2011 USRM Cave Mining-Back To The Basics - Moss

Caving: Back to the
Basics
Allan Moss,
General Manager
Rio Tinto Underground Technology
Theme: Back to the Basics What you
can’t measure you can’t manage
• Measurement: A quantitatively expressed reduction of

uncertainty based on one or more observations (Hubbard: How to
Measure Anything, 2010
• The key measure in the mining industry is value, generally

expressed as NPV, and is a function of metal recovery. Indeed
considerations of value dictate the plan as much dictates as
pure technical requirements
• Technical work on caving in its infancy. Thus there is a paucity
of literature on caving, particularly around cave performance
• Acknowledge the thinking of Dennis Laubscher who laid the
foundation for modern cave design
June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 2

Ore grade and value
1. The resource grade; a

measure of the metal that is
Value is a function of in the ground
Run of Mine (ROM) 2. The reserve grade, a

measure of the effectiveness
grade which is an of the design
outcome of three inter-
3. The recovered grade, a
related factors measure of how the cave is
managed and cave dynamics

Agenda
Context – why the interest in caving
How block caving works and key technical considerations
Back to basics: Robust data and measurement of performance
Wrap-up

Agenda
Wrap -up

Greater Depths of Mining

Trends in Mining ~ to 2013

Trends in Mining ~ after 2013

Why Caving?
• Use of gravity to break the rock (instead of explosives), thus low
operating cost compared with other underground methods
• High production rates can be achieved allowing economies of
scale
• Allows high degree of mechanization
• Safe
However
• High initial capital costs
• Conceptually simple – let gravity do the work - but technically
very challenging
• Requires large design effort; high quality construction; and
rigorously managed operations
Evolution of daily production rates
New generation Caves; under construction
160000
140000
Palabora
Henderson
Homestake - S Dakota
Magma
Western Deeps
1000m
Kidd Creek
Open pits Super
120000
TONNES PER DAY
2000m
caves
3000m
100000
4000m
80000
60000 San Manuel

Climax Henderson “Conventional”
40000
Andina underground
Kiruna Olympic Dam
Palabora
Malmberget
20000 Miami Premier
Freeport IOZ/DOZ
Ridgeway
Kidd Creek
Mount Isa Salvador
0
1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040
YEAR (after Brown 2004a)

Cave Mining ~ When is it Applicable?
• Orebodies with a substantial

vertical dimension; massive
or pipe like
• Rock strength not a
limitation but need sufficient
orebody dimensions
• Primarily used in copper
mining but also
molybdenum and diamonds,

Agenda
Wrap -up

Components of a Caving Operation
Plant
Crushed Ore
Shaft
Ore body
Draw bells
Haulage
system
Production tunnels

Terminology
Zone of Stress Pre-mining

Fracturing Conditions
(seismogenic zone)
Expansion Void
(Air gap)
Caved
Zone
Yielded Zone
(Modified from Duplancic & Brady 1999)

Direction of Advancing Undercut

Modernisation of an Old Method
LHD
Grizzley
Block
Block
CaveCave

Scale
June 2011
1 March 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 16
Increased Production, Higher Lifts
uncertainty
reduced knowledge
limited control
well established method
good control
more certainty

Access and Extraction Complexity
DOZ Mine – Freeport, Indonesia
GBT Area I & II
Escondida, Chile
IOZ
DOZ
Courtesy of PTFI
Block Caving Concept
VALUE REALIZATION
CAPITAL INVESTMENT
100 %
Vyazmensky © 2007
CAVE DYNAMICS
SOURCES OF
UNCERTAINTY
TIME
CAVE MANAGEMENT
Caving Process • Block cave mining is based on
the principle that, once a
sufficiently large area of a block
has been undercut by drilling
and blasting, the overlying
20 block of ore will start to cave
under the influence of gravity.
Progressive spalling • The process will continue until
caving propagates through the
entire block to surface or to the
open pit above
25 35 45
1. Develop undercut level 3. Drill and blast undercut rings

2. Develop production tunnels 4. Open troughs

Mechanics of Caving
(Itasca, MMT, 2007)
In Situ Stress
Elastic Elastic
Damage Threshold Joint Slip
Seismogenic Crack Growth
Peak Strength
Cohesive/Tensile
Yield Weakening
Residual Strength Frictional
Strengthening
Air Gap
σ1
50
Dilation, Modulus
Bulking Softening
Caved
Fully Bulked
σ3
0 10
Key Technical Issues
cave propagation
cave flow
June 2011
cave fragmentation
US Rock Mechanics Symposium 22
Critical dimensions to initiate caving

Fragmentation: the key to a successful
operation

Caving the block
Primary
Index of Interruptions Frequency Fragmentation
(Salvador mine, draw point 04W20)
Secondary
fragmentation
HoD
Initial secondary
fragmentation
Blasting effect
Blasted undercut material
Flow Interruption Index Secondary
(events/tons x 1000) Fragmentation

Stress Drives Fragmentation
a) Fracturing Joint extension and
creation due to stress
Dependent on: Preconditioning of ground

by caving induced stresses
¾ Rock Quality
b) Shear ¾ Caving stress
stress
Increasing Shear and fracture generation in abutment arch

KEY DRIVERS IN REDUCING FRAGMENTATION
Fragmentation is complex: risks!!!
Primary
zone of loosening fragmentation
expansion
Secondary
void
fragmentation
fragment
size
evolution
f(fragment size)
with draw Fine material
higher
mobility of
finer
fragments
within a
draw Coarse material
column
IDZ

Primary fragmentation increase with higher stress level
In‐situ fragmentation 20% increase in stress 40% increase in stress
30m
0.1 1 10
What do we draw?- the recovery issue
High grade ore Dilution entry
ORE BODY
$
WASTE ROCK WASTE ROCK
Vyazmensky
Vyazmensky ©
© 2008
2008 TIME
REPEAT
Geometry of drawbells
DRAWBELLS

Cave Flow
Zone of Loosening
(blocks that were displaced
vertically at least once)
waste
Waste
Entry
waste ore
waste
ore
ore ore
HoD
IDZ ~ Ellipsoid of Motion
(extracted blocks)
Rilling
32
Impacts of Fragmentation
IMPLICATIONS ON PRODUCTIVITY
RESOURCE RECOVERY
SECONDARY
BLASTING
VALUE
AT RISK
Flow dictates Revenue Stream
WASTE ROCK
CAVED ORE WASTE

ENTRY
UNCAVED cylindrical IEZ
ORE
elliptical or frustum
shaped IEZ;
height equivalent
to~100-200 mean
EXTRACTED ORE fragment size
RILLING and MASS FLOW PREDOMINATLY MASS FLOW

What do we draw?- the recovery issue
High grade ore Dilution entry
ORE BODY
$
WASTE ROCK WASTE ROCK
Vyazmensky
Vyazmensky ©
© 2008
2008 TIME

Complexity of Caving
Agenda
Wrap-up

Production Pyramid
$
Recovery Recovery Operations
Draw strategy
& control
Reserve
Production Forecast
Design &
planning
Resource Caving Analysis
Orebody Knowledge

Fundamentals
Monitor &
Measure
Design, Plan, Production

Forecast Knowledge
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify

Rock mass performance dominates
Monitor &
Measure
Design,
Production
value proposition
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify

Monitor &
First Stop Information

Measure
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Acoustic Televiewer Orebody

Knowledge
Learn &
Modify
Rock strength testing

Core Logging
Mapping

Differences in Orebody Knowledge
Monitor &
Measure
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
therefore differences in Uncertainty

Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
Initiation point close to

surface Substantial information
No geotechnical constraints
Ore drilled and typically sampled

as part of mining process – detailed
knowledge for short term planning
Initiation point remote from surface

Limited information Substantial
geotechnical constraints
Limited knowledge of ore- sampling after the fact

Orebody Knowledge - Factors Design,
Monitor &
Measure
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
Joint Orientation SRM suite of tests

(direct tension, UCS, triaxial)
Discrete Fracture
Network (DFN)
Joint Frequency &

Persistence
Rock Mass
Properties
Intact UCS, Primary

Tensile Strength, Fragmentation
Y. Modulus
& Poisson’s ratio
Induced Fracturing vs.
Cave-induced stresses microseismicity
Cave Performance
Monitor &
Measure
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
200
180
Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS)
160
NPM
140 PMC
Oyu Tolgoi
120
100 DOZ 0.35
0.3
Statistics
Oyu Tolgoi
(avg. UCS = 133 MPa)
Experience
Range - 35 to 190 MPa
80 Number of Data Sets - 17
Empirical
0.25 Mean - 106.1 MPa
Median - 100 MPa
Relative Frequency
Std Dev. - 48.2

0.2
60
Methods
0.15
40 0.1
0.05
20
0
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 205
Uniaxial Com pressive Strength (MPa)
Mine
Numerical
Methods
Error in Estimate
Estimated vs. Actual Hydraulic Radius
50
Actual Hydraulic Radius

40
30
(m )
20
Prediction of Cave 10
Performance 0
0 10 20 30 40
Estimated Hydraulic Radius (m)

Advanced Design –
Monitor &
Measure
Numerical Modeling
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
ELFEN CAVE PROPAGATION AND SUBSIDENCE

Orebody
Knowledge
Learn &
Modify
Evolution of vertical displacements (0.1 – 1m)
50m
Cave propagation
arrest and crown
pillar collapse
Vyazmensky, 2008
Lesson learned Monitor &
Measure
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Palabora
successfully Orebody Learn &
Knowledge Modify
transitioned from an
open pit to a 30,000
tpd underground
block cave but…….
dilution of the ore

reserve and
subsequent
reduction in life of
mine
Footprint Condition - Dynamic
Stresses change as undercut passes over and

drawbell developed
Stress concentrated
in walls
Back in “relaxed” state
Experience wall
convergence as
fractured columns
of rock deform
(buckle) into panel
Zone of Stress Induced

Brittle Fracture 1-2m
47
wide
Effect of cave front advance rate
Immediate
abutment
Production
Initial
state
Constru
ction
Rock Behaviour Modes in σ - space
At UCS/10 or >10MPa for UCS >100MPa
49
Behaviour
• Observations are:
– Brittle failure dominates
– Onset and propagation occurs generally in walls and lead
to gradual de-stabilisation of back
– Indications that failure involves a surface skin of around 1
to 2m fractured rock. This is the volume of ground to be
managed
• Drivers of failure are stress; not only the major principal stress
(loading) but the minor principal stress (relaxation). Require
support systems that deal with displacements
50
Where do we Obtain Production Monitor &
Measure
Information?
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
Grade Convergence
Fragmentation Number of buckets drawn
Height of Draw
Location of Cave Back
Compliance to Plan
Grade and Performance Reconciliation
Bucket factor: An imprecise Measure Design,
Monitor &
Measure
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
The LHD: One of the primary

cave management and
measuring tools!!!!!
A measure of how full a

bucket is with solid
material: Mostly a
function of material type
High bucket factor Low bucket factor
possibly > 1 likely < 1
Monitor and Measure: Height of Draw Monitor &
Measure
and Fragmentation
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
53
Monitor and Measure Design,
Monitor &
Measure
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Underground Tonnage Hoisted

Average Drawpoint Availability
45000
MTD Average % Cu = 0.67
0.80 100%
MTD Average = 33,546
90% Orebody Learn &
40000 Knowledge Modify
0.70 80%
70%
35000 60%
0.60
50%
30000 40%
0.50
Tonnes Hoisted
30%
25000
20%
% Cu
0.40
10%
20000
0%
X/CUT 05
X/CUT 18
X/CUT 07
X/CUT 19
X/CUT 16
X/CUT 14
X/CUT 08
X/CUT 12
X/CUT 13
X/CUT 01
X/CUT 09
X/CUT 06
X/CUT 04
X/CUT 15
X/CUT 03
X/CUT 17
X/CUT 02
X/CUT 20
X/CUT 10
0.30
15000
0.20
10000
5000 0.10 Variation from Business Plan

