ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrmms

Numerical investigation of coal and gas outbursts in

underground collieries
T. Xua,b, C.A. Tanga,c,, T.H. Yangc, W.C. Zhuc,d, J. Liud
a
Center for Material Failure Modeling Research, Dalian University, Dalian, 116622, PR China
b
School of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
c
Center for Rock Instability and Seismicity Research, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110006, PR China
d
School of Oil and Gas Engineering, the University of Western Australia, 6009, Australia

Accepted 1 January 2006

Available online 3 April 2006

Abstract

Coal and gas outbursts are a complex catastrophic unstable phenomenon that involve the ejection of large volumes of coal, and are
often accompanied by gas, such as methane, carbon dioxide or a mixture of the two. Coal and gas outbursts are prevalent in deep and
gassy mines where face advance rates are rapid, and where gas drainage is either poor or absent. The occurrence of progressively larger
coal and gas outbursts, and the potential for the catastrophic collapse of coal pillars, is of increasing importance as mining is extended
deeper in seams rich in methane and other hydrocarbons. A unique coupled gas flow and solid deformation numerical model, viz.,
RFPA2D-GasFlow, has been developed and is applied to simulate the evolutionary process of such catastrophic coal failures in
underground collieries. The finite element model, which incorporates the physics of gas flow in the coal seam, the physics of coal
deformation and instantaneous failure, and the cross-couplings between them, is proposed. The model also incorporates small-scale
variability in deformation modulus and strength of the coal and surrounding rock. The variability in modulus and strength is distributed
via a fine-scale resolution model according to the Weibull distribution, where the distribution parameter determines the level of
heterogeneity. This numerical model is applied to simulate the whole process of coal and gas outbursts, including stress concentration,
coal fracturing, gas pressure-driven expansion, and outburst. The instantaneous outburst process and associated stress fields, gas
pressure gradients and displacement vectors are presented step by step. The numerical simulations indicate that the instantaneous
outburst is a complex phenomenon involving interactions between gas pressure, stress and the physico-mechanical properties of the coal,
and it can occur under a variety of conditions. Successful numerical simulation of the whole coal and gas outburst process provides the
basis for identifying the outburst mechanisms, parameterizing the causative processes, and to defining potential precursors of failure.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Coal and gas outburst; Underground mining; Failure process; Numerical simulation

1. Introduction or rock and gas outbursts. They have occurred in virtually

Underground collieries have long experienced sudden,
usually unexpected, expulsions of coal or rock and gas
away from freshly exposed working face during under-
ground mining, either while breaking into or during
development of a seam—normally resulting in a cavity in
the coal or rock mass. These are commonly known as coal
Corresponding author. Center for Rock Instability and Seismicity
Research, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110006, PR China.
Tel.: +86 411 8740 3700; fax: +86 411 8740 3588.
E-mail address: tca@mail.neu.edu.cn (C.A. Tang).
all the major coal producing countries of the world and
have been the cause of major disasters in the world mining
industry.
Such coal and gas outbursts range in size from a few
tones to thousands of tones of coal with corresponding gas
volumes from tens of cubic meters to hundreds of
thousands of cubic meters. In fact, coal and gas outbursts
can release over one million cubic feet of gas, fractured and
even pulverized coal and rock (Fig. 1). The occurrence of
coal and gas outburst in coal mines and caverns poses a
major potential threat to facility operators and has
challenged many researchers in the rock mechanics and

