TN295 
 
 No. 9231 
 
o S> 
 
 
 
 * „9 
 
 ,* 6 ... >*.**■* 
 
 
 
 
 V* •«•• 
 
 <>.. *'Tvr* a 
 
 ^- "vivas' » K v 
 
 • °^ a* ♦;&& % a v •lift- %* -^ 
 
 
 ^\ 
 
 tF*> 
 
 
 "W 
 
 
 *°**. 
 
 
 :•- -£ 
 
 
 • ^ A* •* 
 
 rf^ 
 
 • ^ A* ^ 
 
 
 *^. 
 
 f> cA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • «o 
 
 
 
 

 <k 
 
 M?A> *«V £ * % d$fef' ^f. ** *>Wa> X 
 
 
 4 
 
 **2*fcX *°-i£k* -<*••;£&:% c°*&£k* J *££»:% c 
 
 
 4 O 
 
 
 
 • ^ $ A 
 
 ** v % 
 
 • ^o* : 
 
 
 *bV 
 
 */. « 
 
 
 
 
 ^•v 
 
 A * v *v 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 v^^ 
 
 • A V *V *% 
 
 ^°V 
 
 
 >.*.;««»• .^ , 
 
 
 .6^ V **^^*' A" W' f ^ 
 
 ? *+* ''MIS'! /°* 
 
 
 
 * ^ 
 
 ^0^ 
 
 /% 
 
 
 f .^L% ^ 
 
 V^^V 
 
 « ■ • . 
 
 v^ 
 
 
 
 
 
BUREAU OF MINES 
 INFORMATION CIRCULAR/198 
 
 Advanced Guidelines for Performance 
 Testing of Two-Legged Longwall 
 Shields 
 
 By Thomas M. Barczak 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
 
Mission: As the Nation's principal conservation 
 agency, the Department of the Interior has respon- 
 sibility for most of our nationally-owned public 
 lands and natural and cultural resources. This 
 includes fostering wise use of our land and water 
 resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, pre- 
 serving the environmental and cultural values of 
 our national parks and historical places, and pro- 
 viding for the enjoyment of life through outdoor 
 recreation. The Department assesses our energy 
 and mineral resources and works to assure that 
 their development is in the best interests of all 
 our people. The Department also promotes the 
 goals of the Take Pride in America campaign by 
 encouraging stewardship and citizen responsibil- 
 ity for the public lands and promoting citizen par- 
 ticipation in their care. The Department also has 
 a major responsibility for American Indian reser- 
 vation communities and for people who live in 
 Island Territories under U.S. Administration. 
 
Information Circular 9231 
 
 Advanced Guidelines for Performance 
 Testing of Two-Legged Longwall 
 Shields 
 
 By Thomas M. Barczak 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
 Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary 
 
 BUREAU OF MINES 
 T S Ary, Director 
 

 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data: 
 
 Barczak, Thomas M. 
 
 Advanced guidelines for performance testing of two-legged longwall shields / by 
 Thomas M. Barczak. 
 
 p. cm. - (Information circular / Bureau of Mines (1988)) 
 
 Bibliography: p. 28 
 
 Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27:9231. 
 
 1. Ground control (Mining)-Testing-Standards. 2. Longwall mining-Standards. 
 I. Title. II. Series: Information circular (United States. Bureau of Mines); 9231 
 
 TN295.U4 [TN288] 622 s-dc20 [622' .334] 89-600167 
 
 CIP 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 
 Abstract 1 
 
 Introduction 2 
 
 Definition of terminology 3 
 
 Performance testing goals 4 
 
 Considerations in support performance testing 5 
 
 Load application considerations 5 
 
 Active versus passive load application 5 
 
 Force-controlled versus displacement-controlled loading 6 
 
 Vertical versus horizontal loading 7 
 
 Static versus cyclic tests 9 
 
 Contact configurations and initial load conditions 9 
 
 Constrained load conditions 9 
 
 Symmetric contact configurations 10 
 
 Unsymmetric contact combinations 11 
 
 Other parameter considerations 12 
 
 Height effects 12 
 
 Contact stiffness effects 12 
 
 Load rate considerations 12 
 
 Instrumentation requirements 12 
 
 Basic component responses 12 
 
 Stress concentrations 13 
 
 Load transfer mechanics 13 
 
 Changes in support geometry 14 
 
 Description of shield mechanics and component responses 15 
 
 Canopy responses 15 
 
 Base responses 15 
 
 Lemniscate link responses 16 
 
 Caving shield responses 16 
 
 Leg responses 16 
 
 Unsymmetric contact shield responses 17 
 
 Critical load test configurations 17 
 
 Determination of support resistance 18 
 
 Standardized performance tests 19 
 
 Test documentation 19 
 
 Performance tests 19 
 
 Resistance characteristics 19 
 
 Shield stiffness 25 
 
 Leg mechanics 25 
 
 Stability 26 
 
 Load transfer 26 
 
 Structural integrity 27 
 
 Conclusions 27 
 
 References 28 
 
 Appendix A.-Shield kinematics computer program 29 
 
 Appendix B.-Shield component responses and loading mechanisms 36 
 
 Appendix C.-Support resistance calculations 51 
 
 Appendix D.-Description of standardized performance tests 53 
 
 ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 1. U.S. Bureau of Mine's mine roof simulator 3 
 
 2. Two-dimensional diagram of two-leg longwall shield 4 
 
 3. Leg mechanics 5 
 
 4. Friction considerations in shield testing 6 
 
 5. Zero horizontal load shield tests 6 
 
 6. In situ horizontal and vertical loading of shield support 7 
 
ILLUSTRATIONS-Continued 
 
 Page 
 
 7. Shield displacement possibilities 8 
 
 8. Generalized load transfer mechanics for two-leg shield support 8 
 
 9. Generalized component responses for two-leg shield support 9 
 
 10. Conceptual illustration of freedom in pin joints of shield structure 10 
 
 11. Symmetric canopy and base contacts 10 
 
 12. Matrix of symmetric canopy and base contact combinations 11 
 
 13. Unsymmetric canopy and base contacts 11 
 
 14. Instrumentation to monitor basic component responses 13 
 
 15. Instrumented vertical and horizontal load sensing pin 13 
 
 16. Monitoring leg closure using wire-pull displacement transducers 14 
 
 17. Inclinometer used to measure leg rotation 14 
 
 18. Free-body diagram for caving shield 16 
 
 19. Critical load test configurations 18 
 
 20. Horizontal shield reaction to vertical displacement 19 
 
 21. Typically used rigid-body analysis of shield resistance 20 
 
 22. Standardized test report form 21 
 
 A-l. Shield components, joint identification, and component dimension nomenclature 29 
 
 A-2. Geometric analysis of shield support 30 
 
 Component responses for— 
 
 B-l. Full canopy and base contact 36 
 
 B-2. Base-on-toe contact 37 
 
 B-3. Base-on-rear contact 38 
 
 B-4. Two-point canopy and base contact 39 
 
 B-5. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 40 
 
 B-6. Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 41 
 
 B-7. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location 42 
 
 B-8. Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location 43 
 
 B-9. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 44 
 
 B-10. Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 45 
 
 B-ll. Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 46 
 
 B-12. Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 47 
 
 B-13. Full base contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 48 
 
 B-14. Full base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location 49 
 
 B-15. Symmetric full base contact and symmetric two-point canopy contact 50 
 
 C-l. Moment equilibrium of canopy 51 
 
 C-2. Moment equilibrium of canopy caving-shield combination (summation of moments at link center) 52 
 
 C-3. Moment equilibrium of canopy-caving shield combination (summation of moments at tension link pin) . . 52 
 
 
 UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 cycle per minute 
 
 kip/in 2 kip per square inch 
 
 in 
 
 inch 
 
 pet percent 
 
 in/min 
 
 inch per minute 
 
 psi pound per square inch 
 
 in/cyc 
 
 inch per cycle 
 
 psi/min pound per square inch per minute 
 
 kip/min 
 
 kip per minute 
 
 
ADVANCED GUIDELINES FOR PERFORMANCE TESTING 
 OF TWO-LEGGED LONGWALL SHIELDS 
 
 By Thomas M. Barczak 1 
 
 ABSTRACT 
 
 This U.S. Bureau of Mines report is intended to assist coal mine operators in the selection of longwall 
 supports by providing advanced guidelines for performance testing and standardized test documentation 
 to facilitate support comparisons. These advanced guidelines culminate in a series of proposed tests to 
 evaluate (1) support resistance characteristics, (2) stiffness characteristics, (3) leg mechanics, (4) stability, 
 (5) load transfer mechanics, and (6) structural integrity. The Bureau has conducted extensive studies 
 on shield mechanics to identify boundary conditions that induce loading in support components, which 
 is often not included in current testing techniques. This report discusses influential parameters that 
 affect support behavior and provides insight into how components are loaded and what conditions 
 produce the most severe loading. Testing philosophies and techniques in both active and static frames 
 are discussed. Proper methods for determining support resistance are described and instrumentation 
 requirements for advanced performance testing are provided. 
 
 1 Research physicist, Pittsburgh Research Center, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh, PA. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 This report provides advanced guidelines for perfor- 
 mance testing of longwall support structures. It is in- 
 tended to assist coal mine operators in evaluating support 
 systems prior to purchase. It may also be of interest to 
 other researchers and support manufacturers when con- 
 sidering support responses relative to design requirements. 
 
 The most productive and often most profitable under- 
 ground coal mines in the United States are longwall mines. 
 The decision to pursue longwall mining requires consid- 
 erable capital investment and 5 to 8 years of reserves to 
 depreciate the large capital expense required for equip- 
 ment purchases (7). 2 The major equipment costs are the 
 powered roof supports, representing about 60 pet of the 
 required capital investment. In 1988 dollars, the median 
 purchase cost of longwall roof supports was $50,000 per 
 support or approximately $6.3 million for a single longwall 
 face of average length (663 ft). The control of ground 
 provided by these roof support structures is usually the 
 determining technical factor in whether the operation is 
 successful. 
 
 Longwall supports are used to provide a temporary 
 working space for personnel and machinery during the 
 extraction of a coal panel. Their primary purpose is to 
 provide stability of the face area. In doing so, they must 
 interact with the strata to resist relative motion between 
 the roof and floor as the strata tries to reestablish a stable 
 configuration. More specifically, the support must function 
 to (1) control vertical (roof-to-floor) convergence and (2) 
 maintain stability against horizontal displacements resulting 
 from strata activity. 
 
 Because their operation is essential to successful 
 mining, mine operators frequently require performance 
 testing of longwall supports by equipment manufacturers 
 prior to accepting delivery of the supports for underground 
 installation. These tests generally involve cycle testing by 
 vertical load application under a variety of canopy and 
 base contact configurations to evaluate the potential for 
 structural failure from fatigue loading. Despite these 
 precautionary evaluations, support failures still occur un- 
 derground on supports that proved satisfactory in the 
 laboratory and often at loads less than the rated support 
 capacity (2). Obviously these laboratory tests do not al- 
 ways accurately simulate in-service load conditions. 
 
 The U.S. Bureau of Mines has conducted extensive 
 research on shield mechanics to develop improved support 
 testing methods that will reduce the risk of support failure 
 when in underground service. This research was con- 
 ducted in the Bureau's mine roof simulator (fig. I). 3 The 
 simulator is capable of simulating underground loading by 
 providing controlled vertical and horizontal displacements 
 or forces to full-size longwall supports. 
 
 Italic numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references 
 preceding the apppendixes at the end of this report. 
 
 testing was conducted by personnel of Boeing Services 
 International (BSI), Pittsburgh, PA, under the direction of Carol L. 
 Tassillo, operations engineer, BSI. 
 
 These research studies have advanced the state-of-the- 
 art in roof support performance testing by evaluation of 
 boundary conditions that induce loading in support compo- 
 nents, which is normally ignored in testing. More specifi- 
 cally, advancements in support testing have been made by 
 (1) evaluation of horizontal constrainment of the support 
 structure prior to load application, (2) distinguishing com- 
 ponent responses for applied vertical shield displacements 
 from component responses for applied horizontal shield 
 displacements, (3) quantification of the effects of hori- 
 zontal displacement applied in both the face-to-waste and 
 waste-to-face direction, (4) evaluation of the effects of leg 
 mechanics on support response, (5) identification of cano- 
 py and base contact combinations that produce maximum 
 loading in specific support components, and (6) compar- 
 ison of component response and critical loading for 
 symmetric and unsymmetric contact configurations. 
 
 A format for standardized longwall support perfor- 
 mance testing and test documentation is provided in this 
 report. Currently, performance evaluation programs differ 
 from manufacturer to manufacturer. As a result, a direct 
 comparison of support performance is difficult. A stan- 
 dardized documentation reporting format that will support 
 development of a common data base in order to make 
 more meaningful support comparisons is provided in this 
 report. Standardized testing and documentation will also 
 enable an industrywide historical data base of support 
 performance to be developed. This historical data base 
 would be a source of reference to industry personnel when 
 purchasing new equipment. Such a reference will help 
 operators select supports that are most compatible to their 
 needs with minimum cost of testing and with minimum 
 risk of failure. 
 
 The scope of the guidelines presented in this report is 
 limited to evaluation of the mechanical behavior, structural 
 response, and structural integrity of the support. Proce- 
 dures for evaluation of support compatibility with other 
 equipment and evaluation of operating functions are not 
 included in these guidelines. The scope is also limited to 
 two-leg shield supports because the Bureau has not evalu- 
 ated four-leg shields. While the mechanics of four-leg 
 shields differ considerably from two-leg shields, many of 
 the issues discussed, in particular load application tech- 
 niques, apply to both support types. It is assumed that the 
 reader has a basic understanding of support mechanics. 
 Two Bureau of Mines Reports of Investigation (RI) are 
 recommended as reference material: RI 9188 (2) "Vertical 
 and Horizontal Load Transferring Mechanisms in 
 Longwall Shield Supports," and RI 9220 (3), "Two-leg 
 Longwall Shield Mechanics." 
 
 This report begins with a definition of terminology to 
 avoid any confusion in the meanings of terms used. This 
 is followed by a brief discussion of performance testing 
 goals. Next, several important considerations in perfor- 
 mance testing are discussed in detail: Load application 
 considerations, contact configuration and initial load con- 
 ditions, and instrumentation requirements. Also included 
 
Figure 1.-U.S. Bureau of Mine's mine roof simulator. 
 
 are less influential parameter considerations such as height 
 effects, contact stiffness effects, and load rate consider- 
 ations. A discussion of shield mechanics and component 
 responses for several boundary conditions and loading 
 considerations is also provided. The report concludes with 
 
 a suggested program plan for advanced performance evalu- 
 ation of longwall support structures. Proposed tests are 
 documented on a standardized reporting form to illustrate 
 the ability of the form to concisely convey test information. 
 
 DEFINITION OF TERMINOLOGY 
 
 The two-dimensional diagram of a two-legged shield 
 support (fig. 2) illustrates the major shield components. 
 These components are identified as the canopy, base, 
 caving shield, front links, rear links, and leg cylinders. 
 Reference will also be made to the caving shield- 
 lemniscate assembly, which includes the caving shield and 
 link components. A brief definition of other terminology 
 
 used in subsequent discussions of support performance 
 testing is also provided in this section. Because this 
 terminology may not be consistent throughout the industry, 
 it is important that these terms be understood to avoid any 
 misinterpretations. 
 
 Probably the most unfamiliar and perhaps ambiguous 
 is the term "constrainment." Constrainment is defined as 
 
Canopy 
 
 Base 
 
 Figure 2. -Two-dimensional diagram of a two-leg longwall shield. 
 
 forced restriction, and is used in the context of support 
 performance testing to indicate an initial shield condition, 
 where the canopy and/or base is horizontally constrained 
 prior to load application by forced horizontal displacement 
 of the canopy relative to the base. Constrainment is a 
 means to remove rigid-body translational freedom in the 
 numerous joints of the shield structure to allow the caving 
 shield-lemniscate assembly to fully participate in the 
 shield's load transfer mechanics. The following are defini- 
 tions of the specialized terminology used in this report. 
 
 Constrainment. -Forced restriction (of the canopy 
 relative to the base). 
 
 Configuration, confacr.-Combination of vertical and 
 horizontal contacts on canopy and base through which 
 forces or displacements are applied to the support 
 structure. 
 
 Configuration, constrained shield.— Shield configuration 
 in which the canopy is displaced horizontally relative to 
 
 the base prior to load application to remove rigid-body 
 translational freedom in the pin joints to allow the caving 
 shield-lemniscate assembly to fully participate in the 
 shield's load transfer mechanics. 
 
 Configuration, restrained shield. Sh\e\d configuration in 
 which horizontal contact restricts horizontal displacement 
 of the canopy or base. 
 
 Displacement, horizontal, face-to-waste.- Face-to-waste 
 horizontal translation of the canopy relative to the base; 
 i.e., the canopy is displaced towards the gob. 
 
 Displacement, horizontal, waste-to-face.— Waste-to-face 
 horizontal translation of the canopy relative to the base; 
 i.e., the canopy is displaced towards the face. 
 
 Displacement, vertical-Convergence of the canopy 
 relative to the base by roof-to-floor or floor-to-roof 
 displacements. 
 
 Face. -Pertaining to the area in front of the supports. 
 
 Load frame, active— A load frame in which one or both 
 platens are capable of controlled force or displacement. 
 
 Load frame, static. -A load frame in which the platens 
 remain stationary and are intended only to react loads 
 applied by an active support specimen. 
 
 Load application, active— YLxXemaWy applied loading by 
 an active load frame to a passive roof support structure. 
 
 Load application, passive. -Loads, generated through 
 reactions developed in a static load frame by hydraulic 
 pressurization of the support leg cylinders. 
 
 Loading force-controlled. -Forces applied to a roof 
 support structure are controlled and the support canopy 
 and base are free to displace until equilibrium is attained. 
 
 Loading displacement-controllled— Displacements ap- 
 plied to a roof support structure are controlled and the 
 support reactions vary. 
 
 Restraint-Contact that restricts displacement in one 
 direction or more. 
 
 Waste-Caved material behind the supports. Synony- 
 mous with gob. 
 
 PERFORMANCE TESTING GOALS 
 
 The performance testing program should determine the 
 suitability of a support to its intended application. Hence, 
 the primary goal of a performance testing program is to 
 simulate as closely as possible the various loading con- 
 ditions that occur underground. However, actual under- 
 ground loading conditions are not predictable from current 
 strata mechanics analyses and are generally not well de- 
 fined even in existing mines. Therefore, knowledge of 
 shield mechanics is necessary to develop a testing program 
 that will explore the full capabilities of the supporting 
 system for a wide range of hypothetical loading conditions. 
 While the performance testing program cannot ensure 
 successful operation, it should minimize the risk of failure 
 by accurately defining the capabilities of the support and 
 conditions, if any, that will cause failure. 
 
 The tests should be standardized so that they can be 
 duplicated if necessary. All parameters that affect support 
 
 behavior should be addressed in the testing program. Test 
 results should be clear and well documented. It is impor- 
 tant that loading mechanisms are correlated to support 
 response so that unanticipated problems that might occur 
 after the support is put into service can be better defined. 
 This philosophy will also provide insight into design im- 
 provements for next generation supports or support 
 designs for other applications. 
 
