Design of Mine Pillars

Coal pillars are to be left in the mine to support the overburden and to
maintain the competence of the exposed roof.

It also serves various purposes e.g., protection of gate roadways or

entries, panel isolation to guard against spontaneous heating, protection
of mine shafts and surface subsidence control.

Usually these pillars are in square or rectangle in shape.

 Hard rock mine pillar
In mining, the goal is to safely extract as much of the
complete orebody. However, this is often not practical as
the size of the mining stopes is constrained by the
quality of the rockmass in which the mining is being
carried out. Therefore, a common mining practice
involves leaving rock "pillars" between openings to
maintain the stability of the openings. Hence, a pillar can
be defined as "the in situ rock between two or more
underground openings".
 Hard rock mine pillar
Mine pillars can have simple to complex geometries
depending on the nature of the orebody, the mining
method, and the purpose of the pillars. Tabular ore
bodies use barrier pillars to give regional support
and divide the orebody into panels. Rib pillars are
used to separate individual mine openings and give
local support. Post pillars are used for local support
in some cut and fill operations. When the orebody is
oriented vertically (steeply dipping) sill pillars are
used to divide the orebody into multiple mining
horizons and crown pillars are used to prevent the
mining activity from affecting the ground surface
above the mine.
Types of pillars commonly encountered in hard rock mines
 USE OF MINE PILLARS
 Protective pillar: protects shaft, surface features, etc. Controls subsidence/regional failure.

 Rib/barrier pillar: (length significantly greater than width)

Carries high load and used between adjacent to production panels, goaf, protection of gate roads
in longwall mining, subsidence control development panel, leased area, mining area, specific
hazard area (flood, sealed off working, inundation area etc.).

 Development pillar: provides long term stability to part of the mine entries to maintain access
used for ventilation, power, water, men and material

 Production pillar: pillars formed during production in the panel and provides short term
stability.

 Yield pillar: yields/crushes in a controlled manner through out their width. These are used in
protection of panel or as a part of development method for improving adjacent road way
conditions.

 Chain pillar: pillars mostly used for panel for isolation of panel.
 MINE PILLAR

SLENDERNESS
FUNCTION SHAPE
(W/H)

PILLARS IN PILLARS IN
COAL MINES HARD ROCK MINES
SLANDER* SQUARE
MINE PILLAR
CLASSIFICATION
PROTECTIVE SILL INTERMEDIATE** RECTANGULAR

RIB/ SQUAT***
CROWN RIB
BARRIER

* W/H < 3, ** 3<W/H < 6, *** W/H >6

DEVELOPEMENT PROTECTIVE IRREAGULAR

PRODUCTION POST DIAMOND

CHAIN YIELD
Figure 11.3: Layout of barrier pillars and panel pillars in a laterally
extensive orebody.
 Field observations of pillar performance

The most convenient observations of pillar response to induced mining loads

and displacements are made in room and pillar operations, since the method
allows direct access to the pillar sites.

Stoping activity in an orebody causes stress redistribution and an increase in

pillar loading, illustrated conceptually in Figure.

For states of stress in a pillar less than the in situ rock mass strength, the
pillar remains intact and responds elastically to the increased state of stress.

Mining interest is usually concentrated on the peak load-bearing capacity of a

pillar. Subsequent interest may then focus on the post-peak, or ultimate load-
displacement behaviour, of the pillar.
Figure: Redistribution of stress in the axial direction of a pillar accompanying stope development.
Figure: A typical longwall panel.
Fig: Components of longwall face
Figure: Zones of disturbances above longwall panel
Fig: Conceptual presentation of stress
redistribution around longwall panel
Fig: Conceptual diagram of coal wall spalling at the longwall face.
Fig: Stresses redistribution and
fracturing around the longwall face
Highly damaged zone (HDZ) Excavation damaged zone Excavation influenced zone Intact zone
(EDZ) (EIZ)
• Macro-scale factures • Micro-scale factures • Minimal changes in rock mass • Rock mass properties remain
• Significant and irreversible deterioration • Irreversible changes in rock properties unaltered
of rock mass properties mass properties • Moderately stable rock mass
• Extremely prone to instability and • Sharp increase in the slope of
spalling the abutment stress curve
• Gradual rising or near horizontal slope
of the abutment stress curve
The structural response of a pillar to mining-induced load is determined by
the rock material properties, the geological structure, the absolute and
relative dimensions of the pillar and the nature of surface constraints applied
to the pillar by the country rock.

