NumericalSimulationofFluid-SolidCouplinginSurrounding...

Research ArticleNumerical Simulation of Fluid-Solid Coupling in SurroundingRock for River Stope Mining

Haiping Yuan12 Chenghao Chen1 Zhongming He2 and Yixian Wang 1

1School of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering HeFei University of Technology Hefei China2State Engineering Laboratory of Highway Maintenance Technology Changsha University of Science amp TechnologyChangsha China

Correspondence should be addressed to Yixian Wang wangyixian2012hfuteducn

Received 14 January 2020 Accepted 10 April 2020 Published 29 April 2020

Academic Editor Anil Kumar

Copyright copy 2020 Haiping Yuan et al)is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution Licensewhich permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited

Mining disturbance will induce further weakening of faults and rock bridges improve rock mass permeability and in seriouscases conduct surface rivers to cause disasters A numerical calculation model of river-fault in the mining area is establishedBased on the fluid-solid coupling theory of rock mass the influence of mining disturbance on the development and evolutionprocess of rock bridge rupture and river-fault-stope potential seepage channel is simulated and calculated Research studies showthat under the disturbance of ore bodymining it is possible to form a channel from the river to fault to seepage and drainage in thestope )e disturbance of ore body mining has no great adverse effect on the stability of the rock mass at the top of F2 fault )erock mass damage caused by mining is only distributed in local areas and the rock bridge between the river fault and stope is notcompletely connected )e fracture of mining rock mass leads to the increase in permeability of rock mass and seepage tends tospread in the direction of the fault but there is no obvious through drainage channel from surface water to the stope)e results ofresearch provide technical guidance for the mine to use the filling mining method after the river does not change the road safetyand reliability certification and can also provide reference for similar mines

1 Introduction

Under the actions of tectonic movement weathering erosionetc a natural geological body develops a large number offissures or even faults with different directions and sizes whichare cutting each other )e existence of these joints and faultsprovides necessary channels for the infiltration and flow ofsurface water and groundwater Mining has a nonnegligibledisturbance to the fault When the rock mass is disturbed bymining unloading the original stress balance state of thesurrounding rock mass is destroyed which promotes furtherdevelopment of fractures thus leading to changes in thepermeability of the surrounding rock and the flow state ofgroundwater When the rock bridge between the fault and thestope is seriously damaged it results in the development offractures through and affects the underground aquifer orsurface water and the water will flow into the stope causingwater inrush and mud inrush disasters [1ndash5]

At present scholars generally use fluid-solid couplingtheory to study the effect of water on disturbed rock massBased on the classical Biot seepage mechanics and the splitevolution model of the curve expansion path scholars suchas Yang et al [6] and Nie et al [7] respectively studied therock crack growth and failure mechanism under the actionof pore water pressure Zhang et al [8] Li et al [9] Lu [10]and others analyzed the coupling evolution process of thestress field seepage field and damage field of rock mass andstudied the coupling mechanism of stress-seepage-damageduring the formation of the water inrush passage Bai [11]Yao and Lu [12] Park and Wang [13] and Zoback andByerlee [14] found that the rock permeability coefficient ischanging after being disturbed Zhu and Wei [15] Zhao andPeng [16] and other scholars put forward the fluid-solidcoupling prediction model of disturbed rock mass under theinfluence of karst geomorphology and the water inrushprevention mechanism under the corresponding conditions

HindawiShock and VibrationVolume 2020 Article ID 9786182 11 pageshttpsdoiorg10115520209786182

In conclusion the research studies on seepage disturbedrock mass by scholars mainly focus on the mechanism ofrock crack propagation and the seepage model of rock mass)ere are few reports on the fracture mechanism damageeffect and seepage channel formation of the stope-fault rockbridge under complex conditions of fault influence andmining disturbance

Based on the engineering background of the influence ofthe Xima River on the seepage of the filling mining methodin the Makeng Iron Mine this paper establishes a fluid-solidcoupling numerical analysis model of ore bodymining basedon FLAC3D studies the damage effect of the fault-stope-rockbridge and the dynamic response of the seepage channelafter mining disturbance demonstrates the safety and re-liability of the river (Xima River) in the mining area withoutdiversion and provides reference for similar mining proj-ects )e method described in this article relies on the actualsituation of the project to dynamically and iteratively cal-culate the seepage parameters and deformation data )ecloud image of the parameters related to the rock bridgebreaks intuitively reflecting the disruptive effects of miningdisturbances and provides theoretical support for the safetyassessment of mining activities under rivers

2 Rock Bridge Fracture Fluid-SolidCoupling Technology

21 Fracture Mode of Mining-Induced Rock Bridge At thesame time the rock mass containing joints weak planes andfaults is further weakened under mining disturbance such aslarge-scale blasting which easily causes damage or evenbreaks the rock bridges between stopes and faults Atpresent the research on the rock bridge is mainly based onthe Lajtai rock bridge failure theory [17ndash19] which holdsthat with the change of normal stress rock bridge failuremodes are divided into three types tensile failure shearfailure and tensile shear composite failure [20] As shown inFigure 1 the typical pure shear and tensile shear failuremodes of rock bridges obtained from uniaxial compressiontests are presented

For the problem of ore body mining the failure mode ofthe rock is mainly shear failure and tensile shear failurewithin the stress range of most mining surrounding rock)e main formula is shown in equation (1) whereτL is theshear strength c is the cohesion of the rockφ is the angle ofinternal friction and σn is the normal stress

τL 2c + σn tanφ( 1113857

2

1 + tan2 φminus σ2n1113890 1113891

12

(1)

Based on equation (1) the software is developed againthrough the FISH language embedded in FLAC3D and codesare written to simulate the fracture of the mining rockbridge

