Mining & Exploration Geology 592

CLASSICAL METHODS OF
RESOURCE ESTIMATION
Averaging Grade, Sectional, Polygonal and
Triangle Methods, and Inverse Distance
Weighting (IDW)
 This module will explain ..

• Advantages and disadvantages of classical or traditional

methods of resource estimation

• The section or panel method of estimation

• The polygonal method of estimation

• The triangle method of estimation

• Inverse Distance Weighting method

THE RESOURCE ESTIMATION PROCESS

• Log geology from drilling and assay samples

• Combine component results (assay, density etc) with

geology = DATA (needs to be validated)

• Composite (average) grade where necessary

• Interpret ore zones or by ore type – will need cut off grade

• Apply appropriate estimation procedure

WHAT DO WE NEED BEFORE WE START?
The validated (checked) drilling information regarding depth, geology,
assay, density etc.

BHID From To Ni% Geol Density

SR001 0 2 .01 Basalt 2.1

SR001 2 4 .01 Basalt 2.1

SR001 20 22 .45 Basalt 2.2

SR001 22 24 1.5 Sulphides 4.4

SR001 24 26 3.5 Sulphides 4.8

SR001 26 28 5.5 Sulphides 5.5

Combine geology and assays to interpret ore/grade zone

from the drilling information
 CALCULATION OF AVERAGE GRADE
Cu %

1m 5 Cu value Consider a diamond core through a Cu deposit that

3 from 1 m has been sampled (half-core) every 1m for the
2
core sample duration of the ore zone and assayed for Cu in %
3
7 In this case, where equal lengths are sampled (i.e.
0 1 m), the average grade is a simple average or
1 mean
3 m = ∑nxi
5
4 Where m is the mean, xi is the measured grade
3 for sample i, and n is the number of samples
6
2
The average grade for the drillhole intersection is
4
2 = 51/16
1 = 3.18%

Sum 51
CALCULATION OF AVERAGE WEIGHTED
GRADE
For resource estimation, often it is necessary to find a mean or average
grade from samples of differing sizes (could be lengths, widths).

The average grade of separate sized samples is reported as weighted

mean, with weights related to the sizes or masses or volumes of the
individual samples.

For example, often instead of sampling 1 m half-core, geologist may

sample the core according to the lithological similarities (domains) rather
than length. In this case each sample will be of differing lengths and the
grades have to be weighted according to length

mw = ∑ wi xi
Where wi is corresponding weight for sample with grade xi
CALCULATION OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE
GRADE
Weighting for sampling length
Average grade = Σ (Length x Grades)
Σ Lengths

Weighting for length and rock density

Average grade = Σ (Specific gravity x Lengths x Grades)
Σ (Specific gravity x Lengths)

Lengths or intervals
 WEIGHTED GRADE AVERAGE EXAMPLE
Cu grade Density Length Grade Density
Length l g (d) l.d l.g.d l.g
2.5 3.3 3.3 8.25 27.2 8.25 2.5 3.3 3.3
3.4 1.1 3 10.2 11.2 3.74
1.5 4.5 3.8 5.7 25.7 6.75
3.4 1.1
4 1.3 3 12 15.6 5.2 3
11.4 36.15 79.7 23.94
1.50 8.2
3.8

4 1.3
3
Average grade on length = 23.94/11.4 = 2.10%
Average grade on length & density = 79.7/36.15 = 2.20%
Neglecting density results in underestimation of weighted
grade
 GRADE AVERAGING - COMPOSITING
Compositing involves combining existing data (e.g. assay or density),
i.e. calculating weighted averages over larger sample size (volume,
mass) than original samples

You can composit on a particular criteria. For example, average assay

values from a drillhole data based on either bench size or on geology

By Bench
By Geology

Hangingwall

Footwall
 COMPOSITING EXAMPLE
5
3
3.25
2
Compositing results in a
3 3 similar mean and reduction
7
in variance (or reduction in
0 standard deviation).
2.75
1
3 The reduction in variance
5 with larger sample sizes or
4 combining larger volumes is
4.5 known as volume-variance
3
6
effect
3.37
2
4 2.25
2 Same mean for weighted samples
1

N 16 4 2
Mean 3.18 3.18 3.18 Reduction in sample
St Dev 1.90 .96 0.27 variance or deviation
 WHY USE COMPOSITING?

