LOCK CAVE SCHOOL OF EXCELLENC

Bogenfels arch after global warming ? Why did

this not cave?
 CAVABILITY IN MASSIVE ORE DEPOSITS -
CONTENTS

 Statement of the problem and issues

 Stress in caving - basic caving mechanics
 Rock Quality
 Hydraulic Radius
 Prediction of cavability
 Further caving considerations
Issues and problems
 Conditions for cave initiation or cavability

 Mechanics of caving under a range of conditions

 Will caving continue to propagate to surface or be arrested at some

stage ?

 Influence of cave height

 Influence of rock mass strength

 Influence of in situ and re-distributed stresses

 Interaction of a propagating cave with the surface or an open pit

The main factors affecting cave propagation in a transition from
open pit to underground cave mining

Flores (2004)
Basic caving mechanics Stresses around the
cave
Diagram illustrating the different stages of caving propagation in
(Flores & Karzulovic 2003b)
a transition from open pit to underground mining by caving

CAVING INITIATION CAVING WITHOUT CONNECTION CAVING WITHOUT CONNECTION

CONNECTION TO THE PIT BOTTOM TRANSITIONAL CAVING

Elastic analysis of tangential stresses
Tangential stress versus cave height
Relation between H (block height) and B (base minimum span)
in block and panel caving mines
500
H  2B H B
Connection
450
Difficult to surface
connection
400
to surface

Easy
350
(m)

connection
to surface
300
BLOCK HEIGHT

250

200

150

100

50

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800

FOOTPRINT WIDTH (m)

Flores et al (2004a)
Diagram illustrating possible caving scenarios

Flores et al (2004b)
Zones of caving propagation behaviour during the

evolution of the cave (Flores & Karzulovic 2003b)

Connection
with the pit
bottom

Caving
propagation
arrest

Virgin caving
propagation

Caving
initiation
Caving propagation factor (CPF)
(Flores et al 2004b)

where S1 and S3 are known

from the results of the
numerical models, ci is the
uniaxial compressive
strength of the “intact” rock,
and mb,
s and a are material
constants that depend on
the value of mi
and the geological strength
index of the rock mass, GSI
Diagram illustrating the zones that define the likelihood of caving

propagation in terms of the caving propagation factor (Flores & Karzulovic 2003b)
 Induced Stresses In The Cave Back
 It is important that the stresses in the cave back are calculated
for different heights so that these can be related to changes (if
any ) in the rock mass or the geometry as the caving
progresses. It is on record that caving has ceased as a result of
stress or rock mass changes or a change in the geometry.
 The induced stress is a function of the orientation of the cave
front, shape of cave back, variation in rock types and
proximity to previously mined areas.
 The stresses in the cave back can be modified to an extent by
the shape of the cave front.
 Numerical modeling can be a useful tool that helps to
determine the stress pattern associated with several, possible
mining sequences. . High horizontal stresses acting on
vertical joints will inhibit caving
 Induced Stresses In The Cave Back

 The stresses in the cave back can be modified to a certain extent by the shape of
the cave front, in this respect numerical modeling can be a useful tool.
 A concave shape to the undercut provides better control of major structures and
generally a stronger undercutting environment.
 The magnitude of the principal stress should be related to the RMS (rock mass
strength).
 Once the drawpoints are commissioned then the principal stress in the cave back
becomes a higher induced stress and any principal stresses that are more than half
the RMS will play a significant role in the caving.
 All the features that are observed on the level such as squeezing in weaker
ground with strain bursts and stress spalling in more competent zones will occur
in the undercut back. In fact more so because there is freedom of movement and
gravity plays a significant role.
 ROCK QUALITY
 The Rock Mass Rating (RMR) of the orebody and hangingwall rock mass must
be recorded on sections for the anticipated height of caving. This data will show
if there are changes in the rock mass, major structures must be allocated IRMR
values.
 This data is also required for fragmentation calculations. When the IRMR has
been adjusted to MRMR it will be possible to identify zones where there might
be problems in cave propagation.
 In those orebodies with a range of ratings it is the continuity of the lower ratings
that will determine the size of the undercut.
 Any abnormal features that might impact on the cavability should be noted e.g. a
prominent competent zone whose geometry has not been appreciated in the
averaging of the RMR such as the silicified core at Northparkes. A feature such
as this could result in an increase in the HR.
 Major Structures

 Major structures have to have sufficient continuity so that they

will influence the cavability of the ore.
 In the chrysotile asbestos mines, shear zones are the major
components in initiating the cave.
 The orientation of the structures is important as vertical
structures are not as important as dipping structures.
 The orientation and dip can influence the direction of
undercutting.
E48 OREBODY MAJOR STRUCTURES
 ACTUALIZACIÓN Y
ACTUALIZACIÓN Y RECONOCIMIENTO
RECONOCIMIENTO
CHUQUICAMATA EN
CHUQUICAMATA EN PROFUNDIDAD
PROFUNDIDAD

