Quantifying Rockfall and Rockburst Risk in Underground Mines William Joughin.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Integra Consult A/S Safety Assessment. Integra Consult A/S SAFETY ASSESSMENT Objective Objective –Demonstrate that an acceptable level of safety will.
Advertisements

Recent Experience in Turkey for Building Vulnerability and Estimating Damage Losses P. Gülkan and A. Yakut Middle East Technical University.
Lessons Learned from the Application of Risk Management in the Shipment of LNG.
THE USE OF YIELD LINE ANALYSIS AND PANEL TESTS FOR THE DESIGN OF SHOTCRETE  by  WC JOUGHIN* and GC HOWELL** SRK Consulting, Johannesburg * Principal.
EMPIRICAL DESIGN METHODS – UBC GEOMECHANICS RESEARCH –CERM3 WORKSHOP
Better together... we deliver SASOL CHEMICALS BASE CHEMICALS (EXPLOSIVES) MOSH - "Day of Learning" 2014.
Framework for comparing power system reliability criteria Evelyn Heylen Prof. Geert Deconinck Prof. Dirk Van Hertem Durham Risk and Reliability modelling.
Sensitivity Analysis In deterministic analysis, single fixed values (typically, mean values) of representative samples or strength parameters or slope.
Safety System & Scene. Overview Safety Terms Hazards Hazard Lists Worst Case Conditions Hazard Characteristics Analysis Sumary.
OUTLINE SPATIAL VARIABILITY FRAGILITY CURVES MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS CONCLUSIONS EFFECTS DESIGN RECOMMEND BEARING CAPACITY OF HETEROGENEOUS SOILS APPENDIXOUTLINE.
The Hidden Hazards in Non-Coal Mining Nick Hardie C.Eng. EUCOSH workshop , Beijing.
FACTORS AFFECTING SLOPE FAILURE Introduction Sr. No Name of the parameters and properties Details 1Geological DiscontinuitiesFault, Joint, bedding plane,
A study of the stability mechanism within shallow mining operations that will impact on the sustainability of Platinum Mines The CSIR Research and Innovation.
Tony Leach (Itasca Africa)
Department of Consumer and Employment Protection © 2008 Resources Safety 1 Please read this before using presentation The charts and tables in this presentation.
Quantifying risk by performance- based earthquake engineering, Cont’d Greg Deierlein Stanford University …with contributions by many 2006 IRCC Workshop.
6/23/2015 Risk-Informed Process and Tools for Permitting Hydrogen Fueling Stations Jeffrey LaChance 1, Andrei Tchouvelev 2, and Jim Ohi 3 1 Sandia National.
Development & Implementation of Strata Control Practices
A Comparison of Numerical Methods and Analytical Methods in Determination of Tunnel Walls Displacement Behdeen Oraee-Mirzamani Imperial College London,
SLOPE STABILITY IN OPENCAST MINES
Process Hazard Analysis DOW Fire & Explosion Index ChE 258 Chemical Process Safety University of Missouri - Rolla.
Slope Stability in Jointed Rock Masses
Reliability Analysis Procedures for Infrastructure Facilities Andrzej S. Nowak University of Nebraska - Lincoln Outline  Causes of Uncertainty  Load.
Risk Management - the process of identifying and controlling hazards to protect the force.  It’s five steps represent a logical thought process from.
Induced Slip on a Large-Scale Frictional Discontinuity: Coupled Flow and Geomechanics Antonio Bobet Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN Virginia Tech,
VTT-STUK assessment method for safety evaluation of safety-critical computer based systems - application in BE-SECBS project.
DESIGNING FOR SAFETY CHAPTER 9. IMPORTANCE OF DESIGNING FOR SAFETY  In the near future, the level of safety that companies and industries achieve will.
Application of the Direct Optimized Probabilistic Calculation Martin Krejsa Department of Structural Mechanics Faculty of Civil Engineering VSB - Technical.
“ Building Strong “ Delivering Integrated, Sustainable, Water Resources Solutions 1 What is Engineering Risk and Reliability? Why We Use It? Robert C.
