jiawan #7 coal seam with an average thickness of
5 m. The goaf projection covers more than half of
the #2233 working face, including the ventilation
roadway. Many micro-seismic phenomena have
been recorded during mining due mainly to dynamic
disturbances caused by blasting, HHRB and peri-
odic weighting. The mine location and detailed
working face layout plan are shown in Figure 2.
On August 6, 2018, a rockburst occurred on the
#2233 working face, causing the collapse of numer-
ous roadways and widespread damage. In particular,
the haulage roadway was seriously damaged over
the range of 150–180 m from the mining terminal
(0 m), as shown in Figure 3, as well as a 5-m range
between 143 and 158 m, a 58-m range between 223
and 281 m and a 15-m range between 326 and 341 m
from the mining terminal. A mine micro-seismic
monitoring system (Li et al. 2018a, b) recorded a
large-energy tremor on the day of rockburst with a
focus located in the roof of the high-hard-thick
conglomerate stratum (Fig. 4). The optimal moni-
toring methods and support measures provided
timely warning before the accident, which prevented
large economic losses and fatalities.
Signal Fluctuation Rules of HHRB-Induced
Rockbursts
The Hengda coal mine uses a real-time stress
monitoring system to monitor stress variation in front
of roadways, to mitigate rockburst risks and to ensure
safe and efficient mining. This study presents the
layout of one side of a haulage roadway. Ten pairs of
stress sensors were arranged on the sides of the
haulage roadway, each consisting of shallow and deep
sensors 6 and 10 m from the coal wall. A KBD5-
portable EMR instrument was also added for key
monitoring of the area 200 m ahead of the working
face. Twenty measuring points were arranged in the
monitoring area with a distance of 10 m between
points and four monitoring section divisions (Fig. 2).
The Hengda coal mine also recorded real-time stress
monitoring of hydraulic support resistance. Effective
rockburst monitoring and early warning management
are implemented using these methods to ensure per-
sonnel safety and reduce economic losses.
Pre-rockburst Stress Precursor Characteristics
A change in stope stress is a precursor to dy-
namic disasters that can have a range of initial im-
pact effects on the coal-rock mass in the working
face (Huang et al. 2007; Feng and Zhang 2018).
Stress monitoring in front of the working face is
necessary to control rockbursting in dangerous areas
(Hauquin et al. 2018). On the basis of comparative
analysis of data collected from the 10 pairs of stress
sensors, we select the most apparent change re-
corded from monitoring point #1 to show the stress
curve before and after rockburst (Fig. 5).
The results showed a substantial stress increase
in the two-day period leading up to the rockburst,
from 9.2 MPa on August 4 to 19 MPa on August 6,
followed by a linear decrease to  3 MPa. Signifi-
cant precursors also occurred including an abrupt
stress increase from 1.5 to 9 MPa on July 28–29,
which then decreased to  2.5 MPa, indicating par-
tial failure of the coal-rock mass by a dynamic dis-
turbance. Crack expansion within the coal-rock mass
alleviated the increased stress and prevented rock-
burst formation. Internal pores and cracks of the
coal body compacted continuously between July 29
and August 4 and stress continued to slowly rise,
further increasing the rockburst risk. Stress in-
creased sharply on August 4, reaching nearly the
coal bodyÕs yield limit, and ultimately exceeded the
coal-rock mass bearing capacity on August 6, which
caused the rockburst. In light of the mining envi-
ronment and range of impact damage, the main
explanation of the stress changes is likely due to
evolution of the bearing point of the bending
deformation of the high-hard-thick roof in the #2232
goaf. This increased stress on the coal-rock mass and
internal structural deformation while reducing the
unitÕs resistance that, coupled with the multiple dy-
namic impacts, ultimately led to the rockburst.
 Zhang et al.

Figure 2. Location and layout plan of #2233 working face at Hengda coal mine.

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of monitoring point arrangement and rockburst occurrence area on the #2233 working
face.
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines

Average
Profile of microseismic location Stratigraphic succession
thickness Layer Lithology
Source location results
Column of Coal spacing description
Layer group name seam
High-hard roof Rockburst position
Packsand
Others
350 ~ 530 Shale
etc.
Sandrock
Shuiquan groups 190 ~ 240 Coal
260 m etc.

Packsand
Gritstone
170 ~ 210
Siltstone
2132 Goaf 1362 Goaf etc.

Sunjiawan groups
2232 Goaf Sunjiawan group 1(workable) 5 Coal
15 ~ 25 Gritstone
Sunjiawan group 2 0.7 Coal
2233 wor
king face 8 ~ 11 Gritstone
Sunixia group 1(workable) 5 Coal
6 ~ 14 Mudstone
Sunxia group 2 0.4 Coal
2233 Haulage roadway 5 ~ 10 Mudstone
2233 Ventilation roadway Sunxia group 3(workable) 5 Coal
Sandshale
3° 50 ~ 100 Sandrock
Numerical simulation area

Figure 4. Profile of micro-seismic location results.

shaped fluctuation over the range of 0–50 m, which is

a typical precursor of strong rockbursts (Wang et al.
2005; Li et al. 2019a, b). The EMR exhibited a con-
tinuously declining fluctuation in the range of 50–
100 m and reached a minimum on August 5, which
represents the maximum rockburst risk. At 100–
150 m, the EMR intensity decreased significantly,
energy continuously accumulated in the coal-rock
mass, and the rockburst risk continued to rise. In the
150–200 m range, the EMR intensity showed a sig-
nificant M-shaped fluctuation prior to rockbursting.
The EMR intensity in each interval showed an
apparent peak from July 29 to July 31, consistent with
the stress change. The changes in the four monitoring
Figure 5. Stress variation recorded by stress sensor #1.
sections of the #2233 working face all showed clearly
distinguishable rockburst-precursor characteristics,
which allowed accurate rockburst prediction.
EMR Monitoring Analysis

Rock pressure undergoes a cyclic evolutionary
process during mining, including accumula-
tion fi transformation fi release. Part of this
energy is released in the form of EMR, which makes
analysis of EMR energy distribution characteristics
an important part of preventing and controlling dy-
namic disasters such as rockbursts during mining
(Dou and He 2008; Kong et al. 2019; Qiu et al.2019;
Liu et al. 2019). EMR data collected from four
monitoring sections are shown in Figure 6.
The average EMR intensity data (Fig. 6) are
similar to those obtained from the stress monitors
(Fig. 5), but the changes are sensitive to the collection
region. The EMR intensity showed an inverted N-
Resistance Data from Hydraulic Support
Movement of overlying strata and rock stress
changes are fundamental factors during dynamic
disasters (Zhang et al. 2014). Hydraulic support
plays an important role in relieving overburden
stress and maintaining roof stability. The rockburst
mechanism is, therefore, better understood by
investigating the hydraulic support resistance
behavior. Regional stress state characteristics of the
hydraulic support in the working face show that the
working face is divided into three sections: (a) a
lower section close to the haulage roadway; (b) a
middle section; and (c) an upper section adjacent to

Figure 6. Average EMR intensity.
the ventilation roadway. The corresponding hy-
draulic support resistance curve is shown in Fig-
ure 7.
A peak in maximum hydraulic support pressure
of 6–7 MPa was observed from July 27 to July 31 in the
lower third of the working face, whereas the other two
hydraulic support sections showed a minimum. This is
due to a shift of pressure from the lower section up-
wards, resulting in a stress superposition and increase
in the resistance of the upper and middle hydraulic
supports. This observation is most apparent on Au-
gust 5 when the resistance of the middle and lower
hydraulic supports continued to increase. A clear
accumulation of energy in the haulage roadway of the
coal-rock mass likely exceeded the hydraulic support
limit, and the stress was dynamically transferred to the
upper and middle sections. The continuous dynamic
stress input disrupted the stress balance of the haulage
roadway and led to rockbursting.
HHRB-INDUCED ROCKBURSTING
A HHRB-induced rockburst is characterized by
a sudden pressure release with widespread but low-
Zhang et al.
intensity damage. In light of the cumulative average
length of the advancing working face (244 m, about
1.15 times the length of working face), complex
stope characteristics and various monitoring meth-
ods, it can be concluded that when the first square
area (the advancing distance of the working face is
equal to the width of the working face) was mined,
the haulage roadway evolved into the bearing point
of bending deformation of the high-hard-thick roof
stratum in the #2232 goaf on the north side of the
working face. As the stress shifted forward, the peak
value and range of the stress arch in front of working
face suddenly increased, which activated and rup-
tured the overlying high-hard-thick conglomerate
stratum. This abrupt instability resulted in the re-
lease of a large amount of energy and transfer of
dynamic stress. The surrounding rock along the
haulage roadway was simultaneously affected by the
residual coal pillar stress in the overlying goaf
(#2132) and structural stress of the front fault,
leading to fracturing in multiple areas of the rock
surrounding the roadway. The superposition of dy-
namic stress induced by the HHRB and high static
load destabilized the fracture zone (i.e., weak sur-
face) in the surrounding roof and floor rock forma-
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines

Figure 7. Maximum pressure variation trend of hydraulic support in different areas.

