Author:
Silvis Joshua M.,Hasenfus Greg J.,Haines Allison M.
Abstract
AbstractThe floodable volume of longwall gob can be of great importance in developing accurate coal mine operation plans, particularly for mine water management and environmental control strategies. Given the inaccessibility and difficulty in direct measurement of gob characteristics following gob recompression, hydrologic, geomechanical, and spatial data and principles were used to solve for the porosity and height of the residual gob using a mathematical model framework and bulking-based techniques. Based on this approach, gob porosity of Appalachian longwalls appears to be tighter than previously reported, ranging between 4.99 and 14.31%. Residual gob height, as normalized with respect to mine extraction height, ranges between 1.90 and 2.45. A novel, bedding-based bulking approach is ampliative with respect to existing roof caving and bulking fundamentals, as it has greater explanatory value compared with the traditional, lithologic-based bulking application. The efficacy of using the residual gob characteristics determined by the mathematical model and bedding-based bulking is examined using a causal comparative method, whereby time series prediction of historical groundwater rebound is compared with observed mine pool elevation data. Prediction accuracy is significantly improved using a prototype model to calculate void volume of longwall gob, specifically, the dependence of porosity of the gob material upon the longwall width to overburden depth ratio for movement basins of subcritical and critical panel widths. The potential implication of these findings toward hydrologic, geomechanical, and ventilation studies of longwall gob could be significant.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Materials Chemistry,Metals and Alloys,Mechanical Engineering,Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology,General Chemistry,Control and Systems Engineering
Reference26 articles.
1. Wyrick GG Borchers JW 1981 Hydrologic effects of stress-relief fracturing in an Appalachian valley. Water-Supply Paper 2177. Washington, DC: United States Geologic Survey
2. Winters RW, Capo RC (2004) Ground water flow parameterization of an Appalachian coal mine complex. Groundwater 42(5):700–710. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2004.tb02724.x
3. Donovan, J.J.; Perry, E. F. 2019. Mine flooding history of a regional below-drainage coalfield dominated by barrier leakage. Geofluids. Volume 2019, Article ID 5703108, 16pp. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5703108.
4. Leavitt BR 1999 Mine flooding and barrier pillar hydrology in the Pittsburgh basin. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, October 11–14
5. McCoy KJ, Donovan JJ, Leavitt BR (2006) Horizontal hydraulic conductivity estimates for intact coal barriers between closed underground mines. Environ and Eng Geoscience 12(3):273–282. https://doi.org/10.2113/gseegeosci.12.3.273