Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Procedia
Engineering
Procedia Engineering
Procedia 00 (2011)
Engineering 000–000
26 (2011) 457 – 465
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

First International Symposium on Mine Safety Science and Engineering

The dynamic impact of rock burst induced by the fracture of

the thick and hard key stratum
FENG Xiaojuna, WANG Enyuana,b,, SHEN Rongxia, WEI Mingyaoa, CHEN Yuc,
CAO Xinqida*
a
Faculty of Safety Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221008, China;
b
State Key Laboratory of Coal Resources and Safe Mining, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221008, China;
c
School of Environment and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, 221008, China.
d
School of Mining Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, 221008, China

Abstract

To reveal the dynamic impact of rock bursting induced by the thick and hard roof of gravel as key stratum fractured,
based on the key strata and rock control theories, combined with the mechanical load-based dynamic loading with the
Law of Conservation of Energy in a system, this paper analysed the static stability and the processing of energy
conversion within the system when the key stratum was fracturing. And the key stratum dynamic model of fracturing
was established. The results indicate that large amounts of strain energy would be forced into the rock during the
process as the key stratum fractures and becomes unstable. The greater the dynamic load factor is, the more elastic
energy is forced into the lower rock strata of the key stratum, and the more obvious the dynamic impact of the lower
rock strata would be. The size of the dynamic load factor relates to the aspect ratio of key rock masses, the thickness
of the overburden, the mining height, the height of the fragmentized rock at the bottom of key stratum and the
compaction coefficient of the fragmentized rock under the static during loading conditions. According to the
calculation of actual work, the results are consistent with the field tests approximately. The results can provide
references to similar conditions.

© 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of China Academy of Safety Science and Technology,
China University of Mining and Technology(Beijing), McGill University and University of Wollongong.

Keywords: key stratum; rock burst; dynamic loading; energy constant

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 13512568961

E-mail address: fxjun_cumt@126.com.

1877-7058 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2192
458
2 FENGXiaojun/
FENG Xiaojun Procedia
et al. / Procedia Engineering
Engineering 26 (2011)
00 (2011) 000–000457 – 465

1. Introduction

The key stratum controls the overlying rock strata, even to the surface, with high strength, high
thickness, and overall subsidence of overlying strata happen easily when it fractures [1-3]. The key
stratum that has different lithology, strength and thickness impacts the control of the rock strata and the
dynamic impact of rock burst after it fractures [4-7]. As the key stratum, the thick and hard roof with
gravel is controlling the movements of the entire overburden, because of its characteristics of high
strength, high thickness, fracture would not happen until the area of mining space reaches a value that is
big enough [8]. The whole overburden even surface sinks the surface instantaneously when it fractures,
causing a release of strong dynamic force on the rock strata below the key stratum. With the increasing in
the strength and depth of mining exploitation, the dynamic impact of rock burst will be more and more
important when the key stratum fractures suddenly, and the support designs and the hazards of rock burst
induced by dynamic effects continue to increase[9-10].
The previous have developed comprehensive and systematic studies on rock control, mining damage
and the mechanism of water inrush at the overburden separation area [11-14]. Reference [15] discussed
the impact on the height of water inrush caused by the location of key stratum, and explained the
mechanism of water inrush in some coalmines accidents. Reference [16] discussed the stress of the
compound key stratum with the Elastic Thin Plate Theory and Laminated Plate Theory of the mechanics
of composite materials, and obtained the limit load when the key stratum was unstable by using plastic
limit analysis methods, regarding the combined motion of rock strata overburden as the combined motion
of the key strata based on the hard rock strata. Reference [17] discussed the mechanical mechanism that it
could easily cause mining earthquake and rock burst occurrence when the key stratum broke off in
positive "O-X" type, and by monitoring the rock burst induced by the fracture of the key stratum instantly
in three-dimensions using the micro seism monitoring system. As the key stratum fracture is a dynamic
loading process to the lower rock strata, causing the loading process of rock fracturing is different from
the general static loading conditions, it is necessary to conduct researches on the rock burst induced by the
fracture of the key stratum. This paper established the dynamic model of the key stratum fractured and
derived the dynamic load factor when the dynamic impact loading on the lower strata by combining the
theory of the mechanical load-based dynamic loading with the law of conservation of energy of system,
we analysed the static stability and the process of energy conversion within the system when the key
stratum was fracturing. Confirmatory calculation of actual work was also done, which was consistent with
the field tests approximately. The results can provide references to similar conditions.

