煤炭工程 ›› 2023, Vol. ›› Issue (12): 0-0.

• 生产技术 •    

河曲露天煤矿首采区末期全留沟内排方案

张宇1,罗科1,马力2,吕贵龙3,马宁4   

  1. 1. 山西煤炭进出口集团河曲旧县露天煤业有限公司
    2. 西安科技大学能源学院
    3. 山西焦煤山煤国际河曲露天煤业有限公司
    4. 西安科技大学
  • 收稿日期:2022-09-25 修回日期:2022-11-03 出版日期:2023-12-20 发布日期:2024-03-11
  • 通讯作者: 马力 E-mail:mali217@xust.edu.cn

The scheme of full retention ditch internal dumping in the end of the first mining area for Hequ open pit coal mine

  • Received:2022-09-25 Revised:2022-11-03 Online:2023-12-20 Published:2024-03-11

摘要: 针对研究河曲露天矿首采区向二采区转向的问题,提出了重新拉沟,缓帮留沟和扇形转向三种采区过渡方式,基于河曲露天矿开采现状,通过对三种采区接续方式的优缺点进行对比分析,最终确定采用缓帮留沟过渡方式,采用了全压帮内排开采和全留沟内排开采两种方式进行研究。本文从两种开采方式的综合效益出发,在综合考虑河曲露天煤矿二采区开采程序要求及留沟对内排运输系统、原煤运输系统、运距变化等影响的基础上,系统揭示各种压帮内排方式对剥采系统的综合影响规律,在全压帮与全留沟内排方案中寻求最佳的压帮内排开采程序,对不同开采方式的物料的二次剥离和运输成本等方面进行了计算,构建总费用模型,经技术经济比较,得出全压帮内排剥离物料对运输距离较小,同时内排空间能够完全释放,剥离物料不需要外排,能够实现完全内排,开采会导致二采区开采过程中与首采区接触的西端帮大量的二次剥离量,经济效益不佳,而全留沟内排开采二次剥离量较少,但是由于留沟的影响,使得内排空间无法完全释放,增加了剥离物料的转排费用,同时外排剥离物料需要征收大面积的土地,整体开采费用较高。综合对比两种开采方式,全留沟内排开采具有更好的经济效益,与全压帮内排开采相比更具优越性。

关键词: 露天矿, 采区接续, 全留沟内排, 全压帮内排

Abstract: Abstract:In order to solve the problem of the transition from the first mining area to the second mining area in Hequ open-pit mine,Three transition modes of mining area are proposed, namely, re trenching, retaining trench with gentle slope and sector turning. Based on the current mining situation of Hequ Open pit Mine, the advantages and disadvantages of the three connection modes of mining area are compared and analyzed, and the transition mode of retaining trench with gentle slope is finally determined, two methods of mining with full pressure and internal drainage and mining with full reserved ditch and internal drainage were adopted. Based on the comprehensive benefits of the two mining methods, and on the basis of comprehensively considering the requirements of the mining procedure in the second mining area of Hequ open-pit coal mine and the impact of ditch retention on the internal drainage transportation system, raw coal transportation system, and the change of transportation distance, this paper systematically reveals the comprehensive impact law of various ways of wall pressure and internal drainage on the stripping system, and seeks the best mining procedure of wall pressure and internal drainage in the total wall pressure and ditch retention internal drainage schemes, The secondary stripping and transportation costs of materials with different mining methods are calculated, and the total cost model is constructed. Through technical and economic comparison, It can be concluded that the transportation distance of stripped materials discharged inside the full pressure wall is small, and the inner drainage space can be completely released. Stripped materials do not need to be discharged outside, and can be completely discharged inside. The mining will lead to a large amount of secondary stripping of the western end wall that contacts the first mining area during the mining process of the second mining area. The economic benefit is poor, while the secondary stripping amount of the full ditch drainage mining is small, but due to the influence of the ditch, the inner drainage space cannot be completely released, The transfer cost of stripped materials is increased. Meanwhile, large area of land needs to be expropriated to discharge stripped materials, and the overall mining cost is high. Comprehensive comparison of the two mining methods shows that the full ditch drainage mining has better economic benefits, and is superior to the full pressure wall drainage mining.

Key words: Open pit mine, mining areas transition, mining All reserved for drainage in the ditch, Full pressure upper inner row