Selection of Mass Underground Mining Methods

INTRODUCTION The selection of mass mining methods is the situation facing not only planners of new operations, but also those involved with cur- rent operations, including the eventual change from open-pit to underground. Increasing ground control problems on many mines, plus a better understanding of dilution and ore loss problems have meant a review of current mining methods and support techniques. Experiments are only successful if conducted in the right mining environment and on the right scale. Mining personnel have been known for their conservatism and will tend to persevere with an established method rather than change; often, hidden costs will obscure the correct economic assessment. An established mining sequence is not necessarily correct in the long term. However, recommendations to change are usually met with opposition because of inconvenience, temporary production problems and the desire for a trouble-free guarantee. In any planning exercise, care must be taken that time and money are not wasted in trying to achieve the unattainable. During the decision-making period, production personnel must be involved, and, if possible, they should visit similar omrations to that proposed. Co-operative production personnel will help ensure success. Descriptions of mining methods are available in technical papers and books, and it is not intended to discuss this aspect, but, rather, the various factors which must be recognised before arriving at a final selection. In another paper presented at this Conference (Heslop and Laubscher, 1981) factors affecting ore recovery and dilution are discussed in greater detail for various cave mining methods. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS Comprehensive Geological Data. Geological information is available during the exploration stage, but, often, core from exploration drilling is not analysed with the selection of a mining method in mind. Drilling costs are high, therefore the maximum benefits must be derived from this operation. Holes which have not intersected ore may provide data on possible shaft sites, and 35 mm colour slides of core, sound logging and geomechanics classification, will provide a record which can be used with confidence at a later date. Intersections of the various rock types should be kept for future study; for example, is weathering likely to be a problem, bearing in mind that this can be accelerated in the warm, humid atmosphere of an underground mine. The accumulation of data required to select a mining method starts with initial geological work in the target area, whether this be surface mapping or a diamond drill hole. Publications. As technical papers, reports and books are used in the selection of mining methods, an appeal is made to authors to describe the geological environment so that readers can relate to their own conditions. Not enough emphasis is given to the problems experienced and the techniques employed to overcome them. Follow-up papers are seldom written and we should be prepared to discuss our failures. Diagrams are often misleading, as the ideal and not actual situations are depicted. The caved ore/waste interface is not a straight line, and whereas this may not be significant in a diagram of a 200-117 draw height, it certainly is in sub-level caving with draw zones only 1 - 2 m width but up to 20 m high. SUMMARY OF FACTORS AFFECTING THE SELECTION OF UNDERGROUND MASS MINING METHODS (a) Regional rock stresses and mining geometry. (b) The geomechanics rock mass classification of the orebody and surrounding rock mass. (c) Ratio of the surface area of the ore/unpay interface to the contained ore which determines ore losses and dilution. (d) The cavability and fragmentation data of the ore and hangingwall. (e) The mineral distribution in the orebody and its dilution zone.