2. Subsidence profile curve of the super mining exploration

The super mining exploration is the critical mining state that the width of goaf is larger than 1.2 to 1.4
times the depth. Compared with the full exploration, the maximum subsidence in the central of the super
mining exploration shows: the distribution of the maximum subsidence presents regional characteristic.
The fracture interval is closely related to rock mass strength and thickness according to the theory of the
model of main roof initial fracture. The greater the intensity and thickness are, the greater the fracture
interval is, so the mining conditions are determined by the rock property and thickness of the key stratum.
As the thick and hard layer of gravel of the key stratum possesses high strength, high integrity, and it is
not easy to fracture, the fracture interval is far greater than the general strength of the key stratum, on
which conditions, the movements of rock below the key stratum can be regarded as the super mining
exploration. According to the super mining exploration theory, the deformation of the surface subsidence
varies from zero to maximum with time, which is similar to the full mining exploration. To facilitate the
description of the subsidence profile curve of the mining exploration, the subsidence profile curve of the
 FENG Xiaojun
FENG et al. Procedia
Xiaojun/ / ProcediaEngineering
Engineering0026(2011)
(2011)000–000
457 – 465 459
3

super mining exploration is divided into three parts—―full exploration—equal deformation—full

exploration‖, which is shown in figure 1.The super mining exploration curve equation was described by
the sink basin profile function derived by Soviet Union's[18].
x 1 x
Vz= Vzm [1- + sin( 2 )] （1）
L 2 L
Where Vz is the value of separation area height below the key stratum, Vzm is the maximum value of
separation area height below the key stratum, x is the horizontal distance from the centre of the separation
area to the expected point of surface subsidence, L is the distance from the centre of the separation area to
the boundary of the sink area.

Fig.1 The key stratum mining model of the thick and hard layer

3. The dynamic impact model of key stratum

The dynamic loading effects are caused to the lower rock strata when the key stratum fractures. The
instantaneous stress level is much higher than the static in the stable state, and it forces large strain energy
into the rock strata in the form of elastic wave in a short period of time, being superimposed with the
original energy. When the key stratum fractures, the more elastic energy is forced into the lower layer of
the key stratum, the greater the scope the greater the energy, and the more obvious the dynamic effects to
the lower strata. So it can be seen that the greater the dynamic load factor, the higher the stress level, the
greater the inputted energy, the more prone to instability for rock. Based on the state of the super mining
exploration in the plane model, combined with mechanical mechanism and equilibrium conditions of the
main roof "bond-beam" structure，it is confirmed that when the lower strata are shocked by the fracture
of the key stratum, lots of energy is forced into the lower strata at the earlier stage through the two salient
points where they are contact with. With the variation of coefficients, the contact extent increases
constantly, and extends to surface gradually. Given that the stress disturbance and the energy release on
the fracturing moment make the greatest effects on the surrounding rock masses, we focused on studying
the state on the fracturing moment. Based on the above analysis, the key stratum mechanical model on the
plane of the thick and hard layer was established. See figure 2.
460
4 FENGXiaojun/
FENG Xiaojun Procedia
et al. / Procedia Engineering
Engineering 26 (2011)
00 (2011) 000–000457 – 465

O1

Fig.2 The thick and hard layer of the key stratum model for dynamic impact

According to the actual engineering conditions, combined with the theory of the key stratum fracture,
assuming the key stratum of thick and hard layer as like rigid body, i.e. the effects on the dynamic impact
process from the deformation of fracture can be by passed. Considering the variation of the cushion
coefficient, the dynamic impacted rock subject to Hooke's Law and the elastic modulus is not changed.
The key stratum fractures instantly when the mining interval reaches the limit value. The energy releases
by fracturing is composed of three parts: within the survey region, external load exerts on the key stratum
through the upper boundary of it, which will produce a certain displacement under the action of force. i.e.
the energy generated by external load; then the key stratum will produce a displacement downward when
it fractures, the change of gravitational potential energy; finally, the kinetic energy of the key stratum
before the key stratum fractures. The energy equation was established by the theory of conservation of
energy.
W+T+V=Vεd （2）
Where W is the energy generated by external load, T is the kinetic energy before the key stratum
fractures, V is the gravitational potential energy, Vεd is the energy increase in the rock strata below the key
stratum.

