Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies using

dilution measures

by

Ernesto Villaescusa, Don Suneth Sameera Sandanayake & Rhett Hassell

WESTERN AUSTRALIAN SCHOOL OF MINES

Northern Star Resources

July 2018
Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
2

Abstract

Information from a range of dilution measures was used to compare stope performance
between extracted stopes walls for a range of strike lengths and similar rock mass and
geotechnical conditions. The analyses indicate that different dilution measures are
required to draw definite conclusions regarding the critical size and performance of the
stopes at a particular mine sector.
Analyses that provide information on the failure geometry and the likely mechanisms
of instability are particularly important to improve stope performance. This paper
compares a number of conventional measures such as ELOS, depth of failure as well as
scale independent measures of dilution. The results show that for narrow vein stopes,
the stope wall undercut is a critical parameter controlling the resulting excavation void.

Introduction

Dilution is defined as the low-grade material that is mined and processed together with
an ore stream, thus reducing its net value in terms of ore recovered per tones processed.
The detrimental impact of dilution to the economics of the mining industry is well
documented (Puhakka 1991; Elbrond 1994; Pakalnis et al., 1995; Villaescusa, 1995).
Dilution is always defined and quantified with respect to an idealized (planned) stope
boundary. Therefore, in order to quantify it, the extracted volumes and resulting
excavation void must be effectively measured. To be able to achieve this, a series of
stope surveys need to be carried out after each significant blasting step, and also
following the completion of all stope firings. This is part of a conventional stope
performance review and reconciliation (Villaescusa, 2004) which provides a mechanism
to record the observations from operators and technical personnel in order to indicate
problems and successes during the life of a stope extraction. With the routine use of the
Cavity Monitoring System (CMS) stope survey and other upcoming modern
monitoring techniques (Riquelme et al., 2014) significant information about the actual
variations from a designed stope shape can be routinely obtained and used analytically
to calculate actual tonnage and grade extraction factors for each stope location.

Mining Method

The data analyzed here were collected from a narrow, shear-hosted quartz vein that is
being mined by up-hole benching using an average mining development height and
width of 5m by 4.5m (Figure 1). The bench stope height is 20m floor to floor, the hole
diameter was 76mm and the explosive used was ANFO. The design burden is 1.5m
with an easer hole located 0.5m in front of each row.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
3

RQD 94% RQD 67%

Average depth of Average depth of
failure 0.3m failure 2.2m
Undercut 1.3m Undercut 2.6m
Ore body model
(green & red)

Drilled shape
(blue)

CMS (grey)

a) b)

Figure 1. Cross section views of the up-hole benching operations analyzed a) very good
and b) very poor results.

Figure 2 is a long section view showing the chosen design strategy consisting of
underhand bench stoping under cemented paste fill. The extraction is top-down, pillar-
less with retreat to the access decline infrastructure using a 45° front. The main principal
stress is sub-parallel to the orebody strike and all the stopes back analyzed underwent a
similar level of induced stress and stress change.

Figure 2. Long section view of the overall underhand stope extraction sequence.

Geotechnical Environment

The orebody is hosted within basalt and the depth of mining is 520 m below surface.
Historically, a low ratio of rock mass strength to induced stress has led to violent,
stress-driven failures even at moderate depths. Figure 3 shows the fracture toughness
(Kuruppu et al., 2014) as functions of uniaxial and tensile strengths for the basalt at the
mine site. The results show that the host rock is extremely strong.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
4

Fracture Toughness (MPa m0.5 ) 2.4

Fracture Toughness (MPa m0.5 )

2.4

2.0 2.0

1.6 1.6

1.2 1.2

0.8 0.8

0.4 0.4

0.0 0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 23
UCS (MPa) UTS - Brazilian (MPa)

Figure 3. Intact rock strength properties for host rock.

Figure 4 shows the orientation and magnitude of the main principal stress tensor
components at the mine site. In-situ stress measurements were undertaken in 2003
using oriented core from the early exploration stages. The Acoustic Emission
methodology developed at the WA School of Mines was implemented (Villaescusa et al,
2002; Windsor et al 2007). Recently, the results have been compared and validated with
moment tensor solutions from seismicity collected from the construction of isolated
raisebores (Figure 5).