22 Principle of Fluid-Solid Coupling in Mining Whensimulating the fluid-solid coupling mechanism of rock massthe rock mass is regarded as a porous medium [12] and thefluid-solid coupling calculation is carried out taking into

account both fluid and mechanical effects )e fluid-solidcoupling process includes two mechanical effects on the onehand groundwater seepage in rock mass will produceseepage volume force thus changing the original stress stateof rock mass on the other hand changes in the stress state ofthe rock mass will lead to deformation of the rock massChanges in the structure of the rock mass will affect thepermeability of the rock mass and then the flow state ofwater in the rock mass will also change [22] )e calculationflow of fluid-solid coupling is shown in Figure 2

)e permeability of rock mass is a process closely relatedto the initiation propagation coalescence and mesodamageevolution of macrocracks )e relationship between volu-metric strain and permeability of rock mass is approximatelyan exponential function which can better reflect the evo-lution law of overall permeability during the rock damageprocess as shown in equation (2) [23] In the equation k isthe permeability coefficient p is the pore water pressureξ isthe permeability jump coefficient β is the coupling coef-ficientσii is the average stressH is the Biot constant and a isthe pore water pressure coefficient

k(σ p) ξk0eminus β σii 3minus ap

H( 1113857 (2)

Before the group crack initiation or propagation thestress-seepage coupling effect of the rock bridge fracturechannel and its adjacent rock mass is not obvious but withthe continuous action of mining disturbance and ground-water pressure new damage points appear continuously andthe stress-seepage-damage coupling effect becomes ex-tremely obvious In order to fully reflect the sharp increase ofthe permeability coefficient after rock mass damage it can beregarded as an elasto-brittle material with residual strengthand its stress-damage field evolution law during loading andunloading process conforms to the elastic damage theory)e MohrndashCoulomb criterion and the maximum tensilestrength criterion were used as damage thresholds fordamage identification of elements [24] when the elementreaches the damage threshold of tensile strength ft thedamage variable D is shown in equation (3a) and the per-meability coefficient k of the corresponding element isshown in equation (3b) when the shear stress of the elementreaches the damage threshold the damage variable D isshown in equation (3c) and the permeability coefficient k ofthe corresponding element is shown in equation (3d)

Shearcrack

Shearcrack

Tensilecrack

Shearcrack

Tensilecrack

Figure 1 Shear failure and tensile shear failure of the rock bridge[21]

2 Shock and Vibration

D

0 ε0 le ε

1 minusftr

E0ε εt0 le εlt ε0

1 εlt ε0

⎧⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎩

(3a)

k

k0eminus β σ3minus αp( ) D 0

ξk0eminus β σ3minus αp( ) 0ltDlt 1

ξprimek0eminus β σ3minus p( ) D 1

⎧⎪⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎪⎩

(3b)

where ftr is the tensile residual strength and ξprime is the in-crease coefficient of the permeability coefficient when theunit is destroyed

D

0 εlt εc0

1 minusfcr

E0ε εc0 lt εr

⎧⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎩(3c)

k k0e

minus β σ1minus αp( ) D 0

ξk0eminus β σ1minus αp( ) Dgt 0

⎧⎨

⎩ (3d)

where fcr is the compressive residual strength ξc0 is themaximum compressive strain and ξr is the residual strain

221 Biot Consolidation 2eory [25 26]

Gnabla2u minus (λ + G)zεv

zxminus

zpw

zx 0


zyminus

zpw

zy 0


zzminus

zpw

zz 0

⎫⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎬

⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎭

(4a)

1cw

kh

z2pw

zx2 +z2pw

zy21113888 1113889 + kv

z2pw

zz21113890 1113891

minuszεv

zt

z

zt

zu

zx+

zv

zy+

zw

zz1113888 1113889

(4b)

where u v and w are the displacement components of themicrobody soil skeleton along the positive direction of x y

and z respectively the body strain εv εx + εy + εz

minus (zuzx + zvzy + zwzz) takes compression as positive Eμ and G are the elastic modes of soil under drainageconditions respectively quantity Poissonrsquos ratio shearmodulus G E2(1 + μ) and Lame constantsλ μE(1 + μ)(1 minus 2μ) the amount of water flowing out ofthe soil microunit per unit time is equal to the volumechange of the microelement the horizontal permeabilitycoefficient kh kx ky and the vertical permeability co-efficient kv kz pw is the pore pressure and cw is the se-verity of water

222 Equilibrium Equation

minus qi + qv zξzt

(5)

where qi is the seepage velocity qv is the fluid strength of themeasured volume and ξ is the volume change of fluid perunit volume of the porous medium

223 Equation of Motion )e motion of the fluid is de-scribed by Darcyrsquos law For the case where the density ofhomogeneous and isotropic solids and fluids is constant theequation is

qi minus k p minus pfxjgj1113960 1113961 (6)

where k is the permeability coefficient of themedium p is thepore pressure pf is the fluid density xj is the distancegradient in 3 directions and gj is the three components ofgravitational acceleration

224 Constitutive Equation In the case of only consideringthe effect of stress field and seepage field without consideringother external fields such as temperature field the incre-mental form of the porous media seepage constitutiveequation is as follows

1M

zp

zt+

n

s

zs

zt1s

zξzt

minus αzεzt

(7)

where M is the Biot modulus n is the fluid density s is thesaturation ε is the volume strain and α is the Biotcoefficient