1365-1609/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrmms.2006.01.001
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
906 T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919
Fig. 1. Coal and gas outbursts induced by underground mining.
rock engineering community. In the last 150 years, since
the first reported coal and gas outburst occurred in the
Issac Colliery, Loire coal field, France, in 1843 [1], as many
as 30,000 outbursts have occurred in the world coal mining
industry. The most outbursts, more than one-third of the
total, have occurred in China. These disastrous mine
outbursts have resulted in much loss of equipment,
production time, even entire mines, and the lives of
numerous miners all over the world. For instance, on
October 20, 2004 at the Daping coal mine in Xinmi city,
Henan province, China, 148 fatalities resulted from an
outburst. A large component of the disaster was due to
secondary factors, such as the succeeding gas explosion,
suffocation, and poisoning. Similar disasters have befallen
coal mines in many other countries. These have forced
mining leaders and researchers to develop an under-
standing of the complex outburst phenomenon, and
develop procedures to minimize the effect of outbursts or
eliminate them completely. However, some safety proce-
dures that have been adopted lead to reduced production
rates.
For almost half a century now, considerable attention
has been paid to this complex problem [2]. The preliminary
investigations relating to the coal and gas outburst
mechanism, which were conducted through in situ ob-
servation, physical and theoretical studies, and numerical
modeling, were made to prevent coal and gas outburst
hazard during recent decades. Some empirical hypotheses,
criteria and analytical models have been proposed for the
understanding, analysis and prediction of the coal and gas
outburst conditions.
Kidybinski [3] took into consideration the three compo-
nents of gas content and flow, stress, and coal failure and
proposed the presence of three zones in the coal seam
ahead of the mining operations starting at the coal face: (1)
protection/degassed zone, (2) high gas pressure/active zone
and (3) abutment pressure zone. Within this model, three
fundamental conditions are assumed to be met for an
outburst to occur: (1) failure of the coal in compression
within the active zone, (2) penetration of a hole through the
protection zone and (3) fluidized bed outflow of the
products from the outburst cavity. Gray [4] considered
two gas-initiated failure mechanisms existed: either tensile
failure of unconfined coal or piping of sheared material.
Paterson [5] took the general view that, when gas is released
from coal, there are body forces on the coal equal to the
pressure gradients of the flowing gas. His models were
based therefore on the fundamental assumption that an
outburst is the structural failure of coal due to excess stress
resulting from these body forces.
A model proposed by Litwiniszyn [6] was based on the
gas existing in a condensed state within the coal. When a
shock wave passes through the coal, a phase transforma-
tion occurs of the liquid substance into a gaseous state.
This sudden creation of gas causes the skeleton of the
medium to be destroyed and an outburst to be initiated.
Support for this model is found in the following observa-
tions: (1) sometimes ‘bumps’ and instantaneous outbursts
occur together, and some ‘bumps’ are regarded as initiation
of instantaneous outbursts, and (2) in hand-working,
especially without the ambient noise of machinery,
successive ‘knocks’ in the coal were often precursors to
an instantaneous outburst [7]. However, Paterson [5]
identified several flaws in this model, in particular cause
and effect, where do the shock waves originate? Thermo-
dynamic descriptions have also been proposed for outburst
modeling [8]. Williams and Weissmann [10] used a
schematic of an outburst in frequently encountered
Australian conditions to discuss gas content thresholds
for outbursts. They placed emphasis on a gas pressure
gradient existing ahead of the working face. However, they
also believed that ‘‘the most important parameter is gas
desorption rate, in conjunction with the gas pressure
gradient ahead of the face’’. Jiang and Yu [10], based on
many laboratory tests, presented the ‘spherical shell losing
stability’ model during outbursts (as shown in Fig. 2). They
believed that the outburst process consists of six phases,
viz., (1) intact stress phase, (2) stress concentration phase,
or abutment pressure phase, (3) coal crushed by rock stress,
(4) coal split by gas pressure, (5) expulsion of coal and gas
due to spherical shell losing stability, and (6) movement of
coal and gas desorption.
In addition, many previous studies have considered
tectonic deformation and the microstructure of the
deformed coal to be important factors influencing outburst
occurrence. Farmer and Pooley [11] found that outbursts
only occur in districts subject to severe tectonic move-
ment—hence, their association in many places with
anthracite—and in association with such deformation
and depositional structures as folds, faults, rolls and slips
and in particular with rapid fluctuations in the seam
thickness. Shepherd et al. [12] reported on outburst
occurrences in Australia, North America, Europe, and
Asia, and found that probably over 90% of significant
outbursts have been concentrated in the narrow strongly
deformed zones along the axes of structures such as
asymmetrical anticlines, the hinge zones of recumbent
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919
Fig. 2. ‘Spherical shell losing stability’ model during outbursts (after Jiang [9]).
folds, and the intensely deformed zones of strike-slip,
thrust, reverse, and normal faults. These narrow deformed
zones, whether in mesoscopic or mine-scale geological
structures, form the loci for stress and gas concentration.
Similar studies in China revealed that outbursts nearly
always occurred in long, narrow outburst zones along the
intensely deformed zones of strike-slip, reverse or normal
faults, within which coal has been physically altered into
cataclastic, granular, or mylonitic microstructures [13]. The
other occurrences are associated with bedding-plane faults
and intense folds, which may produce these microstruc-
tures in broader zones. In either case, the outburst-prone
zones generally cover no more than 20–30% of the mine
area. Some fault zones do not exhibit altered microstruc-
ture, and these are not prone to outburst. Thus, the
presence of these altered microstructures is considered as
the first essential factor for outburst occurrence, and
outburst-prone districts could be predicted by studying the
spatial distribution of altered coal and geological struc-
tures. It has also been found that outburst danger increases
with the intensity of deformation and alteration of the coal
microstructure. Many studies have compared coal actually
expelled from an outburst cavity to coal in situ with similar
microstructure, based on their physical and morphological
characteristics. To date no significant difference has been
found [14,15].
There has been a fairly widely accepted view that a
deeper understanding of outbursts mechanism and reliable
methods for the prediction of outbursts must be not only
based upon long years of practical experience in mines, but
also on scientific research and experimentation. Despite
extensive research about violent coal and gas outbursts
occurring in coal mines, surprisingly little progress have
been achieved in the past 150 years towards understanding
or prediction. Especially, a quantitative model that
describes progressive failure process as well as violent
outbursts process in coal mines has not appeared. It is the
aim of this paper to present such a model and to show how
the model explains the observations associated with out-
bursts. For example, the coal is often in pulverized form
907
and appears to flow, although some incidents are merely
large face slumps or floor heaves and associated gas release.
In addition, the mechanical and seepage properties of gassy
coal specimens, such as deformation and strength behavior,
and the evolution of coal permeability, are also covered in
this paper. The rapid advance of computer technology has
enabled applied mathematicians, engineers and scientists to
make significant progress in the solution of intractable-
coupled mining and rock mechanics-associated problems.
Thus, in this paper, a quantitative model, RFPA2D-
GasFlow model, is proposed to describe the coupled gas-
flow and rock failure problems associated with coal/rock
and gas outbursts, and correspondingly, an advanced
powerful numerical tool, RFPA2D-GasFlow code, has
been developed on the basis of the RFPA2D-Flow code
to investigate the mechanism of the complex outbursts and
to try to gain an insight into the coupling mechanism
between gas flow and coal/rock deformation.
2. Theoretical model
When formulating the model in mathematical language,
various levels of complexity can be incorporated into each
component, with the accuracy and versatility of the model
depending on the refinement of the components descrip-
tion. For coal and gas outbursts in mining or drilling, gas
migration problems in gas drainage, and gas disposal in
engineering practice, which can all be attributed to fluid
flow and deformation problems in porous media, the
coupled effect of the medium deformation and fluid flow
may be important for understanding the mechanism of coal
and gas outbursts and the methane gas flow during gas
drainage. As pointed by Paterson [5], for a model that can
be used to predict outbursts, three components must be
accounted for: (i) a gas flow description, (ii) a stress
description, and (iii) a failure description. Hereby, the
descriptions of gas flow, stress and failure in the RFPA2D-
GasFlow model are presented in this section.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
908 T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919
2.1. Flow of gas
The fundamental assumption behind the outburst model
presented here is that the coal is saturated with gas; thus,
the equations for two phase flow in porous media should
be used. In 1856, Henry Philibert Gaspard Darcy [16] first
developed the equation to describe fluid flow through a
porous media. Based on Darcy’s Law, Zhou [17] further
developed the gas filtration equation followed by a linear
law.
dP
qi ¼
lij , (1)
dn
where, qi denotes gas filtration rate (i ¼ 1; 2; 3) in m/s; lij
is the coefficient of gas filtration (i; j ¼ 1; 2; 3) in
m2/(MPa2 s); and P is the square of gas pressure in MPa2.
Generally, gas exists within coal in two distinct forms:
usually referred to as free gas and adsorbed gas. The
adsorbed gas typically accounts for over 95% of the gas
within a coal seam, depending on the pressure at which the
gas is adsorbed, while the free gas, only a small fraction of
the total gas, is stored in the pore or cleat space, either free
or in solution. The total gas content in coal can be
approximated by the empirical equation [17,18]
pffiffiffi
X ¼ A p, (2)
where X is the gas content in gassy coal in m3/m3; A is the
empirical coefficient of the gas content in m3/(m3 MPa1/2),
and p is the gas pressure in MPa.
According to the basic seepage theory of gas flow in
porous media, the following equation for the isothermal
filtration gas flow in gassy coal and rock can be obtained:
qP
aP r 2 P ¼ , (3)
qt
where aP ¼ 4lA
1 P3=4 .
2.2. Deformation of the solid
Secondly, we consider the stress description, which can
be formulated in a number of ways. For a stress analysis in
terms of effective stress, the stress equilibrium equations
take the form [19]:
sij;j þ f i ¼ 0,
where sij is the stress tensor, (i; j ¼ 1; 2; 3) in MPa, fi is the
body forces per unit volume in MPa.
We now use the generalized effective stress principle
based on Terzaghi’s law [20] in the stress equilibrium
equations from one- to two-phased materials:
sij ¼ s0ij þ apdij ,
where sij is the solid total stress tensor, sij0 is the solid
effective stress tensor, p is the gas pressure, and a is a
positive constant equal to 1 when individual grains are
much more incompressible than the grain skeleton, dij is the
Kronecker delta function.
Substitution of Eq. (5) into (4) leads to:
s0ij;j þ f i þ ðapdij Þ;j ¼ 0. (6)
Thus, the equilibrium equation is expressed according to
the effective stress principle.
According to the continuous conditions, for a perfectly
elastic isotropic continuum, the geometrical equation can
be expressed as
1
eij ¼ ðui;j þ uj;i Þ, (7)
2
where eij is the strain tensor, (i; j ¼ 1; 2; 3), ev is the
volumetric strain, ev ¼ e11 þ e22 þ e33 , and u is the dis-
placement of an element.
The constitutive equation for the deformation fields can
be expressed for elastic isotropic materials as
s0ij ¼ Kdij ev þ 2Geij , (8)
where G is the shear modulus and K is Lame’s constant.
On the basis of the above, the equilibrium, the
continuity, and the constitutive equations, the governing
equations for the mathematical model of coal/rock
deformation considering the gas pressure in coal/rock can
be represented as
ðK þ GÞuj;ji þ Gui;jj þ f i þ ðapÞ;i ¼ 0. (9)
2.3. Failure of the solid
Finally, the failure description of the RFPA2D-GasFlow
model is given here. In the RFPA2D-GasFlow code, we rely
on the finite element method to perform the stress analysis
in the model. The model is discretized into a large number
of small elements to take into account the local variations
of the material heterogeneity. The basic elements of the
RFPA2D-GasFlow model can be generalized as follows:
(1) By introducing the heterogeneity of rock properties
into the model, the model can simulate the non-linear
deformation of a quasi-brittle rock with an ideal brittle
constitutive law for the local material;
(2) By recording the event-rate of failed elements, the
model can simulate seismicity and fracturing events
associated with the progressive fracture process;
(4)
(3) By introducing a reduction of the material mechanical
parameters (strength, elastic modulus, etc.) after
elemental failure, the model can simulate strain-soft-
ening and discontinuum mechanics problems in a
continuum mechanics mode;
(4) By introducing the relational equation for stress and
gas permeability, the model can simulate the stress-
(5)
induced variation of gas permeability, especially the
sudden jump of gas permeability in the post-failure
regime.
For the details of the heterogeneity and failure event-rate
of the material, the reader can refer to published papers
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919 909

