Numerical Research on Energy Evolution and Burst Behavior of Unloading Coal–Rock Composite Structures

  • Yan-chun Yin
  • Yun-liang Tan
  • Yan-wei Lu
  • Yu-bao Zhang
Original Paper
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

In order to research the evolution of energy stored in the composite coal-rock structure and coal fragments’ burst characteristics, lateral pressure unloading numerical tests of composite coal–rock models with different Young’s modulus were carried by PFC2D software. The research showed that the accumulated strain energy and kinetic energy in the coal was greater than that in roof and floor, and particles in the coal had a longer burst distance. The variation of the kinetic energy in the model could be separated into initialized burst, rapid burst, stable burst and residual burst stage. With the increase of the coal’s Young’s modulus, the accumulated amount and releasing velocity of strain energy in the coal decreased in the form of a power function, while the strain energy in both roof and floor changed little. The maximum value of the kinetic energy in the coal was negative linearly related to the Young’s modulus of the coal, while that of the rock was positive linearly. When the Young’s modulus of the coal was increased, particles bursted with a shorter distance, and most particles accumulated near the coal wall.

Keywords

Underground mining Rockburst Coal–rock composite body Burst energy Particle flow simulation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research described in this paper was financially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (51604165, 51474137, 11602130), Tai’shan Scholar Engineering Construction Fund of Shandong Province of China (ts201511026), and Scientific Research Foundation of Shandong University of Science and Technology for Recruited Talents (2016RCJJ027).

