See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324783663

Tailings Beach Slope Forecasting: An Empirical Model

Article · July 2016

CITATIONS READS
0 42

1 author:

Hugo Quelopana
Delfing
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Tailinsg beach slope View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hugo Quelopana on 26 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Tailings Beach Slope Forecasting: An Empirical
Model
Hugo Quelopana
Delfing, Chile

ABSTRACT
The tailings beach slope is a key design variable because of it determines, together others
parameters, the growth model of an impoundment and, thus, the related works and the
construction schedule of them (dams, water management system, roads, etc.). Taking this into
account, several studies, with different theoretical approaches, have been developed to model the
tailings deposition and predict the tailings beach slope (Fitton, 2007; Simms, 2007; Pirouz &
Williams, 2007; McPhail, 2008; Li, 2011). These models, notwithstanding their strong background,
have restrictions on their use given the tailings slurry characterization that they need for an
appropriate application.
The use of an empirical model is attractive when you want to study a complex process hard to
model based on fundamental physical principles. The formation of tailings beaches, including the
estimate of the slope, is certainly one of these complex processes.
Considering the above, this paper presents an empirical model, easy to be applied, for tailings
beach slope forecasting. The model is an update of a previous study (Quelopana 2015) which was
improved by means of detailed analysis of deposition process and trends that show the data
available, in addition to a review of the database used for the calibration process (34 mines with full
scale tailings disposal). The model allows obtaining quickly, and with reasonable accuracy for a
first approach, an estimate of tailings beach slope. Hence, the application of the model is convenient
particularly in early stages of projects or when it is necessary to sensitize the impact on the tailings
beach slope caused by changes in the parameters that define the tailings deposition.

1
INTRODUCTION

The tailings beach slope is a key design variable of a tailings storage facility both in design stage as
during the operation. In the early stage of design the tailings beach slope is crucial to compare
disposal alternatives, relating to disposal scheme, thickened level, site selection, among other
issues. In later stages of design the tailings beach slope defines the phases of growth and/or location
of work relating to tailings storage. Depending on the robustness of the design (factors of safety,
risk analysis and characteristics of the project) the incorrect estimate of tailings beach slope could
lead to some deficiencies: an embankment or a dike of a different size than necessary, tailings
conveyor lines and thickening facilities located at an inappropriate level, problems in operational
pond and water management (storm events), change of useful life of deposit, etc.
In recent years several studies, with different theoretical approaches, have been developed to model
the tailings deposition and predict the tailings beach slope. Just to mention some of these
approaches, it has the stream power entropy method (McPhail, 2008), the equilibrium channel slope
method (Fitton, 2007; Pirouz & Williams, 2007) and the slope stability method (Li, 2011). These
models, notwithstanding their strong background, have restrictions on their use given the tailings
slurry characterization that they need for an appropriate application.
On the other hand, an aspiration for engineers is to have tools to obtain quickly, and with
reasonable accuracy, a first estimate of tailings beach slope. This need is particularly evident in
early stages of new projects as well as to carry on an assessment of the impact on an existing
tailings beach slope caused by changes in the parameters that define the tailings deposition. In this
context, the author (Quelopana, 2015) developed an empirical model for tailings beach slope
forecasting, which is based on the analysis of a large database of tailings beach slope values.
This paper is an update of the aforementioned empirical model which was improved by means of
detailed analysis of deposition process and trends that show the data available, in addition to a
revise of the database used for the calibration process.
As a first step of study the original model is presented, including the revision of its key parameters.
Then a database with 40 tailings beach slope values, that comprises a wide range of values for the
key parameters, is used to analyze the relationship between these parameters and the tailings beach
slope. Finally, the new model is calibrated and applied, including a probabilistic approach, to
observe the influence of each key parameter in the tailings beach slope definition.

FOUNDATIONS OF EMPIRICAL MODEL

Original model

The use of an empirical model is attractive when you want to study a complex process hard to
model based on fundamental physical principles. Because the formation of tailings beaches fits this
condition, the author developed an empirical model for tailings beach slope forecasting that was

2
conceived through studying of the phenomenon and its key parameters identified (Quelopana,
2015). The main objective of the empirical model is to be a practical tool to be used in engineering
projects, allowing obtaining quickly a reasonable estimate of tailings beach slope.
The Equation (1) defines the original model noting that four key parameters are considered: solids
content, specific gravity, median diameter and flow rate. As can be seen, there is a proportional
relationship between beach slope and the solids content, specific gravity and d50, and, in turn, an
inverse relationship between beach slope and the flow rate.
0.978×𝐶𝑤 0.365 ×(𝐺𝑠−1)0.542 ×𝑑500.048
𝑖(%) = (1)
𝑄0.390

Where:
i = tailings beach slope, %.
Q = flow rate (per spigot), l/s.
Cw = solids content by weight, %.
Gs = specific gravity.
d50 = median diameter, µm.

Validation of the model

The validation of the model is studied prior to modify it. Figure 1 shows the fit achieved by
applying the model to 8 new cases which are detailed later in Table 1 and were not considered in
the development of the original model. An acceptable fit for 7 of 8 cases is reached allowing
validate that the model has high potential as a tool for estimating the beach slope (as will be shown
this level of adjustment is similar to other existing approaches). The case that has a poor fit
corresponds to uranium tailings that have certain characteristics that would explain the steeper
measured beach slope (3.54%). In the section “Accuracy of the model” this case is analyzed in more
detail.

4,0
Predicted beach slope (%)

3,0

2,0

1,0

0,0
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0
Measured beach slope (%)

Figure 1 Fit of the original model for 8 new cases

3
Revision of key parameters

From the analysis of deposition phenomena as well as of the existing tailings beach slope prediction
methods, it is concluded that the formation of beaches denotes a continuing balance between forces
pushing motion of tailings flow and those that make it slower. Flow rate (velocity) is the main
parameter relating to the forces driving the movement while the rheological behavior of the slurry
is significant to motion resistance.
The modeling of rheological behavior of the slurry is complicated by the difficulty of defining itself
and due to its temporal and spatial variation. The main parameter related to rheology is the yield
stress but cannot be used in this empirical approach because the database would be greatly reduced
because it is a variable that is often not specified. Then, to deal with this fact, the original model
considered the two factors already mentioned – flow rate and rheological behavior – but using
parameters that aim to depict the latter: solids content, specific gravity and median diameter.
The revision of the empirical model denoted that the geometric component of tailings deposition,
specifically the length of the beach, is important whereby it is considered necessary to add this key
parameter in this update of model. As will be seen in the database section, the length of the beach is
strongly related to the tailings beach slope. To explain this relationship we have to look the
available beach profiles in database, all which show certain level of concavity. This concavity,
according to the author, responds to an overlap to greater or lesser degree of two phenomena: (i)
changes in rheology along the path of flow because of sedimentation and shear thinning (Li, 2011)
and (ii) variability over time of the flow and the solids concentration of tailings slurry (Seddon &
Fitton, 2011). The beach profile (concavity) will tend to be fully developed as the length of the beach
increases. Indeed, a large deposit allows all variety of tailings to be deposited “naturally” obtaining
a fully developed profile. By contrast, a short beach (due to a dam or pond that restrains the
growth) truncates the deposition process imposing a rearrangement of the material and shows
mainly the initial part of the profile that has steeper slopes. As a final comment it is interesting to
mention that the slope stability method also considers that the length of beach defines, among other
variables, the overall beach slope (Gaete et al., 2014a).
The second change implemented in this update of model is the removal of median diameter as a
key parameter. As shown the Equation (1) the median diameter has a lower influence compared
with the other key parameters. This low influence was even more noticeable in the first calibration
of the updated model, which included both the length of the beach and median diameter, so it was
decided to remove this variable as a key parameter (the exponent of d50 is decreased from 0.048 to
0.004).

4
DATABASE

Description

Table 1 shows the database of 40 tailings beach slope values belonging to full scale operations or
full scale trials that was collected taking into account the capture of the key parameters set up to
modified model: flow rate (Q), solids content (Cw), specific gravity (Gs) and length of beach (L). It
is stressed that the values of slopes correspond to the overall slope (the concavity of beach profile is
not addressed in this paper). It is observed in the table that the range of slope varies between 0.18 to
3.96% and there are many types of ore. Also it is noted that some mines/deposit have more than one
slope record, which is because there are different process data for each case (different key
parameters values).

Table 1 Listing of tailings beach slopes collected

Mine/Deposit Ore Type i % Q l/s Cw % Gs L m Mine/Deposit Ore Type i % Q l/s Cw % Gs L m

Andacollo C 0,50 678 57,5 2,74 500 Pampa Austral C 0,35 851 35,0 2,70 2500
Aughinish B 2,10 34 60,0 3,30 300 Pe ak G 1,67 21 53,0 2,80 470
Care n C 0,18 2028 45,0 2,70 6900 Pe ak G 2,49 7 53,0 2,80 470
Ce ntury Z 0,75 202 52,7 2,83 2600 Sunrise Dam G 0,88 89 60,0 2,80 900
Ce rro de Maimon GC 2,80 29 55,5 3,10 80 Sunrise Dam G 1,37 37 59,8 2,80 900
Cluff Lake U 3,00 13 52,0 2,70 450 Sunrise Dam G 1,60 21 60,0 2,80 900
Cobriza C 2,00 34 76,8 3,52 110 Talabre C 1,49 50 52,1 2,71 150
Ekati D 1,00 95 40,0 2,70 300 Talabre C 0,30 2388 53,0 2,75 2500
Elura Z 1,70 29 60,0 4,20 700 Unre porte d (N) G 3,96 3 23,0 2,82 23
Erne st He nry CG 0,90 232 69,3 3,51 1900 Unre porte d (N) S 2,04 13 18,6 2,90 49
Espe ranza (N) C 3,11 12 62,6 2,75 120 Unre porte d (N) U 3,54 31 40,1 2,68 82
Espe ranza C 1,07 168 63,2 2,78 240 Unre porte d (N) M 0,80 460 20,1 2,71 295
Kidd Cre e k ZC 1,50 87 62,0 3,10 1300 Unre porte d (N) M 0,99 19 20,1 2,71 344
Las Tórtolas C 0,60 274 26,0 2,80 1200 Unre porte d (N) M 1,22 28 28,8 2,71 492
Miduk C 1,85 198 55,0 2,72 1500 Vaudre uil B 3,50 22 45,0 3,00 500
Musse lwhite G 2,00 34 70,0 3,25 120 Classifie d C 0,50 - - - -
Myra Falls ZC 3,00 33 66,8 3,60 220 Classifie d C 0,70 - - - -
Ne ve s Corvo CZ 1,75 40 65,0 3,45 130 Classifie d CL 2,70 - - - -
Olympic Dam CU 1,50 130 45,0 3,40 300 Classifie d C 3,00 - - - -
Osborne CG 3,00 27 74,0 3,50 235 Classifie d (N) Z 3,00 - - - -
(N): Ne w case B: Bauxite ; C: Coppe r; D: Diamond; G: Gold; L: Le ad; M: Molybde num; S: Silve r; U: Uranium; Z: Zinc

The current database is based on the database of original model which was revised. A few values
were modified due to new available data, other cases of a same mine, with almost the same key
parameters, were merge into a single (in order to avoid overweight a type of tailing in particular)
and 8 new cases were added. The main data sources used to collect the database are indicated in
references section. Some cases are not explicitly identified because of its commercial sensitivity.

5
Analysis of data

Figure 2 shows the relations between the key parameters and the beach slope values. It is noted that
a power trendline is shown in all graphs and the flow rate and length of beach cases use a
logarithmic abscissa axis for better appreciation.
The analysis of Figure 2 indicates:
 The flow rate has a great effect on the beach slope, detecting that the lower the flow rate,
the higher the beach slope.
 A steeper beach slope is more probable with higher level of thickening although the data
present a significant dispersion.
 As the specific gravity is increased, the beach slope tends to rise also as indicated by
trendline.
 The length of beach presents a strong inverse relationship with the beach slope.
 The observed relationship between flow rate and beach slope explains largely why
laboratory and small flumes tests produce steep tailings slopes which then are no reached
in field when flow rate is increased. The same condition, but to a lesser extent, occurs
with the length of beach.

