ArticleScientific reports2025
Evolution of the roof caving and fracture zones during mining of close range coal seams.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of water-permeable fractured zone in weakly cemented overburden considering rock strain-softening.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Research on deformation mechanisms in deep excavation tunnels and the application of the pile foundation-unit-type support.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Study on the influence of stress relief in close-distance coal seam Goaf and roadway excavation disturbance on surrounding rock.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study employs an integrated methodology combining slip line field theory, FLAC3D numerical simulation, and hydraulic injection testing to systematically investigate the evolutionary characteristics of roof two zones under repeated mining conditions in close range coal seams No.9 and 10 (average interburden thickness is 10.2 m). Theoretical modeling reveals a maximum failure depth of 6.26 m in the No.9 coal seam, with corresponding caving and fracture zone heights measuring 9.6 m and 33.4 m respectively. Numerical simulations demonstrate that subsequent extraction of the No.10 coal seam induces fracture zone expansion to 66 m vertical elevation, representing a 73% increase relative to single-layer mining conditions. Strong congruence was confirmed through MATLAB-based regression analysis. Hydraulic injection tests substantiate the spatial heterogeneity of two zones (caving zone and fracture zone) development, while mechanical analysis proposes a stress arch-dominated fracture propagation mechanism. These findings establish a mechanical framework for safe extraction of close range coal seam clusters, successfully informing optimization of combined bolt reinforcement and grouting curtain configurations in practical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.