 This report addresses these needs by providing for a 
 comprehensive evaluation of shield supports. Consider- 
 ations in performance testing are discussed in detail and 
 standardized tests are documented that include evaluation 
 of the following areas of performance: (1) support resis- 
 tance characteristics, (2) stiffness characteristics, (3) leg 
 mechanics, (4) stability, (5) load transfer mechanics, and 
 (6) structural integrity. 
 
CONSIDERATIONS IN SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TESTING 
 
 This section discusses several considerations in perfor- 
 mance testing. The intent is to provide an overview of the 
 various things one must consider when evaluating a long- 
 wall support. Included in these discussions are load appli- 
 cation considerations, contact configurations and initial 
 load conditions, influential parameter considerations that 
 affect shield response, and instrumentation requirements. 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 Some fundamental decisions must be made regarding 
 how the support structure is loaded. The primary goal of 
 the test program is to simulate as closely as possible the 
 loading conditions the support will encounter in under- 
 ground service. This section discusses active versus passive 
 load application, force-controlled versus displacement- 
 controlled loading, vertical versus horizontal loading, and 
 static versus cyclic loading. 
 
 Active Versus Passive Load Application 
 
 displacements. In contrast, a static frame remains passive 
 and support loads are generated by pressurization of the 
 support's hydraulic leg cylinders. 
 
 Active load application in an active frame is the most 
 desirable because it more closely simulates the behavior of 
 the strata and support response when in underground 
 service. In underground operation, the shield is set against 
 the roof by pressurization of the leg cylinders to a nominal 
 pressure. The support then reacts loads in response to 
 strata convergence. This loading is duplicated in an active 
 load frame, where the support is set in the frame at the 
 designated setting pressure and controlled displacements 
 are applied by the load frame. Generating loads only by 
 pressurization of the legs in a static load frame does not 
 permit controlled displacement of the canopy relative to 
 the base. As a result, shield mechanics cannot be con- 
 trolled. This limits the load conditions that can be 
 evaluated. 
 
 If tests are conducted in a static frame, the following 
 recommendations should be considered: 
 
 A decision must first be made as to whether the shield 
 loading tests will be conducted in an active or passive load 
 frame. An active load frame is one in which the load 
 platens of the test frame are displaced to provide loading 
 to a passive roof support structure. The Bureau's mine 
 roof simulator (fig. 1) is an active load frame that can 
 apply controlled vertical and horizontal forces or 
 
 LEG EXTENSION 
 
 Tests should be conducted at less than full first stage 
 leg extension on shields with double telescoping leg 
 cylinders. Leg force can be reduced by as much as 50 pet 
 when the first stage of the leg cylinder is fully extended by 
 active leg pressurization. The mechanics of the leg cylin- 
 der operation that produce this effect are illustrated in 
 figure 3. Basically, the effective area of the leg cylinder 
 
 1 cr,A 2 
 
 LEG CONVERGENCE 
 
 L 
 
 
 KEY 
 
 L 
 
 Leg force 
 
 
 Trapped fluid 
 
 tHH 
 
 Pressure application 
 
 A, 
 
 Area of 1st stage 
 
 A? 
 
 Area of 2d stage 
 
 <7|.2 
 
 Cylinder pressure 
 
 Leg force (L) =0| A 2 
 
 Leg force (L) =01 A, 
 Figure 3. -Leg mechanics. 
 
is reduced as the applied pressure is acted against the 
 smaller upper cylinder piston area, as opposed to leg con- 
 vergence where fluid trapped in the leg acts on the larger 
 area of the lower cylinder. Therefore, even if the leg is 
 actively pressurized to yield pressure, the effective leg 
 force will be half that it would be if the same pressure was 
 achieved by convergence of the leg cylinder. The reduced 
 leg force would result in considerably lower loading of the 
 support components and may lead to erroneous evalua- 
 tions of the support's structural integrity. As illustrated in 
 figure 3, this behavior will not occur when the first stage 
 is not fully extended. 
 
 Leg pressures should be higher than in-service yield 
 pressure. In a static load frame where the leg cylinders 
 are pressurized to cause leg extensions, leg cylinder seal 
 friction and friction in the numerous pin joints of the 
 structure oppose leg forces, which causes a reduction in 
 support resistance (see figure 4). Friction effects are likely 
 to be on the order of 3 to 5 pet of the total support resis- 
 tance, but can reach 10 pet under some (unsymmetrical) 
 load conditions. Therefore, leg pressures should exceed 
 yield pressure by 10 to 20 pet when tested in a static frame 
 to achieve leg forces and component loadings comparable 
 to in-service operation where the friction effects are 
 reversed. 
 
 Zero horizontal load tests should be conducted. Zero 
 horizontal load tests should be conducted, by placing roll- 
 ers on the canopy and/or under the base as illustrated in 
 figure 5, to develop maximum stresses in the caving shield 
 and lemniscate links and to assess shield stability. Without 
 external horizontal restraint on the canopy and base, the 
 caving shield-lemniscate assembly must resist the hori- 
 zontal component of the leg force to maintain shield sta- 
 bility. Also, the line of action of the resultant force in the 
 absence of horizontal shield forces produces maximum 
 bearing pressure on the toe of the base. 
 
 Force-Controlled Versus Displacement- 
 Controlled Loading 
 
 Two methods of load application are generally available: 
 one is to control the forces acting on the shield and the 
 other is to control the displacements imposed on the sup- 
 port structure. The preferred method of load application 
 is by controlled displacement of the canopy relative to the 
 base because convergence of the strata underground more 
 closely simulates displacement control. 
 
 Another reason why displacement control is preferred 
 is because the shield components react loads in proportion 
 to the component stiffness and relative displacements. 
 Controlling the displacement of the canopy relative to the 
 base provides a better control of component loading than 
 controlling the external force acting on the shield. For 
 example, there could be vertical and horizontal forces 
 acting on the shield canopy and base that do not produce 
 horizontal displacements and therefore will not produce 
 significant loading in the caving shield-lemniscate assembly. 
 Shield response to horizontal loading will be described in 
 subsequent discussions of shield mechanics. 
 
 STATIC FRAME TESTING 
 
 ^p>CZ ZZ7 I I I I I I l l I I I ZZZZZZ zJkcE 
 
 \/ I / I I / I I / / A 
 
 KEY 
 
 •> Leg force (L) 
 
 *■ Frictional force (f) 
 
 ACTIVE LOAD APPLICATION — o Support resistance (F) 
 
 <L-=»r r~7 / i i / i i i i i i i g3 <| 
 
 F =L+ f 
 
 Figure 4.-Friction considerations in shield testing. 
 
 ... mkk 
 
 Resultant vertical force 
 
 / /_/_/ ; zzzzz / /_/_/_ / /_/ 
 
 KEY 
 
 — ► Resultant force 
 t> Restraint 
 
 Roller 
 
 Shield displacement 
 
 Resultant vertical force 
 Figure 5.-Zero horizontal load shield tests. 
 
 Force control allows the shield (components) to dis- 
 place uncontrollably until the required force equilibrium is 
 attained. Hence, force control can produce varying results 
 in terms of load transfer and subsequent component 
 loading. Because of these variations in results, 
 displacement control is the preferred loading method. 
 
Vertical Versus Horizontal Loading 
 
 Shield supports are designed to provide resistance 
 against both vertical and horizontal loading as illustrated 
 in figure 6. More specifically, once the shield is set against 
 the roof in an equilibrium configuration, it may be sub- 
 jected to various combinations of vertical displacement, 
 
 face-to-waste horizontal displacement, and waste-to-face 
 horizontal displacement as illustrated in figure 7. Compo- 
 nent responses and developed stress magnitudes are sig- 
 nificantly different for each of these load applications 
 and all three should be imposed on the support structure 
 during performance testing, individually and in 
 combinations. 
 
 Vertical shield loading 
 
 Horizontal 
 shield 
 loading 
 
 Vertical shield loading 
 
 Figure 6. -In situ horizontal and vertical loading of shield support. 
 
VERTICAL 
 DISPLACEMENT 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT Increasing No load 
 
 load 
 
 FACE- TO -WASTE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 A \ 
 
 FACE- TO-WASTE Increasing Increasing 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT load load 
 
 WASTE -TO -FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Figure 7. -Shield displacement possibilities. 
 
 WASTE- TO- FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 \ 
 
 Decrea 
 load 
 
 A 
 
 \ 
 
 Increasing 
 load 
 
 Figure 8 illustrates generalized load transfer mechanics 
 for a two-leg shield depicting load development in the legs 
 and caving shield assembly. The caving shield-lemniscate 
 assembly has very little vertical stiffness and will not 
 develop much loading from vertical displacements. How- 
 ever, the caving shield does have considerable horizontal 
 stiffness and will develop significant loading from hori- 
 zontal displacements, provided the displacement is suffi- 
 cient to overcome rigid-body translational freedom in the 
 pin joints. 
 
 Generalized component responses for vertical, face-to- 
 waste horizontal, and waste-to-face horizontal displace- 
 ments are illustrated for the leg cylinders and lemniscate 
 links in figure 9. As seen in the figure, the behavior of 
 these components is dependent upon the direction of the 
 imposed shield displacement. Because these loading 
 mechanisms are different, each displacement should be 
 considered in the performance test program. 
 
 Vertical and horizontal displacements or forces should 
 be applied independently and in combination with one 
 another after the shield is set at normal operating pres- 
 sures. Because vertical loading will help maintain stability, 
 it is recommended that vertical displacement (loading) be 
 
 Figure 8.- Generalized load transfer mechanics for two-leg 
 shield support. 
 
 applied first, followed by either waste-to-face or face-to- 
 waste horizontal displacement (loading) for combined load 
 cases. 
 
 Loading should be applied until one of four conditions 
 is met: (1) leg pressure reaches yield pressure, (2) leg 
 pressure is reduced to below setting pressure, (3) material 
 yield is approached in one or more components, or (4) the 
 shield becomes physically unstable or the contact configu- 
 ration is altered from canopy or base instability. The 
 magnitude of the displacement depends upon the vertical 
 and horizontal stiffness of the support structure (4). For 
 most shields, 0.5 in of vertical displacement should be 
 sufficient to reach shield (leg) capacity, assuming displace- 
 ments are applied after setting the shield with 2,500-to- 
 3,500 psi leg pressure. The required magnitude of hori- 
 zontal displacement depends upon the translational 
 freedom in the numerous pin joints of the structure. Some 
 shields may require as much as 0.75 in of horizontal 
 displacement before appreciable stresses are developed in 
 the caving-shield lemniscate assembly. 
 
L_l_l_M 
 
 V 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT ^ 
 
 1 
 
 rrY^ 
 
 \ 
 
 FACE- TO-WASTE ^ 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT * 
 
 1 
 
 changes in strain and maximum strain magnitudes. The 
 number of cycles should approximate the expected service 
 life of the shield. Typically, 10,000 cycles of each load case 
 are evaluated. 
 
 CONTACT CONFIGURATIONS AND INITIAL 
 LOAD CONDITIONS 
 
 Shield response is largely dependent upon contact con- 
 figurations and initial load conditions. Contact configu- 
 ration describes the combinations of vertical and horizontal 
 contacts on the canopy and base through which forces or 
 displacements are applied to the support structure. The 
 goal of the testing program should be to utilize contact 
 configurations that produce maximum loading in each of 
 the support components. 
 
 Initial conditions describe the shield configuration and 
 test procedures prior to controlled load application. Ini- 
 tial conditions often dictate how the shield will respond 
 and thus are critical to performance testing. The most 
 important initial condition consideration is horizontal 
 constrainment. 
 
 Constrained Load Conditions 
 
 \ 
 
 WASTE- TO- FACE 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 Figure 9. -Generalized component responses for two-leg shield 
 support 
 
 Static Versus Cyclic Tests 
 
 Performance test requirements described in this report 
 apply equally well to both static tests and cyclic tests. Both 
 static and cyclic tests should be conducted. Static tests 
 should be conducted first to evaluate basic load trans- 
 ferring mechanisms and component responses under pre- 
 cisely controlled loading. Preferably, these tests should 
 be conducted in an active load frame. Cyclic tests can be 
 time consuming and are often conducted in static load 
 frames because of the time required to conduct the tests. 
 The primary objective of cyclic tests is to evaluate fatigue 
 failures. Both static tests and cyclic tests should evaluate 
 boundary conditions that produce different loading mecha- 
 nisms in each support component. Cyclic tests should be 
 conducted under conditions that produce maximum 
 
 Constrainment is a term used to define forced hori- 
 zontal restriction of the shield canopy and base that re- 
 duces or eliminates freedom in the numerous pin joints of 
 the shield structure. Pin freedom, as conceptually illus- 
 trated in figure 10, can be seen by physical inspection of 
 the shield. In the laboratory, constrainment is achieved by 
 horizontal displacement of the canopy relative to the base 
 prior to vertical or horizontal load application. In an 
 underground environment, constrainment may be achieved 
 by advancement of the shield while under partial contact 
 with the roof or if the canopy tip or base toe strikes a 
 protrusion during advancement. 
 
 Tests conducted in the Bureau's mine roof simulator 
 indicate that for unconstrained configurations, the caving 
 shield-lemniscate assembly is not likely to appreciably 
 participate in the shield load transfer mechanics. Hence, 
 when the shield is unconstrained, the vertical and 
 horizontal capacity is controlled by the leg forces. 
 
 The effect of constrainment is to lock up the structure 
 so that the caving shield-lemniscate assembly participates 
 in providing support resistance. Even in a constrained 
 configuration, vertical stiffness of the caving shield- 
 lemniscate assembly is small compared to leg stiffness and 
 most of the vertical load will be taken by the leg cylinders. 
 Horizontally, load resistance provided by the caving shield- 
 lemniscate assembly can equal or exceed the resistance 
 provided by the legs in constrained configurations. There- 
 fore, higher stresses will be developed in constrained con- 
 figurations than in unconstrained configurations and 
 stresses will be a maximum when the canopy is displaced 
 horizontally relative to the base. The caving shield and 
 lemniscate links will show the most increase in loading, but 
 all components will be exposed to higher stresses in 
 constrained load cases. 
 
10 
 
 CANOPY CONTACTS 
 
 BASE CONTACTS 
 
 HORIZONTALLY 
 UNCONSTRAINED 
 
 HORIZONTALLY 
 
 CONSTRAINED, 
 
 FACE-TO- WASTE 
 
 HORIZONTALLY 
 CONSTRAINED, 
 WASTE-TO- FACE 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 — . . •) 
 
 
 • •) 
 
 
 ▼ ? 
 
 
 - • •) 
 
 
 ? ▼ 
 
 
 - . •) 
 
 
 ▼ 
 
 
 . . .) 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 • •) 
 
 
 ▼ 
 
 
 — • •) 
 
 i A 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 Figure 11. -Symmetric canopy and base contacts. 
 
 Figure 10. -Conceptual illustration of freedom in pin joints of 
 shield structure. Light area of pin joint is area of freedom; dark 
 area is point of contact. 
 
 Symmetric Contact Configurations 
 
 Figure 11 depicts symmetric canopy and base contacts 
 typically employed by support manufacturers. Each canopy 
 and each base contact illustrated in figure 11 can be ex- 
 amined in combination as shown in the matrix in figure 12. 
 However, a goal of the test program should be to minimize 
 the number of tests without sacrificing information on the 
 safety and integrity of the support. Combinations that do 
 not produce significantly different responses from another 
 combination can be eliminated from the test program. 
 The Bureau's research into shield load transfer mechanics 
 provides insight into component responses for canopy and 
 base contact combinations. This section discusses general 
 considerations in symmetric contact shield behavior. 
 
 Proposed contact configurations for advanced performance 
 testing are identified in the "Critical Load Test 
 Configurations" section. 
 
 Canopy contacts mostly influence the behavior of the 
 canopy; while the behavior of the base, caving shield, and 
 lemniscate links is more sensitive to base contacts. There- 
 fore, selective canopy contacts can be examined, but sev- 
 eral base contacts need to be tested to evaluate all possible 
 loading mechanisms. Furthermore, the caving shield- 
 lemniscate assembly has very little vertical stiffness (for 
 horizontally unconstrained shield configurations). Almost 
 all of the load on the canopy, regardless of the contact 
 configuration through which the load is applied, will be 
 transmitted by the leg cylinders to the base. Therefore, 
 loading of the base and caving shield-lemniscate assembly 
 is largely independent of the canopy contact configuration, 
 and any canopy contact can be selected in combination 
 with specific base contacts to evaluate all component 
 responses except the canopy. 
 
11 
 
 ► ' My I J T T y 
 
 ■Ail 
 
 J LI „L_ 
 
 2.1 
 
 2.2 
 
 kkikk 
 1 rA J. 
 
 3. 
 
 liiii ill 
 
 4.1 
 
 11 1 1 
 
 6.1 
 
 n 
 
 7.1 
 
 IT 
 
 ► 1 
 
 4.2 
 
 &"3* 
 
 6,2 
 
 S&"w 
 
 Figure 12.-Matrix of symmetric canopy and base contact combinations. Numbers refer to contacts shown in figure 11. 
 
 Full canopy contact is suggested as a standard simply 
 because it is presumed that this configuration is most likely 
 to occur underground. A more conservative selection for 
 the standard canopy contact is concentrated load appli- 
 cation at the leg location. Contact at the leg location will 
 maximize base activity by maximizing load transfer through 
 the leg cylinders. Likewise, canopy responses are largely 
 independent of base contact configurations, and a full base 
 contact can be used to evaluate worst case canopy 
 contacts. 
 
 Unsymmetric Contact Combinations 
 
 In addition to the symmetric contact configurations 
 previously discussed, unsymmetric contact configurations 
 should be evaluated separately in the test program. These 
 contact configurations promote the development of out- 
 of-plane stresses within the support components. Figure 
 13 depicts typically employed unsymmetric canopy and 
 base contacts, which can also be examined in combination 
 to provide a multitude of test configurations. 
 
 In the discussion of symmetric canopy and base contact 
 combinations, it was indicated that canopy contact primar- 
 ily affects only the behavior of the canopy. For configu- 
 rations with unsymmetric canopy contact, the canopy can 
 
 CANOPY CONTACTS 
 
 BASE CONTACTS 
 
 I 
 
 y 
 
 — ■ ° 
 
 »> 
 
 I T 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 KEY 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 
 Figure 13. -Unsymmetric canopy and base contacts. 
 
12 
 
 also influence the behavior of the caving shield and the 
 lemniscate links. In two-leg shield design with split-base 
 designs, unsymmetric base contact (as shown in figure 13) 
 is actually a misnomer in that the contacts do not produce 
 out-of-plane stress development in the base. The two base 
 units act as individual members and influence the behavior 
 of the shield consistent with the mechanics of the more 
 dominant base contact. 
 