Equilibrimequation of nodal

mechanics

Element strainrate of node

rate

Element stressof joint force

Constitutiveequations of

nodes


mechanics


rate



nodes

Mechanical calculation program Seepage consolidationcalculation program

Porosity change

Water pressure

Figure 2 Flowchart of fluid-solid coupling calculation

Shock and Vibration 3

225 Compatibility Equation )e relationship between thestrain rate and the velocity gradient is as follows

1113957εij 12

υij + υji1113960 1113961 (8)

where vij and vji are the velocities of a certain point in themedium and i and j represent directions

In FLAC3D the software is based on the quasistatic Biotconsolidation theory and combines the fluid mass balanceequation Darcyrsquos law seepage-stress function (equation(2)) and seepage-damage function (equations 3andash3d) torealize fluid-solid coupling calculation under the conditionof known volume strain in advance

3 Spatial Relationship between EngineeringRivers and Faults

31 Engineering Survey A group of tight anticline and syn-cline folds and fractures accompanying folds are developed inthe Makeng Iron Mine area as shown in Figure 3 )e foldtrend and the fault strike are mainly distributed in the northeastor north-north direction controlling the shape and occurrenceof the main ore body in the western part of the ore section thenear-north-trending folds and faults are also well developed inaddition faults in the northwest direction are poorly developed)e faults in the ore section mainly include NE-trending F1normal fault F2 reverse fault F3 reverse fault F14 slow faultNW-trending Ximahe fault and F20 normal fault

According to the geological report of the mining areathe spatial relationship of rivers faults and ore bodies in theXimahe mining area is established as shown in Figure 4 )eore body is basically connected to the F2 fault close to theF20 fault and far away from the F1 fault and the F20 fault islocated on the upper part of the ore body in additionaccording to the illustration and detailed exploration geo-logical report the Xima River is theoretically intersectedwith the F1 fault the F2 fault and the F20 fault that is thefault itself is a water-filled fault that connects the surfacewater )erefore it is preliminarily believed that if themining disturbance damage effect is obvious after miningthe ore body in the Ximahe mining area the rock bridgebetween the stope and the fault may be broken thus formingthe seepage channel of the Ximahe⟶fault⟶stope

32 Model Establishment According to the topographicgeological map of the Makeng area the average elevation ofthe Xima River is +450m and the main ore body of themining area is 1600m long with a tendency of 490sim1300m)e mining area includes 5 sections of +50m +10m minus 50mminus 90m and minus 150m and each section is 40m high of whichminus 10msim+10m and minus 110msim minus 90m are respectively mid-dle-level horizontally isolated pillars )rough the extractionand integration of useful information in geological sectionsand topographic maps techniques such as triangular patchconnection and Boolean operations are used to generate atrue three-dimensional model of the geological body that cancompletely describe the spatial structure geometry andspatial boundaries of the rock mass )e main process is

shown in Figure 5 Considering the complexity of the modeland the accuracy of the calculation results the calculationmodel is simplified as a whole and the faults pillars minesand nearby rock masses are unit encrypted and a three-di-mensional model as shown in Figure 6 is established

)e length width and height of the model are1200mtimes 1340mtimes 800m including 808415 cells and 135000nodes At the same time in order to better study the rockbridge failure process and seepage process four monitoringpoints as shown in Figure 7 were set up along the section (thesection passes through the center point of the ore body and isperpendicular to the x-axis hereinafter referred to as section1) Among them monitoring points 1 to 3 are located be-tween the F2 hanging wall ore body and F2 fault

Ore bodies surrounding rocks faults and backfills havedifferent physical and mechanical properties )e calculationparameters of rock physical mechanics are obtained throughlaboratory tests In combination with field fracture surveys therock mechanical parameters are converted into the rock bodymechanical parameters )e seepage parameters are directlyderived from fieldmeasurements)e physical andmechanicalcalculation parameters and seepage parameters of the rockbody are shown in Table 1 [27ndash30] )e yield criterion appliesthe MohrndashCoulomb criterion )e top surface of the model isfree the bottom surface and the periphery are restrained bychain bars and the stress field is simulated according to theself-weight stress field )e total water head of the initialseepage field of the model is +450m the periphery is set as theimpermeable boundary and the mined-out area after ore bodymining is set as the drainage boundary and saturated stableseepage is assumed )e vertical stress of rock mass is theweight of rock mass plus confined water pressure

According to the existing mining plan the model is minedin the order of +50mmine section +10mmine section minus 50mmine section minus 90m mine section and minus 150m section )emining steps of each section comprise 4 steps mining roommining mine filling pillar mining and pillar filling (20working conditions in total) Based on the above simulationscheme this paper focuses on the damage effect of the rockbridge in mining and the seepage characteristics of the rockmass at different times when the rock bridge is destroyed themost seriously (ie when it is mined to minus 150m)

4 Analysis of Fluid-Solid Coupling NumericalSimulation Results

41 Fracture Analysis of Rock Bridge in River-Fault-StopeFigures 8 and 9 show the volumetric curve of the plastic zonein the rock bridge area and the vertical displacement curve ofeach measuring point with the advancement of mining Itcan be seen from the figure that the volume of the plasticzone in the rock bridge area and the vertical displacement ofeach measuring point were gradually increased after the oreis mined and the volume of the plastic zone suddenly in-creased when the mining section 10m and the miningsection minus 150mweremined and the displacement incrementwas relatively larger indicating the possibility of large-scaledamage to the rock mass during the mining of the two minesections At the same time in the plastic zone volume after 3


working conditions the shear failure accounts for more than80 which shows that the rock bridge failure is dominatedby shear failure

