CMRR

Coal Mine Roof Rating
Sunday, October 14, 2012

2 Coal Mine Roof Rating
Table of Contents
Foreword 0
Part I CMRR 7
1 Overview ................................................................................................................................... 7
2 Applications ................................................................................................................................... 7
3 Program Interface
................................................................................................................................... 10
Part II The File Menu 13

1 Creating New
...................................................................................................................................
Files 13
2 Opening Existing
...................................................................................................................................
Files 13
3 Saving Files................................................................................................................................... 14
4 Saving Files...................................................................................................................................
under Different Names (Save As) 14
5 Setting Up the
...................................................................................................................................
Printer 15
6 Printing Files
................................................................................................................................... 15
7 Print Preview
................................................................................................................................... 15
8 Browsing Text
...................................................................................................................................
Files 16
9 Exiting the Program
................................................................................................................................... 16
Part III The Edit Menu 18

1 Project Description
................................................................................................................................... 18
2 Project Input...................................................................................................................................
Parameters 18
3 Custom Rock
...................................................................................................................................
Library 19
4 The Main Input
...................................................................................................................................
Form 20
5 The Unit Access
...................................................................................................................................
Form 23
6 Plot Roof Layers
................................................................................................................................... 24
7 Results Window
................................................................................................................................... 24
Part IV The Import/Export Menu 27

1 Import from ...................................................................................................................................
AutoCAD 27
2 Export to AutoCAD
................................................................................................................................... 28
Part V The Utilities Menu 30

1 Settings ................................................................................................................................... 30
CMRR.INI .......................................................................................................................................................... 32
2 Options ................................................................................................................................... 33
3 Plot Color Options
................................................................................................................................... 35
4 Unit Conversions
................................................................................................................................... 35
5 File Conversion
................................................................................................................................... 36
Contents 3
Part VI The Help Menu 38

1 About CMRR................................................................................................................................... 38
2 Program Updates
................................................................................................................................... 38
3 References ................................................................................................................................... 39
4 HelpButton ................................................................................................................................... 43
Part VII List of Figures 46

1 Figure 1 ................................................................................................................................... 47
2 Figure 2 ................................................................................................................................... 47
3 Figure 3 - Options
................................................................................................................................... 48
4 Figure 3 - Metric
...................................................................................................................................
Version 48
5 Figure 3 - English
...................................................................................................................................
Version 49
6 Figure 3 - Metric
...................................................................................................................................
Version - Landscape Format 50
7 Figure 3 - English
...................................................................................................................................
Version - Landscape Format 51
8 Figure 4 ................................................................................................................................... 52
9 Figure 5 ................................................................................................................................... 52
10 Figure 6 ................................................................................................................................... 53
11 Figure 7 ................................................................................................................................... 54
12 Figure 8 ................................................................................................................................... 54
13 Figure 9 ................................................................................................................................... 55
14 Figure 10 ................................................................................................................................... 56
15 Figure 11 ................................................................................................................................... 57
16 Figure 12 ................................................................................................................................... 58
17 Figure 13 ................................................................................................................................... 58
18 Figure 14 ................................................................................................................................... 59
19 Figure 15 ................................................................................................................................... 60
20 Figure 16 ................................................................................................................................... 61
21 Figure 17 ................................................................................................................................... 62
22 Figure 18 ................................................................................................................................... 63
23 Figure 19 ................................................................................................................................... 64
24 Figure 20 ................................................................................................................................... 64
25 Figure 21 ................................................................................................................................... 65
26 Figure 22 ................................................................................................................................... 65
Part VIII List of Tables 68

1 Table 1 ................................................................................................................................... 68
2 Table 2 ................................................................................................................................... 69
3 Table 3 ................................................................................................................................... 69
4 Table 4 ................................................................................................................................... 69
3
5 Table 5 ................................................................................................................................... 69
Part IX Background Information 71

1 CMRR (Brief...................................................................................................................................
Description) 71
2 Rock Mass Classification
................................................................................................................................... 72
3 Ground Control
................................................................................................................................... 74
4 Bedding ................................................................................................................................... 74
5 Strong Bed ................................................................................................................................... 74
6 Slickensides...................................................................................................................................
and Other Discontinuities 75
7 Uniaxial Compressive
...................................................................................................................................
Strength 76
8 Faults and Other
...................................................................................................................................
Linear Features 76
9 Unit Rating for
...................................................................................................................................
Underground Exposure Data 76
10 Ball Peen Hammer
...................................................................................................................................
Test 78
11 Strength Rating
................................................................................................................................... 78
12 Chisel Test ................................................................................................................................... 78
13 Shear Strength
...................................................................................................................................
of Discontinuities (Cohesion and Roughness) 79
14 Discontinuity
...................................................................................................................................
Intensity (Spacing and Persistence) 79
15 Multiple Discontinuity
...................................................................................................................................
Adjustments 80
16 Unit Rating for
...................................................................................................................................
DrillCore Data 80
17 Point Load Testing
...................................................................................................................................
(PLT) 82
18 RQD ................................................................................................................................... 83
19 Fracture Spacing
................................................................................................................................... 83
20 Immersion Test
................................................................................................................................... 84
21 Moisture Sensitivity
...................................................................................................................................
Deduction 85
22 Strong Bed Adjustment
................................................................................................................................... 85
23 Surcharge Adjustment
................................................................................................................................... 86
24 Unit Contacts
...................................................................................................................................
Adjustment 86
25 Ground Water
...................................................................................................................................
Adjustment 87
26 Ferm Number
................................................................................................................................... 87
27 Slake Durability
...................................................................................................................................
Tests 88
Part X Data Collection and Classification 90

1 Data Collection
...................................................................................................................................
and Classification - Overview 90
2 Data Collection and Classification - Unconfined Compressive
Strength ................................................................................................................................... 91
3 Data Collection
...................................................................................................................................
and Classification - Discontinuity Intensity 92
4 Data Collection and Classification - Shear Strength of
Discontinuities
................................................................................................................................... 93
5 Data Collection and Classification - Moisture Sensitivity
Deduction ................................................................................................................................... 94
Contents 5
6 Data Collection
...................................................................................................................................
and Classification - Strong Bed Adjustment 95
7 Data Collection
...................................................................................................................................
and Classification - Other Adjustments 95
Index 97
5
Part
I
CMRR 7
1 CMRR
Overview
Rock Mass Classification
Ground Control
Data Collection and Classification
Applications
References
Program Interface
About CMRR
Help File Updated: Sunday, October 14, 2012
1.1 Overview
The Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) was developed 10 years ago to fill the gap
between geologic characterization and engineering design. It combines many years
of geologic studies in underground coal mines with worldwide experience with rock
mass classification systems. Like other classification systems, the CMRR begins
with the premise that the structural competence of mine roof rock is determined
primarily by the discontinuities that weaken the rock fabric. However, the CMRR
specifically designed for bedded coal measure rock. Since its introduction, the
CMRR has been incorporated into many aspects of mine planning, including
longwall pillar design, roof support selection, feasibility studies, extended cut
evaluation, and others. It has also become truly international, with involvement in
mine designs and funded research projects in South Africa, Canada, and Australia.
See also: Data Collection and Classification, Background Information, Applications
1.2 Applications
Description:
During the past 10 years the CMRR has been used extensively in the U.S. Figure
12 shows the current data base, containing 264 observations from more than 200
mines. The figure reveals some very important regional trends. Weak roof
predominates in the northern Appalachian and Illinois Basin coalfields, which are
also areas where roof falls tend to occur more frequently (Pappas and Mark, 2003).
Central Appalachian mines have a wide range of CMRR values, but the typical roof
is of moderate strength. Utah mines tend to have the most competent roof in the
U.S.
A number of mine planning design tools that are based on the CMRR are discussed
below.
Analysis of Longwall Pillar Stability (ALPS)

The first, and perhaps the best known, application of the CMRR is the ALPS pillar
design method (Mark et al, 1994a). A large database of longwall case histories was
collected from throughout the US, and subjected to statistical analysis. The results
showed that when the roof was strong (CMRR>65), longwall chain pillars with an
ALPS Stability Factor (SF) as low as 0.7 could provide satisfactory tailgate
conditions (Figure 13). On the other hand, when the roof was weak (CMRR<45), the
ALPS SF might need to be as high as 1.3. ALPS has been the standard technique
employed to size pillars for most US longwalls for many years.
Longwall Tailgate Design (Australia)

ALPS was the starting point for an Australian Coal Industry Research Project
(ACARP) whose goal was to develop an Australian chain pillar design methodology (
Colwell et al., 1999). The project aimed to calibrate ALPS for the different
geotechnical and mine layouts used in Australia. Ultimately, case history data were
collected from 60% of Australian longwall mines.
The study found strong relationships between the CMRR, the tailgate SF, and the
installed level of primary support. Design equations were developed that reflected
these trends. The final product, called the Analysis of Longwall Tailgate
Serviceability (ALTS), was implemented in a computer program and has become
widely used in Australia.
Stability of Extended Cuts

Place changing is the standard development method in the U.S. The traditional 20 ft
(6 m) cut length was determined by the distance from the cutting head to the
operator's compartment. With the advent of remote control continuous miners,
"extended cuts" up to 40 ft (12 m) long have become common. However, many
mines with extended cut permits only take them when conditions allow. Where the
roof is competent, extended cuts are routine. At the other extreme, when the roof is
very poor, miners may not be able to complete a traditional 20 ft (6 m) cut before the
roof collapses.
To help predict when conditions might be suitable for extended cuts, a study was
conducted at 36 mines throughout the U.S. The study found that when the CMRR
was greater than 55, extended cuts were nearly always routine, but when the CMRR
was less than 37, they were almost never taken (Mark, 1999a). The data also
showed that extended cuts were less likely to be feasible as the roof span or the
depth of cover increased (Figure 14).
Roof Bolt Selection

CMRR 9
To help develop scientific guidelines for selecting roof bolt systems, NIOSH
conducted a study of roof fall rates at 37 U.S. mines (Mark et al., 2001; Molinda et
al., 2000). The study evaluated five different roof bolt variables, including length,
tension, grout length, capacity, and pattern. Roof spans and the CMRR were also
measured. Performance was measured in terms of the number of roof falls that
occurred per 10,000 ft of drivage.
The study found that the depth of cover (which correlates with stress) and the roof
quality (measured by the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR)) were the most important
parameters in determining roof bolting requirements. Intersection span was also
critical. The study's findings led to guidelines that can be used to select the proper
span, bolt lengths, and bolt capacity based on the CMRR. The results have been
implemented into a computer program called Analysis of Roof Bolt Systems (ARBS).
Multiple Seam Mining

Interactions with previous mining in underlying or overlying seams are a major cause
of ground instability in the U.S. A statistical analysis of a data base of more than 360
case histories found that the CMRR was highly significant in predicting the outcome
of a multi seam interaction. Other significant variables include the pillar SF, the total
pillar stress, whether the previous seam was above or below, and what type of pillar
structure is present in the previous seam.
The statistical analysis became the foundation for the AMSS software package. The
output from AMSS is the "critical interburdern thickness" that is necessary to avoid
interactions. AMSS indicates that, all else being equal, a CMRR = 45 roof requires
approximately 15 m more interburden than a CMRR = 65 roof.
Longwall Mining through Open Entries and Recovery Rooms

Unusual circumstances may require that a longwall retreat into or through a
previously driven room. The operation is usually completed successfully, but there
have been a number of spectacular failures. To help determine what factors
contribute to such failures, an international data base of 131 case histories was
compiled (Oyler et al., 1998).
The study found that the CMRR and the density of standing support were the two
most important parameters in predicting severe weighting-type failures. These
failures only occurred when the CMRR was less than 55, and when the support
density was less than 75 psi (0.5 MPa). When the CMRR was 40 or less, all the
successful cases employed a standing support density of at least 150 psi (1.0 MPa).
Roof Fall Evaluations (South Africa)

The CMRR featured prominently in an important research project sponsored by the
Safety in Mine Research Advisory Committee (SIMRAC) and other leading industry,
labor, and government organizations in South Africa. The goal of the project was to
investigate the causes of fatal roof failures in South African coal mines. A team of
recognized experts visited a broad spectrum of mines and collected data at 182 roof
fall sites. The study found that roof falls were more likely where the roof was less
competent in terms of the CMRR. Another finding was that the CMRR correlated
well with roadway widths. Based on data presented by Mark (1999b) (see Figure 15)
, the study also concluded "in South African coal mines, less support is used for
comparable roof conditions than either the USA or Australia. This supports previous
conclusions that in South African coal mines, the density of supports needs to be
increased" (van der Merwe, 2001).
Another SIMRAC study found the CMRR easy to use and robust enough to
adequately describe the roof conditions at most South African collieries (Butcher,
2001). It took less than four hours for a trained geologist to become competent with
the method. The results seemed more reasonable than those obtained from the
RMR, which tended to overrate ground conditions by at least one class (20 points)
due to its lack of sensitivity to the characteristics of bedded strata. Some
improvements were suggested for the CMRR, including adjustments for joint
orientation, blasting, and horizontal stress.
Baseline Comparison of Ground Conditions (Canada)

The underground coal industry of Canada is small and geographically dispersed. To
assist the mines in maintaining world-class safety standards, CANMET established
the Underground Coal Mine Safety Research Consortium. One of the Consortium's
first projects was aimed at establishing a "best practice" baseline for conducting
geological and geomechanical assessments and applying the findings to
geotechnical design.
The CMRR was found to be particularly valuable in the assessment (Forgeron et al.,
2001). It allowed the Canadian underground mines to be compared with each other
and with international benchmarks. Based on the CMRR, many ground control
safety technologies developed in the U.S. were found to have direct application to
the Canadian mines.
Other Applications
· Highwall mining can become uneconomic if the roof is so weak that it
collapses before the miner has been withdrawn from the hole. The CMRR has
been used to evaluate potential highwall mining reserves and identify
potentially unsuitable areas (Hoelle, 2003).
· Tailgate support guidelines incorporating the CMRR have been included in
the STOP program (Barczak, 2000).
· Input for numerical models have been derived from the CMRR (Karabin and
Evanto, 1999).
1.3 Program Interface

The File Menu
The Edit Menu
The Import/Export Menu
CMRR 11
The Utilities Menu

The Help Menu
Part
II
The File Menu 13
2 The File Menu

Description:
Use the File menu option to access various file management operations such as:
Creating New Files

Opening Existing Files
Saving Files
Saving Files under Different Names (Save As)
Setting up the Printer
Printing Files
Print Preview
Browsing Text Files
Exiting the Program
2.1 Creating New Files

Description:
Use the New option to erase the existing dataset (if any) from memory and create a
new (blank) dataset. All related entries are set to their initial values.
Notes:
· The program will prompt you whether to save the current file to disk.
2.2 Opening Existing Files

Description:
Use the open option to load a file (dataset) from the disk into program memory.
To use Open:
· Select the Open option from the File menu. The program displays a listing of
the available files in the current data directory.
· Optionally, select a different drive or directory using the mouse or the cursor
control keys.
· Select or enter a filename.
Notes:
· If the file extension is omitted, the default extension will be appended.