LIQUEFACTION FAILURE OF FOUNDATION - STRUCTURE COLLAPSE.
Proposed Design Methodology for shotcrete W.C Joughin, G.C. Howell, A.R. Leach & J. Thompson.
Patterns of Event Causality Suggest More Effective Corrective Actions Abstract: The Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS) has used a consistent.
Rock Mechanics/Geophysics Larry Costin, Sandia National Labs Paul Young, University of Toronto Discussion Points November 12, 2004 DUSEL Workshop.
Projects THE BASIL READ GROUP Mining and processing activities in Zimbabwe and some thoughts on mining the Great Dyke. Dr Michael Roberts, TWP SAIMM Zimbabwe.
Why Risk Models Should be Parameterised William Marsh, Risk Assessment and Decision Analysis Research Group.
MNM Fatal Fall of Roof Accident Fall of Roof Accident April 15, 2011 (Idaho) April 15, 2011 (Idaho) Underground Silver Operation Underground Silver.
Specific inspection issues in the non-coal mining sector Peter Roedel WORKSHOP ON WORK SAFETY RESPONSIBILITY SYSTEMS WITHIN OSH INSPECTION SYSTEMS 15 –
Duncan Adams Rock Engineering Rock related safety in South African mines— are we making progress? Duncan Adams 19 April 2012 Duncan Adams Rock Engineering.
Large Seismic Event Mitigation Zachary Mayer May
1 Naruki Wakabayashi Shimizu Corporation Tokyo Japan Study on the Jointed Rock Mass for the Excavation of Hyper-KAMIOKANDE Cavern at Kamioka Mine NNN07.
HIGHWALL STABILITY DUE TO GROUND VIBRATIONS FROM BLASTING Dr. Kyle A. Perry Dr. Kot F. Unrug Kevin Harris Michael Raffaldi.
Risk Estimation Two distinct categories of Risies Voluntary Risks e.g. driving or riding in an automobile, and working in an industrial facility. Involuntary.
-Kazem Oraee (Prof) - Arash Goodarzi (Eng) - Nikzad Oraee-Mirzamani (Phd) -Parham Khajehpour (Eng) 34th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining.
EQE International The use of Fragility Analysis in Seismic Safety Cases for Nuclear Power Stations.
The Ground Response Curve, Pillar Loading and Pillar Failure G.S. (Essie) Esterhuizen Chris Mark Michael Murphy The findings and conclusions in this presentation.
Ground Vibrations and Air Blasts: Causes, Effects and Abatement.
M S H A PART 100 RULING. 30 CFR PART 100 ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES; FINAL RULE.
Quality Control Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill.
Contribution to Assessing the Risk of Unexpected High Wall Failure in South African Opencast Coal Mines Liisa Kawali.
1 Investigation of buried flexible culvert subjected to rockfall loading - A brief summary of instrumentation and data aquisition from full-scale tests.
Ranjan kumar Assistant Manager CCL,Ranchi
On the Assessment of Robustness: A General Framework
EQE International The use of Fragility Analysis in Seismic Safety Cases for Nuclear Power Stations.
Objectives Upon completion of this module you should be able to:
BRIDGES MOST IMPORTANT GEOTECHNICAL EFFECT- LIQUEFACTION
Kick-off Conference “Risk Management for
Risk management - HIRAC awareness presentation
Quality Risk Management
Air Carrier Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS)
CPM, PERT & Schedule Risk Analysis in Construction
Evaluating Non-Leak Threats
Rockfall Risk: Determining the expected costs of rockfall consequences
Duncan Adams CoM – MOSH Learning Hub 29 November 2013
Mine Health and Safety Inspectorate
Use of Joint Trace Plots to Evaluate Stability of Mining Excavations
Numerical Analysis of slopes
NZISM Wellington Branch Knowing your risk management landscape
Hydroelectric Cavern’s Stability evaluation and rockbolts failure investigation using induced seismicity Sivakumar Cherukuri.
Watson B.P., Milev A.M., Roberts D.P. Presenter: B.P. Watson
Challenges in mine seismology
Presentation transcript:

Quantifying Rockfall and Rockburst Risk in Underground Mines William Joughin

Objectives Realistically quantify the rockfall and rockburst risk under a given set of conditions from a safety and economic perspective – Enable the comparison of support systems, mining layouts, safety strategies – Assess the effects of quality of support installation and support strength variability

Design philosophies Deterministic (Capacity/Demand) – Factor of safety 1.5 – 2.0 for high consequence Variability not considered – Limit states design 95% fall out height Civil engineering – reinforced concrete code – Ultimate limit state and Serviceability limit state – Partial safety factors for load and material properties based on 5 percentile (1-95%) Variability partially, but not all cases are considered Probabilistic – Monte Carlo simulation to determine Probability of Failure All cases considered, load and material variability considered What is an acceptable probability of failure???? – Risk Evaluation!! Incorporates all of the above Accepted risk criteria based upon safety and economics

Risk Evaluation Process Keyblock Stope Collapses Rockburst Seismically induced rockfall Injury to personnel Damage to equipment Expected fatalities Evaluate against accepted injury risk level Loss of production Excavation damage Pillar failures Expected economic loss Human Resources Public Relations Unforeseen rock mass behaviour Rockfalls of varying size Industrial Action Stakeholder resistance Loss of reserves Evaluate loss of revenue against cost of improved risk control Evaluate effect on NPV Accepted level of risk – based on above? Fault tree to determine the potential for rockfalls Event tree to determine the risksAccepted risk levels

Overview Accepted level of risk? Rockfall analysis (keyblock analysis –Jblock) Injury analysis Economic Evaluation Rockburst analysis (empirical analysis)

Accepted level of risk Zero tolerance, zero fatalities, zero injuries, zero harm How do you get to zero, when people are exposed to hazards? How do you design for zero risk? Need to set realistic, measureable targets. Injuries and Fatalities

Accepted level of risk International Benchmarking against all industries – Annual Probability of injury / fatality Ongoing Improvement Expected frequency of injuries/fatalities Expected frequency of incidents with one or fatalities Individual injury/fatality risk DIFR / FIFR 2013 Benchmark – all accidents Injuries and Fatalities

Accepted level of risk Injuries and Fatalities – International benchmarking F-N Graph

Accepted level of risk Injuries and Fatalities F-N Graph International Criteria

Accepted level of risk Injuries and Fatalities

Accepted level of risk Injuries and Fatalities

Accepted level of risk Cost HighLow High Low Rockfall/Rockburst Hazard Economic evaluation

Accepted level of risk Cost HighLow High Low Expected cost =  (Cost of expected incidents) Rockfall/Rockburst Hazard Economic evaluation

Accepted level of risk Rockfall/Rockburst Hazard Cost HighLow High Low Expected cost =  (cost of expected incidents) Economic evaluations for given scenarios Economic evaluation

Accepted level of risk Compare different scenarios Annual costs – Cost of risk control + – Expected loss Discounted cashflow – Capital outlay (at start of implementation) – Annual costs – Reserve loss (at end of life of mine) – Net Present Cost (NPC) Economic evaluation

Rockfall analysis - JBlock Not just probability of failure of a single event Frequency of large and small rockfalls (size counts) Represent as many failure modes as possible Represent a realistic rock mass with variable discontinuity characteristics Represent realistic support patterns with installation and strength variability

Rockfall analysis - JBlock Simulation area Represents area mined Primary keyblock Secondary keyblock Unformed block Joint traces on oriented stope hangingwall Represents a ground control district / geotechnical domain 3D keyblocks

Rockfall analysis - JBlock Joint dip & dip direction Joint shear strength Joint length and spacing Joint strength Faults (additional joint set) Other features – Parting planes – Ramp domes - bushveld thrusts – Circular domes – eg pillow lavas, cross-bedding (separate entities) – Stress Fractures? – Blast fractures? Simulation area Primary keyblock Secondary keyblock Unformed block Joint characteristics (variability)

Rockfall analysis - JBlock Usually > 10,000 keyblocks or reasonable simulation area Simulation area required to generate blocks is recorded to enable normalisation of results to area mined per annum Represents a ground control district / geotechnical domain The exact same block set can be re-used for support comparisons Simulation area Primary keyblock Secondary keyblock Unformed block Set of blocks for stability analysis Individual blocks are generated!!!!

Rockfall analysis - JBlock Stope dip (0  - 90  )and dip direction Outline Area of interest Stope area

Rockfall analysis - JBlock Types of support – Point support (props, tendons) – Line support (headboards) – Area support (packs) – Membrane support (shotcrete, mesh, TSL backfill?) Very simple strength estimates Variability – Spacing & out of line) – Strength (either installation or unit strength) Support pattern

Rockfall analysis - JBlock Test each block individually (no unravelling effect) Failure (rockfall) – In between support – Failure of support – Block rotation Unravelling is not modelled!!!! Keyblock stability

Rockfall frequency - JBlock analysis Set of failed keyblocks (rockfalls) Simulation area to be normalised per annum Keyblock characteristics – Area – Volume – Height – Failure mode – Face length affected Output

Rockfall analysis - Data calibration Lonmin & Impala data 3 years Represents 1000 crews 810 Rockfalls 0.5m 3 to 4000m 3

Rockfall analysis - Data calibration Small rockfalls? – more rockfall injuries than rockfalls Length, width and height Errors in database Unknown variables – support, mechanism, ground control district etc Face or Back area – time dependency? Falls after blast, removed by barring?