[21,22]. Here the other two aspects of the failure descrip- Similarly, for tension, the maximum tensile stress
tion, damage induced stiffness degradation and damage- criterion is chosen as the strength criterion for the elements:
induced permeability increase, are presented as below. s3 p
f t , (13)
In the model, only an elastic constitutive law with linear
behavior has been introduced for all elements, which have where ft is the threshold for the tensile strength of elements.
been assigned different strength and elastic constant Correspondingly, the damage variable D in tension can
parameters depending on the heterogeneity of the rock be expressed as
8
materials. The elastic constitutive relation for an element > 0; et0 pe;
under uniaxial compressive stress and tensile stress is <
f tr
D ¼ 1
E 0 e ; etu peoet0 ; (14)
illustrated in Fig. 3. When the stress in the element satisfies >
: 1;
the strength criterion (such as the Coulomb–Mohr epetu ;
criterion), the element becomes damaged. In elastic damage
where ftr is the residual tensile strength of the elements;
mechanics, the elastic modulus of the element may degrade
et0 and etu are the tensile threshold strain of damage
gradually as damage progresses. If the element and its elements and the final tensile strain of the failed elements,
damage are assumed to be isotropic, the elastic modulus of respectively.
the damaged element is defined as follows:
E ¼ E 0 ð1
DÞ, (10) 2.4. Evolution of permeability
where D represents the damage variable, E and E0 are the
elastic moduli of the damaged and undamaged elements, For damage-induced permeability change, most of the
respectively. The parameters E, E0 and D are all scalar. theories are only valid in the pre-failure regions. During
For compression, Mohr–Coulomb criterion is chosen as elastic deformations, the rock permeability decreases when
the strength criterion for the elements: the rock compacts, and increases when the rock expands.
However, a dramatic and remarkable increase in rock
1 þ sin f permeability can be expected as a result of the generation
s1
s3 Xf c , (11)
1
sin f of numerous microfractures on reaching the peak load.
where s1, s3, are the maximum principal stress and Then, the permeability may gradually drop again should
minimum principal stress, respectively; f is the internal the failed rock be further compacted, or the permeability
friction angle and fc is the threshold of the compressive may increase continuously should the failed rock be further
strength of elements. extended. The gas permeability coefficient in uniaxial
Correspondingly, the damage variable D in compression compression and tension can be described in the following
can be expressed as equations [23].
( The gas permeability of the elements in compression can
0; eoec0 ; be described as
D¼ fcr (12) (
1
E 0 e ; ec0 pe;
l0 e
bðs1
apÞ ; D ¼ 0;
l¼ (15)
where fcr is the residual compressive strength of elements, e xl0 e
bðs1
apÞ ; D40;
and ec0 are the compressive strain and the compressive
threshold strain of the elements, respectively. where l0 is the initial gas permeability for unloaded coal
and rock, b is the coupling factor of stress to pore pressure,
a is the coefficient of pore pressure, and x is the coefficient
of sudden jump of gas permeability for loaded elements in