WASM AE - Main Principal Stresses POLE PLOT

Depth = 142m
Magnitude – Bearing/Plunge
s 1 = 14.2MPa – 358/00
s 2 = 9.2MPa – 088/11
s 3 = 4.4MPa – 267/79
Depth = 342m
s 1 = 28.1MPa – 005/03
s 2 = 19.7MPa – 095/02
s 3 = 9.6MPa – 223/86
Depth = 189m
s 1 = 17.0MPa – 008/07
s 2 = 9.8MPa – 098/02
s 3 = 5.6MPa – 205/83
Depth = 429m
s 1 = 28.1MPa – 168/03
s 2 = 22.1MPa – 258/06
s 3 = 14.6MPa – 052/84
Depth = 506m
s 1 = 30.2MPa – 054/09
s 2 = 18.5MPa – 148/22
s 3 = 12.5MPa – 304/66
Depth = 699m
s 1 = 39.5MPa – 048/09
s 2 = 26.9MPa – 142/22
WA School of Mines s 3 = 18.3MPa – 296/66

Figure 4. In-situ stress measurement results using oriented core and the Acoustic
Emission methodology.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
5

Figure 5. Estimated orientation of main principal stress from measurements of

seismicity.

External Dilution

Dilution can be divided into three general categories, namely; internal, external and ore
losses (Villaescusa, 2014). This study only focuses on external dilution, which is defined
as the waste or low-grade material that comes from sources located outside a planned
stope boundary and is combined with ore. External dilution is critical to the economics
of steeply-dipping, narrow vein orebodies, that are usually defined by mining widths of
less than the typical mechanized development mining spans of 4 to 5m. Because of the
nature of a narrow orebody sometimes being less than 1m in width, it is expected that
significant internal dilution is also experienced during bench stoping of such thin
orebodies.

The following are the key factors that are being considered as controlling the external
dilution within this study.

Rock Mass Quality

Structural features such as bedding, faults, shear zones, dykes and contacts usually play
prominent roles in narrow vein stope wall instability and resulting external dilution.
Back analysis of unsupported stope wall performance by Baczynski (1974), has shown
that the number of discontinuities per metre (linear frequency) within the first 3-5 m of
an exposed wall usually has a major control on the external dilution. Historically, the
linear frequency of discontinuities can be linked to the conventional RQD measures
(Priest and Hudson, 1976) and either parameter can be used to characterize a
geotechnical domain, especially if diamond drill data from orebody delineation from an
exploration program were used for the assessment. Figure 6 shows a contour of RQD
values for data collected per metre and averaged for the first 3 metres of the
hangingwall of the orebody section studied here.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
6

RQD (%)
Stope location
where dilution
data were calculated 90

75
50
25
0

Figure 6. Long section view showing contours of RQD values calculated over the first 3
metres of the immediate hangingwall.

Stope Wall Undercut

Poor alignment of development sills and pre-existing development intersecting the
stope walls also contribute to failures. In narrow vein orebodies, the development drive
location has been shown to be critical for dilution control (Villaescusa and Cepuritis,
2005). A poorly located drive may undercut the stope walls creating zones of weakness
where failure starts and propagates up-dip to the next access level. Figure 7 shows
examples of the range of stope wall undercut considered within this study.

Resulting
cavity
outline
(gray)
Designed
stope
outline
(blue)

Development
access drive
(orange)

Figure 7. Example of a range of stope wall undercuts analyzed.

Stope Geometry
A geometrical control where a range of failure depths can be established for stopes
having a similar hydraulic radius has been shown by Villaescusa (2004). For a particular
operation, the depth of failure increases sharply when the hydraulic radius exceeds a

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
7

critical value. Thus, for a fixed stope height, a larger failure depth is expected as the
stope length is increased beyond a certain dimension.

Drilling and Blasting Practices

Damage from blasting may also lead to stope wall failures. The damage is a function of
the orebody width and also drilling limitations in terms of hole length and accuracy.
Explosive density and performance determine the extent of damage to the host rocks,
increasing external dilution. The effects of blasting on stability can be determined based
on measurements of hole deviation, hole angle, the distance of the holes to the exposed
stope walls and their related blast vibrations, (Villaescusa, 2014; Hassell et al, 2015).

