Practical Values of Friction Factors

Brian S. Prosser
Mine Ventilation Services, Inc.
4946 East Yale Ave., Suite 103
Fresno, California 93727
USA

Keith G. Wallace
Mine Ventilation Services, Inc.
4946 East Yale Ave., Suite 103
Fresno, California 93727
USA

ABSTRACT
Over the past fifteen years, engineers from Mine Ventilation Services, Inc. (MVS) have measured numerous friction factors
at many different types of mining operations. The results of these measurements indicate that standardized friction factors
referenced in most ventilation textbooks are greater than those measured in the field for similar airway support systems.
Many referenced friction factors are still based on G. E. McElroys classic paper Engineering Factors in the Ventilation of
Metal Mines published in 1935. Most mechanized mines now incorporate airways that are larger, have more advanced
support systems, and more uniform openings. This paper describes the measurement techniques and results from friction
factor measurements taken during ventilation surveys at various mines with differing support systems. A comparison between
textbook and measured values is also presented.
KEYWORDS
friction factors, resistance, Atkinson.

INTRODUCTION
The Atkinson friction factor has long been a primary
component in calculating airway resistance for ventilation
planning purposes. One of the original publications
concerning friction factors in mines was published in 1935
by the former U.S. Bureau of Mines (McElroy, 1935).
Subsequently, numerous papers, articles, and texts have
been published on friction factors including Kharkar et. al.
(1974), Hall (1981), Wala (1991), McPherson (1992), and
Hartman, et. al. (1997). Accurate values of friction factor
are critical in ventilation planning exercises. No computer
simulation is meaningful if the airway resistances
throughout a mine are not accurately assessed. For
proposed underground airways, the only way to develop a
ventilation model for planning purposes is by the estimation
of friction factors. For existing underground mines, it is
recommended that a proper ventilation survey of the mine
ventilation infrastructure be conducted prior to ventilation
planning exercises. However, the reality is that many mines
lack both the time and resources to conduct these thorough
investigations. This results in a reliance upon published
friction factor data for estimation of airway resistances.

Mine Ventilation Services, Inc. (MVS) engineers have been

involved in the measurement, classification and planning of
ventilation systems for over fifteen years and have
consequently built a substantial library of measured friction
factors. A review of these measurements indicates that
standardized friction factors referenced in many articles and
textbooks on ventilation appear greater than those MVS has
measured in the field for similar airway support systems. A
comparison of friction factors is described in this paper for
both hard rock and coal mining operation.

GENERAL THEORY
The determination of frictional pressure drop (p) in mine
airways may be obtained from the following relationship:
Equation 1
f

p = fL

Per u 2

2
A

= coefficient of friction
(dimensionless)
Per = Airway perimeter (m)
A = Area (m2)

(Pa)

= Air density (kg/m3)

u = Air velocity (m/s)
L = Length (m)

This is a form of the Chezy-Darcy Equation, and is

applicable to circular and non-circular airways and ducts.
The Chezy-Darcy coefficient of friction (dimensionless)
varies with respect to Reynolds Number, the trend of which
is plotted on the Moody diagram. The Chezy-Darcy
equation was adapted by Atkinson to give the following,
commonly used, Atkinson Equation:
Equation 2

p = kL

Per 2
u
A

(Pa)

The Atkinson friction factor (k) is a function of air

density, and is computed as the product of the Chezy-Darcy
coefficient of friction and the air density, divided by a
factor of two. Since the Chezy-Darcy coefficient of friction
is dimensionless, the Atkinson friction factor has the units
of density (kg/m3). The Atkinson Equation may be
expressed in terms of the Atkinson resistance (R) for the
airway, where:
Equation 3

R =

p
Per
= kL 3
Q2
A

FRICTION FACTOR MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES

(Ns2/m8)

The first part of this equation, relating frictional pressure

drop and quantity to resistance, is known as the Square
Law. This important relationship is used to establish
resistance from measured pressure and quantity data. The
second part of the equation is used to determine resistance
from typical Atkinson friction factors, and known or
proposed airway geometry. It should be noted that the
frictional pressure drop term in the Square Law is directly
proportional to air density, as is the Atkinson friction factor.
Hence, the Atkinson friction factor that is applied must be
adjusted for actual mine air density.
When using the Atkinson friction factor it is important
to remember that the factor is not constant for a given
airway, but varies with Reynolds Number. However, in
mine ventilation it is normal to assume that the Atkinson
friction factor is relatively constant, regardless of the flow
regime. This is because for fully turbulent flow (which is
typically the case in mine ventilation) the friction factor is a
function only of the relative roughness of the airway.
Roughness can be defined as the height of the airway
aspiraties (e) divided by the hydraulic mean diameter (d =
4A/Per). The Von Krmn equation gives the relationship
for Atkinson friction factor and relative roughness for fully
turbulent flow:
Equation 4

f =

2k
=

d
4 2 log10 + 1.14
e

diameters. Hence, as the airway hydraulic mean diameter

increases, and all other conditions remain the same, both
the relative roughness and the Atkinson friction factor will
decrease. However, this change in Atkinson friction factor
is usually small, and is often not discernible in field
measurements. For example, an airway with an average
asperity height of 50 mm (0.16 ft), and dimensions of 2 m
(6.6 ft) by 6 m (19.7 ft), the Atkinson friction factor at
standard density is 0.0068 kg/m3 (36.7 lbfmin2/ft4 10-10).
If a second airway is considered which has the same surface
asperity height, but has dimensions of 3 m (9.8 ft) by 6 m
(19.7 ft), the Atkinson friction factor drops to 0.0061 kg/m3
(32.9 lbfmin2/ft4 10-10). Hence, for this example a 50%
increase in flow area results in only 10% change in the
Atkinson friction factor. It is difficult to measure this
difference in the field due to the numerous factors that are
required to compute friction factors. For this study,
variations in friction factor as a function of airway size
were not considered due to the considerable scatter in the
measured Atkinson friction factors for various entry types.

From this equation, it is apparent that the Atkinson friction

factor will vary for airways with the same surface
roughness (asperity height), but different hydraulic mean

The friction factors measured by MVS were conducted

during the course of ventilation surveys at numerous mining
operations. For each mine, measured frictional pressure
drops and airflow data were used to develop ventilation
networks. To determine accurate friction factors, airways
were selected which minimized shock losses. The air
quantities were measured by determining the mean air
velocities and airway cross-sectional areas at predetermined
locations in the airways of interest. Rotating vane
anemometers attached to extendible rods were used to
traverse the airways for measurement of the mean air
velocities. Traverses were repeated until two readings were
obtained within 5%. The airway cross-sectional areas were
measured using steel tapes. The air quantities at each station
were computed as the product of the air velocity and the
airway cross-sectional area.
Frictional pressure drops through the airway were
determined using the gauge-and-tube technique. The gaugeand-tube (or trailing hose) method allows direct
measurement of frictional pressure differentials using a
digital manometer connected to a length of tubing, the ends
of which were connected to the total pressure ports of pitotstatic tubes. Psychrometric properties of the air were also
measured in the airways in order to determine the air
densities so that friction factors could be reported on a
standardized basis.
The calculation of Atkinson friction factor (k) is
conducted by re-writing the Atkinson resistance equation so
that:
A3
(kg/m3)
LPer
Where R is determined by the square law, R = p/Q2.

Equation 5

k=R

Airway lengths were evaluated either from the known

length of the pressure tube, or were measured with a nylon
tape. The cross-sectional area and perimeter used in this
equation were averaged from two to four measurements
taken along the length of drift used in computing the
friction factor. When measurements are taken in the field
they are measured and recorded at the actual mine air
density. When reporting friction factors against published
information they must be calculated on a standardized basis
as follows:
(kg/m3)

FRICTION FACTOR MEASUREMENTS IN METAL

MINES
Measurements of airway friction factors were obtained
during ventilation surveys of thirteen metal mines around
the world. The majority of these mines employed traditional
jumbo drill and blast development techniques to drive the
main airways for which these friction factors are
representative. Friction factor data were taken wherever
possible for varying airway sizes, ramps, and bored and
alimak raises. Figure 1 shows the measured k-factors taken
in a number of metal mines along a straight level drift. In
general, these drifts were arched with rock bolts and mesh.
The results indicate that for the 40 measurements taken of
friction factor for a level airway mined by drill and blast
techniques, the mean value is approximately 0.009 kg/m3

Average Value = 0.00879 kg/m

3
01

2-

0.

01

2
0.

01

1-

0.

01

1
0.

01

0-

0.

01

0
0.

00

9-

0.

01

9
0.

00

8-

0.

00

8
0.

00

7-

0.

00

7
0.

0.

00

6-

0.

00

6
00
0.

00

5-

0.

00

0.

All measurements presented in this paper are reported at

a standardized density of 1.2 kg/m3 (0.075 lb/ft3). When
standardized friction factors are used in future ventilation
modeling, it is imperative that they be corrected for the air
density expected at the mine. For example, a proposed mine
at 1,830 m (6,000 ft) above sea level may have an air
density of 0.960 kg/m3 (0.060 lb/ft3). If a friction factor of
0.0093 kg/m3 (50 lbfmin2/ft4 10-10) was selected from a
standardized reference table, then for computer modeling a
corrected friction factor of 0.0074 kg/m3 (40 lbfmin2/ft4
10-10) should be used.

Number of Measurements

Standardized friction factor (kg/m3)

Actual friction factor (kg/m3)
Actual air density (kg/m3)
Standard Air density (kg/m3)

4-

=
=
=
=

std
act

00

kstd
kact
act
act

k std = k act

0.

Equation 6

(49 lbfmin2/ft4 10-10). However, it is important to note that

the standard deviation for this average is 0.00239 kg/m3
(12.9 lbfmin2/ft4 10-10). This gives a statistical range of
0.0066 kg/m3 (36 lbfmin2/ft4 10-10) to 0.011 kg/m3 (62
lbfmin2/ft4 10-10). Because of the statistical scatter in the
readings (particularly in the upper range), it is
recommended that for design purposes a friction factor of
approximately 0.010 kg/m3 (60 lbfmin2/ft4 10-10) be used.
This value should provide some conservatism in the design.
Table 1 shows friction factor measurements for other types
of airways in a metal mine.

Friction Factor Span (kg/m3)

Figure 1: Metal Mine General Level Drift Data

The measurements taken for conveyor drifts, alimak
raises, bored raises and ramps show a relatively wide range
of values. This spread is mainly due to the way each
individual airway is constructed and any shock losses
present due to entry or exit losses and constrictions or
expansions. For example, the friction factor for a ramp is
directly dependant on how tightly spiraled the ramp is
constructed. The measurements given in the table all take
into account the shock losses encountered in the airway due
to bends (airway spiral). For each airway type listed on
Table 1, it is important to note the standard deviation
computed for the range of data presented. The data suggests
that it is probably prudent to use the mean values presented
plus one half to one standard deviation in order to be
conservative.

Table 1: Standardized Friction Factors for Metal Mine Airways

Level Drift
Ramp
Alimak Raise
0.00879 (47.4) 0.01158 (62.4) 0.01126 (60.7)
Average Value
0.01284 (69.2) 0.01739 (93.7) 0.01579 (85.1)
Maximum Value
0.00468 (25.5) 0.00698 (37.6) 0.00874 (47.1)
Minimum Value
0.00239 (12.9) 0.00310 (16.7) 0.00330 (17.8)
Std. Deviation
40
20
5
# of Measurements
Note: Atkinsons Friction Factor in kg/m3 (lbfmin2/ft4 10-10)

Bored Raise

Beltway

TBM Drift

0.00466 (25.1)
0.00698 (37.6)
0.00230 (12.4)
0.00152 (8.2)
10

0.01399 (75.4)
0.01664 (89.7)
0.01228 (66.2)
0.00184 (9.9)
5

0.00440 (23.7)
0.00560 (30.2)
0.00341 (18.4)
0.00111 (6.0)
3

Number of Measurements

5
3

Mean Value = 0.00753 kg/m

4

2
0.

01

1-

0.

01

1
0-

0.

01

0
01
0.

0.

00

9-

0.

01

9
8-

0.

00

8
00
0.

00

7-

0.

00

7
0.

0.

00

6-

0.

00

6
00
0.
500
0.

0.

00

4-

0.

00

Friction Factor Span (kg/m )

Figure 2: Coal and Soft Rock Intake Airway Data

5
3

Number of Measurements

Mean Value = 0.00872 kg/m

4

2
0.

01

1-

0.

01

1
0.

01

0-

0.

01

0
0.

00

9-

0.

01

9
0.

00

8-

0.

00

8
0.

00

7-

0.

00

7
00
0.
0.

00

6-

0.

00

5-

Figures 2 and 3 show the measurements taken in coal

and soft rock mines for both typical intake and return
airways. Table 2 shows the friction factor data for intake,
return, conveyor and cribbed airways. In general, the
airways measured were rectangular. The results of these
measurements show that the mean value of friction factor
computed for intake and return airways is a reasonable
value to use for future ventilation planning purposes. The
standard deviation is not too significant for these types of
airways and the data does not appear to be skewed above or
below the average. However, there is a significant spread of
data for conveyor and cribbed airways. For these airways it
is suggested that care be used in implementing these data in
a design. It may be prudent to use the average value
presented plus one half standard deviation to provide some
conservatism in the design. The reason for this is that the

00

Measurements of airway friction factors were obtained

during the ventilation surveys of fourteen coal and soft rock
mines from both the east and west coast regions of the
United States. Sufficient data were measured to determine
characteristic friction factors for both intake and return
airways, however, a lack of data for belt and cribbed entries
was noted. In most coal mines the airflow in beltways is
kept to a minimum which results in difficult conditions for
the measurement of frictional pressure differentials. The
variance in resistance encountered in the cribbed drifts was
extreme. The friction factor for these drifts will vary based
upon the cribbing spacing, construction, layout in the drift,
and the aerodynamic properties of the construction. There
were insufficient field data recorded to adequately describe
these factors for cribbed entries. In general the mean
friction factor for return entries appears to be higher than
that of intake entries for the same roof support type. This is
due to the intake entries being better maintained and
generally cleaner than the return entries. For this paper an
intake airway is defined as a clean rectangular entry with
roof bolts and limited mesh lining. A return airway is
described as a rectangular airway with some irregularities
(sloughing), roof bolts, and limited mesh.

friction factor is very dependent on the geometry and size

of the conveyor belt, and on the cribbing material and
spacing.

0.

FRICTION FACTOR MEASUREMENTS IN COAL AND

SOFT ROCK MINES

Friction Factor Span(kg/m )

Figure 3: Coal and Soft Rock Return Airway Data

Table 2: Standardized Friction Factors for Coal Mine Airways

Intake Drift
Return Drift
Average Value
0.00753 (40.6)
0.00872 (47.0)
Maximum Value
0.01148 (61.9)
0.01133 (61.1)
Minimum Value
0.00482 (26.0)
0.00566 (30.5)
Std. Deviation
0.00219 (11.8)
0.00176 (9.5)
# of Measurements
23
15
Note: Atkinsons Friction Factor in kg/m3 (lbfmin2/ft4 10-10)

Belt Drift
0.01058 (57.0)
0.01757 (94.7)
0.00459 (24.3)
0.00636 (34.3)
5

Cribbed Drift
0.06781 (365.5)
0.14409 (776.6)
0.04522 (243.7)
0.02516 (135.6)
7

CONCLUSIONS AND COMPARISONS WITH

VENTILATION TEXTS
The mean and recommended standardized friction factors
presented in this paper were compared with standardized
friction factors for similarly described airways in several
articles and ventilation texts. This comparison is shown on
Table 3. It was noted that a number of ventilation textbooks
reference metal mine friction factor data originally
computed by McElroy (1935). These texts include; Mine
Ventilation and Air Conditioning Hartman (1997),
Mining Engineering Handbook Hartman (1992), and
Mine Ventilation Engineering Hall (1981). Table 3 only
lists Mine Ventilation and Air Conditioning by Hartman
et. al. (1997) since the other texts reference the same source
for metal mine friction factors. This text also references
Kharkar et. al. (1974) for coal mine entries. In general, the
recommended MVS values are consistently lower than the
values quoted in the ventilation texts. For coal mines, the
friction factors listed by McPherson, 1993 and Hartman et.
al. (1997), are very close to the factors measured by MVS.
However, friction factors based on McElroys work for
airways driven in igneous rocks (metal mine airways) are
over 100% higher than what was measured by MVS. One
possible explanation for this discrepancy is the modern
techniques and equipment used to drive drifts in metal
mines today. These modern mining techniques may provide

for a larger, smoother, and more regular airway, which

would consequently have a lower friction factor. MVS did
not measure a single friction factor as high as those
referenced by McElroy (1935). It can be seen that if
McElroys values of friction factor are used for mine
planning, an unnecessarily high mine resistance will be
built into the design. This could result in over sizing main
fans and possibly result in unnecessary developments.
Comparison of the MVS recommended friction factors with
McPherson (1993) showed reasonably close results.
In reviewing engineering work conducted by others,
MVS personnel have observed that a common mistake is
made by not adjusting the friction factor for actual mine
density. As mentioned previously, certain operations where
the air density is significantly higher or lower than standard
air density not adjusting the friction factor could have a
significant impact on the total mine resistance.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the help and
dedication of both Dr. Malcolm J McPherson, and Mr. Ian J
Duckworth for both presenting ideas, and providing
valuable insight and critique of this paper.

Table 3: Comparison of Standardized MVS Measured k Factors with Published Data

Airway Type

Mean MVS
Measured Data
0.0075 (41)

Suggested MVS
Value
0.0075 (41)

McPherson
(1993)
0.009 (49)

Hartman et. al.

(1997)
0.0080 (43)

Rectangular Airway Clean Airway

(coal or soft rock with rock bolts limited
mesh)
0.0087 (47)
0.0087 (47)
0.009 (49)
0.0091 (49)
Rectangular Airway Some Irregularities
(coal or soft rock with rock bolts limited
mesh)
Metal Mine Drift (arched and bolted with
0.0088 (47)
0.010 (60)
0.0120 (65)
0.0269 (145)
limited mesh)
Metal Mine Ramp (arched and bolted with
0.0116 (62)
0.013 (71)
-n/a0.0297 (160)
limited mesh)
Metal Mine Beltway (large area, rock
0.0140 (75)
0.015 (80)
-n/a-n/abolted with mesh)
Bored Circular Raise (contains entry/exit
0.0047 (25)
0.0050 (27)
0.004 (22)
0.0028 (15)
loss)
Rectangular Alimak Raise (un-timbered
0.01126 (61)
0.0129 (70)
0.014 (75)
-n/awith rock bolt and mesh)
TBM Drift
0.0044 (24)
0.0050 (26)
0.0055 (30)
0.0037 (20)
(rock bolts with mesh)
Note: Atkinsons Friction Factor in kg/m3 (lbfmin2/ft4 10-10). Bold indicates large discrepancy with MVS measured values.

REFERENCES
Duckworth, I.J., Prosser, B.P., 1997, An Analysis of the
Data Obtained from Ventilation Studies of Longwall
Panels, Proceedings of the sixth International Mine
Ventilation Symposium, Edited by Ramani, R.V., pp. 479485.
Hall, C.J., 1981, Mine Ventilation Engineering, Published
by The Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration,
Inc., pp. 62-72.
Hartman, H.L., Mutmansky, T.M., Ramani, R.V., and
Wang, W.J., 1997, Mine Ventilation and Air
Conditioning, Third Edition, Published by John Wiley &
Sons Publishing Company, pp. 155-157.
Hartman, H.L., 1992, editor, SME Mining Engineering
Handbook, Published by The Society for Mining,
Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc., pp. 1052-1092.
Kharkar, R., Stefanko, R., and Ramani, R.V., 1974,
Analysis of Leakage and Friction Factors in Coal Mine
Ventilation Systems, Special Research Report Number
SR-99, Pennsylvania Department of Commerce.
McElroy, G.E., 1935, Engineering Factors in the
Ventilation of Metal Mines, U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Mines, Bulletin Number 385.
McPherson, M. J., 1993, Subsurface Ventilation and
Environmental Engineering, Published by Chapman &
Hall, pp. 134-140.
Von Karman, T., 1939, Transactions ASME 61, p. 705.
Wala, A.M., 1991, Studies of Friction Factor for
Kentuckys Coal Mines, Proceedings of the 5th U.S. Mine
Ventilation Symposium, Edited by Wang, Y.J., pp. 675684.