Three main modes of pillar behaviour under stresses approaching the rock
mass strength have been recognised, which may be reproduced
qualitatively by laboratory tests on model pillars in a displacement controlled
testing machine.
In relatively massive rock, the most obvious sign of pillar stressing involves
spalling from the pillar surfaces, as illustrated in Figure 13.5a. Fretting or
necking of the pillar occurs.

In a detailed study, Lunder and Pakalnis (1997) described the progressive

stages of degradation of a pillar in terms of the modes of deformation
represented in Figure 13.6.

Although the initial signs of rock stress may be local shear failure, associated
with the re-entrant geometry represented in Figure 13.6a, the formation of
surface spalls illustrated in Figure 13.6b is a more extensive failure indicative
of states of stress satisfying the conditions for fracture initiation and rock
damage in a significant volume of the pillar. In this condition, the pillar is
partially failed, but the core of the pillar is intact, in terms of the model of rock
fracture and failure.
Figure 13.6 Schematic illustration of the evolution of fracture and failure in a pillar in massive rock (after
Lunder and Pakalnis, 1997).
Higher states of stress lead to damage accumulation through internal crack
initiation and extension, and interaction of the network of cracks, as shown in
Figure 13.6c. When friction between the fully developed crack population is
fully mobilized, the pillar is at peak strength, and mechanically is at a state of
failure, illustrated in Figure 13.6d. This model of the progressive evolution of
pillar failure is consistent with the micromechanical modelling of pillar loading
reported by Diederichs (2002), in which progressive crack formation and
localisation of shear strain was observed.

The effect of pillar relative dimensions on failure mode is illustrated in Figure

13.5b. For regularly jointed orebody rock, a high pillar height/width ratio may
favour the formation of inclined shear fractures transecting the pillar. There are
clearly kinematic factors promoting the development of penetrative, localised
shear zones of this type.
The third major mode of pillar response is expressed in an orebody with
highly deformable planes of weakness forming the interfaces between
the pillar and the adjacent country rock. Yield of the soft layers
generates transverse tractions over the pillar end surfaces and promotes
internal axial splitting of the pillar. This may be observed physically as
lateral bulging or barrelling of the pillar surfaces. Geomechanical
conditions favouring this mode of response may occur in stratiform
orebodies, where soft bedding plane partings define the foot wall and
hanging wall for the orebody. The failure condition is illustrated in Figure
13.5c.
Other specific modes of pillar response may be related directly to the
structural geology of the pillar. For example, a pillar with a set of natural
transgressive fractures, as illustrated in Figure 13.5d, can be expected to
yield if the angle of inclination of the fractures to the pillar principal plane
(that perpendicular to the pillar axis) exceeds their effective angle of
friction. The amount of slip on the fractures required for yield, and
subsequent relaxation of the elastic state of stress in the pillar, need only
be of elastic orders of magnitude.