· If the current dataset is not saved, the program will prompt whether to save
changes or not before discarding the current dataset.
2.3 Saving Files

Description:
Use the Save option to save an existing file (dataset) to the drive or directory from
which it was originally loaded. Any changes that were made since the last time the
file was saved will be saved on the disk. The filename stays the same and the file
remains in memory.
To use Save:
Select the Save option from the File menu.
Notes:
· If the file has never been saved using the Save As option, choosing Save
automatically displays the Save As dialogue box, which prompts for a filename
before saving it.
2.4 Saving Files under Different Names (Save As)

Description:
Use the Save As option to save a file and give it a new name.
To use Save As:
· Select the Save As option from the File menu. The program displays a listing
of the available files in the current data directory.
· Optionally, select a different drive or directory.
· Select or enter a filename.
Notes:
· If the file exists, the program will prompt whether to overwrite the existing file.
· Use Save for a faster save operation.
The File Menu 15
2.5 Setting Up the Printer

Description:
Use this option to select the Printer to use for printing output and graphics. This
printer becomes the Windows default printer.
To use this option:
Select the Printer from the drop-down list and click on OK.
2.6 Printing Files

Description:
Use the Print option to print the current dataset (file) from program memory to the
default windows printer. The default printer may be set using the Setting Up the
Printer menu option.
Notes:
· The file is send directly to the printer, without preview. Use the Print Preview
option to preview the file and then send it to the printer.
2.7 Print Preview

Description:
The user may navigate through the Print Preview Window by using the vertical scroll
bar.
The text in the window can be send directly to the printer, or it can be copied to the
Windows clipboard for use in other applications.
Notes:
· This operation does not send any control characters to the printer. All output is
ASCII text. The text prints in "Courier" or "Courier New" font in size 9. If these
fonts are not available to the printer, then printed text will appear in the default
printer font.
· Each printed page is formatted with preset margins as follows:
ü left margin = 1 inch
ü top margin = 1 inch
ü bottom margin = 1 inch
ü right margin = variable
2.8 Browsing Text Files

Description:
Use the browse option to view a text (ASCII) file in a specified directory. No editing
is allowed during browsing.
Use the pattern field to specify a file pattern (i.e. *.txt). The file window will be reset
to conform to the specified pattern. The default pattern is *.CMR. More than one
patterns can be applied using “;” as delimiter (e.g. *.txt;*.dxf).
Use the Set Font command button to specify the type and size of font for the
displayed text. These settings are saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Use the cursor control keys to move within the browse window.
2.9 Exiting the Program

Description:
Use the Exit option when ready to exit this program and return to the original
environment. The program will prompt you to save the current file to disk, if not
already saved.
Part
III
3 The Edit Menu

Description:
Use the Edit menu option to access various parameter input/edit forms such as:
Project Description
Project Input Parameters
3.1 Project Description

Project Description includes the following fields:
Project Title:
This is an arbitrary 80 character description of the model being generated.
Project Description:
This is an arbitrary 300 character description of the model being generated. It is a
recommended to make this a fairly detailed description of the specifics of the input
file. This text may be a single line of characters or may contain "carriage return
characters".
Mine Name:
This is an arbitrary 80 character field for the Mine Name.
Seam Name:
This is an arbitrary 80 character description for the Seam Name.
Number of Locations at Mine Site:

The user can specify the number of locations where CMRR data will be generated
for the particular mine site. All the location data can be saved in a single file for
further processing,. A file can hold a maximum of 100 locations.
Current Units:
The user can also set the type of units that will be used in the current project. The
program is designed to use two different sets of units:
· feet, in, psi
· m, cm, MPa
3.2 Project Input Parameters

Options:
The Edit Menu 19
· The Main Input Form

· The Unit Access Form
Description:
Location Management
The user can navigate through the various data sets for a particular mine using the
Current Location slide bar at the top of this form. The maximum number of
locations allowed is determined by the information entered under Project
Description.
CMRR
This is a calculated field. For more information, see CMRR (Brief Description). For a
more detailed analysis, see also Overview.
· Unit Rating for Underground Exposure Data

· Unit Rating for DrillCore Data
3.3 Custom Rock Library

Description:
As of version 2.0, the user can enter custom descriptions for Rock Types. This
option allows the user to manage custom rock type entries as follows:
Add Entry
A new entry can be typed in the Rock Type text box and then entered in the list. The
program checks for duplicates. If a duplicate entry is added, then the program
appended a unique ID number at the end of the text description.
Delete Entry
A selected entry can be deleted. However, when an CMR file is loaded, then no
entries can be deleted, even if they are not used by the CMR file.
Modify Entry
A selected entry can be modified. The text is copied in the "Rock Type" text box,
where the user can modify it and then the new text is added in the list. .
Input from Ferm List

This option allows the user to populate the library list with the Ferm entries available
in the CMRR program. The word "custom" is prepended to each entry.
Input from CMR File

This option allows the user to import just the library entries from an existing CMR
file.
Export to Library File

This option allows the user to export entries to a CML file (CMRR Library file). This
is a plain ascii file and can be copied along with a regular CMR file to another
computer, to implement the same custom CMRR rock library there.
Import from Library File

This option allows the user to import entries from a CML file (CMRR Library file).
The program checks for duplicate entries.
Notes:
· Double click on an entry to set the color of the formation to be plotted under
Plot Roof Layers.
3.4 The Main Input Form

Description:
For each location the following data should be entered:
Corehole ID
This is an optional parameter. It is used to identify the current location.
Depth to the Roof Line

The depth to the top of the seam (roof line) in the current units (ft or m) should be
entered. Entering or changing this field results in two different behaviors depending
on the setting of the Use Depth to Calculate Unit Thicknesses option:
· If this option is enabled (elevation mode), then when changing the Roof Line
elevation, the program will check the new elevation against existing elevations:
· if the new elevation is below the elevation of the lowest Unit, then the
thickness of this unit will be increased accordingly
· if the new elevation is between Unit elevations, then the appropriate unit
elevation will be modified and the Units below will be disabled. (This way
the original unit thickness is preserved for these units.)
· if the new elevation is higher than the highest Unit, then all units will be
disabled.
· If this option is disabled (thickness mode), then when changing the Roof Line
elevation, the program will modify the unit elevations for all units, assuming that
the bottom of the lowest unit constitutes the roof line.
Easting
This is an optional parameter. It is used when CMRR data is exported on to a mine
map.
The Edit Menu 21
Northing
This is an optional parameter. It is used when CMRR data is exported on to a mine
map.
Type of Data
There are two possible data types:
· Underground exposure, and
· Drill core.
This information is vital since it determines the type of Unit Rating that will be
used.
Notes:
· Underground exposure can be checked if the data was collected from a roof
fall, overcast, or highwall.
· Drill core can be selected if drill core information is available from actual core,
drillers logs, E-logs, or stratascope data.
· Once unit information is entered, then the data type is locked for the particular
location in the data set. To unlock the data type, the user should clear all
information at the current location.
Number of Units
The total number of units (i.e. roof layers) at the particular location should be
entered. These should cover the bolted interval up to a maximum of 8. Units are
the building blocks of the CMRR and are defined as roof rock members with distinct
structural characteristics (Figure 3).
Note:
· First the user must decide on the height of the bolted interval as determined by
the length of roof bolt. Within that interval, the roof must be divided into Units
and for each Unit the program will calculate a Unit Rating. A single unit may
include more than one rock types if all have similar structural characteristics
(i.e. strength). Hence, to determine the number of Units in the roof, divide the
strata into Units of equivalent structural strength. Sometimes the ragged edge
of a roof fall show brows, which can aid in grouping rocks of equal strength.
Rock members in the roof generally correspond to Units but not always. For
example, interbedded sandstones and shales, (“stackrock”) might be treated
as a single Unit if they have similar geotechnical properties. Many times these
are minor changes and can be lumped into larger Units if you take a step back
from the core and look at its overall character. Usually there are 1-3 individual
Units comprising a roof, but the program can accommodate up to 5 Units.
Units must be at least 6 inches thick, because it is assumed that thinner Units
are unlikely to significantly affect the overall structural competence of the
bolted interval.
Bolt Length
The length of the bolts used at this particular location should be entered. The bolt
length identifies the rock thickness used in the calculation of CMRR.
Use Depth to Calculate Unit Thicknesses

· When this option is enabled, the user will be prompted to enter depth from the
top for each unit. The thickness of each roof unit will then be back-calculated
from unit elevation data. (This option allows drillcore data to be entered
directly into the CMRR program.)
· When the option is disabled, the user will be prompted to enter the thickness
of each roof unit. The elevation of each roof unit will then be back-calculated
from unit thickness data.
See also: Depth to the Roof Line
Unit Description
· Use Ferm Library: When this option is enabled, the user can only using the
rock definitions provided by the Ferm Rock Library (this is the default setting
and the only setting applicable to the original version of CMRR).
· Use Custom Rock Library: When this option is enabled, the user may use
rock descriptions from a custom rock library that can be maintained by the
program. See Custom Rock Library for more details.
· Enter Text Description: When this option is enabled, the user can enter
simple text in the rock description field. This setting does not ensure uniform
representation of rock strata in the same or different locations even within the
same CMR file. In addition this option does not allow setting the plot colors for
different rock formations. No warning will be issued if the description field is
left blank.
Groundwater Conditions
The appropriate groundwater conditions should be selected from the drop down
combo box. For more details, see Groundwater Adjustment.
Surcharge Conditions
The appropriate surcharge conditions should be selected from the drop down
combo box.
For more details, see Surcharge Adjustment.
General Notes:
· If the Auto Calculate CMRR upon Return from Unit Editor option is checked in
the CMRR Options form, then the program will automatically calculate CMRR
when changes that affect CMRR are implemented. Otherwise, calculation is
manual and can be done by clicking on the Calc CMRR command button. It is
strongly advised to use the Auto Calculate feature.
· Click on the Plot Roof Layers command button to plot a roof cross section on
the screen. For more details, see Plot Roof Layers.
The Edit Menu 23
3.5 The Unit Access Form

Description:
This is a dynamic form comprising of a number of rows. Each row corresponds to a

Unit, up to the maximum number of Units selected in the Main Input Form, For
each unit the following general information should be supplied.
Thickness of the Unit

The thickness of each unit in the current units (ft or m) should be entered.
Alternatively this value is automatically calculated if the option Use Depth to
Calculate Unit Thicknesses is enabled.
Rock Type
The appropriate rock type for each unit should be selected. A selection of rock
types, also identified by their Ferm Number, are provided in the pull-down combo
box. Click on the Picture command button next to each entry to see a picture of
the formation (if available). Additional description of the formation may be entered
in the form available for each unit.
Custom Rock Type

When the Use Custom Rock Library check box is checked, then the user is
presented with an alternate set of Rock Descriptions. These rock descriptions can
be managed through the Rock Library menu option. See also Custom Rock Library.
When a Custom Rock Library is used, then Rock Pictures are not available.
Depth to the top of the Unit

Automatically calculated if the depth to the top of the coal seam is available.
Alternatively this value should be entered if the option Use Depth to Calculate Unit
Thicknesses is enabled.
Unit Rating
This field is automatically calculated (or updated) each time the user leaves a unit
form.
Unit Status
This check box can be used to disable a unit from CMRR calculations.
Detailed Information for Each Unit

To enter detailed information the user should click on the Unit command button to
the left of each row. Depending on the type of data that was requested in the main
input form, the program will branch to the forms for:
· Unit Rating for Underground Exposure Data

· Unit Rating for DrillCore Data
3.6 Plot Roof Layers

Description:
This form allows viewing and printing of the layer information and bolt layout for a
particular location. Additional information includes the Mine Name and Coal Seam
Name as well as the overall CMRR value for the location. The user can specify the
type and size of fonts used for viewing and/or printing.
Notes:
· The colors of the different rock strata depicted in this plot are defined either
through the Plot Color Options Option for Ferm Rocks or under the Custom
Rock Library menu for custom rock definitions.
· A coloring scheme can not be assigned to Rock definitions that are entered as
simple text.
3.7 Results Window

Description:
The text is organized in pages. By default, the user views the first output page,
which is usually the second page. The first page is reserved for printing the input
data.
The user may navigate through the text of a single page using the vertical scroll bar
and the arrow keys. No editing is allowed.
Text can be selected (block select) and copied to the clipboard using Ctrl-C. Use
Ctrl-A to select all text in a page.
In addition, use the command buttons below for additional output navigation and/or
printing operations:
Previous Page: Display the previous page of output (if any).
Next Page: Display the previous page of output (if any).
View Plot: Display a plot of the geometry of the mining plan with options to display
dimensions or pillar properties.
Print Page: Print current page to any Windows printer.
Print All: Print all pages to any Windows printer.
Copy Page: Copy current page to the clipboard.