ELOS

ELOS, has been defined as the Equivalent Linear Overbreak/Slough (Clark and
Pakalnis, 1997). ELOS is calculated by the measured values of overbreak volume
relative to the stope surface area as follows:

V S OB
ELOS = 1
AS

where ELOS is defined as the equivalent linear overbreak/slough, VSOB is the volume of
over break, and AS is the surface area of a particular stope wall.

Figure 8 shows the ELOS values for the stope surfaces back-analyzed here. Although
their distributional nature is similar, the hangingwall values are higher than those
calculated for the footwalls

3.0 3.0

2.5 2.5

2.0 2.0
ELOS (m)
ELOS (m)

1.5 1.5

1.0 1.0

0.5 0.5

0.0 0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
a) Hydraulic Radius (m) b) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 8. Calculated ELOS for a) stope hangingwalls and b) stope footwalls.

Depths of Failure

Information from failure depths can be used to compare stope performance between
stopes for a range of strike lengths and similar rock mass and geotechnical conditions

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
8

(Villaescusa, 2004). The depth of failure is defined by the distance to any part of the
excavation void resulting outside a planned stope boundary. Maximum and average
depths of failure can be determined by comparing the CMS wireframes with the stope
design boundaries. The average depth of failure is simply determined by calculating the
average distance from the planned boundary to the resulting void for 1/3, 1/2 and 2/3
of the stope strike length as shown in Figure 9.

Df (2/3)
Depth of failure @ 2/3 stope length – Df(2/3)

Stope design boundary

Df (max)
Maximum depth of failure – Df (max)
Df (1/2)
Depth of failure @ 1/2 stope length – Df(1/2)

Df (1/3)
Depth of failure @ 1/3 stope length – Df (1/3)

Average Depth of failure = [Df(1/3) + DF(1/2) + Df (2/3) ]/3

Figure 9. Plan view showing the calculation of the average depth of failure with respect
to a stope design boundary.

Figure 10 shows the calculated values of average depths of failure for the stope
hangingwalls and footwalls that were analyzed. For narrow vein stopes (i.e. less than 4-
5m wide voids) depths of failures ranging from 0.5 to 1m are considered good to very
good results; failures ranging from 1 to 2m are considered a fair outcome while failures
exceeding 2m are considered poor to very poor results. The data suggest that the critical
stope geometry may be defined by a Hydraulic Radius slightly greater than 3.5m,
where the depths of failures appears to significantly increase. This is the equivalent of
an approximate 12-15m strike length for the height of stope and cablebolt reinforcement
being implemented.

As expected, the depths of failures were consistently less within the footwalls of the
stope boundaries. Failures of less than a metre are linked to blast damage, and this level
of damage appears to be present even for very small stopes. As the size of the stope
increases, other factors start to control stability and stope wall behavior. For the stope
hangingwalls, once a critical span is reached, pervasive and low strength bedding plane
breaks largely control the failures. Cross jointing decreases the ability of the rock mass
to sustain tensional stresses and most failure surfaces are often defined by geological
discontinuities.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
9

4.5 4.5

Average Depth of Failure (m)

Average Depth of Failure (m)

4.0 4.0
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
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
a) Hydraulic Radius (m) b) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 10. Calculated average depth of failure for a) stope hangingwalls and b) stope
footwalls.

Scale Independent Measures of Dilution

Cepuritis (2011) introduced a number of stope performance indicators with the

objective of capturing geometrical factors related to the underlying failure modes at the
stope walls. For example, failed arched shapes may be related to failure within weak
rock masses, tabular failures on weak bedding planes may show a large extensivity,
while the control by specific geological structures may result in deep failures.

Typically, stope wall performance is analyzed by means of volume, area or depth of

instability. Cepuritis (2011) suggested that a better characterization of the performance
is achieved by considering the location, orientation, size and shape of the stope wall
over break. Cepuritis (2011) suggested that scale-independency is a required
characteristic for a suitable geometrical comparison. Therefore, a comparing measure
should be represented by a non-dimensional value.

