Rock Mechanics, Fuenkajorn & Phien-wej (eds) 2011.

ISBN 978 974 533 636 0

Reviews of slope failure in lowwall area 3 of Mae Moh mine

P. Doncommul, P. Pimklang, N. Mungpayabal & A. Chaiwan Geotechnical Engineering Department of Mae Moh Mine , Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, Mae Moh, Lampang, Thailand

Keywords: Slope failure, slope stability, shear strength, lowwall, coal mine ABSTRACT: Lowwall area 3 is located in the north east pit area of Mae Moh mine. This trial area was excavated in February 1996. The first failure occurred in June and progressed to the east in September 1996 as the second failure. After heavy rain, the third and fourth failures of the whole area occurred in August and September 1998 with more than 3 millions cubic meters of mass movement. Detailed geologic structures, shear strength of the materials and monitoring results of failures were collected and reviewed. Lessons learnt from this review are very useful for future works of the mine and for those who involved in this subject. 1 INTRODUCTION

The Mae Moh mine is located at latitude 181821 N and longitude 994402 E, about 630 km north of Bangkok, and 30 km east of Lampang central (Figure 1). Coal mining in the Mae Moh open pit lignite mine is operated by the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT). This mine is the largest open pit mine in Thailand, with 4 km wide, 7.5 km long and 270 m deep. Lignite from this mine is the most important source of coal which according to statistics in April 2008, is the lowest cost fuel for electricity generating in Thailand (Figure 2).

Figure 1. Location of the Mae Moh mine in Lampang province, Thailand. 219

Reviews of slope failure in lowwall area 3 of Mae Moh mine

14

Solar cell

Fuel cost (Bath/Unit)

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lignite Natural gas Diesel Fuel oil

Fuel type

Figure 2. Fuel costs in Thailand as of April 2008. The Mae Moh mine and its thermal power plants started operation in 1955 and its production capacity has been progressively increased. Recently this power plant includes the total number of 10 units which consumes up to 50,000 tons of coal per day, serving 21.65% of the total electricity demands in Thailand (Figure 3). Therefore the annual requirement of coal for power plant is approximately 15-16 million tons. This high requirement of lignite indicates a huge volume of overburden excavation with open pit mining, which is estimated as 60-80 million cubic meters per year. The geological and economical lignite reserves in Mae Moh mine are approximately 1,140 million tons and 814 million tons, respectively. The total volume of coal excavated so far is 300 million tons (as of 2007). The current deepest level of the lignite pit is 270 meters. In the future, EGAT plans to excavate to the depth of 280 meters in 2017, 326 meters in 2022, 350 meters in 2028, and eventually to the final depth of 490 meters. To dig up more lignite by deepening the excavations in the pit, serious engineering problems are encountered due to the influence of underground water pressure (Giao, 1992), the instability of rock slopes and huge stress relief. Moreover, the presence of weak and thin layers of clay seam filling forming a shear plane becomes a significant problem because of their extremely low strength (EGAT, 1985).

Renew 1.25% Diesel 0.40% Coal 21.65%

Hydropower 5% Fuel oil 1.70%

Natural Gas 70%

Figure 3. Electricity sources in Thailand as of June 2008. 220

Rock Mechanics, Fuenkajorn & Phien-wej (eds) 2011. ISBN 978 974 533 636 0

MAE MOH MINE GEOLOGY

Mae Moh mine is in Mae Moh tertiary basin with more than 1,000 m of maximum thickness. Sediment in this basin was classified in to three formations from lower Huai King, Na Khaem and Huai Luang formations. Huai King formation consists of sandstone, siltstone, mudstone claystone and conglomerate with green, yellow, blue and purple in color. Na Khaem formation composes of grey, greenish grey mudstone clay and some sand with five zones of coal J,K,Q,R and S. The main seams are K and Q. Huai Luang formation mostly are red brown stiff clay and some sand. All stratas lying above K seam are overburden and claystone layers under Q coal seam are defined as underburden with some green sheared clays inter-bedded. Most stratas dip 10-15 degrees to the center of the basin. Normal faults found through out the basin (Figure 4). 3 NORTHEAST PIT SLOPE DESIGN CRITERION

After extensive program of geotechnical study on the Mae Moh mine in 1985, slope criteria were designed for each part of northeast pit. For the high-wall area 1:3 (vertical-to-horizontal) slope was set up. In the low-wall part with no normal fault, slope was designed parallel to bedding plane of the underburden. In the low-wall area with fault, some parts of underburden were planned to cut for appropriate slope angle according to the throw of the fault. 4 C-ROAD FAILURE