 In terms of critical loading, component responses, with 
 the exception of the canopy, are likely to be dominated by 
 the base configuration. Unsymmetric canopy contact will 
 produce slightly larger canopy strains than symmetric 
 contact, but the influence of the unsymmetric canopy con- 
 tact on the caving shield is likely to be dominated by the 
 base contact in all but full-base contacts. The dominance 
 of the base contact configuration in the behavior of the 
 caving shield, lemniscate links, and base members also 
 makes worst-case symmetric base contacts more critical 
 than unsymmetric base contacts. This suggests that in 
 terms of critical shield loading, only symmetric contacts 
 need to be investigated, but because load transferring 
 mechanisms are also criteria for the selection of perfor- 
 mance tests, unsymmetric contacts should be investigated. 
 Specific unsymmetric contact configurations proposed for 
 advanced performance testing are identified in the "Critical 
 Load Test Configurations" section. 
 
 OTHER PARAMETER CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 Load application, contact configuration, and constrain- 
 ment are the most important parameters to consider in 
 performance testing of shield supports. However, there 
 are several other parameters that can be considered, in- 
 cluding height effects, contact material stiffness, and load 
 rate effects. 
 
 dependent upon the physical properties of the strata (5). 
 Generally, stiffer contact materials will produce higher 
 localized stresses at the contact locations. 
 
 In laboratory tests conducted in a relatively rigid test 
 frame, the resulting stress in the support structure is also 
 strongly influenced by the rotational stiffness of the contact 
 material. For example, contact by a 6- by 6-in concrete or 
 steel block will produce up to several hundred percent 
 larger strains in the support structure than will contact by 
 a round steel bar. The steel and concrete blocks, because 
 of the cross sectional area contacting the canopy or base, 
 produce additional bending strains in the support structure. 
 Steel blocks provide good contact stability and a conserva- 
 tive assessment of component loading, hence, they are the 
 recommended contact material. 
 
 The canopy is likely to be most affected by material 
 contact stiffness considerations its bending strength is 
 generally weaker than that of the base. It is expected that 
 the effect of the rotational stiffness of the strata will be 
 less pronounced than the laboratory results because the 
 strata are assumed to be less rigid than the laboratory test 
 frame. 
 
 Load Rate Considerations 
 
 Some tests have suggested a load rate effect on shield 
 strain profiles (5), but no conclusive data have been ob- 
 tained thus far. Until more evidence of rate effects are 
 documented, it is suggested that displacement rates of 
 0.1 in/min be utilized in shield performance testing. There 
 is also some evidence to suggest that slower cycle rates are 
 more critical than faster cycle rates, but again the evidence 
 is inconclusive at this time. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS 
 
 Height Effects 
 
 Generally, lower shield heights will produce lower 
 stresses in the support structure than identical boundary 
 conditions at higher shield heights. This suggests that 
 shields should be tested at heights slightly higher than 
 anticipated for underground service. 
 
 The increase in component loading at higher shield 
 heights can be attributed to the increased stiffness of the 
 shield with decreasing shield heights (5). Because the 
 shield stiffness is greater, the same loads will produce less 
 displacement which results in less strain development per 
 unit load. The difference in strains between low and high 
 shield heights is dependent upon the change in stiffness for 
 different shield geometry configurations. Strain changes of 
 10 to 15 pet are possible for maximum changes in shield 
 height (geometry). 
 
 Contact Stiffness Effects 
 
 It has been established that shield responses are largely 
 dependent upon canopy and base contact configurations, 
 but the interaction of the support with the strata is also 
 
 The support should be instrumented to determine (1) 
 basic component responses and nominal stress develop- 
 ment, (2) areas of stress concentration, (3) load transfer 
 mechanics, and (4) changes in support geometry. Specific 
 instrumentation for each of these requirements is sug- 
 gested as follows. 
 
 Basic Component Responses 
 
 Figure 14 depicts instrumentation to monitor basic 
 component responses and nominal stress development. 
 Strain gages are used to assess structural deformations and 
 pressure transducers are used to monitor hydraulic compo- 
 nent responses as illustrated in figure 14. This instrumen- 
 tation will provide a fundamental description of the shield 
 structural response and basic design integrity. Load appli- 
 cation should be terminated prior to any strain gage indi- 
 cation of material yield to ensure elastic recovery of the 
 shield, unless destructive testing is desired. Again, this 
 instrumentation is intended only to determine nominal 
 component stress development. It does not necessarily 
 ensure the structural integrity of the support as it is not 
 intended to identify stress concentrations. However, any 
 
13 
 
 indication of component yielding by this instrumentation, 
 excluding hydraulic component response, should be viewed 
 as indication of unacceptable support design. 
 
 Stress Concentrations 
 
 It is usually impractical to put enough strain gages on 
 a support to assess stress concentrations in all areas of the 
 support structure. Localized regions of high stress are 
 often dictated by abrupt changes in the geometry of the 
 structure, and therefore are somewhat shield specific. 
 Areas of concern might include leg sockets, hinge pin 
 clevises, and regions around holes. Triaxial gauges should 
 be used if the state of stress is not apparent in these re- 
 gions. Photoelastic plastic can also be employed to 
 
 provide a more generalized picture of stress concentra- 
 tions. The plastic produces colored fringes when viewed 
 under polarized light in response to stress profiles of the 
 underlying structure. 
 
 A primary concern in the evaluation of stress concen- 
 trations is the promotion of crack growth from fatigue 
 loading. Hence, an important consideration in evaluating 
 structural integrity of the support is to identify inherent 
 flaws in the structure. This can be done by ultrasonic 
 techniques or X-ray detection. Knowledge of the stress 
 intensity factors for the component steel should be ac- 
 quired and used in conjunction with the nominal stress 
 development measurements to assess fatigue related 
 failures. 
 
 Load Transfer Mechanics 
 
 KEY 
 o Strain gage 
 H Pressure transducer 
 • Pin joint 
 
 Figure 1 ^-Instrumentation to monitor basic component 
 responses. 
 
 Some indication of load transfer within the support 
 structure is desirable for evaluation of imposed loading 
 and support responses to performance testing. The most 
 critical requirement is to assess load transfer between the 
 canopy and caving shield assembly. This is best achieved 
 by replacing the canopy-caving shield hinge pin with an 
 instrumented pin that is instrumented with strain gages in 
 two orthogonal axes to determine vertical and horizontal 
 force reactions. These pins are commercially available and 
 can be configured to a specific shield design. Figure 15 
 shows an instrumented pin used by the Bureau. Ideally, 
 knowledge of load transfer at all joints within the structure 
 is desired to provide a complete picture of load transfer. 
 If instrumented pins are not available, then the lemniscate 
 links should be instrumented with strain gages to assess 
 load transfer to the caving shield-lemniscate assembly. 
 
 -Canopy 
 
 Insertion of 
 instrumented pin, 
 (see inset) 
 
 Caving 
 shield 
 
 Figure 15. -Instrumented vertical and horizontal load sensing pin. 
 
14 
 
 Changes in Support Geometry 
 
 Appendix A provides a computer program for deter- 
 mining the spatial coordinates of a shield geometry for a 
 specified shield height. The program is written in Fortran 
 and can be run on any IBM compatible computer. 4 In 
 addition to this mathematical model, the following physical 
 changes of geometry of the support structure should be 
 monitored during testing. 
 
 Displacement of canopy relative to the base. -Vertical and 
 horizontal displacement of the canopy relative to the base 
 should be monitored. If these displacements cannot be 
 accurately determined from load frame information, then 
 the support should be instrumented to monitor leg closure 
 and leg rotation as shown in figure 16 and 17, respectively. 
 Vertical and horizontal displacements are determined as 
 follows: 
 
 5 V = AL sinfl + L A0 cos0 and 
 6 h = AL cos0 +LA^ sin0, 
 where 8 V = vertical displacement, 
 
 5 h = horizontal displacement, 
 AL = leg closure, 
 A0 = change in leg angle, 
 L = initial leg length, 
 and 6 = initial leg angle. 
 
 4 Reference to specific products does not imply endorsement by the 
 U.S. Bureau of Mines. 
 
 Figure 16. -Monitoring leg closure using wire-pull 
 displacement transducers. 
 
 Figure 17.- Inclinometer used to measure leg rotation. 
 
15 
 
 Leg cylinder compression.— Leg closure should be moni- 
 tored by a wire-pull displacement transducer. In multiple 
 stage leg designs, closure of each stage should be 
 measured independently as illustrated in figure 16. 
 
 Leg cylinder rotation.— Ltg cylinder rotation with respect 
 to the plane of the canopy should be measured. Figure 17 
 depicts a small analog inclinometer that can be used for 
 such measurements. 
 
 Plane of reference of canopy relative to the 
 base. -Measurements should be taken to monitor 
 
 orientation of canopy relative to the base. This orientation 
 can be determined from inclinometers such as those 
 described for leg orientation measurements. 
 
 Shield height. -Initial shield heights should be recorded 
 prior to each test. This measurement does not require any 
 specialized instrumentation; any common measuring tape 
 should be adequate. Changes in shield height during 
 testing can be determined from leg orientation and leg 
 closure measurements. 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF SHIELD MECHANICS AND COMPONENT RESPONSES 
 
 A discussion of component responses is essential to the 
 identification of critical contact configurations and load 
 conditions. Appendix B describes component responses 
 and loading mechanisms for several load conditions and 
 contact configurations. The mechanics of the support 
 structure as described in the diagrams in appendix B 
 should be understood to properly interpret test results for 
 each load case evaluated. Specific component responses 
 for symmetric contact configurations are described in the 
 following sections. General responses for unsymmetric 
 contact configurations are described separately. 
 
 CANOPY RESPONSES 
 
 Bending will produce maximum stresses in the canopy 
 structure because the canopy acts primarily as a canti- 
 levered beam. Maximum bending will occur when tip 
 loading is a maximum, which occurs with two-point canopy 
 contact with the contacts at the ends of the canopy as 
 shown in canopy contact 3 in figure 11. Maximum stresses 
 will occur just ahead of the leg connection or near the 
 beginning of the tapered section of the canopy. Because 
 the canopy structure is fairly stiff in the region between the 
 leg connection and the caving shield hinge, loads applied 
 to the canopy structure in this region (canopy contacts 4, 
 5, and 7, figure 11) will produce minimal bending. 
 
 Canopy contacts 4 and 7 in figure 11 are designed to 
 transfer load through the caving shield, however, the 
 caving shield has little vertical stiffness and most of the 
 load for these configurations will be carried by the leg 
 cylinders. Because the canopy is stiff in this region, mini- 
 mal stresses will be developed in the canopy for these 
 contact configurations. 
 
 Overall, the canopy can be considered to be weakest in 
 bending strength and strongest in axial and shear strength. 
 Axial loading is likely to be fairly small and is produced by 
 (1) horizontal components of the leg forces when the 
 canopy tip is restrained, (2) resistance provided by the 
 caving shield-lemniscate assembly, (3) applied horizontal 
 
 loading (displacement) to the canopy tip, or (4) by gob 
 loading on the caving shield. Shear responses are likely to 
 occur in the canopy structure for loads applied away from 
 the leg connection, since these loads must be transmitted 
 to the leg cylinder for transferral to the base structure. 
 
 In summary, maximum stresses in the canopy structure 
 are produced from two-point canopy contact with a 
 horizontally restrained canopy tip. 
 
 BASE RESPONSES 
 
 Maximum stresses in the base structure will also be 
 developed from bending. However, base structures are 
 designed with a larger cross sectional area and are con- 
 siderably stiffer than canopy structures. Therefore, bases 
 are less likely to deform from bending and will develop 
 smaller stresses than the canopy structure for similar 
 contact configurations and load conditions. 
 
 Two loading mechanisms are responsible for producing 
 base bending. The most critical configuration occurs when 
 the base is standing on its toe as illustrated in base 
 contact 7 in figure 11. In this configuration, the rear 
 lemniscate links act (in tension) to pull the base up and 
 maintain equilibrium while the leg force acts in 
 compression to push the base back down. Maximum 
 stresses will be developed in the toe region of the base 
 structure or under the leg connection for this contact 
 configuration. Significant base bending can also be 
 produced by simply supporting the base at its ends (base 
 contact 3, figure 11) in the same manner as with the two- 
 point canopy contact configuration. In this configuration, 
 maximum stresses are likely to occur more towards the leg 
 connection. Because the base has a smaller cross section 
 near its toe than at the leg connection and since the rear 
 link introduces an additional moment in the base structure, 
 standing the support on its toe is likely to be the most 
 critical contact configuration for the base structure. 
 Horizontal restraint at the toe of the base may also be 
 required to maintain base stability in this configuration. 
 
16 
 
 LEMNISCATE LINK RESPONSES 
 
 Lemniscatc links are primarily axially loaded members. 
 Some bending can be induced in the link structures from 
 pin friction, pin eccentricity, or from "curved" link designs 
 where the line of action of the pins is not in line with the 
 centroid of the member; however, in most cases bending 
 forces are likely to be small. 
 
 There are three primary mechanisms that induce signifi- 
 cant stresses in the link members: Base bending, hori- 
 zontal displacement of the canopy relative to the base 
 structure, and one-point base contacts that promote 
 instability of the base members. Without one of these 
 conditions, link loading is likely to be very small since the 
 caving shield-lemniscate assembly has very little vertical 
 stiffness (4). 
 
 Maximum link loading will occur when the base is 
 standing on its toe (base contact 7, figure 11). In this 
 configuration, horizontal stability is provided to the base 
 and canopy by the caving shield-lemniscate assembly, 
 causing considerable strains to be developed in the lem- 
 niscate links. Tensile stresses are developed in the rear 
 links and compressive stresses in the front links for vertical 
 shield displacements. Significant link loading can also be 
 caused by single point base contact at the rear of the base 
 (base contact 8, figure 11), where the front link also acts 
 to maintain stability of the base. In this configuration, 
 tensile stresses are likely to be developed in the front links 
 and compressive forces in the rear links. 
 
 Two-point base contact (base contact 3, figure 11) will 
 also produce link loading, but because bases are generally 
 stiff members, the bending in the base is relatively small 
 and it is not likely to be sufficient to cause critical loading 
 in the link structures. Theoretically, horizontal displace- 
 ment of the canopy relative to the base can produce criti- 
 cal loading of the link structures, but in practice rigid-body 
 translation in the pin joints usually prevents the caving 
 shield-lemniscate assembly from developing its full stiffness 
 before the capacity (leg yield pressure) of the shield is 
 reached. Horizontal constrainment of the shield prior to 
 load application will reduce freedom in the pin joints and 
 enhance link loading under all load conditions. 
 
 CAVING SHIELD RESPONSES 
 
 The caving shield is also most likely to be subjected to 
 maximum loading from bending. As seen in the free-body 
 diagram in figure 18, the caving shield is acted upon by 
 hinge pin forces at the canopy joint and by the lemniscate 
 link forces. The direction of these applied forces vary 
 depending upon contact configuration and applied shield 
 loading as seen in appendix B. Link forces must always be 
 opposite one another to maintain stability of the caving 
 shield. Aside from stress concentrations developed at the 
 joint clevises and geometric discontinuities, maximum 
 stresses are likely to be developed in the section between 
 the front link and the canopy hinge. 
 
 Canopy 
 
 shield 
 
 Rear link 
 
 Base 
 
 Figure 18.-Free-body diagram for caving shield. 
 
 Contact configurations that produce maximum link 
 loading (base contacts 3 and 7, figure 11) will also pro- 
 duce maximum loading in the caving shield. Therefore, 
 maximum caving shield loading requires relative hori- 
 zontal displacement in the joints of the caving shield- 
 lemniscate assembly and will be enhanced by horizontal 
 constrainment. 
 
 LEG RESPONSES 
 
 Leg cylinders will be axially loaded in compression for 
 all load cases, assuming some vertical loading on the 
 shield. Horizontal displacement can produce some 
 bending in the leg cylinders if friction is developed in the 
 leg socket and the horizontal displacement is not resisted 
 by the caving shield-lemniscate assembly. Actual bending 
 is likely to be relatively small. Face-to-waste horizontal 
 displacement of the canopy relative to the base increases 
 leg pressures while waste-to-face horizontal displacement 
 will reduce leg pressures. 
 
 The leg is the dominant load transferring member for 
 most load cases. Hence, there is not a specific contact 
 configuration for critical load evaluation of the legs. Can- 
 opy contact 5 and base contact 6 in figure 11 are designed 
 to induce maximum shear stresses in the leg socket area of 
 the canopy and base, respectively, which is often an area 
 of concern and failure. Because the legs are capable of 
 relieving load by bleeding off internal hydraulic pressure, 
 leg cylinders rarely fail structurally. Seal leakage is usually 
 the most common failure of leg cylinders. Another critical 
 concern is the ability of the yield valves to sufficiently 
 displace hydraulic fluid to relieve leg pressures under high 
 rates of convergence. Such convergence tests are discussed 
 in the "Standardized Performance Tests" section. 
 
 Tests should also be conducted to evaluate the effect of 
 staging on leg reactions for various setting pressures. 
 Effective leg area should be determined by evaluating the 
 slope of applied force versus leg pressure plots. 
 
17 
 
 UNSYMMETRIC CONTACT SHIELD 
 RESPONSES 
 
 Unsymmetric contact configurations are derived by 
 combining symmetric configurations, one established on 
 the left side of the shield and the other on the right side of 
 the shield. The mechanisms for component loading 
 remain essentially the same as for symmetric loading: 
 axial loading is prevalent for the links and legs and 
 bending for the canopy, base, and caving shield. Because 
 unsymmetric contact can create out-of-plane stress devel- 
 opment, unsymmetric contact configurations can produce 
 larger stresses than similar symmetric contact configu- 
 rations. More specific shield responses for unsymmetric 
 contact configurations follow. 
 
 ° Unsymmetric (three-point) canopy contact produces 
 higher strains than full canopy contact but does not 
 produce significantly higher canopy strains than 
 symmetric four-corner canopy contact. 
 
 ° Three-point unsymmetric canopy contact with only 
 one contact at the rear of the canopy will produce 
 larger strains in the caving shield and lemniscate 
 links than either symmetric partial canopy contact or 
 unsymmetric canopy contact, where the missing 
 contact is at one of the canopy tip corners. Load 
 generated by the unsymmetric three-point canopy 
 contact (one contact at the rear of the canopy) is 
 likely to be carried more by one side of the caving 
 
 shield than the other and more through one set of 
 links (left or right side) than the other. If the caving 
 shield is twisting from the unsymmetric canopy 
 response, a transfer of load across the caving shield 
 may occur such that the set of links on the side 
 opposite the missing canopy contact are more 
 heavily loaded. 
 
 ° Individual base units in split-base designs act as 
 independent members and do not promote out-of- 
 plane stress development in the base units. Link 
 response will be dominated by the associated base 
 contact consistent with symmetric base unit re- 
 sponse. For example, two different symmetric base 
 configurations that produce opposite link responses 
 will produce these same opposite link responses on 
 the left side compared to the right side when these 
 base configurations are combined in an unsymmetric 
 base configuration. 
 
 ° Load distribution in the left and right side of the 
 shield is dominated by the respective base contact. 
 The side with the more dominant base contact will 
 develop the most load. 
 
 ° Symmetric base-on-toe and base-on-rear configu- 
 rations produce larger strain development than when 
 these configurations are employed only on one base 
 member in an unsymmetric configuration. 
 