A pillar (or other rock remnant in a mine layout) with a well-developed

foliation or schistosity parallel to the principal axis of loading will fail in a
buckling mode, as illustrated in Figure 13.5e. This mechanism resembles
the formation of kink bands.
A pillar with a well-developed foliation or schistosity parallel to the principal axis of
loading will fail in a buckling mode
Figure 13.5 Principal modes of deformation behaviour of mine pillars.
 Hard rock Pillar Design
The design of mine pillars can significantly affect the
success of a mining operation. Pillars that are under-
designed can lead to failure of individual pillars. On
the other hand if pillars are over designed and left
unnecessarily large it may be uneconornical to
recover the ore.
Since 1960, extensive research for designing
pillars in coal mines have been carried out.
However the design of hard-rock pillars has not
received the same research attention as coal
pillar design.
 Hard rock Pillar Design
This is partly because fewer mines operate at depths
sufficient to induce the stresses required to cause
hard rocks to fail, and in hard-rock mining pillar and
mining geometries are irregular making it difficult to
establish actual loads. Nonetheless as mining depth
increases the potential for the failure of hard-rock
pillars also increases.
 Hard rock Pillar Design
Pillar design and stability are two of the most
complicated and extensive problems in mining related
to rock mechanics and ground control subjects.
Although these problems have been investigated for
a long time, to date only a limited understanding of
the subject has been gained.
 Hard rock Pillar Design
The classic mine pillar design
methodology consisted of three steps:
1. Estimating the pillar load;
2. Estimating the pillar strength, and
3. Calculating the pillar safety factor
(Safety factor = Pillar strength/ Stress on pillar)
 Size of Pillar
The size of the pillars is influenced by the following:
 Depth from the surface and percentage extraction in the workings or
development.
 Strength of the coal: Seams with weak coal require large pillars. Effect
of atmosphere and escape of gas also influence the size of pillars
 The nature of the roof and floor: These influence the liability to crush
and creep. A strong roof tends to crush the pillar edges whilst a soft
floor predisposes it to creep and both calls for large pillars.
 Geological Considerations: In the vicinity of faults, large pillars are
required. Dip and presence of water also influences the decision as to
the size of pillars.
 Time dependent strain: With time the strain goes on increasing, the load
remaining constant and if the size of the pillar is not sufficiently large,
then it may fail under the time dependent strain, although initially it
might be stable
 PILLAR LOAD
DEPENDS ON
1) Roof/Floor Span
2) Type of Roof/Floor
3) Pillar Width
4) Pillar Height
5) Pillar Shape
6) prop. of Discontinuities
7) Location of Pillar
8) Insitu Stress
9) Inclination of Pillar
10) Stiffness of Pillar to that of Roof & Floor
11) Mode of Failure adjacent to Pillar
12) Pillar Material Properties
 PILLAR LOAD
PILLAR
MATERIAL
PROPERTIES

PHYSICAL MECHANICAL

DEGREE OF DEFORMATION POST-FAILURE

STRENGTH CREEP
ISOTROPHY BEHAHOUR BEHVIOUR
 EFFECT OF WIDTH-TO-HEIGHT RATIO
PILLAR STRESS DEPDENDS MORE ON WIDTH-TO-HEIGHT RATIO(W/H).
 Pillar Load
The pillar load, in regular layouts of pillars can be estimated by:
TRIBUTARY-AREA THEORY
PRESSURE ARCH THEORY
BEAM ELASTIC-DEFLECTION THEORY
NUMERICAL MODELLING
 PILLAR LOAD
Tributary-area Theory
It is a commonly used approach for estimating average
pillar load. Base on this theory, each individual pillar is
assumed to carry the weight of the overburden
immediately above it. In the other words, a pillar
uniformly supports the weight of rock overlying the pillar
and one-half the width of rooms or entries on each side
of the pillar.
Pillar load according to tributary area theory in a wide array
Pillar load (σP) on
square pillar:

W + B 
2

σP = γ H  
 W 
Pillar load (σP) on
rectangular pillar:

σP = γ H
(W + B )( L + B )
WL
Where;
H= depth of working
W= width of pillar
L= length of pillar
B= bord width
γ=unit rock weight

Pillar load according to

tributary area theory
 Tributary-area Theory
Brady and Brown (1993) explain that in mining a mineral deposit
of uniform thickness, a quantity of practical interest is the area
extraction ratio (e), which can be calculated by:
B
e=
W +B