Section 1 passes through the center of the ore body and isperpendicular to the x-axis while section 2 passes throughthe center of the ore body and intersects with faults F2 andF20 with an angle of 60deg with section 1 as shown in Fig-ure 10 After the filling and mining of the ore body above the

minus 150m ore section is completed it can be seen from theplastic zone distribution diagram (Figure 11) and stressdistribution diagram (Figure 12) of section 1 and section 2that stress release secondary redistribution of stress fieldand local stress concentration occur in the surrounding rockmass of the stope after the ore body is excavated Due to theexistence of F2 and F20 faults and the influence of weak faultstrength and close proximity to the fault cross tensile stress

AnticlineSkew

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

670

666

667

658

654

650

646

642

670

666

662

658

654

650

646

642

F3

F14

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j2

F20

35

42

89 5248

34 40

26

37

23 63

71

53

54 6560 12

3054

61

63

65

67

59

86

55

53

200 4000

F3F2

F1

F14

Normal faultReverse faultFault IDF1

F20

F1

F2

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1W

P1W

P1W

P1W

45

C2 j-Plq

C2 j-Plq

C1

C1

C1

C1

57

51

Ximahe

fault

Ximahe

fault

Figure 3 Geological map of the Makeng Iron Mine


distribution zones are formed in the upper wall of F2 upwardalong the upper right corner of the stope and in the lowerwall of F20 upward along the upper left corner of the stoperesulting in obvious tensile shear failure of the rock mass)e plastic failure zone of surrounding rock is mainlydistributed in the center of the stope roof stope corner rockbridge between fault and stope weak strength zone ofstructural fracture zone and other areas Although mininghas led to the local destruction of stope periphery faultsrock bridges between faults and stopes and even to thepenetration destruction in very small areas after the filling

and mining of ore bodies above minus 110m the volume of theplastic zone is 18 millionm3 accounting for only 85 of thetotal volume of 2127m3 of rock bridges and there is noobvious further destruction of rock masses on the top offaults F2 and F20 which indicates that mining disturbancehas not had a great adverse effect on the stability of rockmasses on the top of faults F2 and F20 )e distribution ofrock mass destruction area caused by ore body mining islimited to a local area From a global perspective the de-struction area does not completely penetrate stope-rockbridge-fault-Xima River

F1

F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X Y

Z

(a)

F1 F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X

Y

Z

(b)

Figure 4 Spatial relation map of rivers faults and ore bodies (a) Perspective one (b) Perspective two

Vectorizedgeological

profile

Vectorizedtopographic

map


map

ree-dimensional

modeling

Rock massmodel River model Fault model Ore body

modelSurfacemodel

Booleanoperation

A geological body model forcompletely describing spatial

structure geometric form andspatial boundary of rock mass

Figure 5 Flowchart of geological body modeling


42 Analysis of Seepage Capacity of Potential SeepageChannels )e ore mining disturbance will cause the sur-rounding rock mass to be destroyed and the permeability ofthe rock mass will be improved after the rock mass isdamaged as shown in equations (2) and 3andash3d that is therock mass permeability is a function of the stress and the

induced damage variable It can be considered that in theelastic phase the rock stress and permeability have a neg-ative exponential relationship and the jump of the per-meability is considered to increase after the damageAccording to the calculated parameter values of the influ-encing factors the permeability coefficient of the plastic

Table 1 Parameters for different rocks mass

Materialscience

Density(gmiddotcmminus 3)

Tensilestrength(MPa)

Modulus ofelasticity(GPa)

Poissonrsquosratio micro

Cohesiveforce(MPa)

Internalfriction anglef (deg)

Seepagecoefficient(cms)

Fluid modulus(GPa)

Ore rock 3846 27 30 022 65 32 1e-8 10Surroundingrock 2680 18 30 024 25 29 1e-6 10

Fault 2300 06 03 03 01 28 1e-5 10Backfill 2000 08 04 031 01 22 1e-6 10

Fix the displacement of

X and Y Impermeableboundary Impermeable

boundary

Fixed displacement

fixed water pressureFixed displacement

fixed water pressure

Surrounding rockXima river

XZ

Y

(a)

F1 faultF20 faultF2 fault

Xiam riverOre bobyPillar

X

Z

Y

(b)

Figure 6 3D stereoscopic model

4

1

2

3F2

Z

X

Figure 7 )e layout of the monitoring point


failure unit increases when the seepage is calculated Fromthe relationship curve between pore water pressure andseepage time at each monitoring point (Figure 13) it can beseen that after mining the ore body the pore water pressurevalue changes greatly with time within 1sim10 days and after10 days the pore water pressure value gradually decreaseswith time and tends to be stable and basically does notchange after 30 days of seepage the change of pore waterpressure at monitoring point 3 ie monitoring point at faultF2 is very small indicating that no seepage channel has beenformed through to fault F2

In addition through the pore water pressure nepho-gram of different seepage time (Figure 14) it can be seenthat with the development of mining the fracture waterconductivity of the mining rock mass near the stope in-creases gradually Influenced by the weaker fault strengthand the greater permeability of rock mass caused by rockfragmentation the pore water pressure isoline of the stope

200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20Working condition


Shea

r fai

lure

ratio

() Shear failure ratio

Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80

Shear failure volumeTotal volume of plastic zone

Figure 8 Volume curve of the plastic zone in the rock bridge region

4540353025201510

50

0 5 10 15 20Working condition

Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34

Figure 9 Vertical displacement curve of each measuring point

River

Section 2

Sections 12 are parallel to the z-axis

Orebody

F2

F20

F1

Section 1 The plane isperpendicularto the x-axis

XZ

Y

Figure 10 )e positions of sections 1 and 2


roof tends to diffuse towards the fault direction with theadvance of time but after 30 days of seepage (that is afterthe seepage field is basically stable) the pore waterpressure nephogram shows that the seepage field around

the stope is not connected with the fault area that is to saythe seepage field which is obviously connected with thefault is not formed and the seepage and drainage channelof the river fault rock bridge and stope is not formed

NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY

Shear-n shear-pShear-n shear-p tension-pShear-pShear-p tension-p

Tension-n tension-pTension-p

Tension-p shear-p tension-p

(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY

NoneShear-n shear-pShear-n shear-p tension-pShear-pShear-p tension-p



(b)

Figure 11 Plastic zone distribution diagram of model section (a) Section 1 (b) Section 2

17891E + 0615000E + 0610000E + 0650000E + 0600000E + 00ndash50000E + 05ndash10000E + 06ndash15000E + 06ndash20000E + 06ndash25000E + 06ndash30000E + 06ndash35000E + 06ndash40000E + 06ndash45000E + 06ndash50000E + 06ndash55000E + 06ndash60000E + 06ndash65000E + 06ndash66867E + 06

F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)

Figure 12 Stress distribution diagram of model section (Pa) (a) Section 1 (b) Section 2

454

353

252

151

050

0 5 10 15 20 25 30Seepage time (days)

Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34

Figure 13 Pore water pressure-seepage time curve at each measuring point


5 Conclusion

In this paper the Flac3D fluid-solid coupling analysis moduleis used to analyze the geological conditions of the Xima Rivermining area and the research on the rock bridge movementdeformation and fracture evolution process and rock massseepage characteristics in the Xima River mining area underthe filling mining mode is carried out )e main conclusionsare as follows

(1) )e volume of the plastic zone and the verticaldisplacement of monitoring points suddenly in-crease in the rock bridge area during mining 10mand minus 150m sections and the rock mass may bedamaged in a large area

(2) )e disturbance of ore body mining has not had agreat adverse effect on the stability of the rock massat the top of the F2 fault )e distribution of the rockmass destruction area caused by mining is limited tothe local extent From a holistic point of view thedamage zone was not fully penetrated through thestope-rock bridge-Xima River

(3) )e deformation and plastic damage of mining rockmass lead to increased permeability of rock massIsolines of pore water pressure in the stope roof tendto spread in the direction of faults However after theseepage field is basically stable there is still nothrough drainage channel from surface water to thestope )us it can be seen that the river does notchange its course after the filling mining methodwhich has certain safety and reliability

Data Availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are includedwithin this article

Conflicts of Interest

)e authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest

Acknowledgments

)is research was funded by the National Natural ScienceFoundation of China (51874112 and 51774107) and theOpen Research Fund Program of State Engineering Labo-ratory of Highway Maintenance Technology ChangshaUniversity of Science and Technology (kfj170108) All fi-nancial support is gratefully acknowledged

References

[1] Y Lu and LWang ldquoNumerical simulation of mining-inducedfracture evolution and water flow in coal seam floor above aconfissned aquiferrdquo Computers and Geotechnics vol 67pp 157ndash171 2015

[2] H Liu and J Xiang ldquoKernel regression residual decompo-sition-based synchroextracting transform to detect faults inmechanical systemsrdquo ISA Transactions vol 87 2019

[3] H Liu and J Xiang ldquoAutoregressive model-enhanced vari-ational mode decomposition for mechanical fault detectionrdquoIET Science Measurement amp Technology vol 13 no 6pp 843ndash851 2019

[4] H Liu and J Xiang ldquoA strategy using variational mode de-composition L-kurtosis and minimum entropy deconvolu-tion to detect mechanical faultsrdquo IEEE Access vol 7pp 70564ndash70573 2019

[5] H Liu and J Xiang ldquoKernel regression residual signal-basedimproved intrinsic time-scale decomposition for mechanicalfault detectionrdquoMeasurement Science and Technology vol 30no 1 Article ID 015107 2018

[6] T-H Yang C A Tang W Zhu and Q Y Feng ldquoCouplinganalysis of seepage and stresses in rock failure processrdquoChinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering vol 23 no 4pp 489ndash493 2001

[7] T Nie H Pu and G Liu ldquoResearch on splitting failure modelof fractured rock mass under the coupling effect of seepage-stressrdquo Journal of Mining amp Safety Engineering vol 32 no 6pp 1026ndash1030 2015

[8] P-S Zhang W Yan and W-Q Zhang ldquoMechanism of waterinrush due to damage of floor and fault activation induced bymining coal seam with fault defects under fluid-solid couplingmoderdquo Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering vol 38no 5 pp 877ndash889 2016

Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z

Seepage for 15 days Seepage for 30 days

71992E + 0670000E + 0665000E + 0660000E + 0655000E + 0650000E + 0645000E + 0640000E + 0635000E + 0630000E + 0625000E + 0620000E + 0615000E + 0610000E + 0650000E + 0600000E + 00

Trend toFault

Pore water pressurecontour of stope roofWater transmitting ability

Figure 14 Pore water pressure nephogram (Pa) for different seepage days at section 1 of the model


[9] Li-P Li S-C Li and S-S Shi ldquoMulti-field couplingmechanism of seepage damage for the water lnrush channelformation process of coal minerdquo Journal of Mining amp SafetyEngineering vol 29 no 2 pp 232ndash238 2012

[10] Y-L Lu Hydro-mechanical Modeling of Fracturing Evolutionin Rocks and Mechanism of Water-Inrush from Coal Seamfloor China University of Mining and Technology XuzhouChina 2013

[11] G-L Bai ldquoFluid-Solid Coupling model of equivalent con-tinuous mediumin overburden rock based on FLAC3D and itsa pplicationrdquo Journal of Mining amp Safety Engineering vol 27no 1 pp 110ndash114 2010