The Edit Menu 25
Copy All: Copy all pages to the clipboard (pages separated by carriage return
characters).
Part
IV
The Import/Export Menu 27
4 The Import/Export Menu

Description:
Use this menu option to
· Import from AutoCAD: This option imports CMRR location points into the
program
· Export to AutoCAD: This option exports CMRR locations, CMRR values and
optionally location labels to each point.
· Export to ASCII: This option exports CMRR locations, CMRR values and other
data per location to ASCII files. The user can set the appropriate exporting
options
Notes:
· Both options require that AutoCAD 2000 or higher is installed in the computer
running the CMRR program. All input and output to AutoCAD files is handled
through Visual Basic for Applications code.
· If the CMRR program exits ungracefully or is killed by the user, an AutoCAD
program image (although not visible) may still be in memory taking up memory
and user resources. Use the task manager to kill that instance of AutoCAD (if it
is still running).
4.1 Import from AutoCAD

Description:
Use this option to import CMRR location points into the program. CMRR or other
descriptive information can not be imported through this procedure. To facilitate
importing, the CMRR location points should be stored in the AutoCAD drawing file in
a separate layer as AutoCAD points.
Step 1: Type a filename or Select a file user the Browse command button.
Step 2: Select the layer containing the CMRR location points.
Step 3: Check the "Append Locations" check box if appending points to an existing
file.
Step 4: Initiate the import procedure by clicking the "Import" command button. When
the procedure is completed, the program will display the number of points imported.
Notes:
· If the "Append Locations" check box is checked, then the program will import
points and append them to the existing points. However, the "Import"
procedure can not overwrite existing location information. To ensure that the
CMRR file contains only imported points, the user should start a new CMRR file
prior to importing points.
· To append point locations to an existing CMRR file, then open the file, select
the "Import" procedure and ensure that the Append Locations" check box is
checked.
· If CMRR location points are defined on multiple layers, then the user can only
import points from a single layer at a time. To keep all such points in the same
file, the use should check the "Append Locations" option. Note that the "import"
procedure will import ALL points in a layer. It is not a good practise to store
CMRR points on multiple layers.
· The "Import" procedure will only import X,Y,Z coordinates of point entities. It will
not import CMRR data since such data are not stored in AutoCAD files.
4.2 Export to AutoCAD

Description:
Use this option to export CMRR location points to an existing AutoCAD drawing file.
Such information is stored as AutoCAD points in the AutoCAD drawing file.
Optionally export CMRR location IDs for each location to the same file but on a
separate layer. This information is stored as Text in the AutoCAD drawing file.
Step 1: Type a filename or Select a file user the Browse command button.
Step 2: Select whether to export to existing layers or new layers in the specified
AutoCAD file.
Step 3a: If the option to export to existing layers was selected, then the user should
select the appropriate layers using the drop down combo boxes in the form.
Step 3b: If the option to export to new layers was selected, then the user should
specify the layer names using the text boxes provided in the form.
Step 4: In both cases the user can select to export the location IDs as text in the
AutoCAD file. Appropriate layer names should be specified.
Step 5: Click on the export command button to start exporting. When the procedure
is completed, the file will be saved and closed.
Part
V
5 The Utilities Menu

Settings
Options
Unit Conversions
File Conversion
Clear History Window

This option clears the history (activity) window.
Close/Restore History Window

This option closes or restores the history (activity) window according to the current
window status.
Copy History Window

This option copies the contents of the history window to the clipboard. You can then
paste them to any text handling program for further processing.
5.1 Settings
Description:
This form is used to define a number of default parameters and settings for the
CMRR program:
Default Units:
This setting controls the default units for a new or blank project file by configuring
the Units field in the Project Description form. Upon entering and accepting project
input parameters, the default setting in the Project Description form cannot be
changed. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Default File Extension for Input Files:

This setting is the default 3-letter extension used in the Open and Save dialog
boxes in the File Menu. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Data Path:
This setting is the default path used in the Open and Save dialog boxes in the File
Menu. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Show Disclaimer:
This parameter controls whether the disclaimer message will be displayed when
loading the CMRR program. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Maximize Main Menu Window:

The Utilities Menu 31
This parameter controls whether the main menu window will be maximized when
loading the CMRR program. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Keep Recently Filelist:

This parameter controls whether the program will keep the four (4) recently
accessed data files (opened or saved) as menu items in the File Menu. This setting
is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Reminder of Annual Updates:

This parameter controls whether the program will display a warning that a year has
elapsed since the last update of the program. The update date is internally stored
and it is not related to the install date. Annual updates ensure that any bugs that
have been discovered are fixed regularly. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Display Command History Window:

This parameter controls whether the program will display recently executed
commands (and their resulting actions). This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Maximum Characters in Command History Window:

Maximum number of characters displayed in the command history window, before it
is cleared. This setting is enabled only if the Display Command History Window
option is enabled. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
History Font:
This button sets the type and size of font used in the command history window. This
setting is enabled only if the Display Command History Window option is enabled.
This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Enable Toolbar:
This settings controls whether the program will display a toolbar under the main
menu options or not. The toolbar is not editable. This setting is saved in the
CMRR.INI file.
Short Names in Filelist:

This parameter controls whether the program will display the filenames in the
recently accessed list in a short or long format (i.e. including the whole path). This
setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
Load Last Input File:

When this setting is enabled, the program will automatically load the most recently
saved datafile (i.e. the top in the recently accessed files). This setting is saved in
the CMRR.INI file.
Copy Example Files:

When this setting is enabled, the program will automatically copy all example files
from the "Program Files" directory to the user home directory (i.e.
MyDocuments/MyNIOSH). This procedure runs upon every program invocation
unless disabled. The modified files will not be overridden, but missing files will be
replaced. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
External ASCII Viewer:

This option allows the user to specify the external ASCII viewer/editor that will be
used when displaying ASCII data. The default setting in this option is to use the
Notepad editor. This setting is saved in the CMRR.INI file.
5.1.1 CMRR.INI
Description:
This file is automatically created by the CMRR program the first time it is executed.It
should reside in the default document directory for this program, i.e. in the
MyNIOSH subdirectory of the My Documents directory in the computer where the
program is installed (\My Documents\MyNIOSH\). Note that in a network
environment the My documents directory may reside on a different hard drive. The
INI file contains entries such as the ones shown below (the sequence and
parameter values may be different in the actual file):
[Settings]
DefaultUnits=0
DisplayActionWin=1
MaxDisplaySize=300
KeepFileNames=1
ShowDisclaim=0
DataPath=C:\CMRR\
FileExtension=CMR
[FileMenu]
MaxLastFiles=4
LastFile1=C:\CMRR\S1.CMR
[TextBrowse]
BrowseFontName=Courier New
BrowseFontSize=10
BrowseFontBold=0
BrowseFontItalic=0
Notes:
· If this file is deleted, it will be automatically reconstructed the next time the
program is executed but the various settings will default to their original values.
5.2 Options
Description:
This form is used to define a number of default parameters and settings for the
CMRR program:
Edit Menu Options

Default Information Type
This option sets the default information type that will automatically be set, if a new
project is started.
Load the Input Form on File Open

If this option is enabled, the input project parameters form will be automatically
loaded in the following situations:
· File - New is selected.
· File - Open is selected and a file is loaded.
· An existing file is loaded from the recent file list.
Auto Calculate CMRR upon changes in the Editor

If this option is enabled, then the program will automatically calculated the CMRR
file whenever a parameter that affects its calculation is modified. If this option is not
enabled, then a command button will appear at the main input form to allow manual
CMRR calculations.
Auto Calculate CMRR upon entering the Editor

If this option is enabled, then the program will automatically re-calculate the CMRR
value when accessing the parameter form. This is useful when loading CMR files
created under version 1.x. CMRR will be automatically recalculated to one decimal
place that will overwrite the stored value of CMRR (rounded to the nearest integer).
When accessing CMRR version 2.x files, this option should not be enabled.
Show Color Codes in Custom Rock Library

Color codes are stored in the custom rock library. If this option is enabled, then the
user can view the color code assigned to a rock formation. This option is disabled
by default.
Default value for Roof Bolt Length (English)

The user can enter the default roof bolt length to be used when creating data on a
new location. The pre-programmed default value is 6 ft.
Default value for Roof Bolt Length (Metric)

The user can enter the default roof bolt length to be used when creating data on a
new location. The pre-programmed default value is 1.8 m.
Default value for RQD

The user can enter the default for the RQD measured at a particular area. This
value will appear as the default value when a new project is started.
Default value for Depth to Top of Seam (English/Metric)

The user can enter the default for the Depth to the Top of the seam to be used
when creating data on a new location.
Ground Water Adjustment

The user can enter the default for Ground Water Adjustment to be used when
creating data on a new location.
Create a File Association

Use this option to create an association between the program executable and the
extension of the project files. Thus, double-clicking on a project file, will invoke the
CMRR program.
General Options
Print Module Version Information
If this option is enabled, then whenever the input data are printed, a three-line
header is prepended with the program version, filename, etc.
Plot Ground Water Adjusted or Regular Rating Values

This option determines the CMRR value that will be printed when the roof strata
information is plotted.
Moisture Adjustment Deductions

This option determines whether the CMRR value will be calculated using large or
small moisture adjustment deductions.
Export Options
These are the default options for the ASCII export function. All of these options may
be changed after loading the export form. However, if the user exports to a
particular application, setting the default options will always ensure proper
exporting.
Export Options for Numeric Data

· Comma Delimited
· Space Delimited
· Tab Delimited
Export Options for String Data

· Double Quoted Strings
· Single Quoted Strings
· Plain Strings
Export Data Fields

· Location Coordinates
· CMRR Value per Location

· Adjusted CMRR Value per Location
· Location Description
· Depth to the Top of the Seam
· Type of Data (Drillcore or Underground)
· Number of Units
· Bolt Length
· Ground Water Adjustment
· Surcharge Adjustment
5.3 Plot Color Options

Description:
This option allows the user to set the colors for each formation in the Ferm Library.
A collection of default colors is also provided.
To Set the Colors:
· Doubleclick on an entry and the color dialog box will appear. Select a color
and click ok.
· Click on OK to save the color selection in the CMRR.INI file where all the
default settings are kept.
5.4 Unit Conversions

Description:
This utility can be used to convert between English and metric units for 4 types of
units:
Pressure
Conversion between psi (pounds per square inch), Pa (Pascals) and MPa
(MegaPascals) is supported.
Length
Conversion between feet, inches, meters and centimeters is supported.
Stress (Pressure) Gradient

Conversion between psi/ft (psi per foot), psi/in (psi per inch), MPa/m (MegaPascal
per meter) and Pa/m (Pascal per meter) is supported.
Load Gradient
Conversion between lbs/ft (pounds per foot), lbs/in (pounds per inch), kN/m
(kiloNewton per meter) and MN/m (MegaNewton per meter) is supported.
Notes:
· 1 Pa = 1 Newton per square meter

· 1 psi = 1 pound per square inch
5.5 File Conversion

Description:
This utility can be used to convert the current file to a different set of units. If the file
is in English units, then it can only be converted to metric and vice versa.
Notes:
· The current file should already be saved before accessing the conversion
option.
· The current file is then substituted with the converted file.
· A prefix is added to the name of the converted file.
Part
VI
6 The Help Menu

Use the Help menu option to access various Help options, the Disclaimer screen, as
well as information regarding the current version of the program.
Disclaimer of Liability Clause:

This OMSHR/NIOSH developed software is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any
kind including express or implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a
particular purpose. By acceptance and use of this software, which is conveyed to
the user without consideration by NIOSH, the user expressly waives any and all
claims for damage and/or suits for personal injury or property damage resulting from
any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, or damages for
loss of profits, revenue, data or property use, incurred by the user or any third party,
whether in an action in contract or tort, arising from access to, or use of, this
software in whole or in part.
No further development or upgrades for this software are planned. Any questions
concerning this product can be directed to the Office of Mine Safety and Health
Research email box at (omshr@cdc.gov).
See also: About CMRR

6.1 About CMRR
The "Coal Mine Roof Rating" (CMRR) program was originally created by Dr. Chris
Mark and Greg Molinda of the US Bureau of Mines, now NIOSH.
This Windows release version (version 1.0) was created by Dr. Zach Agioutantis
and Dr. Michael Karmis at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
(Virginia Tech) in Blacksburg, VA, USA, under contract to NIOSH. The technical
project officers were Dr. Chris Mark and Greg Molinda.
Version 1.1 was released in September 2002. Minor updates have been released
since then. Version 1.2 was released in December 2004. Version 2.0 was released
in the summer of 2007.
The help and support of Dr. Chris Mark is greatly appreciated.
6.2 Program Updates

No further development or upgrades for this software are planned. However, minor
updates may be issued periodically. This program is automatically set to remind the
user to check the program web site for an updated version a calendar year after
each revision. If an update exists, the user may manually download the setup file
and install the new version.
The Help Menu 39
6.3 References
Barczak, T.M., 2000. Optimizing secondary roof support with the NIOSH support
technology optimization program (STOP). Paper in Proceedings: New Technology
for Coal Mine Roof Support, NIOSH IC 9453, pp. 151-164.
Barton, N.R., R. Lien and J. Lunde, 1974. Engineering classification of rock masses
for the design of tunnel support rock mechanics, vol. 6, pp. 189-236.
Beerkircher, M.D., 1994. Monterey coal companys longwall project. Proc. IL Mining
Institute, Collinsville, IL, pp. 85-93.
Bieniawski, Z.T., 1973. Engineering classification of jointed rock masses.