The extraction ratio is related to the pillar load as follows By

substituting the vertical normal component of the pre-mining
stress field, Pz for 0.025H (Stress gradient generally taken as
0.025 MPa/m ) :
0.025 H
σP =
1− e
It is well known that tributary area theory slightly over-estimates
pillar loads in general.
 Beam deflection
Sheory and Singh (1974) suggested the concept of beam deflection for
the estimation of average pillar stress. The method is primarily for narrow
workings, where loads are transferred on to pillars due to deflections of
the overburden strata. Jeremic (1985) explained that under these
circumstances the rock beam deflections are a function of the flexural
rigidity of the strata and the compressibility of pillars. The approach for
calculation of coal pillar loads is based on the theory of thick beams on
elastic support. A thick beam is considered to be one where thickness is
greater than five times the distance between the supports (roof span).
The evaluation of average pillar stress is convenient for narrow workings
or mining configurations where the tributary area concept does not apply.
 PRESSURE ARCH THEORY
The pressure arch theory in roof action suggests that, when
bord and pillar excavation is made, the roof rock in the
immediate roof deflect slightly and relieve themselves of the
load of the overlying strata by transferring it to the sides of the
opening by means of a pressure arch. The pillars support the
load under the pressure arch. The wider the arch, higher its
height and higher the pillar loading.
The depth mainly influences the minimum width of the pressure
arch, although the type of overburden also plays a part. The
arch width just short of that which the higher strata cannot span
and transfer the load to the sides of the opening is called the
maximum-pressure arch.
The following formula has been developed for
approximating the minimum width of the maximum-
pressure arch
W = 3[(D / 20) + 20]
Where
W = minimum width of arch, in feet;
D = depth of coal from surface, in feet
The equation does not apply for overburden less than 400
ft (122 m) or more than 2,000 ft (610 m) thick.
48
 Strength of Pillar
The strength of pillar is influenced by following factors:
• Uniaxial and triaxial pillar rock strength
• Width-to-height ratio of pillar (Slenderness ratio)
• Pillar volume
• Pillar shape
• Presence of bands and discontinuities in pillar
• Water and weathering underground
• Age of pillar and
• Method of road drivage, viz machine or with blasting.
Figure 11.6 Bases of the tributary area method for estimating average axial pillar stress
in an extensive mine structure, exploiting long rooms and rib pillars.
Figure: Variation of pillar stress concentration factor with area extraction
ratio.
Figure: Distribution of vertical stress in a coal pillar
at various stages of pillar failure (after Wagner,1980).
Figure 11.8: Representation of a partial extraction operation (a) in terms of an equivalent volume, total area extraction (b).
Figure: Relation between yield of an orebody (given as equivalent working
height, he), room span and real working height (after Salamon, 1967).
Figure: Maximum volumetric extraction ratio for various depths of
orebody and orebody thickness (after Salamon, 1967).
Tutorials
Tutorials
Tutorials
Coal Pillars Design Approaches:

 Ultimate Strength: The design determines the strength of a pillar on the basis of its
geometry, size and the compressive strength of the material.
 This approach will compare the expected load of the pillar to its ultimate strength to
determine its safety factor value.
 The main assumption of this approach is that, once the ultimate strength is overcome
the pillar will have zero strength, which is not strictly true in reality.

 Progressive Failure: The design assumes a non-uniform stress distribution within the
pillar.
 The failure of a pillar begin at the point of ultimate strength, and gradually progresses
to ultimate failure.
 Wilson Core Model
 Diest Strain Softening Model

Numerical Models can adopt both ultimate strength and progressive

failure approaches.
Traditionally, all pillar design formulas employ the ultimate strength theory. Each of these
"classic" pillar design formulas consisted of three steps:
Estimating the pillar load
Estimating the pillar strength
Calculating the pillar safety factor.
Classic empirical pillar strength formulas usually follow one of two general forms.

where σp= pillar strength; σs = strength of insitu coal or rock; W = pillar width; H= mining height; α
and β are regression constant and K = a constant depending on the field

Pillar strength formulas by Obert and Duvall (1967) and Bieniawski (1968), Sheorey follow
the first form, whereas formulas by Salamon and Munro (1967) and Holland (1964) follow
the second.
 Load on the Pillars
The load on the pillar may be estimated using any of the following two approaches:
Tributary Area Approach
This relation is used to measure the distribution of load on the uniform sized
excavations/pillars/stooks. The normal stress perpendicular to the seam,

And the average stress on the pillar, P or σp:

Where,
H = depth of cover, m
B = width of the mined out area, m
= unit rock pressure = 0.025 MPa/m of depth
R = extraction ratio
w = width of the pillar, m
α = dip of the seam
The value of k, which is the ratio of horizontal
to vertical in-situ stress, is taken as 1 in the
absence of actual stress measurements.
 PILLAR LOADING
• Estimation of loading on the pillar of Bord and Pillar mines based on tributary
area loading concept.