 CRITICAL LOAD TEST CONFIGURATIONS 
 
 Critical load contact configurations for two-leg shield 
 performance testing are identified in figure 19. Illustrated 
 in the figure are four symmetric canopy and base contact 
 configurations and four unsymmetric canopy and base 
 contact configurations that are considered mandatory for 
 performance testing. The symmetric configurations are 
 described as (1) full canopy and base contact, (2) base-on- 
 toe contact, (3) base-on-rear contact, and (4) two-point 
 canopy and base contact. As previously indicated, con- 
 centrated load application at the leg location can be sub- 
 stituted for the full canopy contact if the shield will remain 
 stable for these configurations. The unsymmetric contact 
 
 configurations are described as (1) unsymmetric base-on- 
 rear contact with unsymmetric canopy contact at the leg 
 location, (2) unsymmetric base-on-toe contact with unsym- 
 metric canopy contact at the leg location, (3) unsymmetric 
 base-on-rear contact with symmetric canopy contact at the 
 leg location, and (4) unsymmetric base-on-toe contact with 
 symmetric canopy contact at the leg location. 
 
 Also included in figure 19 are eight optional tests. 
 These tests are not likely to produce higher stress devel- 
 opment than the mandatory tests, but do provide slightly 
 different loading mechanisms and therefore can be 
 considered for critical load testing. 
 
18 
 
 MANDATORY TESTS 
 Symmetric contact configurations 
 
 1 T f I T T I 
 
 OPTIONAL TESTS 
 
 jjhui 
 
 f^-^f 
 
 JMtt ft 
 
 Unsymmetric contact configurations 
 
 TTTT 
 
 KEY 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right side 
 
 Figure 19.-Critical load test configurations. 
 
 DETERMINATION OF SUPPORT RESISTANCE 
 
 Because active load frames provide controlled forces or 
 displacements, information concerning shield loading is 
 usually available from the load frame. Both displacements 
 and forces should be known. In addition, it is necessary to 
 know not only applied forces, but reactive forces as well. 
 For example, figure 20 depicts a horizontal shield reaction 
 in response to an applied vertical displacement of the 
 canopy (relative to the base). While load frame informa- 
 tion may provide resultant shield loading (forces), partial 
 contact configurations should employ load cells to measure 
 loading at each point of contact. 
 
 Simple rigid-body statics are often used to assess shield 
 resistance in the absence of accurate load frame informa- 
 tion and are frequently utilized to evaluate support resis- 
 tances underground. However, many analyses violate fun- 
 damental equilibrium requirements by ignoring horizontal 
 forces acting on the shield. For example, the analysis 
 
 shown in figure 21 that is commonly used by manufac- 
 turers is valid only for a very limited load condition where 
 there is no horizontal force acting on the support. There 
 is almost always a horizontal force couple acting on two- 
 leg shield supports because of the inclination of the leg 
 cylinders. Only if there is a frictionless interface between 
 the roof and canopy or base and floor is there likely to be 
 no horizontal force acting on the shield. Full shield equi- 
 librium, both force and moment equilibrium, must be 
 satisfied for all analytical analyses of shield resistance. 
 
 It is recommended that each analytical analysis of sup- 
 port resistance begin by drawing the free-body diagram 
 for the full shield and ensuring that force and moment 
 equilibrium is attainable. Appendix C contains the proper 
 rigid-body static analysis for determination of shield 
 resistance. 
 
19 
 
 Resultant vertical 
 force 
 
 Horizontal 
 force 
 
 Horizontal 
 force 
 
 Resultant vertical 
 force 
 
 Figure 20.- Horizontal shield reaction to vertical displacement. 
 
 STANDARDIZED PERFORMANCE TESTS 
 
 The various issues described in this report provide 
 insight into the performance testing of longwall supports. 
 As seen in these discussions, several options are available, 
 which makes determination of standardized performance 
 tests difficult. The scope of the performance tests are 
 likely to be controlled by the facilities and funding 
 available. 
 
 TEST DOCUMENTATION 
 
 As indicated in the introduction, there is a need to 
 establish a standard reporting format for shield perfor- 
 mance testing. This can be accomplished by using the 
 form presented in figure 22. This four-page form provides 
 documentation for a test name, test series, objective, brief 
 description of test procedures, identification of boundary 
 and loading conditions, data reductions available for anal- 
 ysis, instrumentation identification, and well-defined test 
 results for both static and cyclic testing. This form will 
 provide for a common data base to facilitate support com- 
 parisons as well as provide a concise history of support 
 performance test results. 
 
 PERFORMANCE TESTS 
 
 Given the considerations discussed through out this 
 report, the following performance test guidelines are de- 
 veloped. Six test series are noted on the test documen- 
 tation form presented in figure 22. Each of these test 
 
 series has a basic objective and it defines the basis for the 
 proposed standardized tests. Within each test series, sev- 
 eral tests are required to parametrically evaluate all influ- 
 ential variables. A performance test report, using the four- 
 page form documented in figure 22, should be prepared 
 for each test. 
 
 A discussion of each of the six test series follows. 
 Appendix D contains performance test report forms (based 
 on figure 22) with pretest information and data documen- 
 tation requirements completed on the form for each test 
 required in each of the six test series. Therefore, an op- 
 erator can simply take these forms and provide them to 
 the manufacturer as statement of required tests and 
 reporting deliverables. 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 
 The purpose of this test series is to evaluate the resis- 
 tance characteristics of the shield and to determine its 
 maximum load carrying capability and supporting effi- 
 ciency. The following tests are documented for this series 
 (appendix D). 
 
 Support Capacity-Height Effects (Tests CAPHTOl 
 through CAJPHT04).-The objective of these tests is to 
 determine the support capacity as a function of shield 
 height. Vertical and horizontal support resistance is de- 
 termined at leg yield for full canopy and base contact at 
 various shield heights. 
 
20 
 
 ASSUMPTIONS: No horizontal force acting on shield. 
 KNOWNS: 
 
 UNKNOWNS: 
 
 ANALYSIS: 
 
 SOLUTION: 
 
 Leg force (L) 
 Distances b, e, t 
 
 Resultant vertical force (F v ) 
 Resultant vertical force location (x) 
 Front link force (FL) 
 Rear link force (RL) 
 
 Moment equilibrium 
 
 M(A) = F v (x) - L(£) = O 
 M(C) = F v (x + b) - L(e) - O 
 
 F v = Me^D 
 
 x 
 
 (D(b 
 
 f 
 
 Figure 21 .-Typically used rigid-body analysis of shield resistance. 
 
21 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: Resistance characteristics 
 Shield stiffness 
 Leg mechanics 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Stability 
 Load transfer 
 Structural integrity 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE: 
 
 TEST FRAME: Static 
 
 Active 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Shield height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting pressure 
 
 inches 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: Constrained 
 
 Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \/ 
 to establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 ^WMM 
 
 C OT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O 
 to establish unsymmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 HM 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 000 
 000 
 
 , O O Q , 
 Canopy 
 
 SU.W 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 Right 
 
 Oil 
 
 Base 
 
 Figure 22. -Standardized test report form. 
 
^ 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical force 
 Horizontal force: 
 
 Face-to-waste 
 
 Waste-to-face 
 Vertical displacement 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 kips/in 
 
 kips/in 
 kips/in 
 kips/in 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 Horizontal displacement: 
 
 Face-to-waste 
 
 Waste-to-face 
 
 Leg pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical-horizontal 
 Horizontal-vertical 
 
 in/min 
 in/min 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical force vs vertical displacement 
 Horizontal force vs vertical displacement 
 Strain channels vs vertical displacement 
 Strain channels vs vertical force 
 Strain channels vs sum of leg pressures 
 Vertical force vs sum of leg pressures 
 Horizontal force vs sum of leg pressure 
 Strain channels vs number of cycles 
 
 COMMENTS: 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 horizontal 
 horizontal 
 horizontal 
 horizontal 
 individual 
 individual 
 individual 
 
 displacement 
 
 displacement 
 
 displacement 
 
 force 
 
 leg pressure 
 
 leg pressure 
 
 leg pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 O-OzO 
 
 Fill in appropriate O 
 
 to establish instrumentation 
 
 location 
 
 Nomenclature: L-Left 
 R-Right 
 C-Center 
 
 Figure 22.-Standardized test report form-Continued. 
 
23 
 
 MATERIAL PROPERTIES: 
 
 Component Steel type 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Base 
 
 Caving shield 
 
 Links 
 
 Link pins . . . 
 
 Yield stress, 
 psi 
 
 Critical stress intensity 
 factor, kip/in 
 
 TEST RESULTS FOR STATIC LOAD TESTS: 
 
 SUPPORT RESISTANCE: 
 
 Maximum vertical force kips 
 
 Maximum horizontal force .... kips 
 
 DISPLACEMENTS: 
 
 Vertical displacement in 
 
 Horizontal displacement in 
 
 SUPPORT STABILITY: 
 
 Rear of base lifted in 
 
 Toe of base lifted in 
 
 Canopy tip lowered in 
 
 Canopy tip raised in 
 
 Canopy rear lowered in 
 
 Canopy rear raised in 
 
 Shield slid forward in 
 
 Shield slid backward in 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER: 
 
 Leg forces: 
 
 Vertical leg force kips 
 
 Horizontal leg force kips 
 
 Caving shield assembly: 
 
 Vertical pin force kips 
 
 Horizontal pin force kips 
 
 LOAD DISTRIBUTION: 
 
 Gage ID 
 
 Canopy microstrain 
 
 Base microstrain 
 
 Front link microstrain 
 
 Rear link microstrain 
 
 Caving shield microstrain 
 
 Left leg cylinder psi 
 
 Right leg cylinder psi 
 
 Initial conditions 
 
 Maximum load 
 
 TEST LIMITATION: 
 
 Leg yield 
 Instability 
 
 Component strain 
 Other 
 
 Figure 22. -Standardized test report form-Continued. 
 
24 
 
 TEST RESULTS FOR CYCLIC LOADING: 
 
 LOAD ASSESSMENT: Number of cycles 
 
 Load variation per cycle to 
 
 ASSESSMENT OF GENERAL YIELDING: 
 
 Component Location Residual strain, microstrain Maximum deflection, in Cycles 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Base 
 
 Caving 
 
 Links 
 
 ASSESSMENT OF FRACTURE MECHANICS: 
 
 Crack formation: Crack 1 Crack 2 Crack 3 Crack 4 Crack 5 
 
 Component 
 
 Crack length in ... 
 
 Nominal stress psi ... 
 
 Cycle number 
 
 Crack propagation: 
 
 Change in length, . . in/cyc . . . 
 
 Maximum crack length . . in . . 
 
 SUMMARY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT: 
 
 Capacity: 
 
 Stability: 
 
 Structural integrity: 
 
 Figure 22.-Standardized test report form-Continued. 
 
25 
 
 Tip Load Capability (Tests TIP01 through 
 TIP06). -These tests are designed to determine tip loading 
 characteristics of the shield. Tests TIP01 and TIP02 eval- 
 uate maximum tip load capability for symmetric two-point 
 canopy contact. Tests TIP03 and TIP04 evaluate tip load- 
 ing that is generated for full canopy contact. This is im- 
 portant because this is the tip loading that will normally 
 be generated by the shield underground for most setting 
 conditions. Tests TIP05 and TIP06 evaluate tip loading 
 generated by active capsule pressurization once the shield 
 is set. 
 
 Horizontal Support Capacity (Tests HCOl through 
 HC04).-Tests HCOl and HC02 determine the shield 
 resistance to externally applied face-to-waste horizontal 
 displacements. Tests HC03 and HC04 determine the 
 horizontal reaction developed by the shield for vertical 
 displacements. This provides an indication of the hori- 
 zontal force the shield might generate into the roof strata. 
 
 Shield Stiffness 
 
 The purpose of this test series is to determine the hori- 
 zontal and vertical stiffness of the shield in accordance 
 with the following linear elastic model (4): 
 
 F v = K, * 5 V + K^ * 5 h and 
 
 K 3 ** v 
 
 K 4 * 
 
 where 
 
 F v = resultant vertical force, 
 
 F h = resultant horizontal force, 
 
 <5 V = vertical displacement, 
 
 5 h = horizontal displacement, 
 
 and K 1 ,K 2 ,K 3 ,K 4 = stiffness coefficients. 
 
 The objective of these tests is to determine the stiffness 
 coefficients (Kj,K 2 ,K 3 ,K 4 ) by applying independent con- 
 trolled vertical and horizontal displacements to a shield 
 while measuring vertical and horizontal shield reactions 
 (4). These stiffness determinations enable prediction of 
 support reactions when in underground service and provide 
 valuable design information pertaining to component 
 loading and shield behavior. 
 
 Two parameters are considered influential in this test 
 series: Shield height and horizontal constrainment. It is 
 recommended that these stiffness tests be conducted at a 
 minimum of two shield heights (one low, one high) and for 
 both constrained and unconstrained initial conditions. 
 Shield stiffness is slightly dependent on contact configu- 
 ration, therefore it is suggested that the stiffness tests be 
 conducted with full canopy and base contact and two-point 
 symmetric canopy and base contact, as these two 
 configurations should provide the extreme values. 
 
 The following tests are documented in appendix D. 
 
 Shield Stiffness— Constrained Configurations (Tests 
 STFCOl through STFC04). -Determines shield stiffness 
 for constrained initial conditions for vertical and face-to- 
 waste horizontal displacements. 
 
 Shield Stiffness-Contrained Configurations (Tests 
 STFCOS through S7FCOS,). -Repeats tests STFCOl 
 through STFC04 for vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
 displacements. 
 
 Shield Stiffness-Unconstrained Configurations (Tests 
 STFUOl through STFU04).-Determwes shield stiffness 
 for unconstrained initial conditions for vertical and face- 
 to-waste horizontal displacements. 
 
 Shield Stiffness— Unconstrained Configurations (Tests 
 STFU05 through STFU08). -Repeats tests STFUOl 
 through STFU04 for vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
 displacements. 
 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 The purpose of this test series is to evaluate the capa- 
 bilities of the legs cylinders to provide specified support 
 resistance and yield capability to the support. 
 
 Evaluation of the yield behavior of the leg cylinders is 
 accomplished by continuing to converge the shield after 
 initial yield pressure is reached, while observing leg pres- 
 sure and resultant support forces. Both legs should yield 
 at close to the same pressures. Upon yielding, leg pres- 
 sure should remain constant independent of shield dis- 
 placement or leg closure. Vertical supporting force may 
 decrease slightly during yielding, but any decrease should 
 be very gradual. The most influential parameter for this 
 study is the rate of displacement. It is recommended that 
 displacement rates of 0.1 and 1.0 in/min be tested. Shields 
 to be employed in burst-prone conditions should be tested 
 at impact loading. 
 
 Another important consideration involving leg mechan- 
 ics is to evaluate the effect of leg staging on resulting leg 
 force and subsequent shield setting force. As previously 
 discussed, leg force is considerably reduced when the first 
 stage is fully extended. This test series is designed to 
 evaluate these effects by setting the support with a con- 
 stant setting pressure at different shield heights and ob- 
 serving resulting vertical and horizontal shield resistance. 
 In addition, effective leg area for the various leg extensions 
 is determined by evaluating applied force as a function of 
 leg pressure. 
 
 The final requirement in this test series is to compare 
 effective leg area for setting (leg extension) with effective 
 leg area for shield (leg) convergence. Effective leg area 
 for convergence should be nearly constant for all shield 
 heights (leg extensions), whereas effective leg area for 
 setting operations may vary depending on staging mechan- 
 ics. Leg area determinations are necessary to properly 
 determine shield resistances from leg pressure 
 measurements. 
 
:<> 
 
 The following tests are documented in appendix D. 
 
 Leg Mechanics-Yield Pressure (Tests LEGCAPOl and 
 LEGCAP02).-Thc objectives of these tests are to deter- 
 mine (1) capability of the shield and individual leg cyl- 
 inders to yield at specified pressure, (2) reduction in sup- 
 port resistance from yield and displacement between 
 yields, and (3) comparison of leg stiffness by evaluation of 
 increase in leg pressure per unit displacement. 
 
 Leg Mechanics-Impact Load Yield (Test 
 LEGYLDOl). -The purpose of this test is to determine the 
 capability of the yield valves to effectively relieve pressure 
 from impact loading without structural damage to the leg 
 casing or extensive seal damage. 
 
 Leg Mechanics-Leg Cylinder Area (Tests LEGAEXOl 
 and LEGACOOl). -The purpose of these tests is to deter- 
 mine effective leg area for leg extension from active leg 
 pressurization (test LEGAEXOl) and for convergence 
 from externally applied force or displacement (test 
 LEGAC01). 
 
 Leg Mechanics-Setting Force (Tests LEGSETO 1 through 
 LEGSET03).-The objectives of these tests are to evaluate 
 the effect of leg mechanics on shield setting forces and to 
 determine shield setting force as a function of shield 
 height. 
 
 Stability 
 
 The purpose of this test series is to evaluate the stability 
 of the shield under various contact configurations and load 
 conditions. Specific boundary conditions proposed for this 
 test series are documented in appendix D. Vertical dis- 
 placement, face-to-waste horizontal displacement, and 
 waste-to-face horizontal displacement must be evaluated to 
 properly assess shield stability. Horizontal force couples 
 acting on the shield help maintain stability in certain con- 
 figurations, and worst-case tests where horizontal forces 
 are removed are included in these investigations of shield 
 stability. 
 
 The following tests to evaluate shield stability are 
 documented in appendix D: 
 
 Shield Stability-Tip Resultant (Tests STATIPOl and 
 STATIP02).— The, purpose of these tests is to evaluate 
 shield stability for canopy contact forward of the leg 
 location. 
 
 Shield Stability-Zero Horizontal Load (Tests 
 STAHOROl and STAHOR02).-These tests are designed 
 to evaluate the stability of shield when there are no ex- 
 ternal horizontal forces acting on the shield. This load 
 condition depends on the caving shield-lemniscate 
 assembly to maintain stability. 
 
 Shield Stability-Base-on-Toe (Tests STABOTOl and 
 STABOT02).-Thz purpose of these tests is to evaluate the 
 stability of the shield for a base-on-toe contact 
 configuration with waste-to-face horizontal displacement. 
 
 Shield Stability-Base-on-Rear (Tests STABOROl and 
 STABOR02). -The purpose of these tests is to evaluate the 
 
 stability of the shield for a base-on-rear contact 
 configuration subjected to face-to-waste horizontal 
 displacement. 
 
 Shield Stability-Leg Imbalance (Tests STALEGOl and 
 STALEG020).-These tests are designed to evaluate the 
 stability of the shield for unbalanced leg pressures. 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 The goal of this test series is to determine how much 
 load is being transferred through the leg cylinders and the 
 caving shield-lemniscate assembly for various contact con- 
 figurations and load conditions. Load transferring mecha- 
 nisms are dependent primarily on base responses and hori- 
 zontal constrainment for specific shield displacements. As 
 previous discussions of shield mechanics indicated, vertical 
 support resistance is likely to be dominated by the leg 
 reactions, and the participation of the caving shield- 
 lemniscate assembly in horizontal support resistance will 
 depend on the translational freedom in the numerous pin 
 joints of the structure. Hence, an objective of these tests 
 is to determine the participation of the caving shield- 
 lemniscate assembly in the shield's load transfer me- 
 chanics. Load transfer to the caving shield-lemniscate 
 assembly is determined from instrumented load sensing 
 pins at the canopy-caving shield joints. Both symmetric 
 and unsymmetric contact configurations are evaluated in 
 these tests. 
 
