International Journal of Mining Science and Technology xxx (2018) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Mining Science and Technology

Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal–a case study

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Highwall mining of thick (up to 30.48 m) steeply dipping (20° or more) coal seams provides many chal-
Received 10 June 2017 lenges, both geotechnically and operationally, as seam dips near or in excess of highwall mining machine
Received in revised form 19 August 2017 capabilities are encountered. Maximizing coal recovery while maintaining highwall stability requires
Accepted 29 October 2017
innovative techniques with regard to web and barrier pillar layout, depth of penetration, and choice of
Available online xxxx
mining horizon within the seam. Stability of highwall mining slopes, openings, and pillarsare typically
analyzed using the ARMPS-HWM program, as well as LAMODEL, UDEC and Slope-W modeling.
Highwall stability can be maintained, and highwall mining production optimized by applying design cri-
teria in creative ways, including alternating miner penetration depths and initiating mining of thick
seams toward the bottom of the seam. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal requires careful
planning and execution, including close cooperation between geotechnical design engineers, the mining
company, and the highwall mining contractor. This paper describes the application of creative design
techniques to a specific pit arrangement at the Westmoreland Kemmerer Mine, Kemmerer, Wyoming.
Highwall mining was accomplished by UGM ADDCAR Systems, LLC on a contract basis.
Ó 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China University of Mining & Technology. This is an open
access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction reducing the gradient of the openings and increasing the maxi-
mum penetration. Multiple passes from the same hole can increase
Highwall mining is a technique for attaining additional coal the mining height as long as they remain aligned and do not
recovery after the economic strip limit is reached in surface min- encroach into the web pillars. If the seam is thick enough, multiple
ing. It involves remote deployment of a continuous miner in open- penetrations can be made in different elevations while leaving a
ings beneath the final highwall, with no personnel entry. Many sill pillar between the excavations. These down dip operations
candidate areas for highwall mining have thick and steeply dipping are susceptible to water inflow, both from underground and sur-
seams. Mining down dip presents challenges related to the face sources, requiring pumping and/or other control measures.
machine’s maximum pulling capacity, traction of the cutting head,
and material conveying, all of which limit penetration depth. Max-
imum penetration is greater for flatter slopes and decreases for 2. Analysis methods
slopes nearing the threshold of the maximum machine operating
angle. Most highwall mining operations are relatively flat with Highwall mining pillar design is a direct function of coal
slight undulations within the seam; therefore, the highwall mining strength, opening height, opening width, and depth of cover. These
pillar design criteria applies fairly equally to the entire mining inputs are used to create design curves unique to each mine’s
area. However, in steeply dipping deposits, design criteria based geologic environment to specify the web and barrier pillar widths
on higher overburden loads at the far end of the penetration are necessary to achieve the desired safety factor (SF). Agapito
excessively conservative for the shallower portions of the openings Associates, Inc. (AAI) has been involved with most western United
near the highwall. States highwall mining projects performed since the late-1990s.
Thick seams allow for more flexibility when designing for max- Design techniques have evolved over the years; currently, web
imum recovery. Holes can be angled across the seam dip, thereby and barrier pillar designs are based on the National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) ARMPS-HWM program
[1]. The program uses a modified tributary area loading model
⇑ Corresponding author. and an empirical estimation of coal strength to determine
E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Ross). appropriate pillar widths for both web and barrier pillars. AAI then

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2017.12.022
2095-2686/Ó 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China University of Mining & Technology.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article in press as: Ross C et al. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal–a case study in geotechnical design and recovery optimiza-
tion. Int J Min Sci Technol (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2017.12.022
2 C. Ross et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology xxx (2018) xxx–xxx

uses the LAMODEL program as a check of the ARMPS-HWM Highwalls are normally mined along the seam strike and
designs and to predict the potential for cascading pillar failure therefore, highwall mining openings are oriented and mined
should one or more pillars fail. Typically, one complete panel and downdip, perpendicular to the face. For steep seams, an
portions of the adjacent panels are modeled in LAMODEL with angled-hole technique permits increasing penetration, and thus
and without a failed central pillar [2]. UDEC is used primarily to production. By orienting the openings at an angle to the highwall,
model roof conditions, but also provides insight into pillar and instead of mining directly downdip, the mining gradient can be
floor conditions [3]. UDEC is also used in multi-level designs to decreased somewhat resulting in a greater penetration depth.
evaluate the interaction between stacked openings and the ade- However, the holes must be reoriented at a fairly large angle to
quacy of sill pillars. Highwall mining has the potential to reduce realize any significant benefit in a steeply dipping environment,
highwall stability by weakening and raising the stress levels in which may not be practical operationally. Additionally, to maintain
the mined coal seam, usually at the base of the highwall. AAI uses the required web pillar width, fewer openings are possible for a
Slope-W to evaluate overall highwall stability before and after given pit width, thereby reducing the overall production. For the
highwall mining by simulating the weakening of the coal seam maximum practical orientation of 15° from the perpendicular,
based on the extraction ratio [4]. the effective dip for a 20° seam dip is reduced to 18°, permitting
The following are the SFs and design criteria typically used in approximately 30.48 m of increased penetration. Angled holes also
designing a highwall mining excavation area: result in a wider roof exposure at the collar, potentially resulting in
decreased stability.
A highwall mining panel should not exceed 20 openings Production can also be increased in thick seams by making mul-
between barrier pillars. tiple passes in a single opening to increase the effective mining
Web pillar SF  1.6 for normal operations height or to mine multiple stacked openings. Multi-pass mining
Web pillar SF  2.0 for protection of critical structures has been accomplished for heights of about 8.53 m, and even
Minimum 0.8 web pillar width-to-height (w:h) ratio greater heights are operationally possible. Overall production with
Barrier pillar SF of 1.5 with w:h > 4, 2.0 with w:h < 4 a greater mining height is somewhat offset by the requirement for
Overall panel SF (webs and barriers) 2.0. wider web and barrier pillars to maintain stability. For example,
overall production for 8.53 m openings would be about
47.8% greater than the production using 4.26 m openings. The
3. Production optimization ARMPS-HWM design formula includes a w:h term which reflects
the decreased strength of taller (more slender) pillars. Also, a min-
There are many challenges in maximizing recovery for very imum w:h ratio of 0.8 is normally imposed, based on past experi-
steep and thick seams with moderately dipping highwalls. Pene- ence with instability of pillars having low w:h ratios. With taller
tration of the mining machine is typically limited for steeper oper- openings, the potential for rib spalling also increases, and needs
ating slopes. For example, the ADDCAR miner routinely achieves to be considered.
maximum penetrations of 365.76 m or more when working on Multi-lift mining requires very thick seams in order to accom-
grades of less than 16° [5]. As the grade increases past 16°, the modate two (or more) openings and the intermediate sill pillar
maximum penetration decreases, to an ultimate limit of 182.88 (s). For single-pass openings, a rule of thumb that AAI has applied
m at a 20° slope. is that the sill pillar thickness should be at least two times the
For thick seams, production may be increased by mining cross- height of the openings. As the opening height increases however,
seam, cutting vertically across the seam at a flatter dip, to obtain this guideline is likely conservative, and sill pillar thickness should
greater penetration depth. The machine may ultimately contact be determined through numerical analysis. Depending on the seam
the seam roof before maximum penetration is achieved; therefore, thickness, multi-pass mining can be combined with multi-lift min-
the opening should be initiated at the base of the seam to optimize ing to increase production. Normally, the recovery lost from having
penetration. If the seam is thick enough, the machine operating to increase pillar widths associated with higher openings is offset
angle may be reduced sufficiently to permit up to twice the pene- by the increased recovery from the higher openings. Since web pil-
tration depth, resulting in twice the production. Fig. 1 illustrates lar widths required for multi-lift mining are only slightly increased
the expected maximum penetration depths that might be achieved versus those of single-lift mining, production from multi-lift min-
for a 6.10-m excavation height in a 20° seam for different machine ing could double or more, depending on the number of lifts.
inclination sand seam thicknesses. At some inclination, the pene- For moderately sloping highwalls, production can be increased
tration at which the machine contacts the roof coincides with the by implementing an alternate depth mining method. In this
limiting penetration for the given inclination and represents the method, every other hole is mined to the design penetration, while
maximum possible penetration (optimum case). At steeper inclina- the holes between the full penetration openings are stopped short.
tions, the penetration is reduced, due to machine limitations, Fig. 2 shows a plan view of the hole layout that was implemented
resulting in less production. at the mine. For the shorter holes, the depth of cover under the

Fig. 1. Maximum penetration depths in a 20° maximum for different machine

Please cite this article in press as: Ross C et al. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal–a case study in geotechnical design and recovery optimiza-
tion. Int J Min Sci Technol (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2017.12.022
 C. Ross et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology xxx (2018) xxx–xxx 3

highwall is less than that at full penetration, permitting the use of holes alternating between full and reduced penetration: maximum
narrower web pillars at the highwall. The pillar between the ends mining height is 6.10 m (two 3.05 m passes), maximum penetra-
of the full penetration holes is typically wider than necessary as it tion depth 182.88 m, depth of cover at maximum penetration
is composed of the widths of two shorter penetration web pillars 131.06 m, reduced penetration depth 114.30 m, depth of cover at
plus the opening width. Although the coal produced from the reduced penetration depth 95.10, maximum penetration web pillar
shorter holes is reduced, the narrower web pillars at the highwall width 13.26 m (7.41 m required), reduced penetration web pillar
allow more openings to be mined for a given pit width. This width 4.88 m, maximum penetration barrier pillar width 27.13 m
increases overall recovery versus a layout in which all holes are (24.99 m required), and reduced penetration barrier pillar width
mined to the same penetration. AAI has developed algorithms for 18.75 m.
determining the shorter hole penetration that optimizes recovery Fig. 4 shows a typical highwall cross section for Pit 5, where the
for a specific highwall profile. highwall mining took place. If all holes were mined to the full pen-
etration depth of 182.88 m with an excavation height of 6.10 m,
the cover depth would be 131.06 m, the required web pillar would
4. Field experience be 7.41 m, and the overall production would be 419.36 tons/m
along the highwall. If the plan was optimized to include alternate
Using design guidelines developed by AAI and approved by the holes with a penetration depth of 114.3 m, the cover depth over
Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), highwall mining the shorter holes would be 95.10 m, the required web pillar width
at Westmoreland’s Kemmerer Mine began in January 2017 in the at the highwall would be reduced to 4.88 m (0.8 w:h ratio), and the
475 Seam in Pit 5 of the 2UD mining area. The 475 Seam has an overall production would increase to 442.58 tons/m. Note that the
average dip to the west of approximately 20°, with a maximum web pillar width at maximum penetration is 13.26 m (twice the
dip greater than 24°. The seam thickness in this area averages 4.88-m web pillar at the highwall, plus the opening width of
approximately 7.32 m. 3.51 m), which is greater than the 7.41 m required (Fig. 2).
ADDCAR was contracted by Westmoreland to perform the high- As an added degree of conservatism to the geotechnical design,
wall mining excavation in the 2UD area. Fig. 3 shows the ADDCAR AAI recommended that the first highwall panel be limited to 10
launch vehicle stationed at a highwall mining opening. A conven- openings. AAI also recommended that web pillars in this initial
tional coal continuous miner excavates the opening and deposits panel be increased by at least 0.61 m until the alignment of
the cut coal onto a series of linked conveyor cars that are multi-pass openings could be confirmed. Data from ADDCAR’s
positioned and removed from the launch vehicle using a front- on-board monitoring systems confirmed that the alignment was
end loader. Coal discharged from the cars is conveyed along the adequate, and subsequent panels were mined with designed pillar
base of the launch vehicle to a side-stacking conveyor at the rear widths and 20 openings per panel.
of the vehicle. The system is monitored and controlled from an Highwall mining at the Kemmerer Mine is ongoing. To date,
operator room mounted at the rear of the launch vehicle. A number mining has been successful, but not without challenges. The sys-
of modifications were made to the standard highwall mining sys- tem has proven capable of operating at inclinations greater than
tem to allow it to work at the 20° slope present at Kemmerer. the design limit of 20°; in some areas, it has successfully mined
These modification were primarily related to strengthening at an angle greater than 25°. ADDCAR also successfully verified that
components to handle the weight of the miner and train of alignment could be adequately maintained for two-pass mining.
conveyor cars. Additionally, the cutter head was replaced with a During the highwall mining design stage, it was recognized that
higher power, heavy duty unit that yields a higher cutting height water could be an issue because certain areas on the property have
(3.35 m) and higher mining rates than the standard cutter head. historically produced water. However, the location of water
Since the potential highwall mining recovery of the 475 Seam is sources is inconsistent, and inflow volumes could not be predicted
beyond the economic limits of surface mining, exploration data for with accuracy. Owing to the inclination of the openings, water that
the seam beyond the final highwall were sparse. Therefore, addi- drains into the excavation (surface or groundwater) accumulates at
tional exploration holes were drilled to support detailed highwall the face. Groundwater was encountered in the 475 Seam at pene-
mining planning. The depth of cover at the highwall mining tration depths between 64.00 and 182.88 m. Most of the initial
machine’s limits was crucial to the design, and based on the holes in the southern portion of Pit 5 encountered water. While
expected seam dip of 20°, 182.88 m was the maximum penetration the highwall miner is operating, the water has minimal effect on
that could be achieved. Seven holes were drilled from the surface production. However, if mining is interrupted due to mechanical
above the highwall: four corresponding to a penetration depth of or operational delays, the back of the hole tends to flood, making
91.44 m from the highwall, and three near the penetration limit reentry problematic. Although some holes had to be abandoned
of 182.88 m. This additional drilling improved the seam model due to flooding, the next adjacent holes benefited from the dewa-
beyond the final highwall and confirmed the applicability of the tering of the coal seam. By taking advantage of the dewatering,
ADDCAR highwall mining system. Below are the seam variables improving machine availability, and using operator experience to
and highwall mining design criteria used at this location, with allow more of the water to be conveyed out of the hole with the