[12] D-X Yao and H-F Lu ldquoSeepage field-strain field couplinganalysis for rock masses of coal seam floor during miningabove a confinged aquiferrdquo Chinese Journal of RockMechanicsand Engineering vol 31 no 1 pp 2738ndash2744 2012

[13] J AWang andH D Park ldquoFluid permeability of sedimentaryrocks in a complete stress-strain processrdquo Engineering Ge-ology vol 63 no 3-4 pp 291ndash300 2002

[14] M D Zoback and J D Byerlee ldquo)e effect of microcrackdilatancy on the permeability of Westerly Graniterdquo Journal ofGeophysical Research vol 80 pp 752ndash755 1975

[15] W C Zhu and C H Wei ldquoNumerical simulation on mining-induced water inrushes related to geologic structures using adamage-based hydromechanical modelrdquo EnvironmentalEarth Sciences vol 62 no 1 pp 43ndash54 2011

[16] Y Zhao and Q Peng ldquoFluidndashsolid coupling analysis of rockpillar stability for concealed karst cave ahead of a roadwaybased on catastrophic theoryrdquo International Journal of MiningScience and Technology vol 24 no 6 pp 737ndash745 2014

[17] E Z Lajtai ldquoStrength of discontinuous rocks in direct shearrdquoGeotechnique vol 19 no 2 pp 218ndash233 1969

[18] Y-M Liu and C-C Xia ldquoWeakening mechanism of me-chanical behaviors and failure models of rockmass containingdiscontinuous joints under direct shear conditionrdquo Rock andSoil Mechanics vol 31 no 3 pp 695ndash701 2010

[19] X-G Wang Z-X Jia Z-Y Chen and Y Xu ldquoDeterminationof discontinuity persistent ratio by Monte-Carlo simulationand dynamic programmingrdquo Engineering Geology vol 203pp 83ndash98 2016

[20] Z-Q Zhang L I Ning and F-F Chen ldquoReview and status ofresearch on failure mode of nonpenetrative fractured rockmassrdquo Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineeringvol 28 no 9 p 1945 2009

[21] R H C Wong and K T Chau ldquoCrack coalescence in a rock-like material containing two cracksrdquo International Journal ofRock Mechanics and Mining Sciences vol 35 no 2pp 147ndash164 1998

[22] HWang and X-D Sun ldquoSimulation of fluid-solid interactioneffect in rich water tunnel based on FLAC-3Drdquo Journal ofLiaoning Technical University (Natural Science) vol 4pp 468ndash473 2015

[23] T H Yang C A Tang L C Li et al ldquoStudy on the evolutionlaw of permeability in the fracture process of heterogeneousrocksrdquo Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineeringvol 23 no 5 pp 758ndash762 2004

[24] L C Li T H Yang C A Tang et al ldquoCoupling analysis ofrock hydraulic fracturing processrdquo Chinese Journal of RockMechanics and Engineering vol 22 no 7 p 1060 2003

[25] J R Booker and J C Small ldquoAn investigation of the stabilityof numerical solutions of Biotrsquos equations of consolidationrdquoInternational Journal of Solids and Structures vol 11 no 7-8pp 907ndash917 1975

[26] F J Gaspar F J Lisbona and P N Vabishchevich ldquoA finitedifference analysis of Biotrsquos consolidation modelrdquo AppliedNumerical Mathematics vol 44 no 4 pp 487ndash506 2003

[27] W Song J Xiang Y Zhong et al ldquoA simulation-basedmethod to detect mechanical parameters of I-beams andhollow cylindersrdquo Journal of Testing and Evaluation vol 48no 6 2020

[28] W Song Y Zhong and J Xiang ldquoMechanical parametersidentification for laminated composites based on the impulseexcitation techniquerdquo Composite Structures vol 162pp 255ndash260 2017

[29] W Song Y Zhong and J Xiang ldquoMechanical parametersdetection in stepped shafts using the FEM based IETrdquo SmartStructures amp Systems vol 20 no 4 pp 473ndash481 2017

[30] W Song Y Zhong and J Xiang ldquoA simulation model basedfault diagnosis method for bearingsrdquo Journal of Intelligent ampFuzzy Systems vol 34 pp 3857ndash3867 2018


In conclusion the research studies on seepage disturbedrock mass by scholars mainly focus on the mechanism ofrock crack propagation and the seepage model of rock mass)ere are few reports on the fracture mechanism damageeffect and seepage channel formation of the stope-fault rockbridge under complex conditions of fault influence andmining disturbance

Based on the engineering background of the influence ofthe Xima River on the seepage of the filling mining methodin the Makeng Iron Mine this paper establishes a fluid-solidcoupling numerical analysis model of ore bodymining basedon FLAC3D studies the damage effect of the fault-stope-rockbridge and the dynamic response of the seepage channelafter mining disturbance demonstrates the safety and re-liability of the river (Xima River) in the mining area withoutdiversion and provides reference for similar mining proj-ects )e method described in this article relies on the actualsituation of the project to dynamically and iteratively cal-culate the seepage parameters and deformation data )ecloud image of the parameters related to the rock bridgebreaks intuitively reflecting the disruptive effects of miningdisturbances and provides theoretical support for the safetyassessment of mining activities under rivers

2 Rock Bridge Fracture Fluid-SolidCoupling Technology

21 Fracture Mode of Mining-Induced Rock Bridge At thesame time the rock mass containing joints weak planes andfaults is further weakened under mining disturbance such aslarge-scale blasting which easily causes damage or evenbreaks the rock bridges between stopes and faults Atpresent the research on the rock bridge is mainly based onthe Lajtai rock bridge failure theory [17ndash19] which holdsthat with the change of normal stress rock bridge failuremodes are divided into three types tensile failure shearfailure and tensile shear composite failure [20] As shown inFigure 1 the typical pure shear and tensile shear failuremodes of rock bridges obtained from uniaxial compressiontests are presented

