초록

용어보기논문에서 용어와 풀이말을 자동 추출한 결과로, 시범 서비스 중입니다. AI-Helper

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

To predict the ground subsidence caused by mines, various evaluation methods were applied to cases of ground subsidence in Korea, and the results were compared and analyzed. Continuous subsidence, which is relatively easily and accurately predicted, was excluded in this analysis. The stress arch - v...

To predict the ground subsidence caused by mines, various evaluation methods were applied to cases of ground subsidence in Korea, and the results were compared and analyzed. Continuous subsidence, which is relatively easily and accurately predicted, was excluded in this analysis. The stress arch - volumetric expansion method, limit equilibrium method, numerical analysis, probabilistic method, and evaluation method of the Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation (KO MIR) were applied to 36 subsidence cases, including subsidence location, width, and depth, and goaf width, depth, and incline data. The stress arch - volumetric expansion method was the most accurate with an accuracy of ~92%. In the case of the KOMIR method, the regression model is 86.1% accurate, but somewhat lower in accuracy using a triangular pyramidal volume. The stress arch - volumetric expansion and KOMIR methods have the disadvantage of evaluating whether subsidence occurs or not. In the case of the numerical analysis, the accuracy is 72.3% when estimating the subsidence depth, but is slightly lower (55.8%) when estimating the subsidence width. The probabilistic and limit equilibrium methods have similar accuracies of 50.8~63.7%. Given it is possible to determine whether subsidence occurs, and the subsidence location, width, and depth with each method, it is recommended to apply various methods when evaluating sinkhole-type subsidence.

Keyword