tion of the roadway to further withstand excessive
concentrated stress, ultimately leading to the rock-
burst.
MECHANISM OF HHRB-INDUCED
ROCKBURSTING
Dynamic Stress Propagation Law
Assuming that a coal-rock mass can be consid-
ered an isotropic and continuous medium, the dy-
namic stress yielded by the HHRB can be expressed
as (Itasca Software Company 2017):
 vn and vs , v0 is the peak particle vibration velocity
rn ¼ qCP vn
; ð1Þ
rs ¼ qCs vs
where rn and rs are the induced dynamic normal
and shear stresses (MPa) within the coal-rock mass
when the P- and S-waves arrive, respectively, q is the
density (kg/m3) of the coal-rock medium, CP and Cs
are the propagation velocities (m/s) of the P- and S-
waves, respectively, and vn and vs are the particle
vibration velocities (m/s) induced by the propaga-
tion of the P- and S-waves, respectively.
The propagation velocity of the dynamic stress
in the medium is mainly related to the bulk modulus
(K) and shear modulus (G), which are calculated,
respectively, as (Sun et al. 2011):
and cracks cause the dynamic stress to gradually
decay during propagation. Results from laboratory
and in situ tests have shown that dynamic stress
attenuates exponentially with increasing propaga-
tion distance (Pellant 1999; Gao et al. 2007). The
attenuation coefficient a is described by the Hud-
son mode (Chafi et al. 2009; Babanouri et al. 2013)
as:
(
v ¼ v0 La
 3 4 h 1c05
i
2 ; ð3Þ
a ¼ cx0s N
V a 225p AU 2
1 þ 2c
p
05 Bð B  2 ÞU 3
s
where v is the particle vibration velocity (m/s) in-
duced by seismic wave propagation, which includes
(m/s) around the seismic source, L is the distance
(m) from the seismic source, x is angular frequency,
a is average crack length, N is number of cracks, V is
total volume of the medium c0p and c0s are the P- and
S-wave velocities of the matrix skeleton of coal-rock
 5
mass, and A ¼ 3=2 þ c0s =c0p , B ¼ 2 þ 15c0s =4c0p 
 3  5
10 c0s =c0p þ8 c0s =c0p , U1 ¼ 16ðk þ 2lÞ=3ð3k þ 4lÞ,
U3 ¼ 4ðk þ 2lÞ=3ðk þ lÞ, where k and l are Lame
constant of matrix skeleton of coal-rock medium.
The dynamic stress can be obtained at any
position by combining Eqs. 1 and 3 (Fig. 8), thus:
Y
n

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi rd ¼ qn Cn v0 La
i ;
i
ð4Þ

CP ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ðK þ ffi 4G=3Þ=q :
i¼1
ð2Þ
Cs ¼ G=q
where qn is the density (kg/m3) of the nth medium,
Cn is the seismic wave propagation velocity (m/s)
However, the coal-rock mass has a complex com-
through the nth medium and it includes CP and Cs ,
position with different mineral particles and debris
 Zhang et al.

Li is the distance (m) that the seismic wave propa- mechanisms (Fig. 9). Under uniform loading, the
gates through the ith medium and ai is the attenua- deformation model under a static limit equilibrium
tion coefficient of the ith medium. state of the rectangular plate can only be in A mode,
as described in Zhu et al. (2018). This paper analyzes
model A.
Dynamic Elastoplastic Deformation of a Plate According to the torque equilibrium equation,
Under Dynamic Stress the static equilibrium equation of plate #1 is:
nb qðtÞxds ¼ 2M0 a; ð7Þ
An elastic thin-plate mechanical model is 0
widely used to simulate small defection disturbance R nb
deformation of overlying strata under high static where 0 qðtÞxds is the torque of the dynamic stress
stress. The model results offer useful information load on the fixed boundary of the triangular plate,
regarding the deformation of overlying strata; how- 2M0 a is the ultimate torque of the triangular plate
ever, certain limitations remain (Huang 2012). For subject to the fixed boundary, n is a dimensionless
example, strata under dynamic stress undergo both parameter for determining the position of plastic
elastic and plastic deformation. Compared with hinge line, and
large-scale plastic deformation, elastic deformation 
is less severe and can be recovered. Therefore, the ds ¼ ½2ðnb  xÞ= tan hdx
: ð8Þ
following assumptions are made for the large tan h ¼ 2nb=a
elastoplastic deformation of plates under medium- Combining Eqs. 7 and 8 yields:
and/or low-velocity dynamic stress loads (Jones 
2011): ax a
nb qðtÞ a  xdx ¼ qðtÞ n2 b2 ¼ 2M0 a: ð9Þ
0 nb 6
(1) The overlying strata are considered elasto-
plastic plates. The elastic recoverable part Similarly, the static equilibrium equation of plate #2
and plastic strengthening part can be ne- is:
glected. 
a=2 qðtÞ b 
4nby ba2
(2) The overall deformation model of a plate ydy ¼ qðtÞ ð3  4nÞ ¼ 2M0 b:
0 a 24
structure under dynamic stress loading is
the same as that under static load limits. ð10Þ

In this study, we developed a large defection
analysis model of a rectangular elastoplastic plate
(Fig. 9). The short side length of the model is a, the
long side is b, the thickness is h, the static yield limit
stress of the material is rbmin , and the surrounding
boundary is rigid, fixed and subject to a uniform load
q(t) outside the plane.
According to mechanics principles, the elasto-
plastic ultimate bending torque per unit plate length
is:
M0 ¼ rbmin h2 =4: ð5Þ
The ultimate membrane force per unit plate length
of the plate is:
N0 ¼ rbmin h: ð6Þ
Due to the plate structure symmetry, two deforma-
tion modes appear in the elastoplastic plate under
dynamic stress loading, whereby a yield line divides
the whole structure into several rigid plate failure
If the length–width ratio c = b/a, it is apparent that
c ‡ 1. By combining Eqs. 9 and 10, the critical load
q and dimensionless parameters n are deduced,
thus:
8 h  pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi i
< q ¼ 16M0 c2 þ 2 1 þ 1 þ 3c2 =3 =b2
 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi : ð11Þ
: n ¼ 1 þ 1 þ 3c2 =2c2
For dynamic stress rd , when rd[q , the plate
begins to deform plastically. When q\rd\cq , the
plastic deformation response of the plate appears in
deformation mode A and when cq\rd , the plastic
deformation mode of the plate is B, where c is the
critical load factor for discriminating the initial
deformation mode.
The kinematics method can be used to solve for
deformation displacement at any time and at any
position of the rectangular plate; however, the
solution process is cumbersome. Therefore, this pa-
per mainly analyzes the final deformation state of
the plate, which is more suitable for solution by the
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines

Figure 8. Schematic diagram of the dynamic stress propagation model.