Transaction of the South African Institution of Civil Engineers, vol. 15, No. 12, pp.
335-344.
Bieniawski, Z.T., 1988. Rock mass classification as a design aid in tunnelling.

Tunnels and Tunnelling, pp. 19-23.
Bieniawski, Z.T., 1989. Engineering rock mass classifications. Wiley, NY, 251 p.
Buddery, P.S. and D.C. Oldroyd, 1992. Development of a roof and floor
classification applicable to collieries. Paper 35 in Proc. Eurock '92 Conference
(Thomas Telford, London, pub.), pp. 197-202.
Butcher, R.J., 2001. Application of the coal mine roof rating system in South African
collieries. In Peng SS, Mark C, eds. Proceedings of the 20th International
Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp. 317-321.
Colwell, M., R. Frith and C. Mark, 1999. Calibration of the analysis of longwall pillar
stability (ALPS) for Australian conditions. Paper in the Proceedings of the 18th
International Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp.
282-290.
Damberger, H.H., W.J. Nelson and H.F. Krausse, 1980. Effect of geology on roof
stability in room-and-pillar mines in the Herrin (no. 6) coal of Illinois. In Proc. 1st
Conf. Ground Control Problems in the Illinois Coal Basin, Univ. of Southern Illinois,
Carbondale, IL, pp. 14-32.
Deere, D.U. and R.P. Miller, 1966. Engineering classification and index properties
for intact rock. Technical Report No. AFWL-TR-65-116, Air Force Weapons
Laboratory.
DeMarco, M.J., 1984. Yielding pillar gateroad design considerations for longwall
mining. Paper in New Technology for Longwall Ground Control: Proceedings of the
USBM Technology Transfer Seminar, USBM SP 94-01, pp. 19-36.
Ealy, D.L., R.D. Mazurak and E.L. Langrand, 1979. A geological approach for
predicting unstable roof and floor conditions in advance of mining. Mining Congress
Journal, pp. 7-23.
Ferm, J.C., R.A. Melton, G.D. Cummins, F. Mather, L. McKenna, C. Muir and G.E.
Norris, 1978. A study of roof falls in underground mines on the Pocahontas #3
seam southern West Virginia and southwestern Virginia. USBM Contract
H0230028, Dept. of Geology University of South Carolina.
Ferm, J.C. and G.C. Smith, 1981. A guide to cored rocks in the Pittsburgh basin.
Dept. of Geology, Univ. of KY, Lexington, and the Univ. of SC, Columbia, 109 p.
Forgeron, S., C. Mark and D.J. Forrester, 2001. Standardization of geological and
geomechanical assessment at underground coal mines in Canada. CIM Bulletin, pp.
83-90.
Hoek, E., 1977. Rock mechanics laboratory testing in the context of a consulting
engineering organization. Intl. J. Rock Mech. and Mng. Sci., vol. 22, pp. 93-101.
Grau, R.H. III and E.R. Bauer, 1997. Ground control worker safety during extended
cut mining. Proc. 16th Intl. Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown,
WV, pp. 283-288.
Harwood, C., M. Karmis, C. Haycocks and J. Lu, 1996. Optimizing secondary

tailgate support selection. Proc. 15th Intl. Conf. on Ground Control in Mining,
Golden, CO, pp. 469-476.
Hoelle, J., 2003. Analysis of unsupported roof spans for highwall mining at Moura
coal mine. Proceedings COAL 2003, 4th Australasian Coal Operators Conference,
Wollongong, Australia, pp. 50-62.
Hylbert, D.K., 1978. The classification, evaluation, and projection of coal mine roof
rocks. Mining Engineering, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 1667-1676.
International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM) Commission on Testing Methods,

1985. Suggested method for determining the point load strength (revised version).
Intl. J. Rock Mech. and Mng. Sci., vol. 22, pp. 51-60.
International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM), 1982. Suggested methods for
rock characterization, testing, and monitoring, Pergamon Press, London, 1982.
Kane, W.F., 1985. Geologic and geotechnical controls on the stability of coal mine
entries. Ph.D. thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, VA, 303 p.
Karabin, G.J. and M.A. Evanto, 1999. Experience with the boundary element
method of numerical modeling to resolve complex ground control problems. Paper
in Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Coal Pillar Mechanics and
The Help Menu 41
Design, NIOSH IC 9448, pp. 89-114.
Karmis, M. and W. Kane, 1984. An analysis of the geomechanical factors

influencing coal mine roof stability in Appalachia. Second International Conference
on Stability in Underground Mining, Lexington, KY, pp. 311-328.
Kester, W.M. and Y.P. Chugh, 1980. Premining investigations and their use in
planning ground control in the Illinois coal basin. Proceedings of the 1st Conference
Ground Control Problems in the Illinois Coal Basin, pp. 33-43.
Lattila, J.W., J.J. van Wijk, E. Wevell and D. Neal, 2002. Evaluation of the impact
splitting technique used for predicting geotechnical conditions in underground coal
mines. Proceedings SANIRE 2002 Symposium, South African National Institute of
Rock Engineering, 11 p.
Mark, C., 1999a. Application of the coal mine roof rating (CMRR) to extended cuts.
Mining Engineering, pp. 52-56.
Mark, C., 1999b. Ground control in South African coal mines-A U.S. perspective.
Paper in the Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Ground Control in
Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp. 186-193.
Mark C, Barczak TM, 2000. Fundamentals of Coal Mine Roof Support. Paper in
New Technology for Coal Mine Roof Support, Proceedings of the NIOSH Open
Industry Briefing, NIOSH IC 9453, pp. 23-42.
Mark, C., F.E. Chase and G.M. Molinda, 1994a. Design of longwall gate entry
systems using roof classification. Paper in New Technology for Longwall Ground
Control: Proceedings of the USBM Technology Transfer Seminar, USBM SP 94-01,
pp. 5-18.
Mark, C., G.M. Molinda and D.R. Dolinar, 2001. Analysis of roof bolt systems
(ARBS). Paper in the Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Ground
Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp. 218-225.
Mark, C., G.M. Molinda, A.P. Schissler and W.J. Wuest, 1994b. Evaluating roof
control in underground coal mines using the coal mine roof rating. Paper in the
Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown,
WV, pp. 252-260.
Mark, C. and G.M. Molinda, 1996. Rating coal mine roof strength from exploratory
drill core. In: Ozdemir L, Hanna K, Haramy KY, Peng S, eds. Proceedings of the
15th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp.
415-428.
Mark, C. and T.P. Mucho, 1994. Longwall mine design for control of horizontal
stress. Paper in Proceedings of the Mine Technology Transfer Seminar. Pittsburgh,
PA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines (USBM) Publication No.
01-94, pp. 53-76.
Marshall, S., 1984. Composite geologic and linear mapping for defining safe, high
productivity mining in the Appalachian coal fields. Fifteenth Annual Institute of Coal
Mining, Health, Safety, and Research, Blacksburg, VA, 10 p.
Martin, E.M., F. Carr and G. Hendon, 1988. Strata control advances at Jim Walter
Resources. 7th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown,
WV, pp. 66-75.
Milici, R.C., T.M. Gathright, B.W. Miller and M.R. Gwin, 1982. Geologic factors
related to coal mine roof falls in Wise County, Virginia. Appalachian Regional
Commission Contract No. CO-7232-80-I-302-0206, 103 p.
Moebs, N.N. and J.C. Ferm, 1982. The relation of geology to mine roof conditions
in the Pocahontas No.3 coalbed. USBM IC 8864, 8 p.
Moebs, N.N. and R.M. Stateham, 1985. The diagnosis and reduction of mine roof
failure. Coal Mining.
Molinda, G. and C. Mark, 1994. The coal mine roof rating (CMRR)-A practical rock
mass classification for coal mines. USBM IC 9387, 83 p.
Molinda G.M. and C. Mark, 1996. Testing the Strength of Coal Mine Roof Rocks.
USBM IC 9444, 36 pSS.
Molinda, G.M., 2003. Geologic hazards and roof stability in coal mines. NIOSH IC
9466, 33 p.
Molinda, G.M., C. Mark and D.R. Dolinar, 2000. Assessing coal mine roof stability
through roof fall analysis. In Mark, C., D.R. Dolinar and R. Tuchman, eds. New
Technology for Coal Mine Roof Support, Proceedings of the NIOSH Open Industry
Briefing, pp. 53-72.
Newman, D.A. and Z.T. Bieniawski, 1986. Modified version of the geomechanics
classification for entry design in underground coal mines. Transactions, Society of
Mining Engineering AIME, vol. 280, pp. 2134-2138.
Oyler, D.C., R. Frith, D.R. Dolinar and C. Mark, 1998. International experience with
longwall mining into pre-driven rooms. Proceedings, 17th International Conference
on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp. 44-53.
Pappas D., Mark C., 1993. Load-Deformation Properties of Coal Mine Gob
Materials. USBM RI 9458, 39 p.
Priest, S.D. and J.A. Hudson, 1976. Discontinuity spacings in rock. Intl. J. Rock
The Help Menu 43
Mech. Mng. Sci., Vol 13, pp. 135-148.
Rusnak, J. and C. Mark, 2000. Using the point load test to determine the uniaxial
compressive strength of coal measure rock. In Peng SS, Mark C, eds.,
Proceedings, 19th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining,
Morgantown, WV, pp. 362-371.
Schaffer, J.F., 1985. Roof fall prediction at an Illinois underground mine.

Proceedings, 2nd Conference on Ground Control Problems in the Illinois Coal
Basin, Southern Illinois University, pp. 55-63.
Sickler, R.A., 1986. Engineering classification of shales. Proceedings, Conference

on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp. 221-233.
Sinha, A. and V. Venkateswarlu, 1986. Geomechanics classification for support

selection in Indian coal mines - case studies. Proceedings, 5th International
Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology. vol. 1, 1986, pp.
159-164.
Stingelin, R.W., J.R. Kern and S.L. Morgan, 1979. Premining identification of
hazards associated with coal mine roof measures. USBM Contract #JO177038,
HRB-Singer, Inc. State College, PA, 216 p.
Van der Merwe, J.N., 2001. In situ investigation into the causes of falls of roof in
South African collieries. In Peng, S.S. and C. Mark, eds. Proceedings, 20th
International Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, pp.
105-118.
Venkateswarlu, V., A.K. Ghose and N.M. Raju, 1989. Rock-mass classification for
design of roof supports - a statistical evaluation of parameters. Mining Science and
Technology, 8, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam - Printed in the
Netherlands, pp. 97-107.
Williamson, D.A., 1984. Unified rock classification system. Bulletin of the

Association of Engineering Geologists, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 345-354.
Wuest, W., M.J. DeMarco and C. Mark, 1996. Review of applications of the coal
mine roof rating (CMRR) for ground control planning and operations. Mining
Engineering, pp. 49-55.
Zhou, Y., C. Haycocks and W. Wu, 1988. Geomechanics classifications for multiple
seam mining. SME Annual Meeting, January 25-28, Phoenix, AR, 10 p.
6.4 HelpButton
Position the cursor on any item on the form and press F1 for context sensitive
help.
Part
VII
7 List of Figures
Figure 1: Effect of water on a moisture sensitive shale.
Figure 2: Flow Chart for the CMRR.
Figure 3: Underground data sheet for the CMRR.
Figure 4: Diametral and Axial Point Load Test.
Figure 5: Relationship between Axial PLT and UCS tests for shale (Rusnak and
Mark, 2000).
Figure 6: CMRR rating scale for Axial Point Load or UCS tests: a) Metric Units, b)
English Units.
Figure 7: Comparison between UCS and Ball Peen Tests.
Figure 8: CMRR rating scale for Fracture Spacing or RQD.
Figure 9: CMRR rating scale for Diametral Point Load tests: a) Metric Units, b)
English Units.
Figure 10: Data Sheet for the Immersion Test.
Figure 11: Comparison of the Slake Durability and Immersion Tests.
Figure 12: The CMRR Data Base.
Figure 13: Relationship between the CMRR and the ALPS SF.
Figure 14: Relationship between the CMRR and the feasibility of Extended Cuts.
Figure 15: Relationship between the CMRR and Roof Bolt density in the US,
Australia and South Africa.
Figure 16: Rock Quality Designation (RQD) for core.
Figure 17: Highwall Divided into Structural Units.
Figure 18: Scale for comparing Ball Peen Hammer indentation to the Compressive
Strength of the rock.
Figure 19: Bedding Strength is estimated by the Chisel Test.
Figure 20: Point Load Test.
Figure 21: Roughness scale for discontinuity.
Figure 22: Specimens shape requirements for (a) the diametral test, (b) the axial
test, (c) the block test, and (d) the irregular lump tests.
List of Figures 47
7.1 Figure 1
Effect of water on a moisture sensitive shale
7.2 Figure 2
Flow Chart for the CMRR

7.3 Figure 3 - Options

Underground data sheet for the CMRR. This figure is rotated so it will print in
landscape mode without changing the printer default paper orientation. Select
appropriate link below. Also, the underground data sheet may be printed through
the "resource files" option of the Help menu of the CMRR program.
Figure 3 - Metric Version

Figure 3 - English Version
Figure 3 - Metric Version - Landscape Format
Figure 3 - English Version - Landscape Format
7.4 Figure 3 - Metric Version

List of Figures 49
7.5 Figure 3 - English Version

7.6 Figure 3 - Metric Version - Landscape Format

List of Figures 51
7.7 Figure 3 - English Version - Landscape Format

7.8 Figure 4
Diametral and Axial Point Load Test
7.9 Figure 5
Relationship between Axial PLT and UCS tests for shale (Rusnak and Mark, 2000)
List of Figures 53
7.10 Figure 6
CMRR rating scale for Axial Point Load or UCS tests: a) Metric Units
CMRR rating scale for Axial Point Load or UCS tests: b) English Units
7.11 Figure 7
Comparison between UCS and Ball Peen Tests.
7.12 Figure 8
CMRR rating scale for Fracture Spacing or RQD

List of Figures 55
7.13 Figure 9
CMRR rating scale for Diametral Point Load Tests a) Metric units
CMRR rating scale for Diametral Point Load Tests b) English units
7.14 Figure 10
Data Sheet for the Immersion Test.