Bring data to a common support. Even representation of sample

grades. The geology or mining method may dictate that
samples be composited to specific lengths i.e. support
(volumes). For example, produce bench composites or average
grade for a geological domain

Reduce the effect of extreme high grade values and thereby

minimize the erratic behaviour of estimating sample ranges

Compositing incorporates dilution which is consistent when

mining. For example, mining benches requires to mine blasted
blocks rather than smaller intervals that carry high grade

Reduce the number of samples so data handling and efficiency

are increased
 CLASSICAL ESTIMATION
CALCULATIONS
Calculating resource or reserve of a deposit will use the following
formula(s)

Tonnage = Area * Thickness * Tonnage Factor

= Volume * Bulk Density (specific gravity)
e.g. 105 M/t at average grade of 1.3g/t

Tonnage is in tonnes, often reported in million tonnnes

Area = area of influence on a plan or section in m 2 or km
Thickness = of deposit within the area of influence in m
Bulk density = includes volume of pore spaces and is determined from
several field samples
 CLASSICAL ESTIMATION CALCULATIONS
ADVANTAGES - DISADVANTAGES

Advantages
• Simple and easy to apply
• Often provide good estimates where drilling pattern is
uniform, grades are continuous and ore body is distinct
• Applied during grade control in surface and UG mines

Disadvantages
• Assumes uniformity and correlation of mineralization
between sample points
• Assumes area of influence of sampling data
• Does not consider heterogeneity of grade direction
 GLOBAL AND LOCAL ESTIMATION

Global
• Estimation on a large area (e.g entire deposit or main
geological domain)
• Large number of samples > 100
• Longer duration

Local
• Estimation over a small area. Use nearby samples
• Few samples
• Can be as samples collected or over longer term sample
collection
 TRUE WIDTH
• Drill holes seldom intersect a deposit in a perpendicular
fashion. Thus, a geometric correction is required to
determine the true width of the ore intersection

• This correction will vary depending on whether the drill

hole is perpendicular or oblique to the strike of the
mineral deposit.

• A hole orientated down the plunge of the orebody is

known as a “director’s special”
 TRUE WIDTH
Surveyed hole with known dip of the mineral deposit
“Director’s
Wt = Wm × sin (α + β ) DDH
special”

Wt = Wm × cos(α )
α
where
Wt = true width (thickness) ore body
Wm = measured width (thickness
α = dip angle of hole
β = dip of the orebody
RECAP OF AREA OF COMMON POLOGONS
Rectangle
Area = h x ½ b
Area = h x w

Triangle
h
h
w

Area = h x 1/2(a+b)

a
h Trapezoid

b
 CROSS-SECTIONAL METHODS
1. Drilling conducted along sections (panels)
from which ore body and grade obtained

2. Average grades are calculated

for each section using compositing

D
3. Average grades for each
section interpolated using the
half-way rule” between sections
to calculate volumes

4. Volumes multiplied by densities to

give tonnage
 CROSS SECTION EXAMPLE

Drill hole 2
4
3
Mineral deposit 5
6
Panels

Moderately dipping tabular deposit drilled by fanning diamond holes

Grades averaged for each section/panel
 CROSS SECTION EXAMPLE

Plan View

A1 Length of
Dm Grades grade
A2 for each intersects
length
A3

6.3 m @2.18 % Ni
Ore
intersects
(zones)
Average Grade
for each hole 1.89 3.23 2.24 2.18 1.44

For each section, the drill hole info is plotted, grades are averaged for each hole
for each length interval taken
 CROSS SECTION EXAMPLE USING
HALF-WAY RULE

1.5 m

Ore
3.7 m
intersects
Area of each rectangle 5.55 34.7 49.64
(zones) 47.25 22.4

Average Grade for

each hole 1.89 3.23 2.24 2.18 1.44 =159.52

Area x Grade 31.1 121.1 104.4 111.2 27 =373.9

Average grade for section A1 = 373.9.9/159.524 = 2.34%

 CROSS SECTION EXAMPLE USING
GRADUAL CHANGE

Ore section divided into 5

equal sections from each 4 5
drillhole – 1, 2, 3 etc) 4 Ore body outline
3 (polygon) in
2 section –
1 interpreted based
on ore
2 intersections in
drill holes
Average Grade
for each hole 1.89 3.23 2.24 2.18 1.44

Area for each 16.5 37.2 46.6 51 18.8 =170.4

panel (m2 )
Area x Grade 31.1 121.1 104.4 111.2 27 =394.9

Average grade for section A1 = 394.9/170.4 = 2.31%

Modified from Annels (1991)

 CROSS SECTION EXAMPLE cont.

