Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk最新文献

{"title":"Geotechnical risk-informed decision-making in mining","authors":"J. Lupo","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_0.5_LUPO","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_0.5_LUPO","url":null,"abstract":"Uncertainty and variability are ever-present in the fields of geomechanics and geotechnical engineering. These uncertainties and variabilities can introduce risk into mine facilities (open pits, underground, tailings storage facilities, etc.). Traditionally, the Factor of Safety (FS) has been used as a measure of anticipated performance. In other words, if the FS meets the acceptance criteria, it is anticipated that the facility will perform in an acceptable manner. However, the FS, by itself, does not communicate anything about risk, nor variability or uncertainty. Reliability methods allow calculation of a Probability of Failure (PF), which can be integrated into a risk assessment. However, a PF assumes that all of the critical elements of a design have been adequately addressed. In either case, the FS and PF, by themselves, are of limited utility if performance measures (deformation, piezometric head, etc.) are not also defined as part of the acceptance criteria. \u0000Risk-informed decision-making (RIDM) provides an avenue to make informed risk decisions while providing a platform for defining the acceptance criteria. In this approach, there is a direct link between risk and performance. The RIDM process also allows the risk and acceptance criteria to be updated periodically, so that changes in the operation and/or performance can be considered. This approach is in contrast to the current practice where acceptance criteria are often defined without regard to the site conditions and where risk and acceptance criteria are treated as constants.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"150 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115599301","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Construction of a damage risk model for footwall drifts","authors":"Jake Andrijasevich, H. Basarir, Johan Wesseloo","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_15_ANDRIJASEVICH","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_15_ANDRIJASEVICH","url":null,"abstract":"Current design of underground mine openings involves a great deal of uncertainty as the geotechnical domains in which mines operate are non-homogenous and highly variable in nature. Current industry practice largely follows a deterministic, Factor of Safety based approach. However, final decisions in mining operations are based on both risk and financial cost, rather than probability distributions or Factor of Safety. \u0000The overall aim of the paper is to create a damage risk model for footwall drifts in a mine using the sublevel caving production method. Both numerical and probabilistic outcomes were used to evaluate and assess risk with the aid of a risk matrix. A number of parameters including rock properties, mining-induced stresses and the location of a drift relative to the weakness zone were considered. A special emphasis was placed on the economic consequences of the assessed risk and failure potential, described in terms of drift convergence. Considered economic consequences include rehabilitation, time duration, production loss exposure and delay flexibility, with particular focus applied to shareholder value and public reputation (PR). The associated costs were then compared to find the optimum location for the drift.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116092951","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Calibrating and testing of the forecasts of seismic hazard for planned mining sequences","authors":"Dmitriy Malovichko","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_13_MALOVICHKO","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_13_MALOVICHKO","url":null,"abstract":"The forecast of seismic hazard in mines depends on the planned mining sequence and therefore it is required to: \u00001. Model the changes in stresses and strains associated with future mining. \u00002. Transform these changes to the parameters of expected potentially damaging seismic events (location, time, size, mechanism). \u0000This modelling of expected seismicity has to be calibrated. It needs to be shown that the recorded seismic response to the mining in the past can be replicated using a numerical model. The seismic hazard calculated for future mining steps also needs to be tested against the observed seismicity after the planned mining is completed. \u0000The same mathematical framework can be used for both the calibration and the testing of seismic hazard forecasts. The area skill score (Zechar & Jordan 2008) is adopted to assess the match between the location of significant seismic events and calculated hazard maps for the past mining steps (calibration) and forecast maps for the future mining steps (testing). The 3D rotation angle (Kagan 2007) is used to compare the source mechanisms of recorded significant seismic events with the expected mechanisms for the past and future mining steps. The seismic events affecting the poor performance of the forecast both in terms of location and source mechanisms can guide possible adjustment to the input parameters of the model (e.g. orientation of in situ stress, failure criteria) and help to improve the forecasts. \u0000The suggested approach of calibrating and testing of seismic hazard forecasts is illustrated using data from Renison mine, Australia.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128447985","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Using an integrated monitoring platform to communicate geotechnical risk to project stakeholders","authors":"Wj Conrad, A. Neuwirt","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_07_CONRAD","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_07_CONRAD","url":null,"abstract":"Geotechnical data is frequently analysed by highly qualified engineers, but often a challenge is relaying what the data means to other project stakeholders for them to make informed decisions. From equipment operators, to corporate leaders, to the general public, it is an engineer’s responsibility to be able to communicate in an effective manner the meaningful information about risk that is applicable to each group/person. As datasets grow larger, monitoring technology advances, and the input from stakeholders becomes increasingly important. Integrated monitoring platforms must allow engineers to interpret technical information into an understandable form for logical decision-making as it relates to design, safety, environmental management, operations, and regulations. Summarising key metrics, filtering out noise, and aggregating data types for a simplified view of a project are all necessary to effectively allow an engineer to communicate risk and uncertainty with a broad audience. This paper will examine how integrated monitoring platforms assist in bridging the transferring of information about risk to the different types of technical and non-technical stakeholders involved in geotechnical projects; specifically in mining operations.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121355343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Major hazards associated with cave mining: are they manageable?","authors":"G. Flores-González","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_0.3_FLORES-GONZALEZ","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_0.3_FLORES-GONZALEZ","url":null,"abstract":"Cave mining methods have become viable and preferred mass underground mining options where the objectives are low cost and high production rates. However, the cave mining industry has already entered into a less certain period or environment where some of the current cave mining options are already showing not to be fully suitable to achieving the envisaged low cost and high productivity objectives. This environment includes deeper and sometimes blind deposits (up to 1,400 m from surface), lower average grade deposits, harder and heterogeneous rock masses, higher stress and, in some cases, higher temperature environments. This is requiring design of greater caving block heights, demand for increased safety and productivity, and escalating mining costs (capital and operating). In addition, there is increasing shortage of technical skills, capital becoming more difficult to access, and communities desiring higher environmental standards. \u0000In this new cave mining environment, several hazards are identified that can have critical impact on safety, productivity and profitability. It is necessary, therefore, that these major hazards be acknowledged,and the likelihood of their occurrence be evaluated and minimised during the deposit investigation, mine design and planning, and operational stages of the caving process. These are not trivial issues and can have the most serious of consequences. They demand serious managerial and technical attention (Brown 2012). \u0000This paper focuses on the major hazards associated with the caving process which are rockbursts, air blast, subsidence and inrushes. These hazards are experienced during the cave establishment (development, drawbell opening, undercutting), cave propagation, cave breakthrough to surface, and steady state production stages. Measures to manage these risks aiming to reduce their consequences are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126589925","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Geotechnical risk in mining methods and practice: critical issues and pitfalls of risk management","authors":"B. Hebblewhite","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_17_HEBBLEWHITE","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_17_HEBBLEWHITE","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reviews the progressive growth of awareness, adoption and practices with respect to geotechnical risk in mining in Australia over the last four decades, with a particular focus on underground mining. Initial experience in the 1980s was drawn from other high-risk industries such as nuclear and petrochemical sectors, and whilst the mining industry recognised the issue of a changing hazard and risk environment, it did not change practices significantly. Subsequent growth in understanding of the evolving discipline of risk management, coupled with major changes in mining legislation to a more enabling legislative framework, have led to a far more risk-aware industry where risk assessment and risk management practices have become a fundamental component of the overall mining management systems. \u0000In underground mining, geotechnical risk is at, or close to, the top of the risk priority list for proactive mine management today. The recognition of what are referred to as ‘core risks’ associated with particular mining methods was a further development in the maturity of the industry management systems, with implications for all levels of management, right from feasibility through to design, planning and operations. \u0000One of the problems with the growth of risk-based management practices in Australia is that because we do so many risk assessments and develop so many hazard plans, we have, in some cases, become too blase about them and do not give due recognition and priority to the ongoing management of important risks – with the potential for serious consequences through lack of attention to detail and lack of integration of risk management into the mine management system. In an effort to overcome this issue and place higher priority on the most critical risks facing a mining operation, the International Council of Mining and Metals (ICMM) Critical Control Management (CCM) system, for focusing on the most critical risks, and then directing more attention to the actual control practices required to manage them, has been a valuable trend in recent years. \u0000In the Australian coal sector over the last 10 years, the industry-funded RISKGATE system has also been an extremely useful documentation of industry experience and a tool to assist operators either investigate incidents or plan risk assessments on new topics or areas. Geotechnical topics make up at least three of the 18 major topic areas covered by RISKGATE. This paper will briefly outline how RISKGATE operates and is applicable to the industry in the geotechnical space. \u0000Keywords: geotechnical risk, legislative frameworks, mining methods, hazards, risk assessment, risk management","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124325493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Development of the Mine Geotechnical Risk Index","authors":"Sanjive Narendranathan, M. Cheng","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_28_NARENDRANATHAN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_28_NARENDRANATHAN","url":null,"abstract":"The authors have developed the Mine Geotechnical Risk Index (MGRI), which has been advanced to attribute tolerable thresholds of risk in a given transitional mine closure context. This paper presents the philosophy behind the development of the MGRI using a conceptual case study and sets out how the authors propose it could be applied by practitioners in particular scenarios only when assessing tolerable thresholds of risk. The reader should note that this approach is not intended to replace conventional engineering risk assessments, it is merely an alternative method in evaluating the ‘tolerability’ of elevated risk thresholds.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116938142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The role of the geotechnical model for rapid integration in managing operational geotechnical risk","authors":"MC Brockman, Kmr Gosche, D. D. Plooy","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_24_BROCKMAN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_24_BROCKMAN","url":null,"abstract":"AngloGold Ashanti (AGA) has developed a concept to integrate geotechnical input into long-term mine planning using a ‘block model approach’ referred to as a geotechnical model for rapid integration (GMRi). The GMRi is a simple spatial collection of rock mass data integrated with empirical evaluations, numerical modelling results and monitoring data for a specific mine plan. In this paper, the value of using the GMRi to manage geotechnical risk and identify opportunities associated with ground support design, stress-induced damage, design stope spans and total extraction is demonstrated. The GMRi concept allows for the rapid evaluation of spatially distributed geotechnical data and identifies areas of risk and opportunity, demonstrated at two recent underground studies completed at AGA’s Australian operations.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"138 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132431480","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Getting back to basics: risk fundamentals applied to the geotechnical engineering of tailings storage facilities","authors":"J. Coffey, N. Šušić","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_25_COFFEY","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_25_COFFEY","url":null,"abstract":"Inherent uncertainty associated with the selection of input parameters to various geotechnical analyses often results in the likelihood of failure being a dominant topic in the discussion of risk associated with geotechnical assets. As a result, embankment failure is the default risk scenario driving ongoing management of tailings storage facilities (TSFs). This commonly applied approach is inefficient as it drives resource intensive TSF management and limits scope for a risk-based approach. However, many TSFs operate with several layers of controls in place. Therefore, assessment of risk with consideration of these controls would promote greater efficiency in TSF management. \u0000A fit for purpose approach will be discussed that demonstrates how risk can be utilised as the foundation for the development of a management framework for a single or portfolio of TSFs. This approach focuses on the identification and monitoring of controls, based on the understanding that hazards impact when the controls put in place to manage them fail. It is necessary to build such an approach with the full application of risk principles, which will be introduced by a specialist in corporate risk. Topics covered include a brief history of risk, importance of control effectiveness in scenario selection and risk evaluation and communicating value at risk to drive resource allocation. It is hoped that this discussion and presentation of simple examples allows risk concepts to be better applied to the design and management of geotechnical structures.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"74 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123186640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Managing geotechnical risk in multi-pit operations","authors":"Sdn Wessels, R. Dixon","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_18_WESSELS","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_18_WESSELS","url":null,"abstract":"Rio Tinto Iron Ore operates 16 different mine operations in the Pilbara region of Western Australia. Across these operations, there could be more than 100 operational open pits at any given time. This poses a considerable challenge for the effective management of geotechnical risks with finite resources. There are also a number of external legislation and internal compliance requirements that need to be adhered to. \u0000A number of standardised systems and tools have been developed by the geotechnical teams to manage the geotechnical risks and this paper introduces the different components of Rio Tinto Iron Ore’s geotechnical management System (GMS). The GMS covers the complete process, from the geotechnical design of a slope, through implementation to verification of performance and feedback to the design engineer. The focus of the paper will be on the Geotechnical Risk and Hazard Assessment Management System (GRAHAMS) which is used to assess and document the safety and economic geotechnical risk assessments of different slope areas. A number of reports and visual summaries of the risk assessments are available in the system, offering leaders the opportunity to identify areas of elevated risk and allocate resources accordingly. Details of realised risks (geotechnical hazards) are also captured and GRAHAMS provides a process to communicate the hazard and relevant controls to operational personnel. The GRAHAMS system was recently enhanced, moving from a Microsoft Access front-end to a web-based platform. This will enable a number of system improvements to further increase its effectiveness.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"674 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133562930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}