0 0.00
10,000
01-May-11
02-May-11
03-May-11
04-May-11
05-May-11
06-May-11
07-May-11
08-May-11
09-May-11
10-May-11
11-May-11
12-May-11
13-May-11
14-May-11
15-May-11
16-May-11
17-May-11
18-May-11
19-May-11
20-May-11
21-May-11
22-May-11
23-May-11
24-May-11
25-May-11
26-May-11
27-May-11
28-May-11
29-May-11
30-May-11
31-May-11
5,000
Variation (tons)
15 Average Tonnes Hoisted Hoisting Potential Planned Tonnes Measured Grade %Cu 0
Metal Balance -5,000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
10
-10,000
Plan
5 -15,000 Something is
0
-20,000 happening
Week
-5
-10
1000
Higher than Shortfall realizations
-15 plan perceived Shortfall
against
perceived
05Q1
05Q2
05Q3
05Q4
06Q1
06Q2
06Q3
06Q4
07Q1
07Q2
07Q3
07Q4
08Q1
08Q2
08Q3
08Q4
09Q1
09Q2
09Q3
09Q4
GOOD plan
as BAD single
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 realization
IEZ = IEZ = IEZ = IEZ =
13m 12m 10m 8m
33 24 17 12
months months months months
13m 12m 10m 8m
33 24 17 12
Recovery? Design,
Monitor &
Measure
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
Material actually recovered

due to over pulling
Material “planned” to be recovered
57
Monitor &
Must be very careful

Measure
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
with Statistics
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify
LHD availability vs. Tons Hoisted
80%
70%
L H D A v a ila b ility
60%
50%
40% Care required when examining data in isolation
30%
20%
10%
0%
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Average Tonnes Hoisted
June 2011 58
US Rock Mechanics Symposium
Monitor, Learn, React Monitor &
Measure
Design,
Production
Plan,
Knowledge
Forecast
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify

Implications of Time to Construct Monitor &
Measure
No Feedback loop Design,

Plan,
Forecast
Production
Knowledge
Orebody Learn &

Knowledge Modify

Agenda
Wrap -up

Can’t define risk - Can’t define
value
Characterisation – the resource; understanding the size of the prize
Design – resource to reserve; time for imagination
Construction – the big spend and first taste of reality

Operation – recovery and payback
Paper (Design) Value vs. Actual Value

Complete knowledge of the future is an
impossibility
The question then becomes “how
representative is the information we have on
hand?”
This information is used to develop a robust
enough plan to cater for the inherent 1,5 m
uncertainty. CONCRETE
DAMAGE
Uncertainty translates to risk (Flexibility CONCRETE
costs money) DAMAGE
Block caving is not for marginal projects

The Vision – an Ore Factory
Required
Fragmentator
In Situ
Fragment Crushing
Size and Grinding
Energy
(Distance Traveled)
Reliable
Ore Flow
Predictable Ore Transport

Fragmentation and Sizing
(+ grade)
The Ore
The RockFactory
Factory

Light at the End of the Tunnel
Summary
• Caving method relies on gravity to
break the rock sufficiently to allow
efficient transfer to surface
• Knowledge and planning is critical.
• Four steps in reliable production
forecasts:
1. Collect appropriate rock mass and
operating data
2. Turn data into information through
organising and visualising
3. Analyse and forecast
4. Monitor, reconcile and learn
Thank you for your Attention

64
13m 12m 10m 8m
13m 12m 10m 8m
33 24 17 12
13m 12m 10m 8m
33 24 17 12
Uncertainty in Cash Flow over
Time
Stage 1: Initial Cave: 0 to 30% draw ( this will be include the
period of production build up)
Stage 2: Steady State Cave: 30 to 60% draw
Stage 3: Mature Cave: 60 to end of life draw (nominally 100%)
Stage 3 Uncertainty in Performance