Circularity
Cepuritis (2011) utilized the polygonal lines defined by the intersection of the instability
volume with a planned stope surface to define a two-dimensional shape measure of
stope wall performance as follows:

4A
Circularity = 2
P2

where A and P are the total area and total perimeter, respectively, of the closed polygonal
line(s) of intersection.

Figure 11 shows the calculated circularity values for the stope wall conditions that were
analyzed. Again, similar to the results from the depth of failure, a change of results
appears to occur at a Hydraulic Radius of approximately 3.5m. The interpretation is
that circularity measures ranging from 0.6 to 0.7 represent regular failures, such as the

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
10

damage resulting from a row of blastholes at a stope boundary. On the other hand,
failures having complex and irregular shapes involving geological discontinuities tend
to have low values of circularity (Cepuritis, 2011). The data shows that a mixture of
failure shapes occurs beyond a Hydraulic Radius of 3.5m.

0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
0.6 0.6

Circularity
Circularity

0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
a) Hydraulic Radius (m) b) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 11. Calculated failure circularity for a) stope hangingwalls and b) stope
footwalls.

Extensivity
Cepuritis (2011) also introduced a measure to assess how extensive the two-dimensional
area of instability is with respect to a stope wall under investigation. The extensivity
measures are given by:

AOB
Extensivit y = 3
AS

where AOB is the area of overbreak.

Figure 12 shows the extensivity values for the stope walls that were analyzed. The
extensivity values ranging from 0.9-1.0 indicate that the instability covers the majority
of the stope wall. However, for stope sizes below a Hydraulic Radius of 3.5m, their
depths of failures are limited to the blast damage, as mentioned earlier.

Hemisphericity
Cepuritis (2011) considered the flat intersectional area of instability and compared it to
the volume of a hemisphere in order to describe the three-dimensional shape of over
break. The scale-independent measure of the three-dimensional shape of instability is
given by:
 3V S 
 
 2π 
Hemisphericity = 3 4
 
A 2
 
π

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
11

where VS is the intersected volume of instability and A is the intersected area with a
stope wall under consideration.

1.0 1.0
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
Extensivity

Extensivity
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
a) Hydraulic Radius (m) b) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 12. Calculated failure extensivity for a) stope hangingwalls and b) stope
footwalls.

Figure 13 show the hemisphericity values calculated for the stope walls that were
analyzed. Low values indicate a shallow, flat or platey shape of failure. The data show
that the footwall failures are shallower than the hangingwall failures as indicated earlier
by the depth of failure analysis. A similar conclusion can be reached by plotting a
comparison of hemisphericity versus extensivity as shown in Figure 14. Although
extensive, the footwall failures are shallow and mostly controlled by blast damage.

1.0 1.0
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
Hemisphericity

Hemisphericity

0.7 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
a) Hydraulic Radius (m) b) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 13. Calculated hemisphericity of failures for a) stope hangingwalls and b) stope
footwalls.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
12

1.0 1.0
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
Hemisphericity

Hemisphericity
0.7 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
a) Extensivity b) Extensivity

Figure 14. Calculated failure hemisphericity vs extensivity for a) stope hangingwalls

and b) stope footwalls.

Relative Volume of Failure

A comparison of instability between different stope walls must consider the relative
shapes and coverage of overbreak across the respective stope surfaces. Instabilities that
are deep and arcuate in shape and cover an entire stope surface represent stope
performance conditions worse than those represented by instabilities that are shallow
and platey in shape. Cepuritis (2008) suggested that the hemisphericity and extensivity
for a particular stope wall can be evaluated relative to the volume of a hemisphere
having a 100% extensivity, as follows:

3
 Extensivity  2
Relative Volume = 2π * Hemisphericity   5
 π 

The relative volume can be used to quantify and subsequently classify relative stope
performance, irrespective of the stope scale.

Figure 15 shows the relative volumes of failures calculated for the stope walls that were
analyzed. As expected the stope footwalls showed less relative volumes of failures
compared with the stope hangingwalls.