(C1 xC 2 )
σL = γgH
(w 1 xw 2 )

Fig: Tributory Loading Concept

 Stresses in pillar by Tributary area Method
Pillar Stress

γH (w p + we ) 2
γH
σp = =
w 2
p 1− R
where H = depth of cover, γ = unit weight of overburden ; Can be expressed in terms of
extraction ratio R = total void/ total area

w 2p
R = 1−
Tributary area pillar
(w p + we )
2

Safety factor
stress
during development
Actual pillar
stress Strength of pillar S p
h SF = =
Stress on pillar σp
wp
 PILLAR LOADING
Tributary area loading concept It has certain following limitations:

• The attention of tributary load is being restricted to the normal pre-mining stress to apply to the
vertical principle axis of the pillar support system. It assumes that all other stress components of
the mining stress field have no effect on the pillar performance.

• Tributary estimates are valid only if the geometry of pillars is highly regular and it is repeat itself
over a relative distance. So, any irregularity (i.e. solid ribs) will be relatively far away from the
majority of the pillars, so its overall influence on the entire pillar structure can be neglected.

• Tributary is only applicable for support pillars under static load. For example, it cannot estimate
the abutment load on a chin pillar.

• Tributary load is too conservative for longwall mining. It overestimates the pillar loads, because
tributary load assumes the load is uniformly distributed over the pillars, which is not the case.
 Load on the Pillars
Wilson’s Approach
The pressure (P in MPa) coming over the chain of pillars with goaf on
one or both sides is estimated using the following relation:

Where,
ρ= unit rock pressure =0.025 MPa/m,
H = depth of cover, m
W1 = width of the pillar, m
W2 = length of the pillar, m
B = gallery width, m
L = extraction width, m
σc = compressive strength of 2.5 cm cube coal, taken as 30 MPa
h = extraction height, m
 Pillar Strength Equations
Overt-Duvall/Wang Formula
limitations: Developed for hard rock specimen but can also be applied to coal seams and found to be suitable
for Wp/h ratio upto 8.
 wp 
Sp = S1  0.778 + 0.222 
 h 
Holland-Gaddy Formula
Holland (1964) extended Gaddy’s work (1956) and proposed this formula. K is Gaddy’s
constant and the units of wp and h should be expressed in inches. This formula works well for a
coal pillar safety factor of 1.8~2.2 with a wp/h ratio between 2 to 8.

K wp
Sp =
h
Holland Formula (1973)
Given different formula and recommended wp
safety factor for using this formula is 2.0. S p = S1
h
Salamon-Munro Formula (1967) Based on the 125 case histories in South African coal fields.
where Sp is expressed in psi and MPa and pillar dimensions are in ft and m in English and SI
units respectively. Recommended safety factor for using this formula is 1.6, the range being
1.31 to 1.88.

w 0.46 w 0p.46
S p = 1320
p (English units) or S p = 7.2 0.66
(SI units)

h 0.66 h

Bieniawski’s Formula based on large scale testing  wp 

of insitu coal samples in South Africa and in USA . S p = S1  0.64 + 0.36 
Recommended safety factor range 1.5 to 2.0  h

H W 
CMRI Formula (sheorey)
S 0.27σ c h
= −0.36
+  − 1 MPa
160  h 
PILLAR STRENGTH

Size effect
• The relationship between the size and
the strength of the specimen can be
generalized by the equation given
below:

S1 = k 1d − a

wp

a
wp
 PILLAR STRENGTH
Shape effect (Das, 1986)
Slender pillars, whose w/h ratios are less than about
3 or 4. When these pillars are loaded to their
maximum capacity, they fail completely, shedding
nearly their entire load.

Intermediate pillars are those whose w/h ratios fall

between about 4 and 8.
These pillars do not shed their entire load when they
fail, but neither can they accept any more load.