 The following load transfer tests are documented in 
 appendix D: 
 
 Load Transfer-Unconstrained Load Conditions (Tests 
 LTSUFWOl, LTSUFW02, LTSUWFOl, and 
 STSUWF02).-These tests evaluate the participation of the 
 caving shield-lemniscate assembly and the leg cylinders in 
 the shield load transfer mechanics for unconstrained initial 
 load conditions. Test series LTSUFW evaluates vertical 
 and face-to-waste horizontal displacements and test series 
 LTSUWF evaluates vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
 displacements. 
 
 Load Transfer-Constrained Load Conditions (Tests 
 LTSCFWOl, LTSCFW02, LTSCWFOl, and 
 LTSCWF02).-Thzse, tests evaluate the participation of the 
 caving shield-lemniscate assembly and leg cylinders in the 
 shield load transfer mechanics for constrained initial load 
 conditions. Test series LTSCFW evaluates vertical and 
 face-to-waste horizontal displacements and test series 
 LTSCWF evaluate waste-to-face horizontal displacements. 
 
 Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Contact Configu- 
 rations.- -The purpose of these tests is to evaluate load 
 transfer mechanics for unsymmetric contact configurations. 
 Test identifications and associated contact configurations 
 are as follows: test LTSLEG, unsymmetric canopy contact 
 at one leg location; test LTSBOT, unsymmetric base-on- 
 toe contact; and test LTSBOR, unsymmetric base-on-rear 
 contact. 
 
27 
 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 The most difficult and time-consuming portion of the 
 program is to assess the structural integrity of the shield. 
 As the previous discussions have indicated, several influ- 
 ential variables must be evaluated to properly assess a 
 shield's structural integrity. These include (1) height, (2) 
 contact configuration, (3) direction and magnitude of ap- 
 plied loading (displacement), and (4) constrainment. Hori- 
 zontal displacement and horizontal constrainment are two 
 very influential parameters that are frequently overlooked 
 in support performance testing. Appendix D documents 
 tests that include all of these parameter considerations. 
 
 Structural failure is attributed to either fatigue or com- 
 ponent loading beyond its design strength. Static load tests 
 should be employed to evaluate the overall integrity of the 
 structure from strength of materials considerations by 
 evaluating various loading mechanisms that produce dif- 
 ferent stress developments in each of the support compo- 
 nents. Cycle tests should be conducted to evaluate fatigue 
 loading using fracture mechanics principles to relate crack 
 growth and stress intensity factors for specific component 
 geometries. 
 
 Fatigue occurs from repeated loading at nominal loads 
 below the design strength (i.e., no general inelastic compo- 
 nent deformation although there will be plastic deforma- 
 tion on the microscopic scale at the crack tip). Mechani- 
 cally, fatigue causes crack formation and promotes crack 
 growth as the number of cycles increases. When a crack 
 grows large enough (reaches critical crack length), crack 
 growth becomes unstable and failure (fracture) occurs. 
 Fatigue failures generally develop in or near weldments 
 because of stress concentration formed by material discon- 
 tinuities or inherent flaws in the welds. Fatigue failures 
 generally develop gradually but fracture, which results in 
 loss of load-carrying capability, can be sudden, being 
 caused by one more application of load. 
 
 Structural failures also occur from loading beyond the 
 design strength of the material. The primary failure me- 
 chanism is described as general yielding, in which cumu- 
 lative deformations are sufficiently widespread to threaten 
 
 the structural integrity or functional capability of a compo- 
 nent. Failure (fracture) by static loading is unlikely, be- 
 cause longwall roof supports are generally constructed 
 from mild steel that exhibits good ductility. This means 
 the steel will deform, usually bend, considerably before 
 reaching ultimate strength and rupturing. 
 
 Maximum stresses are likely to occur in areas where 
 the geometry of the structure changes drastically, such as 
 around holes or where plates are welded together, or 
 where there are changes in material properties. These 
 localized high stress concentrations may or may not affect 
 the overall structural integrity of the component. The 
 probability of failure from localized high-stress concen- 
 trations depends on the ability of the structure (material) 
 to redistribute the strain energy. If the energy can be 
 redistributed through plastic deformation, then the 
 probability of failure (fracture development) is reduced. 
 
 Several tests are documented in appendix D to evaluate 
 the structural integrity of the shield. These tests are di- 
 vided into two main categories: static load tests and fa- 
 tigue loading tests. Each of the symmetric and unsym- 
 metric contact configurations identified in the "Critical 
 Load Test Configurations" section (fig. 19) should be 
 evaluated. The static load tests should be conducted for 
 vertical, face-to-waste horizontal, and waste-to-face 
 horizontal displacements applied independently and in 
 combination with one another as indicated in appendix D. 
 It is mandatory that all tests be conducted for horizontally 
 constrained configurations to ensure full participation of 
 the caving shield-lemniscate assembly in the shield's load 
 transfer mechanics. 
 
 A minimum of 10,000 cycles per load case should be 
 applied for the fatigue loading tests. All mandatory load 
 cases specified in the critical load test configurations iden- 
 tified in figure 19 should be evaluated. If this number of 
 tests is prohibitive, then full canopy and base contact, 
 symmetric base-on-toe contact, and two-point canopy and 
 base contact tests should be given highest priority. The 
 number of cycles should not be sacrificed to permit testing 
 more configurations. 
 
 CONCLUSIONS 
 
 Because actual underground loading conditions are 
 rarely known, knowledge of support mechanics is essential 
 to develop performance testing programs that explore the 
 full capabilities of longwall supports. It is believed that the 
 guidelines provided in this report will advance the state- 
 of-the-art of shield performance testing. Several influential 
 parameters that are often ignored in current testing pro- 
 grams, such as horizontal displacement and horizontal 
 constrainment, are included in the scope of these advanced 
 guidelines. 
 
 Equally important is the need to standardize testing 
 procedures and test documentation so that a meaningful 
 comparison of support performance can be made. Obvi- 
 ously, there will be circumstances that dictate shield 
 
 specific tests, but it seems reasonable that some basic tests 
 can be conducted on all supports to provide a common 
 and historical data base of support performance. It is 
 believed that the proposed four-page test documentation 
 form is a good start in that direction. 
 
 If advancements in support design are to be made, 
 performance testing must become more conscious of de- 
 sign considerations. Although the main objective of the 
 test guidelines proposed in this report is not design con- 
 sideration, the tests will provide considerably more design 
 information than current performance tests, which 
 investigate fewer parameters and are conducted under less 
 controlled environments. 
 
28 
 
 REFERENCES 
 
 1. Barczak, T. M., and C. A. Goode. Considerations in the Design 
 of Longwall Mining Systems. Paper in Proceedings, International 
 Symposium on State-of-t he-Art of Ground Control in Longwall Mining 
 and Subsidence (Honolulu, HI, Sept. 4-5, 1982). Soc. Min. Eng. AIME, 
 1982, pp. 
 
 2. Barczak, T. M., and D. E. Schwemmer. Horizontal and Vertical 
 Load Transferring Mechanisms in Longwall Roof Supports. BuMines 
 RI 9188, 1988, 24 pp. 
 
 3. Barczak, T. M., and D. E. Schwemmer. Two-Leg Longwall Shield 
 Mechanics. BuMines RI 9220, 1989, 34 pp. 
 
 4. . Stiffness Characteristics of Longwall Shields. BuMines 
 
 RI 9154, 1988, 14 pp. 
 
 5. . Critical-Load Studies of a Shield Support. BuMines 
 
 RI 9141, 1987, 15 pp. 
 
29 
 
 APPENDIX A.-SHIELD KINEMATICS COMPUTER PROGRAM 
 
 A computer program 1 is provided that calculates the 
 spatial coordinates for a designated shield height for a 
 two-leg longwall shield with lemniscate linkage. The pro- 
 gram evaluates the kinematics of the shield using a para- 
 metric approach, which is outlined below and depicted in 
 figures A-l and A-2. 
 
 Note that in the test and figures of this appendix, 
 lengths (distances between coordinate points) are prefixed 
 with either an A (AL), indicating actual measured or 
 known quantities, or an S (SL), indicating shield-height- 
 dependent quantity that is unknown. 
 
 Using figure A-2 and beginning with a selected value of 
 SL- 
 
 ^eveloped by David E. Schwemmer, structural engineer, Boeing 
 Services International, Pittsburgh, PA. 
 
 1. Compute B 3 using law of cosines in triangle DGC. 
 
 2. Compute SM using the law of cosines in triangle 
 DFC. 
 
 3. Compute -y 2 and y 3 using the law of cosines in 
 triangle DAC. 
 
 4. Compute *1, then shield height, Y3 coordinate, using 
 trigonometry. 
 
 5. Compare Y3 coordinate, plus thickness of canopy 
 and base relative to appropriate pin connection locations, 
 to shield height requested. Adjust SL accordingly until 
 difference between computed and actual shield height is 
 less than a prescribed small value, e. Steps 1 through 5 
 are repeated until it is attained. 
 
 6. Once the correct SL is found, basic trigonometry is 
 used to compute the remaining coordinates and angles. 
 
 AL3 
 
 Lemniscate 
 pole point 
 
 Figure A-1 .-Shield components, joint identification, and component dimension nomenclature. 
 
30 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Figure A-2.- Geometric analysis of shield support. 
 
31 
 
 C SHIELD GEOMETRY 
 
 C 
 
 C MODIFIED VERSION OF SHGEOM.FOR TO ACCOMMODATE TERMINAL INPUT 
 
 C OF CANOPY AND BASE THICKNESS 
 
 C 
 
 C FILE: NEWGEOM.FOR 
 
 C 
 
 C PROGRAM FOR THE KINEMATIC DETERMINATION OF A SHIELD 
 
 C 
 
 C DUE TO NONLINEARITY OF GOVERNING EQUATIONS, A PARAMETRIC TECHNIQUE TO 
 
 C ZERO IN ON THE UNIQUE GEOMETRY FOR A SPECIFIED SHIELD HEIGHT IS 
 
 C UTILIZED. 
 
 C 
 
 IMPLICIT REAL*8(A-H,0-Z) 
 
 DIMENSION VF(50) ,VL(50) ,XHT(50) , HFC 50) ,HL(50) 
 C 
 
 0PEN(UNIT=2,TYPE='0LD' ,FILE=' [METF. FORTRAN] SHIELD .DAT • ) 
 
 0PEN(UNIT=3,TYPE='NEW« ,FILE=' [METF . FORTRAN]NEWGEOM. OUT » ) 
 C 
 
 READ(2, 1100)AR1 
 
 READ(2,1100)AR2 
 
 READ(2,1100)AR3 
 
 READ(2,1100)AR4 
 
 READ(2,1100)AR6 
 
 READC2, 1100)AH4 
 
 READ(2,1100)AV1 
 
 READ(2,1100)AV4 
 
 READC2, 1100)AL1 
 
 READ(2,1100)AL2 
 
 READ(2,1100)AL3 
 
 READ(2,1100)AL4 
 
 READ(2,1100)AL5 
 READC2, 1100)AL6 
 
 READ(2,1100)AL7 
 
 READ(2,1100)AL9 
 
 READC2, 1 100)ETA3 
 
 CL0SEC2) 
 
 WRITEC*, 1010) 
 
 READ(*,1020)ASHT 
 
 WRITE(*,1420) 
 
 READ(*,1020)BAS 
 
 WRITEC*, 1430) 
 
 READ(*,1020)CAN 
 C 
 
 C BEGINNING WITH A SELECTED VALUE OF THE PARAMETER SL 
 C 
 
 PI=3. 141592654 
 CONV=2.*PI/360. 
 
32 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 SL=30. 
 ETA3=ETA- 
 EPSILON=C 
 DN=PI-. 1 
 UP=PI+. 1 
 
 >*CONV 
 ).01 
 
 c 
 c 
 c 
 
 DETERMINE 
 OF SHIELD 
 
 THE ANGLES 
 (SHTO) FOR 
 
 AND LENGTH 
 COMPARISON 
 
 150 
 
 
 DO 100 1=1,150 
 IFCI.EQ. 1 )SUM=SUM+1 
 
 SM TO COMPUTE THE OVERALL HEIGHT 
 WITH THE REQUIRED HEIGHT. 
 
 IFCI.EQ. 150)WRITE(», 1160) 
 
 IFCI.EQ. 150)STOP 
 C 
 
 AL1P=AL1/C0S(ETA3) 
 
 TANG=((AR2*AR2-SL*SL-AL1P*AL1P)/(-2.*SL*AL1P)) 
 C 
 
 IFCTANG.GE.1 . .OR . TANG .LE .- 1 . ) WRITE (* , 1 41 ) 
 
 IFCTANG.GE.1 . .OR . TANG .LE . - 1 .0)STOP 
 C 
 
 BETA3=DACOS((AR2*AR2-SL*SL-AL1P*AL1P)/(-2.*SL*AL1P)) 
 
 SM=SQRT ( ( AL 1 +AL2 ) * ( AL 1 +AL2 ) +SL*SL-2 . * ( AL 1 +AL2 ) *SL* 
 
 1COS(ETA3+BETA3)) 
 C 
 
 AN=SQRT(AL4*AL4+AV1*AV1 ) 
 
 GAMMA2=DAC0S((AR1*AR1+AN*AN-SL*SL)/(2.*AR1*AN)) 
 
 GAMMA3 = DAC0S( ( AR 1 *AR 1 -AN*AN+SL*SL ) /( 2 . *SL*AR 1 ) ) 
 
 ALPHA2=DATAN( (AV1/AL4) ) 
 
 ANGLE1 =PI-ALPHA2-GAMMA2 
 
 IF(ANGLE1 .GT. (PI/2. ))G0 TO 510 
 
 ANGLE3=GAMMA3+BETA3-ANGLE1 
 C 
 
 Y3 = AR1*SIN( ANGLE 1 ) + ( AL1+AL2 ) *SIN ( ANGLE3+ETA3 ) 
 C 
 
 C CANOPY AND BASE THICKNESS ASSUMES PIN LOCATIONS AT BASE 
 
 C AND CANOPY CROSS-SECTIONAL MIDPOINTS 
 
 C 
 
 SHT0=Y3+BAS/2.+CAN/2. 
 C 
 
 TEST=SHTO-ASHT 
 
 IFCABS(TEST) . LE . EPSILON )G0 TO 500 
 
 IFCTEST.LE.O. )SL=SL+TEST/1 . 
 
 IF(TEST.GT.O. )SL=SL-TEST/1 . 
 100 CONTINUE 
 
 510 SL=SL+SUM 
 
 GO TO 150 
 C 
 
 C THE PARAMETRIC EVALUATION IS COMPLETE AND THE SHIELD COORDINATES 
 C CAN NOW BE COMPUTED 
 
33 
 
 C 
 500 ETA2=DATAN(AL1*TAN(ETA3)/AL2) 
 
 ETA1=PI-ETA3+ETA2 
 C 
 
 AL2P=SQRT(AL2*AL2+(AL1*TAN(ETA3))*(AL1*TAN(ETA3))) 
 
 BETA1=DAC0S((AL1P*AL1P-SL*SL-AR2*AR2)/(-2.*SL*AR2)) 
 
 BETA2=DACOS((SL*SL-AL1P*AL1P-AR2*AR2)/(-2.*AL1P*AR2)) 
 
 TRI=BETA1+BETA2+BETA3 
 
 IF(TRI.GE.DN.AND.TRI.LE.UP)GO TO 110 
 
 WRITEC*, 1400)1 
 
 STOP 
 C 
 1 10 PHI1=DACOS((AL2P*AL2P-SM*SM-AR2*AR2)/(-2.*SM*AR2)) 
 
 PHI2=DACOS((SM*SM-AR2*AR2-AL2P*AL2P)/(-2.*AR2*AL2P)) 
 
 PHI3=DACOS((AR2*AR2-SM*SM-AL2P*AL2P)/(-2.*SM*AL2P)) 
 
 TRI=PHI1+PHI2+PHI3 
 
 IF(TRI.GE.DN.AND.TRI.LE.UP)GO TO 120 
 
 WRITEC*, 1400)2 
 
 STOP 
 C 
 120 X1=-AR1*C0S(ANGLE1 ) 
 
 Y1=AR1*SIN(ANGLE1) 
 C 
 
 X2P=X1+AL1*COS(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
 
 Y2P=Y1+AL1*SIN(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
 C 
 
 X2=X1+AL1P*COS(ANGLE3) 
 Y2=Y1+AL1P*SIN(ANGLE3) 
 C 
 
 X7P=X1+(AL1+AL6)*COS(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
 Y7P=Y1+(AL1+AL6)*SIN(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
 C 
 
 X3=X1+(AL1+AL2)*COS(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
 Y3=Y1+(AL1+AL2)*SIN(ANGLE3+ETA3) 
 C 
 
 ANGLE4=DATAN((Y3-Y2)/(X3-X2)) 
 
 X7=X2+(AL6/C0S(ETA2))*C0S(ANGLE4) 
 
 Y7=Y2+(AL6/C0S(ETA2))*SIN(ANGLE4) 
 C 
 
 XR3=X7+AR3*COS((PI/2. )-ANGLE4) 
 
 YR3=Y7-AR3*SIN((PI/2. )-ANGLE4) 
 C 
 
 X5=X3+AL7 
 Y5=Y3 
 C 
 
 XR4=X5 
 
 YR4=Y5-AR4 
 
34 
 
 X6=X3+AL9 
 
 Y6=Y3 
 C 
 
 XR6=X6 
 
 YR6=Y6-AR6 
 C 
 
 X4=X3+AL3 
 
 Y4 = Y3 
 C 
 
 AM1=Y1/X1 
 
 AM2=(Y2-AV1 )/(X2-AL4) 
 
 AB2=Y2-(AM2*X2) 
 
 X0=AB2/(AM1-AM2) 
 
 Y0=AM1*X0 
 C 
 
 ALANG=DATAN((YR6-AV4)/(XR6-AH4)) 
 
 AFANG=PHI2-ANGLE4 
 C 
 
 C PRINT OUTPUT TO THE SCREEN AND DATA FILE 
 C 
 
 WRITE(* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITE(* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 WRITEC* 
 
 1210)SHTO 
 
 1220)X0,Y0 
 
 1230)X1 ,Y1 
 
 1240)X2,Y2 
 
 1250)X3,Y3 
 
 1260)X4,Y4 
 
 1270)X5,Y5 
 
 1280)X6,Y6 
 
 1290)X7,Y7 
 
 1300)XR3,YR3 
 
 1310)XR4,YR4 
 
 1320)XR6,YR6 
 
 1330)X2P,Y2P 
 
 13 J 40)X7P,Y7P 
 
 1350)ALANG/CONV, AFANG/CONV 
 
 IOUT = 
 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 WRITE 
 
 3 
 (IOUT 
 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 (IOUT 
 
 1210 
 1440 
 1450 
 1220 
 1230 
 1240 
 1250 
 1260 
 1270 
 1280 
 1290 
 1300 
 
 )SHTO 
 
 )BAS 
 
 )CAN 
 
 )XO,YO 
 
 )X1 ,Y1 
 
 )X2,Y2 
 
 )X3,Y3 
 
 )X4,Y4 
 
 )X5,Y5 
 
 )X6,Y6 
 
 )X7,Y7 
 
 )XR3,YR3 
 
35 
 
 WRITE (IOUT, 1 31 0)XR4,YR4 
 
 WRITEUOUT, 
 WRITECIOUT, 
 WRITECIOUT, 
 WRITECIOUT, 
 
 FORMAT STATEMENTS 
 
 1010 
 1020 
 1100 
 1160 
 1210 
 1220 
 1230 
 1240 
 1250 
 1260 
 1270 
 1280 
 1290 
 1300 
 1310 
 1320 
 1330 
 1340 
 1350 
 1400 
 1410 
 1420 
 1430 
 1440 
 1450 
 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 FORMAT 
 END 
 
 C5X,' 
 
 (F6.2 
 
 (1X,F 
 
 (10X, 
 
 (10X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 (5X 
 
 ( 10X 
 
 (10X 
 
 1320)XR6,YR6 
 1330)X2P,Y2P 
 1340)X7P,Y7P 
 1350)ALANG/CONV,AFANG/CONV 
 
 SPECIFY OVERALL SHIELD HEIGHT IN inches 
 
 ) 
 
 12.5) 
 
 'SHIELD HT OF 
 
 'OVERALL SHIELD HEIGHT 
 
 XO AND YO COORDINATES 
 
 ,$) 
 
 • E10.4 ' NOT 
 
 IS 
 
 XI 
 X2 
 
 X3 
 
 X4 
 
 X5 
 
 X6 
 
 X7 
 
 XR3 
 
 XR4 
 
 XR6 
 
 X2P 
 
 X7P 
 
 LEG 
 
 AND 
 
 AND 
 
 AND 
 
 AND 
 
 AND 
 
 AND 
 
 AND 
 AND 
 AND 
 AND 
 AND 
 AND 
 AND 
 
 Y1 COORDINATES 
 
 Y2 COORDINATES 
 
 Y3 COORDINATES 
 
 Y4 COORDINATES 
 
 Y5 COORDINATES 
 
 Y6 COORDINATES 
 
 Y7 COORDINATES 
 
 COORDINATES 
 
 YR3 
 YR4 
 YR6 
 Y2P 
 Y7P 
 F. 
 
