- QAThYDsrgzUC
- Raileanu Et Al._2012_crustal Models in Romania – II . Moldavian Platform and Adjacent Areas
- 1111
- The Uncertainties of Risk Management
- SEEPW 2007 Engineering Book
- Human Decision
- 14 Management
- UDPG1673_Tutorial 3_201601
- A Comparison of Statistical Techniques for Combining Modeled and Observed Concentrations to Create High-Resolution Ozone Air Quality Surfaces.pdf
- As a Competent Project Risk Manager
- 1-s2.0-S1365160902000047-main
- Laboratory Quality Control. Ppt
- The Economic Definition of Ore
- Add 8431
- hads_norm_BJCP_2001_HADS_2
- Strategic Acting
- ISO 12242-2012
- Still a man's game: Gender representation in online reviews of video games - by James Ivory; Mass Communication and Society (2006)
- math 1040-jacobs final project
- Change Management Process
- 5 Contingency Approach
- H006 - Testing Strategies & Evidence-gathering
- class 11 business chapter 1.docx
- EQT 373__test1
- CI mu p
- Critical Part Life Extension Efforts.pdf
- Features of the safety assessment and general methodology
- IJAIEM-2012-10-31-073
- Factorial Analysis for Modeling Large-scale
- Students Tutorial Answers Week8
- Herrera 1968
- Spencer 1950
- Park-1961
- Chapter 13
- Lueth et al-1990
- Fuller and Ericksen-1962
- Rice et al-2005
- Hollister 1975
- Sillitoe and Burrows-2003
- Epi Thermal
- Flint-1986
- Carter and Torres-1964
- Baldwin and Pearce-1982
- McKee et al-1986
- Nystrom and Henriquez-1994
- Lehmann Et Al-1990
- Lindgren 1935
- Deen et al-1994
- Scherkenbach and Noble-1984
- Johnson 1955
- Goodell and Petersen-1974
- Herzenberg-1936
- McKinstry and Noble-1932
- Soler-1986
- Mckee et al-1975
- Ward-1961
- Soler and Bonhomme-1988
- Thorn-1988
- Grant et al-1979
- Lindgren 1924

Presentation aim

• To highlight the risks present in resource and reserve estimation and give an insight into some of the tools available in Minesight that can be used to determine grade risk.

Presentation Summary

• • • • • • •

Snowden overview Risk factors in mining Simulation for grade risk Confidence limits and probability above cutoff Case Study: Grade risk – python scripting. Handy hints Questions

Snowden overview

• Downer EDI • Snowden (160+ people worldwide) • Resource Evaluation Group • Mining Engineering Group • Geotechnical Engineering Group • Corporate Services Group (Audits, Valuations) • Business Improvement Group (Six Sigma) • Risk Management Group • Mentoring and Training • Technologies (Supervisor, Reconcilor)

• Offices in Perth, Brisbane, Johannesburg, Vancouver and London.

For further details refer to www.snowdengroup.com

**Minesight experience / training
**

• 12+ years experience using Minesight in grade control, geological modelling, stockpile modelling, resource estimation, resource classification, statistical and spatial analysis, mine planning, scheduling and pit optimisation • Snowden also deliver in depth training courses and detailed training manuals are also available: • Snowden resource estimation guide using Minesight software* • Statistical and spatial analysis using MSDA* • Kriging and block model validation • Resource estimation and classification • Simulation and risk analysis

**Involvement in Minesight Software Development
**

• Boddington Gold Mine, Western Australia

• Inclined benches

**• Lihir Gold Mine, Papua New Guinea
**

• Stockpile Modelling

**• Mt Isa Copper Mine and George Fisher Mine, Queensland
**

• • • • • • • • • Data Security System Multirun tool Drillhole design tool Compositing weighting Kriging engine Easting offset (unfolding) Geomap tool Minesight Data Analyst (MSDA) Block modelling & resource evaluation

Risk?

**Risk = Likelihood x Consequence
**

What is the likelihood that you will be injured? How severe will be your injuries? Is the risk acceptable?

•

If you understand the risks present then you can mitigate the impact of these risks with good management and decisions.

