Professional Documents
Culture Documents
classify drilling requirements from experience of numerous case histories for low,
medium, and highly complex structural geology. This approach will be modified
with time and additional subdivisions will be developed by continuously adding
real data.
The same question arises: how much data is required to obtain the required
confidence in the structural models. In hard rock slopes, structures are the
dominant factor in engineering safe slopes. For this reason an attempt has been
made to classify the level of structural complexity, followed by an appropriate
level of data confidence. This table is a first pass at classification and should be
considered as work in progress. What is required is real data from many different
sites to compile a comprehensive data base of information versus success and
failures. While experienced geologists may consider this as bread and butter
fodder, their input is required to avoid repeating the learning curve from scratch,
and instead start from an advanced knowledge base.
Data quality definition:
Achieving an acceptable standard of data quantity and quality is the
ultimate aim for proceeding with engineering design. The current basis
for the required standards is presented in the figure below.
Bayes Theorem: In essence, Bayes theorem suggests that when more
data is added without changing the value of the result, then sufficient
information has been provided for a reliable outcome. This only applies
after all attributes have been considered.
Bayes theorem
demonstrates how posterior outcome B alters the prior assessment of
A:
P[A I B] = P[A]{Additional Knowledge}
Parameters are Expected Value E[R] and Variance V[R]. Identify the difference
between variances of known parameters and uncertainties in feature
occurrences.
There is a great need for the development of the model in Fig 1 to provide
guidance in the approach to developing a reliable model for the quantifying of
data reliability. This topic has generated much interest and is the prime topic of
studies being undertaken by a number of research programs. The objective is to
define the data requirements related to different levels of structural complexity.
The approach developed in the case of Resource and Reserve Estimation is a
guide that could easily be adapted to the data requirements for determining the
reliability of the structural complexity.
CLASSIFICATION OF CONFIDENCE IN DATA
This concept has been developed in the theory of grade estimations using
sophisticated kriging techniques and others.
INCREASE LEVEL OF
GEOLOGICAL
KNOWLEDGE AND CONFIDENCE
THEREIN
CLASSIFICATION OF
CONFIDENCE LEVELS
RESOURCES
RESERVES
INFERRED
POSSIBLE
INDICATED
PROBABLE
MEASURED
PROVEN
With relatively little data available at conceptual stage of the design process, the
likely range of slope angles will be widely spread as shown in the red range of
Fig 3. As more data becomes available during the Pre-feasibility stage the spread
of data reduces, and finally in the bankable feasibility stage a further reduction in
the data spread provides sufficient reliability for the planning at feasibility
standards.
A similar interpretation can be presented as shown in Fig 4 below, where the
same data is shown in the spread of the variances to a single PoF (probability of
failure) value for the different data distributions. Fig 4 demonstrates the
variability of the FoS from 1.6 to 1.2, purely due to the volume of data available.
This simple exercise demonstrates the requirements of data volumes to improve
economics and reliability.
Fig 4 - FoS reduces from 1.6 to 1.2 for the same PoF of 5%, due to improved data
Fig 5 - Data obtained from blast hole drilling, demonstrating the Volume/Variance
relationships
The ultimate impact relates to the final consequence, which represents the
perceived risk. Different levels of risk are identified in the following discussion.
Mine planning
A typical structure for an open pit mine risk valuation is presented in Fig 6 below.
Risks can be estimated for each of the boxes within the branches and are
accumulated into the TOP FAULT. Deterministic data can provide real
information while subjective judgement is also required to determine acceptable
risk profiles.
Each of the above components can be assessed in detail as shown in Fig 6 below.
In this case, the mine planning risks are addressed in terms of geological,
geotechnical, mine layouts, as well as operating risks. In addition, QA/QC, the
macro economic impact, PR and HR components provide control mechanisms
within the planning programs for risk management.
RISK EVALUATION
The first level of risk evaluation is the well-developed qualitative risk matrix
shown in Fig 8. The impact on the vertical scale (Million Rand) presents a cost in
South African Rands and the likelihood of an event is presented on the horizontal
scale in percentage terms.
Typical mining profiles are developed for each alternate mine geometry for every
second year as indicated. The life of mine boundary curve represents the
cumulative impact of the likelihood of events and consequential costs, expressed
in NPV terms.
Fig 11 below, provides the alternative outcomes for the different options for
slope angles developed in the mine design. These determinants are then
evaluated in NPV terms, but could equally be determined on an annualized
operating cost basis, instead of the NPV parameter.
Fig 11 - The boundary curves developed for the different slope angles into NPV
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Competitive designs for the same orebody development have invariably
resulted in improved results of efficiency, costs and safety. With the
numerous design packages available today, competitive designs should
be based on the following paramenters:
Mining layouts for ore exposure,
Drilling and blasting techniques and advanced technologies, e.g presplit benches with high standard of QA/QC.
Dual ramp layouts to provide alternative access in case of obstruction
and bench failures