1 compression.
Compression For elements in tension, the gas permeability–stress
fc equation is expressed as
Elastic 8
> l e
bðs3
apÞ ; D ¼ 0;
< 0

bðs3
apÞ 0oDo1;
Degraded l¼ xl 0 e ; (16)
>
: x0 l0 e
bðs3
pÞ ;
fcr D ¼ 1;
tu t0
3 c0 cu 1
-ftr where x0 is the coefficient of sudden jump of gas
permeability for failed elements in tension.
The other parameters are the same as the earlier
equations. In this way, the damage-induced stiffness
Tension -ft
degradation and damage-induced permeability variation
are presented in the RFPA2D-GasFlow model.
Fig. 3. Elastic damage constitutive law for element under uniaxial In the simulations using the RFPA2D-GasFlow code, the
compression and tension. numerical sample is loaded either in a displacement control
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
910 T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919

mode or in a load control mode. At each loading 1 Experimental Curve

increment, the stress and strain, and the stress and gas Numerical Curve
0.8

Normalized Stress
permeability in the elements are calculated; then, the stress
field and flow field are examined and those elements, which 0.6
are strained beyond the pre-defined strength threshold level
are broken irreversibly. If some elements have failed, then 0.4
the model with new parameters for some of its elements
moves to a new equilibrium. The next load increment is 0.2
added only when there are no more elements strained
0
beyond the strength threshold level at an equilibrium strain 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
field. Thus, numerical loading on the model can be (a) Normalized Strain
performed in this way—as a direct analog to the
laboratory-testing machine

3. Validation of the RFPA2d-gasflow model

Validation of RFPA2D-GasFlow model was conducted

for the failure process of coal or rock and the gas flow
process in the coal or rock failure process. Several coal
specimens, 50 mm in width and 100 mm in length, were
prepared from blocks of coal, which were taken from the
Gushuyuan mines in Jincheng city, Shanxi province, PR
China. The ISRM Suggested Methods [24] were kept in
mind while preparing the specimens. The coal specimens
were conducted on the RMT-150B servo-controlled rock-
testing machine and the uniaxial compressive strength, the
strain at the peak stress, and the complete stress–strain
curves were obtained. Meanwhile, several model specimens (b)
with the same scale parameters, such as failure strength,
Fig. 4. Comparison of experimental curves and numerically simulated
elastic modulus, but with different homogeneity indices
curves for specimens.
were numerically tested under uniaxial compression.
The model specimens, with geometry of 100 mm  50 mm
in size, were all discretized into 20,000 elements. Based
10m
on the experimental results on two coal specimens in
uniaxial compression and numerical simulations with
RFPA2D-GasFlow code, the dimensionless stress–strain
curves were obtained as shown in Fig. 4a. It can be seen
that the numerically simulated curves in uniaxial compres-
sion tallied well with the experimental curves, except for the
initial portions of the curves. The main reason for the
p=0.1MPa
diversity at the initial portions of the numerical curves and p=3MPa
experimental curves was the adjustment of the gaps in the 10m
steel platens, coal specimen and loading cell at the beginning
of loading, and the closure of the extensively distributed pre-
existing microcracks in the specimens. Moreover, the
numerical simulation method replicates the complete
process of deformation and failure of rock, especially
the localization of deformation and failure, as illustrated p=3MPa
in Fig. 4b. Numerical model for radial gas flow in coal seam
From the comparisons of the numerical simulations and
Fig. 5. Numerical model for a radial open-hole cavity well.
experimental results, it can be seen that the numerical
method is not a simple replication of theoretical or
analytical methods, but an effective method of reproducing For the validation of the gas flow in the coalbed, the
the entire process of deformation and failure and classical well-pumping test for the steady gas flow around a
investigating the mechanical behavior of rock under circular borehole in a homogeneous, isotropic, elastic
loading. material subjected to far-field gas pressures was adopted
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919
here. A radial numerical model, 10m  10 mm, was
constructed with a cavity borehole of 0.5 m in diameter in
the center (Fig. 5). The numerical model was discretized
into a 200  200 (40,000 elements) mesh. The initial gas
pressure in the coalbed was 3 MPa, the borehole pressure
was equal to the atmospheric pressure. The gas flow
process in the coalbed and the changing curves of gas
pressure with duration are illustrated in Figs. 6a and b,
respectively. It can be seen from Fig. 6b that the gas
pressure around the borehole gradually decreases with
duration and finally stabilizes in a new equilibrium state.
This tallies well with the theoretical predictions [17].
As can be seen, the numerically simulated results of the
failure process of coal and the gas flow in the coalbed show
that the RFPA2D-GasFlow is an appropriate tool for
studying coupled gas flow during the coal or rock failure
process, as well as outbursts. Furthermore, the numerical
results can be displayed as an ‘animation’ to provide an
improved perception and understanding of the deforma-
tion and failure mechanisms of the progressive failure
process of coal, as well as outbursts.
4. Numerical simulation of the failure of gassy coal
For a number of reasons, gassy coal is far from being a
straightforward material to model. Coal has a dual
porosity nature: it has a micropore system with pore
diameters in the range 0.5–1.0 nm and a macropore system
with pores somewhat larger, in the range about
(a) t =1d
2.5
2
p/MPa
1.5
1 t=1d
0.5
0
0 1
(b)
Fig. 6. Numerically simulated results in radial open-hole cavity well.
911
10 nm–10 mm. As a result of the geometry of the cleat
(the fracturing) structure, the permeability of coal is
anisotropic. Furthermore, the permeability of coal is stress
dependent. An increased confining stress causes the cleats
to close, reducing the absolute permeability: reductions of
two-orders of magnitude have been observed. So, the
evolution of the permeability of gassy coal was numerically
investigated to gain an insight into its effect on coal and gas
outbursts.
4.1. Mechanical properties
4.1.1. Numerical model
The mesh for the plane strain numerical sample consists
of 200  100 elements with a geometry of 100 mm  50 mm
in size (as shown in Fig. 7), and all the elements have the
same size (and are square in shape). The pore pressure in
the rock specimen is denoted as P, and the confining
pressure and axial pressure acted on the numerical rock
specimen are respectively denoted as s0 and s1. In order to
incorporate the heterogeneity of the rock specimen, the
widely used Weibull distribution [25] was introduced to
describe the material properties of the elements, such as
failure strength, Young’s modulus, and Poisson’s ratio at
the mesoscopic level. The input material mechanical
property parameters used for the numerical model rock
specimen are listed in Table 1 below.
An external displacement at a constant rate of 0.002 mm/
step in the axial direction was applied to the rock specimen
t=12d t=40d
t=12d
t=40d
2 3 4 5
r/m
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
912 T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919

