Elders and betters, mentors and teachers - ISRM · panel caving (continued) 24 ¾Requires an...
Transcript of Elders and betters, mentors and teachers - ISRM · panel caving (continued) 24 ¾Requires an...
1
1
ROCK MECHANICS – THE BASIC MINING SCIENCE: CHALLENGES IN UNDERGROUND
MASS MINING
E T Brown
2007 Müller Lecture
2
Brian FlowersJames FootsCharles FairhurstEvert HoekJohn JaegerManuel RochaDoug StewartHugh Trollope
Elders and betters, mentors and teachers
3
Theme 7 Panel, First ISRM Congress, Lisbon, 1966
4
Barry BradyJohn BrayGideon ChitomboCharles FairhurstGermán FloresNeal HarriesEvert HoekJohn HudsonAntonio KarzulovicTao Li
Colleagues and former students
José LobatoRob MorphetDon McKeeStephen PriestKevin RosengrenErnesto VillaescusaJohn WatsonChris WindsorJian Zhao
2
5
Sten BjurströmJohn FranklinMaria de Lurdes EusébioNuno GrossmanArnaldo SilvérioKalman KovariShun SakuraiHorst WagnerWalter Wittke
ISRM colleagues
6
First ISRM Congress, Lisbon, 1966
7
ROCK MECHANICS – THE BASIC MINING SCIENCE: CHALLENGES IN UNDERGROUND
MASS MINING
E T Brown
2007 Müller Lecture
8
Orebodies at the Neves Corvo Mine, Portugal
ZAMBUJALLOWERCORVO
NEVES SOUTH
NEVES NORTH
UPPERCORVO
CORVO SEZINC
GRAÇA SWZINC
GRAÇA SE
ShaftPillar
Backfill (Nov.04)
Copper Ore
Zinc Ore
Copper Ore (Pillar)
3
9
Underground ore loading at the Neves Corvo Mine, Portugal
700 HAULAGE LEVELTORO 40 LOADING
AT ORE PASS10
Overview of modern mass miningIntroduction to block and panel caving (BPC)Industry trends in BPC, including the next generation of “super caves”Rock mechanics challengesImplications for the discipline of rock mechanics
Outline
11
Mining by block and panel caving, sublevel caving, and open and sublevel stoping, and their variants; and
Production rates of at least 30,000 tonnes of ore per day, or about 10 million tonnes per year.
Underground mass mining involves
12
4
13
Evolution of daily production rates at selected large underground mines
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040
YEARYEAR
TON
NES
PER
DA
YTO
NN
ES P
ER D
AY
Bingham Canyon
Climax
Salvador
Kiruna
Mount Isa
San Manuel
El Teniente
MiamiRidgeway & RWD
Olympic DamAndina
Freeport IOZ/DOZ
Henderson
MalmbergetPalabora
PremierKidd Creek
CEU
El Teniente
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040
YEARYEAR
TON
NES
PER
DA
YTO
NN
ES P
ER D
AY
Bingham Canyon
Climax
Salvador
Kiruna
Mount Isa
San Manuel
El Teniente
MiamiRidgeway & RWD
Olympic DamAndina
Freeport IOZ/DOZ
Henderson
MalmbergetPalabora
PremierKidd Creek
CEU
El Teniente
Grasberg UG/ Resolution
Chuquicamata UG
Bingham Canyon UG
14
Andina Sur Sur underground project, ChileChuquicamata transition project, ChileEl Teniente New Mine Level, ChileGrasberg, IndonesiaOyu Tolgoi, MongoliaResolution, USA
Some planned “super caves”
15
Known operating and planned block andpanel caving mines
16
Open pit and block cave, Palabora Mine,South Africa, April 2004
5
17
Unfavourable economics of further open pit cut-backs
Inability to ensure the continuing stability and safety of high open pit slopes
Adverse environmental impact of further open pit development
Cost and productivity advantages of BPC over other underground mass mining methods
Reasons for a transition from open pit tounderground mining by block and panel caving
18
Outline
John O’ReillyRio Tinto, 2004
“Projections based on current reserves show that in about 15 years’ time, Rio Tinto could be producing
more copper from underground than from open pits”
19
Classification of underground mining methods (after Brady & Brown 2004)
20
Schematic showing the essential features of block caving
6
21
Mechanised panel caving(Flores 2005)
22
Late 19th century: Precursor to modern block caving developed in the iron ore mines, northern Michigan, USAEarly 20th century: The block caving method developed in the USA for iron ore and then copper mining in the western states1920s: Block caving started in Canada and Chile Late 1950s: Block caving introduced into southern African diamond mines and then chrysotile asbestos mines
Historical development of block and panel caving
23
Late 1960s: LHD vehicles developed for underground mining1970: LHDs used with block caving at El Salvador mine, Chile1981: Mechanised panel caving introduced in the primary ore at El Teniente mine, Chile1990s: Planning of the new generation of block caves with larger block heights in stronger orebodies (e.g. Northparkes, Palabora)2005 on: Planning the next generation of “super caves”
