Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Full-Scale Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of a Hybrid Geopolymer/Biopolymer Cementitious Material Developed for Pumpable Roof Supports in Underground Mines

  • Published:
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, a new hybrid geopolymer/biopolymer (GP/BP) cementitious material was developed for improving the performance of pumpable roof supports in underground mines. This study demonstrates the application of the hybrid GP/BP cementitious material and validates its effectiveness in full-scale. In this regard, eight (8) full-size (0.61 m diameter and 1.52 m height) cribs were produced in collaboration with Minova International Ltd and tested at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Mine Roof Simulator (MRS) Laboratory. These full-size cribs were produced with different material configurations to evaluate the effect of water to solid (W/S) ratio, Portland cement (PC) content, and BP dosage. The results demonstrated and validated the effectiveness of the hybrid GP/BP cementitious material in increasing the peak and residual bearing capacities of pumpable cribs and eliminating the issue of deterioration when exposed to air compared with the conventional Portland cement/fly ash (PC/FA) cementitious material currently used in practice. On average, the peak uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) and the highest residual UCS after peak of the full-size cribs produced from the hybrid GP/BP cementitious material are 1.90 and 1.33 times of those of the PC/FA-based full-size cribs by one company and 2.32 and 1.66 times of those of the PC/FA based full-size cribs by the other company, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

All data and models generated or used during the study appear in the submitted article.

References

  1. Peng SS (2000) Cutting through open entries require proper support. Coal Age 6:37–40

    Google Scholar 

  2. TM Barczak (2005) An overview of standing roof support practices and developments in the United States. In: Best practices in rock engineering, proceedings of the third southern african rock engineering symposium, 10 - 12 October, 2005. Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa: South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, pp 301–334

  3. Nikvar-Hassani A, Zhang L (2022) Synthesis of a CKD modified fly ash based geopolymer cementitious material for enhancing pumpable roof support. Mater Struct Constr 55. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-022-01899-8

  4. Mark C, Barczack TM (2000) Proceedings: new technology for coal mine roof support. In: New Technology for Coal Mine Roof Support. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH), pp 23–42

  5. Jennmar Corporation (2013) J-CRIB pumpable crib catalogue. Taken from “www.jennchem.com.au”

  6. NTI (2019) Pumpable cribs. NTI Min tunneling Co

  7. Barczak TM, Tadolini SC (2008) Pumpable roof supports : an evolution in longwall roof support technology. Trans Soc Mining, Metall Explor 324:19–31

    Google Scholar 

  8. Batchler T (2017) Analysis of the design and performance characteristics of pumpable roof supports. Int J Min Sci Technol 27:91–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2016.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Davidovits J (2008) Geopolymer chemistry & application. Institute Géopolymèr, F-02100 Saint-Quentin, France

  10. Duxson P, Fernández-Jiménez A, Provis JL et al (2007) Geopolymer technology: the current state of the art. J Mater Sci 42:2917–2933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-006-0637-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Provis JL (2014) Geopolymers and other alkali activated materials: why, how, and what? Mater Struct Constr 47:11–25. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-013-0211-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhuang XY, Chen L, Komarneni S et al (2016) Fly ash-based geopolymer: clean production, properties and applications. J Clean Prod 125:253–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Majidi B (2009) Geopolymer technology, from fundamentals to advanced applications: a review. Mater Technol 24:79–87. https://doi.org/10.1179/175355509X449355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Xiaolong Z, Shiyu Z, Hui L, Yingliang Z (2021) Disposal of mine tailings via geopolymerization. J Clean Prod 284:124756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Guo H, Yuan P, Zhang B et al (2021) Realization of high-percentage addition of fly ash in the materials for the preparation of geopolymer derived from acid-activated metakaolin. J Clean Prod 285:125430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Louati S, Baklouti S, Samet B (2016) Acid based geopolymerization kinetics: effect of clay particle size. Appl Clay Sci 132–133:571–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2016.08.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lin H, Liu H, Li Y, Kong X (2021) Properties and reaction mechanism of phosphoric acid activated metakaolin geopolymer at varied curing temperatures. Cem Concr Res 144:106425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wei Q, Liu Y, Le H (2022) Mechanical and thermal properties of phosphoric acid activated geopolymer materials reinforced with mullite fibers. Materials (Basel) 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15124185