For the problem of ore body mining the failure mode ofthe rock is mainly shear failure and tensile shear failurewithin the stress range of most mining surrounding rock)e main formula is shown in equation (1) whereτL is theshear strength c is the cohesion of the rockφ is the angle ofinternal friction and σn is the normal stress

τL 2c + σn tanφ( 1113857

2

1 + tan2 φminus σ2n1113890 1113891

12

(1)

Based on equation (1) the software is developed againthrough the FISH language embedded in FLAC3D and codesare written to simulate the fracture of the mining rockbridge

22 Principle of Fluid-Solid Coupling in Mining Whensimulating the fluid-solid coupling mechanism of rock massthe rock mass is regarded as a porous medium [12] and thefluid-solid coupling calculation is carried out taking into

account both fluid and mechanical effects )e fluid-solidcoupling process includes two mechanical effects on the onehand groundwater seepage in rock mass will produceseepage volume force thus changing the original stress stateof rock mass on the other hand changes in the stress state ofthe rock mass will lead to deformation of the rock massChanges in the structure of the rock mass will affect thepermeability of the rock mass and then the flow state ofwater in the rock mass will also change [22] )e calculationflow of fluid-solid coupling is shown in Figure 2

)e permeability of rock mass is a process closely relatedto the initiation propagation coalescence and mesodamageevolution of macrocracks )e relationship between volu-metric strain and permeability of rock mass is approximatelyan exponential function which can better reflect the evo-lution law of overall permeability during the rock damageprocess as shown in equation (2) [23] In the equation k isthe permeability coefficient p is the pore water pressureξ isthe permeability jump coefficient β is the coupling coef-ficientσii is the average stressH is the Biot constant and a isthe pore water pressure coefficient

k(σ p) ξk0eminus β σii 3minus ap

H( 1113857 (2)

Before the group crack initiation or propagation thestress-seepage coupling effect of the rock bridge fracturechannel and its adjacent rock mass is not obvious but withthe continuous action of mining disturbance and ground-water pressure new damage points appear continuously andthe stress-seepage-damage coupling effect becomes ex-tremely obvious In order to fully reflect the sharp increase ofthe permeability coefficient after rock mass damage it can beregarded as an elasto-brittle material with residual strengthand its stress-damage field evolution law during loading andunloading process conforms to the elastic damage theory)e MohrndashCoulomb criterion and the maximum tensilestrength criterion were used as damage thresholds fordamage identification of elements [24] when the elementreaches the damage threshold of tensile strength ft thedamage variable D is shown in equation (3a) and the per-meability coefficient k of the corresponding element isshown in equation (3b) when the shear stress of the elementreaches the damage threshold the damage variable D isshown in equation (3c) and the permeability coefficient k ofthe corresponding element is shown in equation (3d)

Shearcrack

Shearcrack

Tensilecrack

Shearcrack

Tensilecrack

Figure 1 Shear failure and tensile shear failure of the rock bridge[21]


D

0 ε0 le ε

1 minusftr


1 εlt ε0

⎧⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎩

(3a)

k




⎧⎪⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎪⎩

(3b)


D

0 εlt εc0

1 minusfcr

E0ε εc0 lt εr

⎧⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎩(3c)

k k0e



⎧⎨

⎩ (3d)




zxminus

zpw

zx 0


zyminus

zpw

zy 0


zzminus

zpw

zz 0

⎫⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎬

⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎭

(4a)

1cw

kh

z2pw

zx2 +z2pw

zy21113888 1113889 + kv

z2pw

zz21113890 1113891

minuszεv

zt

z

zt

zu

zx+

zv

zy+

zw

zz1113888 1113889

(4b)





minus qi + qv zξzt

(5)






1M

zp

zt+

n

s

zs

zt1s

zξzt

minus αzεzt

(7)



mechanics


rate



nodes


mechanics


rate



nodes


Porosity change

Water pressure




1113957εij 12

υij + υji1113960 1113961 (8)

















AnticlineSkew

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

670

666

667

658

654

650

646

642

670

666

662

658

654

650

646

642

F3

F14

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j2

F20

35

42

89 5248

34 40

26

37

23 63

71

53

54 6560 12

3054

61

63

65

67

59

86

55

53

200 4000

F3F2

F1

F14


F20

F1

F2

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1W

P1W

P1W

P1W

45

C2 j-Plq

C2 j-Plq

C1

C1

C1

C1

57

51

Ximahe

fault

Ximahe

fault





F1

F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X Y

Z

(a)

F1 F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X

Y

Z

(b)



profile


map


map

ree-dimensional

modeling


modelSurfacemodel

Booleanoperation








Materialscience





Cohesiveforce(MPa)



Fluid modulus(GPa)





boundary

Fixed displacement




XZ

Y

(a)



X

Z

Y

(b)


4

1

2

3F2

Z

X





200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560



Shea

r fai

lure

ratio


Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80



4540353025201510

50


Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34


River

Section 2


Orebody

F2

F20

F1


XZ

Y





NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault



























D

0 ε0 le ε

1 minusftr


1 εlt ε0

⎧⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎩

(3a)

k




⎧⎪⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎪⎩

(3b)


D

0 εlt εc0

1 minusfcr

E0ε εc0 lt εr

⎧⎪⎪⎨

⎪⎪⎩(3c)

k k0e



⎧⎨

⎩ (3d)




zxminus

zpw

zx 0


zyminus

zpw

zy 0


zzminus

zpw

zz 0

⎫⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎬

⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎭

(4a)

