1. LONGWALL UNDER
r
ma
ADVERSE STRATA
CONDITIONS Ku
sh
EXPERIENCE OF WORKING PANEL NO.8
ure
D.S
r:M
MD.SURESH KUMAR
Additional Manger/Colliery Manager
The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kothagudem, A.P.
tho
Au

2. INDEX
1. Introduction
r
ma
2. General Information of Longwall Panel No.8
3. Reducing the Face length
Ku
Supports in the Face
Face Operation
sh
Face Swing
4. Working the Face in 1 in 4 gradient
ure
Problems faced with Face Steepness
Creep Control
D.S
5. Negotiating the dyke in the Coal Seam
Face advance below Dyke
r:M
6. Water bearing strata and Goaf water from overlying Mine
Dealing the Face Water
Effect of Heavy inrush of water from the roof strata
tho
7. Geological Disturbances
8. Working over Virgin Bottom Seam
Au
Figures to support the workings over virgin Bottom Seam
9. Longwall Face Retreat below High roof
Stone Roof Portion
Supporting in the High Roof
Method of Girder Support in the High roof
Face Retreat below high roof
Floor Heightening
10. Conclusions
11. References

3. 1. INTRODUCTION
No.5 Incline, Kothagudem Area is one of the biggest underground mines of SCCL,
Khammam district, Andhra Pradesh. There are three workable seams namely Queen seam (Top
seam) King seam and Bottom seam.
The mine was started in the year 1952.Extensive development and depillaring was
made in King Seam and bottom seam. A vertical shaft of 212 m was sunk in the year 1971/1972
and equipped with winding arrangement. Subsequently chair lift system was also introduced
during 1999, which reduced traveling length.
r
With bilateral agreement between India and China, two Longwall sets with 4X760
ma
te IFS Powered roof supports and 2 km long steel card belt supplied by M/s CME China and put
them into operation in the mine at Top seam. Out of that one unit has been transferred to GDK 9
Ku
Inc RG II Area.
Longwall panels have been prepared in Top seam having ‘F’ grade coal. The King
sh
and bottom seams are containing high-grade coal D & C grade, which were worked extensively
by conventional board and pillar mining upto 280 m depth. AM-50s are deployed for LW panels
ure
preparation in top seam. So far 11 LW panels have been worked in top seam in middle section
The 12th Panel (i.e. panel No 8) was completed recently.
D.S
Two sets of Longwall units with 2Km long steel cord belting for coal evacuation
from underground to surface were introduced in the year 1995-96.LW unit-I had worked panels
2, 4, 5A and 5D and unit II had worked panels 3, 5, 5C, 22, 1, 1A, 21 and 8.There by each unit
r:M
has produced 19, 71,874 Te and 27, 75,095 Te respectively.
As per the feasibility report there were 26 panels (15.4 M te) proposed in top seam and
tho
14 panels (9.63Mte) in King seam .Out of 26 panels in Top seam, 11 have been completed. The
balance 14 panels have been reduced to 7 due to the following reasons,
Au
120-m face length as proposed in FR was re-drawn to 150 m.
Change in fault position and its throw, as per latest geological Information.
In the Virgin King seam 14 panels have been projected in ‘FR’.
However 7 panels are available below the panels in Top seam. Finally, the following are LW
panels available for extraction in the Mine.
Top seam Panels 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 Total
Reserves 5.06 4.14 4.60 3.52 3.50 3.54 6.94 31.33
King seam Panels 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.6 M Te

4. 2. GENERAL INFORMATION OF LONGWALL PANEL No 8
2.1 Panel Details:
1. Face length : 150m Center to Center
2. Panel length : 420m
3. Depth of the Top seam : 275m -305m
4. Thickness of the Seam & Height of : 9.0m & 3.0m
extraction
5. Face Gradient : 1 in 6 and 1 in 4
r
ma
6. Immediate Roof & Floor : Shaley Coal
7. Condition of underlying seam : King seam Virgin
8. Condition of overlying Seam : No.1 Seam Goaf (i.e., 8A, 8B & 8C Panels) of 5B
Ku
Incline
9. Number of supports in the face : 103
sh
10. Coal Grade : Higher ‘G’, >2000Kcal Per Kg
ure
2.2 Powered Roof Support:
1. Make : CME (China Mining Engineering), China
2. Type : Chock Shield IFS (Immediate Forward Support)
D.S
3. Length : 3.87m (Main Canopy: 2.47m and Articulated Canopy
: 1.40m)
4. Width : 1.4m (1.50m Center to Center)
r:M
5. Weight : 20.5 tonnes
6. Height : 2.20m (Fully closed piston) and 3.40m (Fully opened
tho
piston)
7. Capacity : 4 Legs x 760 tonnes, each Leg 190 tonnes
Au
8. Pull Force : 63 tonnes
9. Push Force : 30 tonnes
10. Support Density / Resistance : 110 tonnes per square metre (Chock),
103 t/Sq.m. (Overall face)
11. Setting Pressure : 26 Mega Pascals (MPa) or 260 Bar (68% of the
Yield Pressure) 29 MPa or 290 Bar (75% of Yield
Pressure) during weighting periods
12. Yield Pressure : 38.70MPa or 387 Bar
13. Leg Type : Single Telescopic with 1.20m piston length
14. Safety Feature : Yield or Bleed valve (Rate:120 liters per minute)