A1
50 m
A2

A3

Average grade for section = 2.31%

Area of section (ore) = 170.4 m2

To estimate tonnage, need to find volume half way to section A2 (see plan view)
i.e. 25 m and density of ore from multiple density determinations (say 3.5 t/m3)

Tonnage = 170.4 m2 * 25 m * 3.5 t/m3 = 14875 t

 SAMPLING ALONG BLOCKS
• Access usually only available during mining
• Block drilled to a depth as mining continues and new resources and
reserves defined
• Two approaches for averaging grades
– Samples weighted to the length and width of the sides
– Samples weighted according to the area along the face of a block
that has been sampled

200 m

100 m
100 m 100 m

200 m
 POLYGONS

• May be constructed using lines perpendicular at

midpoints, or angular bisectors
• Best applied to tabular deposits and some vein
deposits and often applied to drill hole data
• Minimizes the influence of single points
• Produces “edge effects” and positive bias
• The polygons are “overlain” on the mineralized zone,
but should be adjusted on the basis of geological
information
 POLYGON METHOD
Five drillholes Connect lines to
surrounding drillholes

Average grade gi
found at drill hole is
taken to represent the
grade of the entire
volume material
within the polygon gi

Connect perpendicular
bisectors to lines drawn to
surrounding drillholes
EXAMPLE TO CALCULATE POLYGON GRADE
FROM A DRILL HOLE DATA
Thickness
Interval Thickness Grade
x grade
20 - 22 2 0.22 0.44 g1
22 - 25 3 0.26 0.78
Area of polygon
25 - 29 4 0.18 0.72 = 525 m2
29 - 33 4 0.3 1.2
33 - 35 2 0.12 0.24
35 - 38 3 0.13 0.39
Total 18 3.77

∑ g𝑖 t𝑖
Average grade g from weighted average by thickness =
∑ t𝑖
Average grade g1 of polygon = 3.77/18 = 0.21 % Cu

Volume of polygon = Area x thickness = 525 m2 x 18 m = 9450m3

Tonnage for volume of polygon using density of 3.2 = = 9450 m2 x 3.2 = 30240 t

Resource of polygon is 30,240t @ 0.21% Cu

EXAMPLE OF GLOBAL ESTIMATE VIA POLYGONS -1

Outline of ore body

Average grade
as per geology
for drill hole
calculated as per
3 previous example
.81 2
1 .27
.12
5
4
1.33 8
1.5
.15

6
.25 7 .56

Drillhole number
EXAMPLE OF GLOBAL ESTIMATE VIA POLYGONS – 2
CONNECT THE DRILLHOLES

3
.81 2
1 .27
.12
5
4
1.33 8
1.5
.15
6
.25 7 .56
 EXAMPLE OF GLOBAL ESTIMATE VIA POLYGONS – 3
DRAW THE PERPENDICULAR BISECTORS FOR
POLYGONS

3
.81 2
1 .27
.12
5
4
1.33 8
1.5
.15
6
.25 7 .56
 EXAMPLE OF GLOBAL ESTIMATE VIA POLYGONS – 4
COMPLETE THE POLYGONS AS BEST TO FIT ORE
OUTLINE
Calculate area of each
polygon and multiply by
thickness of ore zone in
3 particular hole to get volume
.81 2 for each
1 .27
.12
5
4
1.33 8
1.5
.15
6
.25 7 .56
CALCULATE GLOBAL GRADE AND TONNAGE
Grade Area Thickness Volume Tonnes x
Hole Density Tonnes
% m2 m m3 Grade

1 0.12 394 18 7092 3.2 22694 2723

2 0.81 376 15 5640 3.3 18612 15076
3 0.27 420 13 5460 3.2 17472 4717
4 1.5 377 18 6786 3.4 23072 34609
5 1.33 338 16 5408 3.4 18387 24455
6 0.25 501 20 10020 3 30060 7515
7 0.56 468 16 7488 3.2 23962 13418
8 0.15 463 12 5556 3.2 17779 2667
172039 105180

∑𝑛
𝑖=1 T𝑖 g𝑖
Where Ti and gi are tonnage
Global grade g� = and grade for polygon i
∑𝑛
𝑖=1 T𝑖

Based on calculations in the spreadsheet, the global grade for the

example is = 105180/172039 = 0.61% Cu

Resource is 172039 t @ .61% Cu

 POLYGON METHOD
IF BLOCK MODELS ARE REQUIRED, USE
NEAREST NEIGHBOURS
Individual blocks
3 for which grade
.81 2 is required
1 .27
.12
5
4
1.33 8
1.50
.15 Drill holes with
average grade
6
.25 7 .56

Mining blocks are demarcated with drill holes and their average grades
First calculate average grade for each block. This requires to first make polygons
around individual drill holes via the perpendicular bisector methods (previous)

Modified after Noble (1992)

 POLYGON METHODS
NEAREST NEIGHBOURS

Polygons constructed via

perpendicular bisector
.81 2 3 method around each
.27 drillhole as in the
1
.12 previous example
5
4
1.33 8
1.50
.15

6
.25 7 .56
 POLYGON METHODS
NEAREST NEIGHBOURS

.81 .27 .27

.12 .81
.81 2 3
.27
.12 1 .81 .27 .27
.12 .12 .81
.12 5
4 1.33 1.33 .15 Blocks with major portion
1.50 1.50 8 .15 within the polygon are
1.50 1.33
.15 assigned average grade
.25 1.50 .56 .15
.25 .56 .15 calculated of the drillhole
6 within the polygon
.25 7 .56
.25 .25 .56 .56
.56
 POLYGON METHODS
GEOLOGICAL CONTROL