List of Figures 57
7.15 Figure 11
Comparison of the Slake Durability and Immersion Tests

7.16 Figure 12
The CMRR Data Base.
7.17 Figure 13
Relationship between the CMRR and the ALPS SF.

List of Figures 59
7.18 Figure 14
Relationship between the CMRR and the feasibility of Extended Cuts.

7.19 Figure 15
Relationship between the CMRR and Roof Bolt density in the US, Australia and
South Africa.
List of Figures 61
7.20 Figure 16
Rock Quality Designation (RQD) for core.

7.21 Figure 17
Highwall Divided into Structural Units.

List of Figures 63
7.22 Figure 18
Scale for comparing Ball Peen Hammer indentation to the Compressive Strength of
the rock.
7.23 Figure 19
Bedding Strength is estimated by the Chisel Test.
7.24 Figure 20
List of Figures 65
Point Load Test.
7.25 Figure 21
Roughness scale for discontinuity.
7.26 Figure 22
Specimens shape requirements for (a) the diametral test, (b) the axial test, (c) the
block test, and (d) the irregular lump tests.
Part
VIII
8 List of Tables
Table 1: Rock Mass Classification Systems for Coal Mines.
Table 2: Approximate UCS Ranges for Ball Peen Hammer Tests.
Table 3: Bedding/Discontinuity Intensity Rating Table for Underground Data.
Table 4: Bedding/Discontinuity Intensity Shear Strength Rating Table for
Underground Data.
Table 5: Moisture Sensitivity Classes and Ratings for both Immersion and Slake
Durability Tests.
8.1 Table 1
Rock mass classification systems for coal mines
List of Tables 69
8.2 Table 2
8.3 Table 3
8.4 Table 4
8.5 Table 5
Part
IX
Background Information 71
9 Background Information
CMRR (Brief Description)
Rock Mass Classification
Ground Control
Bedding
Strong Bed
Slickensides and Other Discontinuities
Uniaxial Compressive Strength
Faults and Other Linear Features
Unit Rating for Underground Exposure Data
Ball Peen Hammer Test
Strength Rating
Chisel Test
Shear Strength of Discontinuities (Cohesion and Roughness)
Discontinuity Intensity (Spacing and Persistence)
Multiple Discontinuity Adjustments
Unit Rating for DrillCore Data
Point Load Testing (PLT)
RQD
Fracture Spacing
Immersion Test
Moisture Sensitivity Deduction
Strong Bed Adjustment
Surcharge Adjustment
Unit Contacts Adjustment
Ground Water Adjustment
Ferm Number
Slake Durability Tests
9.1 CMRR (Brief Description)

Description:
The Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) estimates the structural competence of bolted
mine roof. The important geotechnical features of the rock are assigned a relative
strength value and their effect is combined into a final single value (CMRR). The
CMRR ranges from 0-100. The CMRR is intended to sum up all of the geologic
parameters which determine the strength of the rocks. Numerous other factors are
known to affect the stability of a roof sequence. Among them are horizontal stress,
multiple seam loadings, pillar strength, depth of cover, and roof support. The
CMRR is not intended to characterize unusual or large-scale disruptions of the roof
beam such as faults.
The Coal Mine Roof Rating consists of the Unit Ratings which assess the strength
of individual members of the bolted interval, and adjustments which consider the
strength of the association of all the Units together. The bolted interval is
partitioned into Units (usually 1-3) based on rock members of comparable
properties. The thickness-weighted average of the Unit Ratings is then adjusted for
the effects of the Strong Bed, Ground Water, Surcharge and Unit Contacts to
determine the final CMRR.
The CMRR assumes that it is primarily the discontinuities within the rock which
determine its structural competence or weakness. Rocks are generally weaker in
tension than compression and this is due to laminations or bedding. Because of the
sedimentary deposition of coal measure rocks, internal bedding is almost always an
important discontinuity. Other internal defects in rocks include fossil partings, mud
bands, slickensides, faults, or mica beds. The CMRR evaluates the cohesion on
bedding and other discontinuities by a chisel splitting test (hand sample) or point
load testing (core). The roughness on the surface of the discontinuity can act to
resist or facilitate shearing or delamination. Small asperities (sand and silt grains)
can resist by interlock or cementing. Bedding that is composed of stacked clay
minerals can easily delaminate and shear when flat or planar. The high frequency
or intensity of discontinuities also causes weakness. The spacing and
persistence of each discontinuity set is measured directly or estimated remotely by
observation.
The material strength of the rock matrix itself (unconfined uniaxial compressive
strength (UCS)) contributes to its structural competence. A field test, the Ball
Peen Hammer Test, is a good index test of rock U.C.S. Point Load Testing, or
UCS tests can also be used.
Many clay-rich rocks degrade on contact with water. Water movement by capillary
action on bedding surfaces can cause slaking or delamination. Expansion and
shrinkage of unconfined skin clays with seasonal moisture cycles can also cause
slaking and delamination. Large pressures developed from the expansion of clay
minerals confined up in the roof can damage roof beams. For these reasons
moisture sensitivity of roof rocks is tested by water immersion or observation.
9.2 Rock Mass Classification

Description:
Roof falls continue to be one of the greatest hazards faced by underground coal
miners. Although fatalities from roof falls in the US reached an all-time low of two in
2003, rock fall injuries continue to occur at the rate of about 500 per year. In
addition, approximately 1400 major roof collapses are reported to the Mine Safety
and Health Administration (MSHA) each year. These roof falls can threaten miners,
damage equipment, disrupt ventilation, and block critical emergency escape routes.
One reason roof falls have proven so difficult to eradicate is that mines are not built
of manmade materials like steel or concrete, but rather of rock, just as nature made
it. The structural integrity of a coal mine's roof is greatly affected by natural
weaknesses, including bedding planes, fractures, and small faults. The engineering
properties of rock cannot be specified in advance, and can vary widely from mine to
mine and even within individual mines.
Engineers require quantitative data on the strength of rock masses for design.
Traditional geologic reports contain valuable descriptive information but few
engineering properties. Laboratory tests, on the other hand, are inadequate because
the strength of a small specimen is only indirectly related to the strength of the rock
mass.
Rock mass classification schemes were developed to address these concerns. The
most widely known systems, including Deere's RQD, Bieniawski's RMR, and
Barton's Q, have been used extensively throughout the world (Deere, 1966;
Bieniawski, 1973; Barton et al., 1974). Rock mass classifications have been
successful because they (Bieniawski, 1988):
· Provide a methodology for characterizing rock mass strength using simple

measurements;
· Allow geologic information to be converted into quantitative engineering data;
· Enable better communication between geologists and engineers, and;
· Make it possible to compare ground control experiences between sites, even
when the geologic conditions are very different.
This last point highlights an extremely powerful application of rock mass

classification systems, which is their use in empirical design methods. Empirical
designs base themselves upon mine experience, on the real-world successes and
failures of actual ground control designs. By collecting a large number of "case
histories" into a single data base, and subjecting them to statistical analysis, reliable
and robust guidelines for design can be developed. A key advantage of empirical
techniques is that it is not necessary to obtain a complete understanding of the
mechanics to arrive at a reasonable solution. Rock mass classifications play an
essential role in empirical design because they allow the overwhelming variety of
geologic variables to be reduced to a single, meaningful, and repeatable parameter.
Unfortunately, the civil engineering classification systems are not readily applicable
to coal mining because:
· They tend to focus on the properties of joints, when horizontal bedding is
generally the most significant discontinuity affecting coal mine roof.
· They rate just one rock unit at a time, while coal mine roof often consists of
several layers bound together by roof bolts.
· In addition, the dimensions and stability requirements of tunnels are often very
different from those of mines.
The Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) was developed nearly 10 years ago to meet the
need of mine planners for a simple, repeatable, and meaningful classification system
(Molinda and Mark, 1994). It employs the familiar format of Bieniawski's RMR,
summing the individual ratings to obtain a final CMRR on a zero to 100 scale. It is
also designed so that the CMRR/unsupported span/standup time relationship is
roughly comparable to the one determined for the RMR.
9.3 Ground Control

Description:
In determining the specific rock mass attributes and weightings to use, the CMRR
built upon the rich vein of experience with coal mine ground control during the past
30 years. These sources can be divided into two groups. The first are papers
describing specific geologic features, such as faults, clay veins, sandstone channels,
kettlebottoms, and others. A summary of this work was recently published (Molinda,
2003).
The second group, which includes efforts to generalize results for specific mines,
regions, or countries, was more directly relevant to the development of the CMRR.
In effect, these papers describe rock mass classification systems, though most are
qualitative rather than quantitative. Table 1 provides a list of the coal mine roof
classification systems consulted in the development of the CMRR, along with the
significant geologic factors that they identified as being important to ground control.
The following paragraphs discuss these factors and the issues involved with
incorporating them into the CMRR.
9.4 Bedding
Description:
Bedding is most consistently cited as causing roof problems in coal mines. Two
common examples are weak laminations in shale and thinly interbedded sandstone
and shale (stackrock). In both examples, it is not just that the bedding planes are
closely spaced, but also that the bedding surfaces are very weak.
The issue of bedding is further complicated because some shales may appear
massive, particularly to untrained eyes, but actually be highly laminated. The CMRR
therefore emphasizes testing of the rock material to determine bedding plane
strength even when the bedding is not visible. The approach is similar to that
proposed by Buddery and Oldroyd (1992) and used successfully in South African
coal mines.
9.5 Strong Bed

Description:
A problem unique to horizontally layered sedimentary rocks is that the roof structure
often consists of several layers with different engineering characteristics. In
developing the CMRR, two key questions had to be answered:
1. How far up into the roof should the evaluation extend?

2. How should the different layers be combined into a single rating? Should they
be averaged together, or should the weakest or strongest layers be given
precedence?
The CMRR started with the insight that thickness of the roof structure depends on
the roof bolt length. All coal mine roof in the US must be bolted, and the bolts bind
the different layers together. Therefore, the layers above the bolts have little
influence.
Moreover, experience in many U.S. coalfields has clearly established that roof
stability is greatly enhanced when the roof bolts anchor in a strong layer. This effect
is most evident in the Illinois Basin, where roof falls are almost unknown when the
bolts anchor in a limestone that is at least 2 ft (0.6 m) thick (Kester and Chugh,
1980; Schaffer, 1985; Damberger et al., 1980). The strong bed effect has also
been recognized in Alabama (Martin et al., 1988) and central Appalachia (Hylbert,
1978). Indeed, even the Code of Federal Regulations implies a strong bed effect
when it states in 30 CFR 75.204(f)(1) that "roof bolts that provide support by
suspending the roof from overlying stronger strata shall be long enough to anchor at
least 12 inches (0.3 m) in the stronger strata."
The strong bed's effect on the CMRR depends first upon how much stronger it is
than the other units. Second, the strong bed must be at least 1 ft (0.3 m) thick
before it can provide any additional support, and the amount of the adjustment is
maximum when the bed is at least 4 ft (1.2 m) thick. Third, the roof bolts must
obtain at least 1 ft (0.3 m) of anchorage in the strong bed for the adjustment to be
considered. Finally, the higher into the roof that the strong bed is located, the less
its positive effect will be.
9.6 Slickensides and Other Discontinuities

Description:
While horizontal bedding is generally the most significant weakness in the fabric of
coal measure rocks, often some other type of discontinuity is present. Slickensides,
which are small scale fault (6 ft (<2 m)) distinguished by glassy, grooved surfaces,
are frequently cited as greatly reducing the competence of coal measure mudrocks
(for example, see Moebs and Stateham (1985)). Jointing is encountered in Virginia (
Karmis and Kane, 1984) and occasionally elsewhere. In sandstones, coal spars and
crossbeds can be significant. The original RMR only includes one discontinuity
rating, so it was important that the CMRR contain a "multiple discontinuity
adjustment" to account for these features.
9.7 Uniaxial Compressive Strength

Description:
The UCS of the rock material affects roof strength in several ways. First, it
determines the ease with which new fracturing (as opposed to movement along
pre-existing discontinuities) will take place. Second, the compressive strength of the
rock is a factor in the shear strength of discontinuities. Approximately one-third of
the CMRR is determined by the compressive strength rating, which is approximately
twice the weight given to the UCS in the original RMR.
Laboratory testing is generally considered the standard method of determining the

UCS. Unfortunately, laboratory tests are expensive because the samples must be
carefully prepared. The variability in the results is also high, with the standard
deviation typically about one-third of the mean for coal measure rocks (Rusnak and
Mark, 2000).
As an alternative to standard laboratory testing, the CMRR recommends the Point

Load Test (PLT) for drill core (See Point Load Test).
9.8 Faults and Other Linear Features

Description:
Linear features include sandstone channel margins, lineaments, faults, and some
minor features such as seam rolls and clay veins. Linear features are not included
directly in the CMRR, but in some cases one CMRR value can be determined for
"typical conditions" and another for "fracture zones" or "sandstone channel margin
areas," and these can then be plotted on hazard maps. However, the CMRR is not
designed to rate conditions impacted by a major through-going discontinuity such as
a fault. Such features normally require specially-designed support systems.
9.9 Unit Rating for Underground Exposure Data

