Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
This tutorial will familiarize the user with the Bench Design features of
Swedge by analyzing an open pit mine example.
Swedge includes a Bench Design function that allows the user to assess
the stability of bench-scale wedges for a range of bench face angles. To do
so, two design approaches are available: a managed approach to slope
design and a quantitative hazard assessment. By using the managed
approach, the user is able to assess the number of failed wedges and
minimum bench width required for each bench face angle. For a
quantitative assessment, the user is able to estimate the likelihood of
forming different wedge sizes (Probability of Occurrence) and the
likelihood that such wedges will slide (Probability of Sliding), which
provides an estimate of the Probability of Failure for various back break
distances. Both of these approaches provide valuable information on
bench loss and assist the user in selecting an optimum bench face angle.
Random Variables
Persistence Analysis
Bench Loss
Managed Slope Design
Quantitative Hazard Analysis
If you have not already done so, run the Swedge program by double-
clicking on the Swedge icon in your installation folder. Or from the Start
menu, select Programs Rocscience Swedge 6.0 Swedge.
Whenever a new file is created, the default input data will form a valid
wedge.
Model
3. Select the Sampling tab in the dialog. Make sure the Sampling
Method is set to Latin Hypercube and Number of Samples is
100,000.
4. Select the Random Numbers tab in the dialog. Make sure the
Random Number Generation method = Pseudo-random, and the
Specify Seed check box is unchecked.
Input Data
Now lets define the slope and joint properties in the Input Data dialog.
1. Select the Slope tab in the Input Data dialog. Enter Dip=60, Dip
Direction=190, and Height=15m for the slope. Make sure the Unit
Weight=0.026 MN/m3. The statistical distributions for the Dip
and Dip Direction of the slope should be set as None.
3. Select the Upper Face tab. Define Dip=0 and make sure the Use
Slope Dip Direction box is checked. This automatically sets the
Dip Direction of the Upper Face to that of the Slope. The
statistical distribution for the Dip of the Upper Face should be set
as None.
8. Select the Strength2 tab. Set the parameters to the same values
set out in the Strength1 tab.
Analysis Results
Bench Design
The bench plays a critical role in an open pit mine as it prevents rockfalls
from upper levels of the pit slope from reaching the operational areas in
lower levels. In order for the bench to be functional, the usable width
must be sufficient to catch spillage from the benches above. In bench
design, the usable width is defined as the total width of the bench
minus the bench width lost during excavation. The amount lost is also
referred to as the backbreak distance and is typically caused by planar
or wedge failure along the crest. This is shown in Figure 2.
For bench design, it is important for the engineer to determine (a) the
number of failed wedges that are expected to occur, (b) the likelihood of
different back break distances (Probability of Occurrence) and (c) the
likelihood that a wedge with a given backbreak distance will slide
(Probability of Sliding). When the Probabilities of Occurrence and Sliding
are multiplied together, an estimate of the Probability of Failure is also
obtained for a given backbreak distance, which can be used to assess the
risk along the slope.
BenchWidth
(BW)
Sliding
Wedge
Bench
Interramp Height(BH)
Spill Angle(IRA)
Width
Back BenchFace
break Angle(BFA)
Usable
Width
1. Select the Bench Design check box. For this tutorial, a Fixed
Bench Width analysis will be performed.
2. For this analysis, set the Bench Width to 7m and the Number of
Backbreak Cells to 20.
Backbreak
Distance
Sliding
Wedge
Sampled
IntersectionPoint Bench
Height
BenchFace
Angle
6. Make sure the Bench Face Angle Range check box is toggled
on. Enter a Minimum angle of 40deg, a Maximum of 90deg and
an Interval of 5deg.
8. Press the OK button to save your changes and exit the Bench
Design dialog.
The first is the Total Probability of Failure plot, which is calculated for
each bench face angle by dividing the total number of valid wedges with a
factor of safety less than 1.0 (failed) by the total number of samples
(100,000 in this case).
This shows that the Total Probability of Failure (and therefore the
number of failed wedges) increases as the bench face angle increases from
40 to 90deg. This is logical as one would expect more failed wedges for a
steeper slope.
The normalized frequency of failed wedges can also be calculated for each
bench angle by normalizing the number of failed wedges for a given angle
by the maximum number of failed wedges at a slope angle of 90 degrees.
An optimum bench face angle can then be selected for a given acceptable
level of failure. As an example, if 20% of failures are allowed to occur, a
bench angle of 55 degrees would be recommended. This is the method
published by Carvalho (2012).
Based on this plot, a bench face angle greater than 60deg would not be
recommended as the minimum bench width is greater than 7m. As the
bench face angle decreases, a greater usable bench width is expected.
To interpret the output of the QHA, some terms must first be defined:
This plot shows that the most likely backbreak distance (represented by
the peak of the curve) for each bench face angle is 0.5 to 1.0m. Larger
wedges are also seen to be more common for steeper bench face angles,
given the longer tails in the curve. This is more clearly demonstrated
through a Cumulative Probability of Occurrence plot.
Now that the likelihood of different wedge sizes is better understood, the
probability that a wedge with a given backbreak distance will slide (factor
of safety < 1.0) can be examined.
This plot shows that for shallow bench face angles (40 to 60deg) smaller
wedges (which have smaller backbreak distances) have the greatest
Probability of Sliding. For steeper bench face angles (75 to 90deg), the
probability is seen to decrease initially, before a consistent minimum
value is obtained. This indicates that for steeper bench face angles, larger
wedges are a more significant concern when considering bench loss.