Figure 9. Elastoplastic deformation mode of a rectangular plate. The blue dotted line represents the yield line.

energy method. To facilitate the calculation, the as shown in Figure 9, and the flexural curve function
flexural surface of the rectangular plate is reasonably equation along the x- and y-directions is expressed
simplified into a quadric surface (Cloete et al. 2005), as:
 Zhang et al.

8 h i
< xx ¼ x0 1  ðx=nbÞ2 tiple dynamic loads. This shows that rockbursts are
h i: ð12Þ not only related to dynamic stress energy, but also to
: xy ¼ x0 1  ð2y=aÞ2
the dynamic stress duration and frequency.

The corresponding strain equation is:

( Rockburst Criterion
2
ex ¼ ðdx=dxÞ =2 ¼ 2x20 x2 =ðnbÞ4
; ð13Þ Rockbursts are a result of interaction between
ey ¼ ðdx=dyÞ2 =2 ¼ 32x20 y2 =a4
the dynamic stress of HHRB and high static load
stress of the residual coal pillar in a goaf (e.g.,
where x0 is the maximum displacement in the z-
#2132). Comprehensive analyses in previous studies
direction of the central region of the rectangular
(Chuang et al. 2017; Li et al. 2018a, b; Wang et al.
plate. The work done by the rectangular plate during
2019) provide information regarding the conditions
the deformation process is thus:
for rockbursts, namely when the total stress within a
Z
x2 coal-rock mass reaches a certain critical stress level
W ¼ redV ¼ 2 nb r2x20 2yhdx due to static stress superposition and dynamic dis-
0 ðnbÞ4
V turbance (Fig. 1). Rockbursts are also a long-term
a y2 failure process with changes in the static yield limit
þ 2 2 r32x20 4 2xhd
0 a stress rbmin due to the impact of multiple relatively
2 ah 8bh 4nbh minor episodes of energy release. Hence, a reason-
¼ rx0 þ  ; ð14Þ
nb 3a 3a able criterion for rockbursts should include the
above-mentioned factors and can be expressed as:
where r is the average yield limit of the material,
r ¼ brbmin and b is a coefficient greater than 1 as rs þ rtd[rtbmin ; ð18Þ
determined by the material properties. The kinetic
energy of the rectangular plate subjected to dynamic where rs refers to the static stress within the coal-
stress is: rock mass, rtd is the dynamic stress induced by
HHRB at a given time and rtbmin is the critical stress
E ¼ I 2 =2mab; ð15Þ required for a rockburst to occur at a given time, all
in MPa.
where m is the unit area of the plate mass and I is
Rt
the total dynamic stress impulse, I ðtÞ ¼ 0 rd dt.
Upon introducing energy conservation, W = E, into NUMERICAL SIMULATION ANALYSIS
Eqs. 14 and 15, we obtain:
To further investigate the evolution of rock-
rx20 ðah=nb þ 8bh=3a
,  4nbh=3aÞ
 2
bursts induced by HHRB, rockburst events were
¼ t rd dt 2mab: ð16Þ simulated using FLAC3D numerical simulation
0 software. Because the software is more accurate in
the field of geotechnical mechanics, it has universal
The displacement at the center of the plate is thus: applicability.
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
x0 ¼ t rd dt= 2mabrðah=nb þ 8bh=3a  4nbh=3aÞ:
0
ð17Þ Statistical Model

Equation 17 shows that plate deformation is not
only related to dynamic stress but also to the ratio of
length and width. When other variables remain un-
changed, x0 is positively correlated with the time
integral of rd . Larger rd are, therefore, associated
with larger x0 . Although the change of x0 for each
dynamic stress is relatively small, the superposition
displacement remains particularly large under mul-
The model size was set to 1200 9 700 9 360 m,
according to the geological setting of the Hengda
coal mine in Fuxin, and it was divided into 1,218,060
cells. The inclination angles of the x- and y-axes
were 4 and 3, respectively. The surrounding and
bottom of the model were subject to displacement
constraints, and the static load of the overlying
stratum was 20 MPa. The model was divided into
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines

Table 1. Physical properties of each coal stratum

3
Lithology Density (kg/m ) Bulk modulus (GPa) Shear modulus (GPa) Cohesion (MPa) Friction angle () Tension (MPa)

Packsand 2640 12.09 6.9 27.08 35 3.44

Siltstone 2650 10.73 5.53 16.84 31.5 2.81
7# coal seam 1400 1.8 0.75 0.7 30 0.2
Gritstone 2670 9.87 5.36 24.28 27.5 4.65
5# coal seam 1400 1.8 0.75 0.7 30 0.2
Mudstone 2700 9.76 4.76 9.88 34 4.22
3# coal seam 1400 1.8 0.75 0.7 30 0.2
Sandshale 2620 14.51 7.48 24.5 31.5 5.27
Sandrock 2650 15.12 6.18 22.47 21.5 3.77