4,0 4,0
Measured beach slope (%)

Measured beach slope (%)

3,5 3,5
3,0 3,0
2,5 2,5
2,0 2,0
1,5 1,5
1,0 1,0
0,5 0,5
0,0 0,0
1 10 100 1000 10000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Flow rate (l/s) Solids content (%)

4,0 4,0
Measured beach slope (%)
Measured beach slope (%)

3,5 3,5
3,0 3,0
2,5 2,5
2,0 2,0
1,5 1,5
1,0 1,0
0,5 0,5
0,0 0,0
2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0 4,5 10 100 1000 10000
Specific gravity Length of beach (m)

Figure 2 Key parameters against measured beach slope a) Flow rate, b) Solids content,
c) Specific gravity, d) Length of beach

6
MODIFIED EMPIRICAL MODEL

Definition of the modified model

The adopted mathematical model for this update keeps the original empirical approach and is
based on two main assumptions:
 The overall tailings beach slope is a function of only the four identified key parameters:
flow rate, solids content by weight, specific gravity of the solid and length of beach.
 The influence of each key parameter can be evaluated in a separated way through power
functions.
Then, the proposed function to estimate the tailings beach slope corresponds to:

𝑖 (%) = 𝐴 × 𝑄 𝛼 × 𝐶𝑤𝛽 × (𝐺𝑠 − 1)𝛿 × 𝐿𝜎 (2)

Where:
i = tailings beach slope, %.
Q = flow rate (per spigot), l/s.
Cw = solids content by weight, %.
Gs = specific gravity.
L = length of beach, m.
A, α, β, δ, σ = calibration constants.
It is noted that a specific gravity function was selected so when the specific gravity tends towards
the value of 1 (specific gravity value of water) this term tends towards zero and therefore the slope
will be horizontal.

Model calibration

It was carried out an adjustment by the least squares method to obtain the calibration constants of
equation (2), using the database presented in previous section:
2.630×𝐶𝑤 0.383 ×(𝐺𝑠−1)0.286
𝑖(%) = (3)
𝑄0.331 ×𝐿0.153

The equation (3) shows a proportional relationship between beach slope and the solids content and
specific gravity. In turn, an inverse relationship between beach slope and flow rate and length of
beach is observed. The values of the calibration constants are consistent with the rational analysis of
the phenomena also observed in the analysis of the database: (i) the higher solids content, the
higher yield stress and/or viscosity which results in a steeper deposition because it slows the
movement of the flow, (ii) the higher specific gravity, the greater particle weight which causes in a
steeper slope due to a faster settling, (iii) the higher flow rate, the greater path necessary to
dissipate the momentum of flow, obtaining flatter slopes and (iv) the greater length of beach, the
greater path to develop the fully beach profile that carries out an overall flatter deposition.

7
Accuracy of the model

Figure 3-a) shows the fit of the model to the calibrating data (R2=0.76), noting a greater scatter for
tailings beach slope steeper than 1.5%. At first glance, this dispersion may seem great but it is
deemed that the accuracy is similar to other current approaches. Figure 3-b) shows the performance
of the two best predictions methods, as assessed by Fitton (2014), regarding five mines (sorted from
lowest to highest beach slopes: Century, Ernest Henry, Sunrise Dam, Miduk and Peak). The
modified empirical model has been added in figure, noting that the performance is similar to the
other two approaches (the empirical model has the smallest mean absolute error). Although these
five cases were considered to define the database of the empirical model, it should not be
overlooked that other 36 cases are also part of the database and certainly have a greater influence in
calibration process.

5,0 4,0

Predicted beach slope (%)

Predicted beach slope (%)

4,0 Fitton 2007

3,0
3,0
2,0 Fitton and
2,0 Slatter 2013

1,0 Quelopana
1,0
2016
0,0 0,0
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0
Measured beach slope (%) Measured beach slope (%)

Figure 3 a) Fit of the empirical model and b) Predicted performance of empirical model and other approaches

The deviation observed in Figure 3-a) would be explained for the overlap or mix of the following
circumstances:
 The limitations of the chosen mathematical model due to its structure (power functions)
as well as the key parameters considered.
 Errors or deviations in database. As example, the temporal variation of key parameters,
depending on its magnitude, can lead to obtain values not entirely representative of these
parameters.
 The tailings rheology is crucial in the deposition process and depends not only of
thickening stage (and characteristic of tailings) but also of the transport and distribution
scheme that affects in shear thinning process. Therefore, the solids content parameter is
limited not only to represent the yield stress but also the possible variations thereof.
 Another aspect difficult to quantify is the deposit operational scheme, which may be
important in the final beach slope. A deposit with a permanent discharge is different
from a deposit with cycled deposition, allowing thin layers and promoting desiccation,
which apparently is associated with a steeper slope (Wates et al., 2015).
 The influence of ore type may be important and, therefore, a unique function as
presented may be limited to represent all type of ore. Nevertheless, although recognizing

8
 that there are some types of ore with few cases, the analysis of data do not show that
some kind of ore type escapes particularly of the adjustment attained.
The three cases with minor fit achieved are Vaudreuil (3.50% vs 1.91%), Uranium (unreported mine,
3.54% vs 2.01%, the same case with poor fit in original model) and Miduk (1.85% vs 0.81%). In the
first case the deviation would be due to the model is not able to represent the rheological behavior
of this red mud slurry (despite its low solids content of 45%, the tailings are pumped using
displacement pumps which indicates a high yield stress). For the Uranium case the steeper slope is
reached possibly because of a very quick sedimentation effect similar to disposition of material in
sand dam (the median diameter is 236 microns and the solids content is only 40.1%; the case that
follows in median diameter is only 136 microns) while the model is focused in an intermediate or
low rate of sedimentation. In the Miduk cases it is not possible to give a hypothesis for the
deviation with the available data, however it is interesting to note that other approaches have also
achieved only a limited fit to the measured beach slope, as was shown in Figure 3-b), which would
indicate that there is some aspect of this case that is not well assessed.
Finally it is noted that the modified model have a better fit to data than original model (R2=0.76
versus R2=0.72).

Application of the model

The application of the model is direct by just entering the values for the key parameters in Equation
(3). Additionally, a probabilistic approach can be carried out in considering the level of deviation or
error of adjustment. As first step it defines the rate of error as show the Equation (4):
(𝑖_𝑎 −𝑖_𝑝)
𝑒𝑟 = 𝑖_𝑝
(4)

Where:
er = rate of error.
i_a = actual or measured beach slope, %.
i_p = predicted beach slope according Equation (3), %.
An average and standard deviation of 0.04 (practically equal to zero) and 0.33 respectively are
obtained for rate of error by applying the Equation (4) to the database. Then, it is possible to
estimate the tailings beach slope with a certain probability of exceedance adopting that the rate of
error has a normal distribution with average of zero and standard deviation of 0.33:
𝑖_𝑒𝑥𝑐(𝑥) = 𝑖_𝑝 − 𝐹(𝑥; 0,0.33) × 𝑖_𝑝 (5)
Where:
i_exc(x) = predicted beach slope with a probability of exceedance of x, %.
i_p = predicted beach slope according Equation (3), %.
F(x;0,0.33) = cumulative distribution function of normal distribution at x (average of 0 and standard
deviation of 0.33).

9
The rate of error is used, instead of the error (difference between measured and predicted beach
slope), because it allows replicating the fact that steeper beach slope, the greater uncertainty, as was
shown in Figure 3-a). It also noted that a beta distribution has a better fit to rate of error but
numerically the difference with normal distribution is negligible (for a range of probability of
exceedance of 20-80%) so it is not justified its more complex application considering the scope of
this paper.
Figure 4 shows the sensitivity analysis carried out to investigate the influence of key parameters,
including the probabilistic approach already described. A base case is defined as starting point
(flow rate of 100 l/s; solids content of 60%; specific gravity of 2.8; and length of beach of 500 m) and
for each case the respective key parameter is varied. In the figure the flow rate graph uses a
logarithmic abscissa axis for better appreciation and the probability of exceedance cases of 20 and
80%, additionally to direct application of the empirical model (Equation (3), Pexc: 50%), are shown.

