Managing a change in rock mass response to mining at the Frog’s Leg underground mine

Authors: Mgumbwa, J; Page, A; Human, L; Dunn, MJ

Open access courtesy of:

DOI https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_rep/1704_63_Mgumbwa

Cite As:
Mgumbwa, J, Page, A, Human, L & Dunn, MJ 2017, 'Managing a change in rock mass response to mining at the Frog’s Leg underground mine', in J Wesseloo (ed.), Deep Mining 2017: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Deep and High Stress Mining, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 917-936, https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_rep/1704_63_Mgumbwa

Download citation as:   ris   bibtex   endnote   text   Zotero


Abstract:
Evolution Mining's Frog’s Leg underground mine experienced an increase in the number of seismic events and rockburst occurrences during 2015. This was due to increased stress levels due to increasing mining depth and unfavourable mining geometry (mining the sole remaining diminishing pillar) as well as interaction with some seismically active crosscutting geological structures. At the time, the extraction sequence was transitioning from central access to an end-on retreat sequence with stopes in the diminishing pillar being extracted as triple lifts. Initially, a triple lift extraction methodology was implemented to eliminate the exposure of personnel and equipment to potentially seismically active ground as the closure pillar was extracted. All production activities for the closure pillar were conducted outside the oredrives from a drive situated in the hanging wall. Intense episodes of seismic activity occurred during the third and fourth quarters of 2015 as well as early in the first quarter of 2016 while the closure pillar was being extracted. During this period, two rockbursts occurred; after the second rockburst, management decided to temporarily halt production activities in the area pending geotechnical investigation and the development of a new extraction strategy. A Geotechnical Review Board (GRB) was formed to review and evaluate the situation to date and provide guidance on: the extraction sequence, ground support design and implementation, and seismic monitoring requirements. Following the GRB evaluation, a program of works was initiated including assessment of various extraction sequences and dynamic ground support design. Subsequently, these have been implemented and mining activities have resumed. This paper provides an overview of the mining practices that led to increased seismicity and rockbursts as well as measures that were implemented to mitigate the hazard associated with increased mining-induced seismicity and increasing stress levels.

Keywords: seismicity, high stress, closure pillar, extraction sequence, ground support

References:
Brady, BHG & Brown, ET 2004, Rock Mechanics for Underground Mining, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London.
Dunn, M 2016, Geotechnical Review Board Summary and Implementation Progress, internal Evolution Mining report, Evolution Mining, Perth.
Human, L 2016a, Dynamic ground support design variation FoS calculations-Stage 2, internal Evolution Mining report, Mungari Operation, Kalgoorlie.
Human, L 2016b, Preliminary numerical modelling results – Mist diminishing pillar, internal Evolution Mining report, Mungari Operation, Kalgoorlie.
Institute of Mine Seismology 2015, Intermediate and long term seismic hazard at Frog’s Leg Mine, consultancy report prepared for La Mancha Resources Australia, Mungari Operation, Kalgoorlie.
Institute of Mine Seismology 2016, Development of ground motion prediction equation for Frog’s Leg Mine, consultancy report prepared for Evolution Mining, Mungari Operation, Kalgoorlie.
Kaiser, PK, McCreath, D & Tannant, D 1996, Canadian Rockburst Support Handbook (CRSH), Geomechanics Research Centre, Laurentian University, Sudbury.
Langille, C 2016, Geotechnical and seismic management review-Frog’s Leg Mine, Northwind Enterprises consultancy report prepared for Evolution mining, Mungari Operation, Kalgoorlie, pp. 12.
Map 3D International Ltd 2017, Map3D, version 64, viewed 8 January 2017,
Mgumbwa, J & Nester, T 2014, ‘Paste improvement at La Mancha’s Frog’s Leg underground mine’, in Y Potvin & T Grice (eds), Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Mining with Backfill, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 281–294.
Mikula, P 2012, ‘Progress with empirical performance charting for confident selection of ground support in seismic conditions’, Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy: Section A, vol. 121, no. 5, pp. 192–203.
Mikula, P 2016, Frog’s Leg Seismic ground supports review, Mikula Geotechnics consultancy report prepared for Evolution Mining, Mungari Operation, Kalgoorlie.
Simser, BP 2007, ‘Strategic and tactical approaches for mining at depth at Xstrata’s Craig Mine’, in Y Potvin, J Hadjigeorgiou & TR Stacey (eds), Challenges in Deep and High Stress Mining, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 435–443.
Turner, M & Beck, D 2007, ‘Monitoring the onset of seismicity’, in Y Potvin, J Hadjigeorgiou & TR Stacey (eds), Challenges in Deep and High Stress Mining, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 181–188.
Villaescusa, E 2014, Geotechnical Design for Sublevel Open Stoping, Taylor and Francis, London.
Villaescusa, E & Machuca, L 2011, Stress Measurements From Oriental Core Using the WASM AE Acoustic Emission Method, Frog’s Leg Mine, consultancy report prepared for La Mancha Resources Australia by Western Australia School of Mines, Curtin University, Kalgoorlie.
Villaescusa, E, Seto, M & Baird, G 2002, ‘Stress measurements from oriented core’, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 39, pp. 603–615.




© Copyright 2024, Australian Centre for Geomechanics (ACG), The University of Western Australia. All rights reserved.
View copyright/legal information
Please direct any queries or error reports to repository-acg@uwa.edu.au