Managing the geotechnical and mining issuesretreat, and hence the original pillar design was usually based on the maximum percentage extraction to be achieved during the primary development

Transaction

Paper

Introduction

Tavistock Colliery was first registered in 1936,and in 1960 Tavistock Colliery also acquiredthe South Witbank Coal Mine (SWCM), whichwas originally registered in 1945. It wasduring 1975 that JCI acquired an interest inTavistock Colliery and SWCM, andsubsequently in 1998 Duiker Mining acquiredTavistock Colliery from JCI. In 2000 Glencorebought Duiker Mining from Lonmin, andfinally in 2002 Xstrata Coal South Africa(XCSA) acquired the mining interests ofDuiker Mining.

The first coal was produced at TavistockColliery in 1948. Tavistock Colliery has themining rights for the No. 2, 4, and 5 Seams in

the mine lease area. Both the No. 2 and 5Seam have previously been mined, and there isstill a small portion of No. 2 Seam reserves ofapproximately 3.2 Mt of run-of-mine (ROM)coal that has been excluded from any futureplans, owing to the low yields and adversegeological conditions. All mining is currentlyconcentrated on the No. 4 Seam, comprisingone pillar extraction and three developmentsections with a total output of around 280 000 t/month.

The available coal reserves have dwindledover time, and the majority of the coal is nowlocked up in the remaining safety pillars. Thepillar extraction project was initiated by thisreality and the necessity to extend the life ofmine in line with the entire Southstockcomplex which comprises, the South Witbank,No. 5 Seam, and Tavistock Collieries. To datearound 655 000 t of coal has been safelyextracted from the pillar extraction panels, asindicated on the Tavistock Collieryunderground plan in Figure 1. The in-houseprocess developed and implemented towardsachieving this in a safe and efficient mannerwill be discussed.

Mining methods at Tavistock Colliery

Historically, the mining of the available coalreserves was never carried out with theintention to conduct pillar extraction onretreat, and hence the original pillar designwas usually based on the maximumpercentage extraction to be achieved duringthe primary development mining phase6. Bord

Managing the geotechnical and mining issuessurrounding the extraction of small pillars atshallow depths at Xstrata Coal South Africaby S.Z. Pethö*, C. Selai*, D. Mashiyi*, and J.N. van derMerwe*

SynopsisPillar extraction at shallow depths with small pillars that were notoriginally intended for secondary extraction can provide a hugebenefit to the coal mining industry in those areas where asignificant percentage of the remaining coal reserves are locked upin small pillars at shallow depths and where opencast miningmethods are simply not as cost-effective and practical to implement.A system considering all of the pertinent geotechnical and miningaspects for the safe and efficient pillar extraction of small pillars atshallow depths at Xstrata Coal South Africa (XCSA) has beenfurther developed and implemented as part of an ongoingimprovement process addressing all of the relevant legal andassociated risk aspects. This work follows on from the previouspillar extraction work carried out at the ATC, Boschmans, andSpitzkop Collieries.

The process involved a number of in-house workshops andsessions arranged with all key personnel from Tavistock Colliery,and also included Professor Nielen van der Merwe of the Universityof the Witwatersrand, a world renowned authority on pillarextraction, towards reviewing and developing the Modified NEVIDpillar extraction system employed previously at Boschmans Colliery.

The system is currently being employed at Tavistock Collierywith success and no major accidents, with around 655 000 t of coalhaving been successfully extracted from the pillar extraction panels.

Keywordspillar extraction, small pillars at shallow depths, goafing, numericalmodelling, instrumentation, mining and geotechnical considerations.

* Xstrata Coal South Africa.© The Southern African Institute of Mining and

Metallurgy, 2012. SA ISSN 0038–223X/3.00 +0.00. This paper was first presented at the,MineSafe Conference, 15–18 August 2011,Emperors Palace, Hotel Casino Convention Resort,Johannesburg.

105The Journal of The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy VOLUME 112 FEBRUARY 2012 �

Managing the geotechnical and mining issues surrounding the extraction of small pillars

and pillar mining has been the prime method employed forcoal extraction since production commenced at TavistockColliery. At first, mining was carried out entirely by conven-tional methods (drill and blast) until the introduction ofmechanized mining using a continuous miner (CM) during2004.

Pillar extraction experience at XCSA

Pillar extraction was initially carried out making use of a totalpillar extraction mining method at the Arthur Taylor Colliery(ATC), with goafing occurring concurrent with the mining.Although no fatal accidents were recorded, there were at leasttwo recorded cases of a CM burial and one major windblastaccident during this period. This was formally addressedthrough the re-design of the pillar extraction method tomitigate any CM burials and windblast accidents. The grouprock engineer at the time, Mr B. Vorster, employed a ModifiedNEVID method based on the pillar extraction mining methoddeveloped by Sasol Mining.10 This method of pillar extractionwas then carried out at Spitzkop Colliery, ATC, and also laterat Boschmans Colliery, with no recorded cases of a CM burialor any windblast accidents.

It must, however, also be pointed out that the methodwas not effectively designed for goafing to occur concurrentwith the mining operation. There are at least three recordedcases of surface subsidences having occurred at BoschmansColliery after the pillar extraction operations had formallyceased. There is no recorded case of any surface subsidenceat Spitzkop Colliery where pillar extraction operations werecarried out.

Pillar extraction at ATC was carried out on only the No. 4Seam with no pillar extraction carried out on the No. 2 Seam.Interestingly enough, pillar extraction was also carried out onthe No. 4 Seam in areas where the No. 2 Seam had previouslybeen mined out below, in addition to those areas where theNo. 2 Seam was not mined out previously. The modifiedNEVID method employed at ATC and Boschmans consisted oftaking only three cuts per pillar where possible, which will bediscussed later.

Mining process adopted for the safe and effectivepillar extraction at Tavistock Colliery

A formal process for evaluating the viability of pillarextraction mining, including all of the key stakeholders, wasinitiated towards gaining a better understanding of theprocess. In this regard a number of workshops, sessions, andalso mine visits were carried out, in which the followingfactors were identified for consideration. For simplicity, thesefactors can be effectively grouped into the Mining andGeotechnical aspects, which will be discussed in the followingsections:

Mining considerations

These were addressed by identifying the key activities andallocating resources and personnel to ensure that these wereeffectively managed.

Mining restrictions (pillar extraction panels available)

Surface and underground

The first challenge confronting Tavistock Colliery was theavailability of panels originally earmarked for pillarextraction, owing to the restrictions imposed by varioussurface structures including public and private roads,buildings, and dams (Figure 2).

Based on the analysis carried out, approximately 30% ofthe original panels earmarked for pillar extraction had to bescrapped due to further expansion plans for water storagefacilities on surface, which were to be extended and in theprocess would encroach into the mineable and targeted pillarextraction areas. In addition to this, there were also theadverse effects associated with combined floor rolls, paleo-highs, hydraulic pressure conditions, and panel orientations,resulting in further panels having to be removed from thepillar extraction schedule.

External and internal stakeholders

Farmers likely to be affected during this process wereconsulted well in advance. Fences were erected around the

�

106 FEBRUARY 2012 VOLUME 112 The Journal of The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy

Figure 1—Underground plan showing the location and extent of the 13 panels where pillar extraction has been carried out at Tavistock Colliery

LEGENDPlanned cuts on the pillar

Extracted Pillars

Goaf area

Floor roll

RoadPillar extractionpanel sequencing

planned pillar extraction panels in order to preventinadvertent access to the surface areas where subsidencecould occur. Prior to the commencement of the pillarextraction mining there was already a project underway torelocate affected communities in informal settlements. Thetrade unions representing the workforce were also dulyinformed about the pending pillar extraction operations andinvolved throughout the process. No major complaints werereceived from any of the abovementioned stakeholdersduring the pillar extraction operations.

Mine planning

A detailed mine design utilizing the available coal resourcesand pillar extraction panels indicated that the Tavistockunderground operation will be able to continue untilDecember 2011. The development is expected to continuewith two sections and the pillar extraction with the other twosections until the end of the year. At the time of publicationTavistock Colliery has just been closed with the last miningtaking place on the day shift of the 30th of January 2012.

Cost and production

Based on the comprehensive mining exercise carried out onthe available pillar extraction panels, the pillar extraction

method was deemed a viable option due to its positive NPV contribution and minimal capital input required. The ROMproduction was originally forecast at 55 000 t/month for athree month period with the intention to ramp up to 80 000 t/month. Production commenced in March 2010, andwas stopped for two weeks due to a fall of ground thatnecessitated the panel to be relocated following an extensiveanalysis on the failure mechanism carried out by various rockengineering experts, as discussed later. It was in November2010 that Tavistock finally achieved 86 000 t/month fromthe pillar extraction section for the first time.

Availability of equipment

A strategic decision was taken to gradually phase out allsingle-pass continuous miners in preparation for miningremnants and pillar extraction. Two ABM30 and one ABM12continuous miners were decommissioned and replaced withthree HM31 continuous miners. Provision was also made inthe budget to replace the existing RHAM single boom withRHAM twin-boom roof bolters in order to match the roofsupport requirements. A machine extractor ‘tande-trekker’was also purchased to be on standby in the event that the CMbecomes stuck or buried by the goaf.

Managing the geotechnical and mining issues surrounding the extraction of small pillarsTransaction

Paper

107The Journal of The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy VOLUME 112 FEBRUARY 2012 �

Figure 2—Plan view showing (a) the location and extent of the Tavistock No. 4 Seam pillar extraction and (b) the mining restrictions on surface

Tavistock Colliery

South WitbankColliery

2009\Jul–Dec201020112012201320142015

LEGEND

(b)

(a)


The scrubber fan on the CM was initially removed as partof modifications carried out, but at a later stage it wasrealized that it was not necessary provided that the fan couldbe switched off. The scrubber fan is required for use in allplanned holings or developing prior to the pillar extractionthat is carried out on retreat.

Support and rehabilitation of the pillar extraction panels

It was decided to outsource the re-support of those panelsidentified for pillar extraction services to a secondary supportcontractor using hand-held machines, due to the versatility ofthe equipment and easy access to these old workings. Adetailed pillar extraction panel support assessment was alsocarried out15, documented, and signed off by the rockengineering department together with the mining departmentand project-managed through an independent companytowards ensuring that this aspect did not become an issue onthe project critical path. In order to keep up with frequentpanel relocations, there would need to be at least two pillarextraction panels prepared in advance at all times.Preparation in this regards also involved the pumping of anywater, rehabilitating the ventilation infrastructure,sweeping/cleaning, construction of travelling ways andconveyor belts, as well as the power and water supply to theworking place. All belt roads and travelling ways would besupported from the beginning of the panel right up to thefaces, and this also included the installation of systematicroofbolt breaker lines5. Breaker line support (Figure 3)consisted of two rows of 1.8 m long x 20 mm diameter full-column resin-grouted roofbolts installed 1 m apart with fivebolts installed per support row, across the width of a bordspecifically to:

� Arrest the planned displacement of the roof strata atthat point

� Prevent any roof failures from spreading� Delineate and maintain a clear demarcation between

the goaf and the working area.

This system has been proven to be very successful in pastpillar extraction projects at XCSA. Mining in a panel couldcommence and continue after four rows of splits from the facehad been re-supported to the required standard.

Labour issues and challenges

Some challenges with regard to the compensation formachine operators demanded by the labour unions wereovercome through a process of constant engagement. It isunderstandable that pillar extraction involves hazards thatare different to those of development, but these are effectivelymanaged and mitigated through the risk assessment processadopted.

Availability of competent skills and training

Following the closure of the ATC and Phoenix undergroundoperations, key employees were identified and transferred toother operations, and during this process a number were alsotransferred to Tavistock Colliery. All mining personnel suchas shift bosses and miners and CM operators who had priorworking knowledge of pillar extraction from ATC wereidentified and included in the labour planning. A formaltraining programme was also initiated and carried out by therock engineering department with the mining crews towardsensuring that the relevant strata control issues and trainingon the critical controls were provided to the miningpersonnel, on issues such at the trigger action response plan(TARP), daily inspection checklist, and the marking andcutting of the pillars.

Risk management process (risk assessment)

An issue-based risk assessment16 for producing coal in apillar extraction section was developed on the mine with theobjective of assessing the availability, adequacy, andeffectiveness of the hard barriers (these are physical barriers,such as lockouts and no-entry barricades, as opposed to softbarriers such as procedures and discussions), and to identifyrequired procedures and standards in order to address thehigh risk/critical tasks. During this process the following keyissues were identified, and a schedule with accountabilitiesestablished and tracked:

� Ensure fit-for-purpose equipment—modificationsneeded to be carried out to existing equipment

� Compile a procedure for extracting the CM in the eventthat the machine is stuck and/or becomes inoperable18

� Draw up a pillar extraction code of practice,7 dealingwith issues such as the required support pattern, ‘nogo’ zones and the demarcation thereof, and thedesignated operator positions with each cut

� To train all relevant personnel on the procedures andstandards and issue licenses where applicable.

Panel pre-emptive document

Prior to pillar extraction taking place in a specified panel, thevarious affected stakeholders (departments) come together ina formal manner to identity all the possible hazards and thelikely related risks anticipated during the pillar extractionprocess, and through this consultative process define the

�


Figure 3—Plan view showing the location of the breaker line supportinstalled

Distance from corner of pillar = 1 m Distance frompillar ribside = 1 m

Distance between roof bolts in a support row = 1 m

Pillar Extraction Direction

Distance between breakerline support rows = 1 m

controls required in order to reduce the risks to theunderground personnel (Figure 4). The process is carried outby critically considering and assessing the following keyissues:

� The geological features and structures, as well as theinfluence on the roof and pillar conditions

� Geometry of the panel (panel length, mining heights,bord width, and the panel width)

� Primary method of mining and age of workings� Type of support installed during the mining process� The prevailing roof, pillar, floor, and support conditions� The existing surface restrictions� Technical data relating to the panel (the actual safety

factor, width-to-height ratio of the pillars, minimumspan of the panel, regional and local stress effects,percentage of sandstone constituting the overburden)

� Previous mining in the area either as overlying orunderlying mining panels

� The recommended method of goaf and subsidencemonitoring, as well as the ventilation structures andlayout required.

At the conclusion of the meeting the completed pillarextraction panel pre-emptive document is duly signed off byall parties and a permit to mine signed and issued by theoperations manager.