3.1 Solve the dynamic load factor

The stress and displacement on the moment of the key stratum fracturing is far greater than that in the
state of stationary. It is difficult to measure the stress and displacement directly under the actual
engineering conditions or by using theoretical arithmetic, while it is easy under the static conditions. The
dynamic load factor is defined as ratio of dynamic load stress, displacement and the static stress,
displacement. The simultaneous equations that are used to resolve the dynamic load factor are established
by combining the static mechanical analysis with the energy constant laws. The concrete steps are as
follows.
3.1.1 Solve the static mechanical equation
The model shown in figure 2 is analysed with the static mechanical theory, setting up the following
equations based on the material mechanical analysis.
 
Fst( 2acos 2bsin )-(G-Fy ) 2(a  b ) 1  cos(2   )  =0
2 2
（3）
2 2
2G+2qa-2Fst-2Fy=0 （4）
 FENG Xiaojun
FENG et al. Procedia
Xiaojun/ / ProcediaEngineering
Engineering0026(2011)
(2011)000–000
457 – 465 461
5

The static stress is solved based on the above equations, the result is as follow:
qa 2( a  b ) 1  cos(2   ) 
2 2

Fst= （5）
 
2( a  b ) 1  cos(2   )   2 a cos
2 2
 2b sin
2 2
Where a and b are the length and height of the block mass of the key stratum,  is the maximum
angle when the key stratum fractured,  is the depression angle of the block mass of the key stratum, i.e.
a
the arctan shown in figure 2, G is the gravity of the two block masses, Fy is the vertical stress of the
b
boundary of the key block masses below the key stratum, Fst is the static on the static equilibrium
conditions,  st is the displacement on the static equilibrium conditions.
3.1.2 Energy Solution
Under the action of the static, with the effects of the cushion coefficient, the lower strata occur to some
subsidence; and in the process of rock bursting, not only does the static impact the subsidence, but also the
displacement subsidence is also impacted by dynamic loading. Taking into account the range of the lower
impacted strata is large, and the strata are fragmentized on the whole and fully cracks, it is considered that
it is mainly the mutual embedding of the rock fractures in the process of impact, and the real kinetic
energy of the impacted strata are small which is seen as zero in the following equations. The formulas
follow：
W+V=Vεd （6）
Vεd=2V'=2Fd  d =K Fst  st
2
（7）
 st=(h+ha-Vzm)ξ （8）

Where Fd is the dynamic loading of rock induced by the key stratum fractured,  d is the dynamic
displacement of rock induced by the key stratum fractured, h is the mining height, ha is the thickness of
roof collapse above the coal seam, K is the dynamic load factor, ξ is the compaction factor under static
load, usually between 0.05-0.15.
The characteristics of the fracturing process and movements are assayed. Beside the energy from the
upper loading, there only exists the transformation of the gravitational energy in the model. The W and V
are figured out based on the theory of quality differential.
W=2q  y dx （9）

V=2 dx V'=2ρgb  y dx  （10）
Where  y is vertical displacement of the key block mass.
3.1.3 Solve the dynamic load factor
The simultaneous equations are solved by using the static stress in formula 5 and the energy generated
by external load in formula 9 and the potential energy changes in formula 10.
  
K2 Fst  st=  qa   gab  b  cos(  ) a2  b2  （11）
 2 
Result of the dynamic load factor
 
2(a 2  b 2 ) 1  cos(2   )   2a cos  2b sin
K2  2 2  qa   gab  b  cos(   ) 
a 2  b 2  （12）
  h  ha  Vm  qa 2(a 2  b 2 ) 1  cos(2   )   2 
462
6 FENGXiaojun/
FENG Xiaojun Procedia
et al. / Procedia Engineering
Engineering 26 (2011)
00 (2011) 000–000457 – 465

The dynamic load factor is resolved according to the above formulas. Adding the relationship between
the dynamic load stress, displacement and the static stress, displacement, the dynamic load stress and
displacement of the impact from the key stratum to the lower layer could be worked out. Combining with
the safety factor, the possible maximum stress and displacement after the key stratum fractures can be
developed, which may provide references for support designing and safety mining in the next phase.
3.1.4 Analysis of results
The analysis of dynamic load factor formula shows that the size of the factor is relate with several
parameters including the aspect ratio of the key block masses, the thickness of the overburden, the mining
height, the thickness of the bottom of the key stratum and the compaction coefficient on static loading
conditions. Because the contribution from each parameter is different, the sensitivity of different
parameters from the dynamic load factor is different as well. In order to study the sensitivity of different
parameters, the formulas are analysed by using the principle of single-factor changing. On the given
actual conditions, this paper focused on the sensitive analysis of the static load compaction factor and the
vertical overburden pressure so that it could be applied as much as possible to the similar mining areas.
The results are shown as follows:

a=60m, b=60m, h=3, ha =8.3m, p=10MN

Fig.3 The dynamic load factor changes with different cushion coefficients

a=60m, b=60m, h=3m, ha=8.3m,  =0.1

Fig.4 The dynamic load factor changes with different burial depth

Figure 3 shows that the dynamic load factor increased with the decrease of cushion coefficients under
the actual mining geology conditions, which suggests that the lower strata collapse are equivalent to the
formation of a loose buffer space, making the effect of rock burst is relatively little when the key stratum
 FENG Xiaojun
FENG et al. Procedia
Xiaojun/ / ProcediaEngineering
Engineering0026(2011)
(2011)000–000
457 – 465 463
7

fractures. On the other hand, it explains that it favour the management principle of the mining pressure
when the roof suddenly fractures by increasing the fragmentation of the main roof. Figure 4 shows that the
dynamic load factor increases with the burial depth decreasing. The main reasons are: as the depth
increased, the incremental value of static stress itself is at a very high magnitude. Although the dynamic
load factor trends downward around -0.2 with the depth increasing, it does not mean that the dynamic
effect decreased. Although the dynamic load factor is relatively smaller, the static load by each part of the
dynamic load factor increased greatly. The increase of static stress makes a major contribution to the
dynamic impact of rock burst at this time. That is to say although the relative dynamic load decreases, the
absolute static increases greatly, so the management and monitoring should be strengthened to prevent
rock burst hazards.

4. Checking the actual project

A coal mine located in north-eastern China. In the process of deep mining, the mine ground pressure
tended to intense, and rock burst occurred many times. The main coal seams are 3# and 9# at present. The
hardness of 3# coal is greater (Plats coefficient f = 3). The average coal thickness is 3.38meters, and the
average depth is -400 meters or so. The average coal seam angle is 30°-33°.The immediate roof is fine
sandstone of 3 to 15meters, which has a 9 meters sandstone thickness. The thickness of the main roof is
around 60 meters gravel, which is determined as the key stratum by calculating and analysing. The mining
pressure reports show that the main roof‗s first weighting interval is around 100 meters under the
conditions, so parameter ―a‖ can be determined to be 50 meters. After the field test on the force of the
support when the main roof fractured firstly, it was found that the dynamic pressure coefficient was about
2.2. The following parameters are determined after calculation. The results are shown in table 1.
Table.1 The actual project results by using the formula 12
The actual
dynamic
Parameters a b   K
2
K pressure
coefficient
Value 50 60 6° 0.1 6.72 2.59 2.1-2.4
The results showed that the theoretical result of the dynamic load factor based on the formula is larger
than the measured one. Analysis shows the following reasons: on the one hand, the calculation is
completed within the elastic deformation, but the rock plastic deformation would also happen due to the
presence of high stress under the actual situations, even though the gravel roofs are hard, thick and strong
enough, the joints are still exist in them. The relative motion of joints and the friction would consume
energy constantly, which lead to larger calculation result; on the other hand, the energy is inputted to both
sides of the key stratum in the form of elastic wave and the energy transfers effectively, which is both
ignored in the process of energy calculation, which causes the energy value is larger than the actual result,
leading to the K value larger, but some guidance and practice still could be given to engineering
references.

5. Conclusions

1) Under the exploration conditions that the thick and hard roof of gravel is regarded as the key stratum,
the separation area matches the subsidence profile curve of the super mining exploration, having the equal
deformation at the central region. The model which contacts the lower strata with two salient points when
the thick and hard layer of the key stratum fractured is established. Lots of energy is forced into the lower
strata at the earlier stage through which they contacted firstly.
464
8 FENGXiaojun/
FENG Xiaojun Procedia
et al. / Procedia Engineering
Engineering 26 (2011)
00 (2011) 000–000457 – 465

2) A large amount of strain energy would be forced into the rock during the process of fracture and
destabilization of the key stratum. The greater the dynamic load factor was, the more elastic energy that is
forced into the lower strata, and the more obvious the dynamic impact on the lower rock strata would be,
the more easily it lead to rock burst hazards.
3) The size of the dynamic load factor relates to the aspect ratio of key rock masses, the thickness of
the overburden, the mining height, the thickness of the rock broken down at the bottom of key stratum and
the compaction coefficient on static during loading conditions. The dynamic load factor increases with the
cushion coefficients decreasing. The lower strata collapse are equivalent to the formation of a loose buffer
space, making the effects of rock shock are relatively little when the key stratum fractured; the dynamic
load factor increases with the burial depth decreasing. Increment of the static stress becomes a major
contribution to the dynamic impact on rock burst at this time. According to the calculation of actual work,
the results are consistent with the field tests.

