在铜坑矿92号矿体裂隙矿岩崩落法开采区域选取试验区,阐述崩落法回采过程巷道顶板危险区域确定的解构法和数值模拟法的具体内涵,对两种方法计算结果及差异性进行分析比较.结果表明:解构法能够准确解算危险结构体可能失稳的形式和具体赋存位置,但其从矢量角度确立的危险结构体数量、危险区域分布范围比真实情况略小,巷道稳定性结果略高;数值模拟法考虑卸荷和爆破作用影响,对回采过程顶板下沉、结构体失稳状态分析较准确,但采用虚拟裂隙面控制结构面发育范围,导致确立的危险结构体数目过多,巷道稳定性比工程实际略低;工程应用中应以解构法为主、数值模拟法为辅,综合确定巷道顶板危险区域.
The test area was selected in caving mining area of No. 92 ore body's fracture ore rock at Tongkeng Minewas. The concrete connotation of the deconstruction method and numerical simulation method of determination of tunnel roof's dangerous area in caving stoping process were described. The comparative analysis of calculation results and differences between these two methods was carried out. The results show that, firstly, the deconstruction method can accurately deconstruct the possible bulking forms and concrete occurrence positions of dangerous structural bodies. However, the number of dangerous structural bodies and the distribution range of dangerous area established by this method from aspects of vector are slightly smaller than real situation, and the results of roadway stability are slightly higher. Secondly, the numerical simulation method considers the influence of unloading and blasting action, so that it can more accurately analyze the roof subsidence and unstable states of structural bodies in stoping process. Nonetheless, it applies the virtual fracture surface to control the development range of structural planes, resulting in that the number of established dangerous structural bodies is excessive and the roadway stability is slightly lower than engineering practice. Thirdly, the deconstruction method should occupy dominant position, aided by the numerical simulation method, to comprehensively determine the dangerous area of roadway roof in engineering applications.
参考文献
- 下载量()
- 访问量()
- 您的评分：
-
10%
-
20%
-
30%
-
40%
-
50%