In order to determine a quantitative classification for the relative volumes of failures,

the data for the stope hangingwall values were plotted against hydraulic radius
considering the depths of failures as shown in Figure 16. The depths of failures were
limited to less than 1m, or as stated earlier, the likely limit of blast damage (i.e. good to
very good narrow vein stope performance). Figure 17 shows the relative volumes for fair
stope performance results in which the depths of failures ranged from 1 to 2m. Finally,
the calculated relative volumes of failures for poor to very poor stope hangingwall
performance are shown in Figure 18. Table 1 shows the resulting classification of the
relative volumes of failures with respect to the known stope performance. The analysis
shows that the values of relative volume of failure are not able to clearly distinguish the

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
13

description of the observed stope performance. It appears that the depth of failure is a
better indicator of stope performance.

0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
Relative Volume

0.6

Relative Volume
0.6
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
a) Hydraulic Radius (m) b) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 15. Calculated relative volumes of failures for a) stope hangingwalls and b) stope
footwalls.

0.0m < average depth of failure < 0.5m 0.5m < average depth of failure < 1.0m
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
Relative Volume
Relative Volume

0.6 0.6
0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Hydraulic Radius (m) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 16. Calculated relative volumes of failures for narrow vein stope hangingwalls
with good to very good performance.

1.0m < average depth of failure < 1.5m 1.5m < average depth of failure < 2.0m
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
Relative Volume

0.6
Relative Volume

0.6
0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Hydraulic Radius (m) Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 17. Calculated relative volumes of failures for narrow vein stope hangingwalls
with fair performance.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
14

2.0m < average depth of failure < 2.5m

0.8
0.7

Relative Volume
0.6
0.5

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0

Hydraulic Radius (m)

Figure 18. Calculated relative volumes of failures for narrow vein stope hangingwalls
with poor to very poor performance.

Table 1. Relative volume of failure for a range of narrow vein stope performances.
Relative volume of Depth of failure Stope wall performance
failure (m)
0.00 to 0.20 < 0.5 Very good
0.00 to 0.20 0.5 to 1.0 Good
0.10 to 0.30 1.0 to 1.5 Fair
0.20 to 0.40 1.5 to 2.0 Poor
0.25 to 0.50 > 2.0 Very Poor

Maximum Depth of Failure

Figure 19 shows the calculated maximum depths of failures for the stopes that were
analyzed. The data show that when the stope sizes increase beyond a Hydraulic Radius
of 3.5m, a significant number of the failures exceeds the 2m depth of failure. Also, a few
of the stope hangingwalls (identified within the ellipse in the figure) had large depths of
failure even though their excavation sizes were comparatively small. Detailed analysis
of the data (Table 2) shows that some of those stopes were located in fair rock mass
conditions. However, some of the stopes walls were undercut by the development
access drives which may have also contributed to the early failures. In some cases,
unique blasting practices, such as repetitive firings from re-drilling has definitely
caused failures at very short stope dimensions.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
15

4.5

Maximum Depth of Failure (m)

4.50

4.0
4.00

3.5
3.50

Maximum Depth of Failure (m)

3.0
3.00

2.5
2.50

2.0
2.00

1.5
1.50

1.0
1.00

0.5
0.50

0.0
0.00
2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00
Hydraulic Radius (m)
Hydraulic Radius (m)
Figure 19. Calculated relative maximum depths of failures for narrow vein stope
hangingwalls.

Table 2. Detailed analysis of hangingwall failures for stopes with limited size.
Stope Failure HR ELOS Circu Exten Hemi Relative Undercut RQD
ID Depth (m) (m) (m) -larity -sivity - Volume Distance (%)
Ave Max sphericity (m)
6010- 1.87 2.20 2.44 2.69 0.64 1.00 0.66 0.75 1.50 77
016
5865- 2.17 2.60 2.85 1.34 0.69 0.85 0.39 0.34 3.20 60
259
5930- 2.33 2.70 3.02 1.80 0.73 0.95 0.42 0.43 1.10 85
979
5930- 2.33 2.90 3.04 2.12 0.68 0.97 0.47 0.51 1.10 81
985
5910- 2.20 3.20 3.20 2.24 0.73 1.00 0.43 0.49 1.20 84
057

Statistical Analysis
As indicated earlier, a number of parameters appear to control external dilution,
namely: geotechnical environment (represented by RQD from diamond drill data), location
of development access with respect to orebody boundaries (stope wall undercut) as well
as the length of the stope (represented by the Hydraulic Radius). In order to determine the
influence of the individual and combined parameters, a series of regression analyses
were undertaken with the data to establish linear relationships between the overbreak
measures (ELOS, Relative volume and Depth of failure) and each of the known factors
controlling instability (RQD, Undercut and HR).

In statistical modelling, a regression analysis estimates the impact of independent

variable(s) (predictor) on a dependent variable (response) (Lunt, 2013). While a few
regression modelling approaches are available, for thess analyses, both univariate and
multilinear regression techniques were implemented. A univariate regression analysis
evaluates the impact of each individual predictor on a given response, whereas a

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
16

multilinear regression investigates whether the response is affected by a combination of

all predictors (Uyanik and Güler, 2013).

The statistical responses studied here were quantified as ELOS, Relative Volume and
Depth of Failure, while RQD, Undercut and HR were considered the predictors. Within
the regression analysis, the coefficient of determination (or the R2 value) determines
how strong the linear relationship is between the predictor and the response.

For this study, regression analyses were performed for two scenarios. Firstly, a set of
univariate regression analyses between the responses and each of the chosen predictors.
Secondly, a series multilinear regression analysis between the responses and all the
chosen predictors. The results are shown in Table 3 and indicate that the stope wall
undercut had the stronger influence on the depths of failures and ELOS. The Hydraulic
Radius had the stronger influence on the Relative Volume of failure. Also, the results
indicated higher R2 values for the responses within the second statistical scenario. An
interpretation is that stope wall overbreak is affected not only by one factor but by a
combination of all three factors.

Table 3. Results of statistical analysis of stope wall failure data.

1st Statistical Scenario
Predictors ELOS Relative Volume Depth of Failure
R2 value R2 value R2 value
RQD 0.19 0.23 0.27
Stope wall undercut 0.30 0.23 0.36
Hydraulic Radius 0.22 0.47 0.21
2nd Statistical Scenario
Predictors ELOS Relative Volume Depth of Failure
R2 value R2 value R2 value
RQD, Stope wall
undercut & Hydraulic 0.42 0.54 0.49
Radius

Figure 20 shows the actual hangingwall undercut distances for a range of stope sizes in
which the maximum depths of failures were less than or equal to 1.5m. The average
undercut distance was 1.4m, resulting on an average depth of failure of only 0.6m. This
clearly shows that the undercut geometry is critical to the stability of narrow vein
mining.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
17

4.5
4.0
3.5

Undercut (m)
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Hydraulic Radius (m)
Figure 20. Undercut distances (average 1.4m) resulting on limited depth of failure
(average 0.6m) for a range of stope sizes.

Concluding Remarks

The measurement of the average depth of failure is one of the best indicators of stope
wall performance. For narrow vein stopes, depths of failure ranging from 0 to 1m are
associated with very good to good stope performance. Failure depths from 1 to 2m
result in fair to poor stope performance, while failures exceeding 2m result in very poor
stope wall responses.

The depths of failures at the stope footwalls are close to the average failure damage
from blasting, for the stress conditions being analyzed. This can be independently
verified using scale independent measures of instability. For example, the data show
that failure circularity measures ranging from 0.6 to 0.7 represent regular failures, such
as the damage resulting from a row of blastholes at a stope boundary.

In order of importance the factors controlling stope wall dilution included stope wall
undercut, stope size and rock mass quality. The data show that, regardless of the stope
size, if the stope wall undercut can be controlled to less than 1.5m, the resulting depths
of failures are likely to be significantly less than 1m. This means that for the current
stope heights of 20m floor to floor, the strike length could be extended close to 35-40m
with no significant failure.