 COORDINATES 
 COORDINATES 
 COORDINATES 
 COORDINATES 
 LINK ANGLES 
 
 ERROR ???' ,12/) 
 
 COMPUTED' ) 
 ,E10.4/) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 E10.4,5X,E10.4) 
 
 HEIGHT IS OUT OF NORMAL OPERATING RANGE'//) 
 SPECIFY SHIELD BASE THICKNESS IN inches : ' 
 SPECIFY SHIELD CANOPY THICKNESS IN inches : 
 'BASE THICKNESS IS ',E10.4/) 
 'CANOPY THICKNESS IS ' E10.4/) 
 
 $) 
 
 $) 
 
36 
 
 APPENDIX B.-SHIELD COMPONENT RESPONSES 
 AND LOADING MECHANISMS 
 
 Utilizing mechanics of materials concepts and known 
 kinematic relationships for two-leg shield supports, shield 
 component responses for various canopy and base contact 
 configurations and displacement loading conditions are 
 depicted in figures B-l through B-15. 
 
 Each figure shows three diagrams that depict compo- 
 nent responses for vertical displacement, face-to-waste 
 
 horizontal displacement, and waste-to-face horizontal 
 displacement for a unique contact configuration. These 
 displacement behaviors can be superimposed to describe 
 shield behavior to any load (displacement) combination. 
 
 KEY 
 Contact 
 Tension ( + ) 
 Compression (-) 
 
 TTTTTTTT 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT \ 
 
 i-r 
 
 1 ' \ No 
 
 V < load 
 
 fTTTt 
 
 1 I T T T 
 
 V"" 1 
 
 ( + ) 
 
 FACE-TO-WASTE \ 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT <">! ^'A 
 
 oUr ; 
 
 fTTTTMTT 
 
 \ 
 
 WASTE-TO- FACE 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT (+) 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 "rrUl 
 
 Canopy 
 
 |s v 
 
 Displacements 
 S v >0 
 
 Base 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 
 S v = 
 8 h >0 
 
 Sh. 
 Base 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 S v = 
 S h <0 
 § 8h 
 Base 
 
 Figure B-L-Full canopy and base contact. 
 
37 
 
 KEY 
 Contact 
 Tension ( + ) 
 Compression (-) 
 
 J T T T T 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT \ 
 
 I T T T T 
 
 v-" 
 
 (+) 
 
 FACE-TO-WASTE V 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT M\ -'^r 
 
 f f T T f 
 
 WASTE-TO- FACE \ 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT (+) 
 
 V^ 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 Canopy 
 
 |S V 
 
 Displacements 
 
 8 V >0 
 
 8h = 
 
 ts v 
 
 Base 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 S h >0 
 
 Base 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 S v = 
 Sh<0 
 t 8h 
 Base 
 
 Figure B-2.-Base-on-toe contact. 
 
38 
 
 KEY 
 Contact 
 Tension ( + ) 
 Compression ( - ) 
 
 »T T T T T 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 » TTTTTTTTT 
 
 FACE-TO -WASTE \ 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT <->* 
 
 ▼ 1 1 I I 
 
 WASTE-TO- FACE \ 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT (+) 
 
 Canopy 
 
 f«v 
 
 Displacements 
 
 8 V >0 
 
 8 h = 
 
 ts v 
 Base 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 
 8 V = 
 8 h >0 
 
 8h. 
 Base 
 
 Canopy 
 
 IT 
 Displacements 
 
 8 V = 
 8 h <0 
 t 8h 
 Base 
 
 Figure B-3.-Base-on-rear contact 
 
39 
 
 KEY 
 Contact 
 Tension ( + ) 
 Compression ( 
 
 -) 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT ^ 
 
 Canopy 
 
 («v 
 
 Displacements 
 
 S v >0 
 
 i*v 
 Base 
 
 T 
 
 FACE- TO -WASTE V 
 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT <") 
 
 \ 
 
 i 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 
 S v s O 
 S h >0 
 
 Sh, 
 Base 
 
 T 
 
 WASTE-TO-FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 (+) 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 S v = 
 S h <0 
 
 Base 
 
 Figure B-4. -Two-point canopy and base contact. 
 
40 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 *■ «— Compression (-) 
 
 FACE- TO -WASTE WASTE- TO- FACE 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Right side 
 
 Air 
 
 Figure B-5.-Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
41 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 - — » Tension (+) 
 *«— Compression (-) 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 FACE-TO -WASTE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 WASTE-TO-FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Left side 
 
 T 
 
 (+i 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 (-) 
 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 (+i 
 
 \ 
 
 \£T 
 
 Figure B-6.-Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
42 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► «— Compression (-) 
 
 FACE- TO- WASTE WASTE-TO- FACE 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Right side 
 
 Air 
 
 Figure B-7. Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
43 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► ■*- Compression (-) 
 
 FACE-TO-WASTE WASTE-TO-FACE 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 \sy 
 
 Figure B-8.-Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and symmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
44 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► «— Compression (-) 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
 Left side \ 
 
 1 
 
 FACE-TO-WASTE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 WASTE-TO- FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Left side 
 
 T 
 
 (+) 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 1 MS 
 
 c 
 
 u/ 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 (-) 
 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 (+) 
 
 \ 
 
 iir 
 
 Figure B-9.-Unsymmetric base-on-rear contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact 
 
45 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► «— Compression (-) 
 
 FACE- TO-WASTE WASTE -TO- FACE 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Figure B-1 0.-Unsymmetric base-on-toe contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact. 
 
46 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► «— Compression (-) 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
 Left side \ 
 
 FACE-TO-WASTE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 WASTE-TO-FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Left side 
 
 T 
 
 (+i 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 (+) 
 
 n 
 
 \£T 
 
 Figure B-1 1 .-Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric three-point canopy contact. 
 
47 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► «— Compression (-) 
 
 FACE-TO-WASTE WASTE-TO-FACE 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Left side \ \ Left side \ \ Left side * 
 
 lL/ \JL/ Y-L/ 
 
 Right side \ \ Right side \ \ Right side \ 
 
 Uy YJL/ Uy 
 
 Figure B-12.-Symmetric two-point base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
48 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► *- Compression (-) 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
 Left side \ 
 
 FACE-TO- WASTE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 WASTE-TO- FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 (+) 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 u; 
 
 Figure B-13.-Full base contact and un symmetric three-point canopy contact 
 
49 
 
 KEY 
 
 V Contact on left side only 
 f Contact on both left and right sides 
 — ► Tension (+) 
 ► «— Compression (-) 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 FACE-TO-WASTE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 WASTE -TO -FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Left side 
 
 T 
 
 (+) 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 X 
 
 Right side 
 
 \ 
 
 (-) 
 
 \ 
 
 Right side 
 
 T 
 
 (+) 
 
 \ 
 
 iir 
 
 Figure B-1 4. -Full base contact and unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
50 
 
 KEY 
 Contact 
 Tension ( + ) 
 Compression (-) 
 
 VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 S v >0 
 
 is v 
 
 Base 
 
 FACE- TO -WASTE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 V 
 \ 
 
 (-) 
 
 rA^ 
 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 
 8 V = 
 S h >0 
 
 Sh. 
 Base 
 
 WASTE-TO-FACE 
 HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT 
 
 T 
 
 ( + ) 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Displacements 
 S v = 
 S h <0 
 
 Base 
 
 Figure B-15.-Symmetric full base contact and symmetric two-point canopy contact. 
 
51 
 
 APPENDIX C.-SUPPORT RESISTANCE CALCULATIONS 
 
 Static rigid-body equations of equilibrium are developed 
 for a two-leg shield acted upon by both vertical and hori- 
 zontal forces. Figures C-l through C-3 illustrate free-body 
 diagrams used in these analyses. Resultant vertical force 
 and its location on the canopy and resultant horizontal 
 force are determined from measurement of leg and front 
 link forces. 
 
 The following are the moment of equilibrium equations 
 given on figures C-l through C-3: 
 
 F v (x) - L(£) = 0, 
 
 F v (x + b) - L(e) - F H (h) = 0, and 
 
 F v (x + a) - L(f) - F H (z) - FL(c) = 0. 
 
 Solutions: 
 
 1. Solve equation (C-l) for F v (x): 
 
 F v (x) = L(£). 
 
 2. Solve equation (C-2) for F H : 
 
 „ F v (x = b) - L(e) 
 
 (C-l) 
 (C-2) 
 (C-3) 
 
 (C-4) 
 
 (C-5) 
 
 3. Substitute equations C-4 and C-5 into C-3 and solve 
 
 for F„ 
 
 F v = L (V L ) - FL(V FL ), 
 
 (C-6) 
 
 where V L = 
 
 and 
 
 (£)(h) - (f)(h) - (£)(z) - e(z) 
 (b)(z)-(a)(h) 
 
 (c)(h) 
 
 FL 
 
 (b)(z) - (a)(h) 
 
 4. Substitute equation C-6 into C-2 and solve for F H : 
 
 F H = L(H L ) - FL(H FL ), (C-7) 
 
 where H L = ^ + b (l)(h) -(f)(h) - (t)(z) -(e)(z) 
 h h (b)(z) - (a)(h) 
 
 and 
 
 H c 
 
 (b)(c) 
 
 (b)(z) - (a)(h) 
 
 5. Solve equation C-5 for x substituting equation C-6 
 for F v 
 
 L(«) 
 
 Fv 
 
 KNOWNS: 
 
 Leg force (L) 
 Distance t 
 
 L \ 
 
 $* P H 
 
 UNKNOWNS: Resultant vertical force (F v ) 
 
 Resultant horizontal force (F H ) 
 Resultant vertical force location (x) 
 Pin reactions (P v , P H ) 
 
 ANALYSIS: Moment equilibrium 
 
 SM(A) = F v (x) - L(£) = O 
 
 Figure C-1. -Moment equilibrium of canopy. 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
52 
 
 KNOWN: 
 
 Leg force (L) 
 Distances b, e, h 
 
 UNKNOWNS: Resultant vertical force (F v ) 
 
 Resultant horizontal force (F H ) 
 Resultant vertical force location (x) 
 Front link force (FL) 
 Rear link force (RL) 
 
 ANALYSIS: Moment Equilibrium 
 
 ZM(C) = F v (x + b) - L(e) - F H (h) = O 
 
 Figure C-2.-Moment equilibrium of canopy caving-shield combination (summation of moments at link center). 
 
 KNOWNS: 
 
 Leg force (L) 
 Front link force (FL) 
 Distances a,c,f,z 
 
 UNKNOWNS: Resultant vertical force (F v ) 
 
 Resultant horizontal force (F H ) 
 Resultant vertical force location (x) 
 Rear link force (RL) 
 
 ANALYSIS 
 
 Moment Equilibrium 
 
 M(R) = F v (x + a) - L(f) - F H (z) - FL(c) = O 
 
 Figure C-3. Moment equilibrium of canopy-caving shield combination (summation of moments at tension link pin). 
 
53 
 
 APPENDIX D.-DESCRIPTION OF STANDARDIZED PERFORMANCE TESTS 
 
 A sample description of suggested standardized tests is recommendations set forth in the main text of this report, 
 
 provided using a preliminary version of the performance Thes test are categorized in terms of (1) support resistance 
 
 test report illustrated in figure 22 of the main text. The characteristics, (2) shield stiffness, (3) leg mechanics, (4) 
 
 first two pages of the test report are used to describe a stability, (5) load transfer mechanics, and (6) structural 
 
 specific test. These tests are consistent with the testing integrity. 
 
54 
 
 SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Support Capacity - Height Effects CAPHT01 thru CAPHT04 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine support capacity as a function of shield height. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE: 
 
 Select four heights to include upper and lower end of 
 
 operating range plus two heights in between. Load shield by 
 vertical convergence of canopy to leg yield and document 
 vertical and horizontal support reactions. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 H1.H2.H3.H4 
 
 al,g2,a3,a4 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate y 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 »TffTffTf 
 
 TIT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 ■#■0-$- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 uu 
 
 Right 
 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 / ~l 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 C J 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 1 " \ 
 
 o 
 
 ♦ 
 
 « s 
 
 ♦ 
 
 o 
 
 t » 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 / "l 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 SlTl KIKl 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Base 
 
SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 55 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 0.1 
 Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only xxx 
 
 Vertical— Horizonta 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i ca 
 i horizontal 
 
 1 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 
 
 
 Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Horizontal Force 
 
 Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 Provide plots of vertical force and horizontal force 
 at leg yield as a function of shield height. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
56 
 
 SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Tip Load Capability TIP01 and TIP02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics xx 
 
 Shield Stiffness 
 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine maximum tip load capacity of shield. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with level canopy to generate minimum capsule 
 
 pressure. Apply vertical displacement to two-point canopy 
 contact. Place load cells at points of contact to measure 
 contact loading. Determine tip load at leg/capsule yield. 
 Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 gl,g2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate SJ to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 m iwwwsi 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 OO O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 ooo 
 
 13U 
 
 
 O 
 
 ' ~l 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 O 
 
 /" > 
 
 o 
 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 1 * 
 1 % 
 
 o 
 
 
 O 
 
 1 1 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 OTA KIKl 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 57 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 i n/mi n 
 i n/mi n 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/min 
 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 psi/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only xxx Vertical— Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— Vert ica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 cyc/min 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Provide plots of load cells at points of canopy 
 contact vs vertical displacement and leg pressure, 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Load cells — 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L -- Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
5S 
 
 SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Tip Load Capability TIP03 and TIP04 
 
 Resistance Characteristics xx 
 
 Shield Stiffness 
 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine tip loading generated for full canopy contact, 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with full canopy contact in level position to 
 generate minimum capsule pressure. Place load cells at 
 canopy contacts to measure contact loading. Apply 
 vertical displacement to leg/capsule yield. Conduct tests 
 at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME ; 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,ct2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate \J 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 ^? u? gvyfu 
 
 in 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 ooo 
 
 rm 
 
 Canopy 
 
 OO 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 «H 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 $■ 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 no 
 
 Base 
 
SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 59 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 0.1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vert i cal —Hori zontal 
 Horizontal —Vertical 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 ~xx 
 
 vs Horizontal Displacement 
 
 vs Horizontal Displacement 
 
 vs Horizontal Displacement 
 
 vs Horizontal Force 
 
 vs Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 vs Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 vs Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 Provide plots of load cell forces as a function of 
 displacement and leg pressure. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 Load cells 
 
60 
 
 SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Tip Load Capability TIP05 and TIP06 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine tip load generation from active 
 capsule pressurization at shield setting. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with level canopy position to designated setting 
 
 pressure. Activate capsule to generate additional tip 
 
 loading. Monitor tip loading through capsule yi eld. 
 
 Monitor base stability during capsule pressurization and 
 subseguent shield loading. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,a2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate \j 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 »TTTTTTTT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 gJLLg 
 
 Left 
 
 OOO 
 O O O 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 ooo 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 oo 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 OTA OO 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 61 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION ; 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 0.1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vertical— Horizontal 
 Horizontal —Vertical 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx 
 
 vs Horizontal Displacement 
 
 vs Horizontal Displacement 
 
 vs Horizontal Displacement 
 
 vs Horizontal Force 
 
 vs Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 vs Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 vs Individual Leg Pressure 
 
 Provide plots of load cells at points of canopy 
 contact vs capsule pressure and leg pressure. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Load cells 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
<>: 
 
 SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Horizontal Support Capacity HC01 and HC02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield resistance to face-to-waste 
 horizontal displacement. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield at 3000 psi setting pressure. Displace shield in 
 a face-to-waste direction. Monitor link loading and leg 
 
 pressure. Maintain load until leg pressure yield or 
 
 excessive component strain. Determine maximum horizontal 
 
 force. Conduct test at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,g2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 MTTTTTT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LPJ 
 
 Left 
 
 OOO 
 O O O 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 4-o-#- 
 
 ooo 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 Canopy 
 
 ou 
 
 Right 
 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 / *l 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 / I 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 / 1 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 1 ~» 
 
 t 
 
 o 
 
 ' 1 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 no 
 
 Base 
 
SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 63 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Hold 
 0.1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 i n/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vertical —Horizontal 
 Horizontal —Vertical 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 XX 
 
 XX vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 XX vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 XX vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
(>4 
 
 SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Horizontal Support Capacity HC03 and HC04 
 
 Resistance Characteristics xx 
 
 Shield Stiffness 
 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine horizontal load reaction to applied vertical 
 displacement. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield at 3000 psi setting pressure. Apply vertical 
 displacement to leg yield. Monitor horizontal force 
 reaction developed from vertical displacement. Conduct 
 at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1,H2 
 al,g2 
 
 3000 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 ,TTTTHTT 
 
 TIT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 -#•0-0- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 OOP 
 Canopy 
 
 oo 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 / ~, 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 / \ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 1 » 
 
 o 
 
 4> 
 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 
 1 * 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 ' s "*l 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
SUPPORT RESISTANCE CHARACTERISTICS 
 
 65 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 0.1 
 Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 Vertical only xxx 
 
 Vert i cal — Hori zonta 
 Hor i zontal — Vert i ca 
 i horizontal 
 
 cyc/min 
 1 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertica 
 vs Vertica 
 vs Vertica 
 vs Vertica 
 vs Sum of 
 vs Sum of 
 vs Sum of 
 vs Number 
 
 1 Displacement 
 1 Displacement 
 1 Displacement 
 1 Force 
 Leg Pressures 
 Leg Pressures 
 Leg Pressures 
 of cycles 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 " vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Reaction fixture 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L -- Left side 
 R ~ Right side 
 C — Center 
 
66 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFC01 and STFC02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 
 Shield Stiffness xx 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
 for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ.) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
 and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
 vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
 horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
 displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to horz 
 displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. displ. 
 