5. 15. Leg make : CME,China and JBE (Jaya Bharat Engg Ltd.), India
2.3 Strata
The different beds of the strata lying over
the working section of the longwall panel
are shown below in Fig.1. The thickness of
the individual beds of Grey sandstone (Grey
Sst) is also shown in Fig.1. The thickness of
the Shaley coal, i.e., immediate roof is 3.0m,
and that of the clay band is 1.44m.
r
ma
Borehole section
Ku
1. Local fall is composed of fall of 3.0m shaley coal roof and 6.35m Grey sand stone bed. Fall
of shaly coal occurred at 11.0m and shaly coal plus 6.35m sandstone bed occurred at 21.80m.
sh
2. Main fall occurred at an average progress of 80.30m with an area of exposure of 12840
square meters.
ure
3. Weighting zone during main fall : C38 to 103
4. During main fall beds upto a strong bed (Moderately Cavable) of 14.68m have been
D.S
collapsed.
5. The caving height in this panel is 24m (i.e., shaley coal 3.0m + Grey Sst bed 6.35m + Grey
Sst bed 14.68m as shown in fig.1.).
r:M
6. Periodical caving of the main roof occurred at an interval of 15 to 25m.
tho
3. Reducing the face length
As per ‘FR’, there were 11 Longwall panels have been extracted in the
Au
Top Seam. The Virgin dip side property kept untouched due to Neighbouring mine -5B. Hence
it was planned to develop panels in the North side property behind the existing Longwall Panel
goaves. The length of the Panels in the Top seam mainly restricted by a 6.5m throw fault
(No….) which is traversing from North West to South east. To reach the Virgin patch on North
side, Trunk roadways were planned to be developed by negotiating this fault. Therefore, a
decision was taken to drive the Top gate and bottom gate upto fault No…., and to connect the
face dip at 58m bottom gate advanced than Top gate to prove the fault and to extract the
additional property in the triangle portion.

6. The 58m staggering of gate roadways increased the face length by 166m.
Though the difficulties added by the additional length 16m in the Face dip is well known, it was
carefully planned to swing the face to reduce it to 150m based on the experience of Panels No.5C
in the same Mine.
3.1 Supports in the Face
Normally, 102 PRS are installed in any of the Panels worked here with
150m Face length. Whereas in Panel No.8 one additional support was added to take care of Gate
roadway support due to anticipated creep problem because was the first Panel to be worked with
r
the Face gradient of 1 in 4.5. But the extra length (16m) was planned to be supported with cogs
ma
and OC Props. Keeping few more no of Power Supports was not feasible due to its removal and
evacuation when face length reduced.
Ku
During installation of Power Supports, around 10 spaces of 1.5m length
were created by missing Power Supports then and there from Midface to Top gate side. But the
sh
AFC Pans were continuously arranged, so that, the extra length was covered by introducing
additional Pans. The spaces in between the Power Supports were supported by bolting, meshing,
ure
one cog and OC Props.
D.S
3.2 Face Operation
The Shearer could be traversed from bottom gate to Top gate and cut the
r:M
entire face due to extra Pans added in the AFC. The Power Supports used to be advanced dip &
Rise side of “Spaces” supported by Cogs and OC props which were used to shifted by one web
tho
length by stopping the Shearer. AFC Pan in that place was advanced with the help of adjacent
Power Support. Problem of difficulties of AFC pushing occurred rarely when short length OC
Au
Props were utilized to push the AFC.
3.3 Face Swing
To reduce the face length gradually, the Face was swing by cutting the
face at the ratio of 1:3 between bottom gate and Top gate respectively. On reduction in the face
length by every 1.5m / .3.0m, One or two pan sets were to be removed at top gate i.e.,
immediate line pans below Drive unit and the gradient Pans. Drive unit were pushed and
meshed to the line pans at dip side. Thus two Power Supports at top gate became idle, without
Pans. The ‘Spaces’ left out in the Supports were covered with Supports by detaching all the
Clevis of Power Supports between nearest “Space” and top gate and by pushing them towards