5,0 5,0

Predicted beach slope (%)

Predicted beach slope (%)

Pexc: 20% Pexc: 20%

4,0 4,0
Pexc: 50% Pexc: 50%
3,0 Pexc: 80% 3,0 Pexc: 80%

2,0 2,0

1,0 1,0

0,0 0,0
1 10 100 1000 20 30 40 50 60 70
Flow rate (l/s) Solid content (%)

5,0 5,0
Predicted beach slope (%)

Predicted beach slope (%)

Pexc: 20% Pexc: 20%

4,0 4,0
Pexc: 50% Pexc: 50%
3,0 Pexc: 80% 3,0 Pexc: 80%

2,0 2,0

1,0 1,0

0,0 0,0
2,7 2,9 3,1 3,3 3,5 3,7 3,9 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000
Specific gravity Length of beach (m)

Figure 4 Sensitivity analysis regarding key parameters a) Flow rate, b) Solids content,
c) Specific gravity, d) Length of beach

The main conclusions obtained from sensitivity analysis are:

 The best way to increase the tailings beach slope is decrease the flow rate, especially
when the project allows discharges lower than 100 l/s. Incidentally, the decrease of the

10
 flow rate by means of increase the number of simultaneous spigots must regard a
minimum distance between them, such that the streams do not merge.
 The increase of solids content becomes less important when it is compared with the effect
of flow rate and length of beach (mainly for low values in these parameters).
 The specific gravity has a limited influence in beach slope.
 The use of probabilistic approach allows have a first knowledge of the variation expected
between forecasted by the model and what happens on the field. For the specific case of
Figure 4, a decrease (increase) in the range of 0.40% is observed for predicted beach slope
when the probability of exceedance is increased (decrease) to 80% (20%) with regard to
the values obtained directly from empirical model (Pexc: 50%). Finally it should not be
overlooked that steeper beach slope, the greater expected variation (uncertainty), as is
observed by comparing the probability of exceedance cases (20 and 80%) with empirical
model (Pexc: 50%). This is shown more markedly in flow rate graph.

CONCLUSIONS

An empirical model have been presented which is an update of a previous develop. First of all, it
was validated the attractive of the original model as a tool for estimating the beach slope through
verifying an acceptable fit for 8 new cases. Then it was detailed the modifications to the original
model: replacement of the median diameter by the length of beach as key parameter.
The modified empirical model is consistent with the rational analysis of the tailings deposition
process and the trends observed for key parameters identified. The model allows obtaining quickly
a first approach of tailings beach slope. The application of model should consider the appropriate
weighting of particular characteristics of each project, mainly when the key parameters used are
outside of the ranges of database.
The length of beach appears as a new variable, other than flow rate and solids content, to be
handled if increase of the overall beach slope is required. This can become important when it is
possible to have small deposits (cell type).

REFERENCE

Fitton, T. (2007) Tailings beach slope prediction, PhD thesis, School of Civil, Environmental and
Chemical Engineering, RMIT University, Australia.

Fitton, T. (2014) The Accuracy of Tailings Beach Slope Prediction, Proceedings of the 17th International
Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2014), R. Jewell, A. Fourie, P. Wells and D. van Zyl
(eds), Australian Centre for Geomechanics and InfoMine Inc., Vancouver, Canada, pp. 47-58.

Gaete, S., Bello, F., Errázuriz, T., Yañez, R., Pinto, M. (2014a) Modelling the Behaviour of High-
Density Tailings Beach Slopes in a Large-Scale Field Test for Minera Esperanza, Proceedings of the
17th International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2014), R. Jewell, A. Fourie, P. Wells
and D. van Zyl (eds), Australian Centre for Geomechanics and InfoMine Inc., Vancouver, Canada,
pp. 71-83.

11
Gaete, S., Bello, F., Engels, J., McPhail, G. (2014b) Thickening and Deposition Trials: Laboratory
Trhough to Industrial Scale - Minera Esperanza, Proceedings of the 17th International Seminar on Paste
and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2014), R. Jewell, A. Fourie, P. Wells and D. van Zyl (eds), Australian
Centre for Geomechanics and InfoMine Inc., Vancouver, Canada, pp. 381-391.

Galdeano, P., Alvarez, L., Gómez, J. (2014) Water Losses from Inactive Tailings Beaches of Carmen
de Andacollo Tailings Dam, 2nd International Seminar on Tailings Management (Tailings 2014), S.
Barrera (ed), Antofagasta, Chile.

Kam, S., Girard, J., Hmidi, N., Mao, Y., Longo, S. (2011) Thickened Tailings Disposal at Musselwhite
Mine, Proceedings of the 14th International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2011), R.
Jewell and A. Fourie, R. (eds), Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, Australia, pp. 225-236.

Lara, J. (2013) Experiencias de Operación de Depósitos de Relaves Espesados y Filtrados, Instituto de

Ingenieros de Minas del Perú, Perú.