Poor Risk Management!

**Risk factors in mining
**

Mother Nature Risk Human Nature Risk

INTEREST RATES INFLATION LABOUR COSTS

Economic Uncertainty Dynamic Constantly Changing

PROCESS CAPCOSTS

COMMODITY PRICES

Cultural Features

Topography

Geotechnics

**Geological Uncertainty More difficult to quantify
**

Mineralisation Limits

Lithology

Mineral Types

**Resource and Reserve risk
**

Resource and Reserve estimates

Ore Geological Resource definition interpretation estimate Reserve estimate Mine planning

RISK is commonly not quantified at any of the technical stages

UNCERTAINTY inherent in each stage

The greater the uncertainty the greater the risk!

**Uncertainty associated with geological interpretation and grade estimation is usually the largest source of potential error in the resource and reserve estimate**

**What is grade risk?
**

Grade Risk: The risk of not meeting estimated grade

• Grade risk is a function of the grade variability present within the selected mining unit (panel) and the probability that the grade present within that panel exceeds the economic cutoff grade • High risk blocks would have a high probability that the grade mined from that block would be less than the economic cutoff grade • The greater the grade variability present The greater the risk that the estimated grade is not achieved • Low risk blocks would be in areas of consistent grade and the probability that the estimated grade of the block exceeding the economic cutoff grade would be high

**How to determine grade risk? Simulation is the answer
**

Conditional Simulation

Reality Multiple realisations

• •

Conditional Simulation gives the user numerous equi probable results for any panel. (A minimum of 100 realisations is recommended) Simulation is typically completed external to Minesight due to the current limitation of items in the block model

**Confidence limits and probability above cutoffs
**

9

8

7

6

SiO2 Grade (%)

5

4

3

2

1

0 1 2 5 10 15 19 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 99 Mean Ranked Simulations

**Distribution of simulated grades
**

1

Cumulative Frequency

• The greater the spread of simulated grades for a panel The greater the risk • Low confidence

• • • •

0

Spread of grades

large variance wide spread large range of potential values Potentially high risk region.

1

Cumulative Frequency

• High confidence

• • • •

0

low variance narrow spread small range of potential values Potentially low grade risk region

Spread of grades

**Example of calculation of error by confidence limit (c.l.)
**

Simulation Mean Rank 1 5 10 25 50 75 90 95 100 Mean

Absolute error

SiO2 Grade (%) 1.75 2.45 5th percentile 2.71 3.53 4.13 5.10 5.60 5.90 95th percentile 7.70 4.29

**95th 5th error at 90% c.l. 2
**

5.90 - 2.45 = 2 1.73

Absolute error for a given 10m x 10m panel is: 4.29% SiO2 1.73% S at 90% c.l.

Relative error

Absolute Error Mean x 100

1.73 4.29

=

40%

Relative error for the same 10m x 10m block is: 4.29% SiO2 40.0% at 90% c.l.

Simulation grade range map (90% Confidence)

• •

Blue regions show low grade variation and are potentially low risk areas Yellow regions show high grade variation and are potentially high risk areas

**Probability above cutoff maps
**

• • Probability map of SiO2 grade being above 4.0% High probability / high risk areas are red

**Probability Calculation 90% c.l.
**

Number of realisations above cutoff grade within 90% CI x 100 90

(82 / 90) x 100 91%

• •

Probability map of SiO2 grade being above 6.0% High probability / High risk areas are red

**Panel error investigation
**

Average relative error at different panel sizes and at different confidence limits

80.00%

Average Relative Error (%)

70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%

10 0m

20 0m

30 0m

40 0m x 50 0m

Co m po s

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

10 m

20 m

30 m

40 m

50 m

10 0m

20 0m

30 0m

Panel Size 90% Confidence 80% Confidence 50% Confidence

40 0m

x

50 0m

ite s

10 m

20 m

30 m

40 m

50 m

**Probability and risk analysis
**

Analysis of first three years production

12.00

11.00

**Maximum grade simulation Minimum grade simulation
**

5

10.00

9.00

Grade

**Median grade simulation
**

4

8.00

**Range in tonnage at a given grade
**

7.00 3

**Range in grade for a fixed tonnage
**

6.00 2 1

5.00

0

4.00 2,500,000

3,500,000

4,500,000

5,500,000 Tonnage

6,500,000

7,500,000

8,500,000

Schedule risk

Grade Variation by Scheduled Year

12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0

Grade

8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 Sim maximum Sim minimum Sim median Kriged estimate

0

2

4 Year

6

8

10

Case Study: Risk calculation - python scripting

•

Python scripts are easily developed by Mintec personnel and save significant time and effort Python scripts are commonly stored under c:\medexe\site\ scripts

•

Load simulations into Minesight

•

•

Load mean ranked simulations to the block model. Due to the limitation of the number of items in the block model it is not possible to load all the simulations to a single block model. Only load the minimum, 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, 95th and maximum ranked simulation values to the block model In addition it is good practice to also load the mean, variance, standard deviation and coefficient of variation of the simulations to the block model

Load probability above specified cutoff’s into Minesight

•

Load probability values above specific cutoffs into the Minesight block model. The example above shows probability values for SiO2 exceeding 2.0%, 4.0%, 6.0%, 8.0%, 10.0%, 12.0% and 14.0% being loaded to block model items SIP02, SIP04, SIP06, SIP08, SIP10, SIP12 and SIP14 respectively

Calculate grade range at different confidence limits for each panel

•

Using block model ‘User Calcs’ the grade range between the 50% confidence limit (25th to 75th ranked simulation), 80% confidence limit (10th to 90th ranked simulation), 90% confidence limit (5th to 95th ranked simulation) and all simulations were calculated for each panel and stored in the block model items S2575, S1090, S0595 and S1100 respectively

Calculate the relative error at different confidence limits

•

For each panel the relative error for each of the confidence limits is calculated and stored to the block model. The relative error is calculated by dividing the simulation grade range for each confidence limit by the simulation mean and multiplying by 100

Calculation of grade risk

**Simulation grade risk matrix
**

1.00

Probability the Block Grade is below the Resource Cutoff Grade (90% c.l.)

0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 10

21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 0 20

22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 0 30

23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 0 40

24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 0 50

25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 0 60

26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 0 70

27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 0 80

28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 0 90

29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 0 100

30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 0 110

31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 0 120

32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 0 130

33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 0 140

34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 0 150

35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 0 160

36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 0 170

37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 0 180

38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 0 190

39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 0 200

% Grade Variance from Mean (Risk 95 = Grade Variance of PCU05 to PCU95). Other Risk Options - Risk 90, Risk 75.

Very Low Risk (1 to 5) Low Risk (5 to 8)

Moderate Risk (9 to 10) High Risk (11 to 15)

Very High Risk (16 to 20) Extreme Risk (>20)

Risk maps

•

Risk maps are a powerful design tool for engineers and geologists

Handy hints

• Use MSDA custom reports to report risk for multiple domains at multiple confidence limits • Use MSDA custom reports to complete statistical comparisons of simulation data against the original composite data • Import simulation and composite variograms into Minesight and compare visually using Import Variograms (ASCII) file • Block model statistical summaries by northing and easting can be completed easily in MSDA via custom reports. Setup a filter tab based on easting or northing and input bins based on appropriate spacing. • Use MSDART to manage large ASCII and CSV files.

Minesight grade risk analysis

procedure summary

1. 2. 3. Define area(s) of interest.

a. Area of interest should be larger than range of variogram

**Extract data within domains
**

a. Code drillholes and block model to geological, structural, weathering and density domains

**Statistics and variography per domain for each element.
**

a. b. c. Complete statistical analysis of raw and declustered drillhole data using MSDA custom reports Complete statistical analysis of composite data using MSDA custom reports Complete statistical analysis of composite by easting, northing and RL using MSDA custom reports

4.

**Kriging Search Optimisation.
**

a. b. Use kriging debug tool to evaluate kriging weights Summarise regression slope values, simple kriging weights and kriging variance via MSDA custom reports

5.