Figure 10. Schematic diagram of geological geometric model.

nine layers, the properties of which are listed in
Table 1, and the thickness of each coal seam is
shown in Figure 10. The Mohr–Coulomb elasto-
plastic constitutive model was used to calculate the
initial static equilibrium. After the balance calcula-
tion, the goaf was arranged in the #3, #5 and #7 coal
seams of the model as the actual coal seam for
excavation balance calculations (Fig. 10).
Dynamic Stress Loading
After calculation of static equilibrium, the dy-
namic calculation begins. The on-site dynamic stress
wave acceleration curve is obtained according to the
micro-seismic monitoring signal (Fig. 11). The stress
wave is filtered and baseline corrected using the
softwareÕs FISH language (ini.Fis and baseline.Fis).
The propagation velocities of P- and S-waves are
calculated using Eq. 4. The wavelength correspond-
ing to the maximum frequency f = 2 Hz of the dy-
namic stress was larger than the maximum size
Dl = 7 m of the grid element, indicating that the dy-
namic stress propagation meets the accuracy
requirement [Dl £ (k/10  k/8)]. The free-field
boundary was used to reduce the stress wave reflec-
tion and Rayleigh resistance (critical damping ratio
Wi ¼ 5% and center frequency fmin ¼ 2 Hz) at the
model boundary to weaken the systemÕs natural
vibration state. Fifteen sets of monitoring points were
set up within the model (Fig. 12) to obtain a more
accurate evaluation of dynamic stress propagation.
 Zhang et al.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Maximum Principal Stress

The maximum principal stress is one of the

indicators describing the actual force of the struc-
ture, and its size determines the degree of structural
damage (Mogi 1967; Jiang et al. 2017; Feng et al.
2020). To determine the influence of dynamic stress
on the damage and deformation of the coal-rock
mass, a maximum principal stress cloud diagram
(Fig. 13) of the #2233 working face was selected at
different times.
The variation range of the maximum principal
Figure 11. Acceleration wave form of dynamic stress.
stress was distributed mainly in front of the working
face and on both sides of the roadways. However,
due to the influence of the upper protection layer,

Figure 12. Diagram of dynamic stress model and monitoring point layout.
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines

Figure 13. Distribution cloud of maximum principal stress.

Figure 14. Distribution cloud of maximum shear strain.

the maximum principal stress variation of the ven-
tilation roadway was not apparent. Under the
influence of dynamic stress, the stress in front of the
working face increased from 20 to 92.23 MPa, the
stress concentration factor exceeded 4.6, and the
rockburst risk increased significantly. Subsequently,
the dynamic stress decreased, the self-vibration ef-
fect of the coal-rock mass increased gradually, the
impact energy weakened gradually, the stress con-
centration fluctuated, and a stress equilibrium state
was finally achieved. The left side of the haulage
roadway was also affected by stress of the protective
coal pillar, which led to high stress concentration,
the right side was affected by mining operations, and
the upper side was disturbed by dynamic stress,
which led to a continuous increase in rockburst risk.
Maximum Shear Strain Increment
and Displacement Change
Shear stress is the main cause of coal-rock mass
failure. The maximum shear strain increment effec-
tively reflects the damage degree of dynamic stress
 Zhang et al.

70
70 Point 12 Point 1
Point 13 60 Point 5
60

Vertical displacement / cm
Point 14 Point 6
Vertical displacement / cm

Point 15 50 Point 9
50
Point 10
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Time / s Time / s

120 Point 3 70 Point 2

Point 4 Point 7
Point 8 60
Vertical displacement / cm
100
Point 11
Vertical displacement / cm

50
80
40
60
30
40 20

20 10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Time / s Time / s
Figure 15. Variation curve of vertical displacement.

to coal-rock mass at different times (Lepik 1994). working face and on both sides of the coal pillar. The
Similarly, vertical displacement intuitively repre- maximum shear strain increment increased from
sents the maximum deformation of overlying strata 0.05 cm at t = 0 s to 0.5 cm at t = 2.0 s. The maxi-
and influences the probability of dynamic disasters mum shear strain increment then gradually de-
such as rockbursts. A strain increment cloud map at creased due to the decreased dynamic stress and
different times and the vertical displacement curve vibration effect of coal-rock mass. At t = 4.0 s, the
of each monitoring point are shown in Figures 14 maximum shear strain increment concentrated
and 15, respectively. mainly in the coal pillar area. This indicates that the
Figure 14 shows a significant change of the dynamic stress exerted a strong influence on the area
maximum shear strain increment under dynamic of high stress concentration and that a weak frac-
stress, starting from the highest point of the working tured zone may have existed in the roadway.
face due to the influence of the dip angle between Coal-rock mass displacement increases sharply
the coal seam and the working face. When the stress under dynamic stress, initially reaching a peak value
propagated to the coal seam, the dynamic load dis- of the displacement response and then decreasing
turbance was distributed mainly in front of the under the influence of internal and external dampers
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines

Note：
Note
shear-n at shear failure now
shear-p elastic, but previously at shear failure
tension-n at tensile failure now
tension-p elastic, but previously at tensile failure

2.0
Shear volume
Tension volume

1.6

Rate of volume change

1.2

0.8

0.4
Block State
Live mech zones shown
0 None
Shear-n shear-p
0 1 2 3 4 5 Shear-n shear-p tension-p
Shear-n tension-n shear-p tension-p
Time / s Shear-p
Shear-p tension-p
Tension-n shear-p
Tension-n shear-p tension-p
Tension-n tension-p
Tension-p

Figure 16. Damage distribution and volume ratio in the plastic zone.

until reaching an equilibrium state. Analysis of
monitoring points #12–#15 showed no apparent
change of displacement in the same coal seam,
whereas displacement in the horizontal direction in
front of the working face decreased gradually with
increasing working face distance with less displace-
ment in the goaf. Dynamic stress energy affected by
vibration of the coal-rock mass in the vertical
direction was gradually lost during propagation, and
the displacement increment decreases gradually.
The maximum vertical displacement increased
nonlinearly with a sharp increase followed by a
fluctuating balance. Monitoring points #6, #8, #9 and
#11 essentially coincided because they were posi-
tioned close together. The displacement at moni-
toring point #3 was larger than those at #4, #8 and
#11 due to the influence of the protective layer,
which was consistent with changes recorded at
monitoring point #9.
lution of coal-rock mass under dynamic stress
(Afraei et al. 2017; Li et al. 2018a, b). We developed
the FISH coding language to obtain the volume ratio
of the plastic zone (current volume of plastic zo-
ne/past volume of plastic zone) as a function of time
(Fig. 16).
During the dynamic calculation process, the
volume of the equilibrated plastic zone showed an
abrupt initial change of 178% from the initial time to
t = 0.5 s and then decreased gradually. The rate of
volume change of shear failure was higher than that
of tension failure before t = 2 s, after which the
opposite was observed. The plastic zone was de-
stroyed notably at t = 0.5 s, which mainly demon-
strates that shear failure and plastic failure were
distributed across the entire coal seam. Dynamic
stress then decreased, elastic recovery occurred in
each region, and the failure form changed from
shear to tensile.

Variation in Plastic Volume of the #2233 Working CONCLUSIONS

Face
Plastic zone variation is the external expression
of coal-rock mass deformation and failure and can
be used to determine the damage and failure evo-
In this study, we discussed the precursor char-
acteristics of rockbursts induced by high-hard roof
breaking (HHRB) using the #2233 working face of
the Hengda coal mine as a case study. We have