In 1988, a failure occurred in the south low-wall of northeast pit (Figure 5). The failure affecting C- road, one main haul road of this area. Failure plane is the combination of fault on upper part and sheared bedding plane of the underburden in lower part. After extensive program of drilling investigation, detailed pit mapping, laboratory testing and back analysis. It was found that weak green clay layer and water pressure along fault and bedding plane were the main causes of this failure. To overcome this type of failure, horizontal drain holes were drilled to drain water from the fault plane inside rock mass and to control water pressure in the slope. The results from extensive drilling along low-wall area showed sheared green clay layers inter-bedded in the underburden through out the low-wall area. The low-wall of the north east pit had been divided into 4 small areas due to their geometry. Low-wall areas 1 and 2 with geometry similar to C-road failure were redesigned to leave more underburden in place as a countered weight and drill drained holes along the slope. Areas 3 and 4 are quite different, their bedding planes dip into the pit with more steep angle, which require a different method to solve these problematic areas.

Figure 4. Stratigraphy and a typical cross section of Mae Moh main basin. 221

Reviews of slope failure in lowwall area 3 of Mae Moh mine

Figure 5. Photograph of C-road failure.

slope 340 slope

B2/6 F7 B0/8 F170/175 B 100/4 F 160/70 B 103/3

B 102/8

320

300

280

260

CR aod
0 50 100 150 200

250

Figure 6. Map and cross section of C-road failure. 5 LOWWALL AREA 3

Lowwall area 3 mine grid is N35-N41 and W5-W12, located in the northeast part of northeast pit. Bedding planes of the underburden in this area dip toward the pit with 10-18 degrees. There are some westward normal faults cut and offset the coal and the underburden into many blocks (Figures 7 through 11). According to mine plan, once coal in front of the faulted block is mined out, bedding plane of weak green clays behind will be day-lighted. Rock mass above these layers will move along bedding plane due to inclination of these planes are greater than their friction angle. It is quite clear that Lowwall area 3 is unstable. Mine geotechnical group proposed to make trial area by providing the receiving berm for sliding mass and hope it could stop within this provided area. Visual inspection, detailed pit mapping and monitoring were carried out to understand the true mechanisms of the slope movement and water pressure. Information and experience from this area will be useful for the deep mine slope design in the future.

222

Rock Mechanics, Fuenkajorn & Phien-wej (eds) 2011. ISBN 978 974 533 636 0

500m.

Figure 7. Map of lowwall of the northeast pit, plan and cross section of lowwall area 3.

100 m. Figure 8. Pit map, cross section and photograph of lowwall area 3 at the first failure. 223

Reviews of slope failure in lowwall area 3 of Mae Moh mine

100 m. Figure 9. Boundary and cross section of the second failure of lowwall area 3.

100m. Figure 10. Map of the third and fourth failure. of lowwall area 3.

Figure 11. Cross section of the lowwall area 3 and the length each failure. 6 EXCAVATION AND FAILURE OF LOWWALL AREA3

Lowwall area 3 was started to excavate in January, 1996 from the upper part at +280 msl. Lowering bench-by-bench, from +280 msl. to +239 msl. Detailed pit mapping was done continuously and cracks were observed along the fault even in dry season. After green clay 224

Rock Mechanics, Fuenkajorn & Phien-wej (eds) 2011. ISBN 978 974 533 636 0

layers were day-lighted about 200 m long and with some rain, more movement found both from monitoring equipments and visual inspection. Finally, the first failure occurred on the 16th of June 1996. Failure size was 80 m (w) 120 m (l) 30 m (h). It was clear that the failure plane was along the top of G1A layer. Failure mass movement was about 20 m at the toe and stopped on the providing floor. However, the second failure occurred within rain season on the 15th of September 1996. The second failure extended more to the east and moved more than 60 m to the west at toe. The north and south of the failure boundary extended only 20 m. Some parts of failure mass at toe were cleaned up. The excavation extended more both in north and south and also lowering to +200 msl according to mine planning in the two following years. The length of the undercut planes extended to the maximum of 500 m. Then, during the rainy season of the second year, the third failure occurred on 20th August 1998 with the full length of excavated slope face. Failure mass was approximately three million cubic meters. After very heavy rained on the 6th of September of that year, the fourth failure occurred as mud and debris flows. These materials flowed over the providing area and affected the active working face. 7 MONITORING DATA

Some monitoring equipments were installed both before and during excavation (Figure 12). Results of these instruments are summarized as follows. 7.1 Inclinometers

Six inclinometers were installed at the top of slope, outside the excavated area. LWI301, total depth 70 m installed in March 1996, very close to the limit of cut and collapsed with first failure of area 3. Four measurements were obtained before it failed. Maximum displacement showed about 1 cm at the depth of 20-22 m. LWI302 installed at 100 m north of LWI301, outside the first and second failure boundaries. The total depth was 80 m. Maximum displacement was 1.5 cm at depth of 16 m with 4 records, the last was on the 15th of October 1996. LWI303 installed with 80 m deep at 100 m north of LWI302. The maximum displacement was 4.5 cm at the depth of 21-23 m. Same as LWI304 and LWI305, the maximum displacement occurred at the same layer, G1A. Rate of the mass movement of LWI303 from chart shown in Figure 13 shows that the movement rate was affected by rain and the movement rate decreased after the first and second failures had occurred.