Daily inspections

In order to ensure full compliance to the standards set forsafe pillar extraction, inspections are carried out on a dailybasis by the miners and shift bosses as well as the mineoverseer. These are carried out by means of a pre-shiftchecklist that encompasses, amongst others, the followingkey aspects (Figure 5):

� Pillar cutting discipline� Demarcation of the geological discontinuities and re-

supporting where necessary� Roof and pillar conditions at the critical positions (CM

operator’s position and the travelling road)� Access control into the section (the miner needs to

have an updated register for all the personnel workingin the section)

� Installation of the required monitoring devices in thesection

� Availability of the CM extractor and also that it is in agood working condition.

Trigger action response plan (TARP)

A TARP was also developed for the pillar extraction towardsmanaging the various critical aspects that would affect theextraction operations and was included as part of the trainingprocess provided to the mining personnel, (Figure 6).


Paper

The Journal of The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy VOLUME 112 FEBRUARY 2012 109 �

Figure 4—Example sheet showing the panel and geological/structural parameters considered in the pillar extraction panel pre-emptive document

Panel and geological/structural parameters


�


Figure 5—Example sheet showing the pre-shift checklist used for the daily inspection


Paper


Figure 6—Pillar extraction Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP) developed

Tavistock CollieryStooping trigger levels and action response plan


Recovery of an inoperable continuous miner in a pillarextraction section

A procedure was developed with the main objective to ensurethat the continuous miner could be extracted and/orrecovered from a position where it has become inoperable.This position can be expected to occur beyond the roofboltbreaker line support, and in essence means that the machinehas become inoperable in a deemed no-go zone.18

Pillar cutting sequence in a pillar extraction section

A procedure was developed with the main objective to ensurethat a standard cutting sequence is adhered to in a pillarextraction section that will define the sequence in which eachidentified pillar in a row must be cut, the amount andsequence in which individual lifts/cuts from a single pillarmust be taken, and importantly indicate the position that theCM operator and his assistant must take in order to ensurethat they do not enter into a ‘no-go’ zone while cutting17

(Figure 7).

Geotechnical considerations

The pillar extraction operation at Boschmans Colliery wascarried out by means of taking only three cuts per pillar(Figure 8) where practicable, and mining four to seven rowsof pillars in this manner, after which two rows of intact

pillars were left as stopper pillars. The intention of thestopper pillars was to mitigate the effects of a windblast.Although this method was found to be a much safer way tocarry out pillar extraction, with a very low risk of CM burialand windblast accidents as compared with the earlier totalpillar extraction carried out,11,12 there was no recorded goafthat occurred concurrent with the pillar extraction mining.

Due to the risks inherent in the non-goafed panels, ameeting was arranged with all stakeholders and expertstowards reviewing, and where possible amending, the pillarextraction cutting sequence employed at Boschmans Collieryfor implementation at Tavistock Colliery.

The various geotechnical aspects considered arediscussed below.

Geotechnical borehole logs

Due to the poor quality of the information available on someof the older geological borehole logs and the lack of adequategeological coverage in the pillar extraction area of interest, itwas decided that initially at least two new geotechnicalboreholes would be drilled per pillar extraction panel andlogged. The geotechnical boreholes would be drilled fromsurface to a position just above the immediate roof andlocated in the centre of the pillar extraction panel. The mainpurposes of these boreholes were firstly to enable thecalculation of the minimum spans for the various panels to be

�


Figure 7—Example showing the pillar cutting sequence and no-go zones for the first two cuts taken

Figure 8—Plan view showing the pillar dimensions for a 10.5 m x 10.5 m pillar for the three different cutting sequences

NO GO ZONE

Cut 1

Movement areas of the operator & assistants

Direction of stooping

2

NO GO ZONE

Cut 2

Movement areas of the operator & assistants

Direction of stooping

3

Cut 1 will always be taken on pillar No. 2 first, unless local geologicalconditions are of such nature that it progibits the execution of this cut.The No Go zone prohibits any person to enter the indicated area oncecutting of the lift/cut starts

When starting cut 2, the operator must position himself in such a way thathe is not in the No Go zone, and therefore behind the line of roof boltbreaker line support (and not in the intersection)

5.4 m2

Kickoutfender

Snooks

3 Cut 4 Cut 5 Cut

3.3 m

3.3

m5.

2 m

2.0

m

3.3

m5.

2 m

2.0

m

3.3

m5.

2 m

2.0

m

3.3 m 5.2 m 2.0 m 3.3 m 5.2 m 2.0 m 3.3 m 6.2 m 1.0 m

5.2 m 2.0 m

5.0 m2

23 m2

2.8 m

5.0 m2 5.4 m2

5.0 m2

3.3 m 5.2 m 2.0 m

1.0

m6.

2 m

2.0

m5.

2 m

3.3

m

3.3

m

3.3 m 5.2 m 2.0 m

3.3

m6.