1cw

kh

z2pw

zx2 +z2pw

zy21113888 1113889 + kv

z2pw

zz21113890 1113891

minuszεv

zt

z

zt

zu

zx+

zv

zy+

zw

zz1113888 1113889

(4b)





minus qi + qv zξzt

(5)






1M

zp

zt+

n

s

zs

zt1s

zξzt

minus αzεzt

(7)



mechanics


rate



nodes


mechanics


rate



nodes


Porosity change

Water pressure




1113957εij 12

υij + υji1113960 1113961 (8)

















AnticlineSkew

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

670

666

667

658

654

650

646

642

670

666

662

658

654

650

646

642

F3

F14

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j2

F20

35

42

89 5248

34 40

26

37

23 63

71

53

54 6560 12

3054

61

63

65

67

59

86

55

53

200 4000

F3F2

F1

F14


F20

F1

F2

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1W

P1W

P1W

P1W

45

C2 j-Plq

C2 j-Plq

C1

C1

C1

C1

57

51

Ximahe

fault

Ximahe

fault





F1

F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X Y

Z

(a)

F1 F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X

Y

Z

(b)



profile


map


map

ree-dimensional

modeling


modelSurfacemodel

Booleanoperation








Materialscience





Cohesiveforce(MPa)



Fluid modulus(GPa)





boundary

Fixed displacement




XZ

Y

(a)



X

Z

Y

(b)


4

1

2

3F2

Z

X





200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560



Shea

r fai

lure

ratio


Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80



4540353025201510

50


Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34


River

Section 2


Orebody

F2

F20

F1


XZ

Y





NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault




























1113957εij 12

υij + υji1113960 1113961 (8)

















AnticlineSkew

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

670

666

667

658

654

650

646

642

670

666

662

658

654

650

646

642

F3

F14

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j2

F20

35

42

89 5248

34 40

26

37

23 63

71

53

54 6560 12

3054

61

63

65

67

59

86

55

53

200 4000

F3F2

F1

F14


F20

F1

F2

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1W

P1W

P1W

P1W

45

C2 j-Plq

C2 j-Plq

C1

C1

C1

C1

57

51

Ximahe

fault

Ximahe

fault





F1

F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X Y

Z

(a)

F1 F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X

Y

Z

(b)



profile


map


map

ree-dimensional

modeling


modelSurfacemodel

Booleanoperation








Materialscience





Cohesiveforce(MPa)



Fluid modulus(GPa)





boundary

Fixed displacement




XZ

Y

(a)



X

Z

Y

(b)


4

1

2

3F2

Z

X





200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560



Shea

r fai

lure

ratio


Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80



4540353025201510

50


Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34


River

Section 2


Orebody

F2

F20

F1


XZ

Y





NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault






























AnticlineSkew

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

064 068 072 076 080 084 088

670

666

667

658

654

650

646

642

670

666

662

658

654

650

646

642

F3

F14

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j2

F20

35

42

89 5248

34 40

26

37

23 63

71

53

54 6560 12

3054

61

63

65

67

59

86

55

53

200 4000

F3F2

F1

F14


F20

F1

F2

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1j1P1j1

P1j1

P1j1

P1W

P1W

P1W

P1W

45

C2 j-Plq

C2 j-Plq

C1

C1

C1

C1

57

51

Ximahe

fault

Ximahe

fault





F1

F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X Y

Z

(a)

F1 F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X

Y

Z

(b)



profile


map


map

ree-dimensional

modeling


modelSurfacemodel

Booleanoperation








Materialscience





Cohesiveforce(MPa)



Fluid modulus(GPa)





boundary

Fixed displacement




XZ

Y

(a)



X

Z

Y

(b)


4

1

2

3F2

Z

X





200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560



Shea

r fai

lure

ratio


Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80



4540353025201510

50


Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34


River

Section 2


Orebody

F2

F20

F1


XZ

Y





NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault





























F1

F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X Y

Z

(a)

F1 F2

F20

Ore boby

River

X

Y

Z

(b)



profile


map


map

ree-dimensional

modeling


modelSurfacemodel

Booleanoperation








Materialscience





Cohesiveforce(MPa)



Fluid modulus(GPa)





boundary

Fixed displacement




XZ

Y

(a)



X

Z

Y

(b)


4

1

2

3F2

Z

X





200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560



Shea

r fai

lure

ratio


Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80



4540353025201510

50


Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34


River

Section 2


Orebody

F2

F20

F1


XZ

Y





NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault






























Materialscience





Cohesiveforce(MPa)



Fluid modulus(GPa)





boundary

Fixed displacement




XZ

Y

(a)



X

Z

Y

(b)


4

1

2

3F2

Z

X





200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560



Shea

r fai

lure

ratio


Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80



4540353025201510

50


Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34


River

Section 2


Orebody

F2

F20

F1


XZ

Y





NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault





























200180160140120100

80604020

0

1009590858075706560



Shea

r fai

lure

ratio


Plas

tic zo

ne v

olum

e (10

000

m3 )

80



4540353025201510

50


Disp

lcem

ent v

alue

(mm

)

12

34


River

Section 2


Orebody

F2

F20

F1


XZ

Y





NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault





























NoneF2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(a)

F20 F2

Rock bridge

Z

XY




(b)



F2

Rock bridge

Z

YX

(a)


F2

Rock bridge

F20

Z

Y X

(b)


454

353

252

151

050


Pore

wat

er p

ress

ure (

MPa

)

12

34



5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault



























5 Conclusion





Data Availability




Acknowledgments


References









Seepage for 1 day

XY

Z

XY

Z

XY

Z



Trend toFault



























NumericalSimulationofFluid-SolidCouplinginSurrounding...

Documents

Transcript of NumericalSimulationofFluid-SolidCouplinginSurrounding...