and the stress acting on the rock specimen as well as the

induced deformation in each element were computed in the
numerical tests.

4.1.2. Numerical results

Fig. 8 shows the numerically simulated macroscopic
failure patterns of the model specimens under different
confining pressures and the correspondingly numerical
complete axial stress versus axial strain curves of rock at
constant confining pressure up to 16 MPa with no pore
pressure are presented in Fig. 9.
As shown in Fig. 8, the angle between the failure plane
and the maximum principal stress direction in uniaxial
compression is about 301, and the angle between the
macroscopic failure plane and the maximum principal
stress direction gradually increases with the increase of
confining pressure acted on the rock specimens—which
agrees well with theoretical predictions. It can be seen from
the stress–strain curves in Fig. 9 that the rock deforms
linearly and elastically at axial stresses below the yield
strength, which is dependent on the confining pressure.
Further compression leads to inelastic deformation up to
the peak strength. At low-confining pressures, the curves
show defined peak strength and a gradual strength decrease
in the post failure region until final deformation occurs at a
Fig. 7. Numerical model for gassy coal.
roughly constant axial stress, i.e., residual strength. At
higher confining pressures, the rock exhibits work hard-
ening and the Young’s modulus of the rock is higher than
Table 1 that of the rock at lower pressures. Meanwhile, the
Mechanical parameters of the numerical model transition from brittle to ductile deformation in rock with
an increase in confining pressure is also intimated in Fig. 9.
Parameters Rock
Fig. 10 provides the relation between peak strength of
Homogeneity index, m 1.5 the rock specimens and the confining pressure at failure
Mean elastic modulus, E0, GPa 30 and Fig. 11 is the numerically obtained failure envelopes of
Mean compressive strength,s0, MPa 200 the rock specimens. As can be seen from Figs. 10 and 11,
Internal friction angle, f1 30
Ratio of compressive to tensile strength, C/T 10
the ultimate compressive failure strength, i.e., the peak
Poisson’s ratio, m 0.25 strength of the numerical rock specimens gradually
Pore pressure, a 1, 3 increases with confining pressure. Even though the linear
Coefficient of stress influence, b 0.1 Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion with tension cut-off is
Confining pressure, MPa 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 adopted in the model, the macroscopic failure envelope is
concave towards the s axis. The numerical results thus
indicate that macroscopic non-linear phenomena, such as

Fig. 8. Macroscopic failure patterns of model specimens with given pore pressure of 1 MPa under various confining pressures.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919 913

70 For rock materials, fracture and friction are macroscopic

0 manifestations of the same processes: e.g., grain crushing,
60 2 crack growth, healing, and plastic yielding. When viewed in
4
50 this way, it is not surprising that the difference between the
8
16
intact strength and residual (or frictional) strength should
40
σ1/MPa

vanish with increasing confining pressure. That is to say,

30 the rock will ideally exhibit a state of plastic flow at
extremely high confining pressure.
20

10 4.2. Seepage properties

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Rock permeability is important in coal mining engineer-
ε1/% ing. As mentioned, disastrous coal and gas outbursts into
excavations pose a potential significant risk to mining and
Fig. 9. Complete stress–strain curves of coal/rock with fixed pore pressure civil engineering projects. Gas flow in rock strata also
under various confining pressures. influences the regular construction and daily servicing of
geo-engineering projects. In the last several decades,
70
hydrogeological and petroleum engineers have become
increasingly involved in the study of the permeability of
60
underground rocks and reservoirs [26–28]. These efforts
50 have led to the development of a wide range of
mathematical models for permeability and stress or strain
40 interaction. In the present study, considering the mutual
UCS/MPa

interaction between stress and permeability, an attempt is

30 made to investigate the evolution of rock permeability, as
well as the relation between permeability and the stress in
20
connection with the complete strain–stress process of
10 loaded rocks using the gas pressure incorporated in the
RFPA2D-GasFlow code.
0
-5 0 5 10 15 20
Tension Compression
4.2.1. Numerical model
In this paper, three different numerical rock specimens
Confining pressure/MPa
with different homogeneity indices (m ¼ 1:5, 3 and 5)
representing materials from relative heterogeneity to
Fig. 10. Relation between the compressive strength of coal/rock and relative homogeneity (Table 2) are established. The speci-
confining pressure for given pore-pressure. men geometry is 100  50 mm and has been discretized into
a 240  120 (28800 elements) mesh. In all cases, the
35 specimens undergo plane strain compression, imposed by
Mohr failure envelope a relative motion of the upper and lower loading plates, as
30
25
shown in Fig. 12. Although the specimens are more or less
τ/MPa