6. Acknowledgements

Financial support for this work provided by the International scientific cooperation projects
(No.2008DFB70100), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No.2010QNB01)
and the independent research projects of State Key Laboratory of Coal Resources and Mine Safety
(No.SKLCRSM09X01) are gratefully acknowledged.

7. References

[1] Qian M G, Miao X X, XU J L, Mao X B. Key strata theory in ground control. Xuzhou: China University of Mining and
Technology Press, 2003: 17-18. (In Chinese)
[2] Qian M G, Miao X X, Xu J L. Study of key stratum theory for control. Journal of China Coal society, 1996, 21(3):225-
229(In Chinese).
[3] Xu J L, Zhu W B, Wang X Z, Yi M S. Classification of key strata structure of overlying strata in shallow coal seam. Journal
of China Coal Society, 2009, 34(7): 865-869(In Chinese).
[4] Wei M Y, Wang E Y, Liu X F, Song D Z, Zhang Y. Numerical Simulation of Roof Fracture Under Dynamic Disturbance.
Journal of Mining & Safety Engineering, 2010, 27(4): 532- 536(In Chinese).
[5] Jia J Q, Wang H T, Tang J X, Li X H, Li K X, Hu G Z. Determination of key strata and interval of roofing breaking of hard
and soft composite roofs. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2006, 25(5): 974-978(In Chinese).
[6] Phillipson S E. Texture, mineralogy, and rock strength in horizontal stress-related coal mine roof falls. International Journal
of Coal Geology, 2008, 75 (3):175– 184(In English).
[7] Shen B, King A, Guo H. Displacement stress and seismicity in roadway roofs during mining-induced failure. International
Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 2008, 45 (5):672– 688(In English).
[8] Wang L, Guo G L, ZHANG X N, LIU Y X. Evaluation on stability of old goaf foundation by long wall caving based on the
key stratum theory. Journal of Mining & Safety Engineering, 2010, 27(3): 57-61(In Chinese).
[9] Tian J S, Gao S. Deformation and failure study of surrounding rocks of dynamic pressure roadways in deep mines. Mining
Science and Technology, 2010，20(6):850 - 854 (In English).
[10] Xu X F, Dou L M, Lu C P, Zhang Y L. Frequency spectrum analysis on micro-seismic signal of rock bursts induced by
dynamic disturbance. Mining Science and Technology, 2010，20(5):682 - 685 (In English).
[11] Li S G, Zhang T J. Catastrophic mechanism of coal and gas outbursts and their prevention and control. Mining Science and
Technology, 2010，20(2):209 - 214 (In English).
[12] Song D Z, Wang E Y, Wang C, Xu F L. Electromagnetic radiation early warning criterion of rock burst based on statistical
theory. Mining Science and Technology, 2010，20(5):686 - 690 (In English).
 FENG Xiaojun
FENG et al. Procedia
Xiaojun/ / ProcediaEngineering
Engineering0026(2011)
(2011)000–000
457 – 465 465
9

[13] Tang J H, Bai H B, Yao B H, Wu Y. Theoretical analysis on water-inrush mechanism of concealed collapse pillars in floor.
Mining Science and Technology, 2004，23(4):1301 - 1306 (In English).
[14] Zuo Y J, Li S C, Qin S F, Li L P. A catastrophe model for floor water-resisting key stratum instability induced by dynamic
disturbance. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2010, 31(8): 2361-2366 (In Chinese).
[15] Zhu W B, Wang X Z, Kong X, Liu W T. Study of mechanism of stope water inrush caused by water accumulation in
overburden separation areas. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2009, 8(2): 36-311 (In Chinese).
[16] Liu K Y, Qiao C S, Zhou H, Teng W Y. Research on combined motion characteristics of overlying rock stratum and
position of key stratum. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2004，23(4):1301 - 1306 (In Chinese).
[17] He H, Dou L M, GONG S Y, ZHOU P, XUE Z J. Rock burst rules induced by cracking of overlying key stratum. Chinese
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2010, 32(8):1260-1265 (In Chinese).
[18] Kratzsch H. The Mining damages and protection. Beijing: Coal Industry Press, 1984:154-155(In Chinese).