4.4 Article

Evaluation of gas drainage and coal permeability improvement with liquid CO2 gasification blasting

Journal

ADVANCES IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 10, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1687814018768578

Keywords

Gas drainage; coal permeability; liquid carbon dioxide; gasification blasting; roadway excavation

Funding

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2017XKQY025]
  2. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT_17R103]
  3. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With the increasing mining depths of underground coal mines, gas drainage and coal permeability improvement with conventional coal seam fracture stimulating methods have shown some deficiencies. In this work, an application of liquid CO2 gasification blasting is proposed for increasing gas drainage and fracturing coal seam with high-gas content and low permeability. The methods of theoretical analysis, numerical simulation as well as field experiments are involved to build up a comprehensive understanding of this promising application. The variation of gas pressure for the gasification blasting is quantitatively determined by using a modified van der Waals equation of state. It is shown that the maximum pressure generated by the rapid thermal expansion of liquid CO2 could induce the initiation and propagation of coal cracks and fractures. To testify the fracturing effects of liquid CO2 gasification blasting on gas drainage, field experiments were carried out on two transportation roadways of Yuwu coal mine in China. It is found that (a) the effective fracturing radius could be about 3 m around the blasting borehole, (b) the quantities of gas extraction and gas emission are increased significantly, and (c) the outburst risk indices for drilling cutting fall below their critical values.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available