Rajo Actual

Rampa Exploración
(en desarrollo)

W
W
FFaallllaa
Campaña de
Sondajes

Campaña
Campaña Sondajes
Sondajes
Paneles
Fase
Fase II 19.770
19.770 m
m Subterránea
Superf:
Superf: 8490
8490 m
m
Subte:
Subte: 11280 m
11280 m

Fase
Fase II
II 19.000
19.000 m
m
Subte:
Subte: 16.840
16.840 m
m

TOTAL
TOTAL 36.610
36.610 m
m
 MODELAMIENTO FALLA OESTE
MINA CHUQUICAMATA

RAJO ACTUAL
(Enero -2001)

ZONA DE CIZALLE
MODERADO
FALLA
OESTE
ZONA DE CIZALLE
INTENSO
TUNEL
TUNEL H -3 CHANCADOR
K-1
TUNEL H -3
ESTE
TUNEL DE DRENAJE
K-1 SW

TUNEL DE DRENAJE
ANTIGUO K -1
 80
E2900

E3000

E3100

E3200

E3300

E3400

E3500

E3600

E3700

E3800

E3900
N5000
65
85 65

82
Dominio Estanques Blancos N4900

84 77 65

N4800

75

75 85
70
80
83 N4700
70
67 65

60
N4600

55
90

84 90
80
N4500
78
75
76

75 82
84

N4400

85
74
85
78
85
86 N4300

68
88
8B1

86 77
82
80 N4200
79
85
88
85
88

N4100
08
08
84
85 80 18
28

70 81
N4000
70
84 86
86 80
82
60
76
80
82 85
N3900
80
69 72

73
74

CARACTERIZACIÓN
75
70 85
73
85 82 70 N3800
82
85 87 88

88 77 83
85 85

ESTRUCTURAL
75 85 80
6D1

N3700

80 85
75 77
77 75
85
60
75
84
85
N3600

42 70 83
83
73 75

76
40 N3500

85
84 35
80 72

40 75
40
75 78 N3400

50
68
72 86
83
80
88
N3300

80
40
75 81

80 75
N3200
85 75 75 70
70

87
75
85
N3100
85
78 85
85

85
82 N3000

85

80 82 70
70
85
80
88 75 85 N2900

68 80
85 80
85 75
80 N2800

80 75
85 85
78 85
78 80
75 80
N2700

85
82
60
N2600
 Structures

 Flat dipping structures angled from 0º to 45º are the most

significant structures as both shear and gravity failure can
occur.
 The location of the structure(s) must be noted with respect to
the undercut boundaries as a regular distribution is preferable
to a concentration of joints / structures in the centre of the
undercut area, which could lead to a chimney cave and
overhangs along the edges.
 Water

 Water in the potential cave zone can assist the cave by

reducing friction on joints or with the effects of increased pore
water pressure.
 The source of the water can be ground water or water
introduced during the rainy season.
 At Shabanie Mine, the monitoring of Block 6 cave showed
that the stress caving increased after heavy rainfall.
 PREDICTION OF CAVABILITY

 LAUBSCHER’S EMPIRICAL MRMR VS

HYDRAULIC RADIUS GRAPH
 THE EMPIRICAL EXTENDED MATTHEWS
METHOD
 NUMERICAL MODEL
 PREDICTION OF CAVE PROPAGATION
 CAVEABILITY – PREDICTION

PREDICTION BASED ON ANALYSIS OF:

 Rockmass strength - IRMR / MRMR
 Relevant major structures
 Regional stress
 Induced stress
 Water
 Location of adjacent mining operations
 Scale of adjacent mining operations - heavy blasting
 IRMR / MRMR of orebody and hangingwall
 Stress effects - shear failure, tension or clamping
 Cave propagation - vertical or lateral extension of the cave.
 CAVEABILITY: ASSOCIATED
CONSIDERATIONS
 Geometry of area under draw
 Hydraulic radius of orebody
 Hydraulic radius to propagate caving
 Minimum span
 Direction of advance of cave front and shape
 Numerical modelling
 Monitoring
 Predicted rate of caving - intermittent or continuous - influence
on rate of caving
 Consolidation
 Chimney caves
Example: Palabora Mine Design – Empirical
Assessment
Stability Diagram (after Laubscher)
100

90

Transitional
80 Stable
70
Palabora
60 Range
MRMR

50

40
More Typical
30 Block Caves
20

10
Caving
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Hydraulic Radius (m)

Laubscher Stability Diagram
 Equations for Mathews stability graph

N = Q'.A.B.C

where
RQD  Jr  RQD = Rock Quality Designation
Q'      Jn = Discontinuity set number
 Jn   Ja  Jr = Discontinuity roughness
number
Ja = Discontinuity alteration
S = Area / Perimeter number
Extended Matthews Stability Graph
 NUMERICAL MODELLING

 To date mathematical modelling of the cavability of

an orebody has not been too successful.
 Maybe the modelling is not capable of coping with
the four dimensions, but this does not mean that we
should not persevere with modelling.
Numerical modeling
NUMERICAL MODELING
EXAMPLES OF CAVING
DOZ CAVE / AIRGAP MONITORING

IOZ/GBT Cave
TDR Cables
(near 17,000 meters YTD
2003)

DOZ Cave July 2003

DOZ CAVE / AIRGAP MONITORING
Air Gap Drift – IOZ
3456/L Monitoring
Open Holes Caving of the
DOZ
Air Gap 50 – 60 meter

DOZ Cave April

2002

300 meters

Estimated Muck Profile

(April 2002)

DOZ Extraction
 Cave management
< 0.8 % e C u
0 .8 - 1.0 % e C u
1 .0 - 2.0 % e C u Ba se o f We a th e rin g
> 2 .0 % e C u
Ba se o f O xid a tio n

4
1 02 00 RL

E 26 O P E N C U T
3
Tonnes (M) 2
1
0
G yp su m Le a c h e d Zo n e Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sept Oct-Dec Jan-Mar
97 98 98 98 98 99
O N E LEVEL Production Tonnes (M) 0.98 1.02 1.14 1 1.13 1.06
(1 0 0 3 0 R L )
Caved Tonnes (M) 0 3.01 0.7 2.46 0.1 0.68

1 00 00 RL

He a vy G yp su m Ve in in g

Continual measurement of cave back

position
05/09 /9 6

21 /0 5 /9 7
21 /01 /97

R econciliation of caved tons verse

9 80 0RL
drawn (production) tons
53300N

53400N
10800E

10900E

11000E
E26 Underground & Opencut Mine

Por tal

Ventilation Shaft

E26 Opencut Mine

Hoisting
Shaft

One Level

Retur n Airway Shaft Access Decline

Cave back as
at M arch 1999

Loading
Conveyor Incline Station

Control Room
& Workshop

9830 Undercut
9818 Undercut

Sublevel Access
Crusher No.1
Decline
 RATE OF CAVING

 All rock masses will cave.

 The manner of their caving and the resultant
fragmentation size distribution need to be predicted
if cave mining is to be successfully implemented.
 The rate of caving can be slowed by controlling the
draw as the cave can only propagate if there is space
into which the rock can move.
RATE OF CAVING

SEISMOGENIC/FRACTURE
PROPAGATION ZONE

DILATION ZONE/ZONE OF LOOSENING

 CAVING

Stress
Concentration

Stress
Stress Concentration
Concentration
CONTROLLING THE EXPANSION GAP
 MONITORING

 Monitoring of a cave is a very important factor and should be

considered at an early stage so that boreholes that were used
for exploration can later be used for monitoring.
 The monitoring techniques range from the very effective
simple techniques to the more sophisticated. It has been found
that the simple techniques are often the best. Visual
observations are extremely important and a simple descriptive
code should be set up.
 CAVE MONITORING – OPEN HOLES

9800 RL

9750 RL
Open Holes

9500 RL

9464 RL
 PALABORA – MONITORING AND PRODUCTION

30,000

25,000
23938
23265
Tonnes Hoisted per Day

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51
Week Number

Hoisted Tonnes (Daily) 2nd Quarter Forecast Hoisted Tonnes Trend (Daily)
E26 Lift 1 Drill & Blast Trial - 10030RL
CONCEPTO DE PREACONDICIONAMIENTO

PROCESO
PRE
ACONDICIONA-
MIENTO
26 m

13
m
 EXPERIMENTO ESCALA INDUSTRIAL

Dia 28 de Septiembre 2001

Cantidad de Tiros : 19
Diametro de los Tiros : 5 1/2”
Explosivo de Columna : Emulsión
RS-5 Dend : 1.15 gr/cm3
Sistema de Iniciación : Detonadores
electronicos
Cantidad de Explosivo : 29500 Kg.
Longitud de Carguío : 85 m
Longitud de los Tiros : 100 y
112 metros
Area a Cubrir : 7000 m2
Tiempo de la Tronadura : 26 ms
Hora de Detonacion : 16 Hrs
EFECTIVIDAD DEL PROCESO DE PRE-ACONDICIONAMIENTO
 REFERENCES
 Dr. Dennis Laubscher (2003) A PRACTICAL MANUAL ON BLOCK CAVING for the
International Caving Study (1997-2000) – Chapter 6 Cavability

 Brown E.T. (2003) Block Caving Geomechanics International Caving Study Chapter 3 Cavability
Assessment

 International Caving Study – Chapter 3 Cavability Assessment

 T. Szwedzicki, E. Widijanto, F. Sinaga, PTFI Freeport Indonesia Propagation of a caving zone, A case
Study from PT Freeport, Indonesia MASSMIN 2004 Santiago Chile Conference papers