7. dip. In this way the Face length was reduced gradually, Additional Pans were removed and the
‘gaps’ in the Power Supports have been covered Stage wise.
4.0 WORKING THE FACE AT 1 IN 4 GRADIENT
Unlike in the other faces, General Seam steepness increased from 1 in 10 to 1 in 6
in this Panel. Moreover, there was gradient change within the face of 150m that the coal seam
from top gate to mid face formed as steep as 1 in 4 and 1 in 6 from mid face to bottom gate.
Smooth face needed to be worked as per seam formation with two different gradients along the
face.
r
4.1 Problems faced with Face Steepness
ma
4.1.1 Face alignment was quite problematic, as the total face length couldn’t be seen with eyes
from one gate to other due to two different gradients in the face
Ku
4.1.2 The Power Supports in the steep portion of the face used to tilt towards bottom gate and
hardly have they been maintained normal to the seam. Thus, in the both the ways the
sh
“support Resistance” was reduced due to “Upward support Résistance” was not being
totally utilized to thrust the Roof vertically.
ure
4.1.3 Shearer traction shoe, Sprocket assembly and guide shoe started breaking frequently.
High shearing load and load on hydraulic main pump, auxiliary pumps in the pump box
D.S
were experienced with the Chinese Shearer DERD-2 x 300 KW. Completion of P-8, has
consumed quit number of Pumps, Sprocket assemblies and traction shoes.
r:M
4.1.4. Drop in Pressure in the Hydraulic Circuit at the Top gate was 4 -6 Mpa resulting in
Sluggish hydraulic operation in the Power Supports. Two numbers of 200 GPM Chainco
pumps were operated simultaneously for some times, to componsate the pressure drop.
tho
4.2 Creep Control
Au
4.2.1 No special technique was adopted for Creep control in the face. The bottom gate was kept
25m advanced by top gate that came to 9-10 degrees oblique face which was double the
amount, in terms staggering length and creep angle when compared to other faces of flat
gradient.
4.2.2 While advancing the bottom gate, the Power Supports were always advanced with an
anchoring prop pushing towards Rise side, to avoid tilting and sliding of Gate end
Supports. Generally the AFC bottom drive pushed and kept anchored first then the other
pans advanced from dip to Rise.

8. 4.2.3 Much comfort was found in Bidirectional Cutting rather than Unidirectional Cutting that
advancing Power Supports and AFC simultaneously had less slope for turning or sliding
of Supports towards dip direction.
4.2.4 In some occasions AFC top gate drive was pulled towards Rise and anchored with a
conveyor advancing ram which has also given better result.
5.0. NEGOTIATING A “DYKE IN THE COAL SEAM
At …….. m of face retreat, the Sand stone roof lowered down for 3m from C-75 to C-85 for the
r
lengths of 15m. The top 3m, Shale and Shally Coal portion of the Seam got missing but the
ma
middle 3m portion which is working section was intact.
Ku
sh
ure
D.S
r:M
tho
Hence, it was planned to work the face having Smooth
Au
floor horizon and with the Stone roof as contact over the Supports
5.1 Face advance below Dyke
5.1.1 The uneven shape of the Sand stone roof in this portion was cut with Shearer to maintain
uniform roof and floor horizons.
5.1.2 Lamination of coal seam with the Sand stone portion at the either edges of the dyke was
found very weak and sandy in nature, which was incapable of withstanding to the
abutment load particularly during face-weighting period. The either sides of the dyke
used to collapse readily resulting in “Face Cavity”.
5.1.3 This was overcome by introducing wire mesh in that portion with fore-pole bolts, for the
length of …… m along the strike direction of the face.