References

  1. Adoko AC, Gokceoglu C, Wu L et al (2013) Knowledge-based and data-driven fuzzy modeling for rockburst prediction. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 61:86–95Google Scholar
  2. Cai W, Dou LM, Si GY et al (2016) A principal component analysis/fuzzy compressive evaluation model for coal burst liability assessment. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 81:62–69Google Scholar
  3. Dou LM, Cai W, Song SY et al (2014) Dynamic risk assessment of rock burst based on the technology of seismic computed tomography detection. J China Coal Soc 39(2):238–244 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  4. Feng JJ, Wang EY, Shen RX et al (2016) Investigation on energy dissipation and its mechanism of coal under dynamic loads. Geomech Eng 11(5):657–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Guo WY, Zhao TB, Tan YL et al (2017) Progressive mitigation method of rock bursts under complicated geological conditions. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 96:11–22Google Scholar
  6. Haeri H, Sarfarazi V (2016) Numerical simulation of tensile failure of concrete using particle flow code (PFC). Comput Concrete 18(1):39–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Haeri H, Sarfarazi V, Zhu ZM (2017) Effect of normal load on the crack propagation from pre-existing joints using particle flow code (PFC). Comput Concrete 19(1):99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. He MC, Zhao F, Du S et al (2014) Rockburst characteristics based on experimental tests under different unloading rates. Rock Soil Mech 35(10):2737–2748 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  9. He MC, Souas LRE, Miranda T et al (2015) Rockburst laboratory tests database—application of data mining techniques. Eng Geol 185:116–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Huang WP, Yuan Q, Tan YL et al (2018) An innovative support technology employing a concrete-filled steel tubular structure for a 1000-m-deep roadway in a high in situ stress field. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 73:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Itasca Consulting Group I (2008) Theory and background: energy tracing. Particle flow code in 2 dimensionsGoogle Scholar
  12. Kouame KJA, Jiang FX, Zhu ST (2017) Research on cause of dynamic disaster of deep mining control in China and its further prevention application in Ivory Coast. Geotech Geol Eng 35(3):1141–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lindin GL, Lobanova TV (2013) Energy sources of rockbursts. J Min Sci 49(1):36–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu ZG, Cao AY, Zhu GA et al (2017) Numerical simulation and engineering practice for optimal parameters of deep-hole blasting in sidewalls of roadway. Arab J Sci Eng 42(9):3809–3818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lu CP, Dou LM, Wu XR (2007) Experimental research on rules of rockburst tendency evolution and acoustic-electromagnetic effects of compound coal–rock samples. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 26(12):2549–2555 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  16. Manouchehrian A, Cai M (2016a) Influence of material heterogeneity on failure intensity in unstable rock failure. Comput Geotech 71:237–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Manouchehrian A, Cai M (2016b) Simulation of unstable rock failure under unloading conditions. Can Geotech J 53(1):22–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Morissette P, Hadjigeorgiou J, Punkkinen AR et al (2017) The influence of mining sequence and ground support practice on the frequency and severity of rockbursts in seismically active mines of the Sudbury Bsin. J S Afr Inst Min Metall 117(1):47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ning JG, Wang J, Jiang JQ et al (2018) Estimation of crack initiation and propagation thresholds of confined brittle coal specimens based on energy dissipation theory. Rock Mech Rock Eng 51(1):119–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Potyondy DO, Cundall PA (2004) A bonded-particle model for rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41:1329–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Song DZ, Wang EY, Li ZH et al (2017) EMR: an effective method for monitoring and warning of rock burst hazard. Geomech Eng 12(1):53–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stacey TR (2016) Addressing the consequences of dynamic rock failure in underground excavations. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49(10):4091–4101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tajdus A, Cieslik J, Tajdus K (2014) Rockburst hazard assessment in bedded rock mass: laboratory tests of rock samples and numerical calculations. Arch Min Sci 59(3):591–608Google Scholar
  24. Tan YL, Yu FH, Ning JG et al (2015) Design and construction of entry retaining wall along a gob side under hard roof stratum. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 77:115–121Google Scholar
  25. Tan YL, Liu XS, Ning JG et al (2017) In situ investigations on failure evolution of overlying strata induced by mining multiple coal seam. Geotech Test J 40(2):244–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wang HW, Jiang YD, Xue S et al (2017a) Investigation of intrinsic and external factors contribution to the occurrence of coal bumps in the Mining Area of Western Beijing. China. Rock Mech Rock Eng 50(4):1033–1047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang J, Ning JG, Jiang JQ et al (2017b) Research on the energy criterion for rockbursts induced by broken hard and thick rock strata and its application. Geotech Geol Eng 35(2):731–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wang SR, Li CY, Yan WF et al (2017c) Multiple indicators prediction method of rock burst based on microseismic monitoring technology. Arab J Geosci.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-017-2946-8 Google Scholar
  29. Wu D, Liu YC, Zheng ZX et al (2016) Impact energy absorption behaviour of cemented coal gangue-fly ash backfill. Geotech Geol Eng 34(2):471–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Xue Y, Gao F, Teng T et al (2016) Effect of gas pressure on rock burst proneness indexes and energy dissipation of coal samples. Geotech Geol Eng 34(6):1737–1748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yin YC, Zhao TB, Tan YL et al (2015) Reconstruction and numerical test of the mesoscopic model of rock based on Otsu digital image processing. Rock Soil Mech 36(9):2532–2540 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  32. Zhang GC, Liang SJ, Tan YL et al (2018) Numerical modeling for longwall pillar design: a case study from a typical longwall panel in China. J Geophys Eng 15(1):121–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhao TB, Yin YC, Tan YL et al (2014) Bursting liability of coal research of heterogeneous coal based on particle flow microscopic test. J China Coal Soc 39(2):280–285 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  34. Zhao TB, Guo WY, Lu CP et al (2016) Failure characteristics of combined coal–rock with different interfacial angles. Geomech Eng 11(3):345–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhao TB, Guo WY, Tan YL et al (2017) Case histories of rock bursts under complicated geological conditions. Bull Eng Geol Environ.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-017-1014-7 Google Scholar
  36. Zhao TB, Guo WY, Tan YL et al (2018) Case studies of rock bursts under complicated geological conditions during multi-seam mining at a depth of 800 m. Rock Mech Rock Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-018-1411-7 Google Scholar
  37. Zuo JP, Wang ZF, Zhou HW et al (2013) Failure behavior of a rock–coal–rock combined body with a weak coal interlayer. Int J Min Sci Technol 23(6):907–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Mining Disaster Prevention and Control Co-founded by Shandong Province and the Ministry of Science and TechnologyShandong University of Science and TechnologyQingdaoChina
  2. 2.College of Mining and Safety EngineeringShandong University of Science and TechnologyQingdaoChina

Personalised recommendations