Historical development of block and panel caving (continued)
24
Requires an orebody of large horizontal and vertical extent with well disseminated mineralisationMay be used in thick flat-lying deposits, steeply dipping veins of sufficient width and diamondiferous pipesThe lateral extent of the orebody must be large enough to allow caving to be initiated This width will depend on the strength of the orebody– traditionally weak, but now may be strongThe height of the ore column should allow adequate production lives of individual drawpoints and an acceptable rate of return on development and production costsBecause production costs are low, BPC may be used for lower grade orebodies than other underground mass mining methods
Conditions under which BPC may be used
7
25
Application to stronger, less easily cavableand more coarsely fragmenting orebodiesApplication to deeper orebodies (including “blind” deposits) under higher stressesApplication to lower grade orebodies than those mined by other underground methodsLarger block heightsIncreased automation towards the “underground rock factory” concept and miner-less mining
Trends in block and panel cave mining
26
New ore handling philosophies and underground layoutsTransitioning from large open pits to underground mining by BPC methodsGreater risks and an increased emphasis on “getting it right” in early decision makingChanging demands on, and skill sets of, managers, engineers and operators
Trends in block and panel cave mining (continued)
27
Their massive scale and the associated project management challengesVery long lead timesHigh capital costsLarge amounts of pre-production development required with long design livesHigh in situ rock temperatures at depth and the associated ventilation and refrigeration requirements
Some engineering challenges in the next generation of super caves
28
The desirability of no entry mining and the automation of excavation and productionThe development of new and improved methods of working and productionWater and environmental managementUnderground communications and control systems
Some engineering challenges in the next generation of super caves (continued)
8
29
Key block cave design activities
GEOLOGICAL BLOCK MODEL
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERISATION
Cavability Assessment
Fragmentation Assessment
Caving Performance Assessment Including Undercutting
CONCEPTUAL MINE DESIGN
Operational Hazard Assessment
Initial and/or Trial Excavation
FINAL MINE DESIGN
Implementation of Final Design
Monitoring During Construction and Mine Operations
Draw Trials
Draw Strategy
Monitoring
Excavation Stability Analysis
Ore HandlingSystem Selection
30
Caving mechanics and cavabilityassessmentFragmentation assessmentCaving performance, including caving initiation by undercutting and continued propagationExtraction level stability under the range of stress conditions applying throughout the life of the caveAssessing the risk and ameliorating the effects of major operational hazardsSurface subsidence prediction
Key rock mechanics challenges
31
Vertical section through a rock mass that is well-suited to gravity caving
32
Conceptual model of stress caving(Duplancic & Brady 1999)
9
33
Progress of caving, Northparkes E26 Lift 1
(van As & Jeffrey 2000)
34
Schematic section showing the path of the Northparkes E26 Lift 1 air blast
(Ross & van As 2005)
35
Evolution of fracturing in a SRM sample (Mas Ivars et al 2007)
36
Advanced microseismic analysis in caving prediction
(ASC & Itasca 2007)
10
37
Summary of preferential structures observed in SRM samples and microseismic clusters, Northparkes E26 Lift 2, Australia
(Reyes-Montes et al 2007)
SRM sample In-situ seismicity
Dom
ain
1
Dom
ain
2
Dom
ain
3
Dom
ain
4
Dom
ain
5
38
Professor Hugh Trollope AO FTSE
39
Fragmentation at Salvador Mine, Chile
Coarse fragmentation at Salvador Mine, Chile
Good fragmentation at Salvador Mine, Chile
40
FracMan model of a 50 m x 50 m x 70 m block, and identification of blocks connected to the undercut
(Rogers et al 2007)
11
41
Extension of pre-existing discontinuities
Opening of filled or healed discontinuities
Opening of bedding or schistosity planes
Crushing of blocks under superimposed weight
Failure of blocks in compression arising from arching
Failure of blocks in induced tension arising from point