100m.
Figure 12. Locations of inclinometer and piezometer in lowwall area 3.

225

Reviews of slope failure in lowwall area 3 of Mae Moh mine

Figure 13. Records of inclinometer LWI303 and movement rate. 7.2 Piezometers

Seven piezometers installed in area 3, as shown in Figure 14, were selected to plot with rainfall data in two groups. The first group is in the southern part composed of the LWP178, LWP 192 and LWP181. The first one was installed in G1A layer, the second and the third were installed in G1 layer. The LWP178 located in the lower part of area 3. It gradually fell down and responded to the rain fall then dried out in 1995 before excavation started. The LWP192 and LWP181were located far to the east of the failure area. The LWP192 slowly fell down from year 1993 to 1998. It responded to the rain fall in the years 1995 and 1996. The LWP181 was high in piezometric level compared to the first two piezometers. It fell down rapidly in the middle and late 1996, and dropped to zero in late 1997. These 3 piezometers showed that they were different in piezometric level, responded to the rain and failure events. The second group including LWP1105, LWP1106, LWP1113 and LWP1114. LWP1106 was in the middle of area 3. The LWP1105, LWP1113 and LWP1114 were located in the northeast of area 3. The LWP1106 suddenly rose up in June 1997 and between September and October 1997 then failed with the third failure on the 20th of August 1998. LWP1105 rose up rapidly from 20 kPa. in September to October 1997, and jumped up to 150 kPa before the third failure occurred. LWP1113 climbed up continuously from 30 to 160 kPa, not responded to rain before the third failure of area 3. LWP1114 started with 120 kPa and jumped up to 150 kPa before failing. LW1113 and LWP1114 showed leakage of water with high pressure from the adjacent area into the east of area 3, and may be the main cause of the third fail in this area.

Figure 14. Piezometer data in lowwall area 3.

226

Rock Mechanics, Fuenkajorn & Phien-wej (eds) 2011. ISBN 978 974 533 636 0

BACK ANALYSIS

Cross section NE6.2 was selected for back analysis of the first failure (Figure 15). There are at least six normal faults in this cross section. Claystone and green clay layers in each fault block varied in dip angle. Three material types are definded; claystone, G1A green clay and fault. The material parameters for the claystone are as follows: unit weight = 19.5 kN/m3, cohesion is 100 kPa, and friction angle = 25 degrees. For G1A, cohesion is 0 kPa. friction angle = 12 degrees. The fault plane properties are as follows: cohesion = 0 kPa, friction angle = 17 degrees. The analysis result shows that, for dry case, the factor of safety is 0.981. The back analysis result was well correspond to the field evidence before sliding occurred.
0.961

Claystone Unit Weight Cohesion Phi G1A Unit Weight Cohesion Phi fault Unit Weight Cohesion Phi 20 kN/m3 0 kPa 17 degree 20 kN/m3 0 kPa 12 degree 19.5 kN/m3 100 kPa 25 degree

300 290 280 270

300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

ElE.

260 250 240 230 220

Distance

Figure 15. Back analysis of section NE 6.2. 9 CONCLUSIONS

Some lowwall areas of the Mae Moh mine pose the risk of slope stability problem. To avoid this risk, removal of the potential movement materials should be the last solution due to the cost. For the best alternative solution under consideration, detail geometry of each area should be well investigated and understood. Mitigation and option of remedial works have to be evaluated and compared as early as possible to get the best option. Lesson learnt from the C-road failure was applied for the low-wall area 3 trial area. Its geometry and weak layers show that it will be certainly fail unless it is removed before undercutting. Geotechnical department of the mine proposed to allow the failure to occur, and provide the receiving area while monitoring its mechanisms. The first failure occurred as predicted, but the second to fourth failures were more severe than expected due to the heavy rain and the disintegrated sliding material. Scale of the first failure and the data collected from these movements are valuable for the mitigation for the future mine areas, such as area 4.1 and area 4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This paper is summarized from failure records of Slope Stability Analysis Section and monitoring data from Slope Stability Monitoring Section, Geotechnical Engineering Department, Mine Planning and Administration Division of Mae Moh Mine. Permission to publish this paper is gratefully acknowledged. REFERENCES Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, 1985. Geotechnical Report Volume1, Thailand Australia lignite Mine Development Project, Mae Moh Mine. Thawonwisuttikul D. , Jariyabhumi, O.(1994). Lesson learnt from slope failure at Mae Moh mine, The Fifth Mining Conference, Songkla: Prince of Songkla University, 1994,pp. 3-41-56. 227