Squat pillars are those with w/h ratios that exceed

10.
These pillars can carry very large loads, and may
even be strain-hardening (meaning that they may
never actually shed load, but just may become more
deformable once they “fail.”).
 Comparison of Salmon and Sheorey Pillar Strength Formulae
50 18
45 16

Pillar Strength (MPa)

14 Sheory
40

Safety factor
12 Salmon-Munro
35
10
30
8
25
Sheory 6
20 Salmon- Munro 4
15 2
90 120 150 180 210 240 270 310 350 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 310 350
Depth (m) Depth (m)
75 8
Pillar Strength (MPa)

65
7
Sheory
55

Safety factor
6
Salmon-Munro
45
5
35 Sheory
4
Salmon- Munro
25
3
15
2
300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660
300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
 Progressive Failure Approach

Fig. Yield zone

confined core zone.
- Wilson Core Model

Fig: Idealized Pillar behaviour

Fig. Change in stress profile through pillar cross section as load increases.
 Strain Softening Approach
As a result of mining in the vicinity of the pillar, the
pillar load, vertical stress gradually increases from the
initial virgin value to maximum load bearing capacity or
pillar strength.
 In this stage of loading, both the pillar load and the
Fig: Idealized Pillar behaviour
mean pillar deformation (or average vertical
convergence) is increasing simultaneously, that is, the
pillar’s load deformation curve is in its ascending
branch.
 This ascending portion of the pressure deformation
curve is defined as Zone I.
 The pillar load is at its maximum when its value
reaches the pillar strength.

Fig; Load Deformation Curve of a Coal pillar

 If the pillar were to deform beyond this point, its load
bearing capacity will diminish, that is, the load-
deformation curve of the pillar moves into its
descending branch or Zone II.
If a pillar is in the descending branch of its load-
deformation curve, then it is regarded as a yield or
yielding pillar.
 Zones II and III are the strain softening portion of the
load deformation curve of a yield pillar.
 Zone II is the area where strain energy can be
dissipated rapidly and sometimes violently as in the
case of a bump.
 Other than numerical modeling, virtually no in-mine
Fig; Load Deformation Curve of
observation exists as to the shape of Zone III.
a Coal pillar
Zones II ands III are where load shedding occurs.
CURRENT APPROACH FOR PILLAR DESIGN BASED ON NUMERICAL MODELLING

10
Sandstone B

Average Stress (MPa)

8

6
A

4 C

2
Coal
O
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
Average Strain

Sandstone
Pillar Strength (MPa) = σ c [0.1514 ( w / h) + 0.2664]
0.66

E post (MPa) = 1062.8 (w/h) -0.9841

Induced Stress Pattern on Pillars with Advancement of Goaf Line2
Induced Stress Pattern on the Specific Pillar in all Stages
 DGMS Guidelines for Pillar Dimensions
According to DGMS Coal Mine Regulation 1957 No. 99, the pillar dimension is given based on depth of the
cover only as shown in the following Table. This guideline ignores the insitu strength of the coal and thus
probably over/under estimate the pillar dimension.
The distance between centers of adjacent pillars
shall not be less than
Where Where the Where the Where
the width of the width of the the
width of galleries galleries width of
Depth of seam from surface the does not does not the
galleries exceed 3.6 exceed 4.2 galleries
does not meters meters does not
exceed exceed
3.0 4.8
meters meters

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Meters Meters Meters Meters
Not exceeding 60 meters 12.0 15.0 18.0 19.5
Exceeding 60 but not exceeding 90 meters 13.5 16.5 19.5 21.0
Exceeding 90 but not exceeding 150 meters 16.5 19.5 22.5 25.5
Exceeding 150 but not exceeding 240 meters 22.5 25.5 30.5 34.5
Exceeding 240 but not exceeding 360 meters 28.5 34.5 39.5 45.0
Exceeding 360 meters 39.0 42.0 45.0 48.0
 Yield Pillar Approach
Yield pillars are defined as a pillar that yields or fails upon isolation from the coal
seam or yields during the longwall development cycle but retains residual strength.
The yield pillar allows a general lowering of the roof and subsequent transfer of
overburden load through the roof and floor after the peak strength is reached onto the
neighboring pillar or abutments or unmined area.
This mechanism often referred as pressure arch concept. This is possible as long as
the width of the yield pillar mining (panel width) is less than critical width above which
stresses can not be carried out by overburden.
Yield pillars are employed in situations where stress concentrations are expected to
be sufficiently high to cause unacceptable ground conditions.
High depth of cover,
High insitu stresses,
Presence of the fulcrum of cantilevering or bridging rock beds in the intermediate
and upper roof or floor.
 Yield Pillar Approach

 Overburden stress transfer was visualized to occur through pressure

arching onto side abutments.

 It was deduced that the yield pillars support only the overburden weight
below the arch, the higher its height and the higher the abutment loading.

 Arching occurs as long as the mining width does not exceed a critical
dimension – the critical pillar arch width.

 If this is exceeded, the pressure arch breaks and the yield pillars are
subjected to full overburden loading, potentially leading to total pillar
collapse and extensive surface subsidence.
Fig. Pillar – Pressure Arch Concept
Fig. Yield Pillars – Pressure Arch Concept
 Yield Pillar Approach

Fig: Idealized Yield Pillar versus non-idealized Pillar

 Yield Pillar Approach

Benefits of Yield Pillar

Deep, bump prone lithology coal reserves can be mined safely only with yield pillars.
 Yield pillars increase the extraction ratio in a mine.
 Reserves formerly defined as unminable, become minable.
 Yield Pillar Approach
Load shedding can take place if the following requirements are satisfied:

There is nearby load-bearing area of unmined coal, standing or intrinsic

supports, longwall shields to sustain the transferred loads.
The roof and floor are sufficiently competent to facilitate the load transfer without
a debilitating roof fall (termed room collapse in our case) or floor heave.
The stiffness of the surrounding rock mass is sufficiently high to ensure that the
equilibrium of the immediate and main roofs remain stable during and after the
“load shedding and transfer” process.
If one or more of these criteria is not satisfied, the pillar will collapse suddenly in
an uncontrollable manner and the entire recovery room can be lost for the
equipment removal.
 Effect of Roof & Floor on Pillar
Strength

 Su and Hasenfus (1999) employed finite element models (FEM) to explore the effect of
various geologic conditions on pillar strength.
 They found that a rock parting may increase the pillar strength, while a clay parting could
reduce it. A weak floor could reduce the pillar strength by as much as 50%.
 All of these effects were minimal for slender pillars, but became much more pronounced
once the w/h exceeded 5.
The models also indicated that varying the uniaxial coal strength had almost no effect on pillar
strength.
Gale(1996,1998) observed that pillar strengths seemed to fall into two groups, using FLAC:
• Strong roof and floor rock where confinement was easily generated within the pillar,
and;

• Weak rock or bedding planes, which could fail either in compression or shear, and
which limited the confinement that could be developed within the pillar, and thus limited
the strength of the pillar system.

Modes of Pillar Failure (Mark):

•Sudden, massive collapse, accompanied by airblast, for slender pillars (width/height<4)

•Squeezing, or slow, non-violent failure, for most room and pillar applications (4<w/h<10)
•Entry failure or bumps for deep cover and longwall applications (w/h>10)
Massive Collapses
Massive collapses are pillar failures that take place rapidly and involve large areas. One
effect can be a powerful, destructive airblast.

When large numbers of slender pillars are used over a large area, the failure of a single pillar
can set off a chain reaction, resulting in a sudden, massive collapse accompanied by a
powerful airblast.

Pillar Squeezes
Squeezes occur when the pillars are too small to carry the loads applied to them. As the
loads are gradually transferred, the adjacent pillars in turn fail. The results can include
closure of the entries, severe rib spalling, floor heave, and roof failure. The process may take
hours or days, and can cause an entire panel to be abandoned.

Pillar Bumps
Bumps occur when highly stressed coal pillars suddenly rupture without warning, sending
coal and rock flying with explosive force.
 Cascading Pillar Failure (CPF)

 CPF is a potential problem faced by all Bord-and-pillar mining operations.

 CPF occurs when one pillar fails suddenly, which then overstresses the neighboring
pillars, causing them to fail in very rapid succession.
 Within seconds, very large mining areas can collapse while giving little or no warning.
 The collapse itself poses danger to miners.
 In addition, the collapse can induce a violent airblast or wind blast that disrupts or
destroys the ventilation system.
 Additional hazards to miners exist if the mine atmosphere becomes explosive as a
result of a collapse.