Description:
Each unit is evaluated for the strength/weakness of internal discontinuities (bedding,

slips, shears, joints, etc.). Note that bedding should be one of the discontinuities
evaluated in all coal measure rocks. The data entered in this form should be
gathered from underground exposures of the roof or exposures in a highwall, Figure
3a. This information will be used to calculate the Unit Ratings.
The following information details the properties of the unit roof data:
Strength
The unconfined uniaxial compressive strength (U.C.S.) as determined by the
Ballpeen Hammer Test should be entered here. Alternatively, if data from load
frame testing is available, then it can be converted into the appropriate strength
index using the graph in Figure 4. For more details, see Strength Rating.
Number of Discontinuities
The number of discontinuities should be entered (the allowable range is 0 to 3).
Note that for intact rock (number of discontinuities = 0), the cohesion of the rock
formation should be entered. In case of fragmented rock, then for each set of
discontinuities, the following data should be entered:
Cohesion
The Cohesion represents the ability of a discontinuity to resist pulling apart in
tension or shearing in compression. It is estimated in hand sample by the Chisel
Test. The number of hammer blows it takes to split a discontinuity with a mason
chisel determines its cohesion and is represented by a value from 1-5 displayed in
the lower half of the data form. For more details, see Cohesion and Roughness.
Roughness
The roughness of a discontinuity surface can act to resist or facilitate shearing or
delamination and, with cohesion, constitutes the surfaces shear strength. For more
details, see Cohesion and Roughness.
Spacing
Discontinuity spacing and persistence is an estimate of the "intensity" of the
discontinuity. The more closely spaced the bedding planes or shear surface the
weaker the Unit will be. For example, if joints occur on an average of 6 inches
apart, a “4" is entered in the block. The spacing can range from value 1 to 5 with
half steps in between. The half steps (for example 1.5) can be used when spacing
is not uniform. An example is when most bedding planes in a unit are less then 2.5
inches apart, but some parts of the unit spacing average 4 inches. Then a value of
4.5 is appropriate. For more details, see Spacing and Persistence.
Persistence
Some joints extend only several inches and affect only part of the unit. Small
slickensides may occur around kettlebottoms only and may not significantly
compromise the roof beam. Conversely large, broad shears (10 ft vertically, 8 ft
horizontally) may sever the roof beam and create a cantilevered roof situation.
Persistence is most important for widely-spaced discontinuities. For more details,
see Spacing and Persistence.
Contacts
Evaluate the contact between Units to determine if it is weak or strong. If the
contrast between Units is a weak surface, it is significant to overall roof strength.
On the other hand, a gradational contact between Units will not effect roof strength.
A description window is provided for optional user information only. It will not figure
in the calculations.
Moisture sensitivity
The moisture sensitivity can determined in either of two ways.
1. By the Immersion Test.
2. By observation.
The moisture sensitivity deduction is applied only if a Unit is exposed to moisture.

A deduction applies only if the Unit that is moisture-sensitive forms the immediate
roof and is exposed to ventilation air, or if groundwater is present percolating
through the bolted interval. For more details, see Moisture Sensitivity.
9.10 Ball Peen Hammer Test

Description:
Underground, the CMRR employs an indention test to estimate UCS proposed by

Williamson (1984). The exposed rock face is struck with the round end of a ball
peen hammer, and resulting characteristic impact reaction is compared to the chart
shown in Figure 3 and Figure 18. The nature of the reaction (indentation), not its
magnitude, is what is important.
A study was conducted to compare the UCS ratings derived from the Ball Peen Test
with the PLT. In 17 of the 23 sites studied (or 81% of the cases), the difference
between the two measurements was 4 points or less (Figure 7). To account for the
changed K, the original Williamson rock strength classes have been slightly
adjusted, as shown in Table 2.
9.11 Strength Rating

Description:
The strength rating is calculated based on Table 2.
9.12 Chisel Test

Description:
The chisel test has been developed as an index for the cohesion on bedding or on
a discontinuity. The chisel is placed end-on to the bedding and is struck by a
hammer until the rock is split on bedding (Figure 19). The number of blows
necessary to split the bedding is correlated to the cohesion. In a “mixed” type rock,
where sandstone and shale beds alternate, the weakest beds will determine the
cohesion of the rock Unit. Therefore, the shale beds should be tested with the
chisel test.
9.13 Shear Strength of Discontinuities (Cohesion and Roughness)

Description:
Bedding plane shear strength is a critical parameter for coal mine ground control,
because the most severe loading applied to coal mine roof is normally lateral,
caused by horizontal stress (Mark and Barczak, 2000). Molinda and Mark (1996)
found that the lateral strength of some shales are just one-sixth of their axial
strength. Two common examples are weak laminations in shale and thinly
interbedded sandstone and shale (stackrock). In both examples, it is not just that
the bedding planes are closely spaced, but also that the bedding surfaces are very
weak.
Underground, the cohesion of bedding surfaces is evaluated by using a 3.5 in (9

cm) mason chisel and a hammer to split hand samples of rock. Weaker, less
cohesive surfaces require fewer chisel blows to split (see Figure 3). Cohesion can
also be estimated by observing the nature of the fractured wall of a roof fall. If the
wall "stair steps," with most of the roof failure occurring along bedding, then the
cohesion is probably low. On the other hand, if most of the failure surfaces cut
across bedding, then the strength of the bedding is most likely equal to or greater
than that of the intact rock. Slickensided surfaces are already planes of failure and
receive the minimum rating.
The issue of bedding is further complicated because some shales may appear
massive, particularly to untrained eyes, but actually be highly laminated. The
CMRR therefore emphasizes testing of the rock material to determine bedding
plane strength even when the bedding is not visible. The approach is similar to that
proposed by Buddery and Oldroyd (1992) and used successfully in South African
coal mines.
The roughness along a discontinuity surface is the other component of the

surfaces's shear strength. In the CMRR, roughness of a surface is estimated
visually and classified into "jagged", "wavy", or "planar," using the system proposed
by Barton (1974). This measure is to be applied on a scale which ranges from hand
sample size to several feet across a fall exposure. The CMRR assumes that
roughness significantly affects shear strength only when cohesion is in the middle
range (see Table 4).
9.14 Discontinuity Intensity (Spacing and Persistence)

Description:
Intensity is determined by the spacing between bedding planes or other

discontinuities, and the persistence, or extent, of each individual discontinuity. The
more closely spaced a set of discontinuities, the greater weakening effect it has on
the rock mass. Persistence is more important for discontinuities that are widely
spaced. Like UCS, Intensity accounts for about 1/3 of the total CMRR.
Underground, both spacing and persistence can be measured directly, using the
standard methods for rock mass characterization (ISRM, 1982). Table 3 shows the
Bedding/Discontinuity Rating Scale for underground data. The matrix shows what
point value is added for each combination of spacing and persistence of
discontinuities.
9.15 Multiple Discontinuity Adjustments

Description:
When a unit contains several sets of discontinuities, the most severe discontinuity
rating will determine the structural competence of the unit. However, additional sets
of discontinuities can further weaken the unit. For example, a unit might be
weakened by both bedding and slickensides. The multiple discontinuity adjustment
(with a maximum deduction of 5 points) accounts for this effect.
This adjustment applies to Underground Exposure Ratings.
9.16 Unit Rating for DrillCore Data

Description:
Individual Unit Ratings are calculated from drill core. For drill core, input data
includes both Point Load Testing and an assessment of fracture intensity using
either RQD or average fracture spacing. The consideration of several types of
discontinuity is accounted for in the effect of multiple discontinuities on RQD. Both
RQD and fracture (all types) spacing is determined and it is left to the judgment of
the user to determine which one best represents the fracture intensity of the core.
The diametral strength is calculated using point load testing. The program
compares these two values and uses the one which weakens the roof beam the
most.
It is recommended that 20 ft of core is washed and logged with standard geologic

and fracture logging methods. Divide the roof core into distinct structural units.
Calculate the RQD for each unit in the roof. A field data sheet is available for data
collection (Figure 13). Different types of discontinuities can be noted on the sheet,
but are grouped by the program for the RQD and fracture spacing determinations.
Measure and calculate the average spacing of the discontinuities over the Unit
thickness. Conduct point load testing on the bedding itself or, if bedding is absent,
on the rock matrix. Then conduct axial point load testing on the core according to
the ISRM suggested procedures. Finally conduct moisture sensitivity testing on
the core.
Input - Unit Description\Rock Properties Data Form
A drill core file can be opened with the File Open command, or the icon which says
Data Type on the upper left task bar can be selected. Here the options are “drill
core” or “underground”. After opening the file the “general” screen appears and it is
necessary to click on the drillcore option under type of data. Next, select the Unit
description option. This screen is the same as the underground data screen.
Double click on “Unit 1" to begin unit data entry. Information about the strength and
intensity of the rock matrix and discontinuities as determined by point load testing is
input in these forms. After data entry it is necessary to click on the “Show CMRR”
button on the bottom task bar to begin the calculation. After each change in form
data it will again be necessary to click the “Show CMRR” to update the calculation.
General - This form will allow the input of general notes about the core and its
discontinuities. “Core extremely broken by two different shear sets” is an example.
Axial Rock Strength PLT

Point load testing data are entered here. The point load test is applied to the rock
matrix to determine the axial strength in lieu of the hammer test for hand samples of
rock. The register can accommodate up to 30 PLT tests. Enter each individual test
by number with its test depth from the surface. The IS(50) is entered next and the
average I S(50) is automatically converted to Uniaxial Compressive Strength
(U.C.S.). If available, the UCS can be entered directly. See also Point Load Testing
(PLT)
Diametral Strength PLT (Rock)

Bedding strength is tested by diametral point load testing along the bedding of the
core. Each individual test (up to 30 tests) is recorded by number, test depth, and
IS(50). IS(50) values are used directly in the rating calculation. See also Point Load
Testing (PLT)
Fracture Intensity
The condition of the core reflects the extent to which discontinuities have weakened
it. The condition of the core is evaluated by determining its fracture intensity in two
ways. First the RQD of the unit is determined, and secondly, the average fracture
spacing of the unit is calculated. The fracture spacing incorporates all types of
core breaks, including bedding and cross bedding discontinuities like shears, and
joints. In the instance where the RQD and fracture spacing overlap, only one of
these measures is used to represent the fracture intensity. Use the measure which
will return the lower rating value (see rating formulas). It is left to the user to
determine which measure most accurately represents the condition of the core.
The program uses the following equations to calculate the discontinuity rating of
coal from RQD and the fracture spacing.
RQD formula
Rating = 10.5 ln (RQD) - 11.6 for RQD>=34.2

Rating = 15 +0.307*RQD for 34.2>RQD>10
Rule: If RQD is less than or equal to 10, then a Rating value 18 is used. This
ensures a Rating value of at least 18.
Fracture Spacing (F.S.) formula
Rating = 5.64 ln (F.S.) + 24
Moisture Sensitivity - Select one from options.
Contact - If the contact between Units is weak, select "Yes". If not, select "No".
For more details, see Strong Bed Adjustment
9.17 Point Load Testing (PLT)

Description:
The PLT has been accepted in geotechnical practice for nearly 30 years (Hoek,
1977). An advantage of the PLT is that numerous tests can be performed, because
the procedures are simple and inexpensive because minimal sample preparation is
required. The apparatus is also inexpensive and portable (Figure 20). The
International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM, 1985) has developed standard
procedures for testing and data reduction.
Another advantage of the PLT is that both diametral and axial tests can be
performed on core. In a diametral test, the load is applied parallel to bedding (
Figure 4). The diametral test is therefore an indirect measure of the lateral strength,
or bedding plane shear strength, and will be discussed further below.
The axial PLT is used to measure the UCS. The Point Load Index (Is50) is
converted to UCS by the following equation:
UCS = K (Is50)
Where K is the conversion factor. A comprehensive study involving more than

10,000 tests of coal measure rocks from 6 states reported by Rusnak and Mark
(2000) found that K=21 fit the data well for the entire range of rock types and
geographic regions (Figure 5). The study also found that the variability of the PLT
measurements, as measured by the standard deviation, was no greater than for
UCS tests. The UCS rating scale used in the CMRR program is shown in Figure 6.
The diametral PLT is a convenient index test that provides a substitute for bedding
plane shear testing. Because the precise relationship between bedding plane shear
strength and the PLT is not known, and since it seems unlikely that the same
K-factor used to convert the axial test to the UCS would apply, the new CMRR uses
the Point Load Index (IS50) directly. The Diametral PLT rating values were derived
from the original CMRR tables and the data presented by Mark and Molinda (1996),
and are shown in Figure 9.
See also: UCS; Discontinuity Shear Strength
9.18 RQD
Description:
The Rock Quality Designation (RQD) has been in use in geomechanics for over 30
years (Deere, 1966). It has been used as a rough indicator of rock strength by
estimating the % of core which equals or exceed 4 inches in length over the length
of the core run.
Example: A five feet (60 inches) core run has a total of 50 inches of recovered
core. It has six pieces within it that equal or exceed 4 inches for a total of 34
inches. The RQD is 34/60 in. or 57% (Figure 12).
9.19 Fracture Spacing

Description:
Geotechnical Core Logging/Fracture Spacing/RQD
Most standard geotechnical core logging procedures include some measure of the
natural breaks in the core. The two most commonly employed are the fracture
spacing and the RQD. Fracture spacing is easily determined by counting the core
breaks in a particular unit, and then dividing by the thickness of the unit.
The Rock Quality Designation (RQD) has been in use in geomechanics for over 30
years (Deere, 1966). The RQD is obtained by dividing combined length of core
pieces that are greater than 4 inches (10 cm) in length by the full length of the core
run. For example: Assume a 60 in. (1.8 m) core run has a total of 50 inches (1.55
m) of recovered core. It has six pieces within it that equal or exceed 4 inches for a
total of 34 inches. The RQD is 34/60 in. or 57% (Figure 16).
Both RQD and Fracture Spacing have their advocates in the geotechnical
community. Priest and Hudson (1976) suggested that the two can be related by the
following formula:
RQD = 100 e-0.1L (0.1L+1)
Where L=number of discontinuities per meter.
As input, the CMRR uses both the RQD and the fracture spacing. When the fracture
spacing is greater than about 1 ft (30 cm), the RQD is not very sensitive, so the
fracture spacing is used directly. At the other extreme, when the core is highly
broken or lost, the RQD appears to be the better measure. Either measure may be
used in the intermediate range.
The program uses the following equations to calculate the Discontinuity Spacing
Rating (DSR) of core from RQD and the fracture spacing. The equations were
derived from the original CMRR rating tables. Figure 8 shows the equations and
rating scale used in the CMRR. The minimum value of the DSR is 18, and the
maximum is 48 (see Figure 8).
Discontinuity Spacing Rating (DSR) Formula (using RQD)

DSR = 10.5 ln (RQD) - 11.6 when RQD>34.2
DSR=15+0.307*RQD when RQD<34.2 and RQD>10
DSR= 18 when RQD is less than or equal to 10.
Note that the CMRR program will not accept an RQD value greater than 90. When
the RQD exceeds 90, then the Fracture Spacing must be used.
Discontinuity Spacing Rating (DSR) Formula (using Fracture Spacing (F.S.))