20
Table 2
15 Mechanical and seepage parameters
10
Parameters Rock
5
Homogeneity index, m 1.5, 3, 5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Mean elastic modulus, E0, GPa 50
σ/MPa Mean compressive strength, s0, MPa 100
Internal friction angle, f1 30
Fig. 11. Simulated failure envelope for model rock specimens. Ratio of compressive to tensile strength, C/T 10
Possion’s ratio, m 0.3
Gas permeability K, m2 (MPa2 d) 0.1
Coefficient of gas content A, m3 (m3 MP1/2) 2
rock failure in nature, can be described and revealed Coefficient of pore pressure, a 0.5
through some simple linear rules at the mesoscopic level. In Coefficient of stress influence, b 0.1
addition, it is noticed that the residual strength (or friction) Confining pressure, MPa 0
Inlet pressure, P1, MPa 2
of rock, is also dependent on the confining pressure, and
Outlet pressure, P2, MPa 0.1
increases with confining pressure.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
914 T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919

heterogeneous on the microscale, they are statistically

homogeneous on the macro-scale since the mechanical
property parameters are randomly distributed throughout
the whole specimen with many elements.

4.2.2. Numerical results

The final simulated stress–strain curves and the corre-
sponding permeability–strain curves of the model speci-
mens are shown in Figs. 13a and b. It can be seen from
Fig. 13 that the heterogeneity of the model specimens has a
remarkable influence on the strength characterization, the
shape of stress–strain curves and permeability evolution.
Simulated tests also reveal that the maximum compressive
strength of the specimens is proportional to the homo-
geneity index. The higher the values of the homogeneity
index, the higher the values of the peak stress and the peak
permeability of the rock samples.
One method of observing damage or microcracking
during rock deformation experiments is by monitoring
acoustic emissions (AE) or seismic events produced during
deformation. In the RFPA2D-GasFLow code, a single AE
Fig. 12. Numerical model for seepage tests.
event represents a microcrack-forming event to indirectly
assess the damage evolution and the AE events change with
the development of microcracking [29]. The simulated
failure process, gas pressure gradients and displacement

60
m=1.5
50
m=3
40
Stress/MPa

m=5
30

20

10

0
0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002
(a) Strain

0.25
Permeability/(m2/(MPa2d))

0.2

0.15

0.1 m=1.5

m=3
0.05
m=5

0
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014 0.0016
(b) Strain

Fig. 13. (a) Simulated stress–strain curves and (b) the corresponding permeability–strain curves.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919 915

vector for a model specimen (m ¼ 1:1) under compression
are shown in Figs. 14a, b and c, and the corresponding
stress–strain curve, AE characteristics and permeability–
strain curve are shown in Fig. 15.
It can be seen from Fig. 15 that the stress–strain curve
and permeability–strain curve linearly develop with a small
increase in axial stress and, at the same time, AE events
linked to damage randomly occur throughout the speci-
men. Further increases in the axial strain lead to the
deviation of stress–strain curve and permeability–strain
curve from linearity and an increase of the AE events rate.
A sharp increase in the AE events rate and the permeability
due to the macroscopic fracturing plane can be observed
after the peak strength is reached. Finally, the eventual
failure of the specimen is characterized by disintegration of
the specimen into pieces by a combination of axial splitting
and local shearing or faulting, with the AE events rate
sharply decreasing, the stress–strain curve approaching a

Fig. 14. (a) Simulated rock failure process and (b) gas pressure gradients for rock specimen (m ¼ 1:5).

8 0.18

7 0.16
Stress/Mpa Normalized AE/counts

Permeability/(m2/(MPa2•d))

0.14
6
0.12
5 Normalized AE
Permeability-strain
0.1
4
Stress-strain 0.08
3
0.06
2 0.04
1 0.02

0 0
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001
Strain

Fig. 15. Numerically simulated stress–strain curves, normalized AE counts, and the corresponding permeability–strain curves for rock specimen with
homogeneity index, m ¼ 1:5.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
916 T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919

residual strength and permeability approaching a relative Table 3

stable value. The simulated results agree well with the Mechanical and seepage parameters for numerical model for instanta-
neous outbursts
findings in laboratory testing [30].
Mechanical and seepage Coal seam Roof and Crosscut
parameters floor