Li, A. (2011) Prediction of Tailings Beach Slopes and Tailings Flow Profiles, Proceedings of the 14th
International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2011), R. Jewell and A. Fourie, R. (eds),
Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, Australia, pp. 307-322.

Lopes. R., Bahia, R., Jefferies, M., Oliveira, M. (2013) Paste Deposition over an Existing Subaqueous
Slurry Deposit of High Sulphide Content Tailings – the Neves Corvo Experience, Proceedings of the
16th International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2013), R. Jewell, A. Fourie, J. Cadwell
and J. Pimenta (eds), Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, pp. 21-35.

McPhail, G. (2008) Prediction of the Beach Profile of High-Density Thickened Tailings from
Rheological and Small-Scale Trial Deposition Data, Proceedings of the 11th International Seminar on
Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2008), A. Fourie, R. Jewell, P. Slatter and A. Paterson (eds),
Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, Australia, pp. 179-188.

Morris, P., Williams, D. (1997) Hydraulic Conditions Leading To Exponential Mine Tailings Delta
Profiles, Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, Section A - Mining Industry,106, pp.
34-37.

Oxenford, J., Lord, E. (2006) Canadian Experience in the Application of Paste and Thickened
Tailings for Surface Disposal, Proceedings of the 9th International Seminar on Paste and Thickened
Tailings (Paste 2006), R. Jewell, S. Lawson and P. Newman (eds), Australian Centre for
Geomechanics, Limerick, Ireland, pp. 93-105.

Pinto, M., Barrera, S. (2002) Tailings Beach Slope Forecasting Copper Tailings, Proceedings of the 9th
International Conference Tailings and Mine Waste, Colorado, United States.

Pirouz, B., Williams, P. (2007) Prediction of Non-Segregation Thickened Tailings Beach Slope,
Proceedings of the 10th International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2007), A. Fourie and
R. Jewell (eds), Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, Australia, pp. 315-327.

12
 Pirouz, B., Javadi, S., Williams, P., Pavissich, C., Caro, G. (2015) Chuquicamata Full-Scale Field
Deposition Trial, Proceedings of the 18th International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste
2015), R. Jewell and A. Fourie (eds), Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Cairns, Australia, pp. 477-
489.

Quelopana, H. (2015) Tailings Beach Slope Forecasting: What Does the Data Reveal?, 3rd
International Seminar on Tailings Management (Tailings 2015), S. Barrera (ed), Santiago, Chile.

Ring, R., Woods, P., Muller, H. (1998) Recent Initiatives to Improve Tailings and Water
Management in the Expanding Australian Uranium Milling Industry, Proceedings of the Impact of
New Environmental and Safety Regulations on Uranium Exploration, Mining, Milling and Management of
its Waste. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, (Pub. Sept. 2001), pp. 51-71.

Robinsky, E., Barbour, S., Wilson, G., Bordin, D., Fredlund, D. (1991) Thickened Sloped Tailings
Disposal - An Evaluation of Seepage and Abatement of Acid Drainage, Proceedings of the Second
International Conference on the Abatement of Acid Drainage, MEND, Natural Resources Canada,
Montreal, Canada.

Seddon, K., Fitton, T. (2011) Realistic Beach Slope Prediction and Design, Proceedings of the 14th
International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2011), R. Jewell and A. Fourie, R. (eds),
Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, Australia, pp. 281-293.

Simms, P. (2007) On the Relation Between Laboratory Flume Tests and Deposition Angles of High
Density Tailings, Proceedings of the 10th International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste
2007), A. Fourie and R. Jewell (eds), Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, Australia, pp. 329-
337.

Wates, J., Venter, H., Dittle, V., Cooper, R. (2015) Practical Observations in Beach Slope Formation
and Application of the Thin Layer Equilibrium Model to Observed Data, Proceedings of the 18th
International Seminar on Paste and Thickened Tailings (Paste 2015), R. Jewell and A. Fourie (eds),
Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Cairns, Australia, pp. 443-453.

Wennberg, T, Sellgren, A., Goldkuhl, I. (2008) Rheological and Depositional Characterisation of

Paste-Like Tailings Slurries, Proceedings of the Conference in Minerals Engineering 2008, Luleå
University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden, pp. 151.

13

View publication stats