DSR = 5.64 ln (F.S.) + 24 (For F.S. in inches)
DSR = 5.64 ln (F.S.) + 5.8 (For F.S. in mm)
Note that the CMRR program will not accept an FS value less than 2.5 inches (65
mm). When the FS <2.5 inches, then the RQD must be used.
9.20 Immersion Test

Description:
Procedures for the immersion test can be found on the immersion test data sheet (
Figure 1, Figure 10). The immersion test was adopted from one proposed by
Sickler (1986).
See also: Slake Durability Tests
9.21 Moisture Sensitivity Deduction

Description:
In the CMRR, the maximum deduction for moisture sensitivity is 15 points. The
data sheet used in the Immersion Test data sheet is shown in Figure 10. If
immersion test results are not available, moisture sensitivity can sometimes be
estimated visually in underground exposures.
Usually, some time is required for contact with humid mine air to affect rock
strength. In short-term applications, therefore, it may not be appropriate to apply
the moisture sensitivity deduction. The CMRR program reports both the Unit Rating
and the CMRR with and without the moisture sensitivity deduction.
Research was conducted to explore the relationship between the Slake Durability
Test (SDT) and the immersion test. In the SDT, 10 lumps of rock, each weighing
about 0.1 lbs, are oven dried, weighed, and then rotated through a water bath for 10
minutes. The repeated wetting and drying, together with the mild abrasion that
takes place during the test, causes moisture sensitive rocks to break down. The
slake durability index is the final dry weight of the sample expressed as a
percentage of the original dry weight (Hoek, 1977).
To compare the two tests, rock samples were collected underground from a variety
of mine settings, carefully wrapped to maintain in situ moisture content, and tested
in the laboratory. A total of 96 tests were run on 16 distinct rock types from 9
mines.
The results are shown in Figure 11. From the testing conducted to date, there is a
good correlation between the two tests for the Not Sensitive and Slightly Sensitive
classes. The correlation is less reliable for distinguishing "moderately sensitive"
rocks from "severely sensitive" rocks. Table 5 indicates how the results from either
test can be used for input to the CMRR.
9.22 Strong Bed Adjustment

Description:
In the original CMRR, the SBADJ was determined using a table. For improved
accuracy and to facilitate implementation of the table in the computer program,
equation (2) was derived using multiple regression:
SBADJ = [(0.72 SBD*THSB) B2.5] * [1 B (0.33 (THWR - 0.5))]

Where:
· SBD is the Strong Bed Difference, the difference between the strong bed=s
Unit Rating and the thickness-weighted average of all the Unit Ratings within
the bolted interval;
· THSB is the thickness of the strong bed (m) and;

· THWR is the thickness of the weak rock suspended from the strong bed (m).
9.23 Surcharge Adjustment

Description:
The strength of rocks overlying the bolted interval is only considered when they are
significantly weaker then the rocks within it. An example was a Western mine
where 4 ft (1.2 m) of relatively strong top coal was overlain by 20 ft (6 m) of weak,
rooted claystone. Because the roof beam needed to carry some of the surcharge
(extra weight) of the incompetent claystone, stability was reduced. The CMRR
accounts for the surcharge with a 3 point deduction.
9.24 Unit Contacts Adjustment

Description:
Many workers have indicated that mine roof containing numerous lithologic contacts
is less competent than roof consisting of a single rock type. When depositional
processes change and deposit distinctly different material there is generally (but not
always) a sharp contact between units. Usually this means a relatively weak
contact, as indicated by the fact that bed contacts are often not preserved intact in
core or fallen roof rock. In other instances, the contact may be gradational and may
not represent a weak plane. The characteristics of a contact surface (cohesion and
roughness) should be noted, and only the weak contacts are considered in
determining the deduction. The maximum deduction from the CMRR is 3 points
when more than 3 or more weak contacts are present.
9.25 Ground Water Adjustment

Description:
Ground water is most prevalent in shallow mines, particularly beneath stream

valleys, but it can also be introduced by leakage from pooled water in abandoned
mines or fracturing of overlying aquifers during high extraction mining. The CMRR
maintains the RMR system's rating scale, with a maximum deduction for flowing
ground water of 10 points.
9.26 Ferm Number

Description:
A color pictorial classification system of common coal measure roof rocks was
previously developed to provide geologists, engineers, and drillers with a standard
by which to group rocks. “A Guide to Core Rocks in the Pittsburgh Basin” by
J.C. Ferm and G.C. Smith (1981) is a field guide featuring color photographs of
named rock types with an attached reference number. This guide has found wide
acceptance throughout the coalfields and fills a longstanding need to standardize
geologic description into a numerical cataloging system. The name and number of
the rock depends on criteria including angle of bedding, color, grittiness, nature of
fracture, size of inclusions, carbonate content, and hardness. A series of questions
guides the user in a flowchart manner to the correct picture. This guide has been
widely accepted by technical personnel because of its use of pictures and because
the number system lends itself well to computer cataloging and analysis. The
primary application has been as an aid in exploration core logging.
Extensive point load testing has been conducted on thirty common coal measure
roof rocks (designated by Ferm numbers). The data can be found in Molinda and
Mark (1990, 1996) . These rocks are displayed with Ferm pictures, Unit Ratings,
axial strength, and diametral strength.
9.27 Slake Durability Tests

Description:
The CMRR employs the simple immersion test to measure moisture sensitivity.
While numerous other tests have been proposed, the closest thing to a standard
moisture sensitivity index is probably the Slake Durability Test (SDT). Hoek (1977)
recommended the SDT as a basic geomechanical test, ISRM standard procedures
have been developed for it, and it is an integral part of Bieniawski's Rock Mass
Rating (RMR).
The SDT is intended for use in establishing the rate of breakdown in a rock mass in
which stability is suspected to vary with time. To perform the test, 10 lumps of rock,
each weighing about 0.1 lbs (0.5 kg), are oven dried, weighed, and then rotated
through a water bath for 10 minutes. The repeated wetting and drying, together with
the mild abrasion that takes place during the test, causes moisture sensitive rocks to
break down. The slake durability index is the final dry weight of the sample
expressed as a percentage of the original dry weight.
To compare the Slake Durability test to the Immersion Test, rock samples were
collected underground from a variety of mine settings, carefully wrapped to maintain
in situ moisture content, and tested in the laboratory. A total of 96 tests were run on
16 distinct rock types from 9 mines.
Part
X
10 Data Collection and Classification

Data Collection and Classification - Overview
Data Collection and Classification - Unconfined Compressive Strength
Data Collection and Classification - Discontinuity Intensity
Data Collection and Classification - Shear Strength of Discontinuities
Data Collection and Classification - Moisture Sensitivity Deduction
Data Collection and Classification - Strong Bed Adjustment
Data Collection and Classification - Other Adjustments
10.1 Data Collection and Classification - Overview

Description:
The data required for the CMRR can be determined either from underground
exposures such as roof falls and overcasts, or from exploratory drill core. In either
case, the main parameters measured are:
· The uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of the intact rock;
· The intensity (spacing and persistence) of bedding and other discontinuities;
· The shear strength (cohesion and roughness) of bedding and other
discontinuities;
· The moisture sensitivity of the rock, and;
· The presence of a strong bed in the bolted interval.
Other, secondary, factors include the number of layers, the presence of
groundwater, and surcharge from overlying weak beds.
The CMRR is calculated in a two-step process. First, the mine roof is divided into
lithologic/structural units, and Unit Ratings are determined for each. When using
underground data, the equation for calculating the Unit Rating is:
Unit Rating = UCS Rating + Discontinuity Intensity Rating + Discontinuity Shear

Strength Rating + Multiple Discontinuity Adjustment + Moisture Sensitivity
Deduction.
For drill core data, the equation is even simpler:
Unit Rating = UCS Rating + Discontinuity Rating + Moisture Sensitivity

Deduction.
Once the Unit Ratings have been determined, the CMRR is calculated by averaging
all the unit ratings within the bolted interval (with the contribution of each unit
weighted by its thickness) and applying appropriate adjustment factors. This second
step is the same regardless of whether the Unit Ratings were from data collected
underground or from core. Figure 2 illustrates the process.
The procedures for gathering data and calculating the CMRR from underground
Data Collection and Classification 91
exposures have remained essentially unchanged since they were first proposed in
1993. The underground data sheet is shown in Figure 3. Procedures to determine
Unit Ratings from drill core have now been streamlined and updated based on new
research (Mark et al., 2002).
10.2 Data Collection and Classification - Unconfined Compressive

Strength
Description:
The UCS of the rock material affects roof strength in several ways. First, it
determines the ease with which new fracturing (as opposed to movement along
pre-existing discontinuities) will take place. Second, the compressive strength of the
rock is a factor in the shear strength of discontinuities. Approximately one-third of
the CMRR is determined by the compressive strength rating, which is approximately
twice the weight given to the UCS in the original RMR.
Laboratory testing is generally considered the standard method of determining the

UCS. Unfortunately, laboratory tests are expensive because the samples must be
carefully prepared. The variability in the results is also high, with the standard
deviation typically about one-third of the mean for coal measure rocks (Rusnak and
Mark, 2000).
As an alternative to standard laboratory testing, the CMRR recommends the Point

Load Test (PLT) for drill core. The PLT has been accepted in geotechnical practice
for nearly 30 years (Hoek, 1977). An advantage of the PLT is that numerous tests
can be performed, because the procedures are simple and inexpensive because
minimal sample preparation is required. The apparatus is also inexpensive and
portable. The International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM, 1985) has developed
standard procedures for testing and data reduction.
Another advantage of the PLT is that both diametral and axial tests can be
performed on core. In a diametral test, the load is applied parallel to bedding (Figure
4). The diametral test is therefore an indirect measure of the lateral strength, or
bedding plane shear strength, and will be discussed further below.
The axial PLT is used to measure the UCS. The Point Load Index (Is50) is
converted to UCS by the following equation:
UCS = K (Is50)
Where K is the conversion factor. A comprehensive study involving more than

10,000 tests of coal measure rocks from 6 states reported by Rusnak and Mark
(2000) found that K=21 fit the data well for the entire range of rock types and
geographic regions (Figure 5). The study also found that the variability of the PLT
measurements, as measured by the standard deviation, was no greater than for
UCS tests. The UCS rating scale used in the CMRR program is shown in Figure 6.
Underground, the CMRR employs the ball peen indention test to estimate UCS
proposed by Williamson (1984). The exposed rock face is struck with the round end
of a ball peen hammer, and resulting characteristic impact reaction is compared to
the chart shown in Figure 3. The nature of the reaction (indentation), not its
magnitude, is what is important.
A study was conducted to compare the UCS ratings derived from the ball peen test
with the PLT. In 17 of the 23 sites studied (or 81% of the cases), the difference
between the two measurements was 4 points or less (Figure 7). To account for the
changed K, the original Williamson rock strength classes have been slightly
adjusted, as shown in Table 2.
10.3 Data Collection and Classification - Discontinuity Intensity

Description:
Intensity is determined by the spacing between bedding planes or other

discontinuities, and the persistence, or extent, of each individual discontinuity. The
more closely spaced a set of discontinuities, the greater weakening effect it has on
the rock mass. Persistence is more important for discontinuities that are widely
spaced. Like UCS, Intensity accounts for about 1/3 of the total CMRR.
Underground, both spacing and persistence can be measured directly, using the
standard methods for rock mass characterization (ISRM, 1982). Table 3 shows the
Bedding/Discontinuity Rating Scale for underground data. The matrix shows what
point value is added for each combination of spacing and persistence of
discontinuities.
When a unit contains several sets of discontinuities, the most severe discontinuity
rating will determine the structural competence of the unit. However, additional sets
of discontinuities can further weaken the unit. For example, a unit might be
weakened by both bedding and slickensides. The multiple discontinuity adjustment
(with a maximum deduction of 5 points) accounts for this effect.
Most standard geotechnical core logging procedures include some measure of the
natural breaks in the core. The two most commonly employed are the fracture
spacing and the RQD. Fracture spacing is easily determined by counting the core
breaks in a particular unit, and then dividing by the thickness of the unit. The RQD is
obtained by dividing combined length of core pieces that are greater than 4 inches in
length by the full length of the core run.
Both measures have their advocates in the geotechnical community. Priest and
Hudson (1976) suggested that the two can be related by the following formula:
RQD = 100 e-0.1L (0.1L+1)
Where L=number of discontinuities per meter.
As input, the CMRR uses both the RQD and the fracture spacing. When the fracture
spacing is greater than about 1 ft, the RQD is not very sensitive, so the fracture
spacing is used directly. At the other extreme, when the core is highly broken or lost,
the RQD appears to be the better measure. Either measure may be used in the
intermediate range.
The program uses the following equations to calculate the Discontinuity Spacing
Rating (DSR) of core from RQD and the fracture spacing. The equations were
derived from the original CMRR rating tables. Figure 8 shows the equations and
rating scale used in the CMRR. The minimum value of the DSR is 20, and the
maximum is 48.
10.4 Data Collection and Classification - Shear Strength of