5. Coal and gas outbursts Heterogeneity index, m 2 10 2

Mean elastic modulus, E0, GPa 5 50 10
Mean compressive strength,s0, 100 300 150
A coal and/or gas outburst is a complex mechanical
MPa
process in which the fracture splitting and ejection of coals Internal friction angle, f1 30 32 30
in gassy coal seam are to a large extent dependent on the Bulk weight/(103 kg/m3) 2.7 1.4 2.0
gas pressure, in situ stress and physico-mechanical proper- Ratio of UCS to UTS 20 10 10
ties of coal and surrounding rock. Therefore, it is of great Poisson’s ratio, m 0.3 0.25 0.3
Gas permeability, l, m2 0.1 0.001 0.01
importance to investigate the mechanism of coal and gas
(MPa2 d)
outbursts based on the stress field in the rock roof, floor Coefficient of gas content, A 2 0.1 0.1
and coal seam. The instantaneous outburst of coal and gas Coefficient of pore pressure, a 0.5 0.01 0.1
away from the working face during coal mining or drilling
is a complex phenomenon. The coal and gas instantaneous
outbursts were therefore simulated using RFPA2D-Gas-
Flow model. It can be seen from the numerically simulated results
The numerical model shown in Fig. 16 is designed to induced by crosscutting that the whole process of coal and
simulate instantaneous outbursts occurring in the course of gas outbursts can be divided into four stages:
crosscutting induced by drilling. In the model, the gassy
soft coal seam is enclosed by impermeable and hard rock (1) Stress concentration stage: At the beginning of cross-
roof and floor. Moreover, a layer of thick hard rock acts as cutting, the loads from the upper rock strata are mostly
a protective screen ahead of the coal seam. The layer of carried on the freshly exposed coal due to stress
hard rock is instantaneously opened by drilling and the concentrations. It is worth noting that the stress in
coal seam behind the protective screen is therefore exposed the coal is not uniformly distributed at the meso-scope
in the course of crosscutting. The model is discretized into scale because of the incorporation of the heterogeneity
a 150  200 mesh (30,000 elements). The gas pressure of model materials.
saturated in the coal seam is 2.1 MPa and the Young’s (2) Coal/rock fracture and splitting induced by rock stress:
modulus and strength of the coal are 10 GPa and 15 MPa, Microfractures in coals are predominantly under the
respectively. In addition, the Young’s moduli and strength abutment stress at this stage. The mechanical properties
of the rock roof and floor far exceed those of the coal seam. of coals progressively degrade due to the effect of stress
The mechanical and seepage parameters of the numerical concentration and creep, as well as the three-dimen-
model are presented in Table 3. Figs. 17a and b show the sional stress state in the coals near the working face
crosscutting-induced instantaneous outbursts and the gradually transforming into a two-dimensional stress
associated stress fields distributions in the rock roof, floor state. As a result, fracturing and splitting parallel to the
and gassy coal seam. Compared with Figs. 2 and 17, it can free exposed face occur first in coals near the working
be seen that the numerically simulated instantaneous face. In the course of splitting, the stress in coals near
outbursts agree well with the ‘spherical shell losing the coalface decreases and the stress peak gradually
stability’ model mentioned earlier. moves away from the coalface and into the deep coals
with the release of the elastic energy stored in the coal.
It is noticeable that a cluster of cracks begins to develop
along with the transfer of the stress peak in the coals.
(3) Crack propagation driven by gas pressure: High-
pressurized gas saturated in the coal seam gushes into
the ‘gas way’ and quickly and violently splits the
fractured coal. The effect of high gas pressure
eventually leads to the formation of the ‘gas way’
during the propagation and coalescence of clusters of
cracks.
(4) Ejection of coals induced by gas pressure, i.e. outbursts:
During the process of crack propagation and coales-
cence induced by gas pressure, the cracks volumetri-
Fig. 16. Numerical mechanical and seepage model of coal and gas cally expand and the gas gushes into the cracks. There
outbursts induced by crosscut penetration. is a large gas pressure gradient because the gas pressure
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919 917