If the undercut of the stope walls can not be minimized, then a relatively small critical
Hydraulic Radius of 3.5m is suggested. For the current stope heights, this means a very
short unsupported strike length of 12m (maximum 15m) before backfill is required.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
18

References

Baczynski, N R P, 1974. Structure and Hangingwall Stability in the Lead Orebodies at

the Mount Isa Mine. MSc Thesis, James Cook University of North Queensland,
Townsville, 227p.
Cepuritis, P, 2008. Techniques to assist in back analysis and assess open stope
performance. In H Schunnesson & E Nordlund (eds), Proc MassMin 2008, Luleå,
9-11 June, 203-212. Luleå: Luleå University of Technology.
Cepuritis, P M, 2011. The use of scale independent shape measures to assess open stope
performance. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 48(7):
1188-1195.
Clark, L M & Pakalnis, R C, 1997. An empirical design approach for estimating
unplanned dilution from open stope hangingwalls and footwalls. Presented at
99th CIM Annual General Meeting, New Frontiers for the Next Century,
Vancouver, 27 April – 1 May.
Elbrond, J, 1994. Economic effects of ore loss and rock dilution. CIM Bulletin, 87(978):
131-134.
Hassell, R, Villaescusa, E, De Vries, R, & Player JR, 2015. Stope Blast Vibration Analysis
at Dugald River Underground Mine. Procc. 11th International Symposium on
Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, Paper Number 192. The AusIMM, Sydney.
Kuruppu, M, Obara, Y, Ayatollahi, MR, Chong, KP, & Funatsu, T, 2014. ISRM-
Suggested Method for Determining the Mode I Static Fracture Toughness Using
Semi-Circular Bend Specimen. Rock Mech Rock Eng 47:267–274.
Lunt, M. 2013. Introduction to statistical modelling: linear regression. Rheumatology,
54(7), 1137-1140.
Pakalnis, R, Poulin R & Hadjigeorgiou, J, 1995. Quantifying the cost of dilution to
underground mines. Mining Engineering, 47/12, 1136-1141.
Priest, S D & Hudson, J A, 1976. Discontinuity spacings in rock. International Journal
of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 13(5): 135-148.
Puhakka, R, 1991. Geological Waste Rock Dilution, Espoo: Finish Association of Mining
& Metallurgical Engineers.
Riquelme, AJ, Abellan, A, Tomas R & Jaboyedoff, M , 2014. A new approach for semi-
automatic rock mass joints recognition from 3D point clouds. Computers &
Geosciences, 68, 38-52.
Uyanık, G. K., & Güler, N., 2013. A study on multiple linear regression analysis.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 234-240.
Villaescusa, E, 1995. Sources of external dilution in underground sublevel and bench
stoping. Proc EXPLO 95: Exploring the Role of Rock Breakage in Mining &
Quarrying, Brisbane, 4-7 September, 217-223. Melbourne: AusIMM.
Villaescusa, E, Seto, M & Baird, G, 2002. Stress measurements from oriented core.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 39(5): 603-615.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018

Quantifying stope performance in narrow vein orebodies
19

Villaescusa, E, 2004. Quantifying open stope performance. In A Karzulovic & M A

Alfaro (eds), Proc MassMin 2004, Santiago, 22-25 August, 96-104. Santiago:
Chilean Engineering Institute.
Villaescusa, E & Cepuritis, P, 2005. The effects of large scale faults in narrow vein stope
stability – a case study. Rock Mechanics for Energy, Mineral & Infrastructure
Development in the Northern Region, Proc 40th U S Rock Mech Symp, Anchorage,
25-29 June, Paper 714.
Villaescusa, E. 2014. Geotechnical Design for Sublevel Open Stoping, CRC Press, 519p.
Windsor, C R, Villaescusa, E, Funatsu, T & Lachenicht, R, 2007. Measurement of the
regional and local stress field along a 10 km strike of the Zuleika Shear Zone in the
Kundana gold mining province of Western Australia. In E Eberhardt, D Stead & T
Morrison (eds), Rock Mechanics: Meeting Society’s Challenges & Demands, Proc
1st Canada – U S Symp Rock Mech, Vancouver, 27-31 May, 7p. London: Taylor &
Francis.

Western Australian School of Mines July 2018