My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-03-21_PERMIT FILE - C1980007A (8)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2008-03-21_PERMIT FILE - C1980007A (8)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:25:42 PM
Creation date
6/20/2008 11:15:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/21/2008
Section_Exhibit Name
Exhibit 60E Subsidence Evaluation for the South of Divide & Dry Fork Mining Areas
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Cracks tend to be more common and more permanent in zones above mine boundaries, barrier <br />pillars, and unyielding chain pillars. Any surface or near-surface water that might be present in this <br />zone has a higher probability of being impacted than that occurring in any other areas above the <br />mining panels. <br />5.6 Angle of Major Influence <br />The angle of major influence, (3, (also called angle of influence of the point of evaluation) is defined <br />by Peng (1992, p. 11) "... as the angle between the horizontal and the line connecting the inflection <br />point and the edge of the radius of major influence." The radius of major influence 0 is therefore the <br />horizontal distance from the vertical projection of the inflection point to the point of maximum <br />subsidence and the limit of subsidence (Figure 3). The angle of major influence is used for <br />computer modeling by the influence function method. In the B Seam mining at West Elk Mine, the <br />angle of major influence ranges (from a horizontal reference) from about 70 to 80 degrees. <br />The angle of major influence may also be referenced to the vertical, as has been done for the break <br />angle and angle of draw. The angle of major influence (from a vertical reference) is roughly equal to <br />the angle of draw (Figure 3), and is therefore also predicted to range from 10 to 20 degrees. <br />5.7 Relation Between Dynamic and Final Subsidence Deformations <br />Maximum dynamic tilt (change of slope) and horizontal tensile and compressive, strain are <br />reportedly less above longwall mining panels than are the final tilt and strain values at panel <br />boundaries. Dynamic tilt and strain decrease, relative to final tilt and strain, as the rate of face <br />advance increases. <br />Dynamic tilt and strain reportedly decrease with increasing speed of longwall coal extraction (Peng <br />1992, p. 20-21). Based on observations in a West Virginia coal mine: <br />1. Maximum dynamic tilt decreased by an average of 42 percent (from 0.0024 to 0.0014) as <br />the mining face rate of movement increased from 10 to 40 feet per day; dynamic tilt <br />therefore decreased by 14 percent as the face rate of movement increased by 30 feet per <br />day. <br />2. Maximum dynamic tensile strain decreased by an average of 22.5 percent (from 0.0031 to <br />0.0024) as the mining face velocity increased from 10 to 40 feet per day; dynamic horizontal <br />tensile strain decreased by 7.5 percent as the face increased by 30 feet per day. 3. <br />Maximum dynamic compressive strain decreased by an average of 48 percent (0.0062 to <br />0.0032) as the face velocity increased from 10 to 40 feet per day; dynamic horizontal <br />compressive strain decreased by 16 percent as the face increased by 30 feet per day. <br />5.8 Critical Extraction Width of Mining Panels <br />Critical extraction width (Wcr) is the width of mining panels necessary for maximum subsidence to <br />occur at a given overburden depth (d). Values for Wcr/d typically range from about 1.0 to 1.4, with <br />an average of about 1.2. Based on the subsidence development data for the 5th NW longwall panel, <br />the critical extraction width may be closer to the average value of 1.2 than 1.4 in the South of Divide <br />and Dry Fork mining areas (Figure 4). <br />5.9 Results of Computer Modeling <br />A computer software package was used to model the results of subsidence measurements at West <br />Elk Mine and to project subsidence in. the South of Divide mining area. The package used is <br />entitled: "Comprehensive and Integrated Subsidence Prediction Model (CISPM)," Version 2.0, by <br />Syd S. Peng and Yi Luo, Department of Mining Engineering, College of Mineral and Energy <br />Resources, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia. This program performed an <br />influence function analysis and, best fit of West Elk Mine subsidence data. The fit between the data <br />points and the influence function output from the model is shown in Figure 6. Considering that there <br />Tetra Tech - 090717/P 13
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.