9. 6.0. WATER BEARING STRATA AND GOAF WATER FROM OVERLYING MINE
A Seasonal nalla known as “Tellavagu” crossing the Mine property at dip side. Due to
that, the strata were reasonably charged with water below 110L. Moreover the Panel No.8 was
exactly located below goaves of Panel No.8A, 8B, 8C of Neighbouring Mine-5B. The average
partition between both the seams is 190m. The make of water during development of Panel itself
was 400 GPM. It was increased gradually to 600 GPM before main fall, 900 GPM after main
fall and sustained at 1000 GPM for a long period after 3 - 4 Periodic falls. The maximum out
flow of water was 1300 GPM during a Periodic fall.
The unexpected water outflow from the Panel No.8, redefined the entire Pumping
r
ma
arrangement of the Mine
6.1 Dealing the Face water
Ku
6.1.1 A deep nallah was cut manually along the bottom gateway as practiced in the earlier
Panels, Spending more than 1000 Manshifts during Panel – Preparation, which was
sh
effectively utilized to deal with the inrush of goaf water by cleaning it regularly.
6.1.2 Water- Pockets were prepared with the dimension of 4m length and 2.5m depth by
ure
blasting the dip side barrier at three places along the length of the gate roadways. Setting
Chambers have been constructed in the Pockets which were cleaned regularly to send the
D.S
clean water without slush to the pumping station.
6.1.3 The dip most workings were not prepared to deal with extra water influx from Longwall
r:M
Panel. Standage capacity was less as there were limited galleries in the dip side. Hence,
a small pumping station was set at the entrance of the gate roadways and the water from
the Panel used to be pumped out with 1 – 40 HP (250 GPM) high head pump and 1- 75
tho
HP (500 GPM) low head pump. Spare pumps were kept readily available at the site
itself.
Au
6.1.4 The total Mine water make up of 1800 GPM without Panel No.8 was added by another
1000 GPM from Panel No.8 which warranted the introduction of 2 No’s of 350 HP
Pumps apart from existing 5 No’s of 240 HP Pumps.

10. 1 IN
ar
N
um
hK
res
Face Start Line
Face Retreat
LONGWALL PANEL # 8
420m X 150m
Su
D.
A A
r:M
tho
Plan of Longwall panel No 8 in Top seam of No.5 Incline over lined by
Goaved out workings of No.1 Seam of 5B Incline
Au

11. 6.2 Effect of Heavy Inrush of Water from the Roof- Strata
6.2.1 There was water always dripping from Roof-Strata, over the Canopies in the face
particularly midface to bottom gate.
6.2.2 The continuous water percolation from the strata considerably weakened the immediate
coal and Shale Portion which used to readily crush over the canopies.
6.2.3 The Shale part of the overlying roof, on mixing with strata water, due to abutment load
during face weighting period, became a loose-mass and was collapsing readily for face
cavities.
6.2.4 50 % of Periodic Weightings resulting in face Cavities due to few more reasons in
r
ma
conjunction with ‘excess strata water’.
6.2.5 The running mass of Shale and Clay mixed with water, on falling down onto AFC, stalled
the 2x200 KW AFC on many occasions. The time taken to restart the AFC after manual
Ku
cleaning the coal, still aggravated the Cavity situation.
sh
7.0 GEO-LOGICAL DISTURBANCES
ure
This was the first Longwall Panel in the Mine which experienced severe geological that
……….. No. of minor faults with 0.1m to 1.0m throw, …… No. of Slips and uncountable
D.S
number of joint-planes along Face dip parallel to the face. Gate roadways were found with
so many undulations due to number of up throw and down throw faults. Gallery heights
reduced at some places in bottom gate which were heightened by dropping the roof layers.
r:M
Two major roof collapses occurred at bottom gate during such heightening due to existence
of combination of slips and minor faults.
tho
8.0 WORKING OVER VIRGIN BOTTOM SEAM
Au

12. 8.1.1 FIGURES TO SUPPORT THE WORKINGS OVER VIRGIN BOTTOM SEAM
F ro n t
R ea r
2 5
Leg Pressure (MPa)
2 0
1 5
1 0
2 5 5 0 7 5 1 0 0 1 2 5 1 5 0
r
F a c e P r o g r e ss (m )
ma
Fig. Pressure distribution between Front and Rear legs
Periodic weighing - 4
Periodic weighing - 3
Ku
Periodic Weighting -1
Periodic weighting - 2
Main weighting
75
70
sh
Mean Load Density ( t / sq.m)
65
ure
60
55
D.S
50
45
40
r:M
25 50 75 100 125 150
F a c e P r o g r e ss (m )
Fig. Mean Load density curve in Longwall panel # 8
tho
40
CPR 75
30
Au
20
LgPes r ( P )
e r sue M a
40
CPR 65
30
20
40
CPR 50
30
20
40
CPR 30
30
20
20 40 60 80 100 120
Face Progress (m)
Fig. Continuous Pressure survey along the length of the panel # 8.

13. 8 0
T o p Z o n e
7 0
MLD ( t / sq.m )
6 0
5 0
4 0
3 0
8 0
M id Z o n e
7 0
MLD ( t / sq.m )
r
6 0
ma
5 0
4 0
Ku
3 0
8 0
B o tto m Z o n e
7 0
MLD ( T / sq.m )
sh
6 0
5 0
ure
4 0
3 0
2 5 5 0 7 5 1 0 0 1 2 5 1 5 0
D.S
F a c e P ro g re s s (m )
r:M
Fig. Zone-wise Meal Load Density Curve in Longwall Panel
tho
Au

14. 9.0 LONGWALL RETREAT BELOW HIGH ROOF
During formation of the Panel No.8, the tailgate 111L was driven with different roof
sections, due to series of up throw and down throw faults, particularly the portion of tailgate
(i.e.305M to 400M – 95M length) was developed in top section having sand stone roof.
9.1 Stone roof Portion:
Length : 305m to 400m (95m)
Avg. width of the gallery : 4.0m
r
ma
5.5m (370m – 385m) at roof horizon
Height : 3.5m to 6.5m
Sides : Week
Ku
Condition of Sandstone : sounds good, Bolted with mesh
sh
9.2 Supporting in the High roof
1. Additional bolting is being done with special capsules to have anchorage in watery
ure
conditions. Around 150No’s new bolts are required to be foxed with 1.0m grid pattern.
2. Two stage girders fixed at 2.0m interval with 3/6 laggings
D.S
3. Timber spread over the 3/6 lagging with wire mesh.
4. Wooden cogs with special timber constructed at 2.0m apart from I – Stage girders to II –
r:M
Stage girders and jammed to stone roof.
5. Lower stage girders were fixed in such a way to maintain optimum height of tailgate
chocks i.e. 30Cms above the long wall face roof.
tho
6. Some additional bolts with mesh fixed to the sides between I – Stage girders and stone roof
and this is being continued.
Au
7. The lower stage girders are reinforced by tying each other with 3/6 girders and bolting.
8. All girders notches were grouted with cement.
9. 40T OC Props are fixed below the girders as per SSR.
10. 40 Te OC Props are being erected in the abutment zone of 30m from the face.
OC Props are fixed over wooden planks wherever height is more.
11. Cement injection was done along dip side.

15. 9.3. Method of Girder Support in the high roof.
a. Span of 4/8 girder was exactly 1.5m
b. Thorough dressing done before locating the girder notches.
c. 3’ Notches were placed along dip side and 1.5’ notches along rise side.
d. 0.5m of girder length were be seated inside the notches on either side.
e. 3/69 laggings spreaded at equal space and the dip side member was kept very close to the
side.
f. Only normal sleepers shall be used for spreading over 3/6 girders.
g. One cog with special sleepers (1.5m length x 5” width x 5”height) at center of the gallery,
r
ma
constructed and jammed to stone roof by placing over 2 adjacent 4/8 girder.
9.4 Longwall face retreat below high roof
Ku
1. 18 Nos girders were fixed at the height of 1.5 to 1.6M from marker band. Last 6 girders
were fixed with slightly raising trend so as to have clearance below the girders for men and
sh
material passage.
2. All the girders were fixed in coal notches only.
ure
3. Normally the LW face is worked in the middle section 3.0M having 1.0M above and 2.0M
below a reference band which is known as ‘Marker band’. The Main gate and tailgate have
D.S
been developed with the similar section only. The available section over the marker band is
0.3M shale and 1.4M coal. Out of 1.7M, 1.0M is being extracted leaving 0.7M coal in the
r:M
roof as contact roof over the canopies of power supports.
4. But to optimize the floor regarding the section will be slightly lifted in the tailgate portion
by 1.5M/1.5M with respect to marker band.
tho
5. Thus0.5M to 1.0M floor removing is required from 315to 335M to expose 1.5M floor
below marker.
Au
6. Floor regarding in this Zone will be attempted with out stopping the face P/Shift regarding.
7. 1.5M below the marker band will be exposed by floor regarding.
8. Max depth to be regarded is 2.0M (335M to 375M).
9. Regrading will be done in a phased manner. Face operation will be stopped and the
Face crew will be utilized for the purpose.
10. It will be also ensured that the cement injection and bamboo bolting to dip side is
Completed before heightening.

