Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ICS II BC PC Mines
ICS II BC PC Mines
Ridgeway UG by SLC.
Salvador UG by PC.
Grasberg OP.
Indonesia
Grasberg DOZ UG by PC.
Bingham
OP considering a transition to UG by PC.
USA Canyon
Henderson UG by PC.
The interpretation of the data collected in this study has allowed current trends and practices in
underground mining by caving methods to be identified. Table 2 summarizes the currently used values of
the most relevant parameters. This compilation may be of value in scoping and pre-feasibility studies.
Final Report
Confidential to ICS Sponsors
68 End of Project - ICS II Report
Table 2 - Typical parameters for block and panel caving mines based on 2002 surveys
Block Height 210 m This typical block height could vary by ± 20%.
< 50,000 m
2
30,000 m
2 These typical areas could vary +20%. It is
Footprint 2 2
recommended to use equal or larger areas, but not
50,000 to 100,000 m 75,000 m
Area smaller than the typical values. Also, square areas
2 2
> 100,000 m 170,000 m are better than the rectangular ones.
2
Smaller areas are not recommended, especially in
Area 10,000 m
massive rock masses.
Height 4m
Could be increased but not decreased.
Width 4m
UCL
environment.
Height 4m
Could be increased but not decreased.
Width 4m
Final Report
Confidential to ICS and MMT Sponsors
End of Project - ICS II Report 69
Powder Factor 400 g/tonne For undercutting blasting. It could vary ± 20%.
3
Oversize Limit 1.8 to 2.0 m Could vary by ± 20%.
(1) These typical values are intended only for the scoping and pre-feasibility stages of a mining project.
Final Report
Confidential to ICS Sponsors