established an elastoplastic plate theory model un-
der dynamic stress and used a FLAC3D numerical
model to further analyze and verify the rockburst
mechanism. The conclusions can be summarized as
follows:
(1) Rockbursts are mainly affected by high
stress concentrations and dynamic stress
associated with HHRB. The results ob-
tained here indicate that stress increases
sharply prior to rockbursting while elec-
tromagnetic radiation intensity reaches a
minimum and hydraulic support resistance
shifts significantly.
(2) We have established an elastoplastic plate
model under dynamic stress on the basis of
impact characteristic analysis. The dynamic
elastoplastic response characteristics of the
roof were analyzed according to the atten-
uation law of dynamic stress, and the max-
imum plate deformation displacement was
determined by the maximum dynamic
stress.
(3) FLAC3D dynamic response analysis shows
that the dynamic stress wave attenuates
gradually during propagation, stress is
transferred to the coal-rock mass interior,
and the rockburst risk increases continu-
ously. Longer dynamic stress wave dura-
tions are associated with larger
displacement and deformation of the coal-
rock strata and larger plastic area. A max-
imum deformation is reached after experi-
encing the peak stress followed by gradual
stability.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work is supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (51934007); the Na-
tional Science Foundation for Young Scientists of
Jiangsu Province (BK20180644); and the China
Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2019M652021).
We thank Esther Posner, Ph.D., from Liwen Bianji,
Edanz Editing China (www.liwenbianji.cn/ac), for
editing the English text of a draft of this manuscript.
Zhang et al.
REFERENCES
Afraei, S., Shahriar, K., & Madani, S. H. (2017). Statistical anal-
ysis of rock-burst events in underground mines and excava-
tions to present reasonable data-driven predictors. Journal of
Statistical Computation and Simulation, 87(17), 3336–3376.
Babanouri, N., Mansouri, H., Nasab, S. K., & Bahaadini, M.
(2013). A coupled method to study blast wave propagation in
fractured rock masses and estimate unknown properties.
Computers and Geotechnics, 49, 134–142.
Bagde, M. N., & Petroš, V. (2009). Fatigue and dynamic energy
behaviour of rock subjected to cyclical loading. International
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 46(1), 200–
209.
Chafi, M. S., Karami, G., & Ziejewski, M. (2009). Numerical
analysis of blast-induced wave propagation using FSI and
ALE multi-material formulations. International Journal of
Impact Engineering, 36(10–11), 1269–1275.
Chuang, L., Huamin, L., & Dongjie, J. (2017). Numerical simu-
lation study on the relationship between mining heights and
shield resistance in longwall panel. International Journal of
Mining Science and Technology, 27(2), 293–297.
Cloete, T. J., Nurick, G. N., & Palmer, R. N. (2005). The defor-
mation and shear failure of peripherally clamped centrally
supported blast loaded circular plates. International Journal
of Impact Engineering, 32(1–4), 92–117.
Dong, L., Zou, W., Li, X., Shu, W., & Wang, Z. (2019). Collab-
orative localization method using analytical and iterative
solutions for microseismic/acoustic emission sources in the
rockmass structure for underground mining. Engineering
Fracture Mechanics, 210, 95–112.
Dou, L., Chen, T., Gong, S., He, H., & Zhang, S. (2012). Rock-
burst hazard determination by using computed tomography
technology in deep workface. Safety Science, 50(4), 736–740.
Dou, L., & He, X. (2008). Rock burst theory and technology.
Xuzhou: China University of Mining and Technology Press.
Faradonbeh, R. S., & Taheri, A. (2019). Long-term prediction of
rockburst hazard in deep underground openings using three
robust data mining techniques. Engineering with Computers,
35(2), 659–675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-018-0624-4.
Feng, J. J., Wang, E. Y., Shen, R. X., Chen, L., Li, X., & Xu, Z.
(2016). Investigation on energy dissipation and its mechanism
of coal under dynamic loads. Geomechanics and Engineering,
11(5), 657–670.
Feng, X., & Zhang, Q. (2018). The effect of backfilling materials
on the deformation of coal and rock strata containing mul-
tiple goaf: A numerical study. Minerals, 8(6), 224.
Feng, X., Zhang, Q., & Ali, M. (2019). Explosion-induced stress
wave propagation in interacting fault system: Numerical
modeling and implications for Chaoyang Coal Mine. Shock
and Vibration. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5856080.
Feng, X., Zhang, Q., & Ali, M. (2020). 3D modelling of the
strength effect of backfill-rocks on controlling rockburst risk:
a case study. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 13, 128.
Gao, M. S., Dou, L. M., Zhang, N., Mu, Z. L., & Yang, B. S.
(2007). Experimental study on earthquake tremor for trans-
mitting law of rockburst in geomaterials. Chinese Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 26(7), 1365–1371.
Hauquin, T., Gunzburger, Y., & Deck, O. (2018). Predicting pillar
burst by an explicit modelling of kinetic energy. International
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 107, 159–
171.
He, J., Dou, L. M., Cai, W., Li, Z. L., & Ding, Y. L. (2015). In situ
test study of characteristics of coal mining dynamic load.
Shock and Vibration. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/121053.
He, M. C., Miao, J. L., & Feng, J. L. (2010). Rock burst process of
limestone and its acoustic emission characteristics under true-
Rockburst Risk Analysis During High-Hard Roof Breaking in Deep Mines
triaxial unloading conditions. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 47(2), 286–298.
Huang, Y. L. (2012). Ground control theory and application of
solid dense backfill in coal mines. Xuzhou: China University
of Mining and Technology.
Huang, B. X., Liu, C., Zhen, B. S., & Cheng, Q. (2007). Distri-
bution abutment pressures on laneway pillars for superwide
isolated fully mechanized top coal caving face. Chinese
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 29(6), 932–937.
Itasca Software Company. (2017). Theory and background, con-
stitutive model: Theory and implementation in user manual of
FLAC3D6.0. MN: Itasca Software Company.
Jiang, Y., Wang, H., Xue, S., Zhao, Y., Zhu, J., & Pang, X. (2012).