Volume = 11700 Grade = 1.30 Volume = 12870 Grade = 1.24

(From Stone & Dunn , 1992)

 TRIANGLE METHOD

• Three points are used to g1, t1

create triangles 1

• Block value is average of the

three ĝ g2, t2
• Equally weights each sample 3 2
point g3, t3

• Produces abrupt edges

g1 is the grade at drillhole 1
• Less biased than polygons t1 is the thickness of
mineralization at drillhole 1

Average grade (weighted) = t1g1 + t2g2 + t3g3

t 1 + t2 + t3

Average grade = (g1 + g2 + g3 )/3

 EXAMPLE OF TRIANGLE METHOD
Average grade from
drillholes 2,3 & 5
3 Triangle Grade Area
.81 2
.27
1 .8
.12 .81 124 0.81 145
1.2 5 1.3
146 0.62 216
.62
4 1.33 8
1.50 1.13 235 0.8 211
.68 .15 245 1.21 262
.77
6
358 1.33 149
.25 7 .56
457 1.13 282
Total Area = 1785 m2
467 0.77 297
Total Area x Grade = 1637
Average Grade = .92% 578 0.68 223

If we knew thickness at each point, we could have averaged it

 TRIANGLE SELECTION

Triangle 9-6-11 Triangle 9-11-12

Volume = 36.1 Volume = 40.4
Grade = 1.04 Grade = 0.93

Depending on triangle chosen from sample point,

volume and grade estimated can differ
 INVERSE DISTANCE WEIGHTING (IDW)
• A widely used simple interpolation method or moving average method
where the grade of a point or block is estimated by considering all the
surrounding grades

• A neighborhood about the interpolated point (block) is identified

• Weighted average is taken of the observation values within this
neighborhood
Estimate = sum of n weighted samples
= (weight1* sample1)+(weight2*sample2)+…

• The “weighting factor” is a taken as inverse of the distance between

each sample and block center, so the “weights” are a decreasing
function of distance i.e values of closer points have greater influence
than values further away
 IDW METHOD PRINCIPLE

g4 g1
This grade value will
d1
have a lower influence
or weight in overall
d4 g estimate for g as it is
most distanced from g
This grade value will d2
have the most influence d3
(be given highest
weight) in estimating
g3 g2
grade g because it is
located closest to g
g d + g d + g d + g d
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
g =
𝑛 𝑔𝑖 +1 d +1 d +1 d
∑𝑖=1
1 d
𝑑𝑖 1 2 3 4
g= 𝑛 Where gi is the grade at i location (drill hole)
∑𝑖=1 𝑑𝑖 di is the distance from point/block to drillhole
 IDW – WEIGHTING OF FUNCTION
(POWER)

As grade of point/block to be estimated is dependant on the

distance or weighting from known values (drillholes), you can
increase this dependency by increasing the weighting

This is done by increasing the power of the distance i.e. d2 instead

of d

Using d2 in the function is the commonly used from of the IDW

equation, but you can even use a higher power i.e. d3 or even
square root

But changing the power also affects the grade estimated

By increasing the power, you are giving more weight to the samples
closer to the unknown than those further away
INVERSE DISTANCE WEIGHTING -EXAMPLE

In this example, the function

g2 d2 is used rather than d

g5 1.0m
0.5m
2m
x g1
Locations used in the
g3 calculation are prescribed by
the search radius
1.5m
Search radius
g4

g 1 4 + g 2 1 + g 3 0.25 + g 4 2.25
Grade in block X is gx =
1 4 + 1 1 + 1 0.25 + 1 2.25
 IDW CONSTRAINTS

• IDW only considers distance of known values (support), NOT

where the support is or the orientation of them

• Difficult to judiciously apply for anisotropic ore bodies i.e. where

grade changes in specific directions

• If clusters in grade i.e drill holes in one specific direction are closer,
IDW gives poor results

• What search radius do you pick? Do you take more distance

samples too? How do you justify your search radius?

Kriging and its variants, attempted to address the above

issues of IDW
 REFERENCES/READINGS

• Annels, A.B (1991). Mineral Deposit Evaluation. A practical approach.

Kluwer Academic.

• Noble, A.C (1992) Ore reserve/resource estimation. Chapter 5.6.

SME Mining Engineering Handbook (Howard L Hartman ed).

• Scott, B. and Whateley, M., (1995). Chapter 9: Evaluation techniques,

In Evans, A. (ed), Introduction to Mineral Exploration, Blackwell
Publishing.

• Stone, J.G. and Dunn, P.G, 1992, Ore reserve estimation in the real
world, Society of Economic Geologists Special Publication Number 3.