 Static Active xxx 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate y to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Fill in appropriate Q to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 al,a2 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from 
 
 horizontal 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained 
 
 TTTMTTT 
 
 OJJ7 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 OO O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 oiy 
 
 
 O 
 
 / "l 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 O 
 
 / \ 
 
 o 
 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 1 * 
 1 "» 
 
 o 
 
 t 
 
 
 o 
 
 '~1 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 rro no 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 67 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/mi n 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/mi n 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/min 
 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 psi/min 
 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical only Vertical— Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— Vert ica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 XX vs 
 
 XX vs 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
OS 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFC03 and STFC04 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
 for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ.) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFC01 and STFC02. 
 
 TEST FRAME ; 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,a2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 ^T\7\?y\7 
 
 Fill in appropriate O t° 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 t%t 
 
 o o o 
 
 OOP 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 /"» 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 / "» 
 
 o 
 
 * 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 o 
 
 1 » 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 1 ™"l 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 69 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Force 
 Force 
 
 Displacement 
 Displacement 
 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 
 Vert i cal --Hori zontal 
 Horizontal —Vertical 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 i n/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/min 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 xxx 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
70 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFC05 and STFC06 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
 for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE i Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
 and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
 vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
 horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
 displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to horz 
 displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. displ. 
 
 Static Active xxx 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate V to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 otl,g2 
 
 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from 
 
 horizontal 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained 
 
 MTTffTf 
 
 o_o 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 •$-0-0- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 oo 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 0- 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 71 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 psi/min 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal—Vertica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 XX vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 XX vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 Force 
 
 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
72 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFC07 and STFC08 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 
 Shield Stiffness xx 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness for constrained initial condition 
 for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFC05 and STFC06. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,g2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 jsmiMi 
 
 O-O 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ■#■0-$- 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 
 .OOP. 
 
 KTU 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 / ~l 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 V * 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 ♦ 
 
 o 
 
 ♦ 
 
 o 
 
 1 1 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 ;"' 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 73 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 
 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 XX vs 
 
 XX vs 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Individual 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: 
 
 L — 
 R — 
 C — 
 
 Left side 
 Right side 
 Center 
 
74 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFU01 and STFU02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
 for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ . ) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
 and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
 vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
 horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
 displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to horz 
 displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. displ. 
 
 Static Active xxx 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 0tl,0t2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 »MTfTTTT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 lllSj 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 -#-0-0- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 OOP 
 
 OTA 
 
 Canopy 
 
 OO 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 '~1 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 \ ^ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 t ~\ 
 
 o 
 
 <$> 
 
 1 * 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 
 t » 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 / **l 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Ofll 
 
 Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 75 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 psi/min 
 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal —Vert ica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 XX vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 XX vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C ~ Center 
 
76 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFU03 and STFU04 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
 for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Face-to-waste horz. displ.) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFU01 and STFU02. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,a2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate y t0 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 H112WL 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 y\m 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 -0-O4- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 .OOP. 
 
 KTU 
 
 Canopy 
 
 ey_y 
 
 Right 
 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 mm 
 
 Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 77 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 i n/mi n 
 in/min 
 i n/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only Vertical— Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 > > > 
 
 X X 
 X X 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 
 VS 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 VS 
 VS 
 VS 
 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
78 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFU05 and STFU06 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
 for full canopy and base contact configuration using linear 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Apply controlled vertical displacement and measure vertical 
 and horizontal shield reactions. Compute Kl as ratio of 
 vertical force to vertical displacement and K3 as ratio of 
 horizontal force to vertical displacement. Apply horizontal 
 displacement. Compute K2 as ratio of vertical force to 
 horz displacement and K4 as ratio of horz. force to horz. 
 displ. 
 
 Static Active xxx 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 al,ot2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 cXilUIUL 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 OJJ? 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 $8 
 
 o o o 
 
 .OOP. 
 Canopy 
 
 OO 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 <H 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 OA7\ 
 
 Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 79 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 0.1 
 Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only 
 
 Displacement 0.1 
 
 Vert i cal — Hor i zonta 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i ca 
 j horizontal 
 
 in/min 
 psi/min 
 eye /mi n 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
 R -- Right side 
 C — Center 
 
80 
 
 SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stiffness - STFU07 and STFU08 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stiffness - unconstrained initial condition 
 for two-point canopy and base contact configuration using 
 elastic shield stiffness model. (Waste-to-face horz. displ.) 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat test procedures for Tests STFU05 and STFU06. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,g2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 C^ 
 
 IMMM1 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 ■#-0-$- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 in 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 $■ 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 3 
 
 Right 
 
 on o/ra 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
SHIELD STIFFNESS 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 81 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 kips/min 
 
 kips/min 
 
 in/min 
 
 in/min 
 
 in/min 
 
 psi/min 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical only Vertical—Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal — Vertica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 XX vs 
 
 XX vs 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 XX 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 
 vs 
 
 
 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C -- Center 
 
82 
 
 LEG MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Leg Mechanics - Yield Pressure. Tests LEGCAPOl and LEGCA002 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 
 Shield Stiffness 
 
 Leg Mechanics xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine: (l)capability of shield and legs to yield at 
 
 specified pressures; (2)reduction in support resistance and 
 displacement between yields; (3) comparison of leg stiffness. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Apply vertical displacement to shield until leg pressure is 
 reached. Continue to provide vertical displacement through 
 succession of leg yields. 
 
 Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate y 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,ot2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 ,ffflffll 
 
 ITT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 yuuy 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 OO O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 -$-0-0- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 OO 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
LEG MECHANICS 
 
 83 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only xxx Vertical— Hor 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— V 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 
 kips/mi n 
 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 0.1 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 izonta 
 ertica 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 ~ vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
84 
 
 LEG MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Leg mechanics - Impact Load Yield. Test LEGYLD01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine ability of yield valves to effectively relieve 
 pressure from impact loading without structural damage to 
 casing or seal damage. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Remove leg cylinder from shield. Install in fixture. 
 
 Pressurize leg to yield pressure. Drop weight on leg 
 
 to simulate impact loading. Conduct tests at two leg 
 
 extensions. Note: Alternative procedure is to leave leg 
 in shield and impact load entire shield. After test, inspect 
 for seal leakage by loading leg and observing any bleedoff. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static N/A 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained N/A 
 
 Fill in appropriate y to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Active N/A 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 yield 
 Unconstrained 
 
 N/A 
 
 jnniiii 
 
 Remove leg 
 for test 
 
 KKE 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 1111 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 uu 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 4\ 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 flTO KlKl 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
LEG MECHANICS 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 
 85 
 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement Impact 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only xxx Vertical—Horizontal 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 
 Measure residual strain in leg cylinder casing. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: 
 
 L — 
 R — 
 C — 
 
 Left side 
 Right side 
 Center 
 
86 
 
 LEG MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Leg Mechanics - Leg Cylinder Area. Test LEGAC001 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine effective leg area for leg extension from active 
 leg pressurization. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Remove leg from shield. Install in test fixture in vertical 
 orientation. Collapse leg to lowest position. Raise to 
 height HI. Set leg at desiginated setting pressure. Measure 
 setting force applied to test frame. Raise to height H2. 
 Repeat test. Raise to height H3. Repeat test. Heights H2 
 or H3 should produce full extension of bottom leg stage. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2.H3 in 
 
 gl t ct2,a3 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained N/A Unconstrained N/A 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 JL1SL31WL 
 
 Remove leg 
 for test 
 
 MI 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 OJJ? 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 OO O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 uu 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 urn 
 
 Canopy 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 <N 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
LEG MECHANICS 
 
 87 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION ; 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Hold 
 
 kips/mi n 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/min 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Hold Vertical— Horizontal 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Provide plot of effective leg area (computed as ratio 
 of vertical force to leg pressure) as a function of 
 leg height. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
88 
 
 LEG MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Leg Mechanics - leg Cylinder Area. Test LEGACOOl. 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine effective leg area for leg convergence. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Remove leg from shield. Install leg in test fixture in 
 
 vertical orientation. Collapse leg to lowest position. 
 
 Raise to height HI. Apply vertical displacement. Measure 
 applied vertical force and leg pressure. Compute effective 
 area as ratio of force to leg pressure. Raise to height H2. 
 Repeat test. Raise to height H3. Repeat test. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained N/A 
 
 Fill in appropriate \J 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 H1,H2,H3 in 
 
 gl,ot2,a3 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Unconstrained N/A 
 
 JLW115L1 
 
 Remove leg 
 for test 
 
 ^TM 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 yjLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 
 , o o o , 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
LEG MECHANICS 
 
 89 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION ; 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 0.1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vert i cal — Hori zontal 
 Hori zontal —Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 
 Provide plot of effective leg area (computed as ratio 
 vertical force to leg pressure) as a function of leg 
 height. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
90 
 
 LEG MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Leg Mechanics - Setting Force. Tests LEGSET01 thru LEGSET03 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 xx 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield setting force as a function of shield 
 height for constant setting pressure. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Col lapse shield completely. Raise to height HI. Set shield 
 at desiginated setting pressure. Measure setting (vertical 
 and horizontal) force applied to test frame. Raise shield 
 to height H2. Repeat test. Raise to height H3. Repeat 
 test. Do not lower shield between tests. At least one test 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 height should produce full extension of bottom leg stage. 
 Static Active xxx 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate y 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 H1,H2,H3 
 
 al > g2 > a3 
 
 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 »TTfTffTf 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 \7\7VU 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 OOO 
 O O O 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 -#-0-$- 
 000 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 00 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 rm Kin 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
LEG MECHANICS 
 
 91 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Force 
 Force 
 
 Displacement 
 Displacement 
 
 Vertical — Hor 
 Horizontal — Vi 
 J horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 Hold 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only Hold 
 
 izonta 
 srtica 
 
 1 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 XX vs 
 XX vs 
 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 Provide plot of setting force as a function of shield 
 height. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
i>: 
 
 STABILITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stability - Tip Resultant. STATIP01 and STATIPQ2 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 xx 
 
 Evaluate shield stability for canopy contact forward of leg 
 connection. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : PI ace contact at canopy leg connection. Apply vertical 
 
 displacement until leg yields. Monitor canopy and base 
 
 rotation. Observe rotations which change contact 
 
 configuration. Move contact further towards tip and repeat 
 test until instability is observed. Conduct test at low and 
 high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,g2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Fill in appropriate \J to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 jtimiii 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 1111 
 
 Left 
 
 OOO 
 O O O 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 t8S 
 
 OOO 
 
 ,000, 
 
 mi 
 
 Canopy 
 
 U.U 
 
 Right 
 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 M 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 no 
 
 Base 
 
STABILITY 
 
 93 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 psi/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only xxx Vertical — Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 cyc/min 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 XX vs 
 
 XX vs 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 XX vs 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
94 
 
 STABILITY 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 TEST NAME : Shield Stability-Zero Horizontal Load. STAH0R01 and STAH0R02 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 xx 
 
 Determine shield stability when there are no horizontal 
 forces acting on the shield. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Eliminate horizontal loading by allowing canopy and base to 
 displace freely in horizontal direction by placing rollers 
 on canopy and under base or by allowing loading platens to 
 displace freely. Set shield. Apply vertical displacement 
 to leg yield. Monitor horizontal displacement and link 
 strain. Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 01,02 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Rollers 
 
 Fill in appropriate y to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 31111111 
 
 Rollers — •& * v 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 V \7 y y 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 UH 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 Canopy 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 «H 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
STABILITY 
 
 95 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only Vertical —Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal —Vert ica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 XXX 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 " vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
96 
 
 STABILITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stability - Base-on-toe. STABOTOl and STAB0T02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stability for base-on-toe configuration 
 with waste-to-face hoizontal displacement. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in base-on-toe configuration. Apply vertical 
 displacement until leg pressure reaches 80 pet of yield 
 pressure. Apply waste-to-face horizontal displacement. 
 Monitor shield stability and link loading. Conduct test at 
 low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 0.80 yld 
 
 01,012 
 
 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate y to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 JIII1II1L, 
 
 TM 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 vvvv 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 OO O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 $8 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 uu 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 4H 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 atta o/ra 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
STABILITY 
 
 97 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement in/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Vertical —Horizontal 
 Hor i zontal — Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 " vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 xx 
 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 
 Fill in appropriate Q to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
98 
 
 STABILITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stability - Base-on-rear. STABOROl and STAB0R02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stability for base-on-rear configuration 
 with face-to-waste horizontal displacement. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in base-on-rear configuration. Apply vertical 
 
 displacement until leg pressure reaches 75 pet yield 
 
 pressure. Apply face-to-waste horizontal displacement until 
 leg pressure is reached or shield becomes unstable. Conduct 
 tests at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,ot2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate y to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 ^TfTTfTTT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 1111 
 
 Left 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 tst 
 
 OOO 
 .OOP. 
 
 mi 
 
 Canopy 
 
 OU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 «N 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
STABILITY 
 
 99 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 0.1 
 Displacement 0.1 
 Displacement 
 
 in/min 
 in/min 
 in/min 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 
 Vertical— Horizonta 
 Horizontal— Vert ica 
 i horizontal 
 
 1 XXX 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 " vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
100 
 
 STABILITY 
 
 TEST NAME ; 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Shield Stability - Leg Imbalance. STALEG01 and STALEG02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine shield stability for imbalanced leg pressure 
 condition. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield with single point contact on canopy at one leg 
 
 location. Relieve leg pressure in leg with no canopy contact 
 and maintain zero leg pressure by routing hydraulic line to 
 drain. Apply vertical displacement to shield until pressurized 
 leg reaches yield or shield becomes unstable. 
 
 Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 
 al,a2 
 
 3000 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 JL2MMSU 
 
 M7T 
 
 OJLff 
 
 Left 
 
 i 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 ooo 
 ooo 
 ooo 
 
 ooo 
 ooo 
 ooo. 
 
 m 
 
 Canopy 
 
 u 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 H 
 
 Jlffl 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
 
STABILITY 
 
 101 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only xxx Vertical—Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal—Vertica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/mi n 
 
 1 xxx 
 
 
 1 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
 R ~ Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 \ V- — -I Displaceme 
 ^\ >i / measuring 
 
 ® 
 
102 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Load Transfer-Unconstrained Load Conditions. LTSUFW01 and 02 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 xx 
 
 Determine load transfer mechanics for unconstrained shield 
 conditions subject to vertical and face-to-waste horizontal 
 displacements. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE i Set shield in unconstrained configuration. Apply vertical 
 displacement until leg pressure yield. Monitor loading in 
 legs and caving shield - link assembly. Repeat tests for 
 
 applied face-to-waste horizontal displacement. 
 
 Conduct tests at low and high shield height. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 otl,ot2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 ^TTTfTTTT 
 
 m 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 -#-0-0- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 oo 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 «H 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 103 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only xxx Vertical— Hor 
 Horizontal only xxx Horizontal— V 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 izonta 
 ertica 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 " vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
 and horizontal displacement also available. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 Instrumented load 
 sensing pins 
 
104 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Load Transfer-Unconstrained Load Conditions. LTSUWF01 and 02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 xx 
 
 Determine load transfer mechanics for unconstrained shield 
 conditions subject to vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
 displacements. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat tests LTSUFW01 and LTSUFW02 substituting waste-to-face 
 
 horizontal displacement for face-to-waste horizontal 
 
 displacement. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 Hl f H2 in 
 
 al t ot2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 ^UUIlll 
 
 TTT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 OJLS? 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ts 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 uu 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 OTA OA7\ 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 105 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 0.1 
 Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Displacement 0.1 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 psi/min 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only xxx 
 
 Vert i cal ~Hor i zonta 
 Horizontal— Vert ica 
 j horizontal 
 
 1 
 
 Horizontal only xxx 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 " vs Individual 
 
 Displacement xx 
 
 Displacement xx 
 
 Displacement xx 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 
 Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
 and horizontal displacement also available. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 Instrumented load 
 sensing pins 
 
106 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Load Transfer-Constrained Load Conditions. LTSCFW01 and 02 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine load transfer mechanics for constrained shield 
 
 subjected to vertical and face-to-waste horizontal 
 
 displacement. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE ; Repeat Tests LTSUFW01 and LTSUFW02 for constrained initial 
 load conditions. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,a2 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \/ t0 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 fTTfTTT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 1111 
 
 Left 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 ooo 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 oo 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 107 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only xxx Vertical— Hor 
 Horizontal only xxx Horizontal— V 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 
 kips/min 
 in/min 
 i n/mi n 
 in/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 izonta 
 ertica 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/mi n 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 " vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 Instrumented pin forces vs vertical displacement also 
 available for analysis. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 Instrumented load 
 sensing pins 
 
108 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Load Transfer - Constrained Load Conditions. LTSCWF01 and 02 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine load transfer mechanics for constrained shield 
 conditions subject to vertical and waste-to-face horizontal 
 displacements. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Repeat tests LTSCFW01 and LTSCFW02 substituting waste-to- 
 face horizontal displacement for face-to-waste horizontal 
 displacement. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 
 
 _0 
 
 3000 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate y t0 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 cJIUIIUL, 
 
 ITT 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 1111 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 ooo. 
 
 rrn 
 
 Canopy 
 
 oo 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 / ~\ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 f \ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 1 \ 
 
 o 
 
 ♦ 
 
 1 * 
 
 ♦ 
 
 o 
 
 1 » 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 no 
 
 Base 
 
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 109 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vertical — Hori zontal 
 Hori zontal — Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 " vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement xx 
 
 Displacement xx 
 
 Displacement xx 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 
 Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
 and horizontal displacement also available. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Instrumented load 
 sensing pins 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L ~ Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
110 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Canopy Contact. LTSLEG 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine load transfer mechanics for unsymmetric canopy 
 contact at one leg location. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE i Set shield in unsymmetric canopy contact at one leg location 
 Apply vertical and face-to-waste horizontal displacements. 
 Monitor load transfer through leg cylinders and individual 
 lemniscate links. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 ctl 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate y 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 C> 
 
 WWII 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 OO O 
 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 *°^ 
 
 coo 
 o o o 
 
 OOP 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 n 
 
 Right 
 
 n 
 
 Base 
 
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 ill 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vertical —Horizontal 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
 and horizontal displacement also available. 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 XX 
 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 
 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 XX 
 
 XX 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 XX 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 Instrumented load 
 sensing pins 
 
112 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Base-on-toe Contact. LTSB0T01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine load transfer mechanics for unsymmetric base-on- 
 toe contact. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in unsymmetric base-on-toe contact. 
 