Rockfall analysis - Data calibration

Injury Analysis Injury Event Tree

Injury Analysis Time Exposure Worker category Areas where people spend time Stope face Gullies Dev end Access tunnels Stope driller 6.0 h 0.5 h 1.5 h Stope team 4.5 h 2.0 h 1.5 h Miner 3.0 h 2.0 h 3.0 h Dev driller 0.0 h 6.5 h 1.5 h Shift boss 1.5 h 2.0 h E = (hours/day x days at work per annum)/(365 x 24 hours)

Injury Analysis Task Max no of Persons Exposure (Hours/day) Exposure (Hours/ annum) Protected (hours/day) Unprotected (hours/day) Slot Development Bogging Shotcrete Bolting Drilling Slot Production Drilling Bogging Face Prep Charging Western Decline Inspection Exposure analysis example

Injury Analysis Spatial Coincidence Probability of coincidence C = Rockfall Area/ Exposure Area Small rockfalls – Low probability – High annual frequency Large rockfalls – High probability – Low frequency Individual injury frequency Ind= E x  (C i ) for each rockfall Total Expected injuries Inj = E x N x  (C i ) for each rockfall Expected incidents (multiple injuries) Binomial distribution Fatal injuries Factor (accident data) Number of people exposed (N)

F-N Graph output

Economic Evaluation Equipment Damage Event Tree

Economic Evaluation Stope Damage Event Tree

Dilution cost Re-supporting cost Area to be re-supported Rockfall Economic Evaluation - Small Rockfalls Production loss (Cleaning up and re-supporting)

Reserve loss (NPV) Production loss (during re- establishing) Area of Sweepings Lost Rockfall Economic Evaluation - Small Rockfalls Pillar Sweepings loss

Economic Evaluation - Small Rockfalls

Economic Evaluation - All Rockfalls

Rockburst analysis Cumulative Frequency – Magnitude Distribution

Rockburst Analysis Calibration for forward modelling Seismic dataElastic Modelling

Rockburst Analysis Calibration for forward modelling a value Modelled Energy

Rockburst Analysis Calibration for forward modelling Constant b value

Rockburst Analysis Time of day analysis

Rockburst Analysis Potential for Rockburst Damage ?

PPV Scaling law StopeDistance Source Stope Seismic Data Source Modelling Location accuracy??

Rockburst Analysis Heal, Potvin & Hudyma, Australian & Canadian mines 83 case histories, 254 damage locations Excavation vulnerability potential (EVP)

Excavation Vulnerability Potential Stress to strength ratio (E1), Support capability (E2), Excavation span (E3), and Geological factor (E4)

Rockburst Analysis E1 (Stress to Strength ratio)

Rockburst Analysis Rockburst sites and Blast experiments Yielding and containment E2 (Support capability) E

Rockburst Analysis E3 = excavation span (m) Geological factors (E4): – Seismically active major structure: 0.5 – Unfavourable rock mass / no major structure:1.0 – Massive rock mass / no major structure:1.5 E3 (excavation span) & E4 (Geological factor)

Rockburst Analysis Rockburst Damage Scale Rockburst DamageApproximate Area R1No damage, minor loose0 R2Minor damage, less than 1 tonne displaced 0.5 m 2 R31 – 10 tonnes displaced5 m 2 R410 – 100 tonnes displaced20 m 2 R5100+ tonnes displaced150 m 2 Rockburst Damage Scale

Rockburst Analysis Rockburst Damage Potential

Rockburst Analysis Injuries and Damage R2 R3 R4

Rockburst Analysis Injuries and Damage R5

Rockburst Analysis Damage comparison example

Rockburst Analysis Rockburst injury analysis example

Conclusions A risk evaluation model has been developed to quantify rockfall and rockburst risk It enables quantification of safety (injury and fatality) and economic risk It enables the comparison between different support systems or safety strategies Rockfall risk is quantified using statistical keyblock anlaysis Rockfall risk is quantified using statistical and empirical methods Data is required for calibration

Acknowledgements Mine Health and Safety Council (MHSC) The management of Lonmin and Impala Platinum are thanked for providing rockfall data for this research South Deep & Telfer (Rockburst Risk) Lawrence Rwodzi – economic analysis Roger Stewart – Risk and economic evaluation software Essie Esterhuizen – JBlock upgrades Jody Thompson, Tony Jager, Dave Roberts, Johan Wesseloo, Dick Stacey, Luis-Fernando Contreras, Graham Howell, and Oscar Steffen.