Assessment and mitigation of coal bump risk during extrac-
tion of an island longwall panel. International Journal of Coal
Geology, 95, 20–33.
Jiang, L., Wang, P., Zhang, P., Zheng, P., & Xu, B. (2017).
Numerical analysis of the effects induced by normal faults
and dip angles on rock bursts. Comptes Rendus Mécanique,
345(10), 690–705.
Jones, N. (2011). Structural impact. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Keneti, A., & Sainsbury, B. A. (2018). Review of published
rockburst events and their contributing factors. Engineering
Geology, 246, 361–373.
Kong, B., Wang, E., Li, Z., & Lu, W. (2019). Study on the feature
of electromagnetic radiation under coal oxidation and tem-
perature rise based on multi-fractal theory. Fractals, 27(03),
1950038.
Konicek, P., Soucek, K., Stas, L., & Singh, R. (2013). Long-hole
destress blasting for rockburst control during deep under-
ground coal mining. International Journal of Rock Mechanics
and Mining Sciences, 61, 141–153.
Lepik, Ü. (1994). Dynamic response of elastic-plastic beams with
axial constraints. International Journal of Impact Engineer-
ing, 15(1), 3–16.
Li, X. B. (2014). Basis and application of rock dynamics. Beijing:
Science Press.
Li, S., Feng, X. T., Li, Z., Chen, B., Zhang, C., & Zhou, H. (2012).
In situ monitoring of rockburst nucleation and evolution in
the deeply buried tunnels of Jinping II hydropower station.
Engineering Geology, 137, 85–96.
Li, Z., He, X., Dou, L., & Song, D. (2018a). Comparison of
rockburst occurrence during extraction of thick coal seams
using top-coal caving versus slicing mining methods. Cana-
dian Geotechnical Journal, 55(10), 1433–1450.
Li, Z., He, X., Dou, L., Song, D., Wang, G., & Xu, X. (2019a).
Investigating the mechanism and prevention of coal mine
dynamic disasters by using dynamic cyclic loading tests.
Safety Science, 115, 215–228.
Li, X. L., Li, Z. H., Wang, E. Y., et al. (2018b). Pattern recogni-
tion of mine microseismic (MS) and blasting events based on
wave fractal features. Fractals, 26(3), 1850029-1–1850029-18.
Li, Z., Niu, Y., Wang, E., Liu, L., Wang, H., Wang, M., et al.
(2019b). Experimental study on electric potential response
characteristics of gas-bearing coal during deformation and
fracturing process. Processes, 7(2), 72.
Li, X., Zhou, Z., Lok, T.-S., Hong, L., & Yin, T. (2008). Innova-
tive testing technique of rock subjected to coupled static and
dynamic loads. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences, 45(5), 739–748.
Liu, S., Li, X., Wang, D., Wu, M., Yin, G., & Li, M. (2019).
Mechanical and acoustic emission characteristics of coal at
temperature impact. Natural Resources Research. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11053-019-09562-w.
Mogi, K. (1967). Effect of the intermediate principal stress on
rock failure. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres,
72(20), 5117–5131.
Niu, Y., Wang, C., Wang, E., & Li, Z. (2019). Experimental study
on the damage evolution of gas-bearing coal and its electric
potential response. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering,
52(11), 4589–4604.
Pan, Y. S. (2018). Disturbance response instability theory of
rockburst in coal mine. Journal of China Coal Society, 43(8),
2091–2098.
Pellant, C. (1999). Rocks and minerals. Beijing: China Friendship
Press.
Qiu, L. M., Song, D. Z., Li, Z. H., et al. (2019). Research on AE
and EMR response law of the driving face passing through
the fault. Safety Science, 17, 184–193.
Sun, S. W., Ling, H., & Ren, S. L. (2011). Application of FLAC3D
in geotechnical engineering. Beijing: China Hydraulic Press.
Wang, E., He, X., Dou, L., Zhang, S., Nie, B., & Cu, M. (2005).
Electromagnetic radiation characteristics of coal and rocks
during excavation in coal mine and their application. Chinese
Journal of Geophysics, 48(1), 216–221.
Wang, E., He, X., Wei, J., Nie, B., & Song, D. (2011). Electro-
magnetic emission graded warning model and its applications
against coal rock dynamic collapses. International Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 48(4), 556–564.
Wang, E., Jia, H., Song, D., Li, N., & Qian, W. (2014). Use of
ultra-low-frequency electromagnetic emission to monitor
stress and failure in coal mines. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 70, 16–25.
Wang, P., Jiang, L., Jiang, J., Zheng, P., & Li, W. (2018). Strata
behaviors and rock burst–inducing mechanism under the
coupling effect of a hard, thick stratum and a normal fault.
International Journal of Geomechanics, 18(2), 04017135.
Wang, H., Jiang, Y., Xue, S., Shen, B., Wang, C., Lv, J., et al.
(2015). Assessment of excavation damaged zone around
roadways under dynamic pressure induced by an active
mining process. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences, 77, 265–277.
Wang, H., Jiang, Y., Zhao, Y., Zhu, J., & Liu, S. (2013).
Numerical investigation of the dynamic mechanical state of a
coal pillar during longwall mining panel extraction. Rock
Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 46(5), 1211–1221.
Wang, P., Jiang, L. S., Zheng, P. Q., Qin, G. P., & Zhang, C.
(2019). Inducing mode analysis of rock burst in fault-affected
zone with a hard–thick stratum occurrence. Environmental
Earth Sciences, 78(15), 467.
Wang, J. A., & Park, H. D. (2001). Comprehensive prediction of
rockburst based on analysis of strain energy in rocks. Tun-
nelling and Underground Space Technology Incorporating
Trenchless Technology Research, 16(1), 49–57.
Xia, K., Huang, S., & Jha, A. K. (2010). Dynamic tensile test of
coal, shale and sandstone using split Hopkinson pressure bar:
a tool for blast and impact assessment. International Journal
of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, 1(2), 24–37.
Yuan, L., Jiang, Y. D., He, X. Q., Dou, L. M., Zhao, Y. X., Zhao,
X. S., et al. (2018). Research progress of precise risk accurate
identification and monitoring early warning on typical dy-
namic disasters in coal mine. Journal of China Coal Society,
43(2), 306–318.
Zhang, Z. Z., Gao, F., & Shang, X. (2014). Rock burst proneness
prediction by acoustic emission test during rock deformation.
Journal of Central South University, 21(1), 373–380.
Zhu, L., Shi, S., & Jones, N. (2018). Dynamic response of stiffened
plates under repeated impacts. International Journal of Im-
pact Engineering, 117, 113–122.