Fig. 17. Numerically simulated coal and gas instantaneous outbursts process and numerically simulated shear stress distributions during instantaneous
outbursts (Steps 1–9 stand for the ninth calculated failure step in the first time step for modeling the outbursts process. The steps continue in incremental
time steps indicating the failure of coal or rock with duration).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
918 T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919
saturated in the cracks is far beyond the pressure in the
freshly exposed coalface, which causes the ejection of
the fractured and splitting coals, i.e. coal and gas
outbursts.
As listed above, the stress concentration, coal/rock
fracture and splitting induced by stress, crack propagation
driven by gas pressure, and ejection of coals induced by gas
pressure are the four major stages of coal and gas outbursts
derived from the numerical simulations in this paper. The
numerical simulated results reveal that in situ stress, gas
pressure and the physico-mechanical properties of coal and
rock are the main contributing factors affecting coal and
gas outbursts. In addition, numerical simulated results not
only trace the initiation, propagation and coalescence of
cracks in coals, but also present the associated evolution of
the stress field in the coal seam and the roof and floor of the
rock strata, i.e., the stress redistribution in the coal seam
and rock roof and floor at every stage.
6. Discussion and conclusions
Instantaneous outbursts in underground coal mines
continue to pose a hazard to safe, productive extraction
of coal. The problem results from a combination of the
effects of stress, gas content and physico-mechanical
properties of the coal. Research and operational experi-
ences have provided the opportunity to test theories on the
mechanisms of an instantaneous outburst. Therefore, in
the present paper, firstly, the elastic constitutive law for
element at a meso-level was proposed considering the
heterogeneity of coal and rock; meanwhile, considering the
relational equation between damage induced gas perme-
ability and stress and the time-dependent equation for
creep damage evolution, the solid–gas coupling model
(RFPA2D-GasFlow) for gaseous coal and rock was
established, and the numerical FEM implementation for
the model was also given. Furthermore, the coupled model
was also validated via two aspects of the failure process of
coal and rock and gas flow in the coal and rock.
Using the RFPA2D-GasFlow code, numerical tests on
the basic mechanical characteristics of gaseous coal and
rock, such as deformation and strength, heterogeneity,
rheology and seepage, were also conducted. The mechan-
ical properties of gaseous coal and rock and the gas
permeability evolution of gaseous coal and rock under
different stress were also numerically investigated to gain a
better understanding of the factors that control the
behavior of gas flow in rocks or rock masses. Such
intensive studies of gas flow in stressed heterogeneous
rocks are useful as initial approaches to many engineering
problems in mining and petroleum industries. Numerical
results indicate that heterogeneity plays an important role
in affecting the evolution of permeability in rock. As the
more homogeneous rock sample fails in a more brittle
manner, which results in a bigger stress drop, a more
significant increase in the overall permeability of the
sample is thus obtained. The simulated permeability
variations in stressed heterogeneous rocks agree well with
the observed results in the laboratory.
Finally, instantaneous outbursts induced by crosscut
driving were numerically simulated. Numerical results
reproduced the whole process of microcracking, propaga-
tion, coalescence and ejection of coal or rock. In addition,
the associated stress fields, displacement vectors, gas
pressure and microseismicities during the outbursts were
clearly visualized. It is noted that the numerical simulations
obtained using RFPA2D-GasFlow in this paper capture
most of the experimental and in situ-observed phenomena,
especially the outburst cavity in a coal and gas outburst.
The successful reproducion of the experimentally and in
situ observed outburst failure phenomena with a numerical
method implies that our understanding of the mechanisms
of coal and gas outbursts has reached a more reasonable
level which, in turn, will help us to make further progress in
better understanding of the mechanism of instantaneous
outbursts and controlling and preventing their occurrence
as induced by underground mining.
Acknowledgments
The work presented in this paper was financially jointly
supported from the General Project of the National
Natural Science Foundation of PR China (Grant
No.50504003, 50374020, and 50504005), the Key Project
of the National Natural Science Foundation of PR China
(50139010), the Major Project of the National Natural
Science Foundation of PR China (Grant No. 50490274)
and the Open Project of the National Laboratory for
Geological Hazard Prevention and Environment Protec-
tion (GZ2004-01). Professor John A Hudson is thanked for
his editorial assistance.
References
[1] Lama RD, Bodziony J. Management of outburst in underground
coal mines. Int J Coal Geol 1998;35(1):83–115.
[2] Beamish BB, Crosdale PJ. Instantaneous outbursts in underground
coal mines: an overview and association with coal type. Int J Coal
Geol 1998;35(1):27–35.
[3] Kidybinski A. Significance of in situ strength measurements for
prediction of outburst hazard in coal mines of Lower Silesia.
Symposium on the occurrence, prediction and control of outbursts
in coal mines. Aust Inst Min Metall, Melbourne 1980:193–201.
[4] Gray I. The mechanism of, and energy release associated with
outbursts. Symposium on the occurrence, prediction and control of
outbursts in coal mines. Aust Inst Min Metall, Melbourne
1980:111–25.
[5] Paterson L. A model for outburst in coal. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 1986;23(4):327–32.
[6] Litwiniszyn J. A model for the initiation of coal-gas outbursts. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1985;22(1):39–46.
[7] Hargraves AJ. Instantaneous outbursts of coal and gas: a review.
Proc Aust Inst Min Metall 1983;285:1–37.
[8] Jagiello J, Lason M, Nodzenski A. Thermodynamic description of
the process of gas liberation from a coal bed. Fuel 1992;71:431–5.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Xu et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 905–919
[9] Jiang CL, Yu QX. Spherical shell losing stability mechanism of coal
and gas outbursts. Xuzhou: Press of China University of Mining and
Technology; 1998.
[10] Williams RJ, Weissmann JJ. Gas emission and outburst assessment in
mixed CO2 and CH4 environments. In: Proceedings of the ACIRL
underground mining sem, Australian Coal Industry Research
Laboratory, North Ryde; 1995. 12pp.
[11] Farmer IW, Pooley FD. A hypothesis to explain the occurrence of
outbursts in coal based on a study of West Wales outburst coal. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1967;4:189–93.
[12] Shepherd J, Rixon LK, Griffiths L. Outbursts and geological
structures in coal mines: a review. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 1981;18(4):267–83.
[13] Peng LS. Introduction to gas-geology. Beijing: China Coal Industry
Publishing House; 1990 250pp [in Chinese].
[14] Evans H, Brown KM. Discussion on ‘‘coal structures in outbursts of
coal and firedamp conditions’’. Min Eng 1973;137:457–60.
[15] Cao YX, He DD, Glick DC. Coal and gas outbursts in footwalls of
reverse faults. Int J Coal Geol 2001;48(1):47–63.
[16] Brown G. Henry Darcy and His Law, available at: http://
bioen.okstate.edu/home/gbrown/Darcy/, 1997.
[17] Zhou SN, Lin BQ. Theory of gas flow and storage in coal seams.
Beijing: China Coal Industry Publishing House; 1998.
[18] Yu QX. Prevention and control of methane in coal mines. Xuzhou:
Press of China University of Mining and Technology; 1993.
[19] Zhao YS. Coupled mathematical model on coal mass-gas and its
numerical method. Chin J Geotechn Eng 1994;13(3):229–39 [in
Chinese].
919
[20] Terzaghi K. Theoretical soil mechanics. New York: Wiley; 1943.
[21] Tang CA. Numerical simulation on progressive failure leading to
collapse and associated seismicity. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1997;34(2):249–61.
[22] Tang CA, Liu H, Lee PKK, et al. Numerical studies of the influence
of microstructure on rock failure in uniaxial compression—Part I:
effect of heterogeneity. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2000;37(3):555–69.
[23] Tang CA, Tham LG, Lee PKK, et al. Coupled analysis of flow, stress
and damage (FSD) in rock failure. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
2002;39(4):477–89.
[24] Fairhurst CE, Hudson JA. Draft ISRM suggested method for the
complete stress-strain curve for intact rock in uniaxial compression.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1999;36(3):279–89.
[25] Weibull W. A statistical distribution function of wide applicability.
J Appl Mech 1951;18(3):293–7.
[26] Bruno MS. Micromechanics of stress-induced permeability aniso-
tropy and damage in sedimentary rock. Mech Mater
1994;18(1):31–48.
[27] Stormont JC. In-situ gas permeability measurements to delineate
damage in Rock Salt. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(7):
1055–64.
[28] Audigane P, Royer J-J, Kaieda H. Permeability characterization of
the Soultz and Ogachi large-scale reservoir using induced micro-
seismicity. Geophysics 2002;67(1):204–11.
[29] Tang CA. Numerical simulation of progressive rock failure and
associated seismicity. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(2):249–61.
[30] Paterson S. Experimental deformation of rocks: the brittle field.
Berlin: Springer; 1978.