16. 9.5 The floor Heightening:
a. All vertical supports will be removed in the zone where floor to be removed.
b. Controlled floor blasting.
c. Fixing 4/8 girders at 1.5M apart with 3/6 lagging, wire mesh and wooden cogs with special
timber (5”x5”x1.5M) to stone roof.
d. Girder notches will be located in the coal sides only which will be grouted immediately.
e. These girders will be re in forced with 3/6 girder ties.
f. Removing the muck and filling on to AFC.
g. Bolting the newly expose sides
r
ma
Steel bolt –Rise side Bamboo bolts – Dip side
h. The removed vertical supports will be reinstalled below the girders.
i. Wooden cogs will be erected below each 4/8 girder only on rise side to reduce the width of
Ku
the gallery exposure.
j. Retreating the face.
sh
ure
D.S
r:M
tho
3/6 Bearings 4/8 Girders Linked fence 1.5M
Au
Wherever the span was more than 3.0m two cogs were constructed over the girder (Ref. Fig: 2)
0.5
Width 4.0M
0.5

17. REDUCING THE FACE LENGTH
from 166m to 150m
PANEL NO 8 150m
150*420m 166m
cutting 1:3 ratio mg to tg
At mg prog of 89.0 m and tg prog 127.40 m face length was reduced to 150m
r
ma
Ku
sh
ure
D.S
r:M
tho
Au

18. ar
Stone intrusion in the Seam
um
Seam 9m
hK
3m
3m
res
3m
Su
D.
C-85
C-75 r:M
tho
Au

19. CONCLUSIONS
Though the mine was not exclusively planned for Longwall technology, Padamavathi Khani
Longwall project has been introduced and completed its 10 years service.
12 Longwall panels have been completed by overcoming different Mining, equipments,
Quality, Geological problems.
10 years of LW Operations in the mine, brought out number of experienced officers
,supervisors and team of technicians and work men.
Panels have been formed and extracted right from the out crop and upto
r
300 m depth in panel No.8 with different walking distances.
ma
Experiences gained in the deviation panel (P-5C), Shallow depth panel (P-1 & 1A) and
stone roof panels (P-21) were markable one.
Ku
Strata monitoring studies are being conducted by Mine Management sincerely and the health
monitoring of supports are being done and maintained efficiently. With that, all these panels
sh
have been worked without any major strata control problems.
This is the only project having worked all panels with 150 m face length (except P No 1 &
ure
1A) and planned to continue to work with the same.
Longwall production has crossed 1.1 M Te in the year of 1996-97.
D.S
Longwall production slowly reduced to 0.3 to 0.4 M Te in the last five years due to ageing
of equipments and indegenisation.
r:M
At this end, new strategy is under formulation to reconstruct the PVK Longwall by
refurbishing the equipment and by taking up necessary repairs and modifications for gainful
development to extract the further LW panels so as to make the project economically viable.
tho
Au
Acknowledgements:
The authors expressed their gratitude to the management S.C.Co.Ltd.,for giving permission to
publish the paper. The views expressed in this paper are of their own and not belonging to the
organisation in which they are working.

20. References:
1. Report on “Numerical modeling & Strata and support behavior investigations at panel no.21
PVK-5 Incline”, Dec 04.
2. Sarkar SK (1998 ) “ Mechanized Longwall Mining –The Indian Experiences ”
3. Dr.Samir Kumar Das (2004), “ Design of Powered supports for Longwall faces” In house
short term course for Mining Executives,
4. Venkata Ramaiah M.S and Suresh Kumar M.D.,(2004) “Experience of Strata monitoring
studies in shallow depth longwall extraction by caving in panel no.1A & 1 of PVK –5 Incline”
r
3rd National seminar on rock excavation techniques at Nagapur organised by The Indian
ma
Mining and Engineering Journal Bhubaneswar chapter.
5. Suresh Kumar M.D.,and U.Shiva shinkar (2006) “Need for working Longwall under hard
Ku
roof in future under ground mining–An experience of negotiating main weighting in sandstone
roof “-Workshop on future of underground coal mining in India Mechanised board&pillar or
sh
longwall”organised by JMMF.Kolkata
6. “Compendium on experiences of Longwall Mining Technology"by SCCL.
ure
7. Venkata Ramaiah and Suresh Kumar M.D.,( 2005 ) “ An experience of loading pattern
with Sandstone roof in Longwall panel No.21 of Padavathi Khani No.5 Incline – National
D.S
Storming session on Mechanisation of Underground Coal Mines Challenges and Technical
options.
r:M
tho
Au

21. Au
tho
r:M
D.S
ure
sh
Ku
ma
r