Discontinuities
Description:
Bedding plane shear strength is a critical parameter for coal mine ground control,
because the most severe loading applied to coal mine roof is normally lateral,
caused by horizontal stress (Mark and Barczak, 2000). Molinda and Mark (1996)
found that the lateral strength of some shales are just one-sixth of their axial
strength.
Underground, the cohesion of bedding surfaces is evaluated by using a 2.5 in. (9

cm) mason chisel and a hammer to split hand samples of rock. Weaker, less
cohesive surfaces require fewer chisel blows to split (see Figure 3). Cohesion can
also be estimated by observing the nature of the fractured wall of a roof fall. If the
wall "stair steps," with most of the roof failure occurring along bedding, then the
cohesion is probably low. On the other hand, if most of the failure surfaces cut
across bedding, then the strength of the bedding is most likely equal to or greater
than that of the intact rock. Slickensided surfaces are already planes of failure and
receive the minimum rating.
The roughness along a discontinuity surface is the other component of the

surfaces's shear strength. In the CMRR, roughness of a surface is estimated
visually and classified into "jagged", "wavy", or "planar," using the system proposed
by Barton (1974). This measure is to be applied on a scale which ranges from hand
sample size to several feet across a fall exposure. The CMRR assumes that
roughness significantly affects shear strength only when cohesion is in the middle
range (see Table 4).
When drill core is available, strength testing can be conducted. The diametral PLT
is a convenient index test that provides a substitute for bedding plane shear testing.
Because the precise relationship between bedding plane shear strength and the PLT
is not known, and since it seems unlikely that the same K-factor used to convert the
axial test to the UCS would apply, the new CMRR uses the Point Load Index (IS50)
directly. The Diametral PLT rating values were derived from the original CMRR
tables and the data presented by Mark and Molinda (1996), and are shown in Figure
9.
If the diametral test results show that the rock fabric or laminations are low strength,
it would be illogical to give the rock high marks for discontinuity spacing. In fact, both
the fracture spacing and the RQD also actually measure the strength of
discontinuities as well as their spacing, because strong ones might withstand the
rigors of the drilling process while weak ones break apart. Therefore, the
Discontinuity Rating is the lower of the Diametral PLT Rating or the Discontinuity
Spacing Rating.
10.5 Data Collection and Classification - Moisture Sensitivity

Deduction
Description:
In the CMRR, the maximum deduction for moisture sensitivity is 15 points. The data
sheet used in the Immersion Test data sheet is shown in Figure 10. If immersion
test results are not available, moisture sensitivity can sometimes be estimated
visually in underground exposures.
Usually, some time is required for contact with humid mine air to affect rock strength.
In short-term applications, therefore, it may not be appropriate to apply the moisture
sensitivity deduction. The CMRR program reports both the Unit Rating and the
CMRR with and without the moisture sensitivity deduction.
Research was conducted to explore the relationship between the Slake Durability
Test (SDT) and the immersion test. In the SDT, 10 lumps of rock, each weighing
about 0.1 lbs (0.5 kg), are oven dried, weighed, and then rotated through a water
bath for 10 minutes. The repeated wetting and drying, together with the mild
abrasion that takes place during the test, causes moisture sensitive rocks to break
down. The slake durability index is the final dry weight of the sample expressed as a
percentage of the original dry weight (Hoek, 1977).
To compare the two tests, rock samples were collected underground from a variety
of mine settings, carefully wrapped to maintain in situ moisture content, and tested in
the laboratory. A total of 96 tests were run on 16 distinct rock types from 9 mines.
10.6 Data Collection and Classification - Strong Bed Adjustment

Description:
One of the most important concepts in the CMRR is that the strongest bed within the
bolted interval often determines the performance of mine roof. The strong bed's
effect on the CMRR depends first upon how much stronger it is than the other units.
Second, the strong bed must be at least 1 ft (0.3 m) thick before it can provide any
additional support, and the amount of the adjustment is maximum when the bed is at
least 4 ft (1.2 m) thick. Third, the roof bolts must obtain at least 1 ft (0.3 m) of
anchorage in the strong bed for the adjustment to be considered. Finally, the higher
into the roof that the strong bed is located, the less its positive effect will be.
In the original CMRR, the SBADJ was determined using a table. For improved
accuracy and to facilitate implementation of the table in the computer program, the
following equation was derived using multiple regression:
SBADJ = [(0.72 SBD*THSB) B2.5] * [1 B (0.33 (THWR - 0.5))]

where:
· SBD is the Strong Bed Difference, the difference between the strong bed's
Unit Rating and the thickness-weighted average of all the Unit Ratings within
the bolted interval;
· THSB is the thickness of the strong bed (m) and;
· THWR is the thickness of the weak rock suspended from the strong bed (m).
10.7 Data Collection and Classification - Other Adjustments

Description:
Number of Units: Many workers have indicated that mine roof that contains
numerous lithologic contacts is less competent than roof that consists of a single
rock type (Karmis and Kane, 1984; Kester and Chugh, 1980). When depositional
processes change and deposit distinctly different material there is generally, but not
always, a sharp contact between units. Since gradational contacts do not weaken
the roof, the characteristics of major bedding contact surfaces (cohesion and
roughness) should be noted. The maximum deduction from the CMRR is 3 points
when more than 3 weak contacts are present.
Ground Water Adjustment: Ground water is most prevalent in shallow mines,

particularly beneath stream valleys, but it can also be introduced by leakage from
pooled water in abandoned mines or fracturing of overlying aquifers during high
extraction mining. The CMRR maintains the RMR system's rating scale, with a
maximum deduction for flowing ground water of 10 points.
Surcharge: The strength of rocks overlying the bolted interval is only considered
when they are significantly weaker then the rocks within it. An example was a
Western mine where 4 ft (1.2 m) of relatively strong top coal was overlain by 20 ft (6
m) of weak, rooted claystone. Because the roof beam needed to carry some of the
surcharge (extra weight) of the incompetent claystone, stability was reduced. The
CMRR accounts for the surcharge with a 3 point deduction.
Index 97
Index -D-
Data Base 58
-A- Data Collection and Classification - Discontinuity

Intensity 92
About CMRR 38 Data Collection and Classification - Moisture
Sensitivity Deduction 94
Adjustment 80, 85, 86, 87, 95
Data Collection and Classification - Other
Agioutantis 38 Adjustments 95
ALPS 7, 58 Data Collection and Classification - Overview 90
ALTS (Australia) 7 Data Collection and Classification - Shear Strength of
Applications 7 Discontinuities 93
Australia 7, 60 Data Collection and Classification - Strong Bed
AutoCAD 27, 28 Adjustment 95
Axial Rating 91 Data Collection and Classification - Unconfined
Axial Strength 91 Compressive Strength 91
Axial Test 82 Data Sheet 48
Data Sheet for the Immersion Test 56
Diametral Point Load Test 55, 65, 82
-B- Diametral Rating 79
Diametral Strength 79
Ball Peen Hammer Test 78
Discontinuities 65, 75
Ball Peen Test 54
Discontinuities, Intensity of 79
Bedding 74
Bieniawski 39
Block Test 65
Bolt Length 20
-E-
Browsing Text Files 16 Effect of water on shale 47
Export to AutoCAD 28
Exposure 76
-C- Extended Cuts 7, 59
Canada 7
Chase 39
Chisel Test 78
-F-
Classification 72 Faults and Other Linear Features 76
CMRR 7, 71 Ferm 39, 87
CMRR Overview 7 Ferm Number 87
CMRR.INI 32 Figure 1 47
Cohesion 79 Figure 2 47
Comparison of the Slake Durability and Immersion Figure 3 48
Tests 57 Figure 3 - English Version 49
Compressive Strength 76, 82, 91 Figure 3 - English Version - Landscape Format 51
Contents 7 Figure 3 - Metric Version 48
Creating New Files 13 Figure 3 - Metric Version - Landscape Format 50
Custom Rock Library 19, 20 Figure 4 52
Figure 5 52
Figure 6 53
Figure 7 54
Figure 8 54
Figure 9 55
Figure 10 56
Figure 11 57 -M-
Figure 12 58
Mark 38, 39
Figure 13 58
Moisture sensitive shale 47
Figure 14 59
Moisture Sensitivity 85
Figure 15 60
Moisture Sensitivity Deduction 85
Figure 16 61
Molinda 38, 39
Figure 17 62
Multiple Discontinuity 80
Figure 18 63
Multiple Discontinuity Adjustments 80
Figure 20 64
Figure 21 65
Figure 22 65
Figures, List 46
-N-
File Conversion 36 NIOSH 38
Flow Chart 47 Number of Units 95
Fracture Spacing 54, 83
-O-
-G- Opening Existing Files 13
Geotechnical Core Logging 83 Options 33
Ground Control 74 Overview 7
Ground Water 87, 95
Ground Water Adjustment 87, 95
-P-
-H- Persistence 79
Plot Roof Layers 24
HelpButton 43 Point Load Test 52, 64
Highwall 62 Point Load Test, Axial 52, 65
Point Load Test, Diametral 52, 55, 65, 82
Print Preview 15
-I- Printing Files 15
Program Interface 10
Immersion Test 56, 57, 84
Project Description 18
Import from AutoCAD 27
Project Input Parameters 18
Irregular Lump Test 65
-K- -R-
Rating scale 53, 54, 55
Karmis 38
References 39
Relationship between the CMRR and the ALPS SF
-L- 58
Results Window 24
Location Management 18 Rock Mass Classification 72
Longwall Recovery Rooms 7 Roof Bolt Density 60
Roof Bolt Selection (ARBS) 7
Roof Line 20
Roughness 79
Index 99
Roughness Scale 65
RQD 54, 61, 83
-U-
-S- UCS 52, 54
Underground 76
Saving Files 14 Underground Data Sheet 48
Saving Files under Different Names (Save As) 14 Uniaxial Compressive Strength 76
Setting Up the Printer 15 Unit Access Form 18
Settings 30 Unit Contacts 86
Shale 52 Unit Contacts Adjustment 86
Shear Strength of Discontinuities 79 Unit Conversions 35
Slake Durability 57 Unit Rating for DrillCore Data 18, 80
Slake Durability Tests 88 Unit Rating for Underground Exposure Data 18, 76
Slickensides and Other Discontinuities 75 Units Number 95
Smith 39 Units Structural 62
South Africa 7, 60
Spacing 79
Spacing and Persistence 79
Specimen Shape 65
Strength 82, 91
Strength Index 76, 91
Strength Rating 78, 91
Strong Bed 74, 85
Strong Bed Adjustment 85
Surcharge 86, 95
Surcharge Adjustment 86
-T-
Table 1 68
Table 2 69
Table 3 69
Table 4 69
Table 5 69
Tables, List 68
Test Ball Peen Hammer 63, 78
Test Block 65
Test Chisel 78
Test Irregular Lump 65
The CMRR Data Base 58
The Edit Menu 18
The File Menu 13
The Help Menu 38
The Import/Export Menu 27
The Main Input Form 20
The Unit Access Form 23

CMRR

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

CMRR

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Coal Mine Roof Rating

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Part II The File Menu 13

Part III The Edit Menu 18

Part IV The Import/Export Menu 27

Part V The Utilities Menu 30

Part VI The Help Menu 38

Part VII List of Figures 46

Part VIII List of Tables 68

Part IX Background Information 71

Part X Data Collection and Classification 90

Help File Updated: Sunday, October 14, 2012

See also: Data Collection and Classification, Background Information, Applications

Analysis of Longwall Pillar Stability (ALPS)

Longwall Tailgate Design (Australia)

Stability of Extended Cuts

Roof Bolt Selection

Multiple Seam Mining

Longwall Mining through Open Entries and Recovery Rooms

Roof Fall Evaluations (South Africa)

Baseline Comparison of Ground Conditions (Canada)

1.3 Program Interface

The Utilities Menu

2 The File Menu

Creating New Files

2.1 Creating New Files

2.2 Opening Existing Files

· If the file extension is omitted, the default extension will be appended.

2.3 Saving Files

Select the Save option from the File menu.

2.4 Saving Files under Different Names (Save As)

To use Save As:

2.5 Setting Up the Printer

To use this option:

2.6 Printing Files

2.7 Print Preview

2.8 Browsing Text Files

2.9 Exiting the Program

3 The Edit Menu

3.1 Project Description

Number of Locations at Mine Site:

3.2 Project Input Parameters

· The Main Input Form

· Unit Rating for Underground Exposure Data

3.3 Custom Rock Library

Input from Ferm List

Input from CMR File

Export to Library File

Import from Library File

3.4 The Main Input Form

For each location the following data should be entered:

Depth to the Roof Line

length identifies the rock thickness used in the calculation of CMRR.

Use Depth to Calculate Unit Thicknesses

3.5 The Unit Access Form

This is a dynamic form comprising of a number of rows. Each row corresponds to a

Thickness of the Unit

Custom Rock Type

Depth to the top of the Unit

Detailed Information for Each Unit

· Unit Rating for Underground Exposure Data

3.6 Plot Roof Layers

3.7 Results Window