  19. Turner LK, Collins FG (2013) Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emissions: a comparison between geopolymer and OPC cement concrete. Constr Build Mater 43:125–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Manjarrez L, Nikvar-Hassani A, Shadnia R, Zhang L (2019) Experimental study of geopolymer binder synthesized with copper mine tailings and low-calcium copper slag. J Mater Civ Eng 31:04019156. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Van Deventer JS, Provis J, Duxson P, Lukey GC (2006) Technological environmental and commercial drivers for the use of geopolymers in a sustainable material industry. In: International symposium of advanced processing of metals and materials, pp 241–52

  22. Li Z, Chen R, Zhang L (2013) Utilization of chitosan biopolymer to enhance fly ash-based geopolymer. J Mater Sci 48:7986–7993. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7610-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Li Z, Zhang L (2016) Fly ash-based geopolymer with kappa-carrageenan biopolymer. Biopolym Biotech Admixtures Eco-Efficient Constr Mater 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100214-8.00009-9

  24. Nikvar-Hassani A, Zhang L (2022) Development of a biopolymer modified geopolymer based cementitious material for enhancement of pumpable roof support. Mater Struct Constr 55:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-022-01953-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chang I, Im J, Cho G-C (2016) Geotechnical engineering behaviors of gellan gum biopolymer treated sand. Can Geotech J 53:1658–1670. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Nikvar-Hassani A, Zhang L (2020) Development of a new geopolymer based cementitious material for pumpable roof supports in underground mining. Geo-Congress 2020: Engineering, Monitoring, and Management of Geotechnical Infrastructure. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, pp 325–334

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Dul M, Paluch KJ, Kelly H et al (2015) Self-assembled carrageenan / protamine polyelectrolyte nanoplexes — investigation of critical parameters governing their formation and characteristics. Carbohydr Polym 123:339–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.01.066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nakamatsu J, Kim S, Ayarza J et al (2017) Eco-friendly modification of earthen construction with carrageenan: water durability and mechanical assessment. Constr Build Mater 139:193–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.02.062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mehta A, Siddique R (2017) Properties of low-calcium fly ash based geopolymer concrete incorporating OPC as partial replacement of fly ash. Constr Build Mater 150:792–807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.06.067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ahmari S, Zhang L (2013) Utilization of cement kiln dust (CKD) to enhance mine tailings-based geopolymer bricks. Constr Build Mater 40:1002–1011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.11.069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Nath P, Sarker PK (2015) Use of OPC to improve setting and early strength properties of low calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete cured at room temperature. Cem Concr Compos 55:205–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2014.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yu Z, Yang L, Zhou S et al (2018) Durability of cement-sodium silicate grouts with a high water to binder ratio in marine environments. Constr Build Mater 189:550–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.09.040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang S, He C, Nie L, Zhang G (2019) Study on the long-term performance of cement-sodium silicate grout and its impact on segment lining structure in synchronous backfill grouting of shield tunnels. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 92:103015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.103015

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Minova International Ltd for their great support during the production and tests of the full-size cribs. Especially, Fred Cybulski, Field Services Lead, and Jason Tinsley, General Manager of Field Services, were very supportive and helpful in planning and producing the pumpable roof supports. The funding received from Alpha Foundation for the Improvement of Mine Safety and Health, Inc. (Alpha Foundation) for this project is greatly appreciated. The views, opinions, and recommendations expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not imply any endorsement by the Alpha Foundation, its Directors and staff.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering and Mechanics, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA

    Arash Nikvar-Hassani & Lianyang Zhang

  2. Power and Dams, Stantec, Denver, United States

    Arash Nikvar-Hassani

  3. CDC NIOSH, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Timothy Batchler

Authors
  1. Arash Nikvar-Hassani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy Batchler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lianyang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Arash Nikvar-Hassani or Lianyang Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nikvar-Hassani, A., Batchler, T. & Zhang, L. Full-Scale Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of a Hybrid Geopolymer/Biopolymer Cementitious Material Developed for Pumpable Roof Supports in Underground Mines. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 41, 669–680 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-024-00921-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-024-00921-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation