Mining in residual soils is a characteristic of some open pit mines, particularly those mines in the tropical and sub-tropical regions. With residual soils prevalence on the earths surface almost as common as that of sedimentary rocks (Wesley 2013), mining in such soils requires special understanding of the behaviour and characteristics of the residual soil to determine slope designs that are both safe and economic. Due to the presence of relict structures, and the relatively low strength of the residual soils and weathered rock, design slope angles in these materials should be developed by blending the results of the kinematic assessments of geologic structures with rock mass stability analyses and traditional soil mechanics (Newcomen & Burton 2000). It is thus imperative that geotechnical designs should be site/location-specific and based on soils field performance, back-analyses and risk zoning. Understanding the variability of these materials is important for developing robust designs. This paper outlines the different aspects that are to be considered when conducting slope designs in residual soils, and in particular, saprolites, and summarises shear strength data from various mine sites that highlights the uncertainty associated with these parameters.
Uncertainty in mining geomechanics and geotechnical engineering is a broad term that accounts for natural variability, lack of data, and lack of knowledge. Reducing uncertainty is a key component of the mining study process and in managing geomechanical/geotechnical risk. Understanding and reducing uncertainty is also a key activity in the design process to ensure that designs are robust and resilient. A variety of methods are used in geomechanical design including empirical, analytical and numerical modelling. All design methods require inputs, and these are based on data from core logging, mapping, laboratory testing, field observations, and monitoring. This data then must be compiled and interpreted so that meaningful and reliable design inputs with a reliability that is commensurate with the level of design (scoping through to operational) can be derived. This includes the development of the geomechanical or geotechnical model. The uncertainty of the geotechnical model is often described in terms of confidence or reliability. Currently, very little quantitative guidance exists in the literature on assessing the confidence level of geotechnical studies and design, although there have been attempts by various authors (Haile 2004; Haines et al. 2006; Read 2009; Dunn et al. 2011) to qualitatively describe what level of geotechnical data is required. Several authors have outlined methods that could be applied to assess the reliability of geotechnical data (Read 2013; Fillion & Hadjigeorgiou 2013; Dunn 2015). Data from a range of projects are reviewed and summarised and an attempt made to quantify the uncertainty for some data, and illustrate the impact this can have on designs and commonly used design acceptance criteria.
Investor confidence is largely driven by a mining companys ability to deliver on the guaranteed return on investment. Thus, robust due diligence processes, functioning as part of a mining companys corporate governance, become essential tools to identify hazards that can impact production, assess the associated risks and introduce controls to manage the risks. The geotechnical practitioner is tasked to manage one of the biggest risks on the mine; that of a rock mass instability. Since an instability, or collapse, need not be large to have a significant impact on production, the challenge is to develop an optimised life-of-mine design with a risk management plan that suits the risk requirements of the mining company and investors, whilst meeting acceptable, minimum safety standards. The concept of a Geotechnical Review Board has been adopted in the industry as a vehicle to provide assurance that the geotechnical risks on a mine have been identified and are being properly managed. The review relies on external parties providing appraisals of the design and processes, and experienced oversight of the active operations. In general, these reviews tend to have a unique style; often a combination of the current, visible, critical issues on the mine and issues deemed as important by either the reviewer or a third party. Coupled with the challenge of fluidity in modern planning environments, the geotechnical practitioner is often still faced with uncertainty in the level of geotechnical risk associated with any given mine plan. This paper introduces a geotechnical risk assessment tool that has been developed for use as a leading indicator within AngloGold Ashantis international operations. The authors aim to provide the reader with insight into how the tool can be utilised to understand a mines ability to proactively identify and manage geotechnical hazards, by exploring the following components: