丘基卡玛塔露天矿封堵方案岩土工程风险分析

L. Contreras, E. Hormazabal, R. Ledezma, M. Arellano
{"title":"丘基卡玛塔露天矿封堵方案岩土工程风险分析","authors":"L. Contreras, E. Hormazabal, R. Ledezma, M. Arellano","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_22_HORMAZABAL","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The development of the geotechnical risk model for the Chuquicamata mine started in 2005 and included the safety and economic impacts of slope failures at different scales (Tapia et al. 2007; Steffen et al. 2008). The model has been updated recently to include a quantitative evaluation of large economic impacts derived from inter-ramp and overall slope failures using a probabilistic approach (Contreras 2015). This paper describes how the later component of the model was used as a tool for the evaluation of four closure alternatives for the open pit. The methodology included three main tasks: \n2. Evaluation of the consequences of slope failure associated with economic losses derived from impacts on production and costs. \n3. Generation of risk maps to compare several closure alternatives. \nThe results of these analyses provided information on magnitude of impacts and their likelihood for the four closure alternatives evaluated. The evaluation of these results facilitated the selection of the appropriate closure alternative considering the mine reference criteria for economic risk.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Geotechnical risk analysis for the closure alternatives of the Chuquicamata open pit\",\"authors\":\"L. Contreras, E. Hormazabal, R. Ledezma, M. Arellano\",\"doi\":\"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_22_HORMAZABAL\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The development of the geotechnical risk model for the Chuquicamata mine started in 2005 and included the safety and economic impacts of slope failures at different scales (Tapia et al. 2007; Steffen et al. 2008). The model has been updated recently to include a quantitative evaluation of large economic impacts derived from inter-ramp and overall slope failures using a probabilistic approach (Contreras 2015). This paper describes how the later component of the model was used as a tool for the evaluation of four closure alternatives for the open pit. The methodology included three main tasks: \\n2. Evaluation of the consequences of slope failure associated with economic losses derived from impacts on production and costs. \\n3. Generation of risk maps to compare several closure alternatives. \\nThe results of these analyses provided information on magnitude of impacts and their likelihood for the four closure alternatives evaluated. The evaluation of these results facilitated the selection of the appropriate closure alternative considering the mine reference criteria for economic risk.\",\"PeriodicalId\":337751,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk\",\"volume\":\"79 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_22_HORMAZABAL\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_22_HORMAZABAL","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

Chuquicamata矿的岩土风险模型的开发始于2005年,该模型包括了不同规模边坡破坏的安全和经济影响(Tapia et al. 2007;Steffen et al. 2008)。该模型最近进行了更新,包括使用概率方法对坡道间和整体边坡破坏产生的重大经济影响进行定量评估(Contreras 2015)。本文描述了该模型的后一部分如何被用作评估露天矿四种闭合方案的工具。该方法包括三个主要任务:评估边坡破坏对生产和成本造成的经济损失。3.生成风险图,以比较几种关闭方案。这些分析的结果提供了有关影响程度及其对四种关闭方案进行评估的可能性的信息。对这些结果的评价有助于在考虑到矿山经济风险参考标准的情况下选择适当的关闭备选方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Geotechnical risk analysis for the closure alternatives of the Chuquicamata open pit
The development of the geotechnical risk model for the Chuquicamata mine started in 2005 and included the safety and economic impacts of slope failures at different scales (Tapia et al. 2007; Steffen et al. 2008). The model has been updated recently to include a quantitative evaluation of large economic impacts derived from inter-ramp and overall slope failures using a probabilistic approach (Contreras 2015). This paper describes how the later component of the model was used as a tool for the evaluation of four closure alternatives for the open pit. The methodology included three main tasks: 2. Evaluation of the consequences of slope failure associated with economic losses derived from impacts on production and costs. 3. Generation of risk maps to compare several closure alternatives. The results of these analyses provided information on magnitude of impacts and their likelihood for the four closure alternatives evaluated. The evaluation of these results facilitated the selection of the appropriate closure alternative considering the mine reference criteria for economic risk.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信