| Literature DB >> 36081010 |
Xinqiu Fang1,2, Fan Zhang1,2, Zongshen Shi3, Minfu Liang1,2, Yang Song1,2.
Abstract
The mine shaft is an important channel linking the underground with the surface, undertaking important functions such as personnel and material transportation and ventilation. Thus the shaft, known as the throat of the mine, is the production hub of the whole mine. Since 1980, damage to coal mine shafts has occurred in many areas of China, which has seriously impacted the safety of mine production. Therefore, real-time monitoring of the shaft wall condition is necessary. However, the traditional monitoring method cannot achieve long-term, continuous and stable monitoring of the shaft wall due to the harsh production environment downhole. Hence, a multi-mode joint sensing system for shaft wall deformation and damage is proposed, which is mainly based on FBG sensing and supplemented by vibrating-string sensing. The principle of FBG sensing is that when the external environment such as temperature, pressure and strain changes, the characteristics of light transmission in the FBG such as wavelength, phase and amplitude will also change accordingly. Using the linear relationship between the strain and the wavelength shift of the FBG, the strain of the measured structure is obtained by calculation. Firstly, this paper introduces the basic situations of the mine and analyzes the causes shaft damage. Then the vertical and circumferential theoretical values at different shaft depths are derived in combination with the corresponding force characteristics. Moreover, a four-layer strain transfer structure model of the shaft consisting of the fiber, the protective layer, the bonding layer and the borehole wall is established, which leads to the derivation of the strain transfer relational expression for the surface-mounted FBG sensing on the shaft wall. The strain-sensing transfer law and the factors influencing the strain-sensing transfer of the surface-mounted FBG on the shaft wall are analyzed. The order of key factors influencing the strain-sensing transfer is obtained by numerical simulation: the radius of the protective layer, the length of the FBG paste, and the elastic modulus of the adhesive layer. The packaging parameters with the best strain-sensing transfer of the surface-mounted FBG on the shaft wall are determined. A total of six horizontal level monitoring stations are arranged in a coal mine auxiliary shaft. Through the comprehensive analysis of the sensing data of the two sensors, the results show that the average shaft wall strain-transfer efficiency measured by the FBG sensor reaches 94.02%. The relative average error with the theoretical derivation of shaft wall transfer efficiency (98.6%) is 4.65%, which verifies the strain transfer effect of the surface-mounted FBG applied to the shaft wall. The shaft wall's deformation monitoring system with FBG sensing as the main and vibrating-string sensing as the supplement is important to realize the early warning of well-wall deformation and further research of the shaft wall rupture mechanism.Entities:
Keywords: monitoring system; shaft wall rupture; strain analysis; the FBG
Year: 2022 PMID: 36081010 PMCID: PMC9460250 DOI: 10.3390/s22176551
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1The schematic diagram of wellbore damage.
Figure 2The schematic diagram of the shaft wall structure.
Figure 3The FBG sensor arrangement model diagram: (a) cross-sectional view; (b) plane-form.
Figure 4Analysis of the forces on each layer in the strain transfer model.
Figure 5Effect of the length of FBG pasted and radius of the protective layer on an average strain perception transfer factor.
Figure 6Effect of the radius of the protective layer on the average strain perception transfer factor.
Figure 7Effect of the adhesive layer elastic modulus on the average strain perception transfer factor.
Physical parameters of the strain-sensing transfer model.
| Physical Parameters | Numerical Value | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Length of optical fiber paste 2 L | 100 | mm |
| Radius of protective layer | 10 | mm |
| Elastic modulus of protective layer | 4 × 109 | Pa |
| Radius of adhesive layer | 20 | mm |
| Elastic modulus of adhesive layer | 5 × 109 | Pa |
| Poisson’s ratio of adhesive layer | 0.35 | — |
FBG and vibrating-string sensor arrangement of each layer.
| Number | Monitoring Horizontal Depth/m | Geotechnical | Layer Thickness | Sensor Type | Number of Sensors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 325 m | Fine medium sand | 28.2 m | Vibrating-string sensor | 8 |
| 2 | 396 m | Fine sand | 18.4 m | FBG sensor | 10 |
| 3 | 473 m | medium sand | 7.6 m | Vibrating-string sensor | 8 |
| 4 | 579 m | Fine sand | 5. 86 m | FBG sensor | 10 |
| 5 | 581 m | Fine sand | 5.73 m | Vibrating-string sensor | 8 |
| 6 | 640 m | siltstone | 3.62 m | FBG sensor | 10 |
Figure 8Arrangement of shaft wall monitoring sensors.
Figure 9The FBG sensing demodulation system.
Figure 10The FBG sensing strain diagram (579 m).
Figure 11Vibrating-string sensing strain diagram (581 m).
Figure 12The FBG sensing strain diagram (396 m).
Figure 13The FBG sensing strain diagram (640 m).