or line loading
Bending failure of elongated blocks
Abrasion of block corners and edges
Mechanisms of secondary fragmentation
42
Drill and blast pre-conditioning trial, Panel III, Andina, Chile
43
Caving mechanics and cavabilityassessmentFragmentation assessmentCaving performance, including caving initiation by undercutting and continued propagationExtraction level stability under the range of stress conditions applying throughout the life of the caveAssessing the risk and ameliorating the effects of major operational hazardsSurface subsidence prediction
Key rock mechanics challenges
44
Cave initiation by undercutting: post-undercutting
12
45
Remnant pillars on the undercut level withpre-undercutting
46
Cave initiation by undercutting:advanced undercutting
47
High extraction ratios and stressesVarying stress paths and stress levels throughout their service livesSeveral possible rock mass responses and failure modesStringent service requirements and long service livesDrawpoint and drawpoint brow stabilityDemanding service requirements of floors
Extraction level excavation design and stability issues
48
Extraction level at the end of construction using an advanced undercut, DOZ mine, Freeport Indonesia
(Moss 2005)
13
49
Subsidence resulting from block and panel caving, Salvador Mine, Chile
(Flores & Karzulovic 2002)
Crater perimeter
Caved rock
50
Comparison of continuous and discontinuous subsidence(Kvapil et al 1989)
Continuous subsidenceDiscontinuous
subsidence
L1
HC
Original surface
Extracted block
L2
Steps
Exploitation of thin layer Exploitation of high block
HC
Crater with caved rock
51
Block and panel caving subsidence terminology(Flores & Karzulovic 2004b)
ψb
δiz
Angle of breakInfluence zone
ψb ψb
Orebody
Stablezone
Influence zone δiz(continuous
deformations)Crater perimeter
(maximum extension of discontinuous deformations)
Cave material
Pre-existing open pit slopes
Undercut levelUnderground cave mining
52
North-south vertical section, Palabora open pit and block cave, South Africa
(Moss 2005)
14
53
The dip of the orebody
The plan shape of the orebody
The depth of mining and the associated in situ stress field
The strengths of the caving rock mass and of the rocks and soils closer to the surface
The slope of the ground surface
Factors influencing the angle of break
54
Major geological features such as faults and dykes intersecting the orebodyand/or cap rock
Prior surface mining
The accumulation of caved or failed rock, or the placement of fill, in a pre-existing or a newly formed crater
Nearby underground excavations
Factors influencing the angle of break (continued)
55
Indicative surface projection of the Resolution orebody
(Hehnke 2005)
56
15
57
Surface features, Apache Leap, near Superior, Arizona
(Photographs: M Scoble)
58
Resolution interpretive geology, East-West section (Hehnke 2005)
59
Subsidence resulting from block caving operations, San Manuel Mine, USA
(Flores & Karzulovic 2002)
Fractured zone
Caved rock
Open pit
Crater perimeter
60
0’ 600’300’
Depth (ft)
San Manuel subsidence reconstruction, July 1959 (Brummer 2006)
16
61
San Manuel subsidence reconstruction, 1967 (Brummer 2006)
0’ 600’300’Depth (ft)
62
San Manuel subsidence reconstruction, 1973 (Brummer 2006)
0’ 600’300’Depth (ft)
63
3D subsidence reconstruction, 1955-73,San Manuel Mine, Arizona
(Brummer 2006)Buildings No. 1 and No. 4 Shafts
South Ore Body Crater
North Ore Body Crater
Northeast Ore Body Crater
Surface Cracking
2015 Grizzly & 2075 Haulage Levels
Mining Blocks
1415 (400 ft)
2015 (600 ft)
San Manuel, West & East Faults
1415 Grizzly & 1475 Haulage Levels
64
Brown’s First Law of Caving Geomechanics
There are no easy answersThere are no easy answers
Corollary
There are no recipes or cook booksThere are no recipes or cook books
17
65 66
The ISRM for honouring me with this award;Rob Morphet of Golder Associates, Brisbane, for support in the preparation of this lecture;Lorna Burns of Golder Associates, Brisbane, for preparing the PowerPoint presentation;several individuals and organisations for providing material used in the lecture;my Portuguese colleagues, particularly Professor Luis Ribero e Sousa, for their support and kind hospitality;my partner, Dale Spender, for her long-suffering tolerance of my interest in holes in the ground; andall of you for listening to me so patiently.
And finally, thanks to …..
67
Glück Auf!