Fig. 3. ADDCAR launch vehicle in operation. Fig. 4. Typical profile of the 6.10-m seam dipping 20°.

Please cite this article in press as: Ross C et al. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal–a case study in geotechnical design and recovery optimiza-
tion. Int J Min Sci Technol (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2017.12.022
4 C. Ross et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology xxx (2018) xxx–xxx

coal, ADDCAR was able to incrementally increase penetration and and multi-lift mining can increase production, but have some
ultimately achieve design penetration on a consistent basis. geotechnical risk associated with them. Cross-seam and alternate
ADDCAR plans to design a pumping system for the highwall mining penetration methods can increase production with very little addi-
machine to help reduce the amount of water at the back of the tional risk. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal requires
hole, allowing the miner to reenter flooded holes. careful planning and execution, including close cooperation
Westmoreland, ADDCAR, and AAI are currently in the process of between those responsible for geotechnical design, the mining
designing another area for highwall mining production, which company, and the highwall mining contractor.
should be ready to begin production later this year.
References
5. Conclusions
[1] NIOSH. ARMPS-HWM: new software for sizing pillars for highwall mining.
Technol News 2006;516(March). 2 pp.
The restrictions imposed by steep-dip mining substantially [2] Heasley KA, Salamon MD. New laminated displacement-discontinuity program:
reduce production and recovery as compared to flat-seam mining. fundamental behavior. In: Proceedings, 15th international conference on
ground control in mining, August 12–15, 1996. Golden (CO): Colorado School
Creative mining methods have been evaluated to optimize produc- of Mines; 1996. p. 111–25.
tion in steep seams, and thick seams in particular. These methods [3] Itasca Consulting Group. UDEC version 5.0 user’s guide. Minneapolis
involve mining the openings at shallower gradients by mining (Minnesota); 2011.
[4] Geo-Slope International Ltd. Stability modeling with SLOPE/W, 2007 version
cross-seam or at an angle to the highwall. Other techniques appli-
7.23 user’s guide. Calgary (Canada); 2010.
cable to increase production include multi-pass, multi-lift, and [5] UGM ADDCAR Systems, LLC. Private communications with key personnel.
alternate depth methods. Angled openings, multi-pass mining, Ashland (Kentucky); 2017.

Please cite this article in press as: Ross C et al. Highwall mining of thick, steeply dipping coal–a case study in geotechnical design and recovery optimiza-
tion. Int J Min Sci Technol (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2017.12.022