2 m

1.0

m

5.0 m2

17.5 m2

2.1 m

5.4 m2

5.0 m2

5.0 m2

12 m2

1.4 m

carried out, and also to ascertain the general roofcomposition of the panel in question. A subsequent useidentified for these boreholes was for instrumentation, whichwill be discussed later. A plan, together with a drillingschedule covering all of the pillar extraction panels, wasdiscussed and drawn up in consultation with the Complexgeologist, and this was then also effectively project-managedtowards ensuring that the required information was alwaysavailable prior to the pillar extraction taking place in thepanel.

Using the available geotechnical information, theminimum spans required for overburden failure to occur werecalculated for each panel considering only the strongestsandstone layer and assuming a tensile mode of failure,using the following equation1:

where, σtm is the sum of the tensile strength of the beamand the resident horizontal stress, γ is the distributed load onthe beam, assuming a unit weight of the overburden strata of25 kN/m3, t is the thickness of the beam, and L is theminimum span. The results of this analysis are shown inTable I.

Numerical modelling – LAMODEL4

For the modelling exercise the LAMODEL numericalmodelling software package was used, which is a boundaryelement program for calculating the stresses anddisplacements in coal mines or other thin, tabular seams orveins. It can be used fairly easily to investigate and optimizethe required pillar sizes and layouts in relation to pillar andmulti-seam stresses. LAMODEL simulates the overburden asa stack of homogeneous isotropic layers with frictionlessinterfaces, and with each layer having the identical elasticmodulus, Poisson’s ratio, and thickness. LAMODEL was usedtowards establishing and quantifying the extraction safetyfactors [ESF] for a representative range of panel spans anddepths, together with the number of pillar cuts. The decisionwas taken to modify the existing NEVID mining method for

the prevailing ground conditions in order to increase thelikelihood of goafing in the pillar extraction panels asfollows, without increasing the overall risk profile, refer tovan der Merwe1:

� Taking five cuts per pillar instead of only three cuts(Figure 8), where practicably possible (Figure 10)

� Mining of five rows of pillars and leaving only onesolid pillar in the centre of the panel of the fifth row,acting as a cushion pillar (compartmentalizes the goaf),instead of mining only four rows of pillars and leavingtwo complete rows as the stopper rows, in order toreduce the impacts of a windblast.

All geological discontinuities identified during the pillarmapping exercise were incorporated into the designing andpositioning of the required cushion pillars as far aspracticably possible. Once the goaf in a panel has beeninitiated and progresses with the subsequent mining, thecushion pillar requirement falls away and the pillar can bemined depending on the outcome of the pillar mappingexercise.

During this exercise a simple and effective process flowwas developed for the pillar extraction operation mining atTavistock Colliery8 (Figure 9).

Panel mapping exercise

This entails an assessment of the various geotechnicalparameters that can directly affect the behaviour of the pillars and immediate rock mass during the pillar extractionprocess. During this process, all the underground panels thatwere planned for pillar extraction were visited, and thefollowing parameters were assessed and the informationcaptured on the survey plans to ensure that the pillarextraction of each panel is carried out in a safe and efficientmanner:

� Geological features such as joints, faults, dykes, andpaleo-floor or floor rolls

� Indication of the weak and strong side of anygeological features observed

� Integrity of the pillars in the panel


Paper


Table I

Minimum span, percentage sandstone in the immediate roof, cuts taken, and instrumentation for the pillarextraction panels

Panel Depth below Panel Panel minimum Percentage of Number of cuts Type of surface name surface (m) span (m) span (m) sandstone (%) taken per pillar instrumentation

1W4SB1E 50 - 59 108 70.9 - 87.1 56 5 TDR1W4SB3E 50 - 58 110 56.3 - 64.5 75.8 5 TDR1W4SB 46 - 51 108.8 64.5 - 68.0 65.4 5 TDR1W6SB 50 - 62 144 80 69.6 5 TDR1W7SB 50 - 60 142 79.5 - 92.0 70.0 5 TDR1W8SB 51-61 109 81 - 119 50.4 5 None1W9SB 51 - 60 140 108 - 112 57.1 5 NoneF11W1 52 107 96.6 64.2 5 NoneF11W2 56 125 106.7 64.2 5 NoneF11W3 55 109 107 74.0 4 NoneF11W4 54 94 107 74.0 4 NoneF11N3 65 91.8 51 29.3 5 NoneF11N2 65 143 96.6 48.8 5 None


� The prevailing ground conditions of the roof and floor� Conditions of the installed roof support units� Signs of increasing stresses on the pillars, roof, floor

and the installed support units� Indications of any water in the roof, particularly at the

intersections, and water in the roadways.

Once the information had been captured, a detailed pillarand risk assessment layout plan was generated which formspart of the pillar extraction pre-emptive risk assessmentprocess. A signed-off copy of the pillar layout plan was thenprovided to the miners (Figure 10).

Instrumentation

It was decided to carry out a simple instrumentationprogramme in order to gain a better understanding of theoverburden behaviour during the pillar extraction process. Inthis regards a decision was made to implement the timedomain reflectometry (TDR) technology, which is a fairlysimple and cost-effective geotechnical monitoring system thatis generally used in massive mines to determine the heightand profile of the cave above the draw point. TDR worksthrough propagating a radar frequency electromagnetic pulsedown a transmission line while monitoring the reflected

signal. As the electromagnetic pulse propagates along thetransmission line, it is subject to impedance by the dielectricproperties of the media along the transmission line. For acustomized mining application solution, the system consistsof grouting a specific type of conductive cable with knownelectrical properties into a surface borehole. A total of five ofthe geotechnical boreholes were instrumented with the TDRcabling (Table I), consisting of three cables of differentthickness in each borehole, with the intention ofunderstanding the overburden behaviour during the pillarextraction. A limited degree of success was achieved with theTDR instrumentation; however, this technique does not lenditself to providing early warning (precursor) information ofoverburden instability and should rather be used to provideinformation related to the location, rate, and extent of rooffailure that occurs during and after pillar extraction.

GoafWarn

Previous work carried out by Brink et al.2, and Edwards3

indicated the need for a reliable early warning seismic systemindicating major roof instability in a coal mine, consideringthe significant percentage of reserves tied up in coal pillars.Following this the GoafWarn instrument was developed,

�


Figure 9—Pillar extraction geotechnical process flow


Paper


Figure 10—Pillar layout plan showing the cushion pillar and the intended cuts to be taken based on the pillar mapping exercise carried out

Joint = Indicating the weakand the strong side


which is installed approximately 50 m to 100 m from theregion where any such roof instability may occur. The devicemonitors the micro-seismicity associated with the formationand extension of fractures which are the precursors to thelarger instability process that follows. The instrumentcomprises a seismic velocity sensor, analogue-to-digitalconversion, and a microprocessor for data processing.

Two of the older generation GoafWarn instruments wereobtained to trial from CSIR Miningtek, with the purpose ofusing them in the pillar extraction section to build up anunderstanding of how the roof behaves prior to, during, andafter the goaf. Unfortunately, no success was achieved withthese instruments because of issues with the software andtiming, and thus valuable information regarding the actualgoafs recorded was lost in the process.

Going forwards, new-generation GoafWarn instrumentswill be purchased to allow for remote reading and accessingof the data, thereby providing a real-time solution to thechallenge at hand of understanding the roof behaviour.

Pillar extraction section performance rating formAs part of the compliance process, a pillar extraction ratingform was designed to rate the section performance of theunderground mining personnel against the set standards andprocedures. The form addresses and assesses, amongstothers, the following key factors:

� Marking of the direction lines on the identified pillarsto ensure that the operator can take the intended cutsin the required direction

� The presence of a signed copy of the pillar extractionpanel pre-emptive risk assessment document andlayout plan for that specific panel at the waiting place,and understanding of the contents

� Understanding of the escape route to be followedduring the event of a goaf occurring

� Correct positioning of the CM operator and his assistantduring the pillar extraction mining process

� Adherence to the cutting sequence and physical cuttingdirection of the pillars as depicted on the layout plan, toprevent an uncontrolled goaf

� Drilling of the required bleeder holes in order to reducethe buildup of any hydraulic pressure in the roof

� Breaker line and support installation as perrequirements.

The performance rating form is compiled during thestartup phase of the new pillar extraction panel and duringthe month, with the results discussed and communicated tothe mine overseer.

Implementation phase

Pillar extraction success

The pillar extraction operation at Tavistock Colliery startedduring April 2010 with the panels situated on the easternside of the mine, viz. 1W4SB1E and 1W4SB3E (Figure 1). Todate the pillar extraction has been effectively carried out on atotal of thirteen panels, and there has been goafing in eightof the panels (Table II). A summary of the goafinginformation for the pillar extraction panels as well as theirorientation is provided in Table III.

As stipulated in Table II, only 62% of the pillar extractionpanels have goafed while the mining was being carried out. Itis pertinent to note that the pillar extraction in three of thenon-goafed panels was undertaken by using five cuts oneach pillar, whereas the remaining two were extracted usingfour cuts per pillar. In all of the panels where goafingoccurred during mining, the pillar extraction was undertakenby using five cuts on each pillar where practicably possible. Itis important to take note of the central remnant portion of apillar left during pillar extraction (kickout fender) that iscreated with the three different mining options used onXCSA. In this regard the area of the kickout fender increasesfrom 12 m2 (1.4 m thick) to 17.5 m2 (2.1 m thick) and to 23 m2 (2.8 m thick) for a 5 cuts, 4, to 3 cuts per pillar respec-

�


Table II

Goaf information for the pillar extraction panels

Total number of pillar extraction panels 13

Total number of pillar extraction panels that have goafed 8

Total number of pillar extraction panels that have not goafed 5

Number of pillar extraction panels orientated in an E-W direction 6

Number of pillar extraction panels orientated in a N-S direction 7

Number of pillar extraction panels orientated in an E-W 4direction that have goafed

