Integration of field erosion measurements with erosion models and 3D civil design tools for development of erosion resistant cover systems

Authors: Peroor, R; Howard, EJ; Braun, T; Chesal, T; Chataut, S

Open access courtesy of:

DOI https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_rep/1915_122_Peroor

Cite As:
Peroor, R, Howard, EJ, Braun, T, Chesal, T & Chataut, S 2019, 'Integration of field erosion measurements with erosion models and 3D civil design tools for development of erosion resistant cover systems', in AB Fourie & M Tibbett (eds), Mine Closure 2019: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Mine Closure, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 1561-1574, https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_rep/1915_122_Peroor

Download citation as:   ris   bibtex   endnote   text   Zotero


Abstract:
Post-closure maintenance activities for various inactive copper tailings impoundments owned by BHP in Arizona (USA) require frequent erosion-related inspections and repairs. BHP assessed these recurring costs and post-closure hazards and commissioned a study of alternative methods to design a more robust, erosion-resistant solution. The study combined field erosion testing, 2D and 3D erosion models, and landform design tools in an innovative way that allowed BHP to make an informed decision regarding improvements to the erosional stability of the tailings impoundments. The design team developed 3D surfaces of the linear and curvilinear slope profiles developed from WEPP modelling, and more complex 3D surfaces developed from the GeoFluvTM software. These surfaces were subjected to 3D landform evolution modelling using SIBERIA. Inputs to the SIBERIA model and GeoFluvTM software were informed using data collected during the field studies. Each SIBERIA model iteration provided insight regarding short-term and long-term erosion performance for each 3D surface and cover system. The design team produced initial and sustaining capital cost estimates for the final engineering designs based on this output. This paper details the innovative approach taken to integrate field measures of erodibility, 2D and 3D models, and civil 3D design software to produce defensible long-term closure designs that are material and site specific, and cost-effective.

Keywords: landform design, erosion covers, natural analogue

References:
Braun, T, Howard, E & Chesal, T 2018, ‘Planning closure of Arizona Closed Sites using field erodibility studies and erosion modelling’, 2nd International Congress on Planning for Closure of Mining Operations, GECAMIN, Santiago
Browning, G, Parish, CL & Glass, JA 1947, ‘A method for determining the use and imitation of rotation and conservation practices in control of soil erosion in Iowa’, Soil Science Society of America Proceedings, vol. 23, pp. 246–249.
Flanagan, DC & Livingston, SJ 1995, ‘WEPP User Summary’, NSERL Report No. 11, National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory, West Lafayette.
Hancock, G, Loughran, R, Evans, K & Balog, R 2008, ‘Estimation of soil erosion using field and modelling approaches in an undisturbed Arnhem Land catchment, Northern Territory, Australia’, Geographical Research, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 333‒349.
Howard, EJ 2018, ‘Integrating erosion prediction into landform designs for rehabilitation and closure planning’, Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress on Planning for Closure of Mining Operations, GECAMIN, Santiago.
Howard, EJ, Loch, RJ & Vacher, CA 2013, ‘Evolution of landform design concepts’, Mining Technology, vol. 120, no. 2, pp. 112–117.
Klingebiel, AA 1961, ‘Soil factor and soil loss tolerance’, Soil Loss Prediction, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas, USDASCS.
Loch, RJ & Donnollan, TE 1983, ‘Field rainfall simulator studies on two clay soils of the Darling Downs, Queensland. I. The effects of plot length and tillage orientation on erosion processes and runoff and erosion rates’, Australian Journal of Soil Research, vol. 21, pp. 33–46.
Loch, RJ, Robotham, BG, Zeller, L, Masterman, N, Orange, DN, Bridge, BJ, Sheridan, G & Bourke, JJ 2001, ‘A multi-purpose rainfall simulator for field infiltration and erosion studies’, Australian Journal of Soil Research, vol. 39, pp. 599–610.
McCormack, DE, Young, KK & Kimberlin, LW 1982, ‘Current criteria for developing soil loss tolerance’, in Determinants of Soil Loss Tolerance, American Society of Agronomy (ASA) Publication 45, pp. 95–112.
Priyashantha, S, Ayres, B, O’Kane, M & Fawcett, M 2009, ‘Assessment of concave and linear hillslopes for post-mining landscapes’, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Acid Rock Drainage (ICARD) and Securing the Future: Mining, Metals & the Environment in a Sustainable Society 2009, Swedish Association of Mines, Mineral and Metal Producers, Stockholm.
Renard, KG, Foster, GR, Weesies, GA, McCool, DK & Yoder, DC 1993, ‘Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE)’, US Department of Agriculture, Handbook No. 703, Springfield, Virginia.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1981, Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act 1980 Appraisal Part 1, Soil, water, and related resources in the United States, Status, condition, and trends, viewed 20 March 2019, ;view=1up;seq=1
US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 1999, National Soil Survey Handbook, Title 430VI, US Government printing office, Washington DC.
US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation 2014, ‘Design Standard No.13 Embankment Dams’, Chapter 7, Riprap Slope Protection Phase 4 (Final).
Willgoose, G & Riley, S 1998, ‘The long-term stability of engineered landforms of the Ranger Uranium Mine, Northern Territory, Australia: application of a catchment evolution model’, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, vol. 23, pp. 237‒259.




© 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