Conditional Simulation

a. b. Run sequential Gaussian simulation (Minimum of 100 simulations per node recommended) Select a node spacing which divides into panel / standard mining unit (SMU) evenly. (A minimum of 25 nodes per panel is recommended)

6.

Simulation Validation

a. b. c. d. Visual Checks Statistical checks using MSDA. QQ-plots Simulation variogram checks against composite variogram model

**Minesight grade risk analysis procedure summary
**

7. 8. 9. Reblock simulations to appropriate panel size or standard mining unit (SMU). Sort simulations per panel by grade and calculate grade range and probabilities above cutoff at selected confidence limits. Calculate grade risk using python scripts

a. b. Ensure simulation risk matrix is correct and within Minesight project Complete statistical analysis of risk by domain and by northing, easting and RL using MSDA

10. Develop risk maps 11. Calculate risk per mining period, stope or region and evaluate mine plan with respect to risk.

Questions

Bring on the bulls! Pamplona here I come!

**Risk Management? – Snowden can help.
**

For further details refer to www.snowdengroup.com

- QAThYDsrgzUCUploaded byPrateek Goyal
- Raileanu Et Al._2012_crustal Models in Romania – II . Moldavian Platform and Adjacent AreasUploaded bytatarudragos
- 1111Uploaded byseyyed81
- The Uncertainties of Risk ManagementUploaded byNia M
- SEEPW 2007 Engineering BookUploaded byMihai
- Human DecisionUploaded byJuan Javier
- 14 ManagementUploaded bymmrjbi9412
- UDPG1673_Tutorial 3_201601Uploaded bychin
- A Comparison of Statistical Techniques for Combining Modeled and Observed Concentrations to Create High-Resolution Ozone Air Quality Surfaces.pdfUploaded byMonica Jaimes Palomera
- As a Competent Project Risk ManagerUploaded byMohola Tebello Griffith
- 1-s2.0-S1365160902000047-mainUploaded byMilton Teran
- Laboratory Quality Control. PptUploaded byKuzhandai Velu
- The Economic Definition of OreUploaded byDiego Nunes
- Add 8431Uploaded byVinod M
- hads_norm_BJCP_2001_HADS_2Uploaded byArja' Waas
- Strategic ActingUploaded byMuhammad Adnan Çh
- ISO 12242-2012Uploaded bymkazem
- Still a man's game: Gender representation in online reviews of video games - by James Ivory; Mass Communication and Society (2006)Uploaded byCarlos Augusto Ferraro Miorim
- math 1040-jacobs final projectUploaded byapi-241537503
- Change Management ProcessUploaded byDon - BIN95.com
- 5 Contingency ApproachUploaded bysreenathscharuvil
- H006 - Testing Strategies & Evidence-gatheringUploaded byKevin James Sedurifa Oledan
- class 11 business chapter 1.docxUploaded bysheetal2001
- EQT 373__test1Uploaded byMae Sy
- CI mu pUploaded byRehab Shehata
- Critical Part Life Extension Efforts.pdfUploaded byVenu Madhav
- Features of the safety assessment and general methodologyUploaded byalex9and9ru9
- IJAIEM-2012-10-31-073Uploaded byAnonymous vQrJlEN
- Factorial Analysis for Modeling Large-scaleUploaded bychellaae2748
- Students Tutorial Answers Week8Uploaded byHeoHamHố

- Herrera 1968Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Spencer 1950Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Park-1961Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Chapter 13Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Lueth et al-1990Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Fuller and Ericksen-1962Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Rice et al-2005Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Hollister 1975Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Sillitoe and Burrows-2003Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Epi ThermalUploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Flint-1986Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Carter and Torres-1964Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Baldwin and Pearce-1982Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- McKee et al-1986Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Nystrom and Henriquez-1994Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Lehmann Et Al-1990Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Lindgren 1935Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Deen et al-1994Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Scherkenbach and Noble-1984Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Johnson 1955Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Goodell and Petersen-1974Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Herzenberg-1936Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- McKinstry and Noble-1932Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Soler-1986Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Mckee et al-1975Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Ward-1961Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Soler and Bonhomme-1988Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Thorn-1988Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Grant et al-1979Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez
- Lindgren 1924Uploaded byHaro Velasquez Sanchez