Number of pillar extraction panels orientated in a N-S direction 4that have goafed

Percentage of total pillar extraction panels that have goafed (%) 62

Table III

Pillar extraction information relating to the mining cuts and goafing

Panel name Span/depth ratio Number of cuts per pillar Goafing during mining

1W6SB 2.88 2.32 5 Yes1W7SB 2.84 2.37 5 Yes1W8SB 2.14 1.79 5 Yes1W9SB 2.75 2.33 5 YesF11W1 2.06 5 YesF11W2 2.23 5 YesF11N3 1.41 5 Yes, but not to surfaceF11N2 2.2 5 Yes, but not to surface1W4SB1E 2.16 1.83 5 No1W4SB3E 2.2 1.90 5 No1W4SB 2.37 2.13 5 NoF11W3 1.98 4 NoF11W4 1.74 4 No

tively, (Figure 8). From the pillar extraction informationgathered to date at XCSA, the relationship of the size andperformance of the kickout fender and the roof behaviour is acrucial aspect that needs to be studied in more detail towardsgarnering a better understanding of the roof failuremechanism for pillar extraction of small pillars at shallowdepths. In this regard, the UDEC and FLAC3D numericalmodelling packages will be able to provide further clarity andinsight.

Challenges experienced and further enhancements

Goaf overrun and fall of ground

There has been one recorded incident of a fall of ground(FOG) and a goaf overrun since the inception of pillarextraction operations at Tavistock Colliery. The FOG occurredin panel 1W4SB1E where the pillar extraction operationcommenced (Figure 1). The FOG occurred on the off-shiftduring cutting of the third row of pillars, and was noticedalong the roadway R3 from split 14 to split 19 (Figure 11).The fall progressed up to split 12 located adjacent to thewaiting place. All the operations were ceased in this panel forthe safety of the underground personnel. An extensive

investigation was conducted by the rock engineeringdepartment towards understanding the mechanism of thisFOG, and Mr Jaco van Vuuren of Saxum Mining, ProfessorNielen van der Merwe, and Mr David Postma the group rockengineer at Sasol Mining were also consulted. The FOG wasattributed to the combination of the floor roll, water in theroof, and the stress changes associated with the east-westorientation of the pillar extraction panel.9,13,14

Following this incident it was decided that in addition allfloor rolls will be mapped and captured on the survey plan toensure that this is taken into consideration during the designof the pillar cutting sequence. In addition, deeper bleederholes (3.9 m in length) will be drilled at the roadway R3,roadway L3, and the belt road for every third split for thedraining of any water from the immediate roof, in order toprevent the build up of any hydraulic pressure, which tendsto cause strata problems. Intensive monitoring of the groundconditions will also be carried out while mining the panels inthe east-west or west-east direction.

Pillar cracking

The mining of panel F11W1 was successfully carried out witha goaf occurring as planned, though not up to surface, andwith no abnormal pillar and roof conditions observed prior tothe commencement of the pillar extraction operation. It was,however, noted during the process of extracting pillars in thispanel that the southern barrier pillar started to developguttering on the right hand side of panel F11W2 (northernside). After completion of the pillar extraction in panelF11W1, preparations were made to commence with the pillarextraction in panel F11W2. The first goaf happened after ninerows of pillars had been extracted, and this also did notprogress up to the surface (Figure 12). After mining a furthertwo rows of pillars the next goaf occurred, which triggered allof the uncompleted goafs (the goaf in panel F11W1 and thefirst goaf in panel F11W2) to progress. The goafing thenproceeded to alternate between the two panels for about anhour. Following this it was noted that the pillars extendingfrom the goaf line backwards had developed an interestingtensile crack extending from the top to the bottom of thepillar corner (Figure 12). This was observed in panel F11W2and also F11W3, the next panel planned for pillar extraction.These tensile cracks were observed on both the eastern andwestern sides of the pillars, with minor guttering noted onthe southern side of the pillars.

It was concluded that the damage to the pillars observedwas as a result of lateral displacement, due to the suddenrelease of horizontal compression accompanying theprogression of the goaf in the adjacent panel. The layout planwas altered to leave four rows of pillars to stiffen up thesystem, and pillar extraction resumed. A special modifiedcutting sequence was developed for panel F11W3, takingcognisance of the cracks and guttering. In this sequence theplanned cuts on the sides of the pillars where the cracks haddeveloped were removed, in order to prevent the alreadyfractured dislodged corners from falling and thereby causinginjuries to personnel or damage to the equipment.

In conclusion, pillar extraction of the panels orientated inthe east-west or west-east direction, probably coinciding withthe direction of maximum horizontal stress, can presentchallenges that need to be managed.