 Apply vertical and face-to-waste horizontal displacements. 
 Monitor load transfer through leg cylinders and individual 
 lemniscate links. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 al 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \ 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 JM1W2 
 
 Left 
 
 uu 
 
 
 • 
 
 t~\ 
 
 • 
 
 Right 
 
 • 
 
 * .. 
 
 o 
 
 Left 
 
 : 
 
 • 
 
 i > 
 
 o 
 
 t 
 
 
 • 
 
 '-i 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 ktu no 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Base 
 
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 113 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 i n/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vertical —Horizontal 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
 and horizontal displacement also available. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 Instrumented load 
 sensing pins 
 
114 
 
 LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Load Transfer-Unsymmetric Base-on-rear Contact. LTSB0R01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer xx 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 Determine load transfer mechanics for unsymmetric base-on- 
 rear contact. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Set shield in unsymmetric base-on-rear contact. 
 
 Apply vertical and face-to-waste horizontal displacements. 
 Monitor load transfer through leg cylinders and individual 
 lemniscate links. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 ol 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 c \7\7\7\7Uyy\7 
 
 mi 
 
 Left 
 
 Mil 
 
 O 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 KITL 
 
 Canopy 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 £ 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 nn 
 
 Base 
 
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANICS 
 
 115 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 xxx 
 
 xxx 
 
 Vert i cal ~Hor i zontal 
 Horizontal —Vertical 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 " vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 Instrumented pin forces versus vertical displacement 
 and horizontal displacement also available. 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 Instrumented load 
 sensing pins 
 
116 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Structural Integrity - Full Contact. STRFUL01 thru STRFUL10 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 response for full canopy and base contact and applied 
 vertical and horizontal displacements. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 (6v)» face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 
 excessive component strain. Test 1; 6v. Test 2: +6h. 
 
 Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: 6v,-6h. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 ctl,a2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 S v , +8 h tests 
 
 tes £ T T T T T 
 
 - 8h tests 
 
 8 v ,+8h tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 7 v vv 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o c 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 -$-0-$- 
 
 ooo 
 
 o o o 
 
 , o o o , 
 
 STTS 
 
 Canopy 
 
 oo 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 no 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 117 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical— Horizontal 
 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 Test 4 t 5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
118 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 TEST NAME ; Structural Integrity - Base-on-toe. STRB0L01 thru STRBOT10 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 response for symmetric base-on-toe contact and applied 
 vertical and horizontal displacements. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 ($v), face-to-waste horizontal (+6h)» and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 excessive component strain. Test 1: sv. Test 2: +6h. 
 Test 3: -6h. Test 4: sv,+6h. Test 5: 6v t -6h. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,a2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 S uf +8i 
 
 h te s t sf ff Tff TTT^ h/ests 
 
 -8h tests 
 
 — *~w 
 
 ITO 
 
 8 v ,+8h tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 yvvv 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 -$-0-$- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 .OOP. 
 
 rra 
 
 Canopy 
 
 OU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 119 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 Test 4,5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
120 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Structural Integrity - Base-on-rear. STRB0R01 thru STRB0R10 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 response for symmetric base-on-rear contact and applied 
 vertical and horizontal displacements. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 (6v), face-to-waste horizontal (+5h) t and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +6h. 
 Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: 6v,-6h. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,a2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \J 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 " + s h test s f f f T T T T T T~? h tests 
 
 -8h tests 
 
 TO 
 
 Sy.+Sh tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 V V V V 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 tst 
 
 o o o 
 
 .OOP. 
 
 n~n 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 Right 
 
 KIKl 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 121 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical— Horizontal 
 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 Test 4 t 5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
122 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Structural Integrity-Two-point contact. STRBEN01 - STRBEN10 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 xx 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 
 response for symmetric two-point canopy and base contact and 
 applied vertical and horizontal displacements. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 (6v) t face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 
 excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +sh. 
 
 Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+sh. Test 5: sv,-6h. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,a2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate y 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 ^ + Shtes ts ? y\7\/ gpgfff -8 h tests 
 
 -8h tests 
 
 TM 
 
 8 v ,+8h tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 VWv " 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 .OOP. 
 
 rra 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 
 O 
 
 ;;. 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 O 
 
 C ,' 
 
 o 
 
 Left 
 
 O 
 4> 
 
 v 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 '.; 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 '"< 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 123 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force kips/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/min 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal—Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 Test 4,5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O t0 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
124 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBT01-STRUBT10 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 
 response for unsymmetric base-on-toe and unsymmetric canopy 
 contact at leg location. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 (sv), face-to-waste horizontal (+5h), and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-sh). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 
 excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +6h. 
 
 Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: 6v,-6h. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 otl,a2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 \7 to 8 V , +S h tes ts \/\/\/g\/U\/\/\7 " s h tests 
 
 - 8h tests 
 
 8 vt +8h tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 TTTT 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 
 tst 
 
 o o o 
 , o o o , 
 
 rm 
 
 Canopy 
 
 U.U 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 • 
 
 / ~1 
 
 • 
 
 o 
 
 [ > 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 4> 
 
 l"» 
 
 ♦ 
 
 o 
 
 1 * 
 
 o 
 
 • 
 
 ;~> 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 nn 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 125 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical — Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal— Vertica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Test 4,5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
126 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 TEST NAME : Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBR01-STRUBR10 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 
 response for unsymmetric base-on-rear and unsymmetric canopy 
 contact at leg location. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 (6v), face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-5h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 
 excessive component strain. Test 1: sv. Test 2: +6h. 
 
 Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h. Test 5: sv»-5h. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 01,02 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate S] to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Sv, +S h tests 
 
 5 £ \/m\7 
 
 -Sh tests 
 
 Jh tests 
 
 TM 
 
 8 v ,+8h tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 TTTT 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 4o^ 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 , O O O , 
 
 iTTi 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 nn 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 127 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal —Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 Test 4,5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
128 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 TEST NAME : Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBT11-STRUBT20 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 
 response for unsymmetric base-on-toe and symmetric canopy 
 contact at leg location. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 (6v), face-to-waste horizontal (+6h), and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-5h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 
 excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +6h. 
 
 Test 3: -sh. Test 4: {v,+6h. Test 5: sv,-6h. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 H1.H2 in 
 
 al,a2 degrees from vertical 
 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 3000 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 *«• ^" " i VVVVVyvV V " s h ' • 
 
 -Sh tests 
 
 8 V ,+Sh tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 UU 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 ♦ o + 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 , o o o , 
 
 rm 
 
 Canopy 
 
 m 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 $ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 nn 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 129 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Displacement 
 Displacement 
 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 0.1 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical—Horizontal 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal —Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 kips/min 
 
 kips/mi n 
 
 kips/min 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 in/min 
 
 psi/min 
 
 cyc/min 
 
 Test 4,5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 xx 
 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
130 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Structural Integrity-Unsymmetric contact. STRUBR11-STRUBR20 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 Evaluate nominal stress development and basic shield 
 
 response for unsymmetric base-on-rear and symmetric canopy 
 contact at leg location. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Conduct five tests to evaluate all combinations of vertical 
 (6V). face-to-waste horizontal (+5h), and waste-to-face horz, 
 displacement (-6h). Set shield and apply displacements as 
 indicated. Maintain load application until leg yield or 
 
 excessive component strain. Test 1: 6v. Test 2: +3h. 
 
 Test 3: -6h. Test 4: 6v,+6h . Test 5: 6v,-$h. 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Active xxx 
 
 H1,H2 in 
 
 0tl,0t2 
 
 
 
 3000 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 V +s h test ^y q y g y 
 
 -Sh tests 
 
 -S h tests 
 
 S v ,+8h tests 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 YTTT 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 *°+ 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 ooo 
 
 rm 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 Right 
 
 nn 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 131 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 0.1 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure psi/min 
 
 Cycles per minute cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical only Test 1 Vertical— Horizontal 
 Horizontal only Test 2,3 Horizontal— Vertical 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 Test 4,5 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Horizontal 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 xx 
 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 XX 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
132 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure - Full Contact. 
 
 Test FATFUL01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading for full canopy and base contact. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
 ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 Static xxx Active 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 Gtl 
 
 yield 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 V to 
 
 MTTTTfT 
 
 Fill in appropriate C to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 ojj? 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 OO O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 4-o-$- 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 .OOP. 
 
 mi 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 / ~1 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 4 
 
 o 
 
 
 t 
 
 o 
 
 ' 1 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 133 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Vert i cal — Hor i zontal 
 Horizontal —Vertical 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 Vertical Force vs 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels vs 
 
 Comments: 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Displacement 
 Vertical Force 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Number of cycles 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
134 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure - Canopy. 
 
 Test FATCAN01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading of canopy unit. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in canopy unit 
 prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 
 crack growth after every l t 000 cycles. Monitor nominal 
 
 canopy strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 Static xxx Active 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 ol 
 
 yield 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate ^ 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 T\7U\7UU\7\7 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 vvvv 
 
 Left 
 
 OOO 
 O O O 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 4-o4- 
 
 ooo 
 
 OOO 
 .OOP. 
 
 KTU 
 
 Canopy 
 
 oy_y 
 
 Right 
 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 t't 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 * ^ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 l" \ 
 
 o 
 
 ♦ 
 
 , ~\ 
 
 ♦ 
 
 o 
 
 1 * 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 135 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Force 
 Force 
 
 Displacement 
 Displacement 
 
 Vertical— Hoi 
 Horizontal—) 
 J horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 -izonta 
 /ertica 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 vs Vertical 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force vs Vertical 
 Strain Channels vs Vertical 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force vs 
 Strain Channels 
 
 vs Vertical 
 vs Sum of 
 vs Sum of 
 Sum of 
 
 Displacement 
 Displacement 
 Displacement 
 Force 
 Leg Pressures 
 Leg Pressures 
 Leg Pressures 
 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Horizontal 
 
 vs 
 
 Individual 
 
 XX vs 
 XX vs 
 XX 
 
 Individual 
 Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 Comments: 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
136 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure - Base. 
 
 Test FATBAS01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading of base unit. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in base unit 
 prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal base 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Static xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Active 
 
 HI 
 
 otl 
 
 
 
 yield 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 ,TTTTTTTT 
 
 TTO 
 
 Fill in appropriate O t0 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 y\m 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 nt 
 
 o o o 
 
 OOP 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 nn 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 137 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Vertical —Horizontal 
 Horizontal— Vertical 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
138 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure - Zero Horizontal Loading 
 
 Test FATH0R01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity 
 
 xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading of shield when subjected to load 
 conditions which eliminate external horizontal loading. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
 ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 Static xxx Active 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Constrained 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 al 
 
 yield 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Unconstrained xxx 
 
 Rollers 
 
 ttttt 
 
 Fill in appropriate \/ to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 O 
 
 Rollers 
 
 jn 
 
 y\/\7\7 
 
 Fill in appropriate O t0 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ue 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 «H 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 \& 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 nxs on 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 139 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION ; 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 eye /mi n 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Vertical —Horizontal 
 Horizontal —Vertical 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 xxx 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force vs Vertical Displacement 
 Horizontal Force vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Horizontal Force vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 Strain Channels vs Number of cycles 
 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 Comments: 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
140 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure - Base-on-toe Configuration. Test FATB0T01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading for symmetric base-on-toe 
 configuration. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
 ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 Static xxx Active 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Hl_ in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 
 ol 
 
 yield psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 V 
 
 to 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 cJIIUIII 
 
 TM 
 
 LLP 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 OO O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 $8 
 
 o o o 
 , o o o , 
 
 ktu 
 
 Canopy 
 
 UU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 \b 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 sin 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 141 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 Force 
 
 Displacement 
 Displacement 
 
 Vertical— Hor 
 Horizontal — V 
 J horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 
 in/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 'izonta 
 fertica 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
14: 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME : 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure - Base-on-rear Configuration. Test FATB0R01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading for symmetric base-on-rear 
 configuration. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
 ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 Static xxx Active 
 
 TEST FRAME: 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 ol 
 
 yield 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate \J to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 _J1UIIU 
 
 Fill in appropriate O t0 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 WW 
 
 Left 
 
 OOO 
 OO O 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 tzt 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 uu 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 on KIKl 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 143 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/mi n 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Vertical —Horizontal 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
144 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME ; 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure - Leg Socket Shear. 
 
 Test FATB0R01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading for canopy and base contact 
 adjacent leg connection. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
 ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Active 
 HI 
 
 mi 
 
 
 yield 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 Fill in appropriate V 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 to 
 
 ^ jmuin 
 
 Fill in appropriate O *° 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 o_o 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 
 OOP 
 
 on 
 
 Canopy 
 
 OU 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 o 
 
 ' 1 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 t \ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 t m \ 
 
 o 
 
 * 
 
 1 * 
 
 ♦ 
 
 o 
 
 1 > 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 *' 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 KlU 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 145 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 
 kips/min 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Force 
 Force 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 in/min 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal 
 
 Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 Vertical only 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 Vertical — Horizonta 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i ca 
 i horizontal 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 
 
 Horizontal only 
 
 1 
 
 Simultaneous vertical an< 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 
 vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx vs Individual 
 
 xx 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: 
 
 L -- Left side 
 R -- Right side 
 C — Center 
 
146 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure-Unsymmetric Contact Configuration. FATUSY01 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading for unsymmetric base-on-toe contact 
 with unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
 ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 Static xxx Active 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 HI 
 
 in 
 
 ol 
 
 yield 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 yyyyyyyy 
 
 Fill in appropriate \7 to 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 Left 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 
 ooo 
 o o o 
 ooo 
 
 no 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 O 
 O 
 M 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 /nrn no 
 
 Canopy Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 147 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION : 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 kips/min 
 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 in/mi n 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE: 
 
 Leq Pressure yield 
 Cycles per minute 1 
 
 Vertical only Vertical— Horizonta 
 Horizontal only Horizontal— Vertica 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Strain Channels 
 Vertical Force 
 Horizontal Force 
 Strain Channels 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Displacement 
 vs Vertical Force 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 vs Number of cycles 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 xx 
 xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
148 
 
 STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 TEST NAME: 
 
 TEST SERIES: 
 
 OBJECTIVE: 
 
 SUPPORT PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT 
 
 Fatigue Failure-Unsymmetric Contact Configuration. FATUSY02 
 
 Resistance Characteristics 
 Shield Stiffness 
 Leg Mechanics 
 
 Stability 
 
 Load Transfer 
 Structural Integrity xx 
 
 Evaluate fatigue loading for unsymmetric base-on-rear 
 contact with unsymmetric canopy contact at leg location. 
 
 TEST PROCEDURE : Determine location and maximum crack length in shield compon 
 ents prior to testing. Test at slightly higher than expected 
 
 operating height. Cycle shield from to 110 pet yield 
 
 pressure for 10,000 cycles. Monitor crack formation and 
 
 crack growth after every 1,000 cycles. Monitor nominal shield 
 strains, residual strains, and permanent deformation. 
 
 TEST FRAME : 
 
 SHIELD CONFIGURATION: 
 
 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS: 
 
 Static xxx 
 
 Shield Height 
 Leg inclination 
 Canopy rotation 
 Setting Pressure 
 
 Active 
 
 HI 
 
 al 
 
 
 
 yield 
 
 in 
 
 degrees from vertical 
 degrees from horizontal 
 psi 
 
 Constrained xxx Unconstrained 
 
 y\7\7\7uyuu 
 
 Fill in appropriate V t0 
 establish symmetric 
 contact configuration 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish unsymmetric contact 
 configuration 
 
 Left 
 
 O OO 
 O O O 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 o o o 
 
 uu 
 
 Right 
 Left 
 
 Canopy 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 $■ 
 
 o 
 
 Right 
 
 nn 
 
 Base 
 
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 
 
 149 
 
 LOAD APPLICATION: 
 
 CONTROL PARAMETERS 
 AND LOADING RATES: 
 
 Vertical Force 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Force 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Force 
 
 Vertical Displacement 
 
 Face-to-waste Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Waste-to-face Horizontal Displacement 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Cycles per minute 
 
 yield 
 1 
 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 kips/min 
 in/mi n 
 in/min 
 in/mi n 
 psi/min 
 cyc/min 
 
 LOAD SEQUENCE : 
 
 Vertical only 
 Horizontal only 
 
 Vert i cal —Hori zontal 
 Hor i zontal —Vert i cal 
 
 Simultaneous vertical and horizontal 
 
 DATA REDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR ANALYSIS : 
 
 Vertical Force vs Vertical Displacement 
 
 Horizontal Force vs Vertical Displacement " 
 
 Strain Channels vs Vertical Displacement 
 
 Strain Channels vs Vertical Force 
 
 Strain Channels vs Sum of Leg Pressures 
 
 Vertical Force vs Sum of Leg Pressures xx 
 Horizontal Force vs Sum of Leg Pressures xx 
 Strain Channels vs Number of cycles xx 
 
 Comments: 
 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Horizontal 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 vs Individual 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Displacement 
 
 Force 
 
 Leg Pressure 
 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 Leg Pressure xx 
 
 INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION: 
 
 Fill in appropriate O to 
 establish instrumentation 
 location. 
 
 Nomenclature: L — Left side 
 R — Right side 
 C — Center 
 
 INT.BU.OF MINES,PGH.,PA 29002 
 
178 90 
 

 
 
 
 \\A* ^*^v 'Wmk=?' > a v *^ »* 
 
 J\. 
 

 \« 
 
 «w> 
 
 ^^ 
 
 w v 
 
 A <^ -o.»» ,0 V ^ •/^7» VV <./••"• ^ ^"•*"ST«\^V 
 
 s* .••«, ***, 
 
 • >■* 
 
 
 
 ^o* 
 
 ' rf* ... % -4 „* v 
 
 
 V.<? 
 
 t . o„ 
 
 > V 
 
 »P<fc 
 
 
 1 K 
 
 £ ^ *.^ S^* 
 
 
 
 S\ 
 
 *o« 
 
 
 •^o* 
 
 
 V^ 1 * 
 
 
 
 V** • A: \/ .'£& %^ 
 
 «? ^ .(ft r» ^ «^ 
 
 
 o * • 
 
 
 4> -.-•* *^ 
 
 ,( 
 
 "oV 1 
 
 o Ay 
 
 0* V 
 
 
 .. •' 
 
 » • 
 
 
 %^ ^:\/M V^ SMS;* \/ 
 
 ^ v *v. 
 
 . . * 
 
 
 HECKMAN 
 
 BINDERY INC. 
 
 1990 
 
 N. MANCHESTER, 
 INDIANA 46962 
 
 *-. « 
 
 
 
 ^"...., "^ A*" ... ~* 
 
 
 v oV 
 
 • ri'