Stage 2
Stage 1
Cash Flow
Base Case
Time
Uncertainty in Schedule
Stage 0 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
2 March 2010 SME March 2010 68

2 March 2010 SME March 2010 69
Case Study - Palabora mine
70
OPEN PIT CAVE MINING
• better control • reduced knowledge

• more certainty • poor control
• high uncertainty
Need for a better technology

COMPLEXITY OF CAVE MINING
KEY RISKS ARE IN

CAVE DYNAMICS
AND CAVE
MANAGEMENT
CAVE DYNAMICS: FRAGMENTATION
IMPLICATIONS ON PRODUCTION LEVEL LOGISTICS:
RESOURCE RECOVERY EQUIPMENT, MUCKING SPEED
VALUE
AT RISK
SECONDARY BLASTING
CONFIDENTIAL ©2009, Rio Tinto, All Rights Reserved 74
CAVE DYNAMICS: FLOW
BLOCK CAVE PANEL CAVE
EARLY DILUTION – POTENTIALLY LOWER AVERAGE GR

UNCERTAINTY Rock mass Cave
Uncertainty
Ore reserves &
response performance
Risk
Orebody Cave TARGET

Construction
knowledge management VALUE
PROCESS
Access:
Exploration shafts/drifts Tonnage:
(Resource) development draw rate, drawpoints
availability
Studies (Reserve) Layout:
bell construction rate
Grade
Cave ramp-up to full

production
CASH FLOW
time
UNCERTAINTY IN CAVE MINING
IN-SITU VALUE: grade ROCK MASS RESPONSE:

UNCERTAINTY A caving, fragmentation, subsidence
UNCERTAINTY B
CAVE FLOW:
UNCERTAINTY C
MINING INPUT:
undercutting,
material extraction rate OUTPUT - VALUE:
(stress, void) tonnage, grade
UNCERTAINTY D UNCERTAINTY f(time)=A*B*C*D
RILING ANIMATION
Caveability
Notes: mines in database

1.Palabora
2.North Parkes
3.Premier
4.Esmerelda
5.Andina
6.Salvador
7.Henderson
8. DOZ
Bingham
9.Finsch
10.Blanco
11.Magma

2011 USRM Cave Mining-Back To The Basics - Moss

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2011 USRM Cave Mining-Back To The Basics - Moss

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caving: Back to the

• Measurement: A quantitatively expressed reduction of

• The key measure in the mining industry is value, generally

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 2

1. The resource grade; a

Run of Mine (ROM) 2. The reserve grade, a

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 3

Context – why the interest in caving

How block caving works and key technical considerations

Back to basics: Robust data and measurement of performance

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 4

Context – why the interest in caving

How block caving works and key technical considerations

Back to basics: Robust data and measurement of performance

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 5

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 6

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 7

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 8

New generation Caves; under construction

60000 San Manuel

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 10

• Orebodies with a substantial

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 11

Context – why the interest in caving

How block caving works and key technical considerations

Back to basics: Robust data and measurement of performance

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 12

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 13

Zone of Stress Pre-mining

(Modified from Duplancic & Brady 1999)

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 14

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 15

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 17

GBT Area I & II

1. Develop undercut level 3. Drill and blast undercut rings

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 20

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 23

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 24

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 25

Dependent on: Preconditioning of ground

Increasing Shear and fracture generation in abutment arch

with draw Fine material

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 27

In‐situ fragmentation 20% increase in stress 40% increase in stress

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 30

CAVED ORE WASTE

RILLING and MASS FLOW PREDOMINATLY MASS FLOW

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 34

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 35

Context – why the interest in caving

How block caving works and key technical considerations

Back to basics: Robust data and measurement of performance

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 37

Resource Caving Analysis

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 38

Design, Plan, Production

Orebody Learn &

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 39

Orebody Learn &

June 2011 US Rock Mechanics Symposium 40

First Stop Information

Acoustic Televiewer Orebody

Rock strength testing

Uncertainty translates to risk (Flexibility CONCRETE