Paper


Figure 11—The FOG and plan view showing the planned and actualpillar extraction cuts taken together with the extent of the falls ofground that occurred in panel 1W4SB1E. The photograph taken invarious areas show the laminated nature of the immediate overburdenand the height of the falls of ground, and also indicate evidence ofsome overthrusting

(a) (b)

(c) (d)


Scaling of pillar corners in areas where the previousmining was carried out using a Voest CM

Scaling occurred during the extraction of pillars that wereoriginally mined using a Voest CM, which tends to create arounded pillar corner in the roof (Figure 13). This cornertends to scale off with the stress changes associated with thepillar extraction operation. Two incidences were also reportedof the Hilti gun causing this fractured piece of rock to becomedislodged, resulting in an injury to an employee during thenormal installation of brattices required for ventilationcontrol.

ConclusionThe pillar extraction process designed and carried out atTavistock Colliery has proved to be a success in terms ofsafety and efficiency, and has enabled a better understandingto be gained of the behaviour of small pillars at shallowdepths during pillar extraction. The work has shown that it ispossible to extract old, small, shallow pillars that were notoriginally intended for secondary extraction, provided thatdetailed prior investigation is done and that the mining isplanned in great detail and executed according to plan.

Based on the experience to date, there is still, however,further numerical modelling work that needs to be carried outtowards understanding the behaviour and interaction of thekickout fender and the immediate roof response during pillarextraction operations for various panel geometries, stressorientations, and depths towards formulating guidelines.

It is also necessary to improve the understanding offailure mechanisms preceding goafing, which will hopefullybe achieved with the implementation of the improvedGoafWarn instrument.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank XCSA management forpermission to publish this paper, and also acknowledge Mr B.Vorster for all of the earlier pillar extraction work carried outat Boschmans, ATC, and Spitzkop Collieries.

References1. VAN DER MERWE, J.N. Rock engineering method to pre-evaluate old, small

coal pillars for secondary mining. Journal of the Southern African Instituteof Mining and Metallurgy, vol. 112, no. 1, 2012. pp. 1–6.

2. BRINK, AVZ. and NEWLAND, A.R. Automatic Real Time Assessment ofWindblast Risk. ACARP project C8026, Australian Coal AssociationResearch Program, 2001.

3. EDWARDS, J. Seismic monitoring for windblast prediction. Mine seismicityand rockburst risk management in underground mines. Australian Centrefor Geomechanics, 1998. pp. 14–1 to 14–6.

4. HEASLEY, K.A. and AGIOUTANTIS, Z. LAMODEL—A Boundary ElementProgram for Coal Mine Design. Proceedings, 10th International Conferenceon Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Tucson, Arizona,2001, pp. 1679–1682.

5. VAN DER MERWE, J.N. and MADDEN, B.J. Rock Engineering of UndergroundCoal Mining 2nd edn. Johannesburg, Safety in Mines Research AdvisoryCommittee, 2010.

6. HSEC COP 013-XCSA Guideline for COP-Combat Rockfall accidents inUnderground Mines, 2011.

7. Pillar Extraction Code of Practice. Tavistock Colliery, 2010.

8. VAN DER MERWE, J.N. Xstrata Coal Personal communication. CentennialChair for Rock Engineering, School of Mining Engineering, Wits, 2011.

9. POSTMA, D. Personal communication. Group Rock Engineer, SASOL, May2010.

10. VORSTER, B. Personal communication. Principal Geotechnical Engineer, Xstrata Coal, Queensland, 2009.

11. STRATA ENGINEERING. Evaluation of the Stability of Pillars in ExistingSecondary Extraction Panels. report number 08-001(XST)-1, June 2008.

12. STABLE STRATA CONSULTING. Stability Analysis of Xstrata Pillar extraction.Proposal, October 2007.

13. SAXUM MINING. XSC 1004-281 Tavistock Section 2 FOG April 10. 1stdraft, April 2010.

14. TAVISTOCK COLLIERY. Fall of ground that occurred at the Tavistock pillarextraction section panel 1W4SB1E, Internal report, April 2010.

15. TAVISTOCK COLLIERY. Support requirements for the planned TavistockColliery pillar extraction panels. Internal report, April 201.

16. TAVISTOCK COLLIERY. April 201,Issue Based Risk Assessment—Producingcoal in a pillar extraction section. Internal report, March 2010.

17. Tavistock Colliery. SSCC UM S001—Pillar cutting sequence in a pillarextraction section. Internal report, April 2010.

18. Tavistock Colliery. ESP 47 Recovering of an inoperable Continuous Minerin a pillar extraction section. Internal report, March 2010. �

�


Figure 12—Underground photograph of a pillar and plan showing the panels where cracks and guttering were observed

Panel F11W2looking in a northeast direction

Guttering

Tension crack

Figure 13—The corner created by the Voest CM showing the scalingthat has taken place

A rounded corner left by the Voest

F11W1

F11W2

F11W3

F11W4

Documents

Managing the geotechnical and mining issuesretreat, and hence the original pillar design was usually based on the maximum percentage extraction to be achieved during the primary development