Coupled two-dimensional finite element modelling of mine backfilling with cemented tailings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mine backfilling is a process whereby mine tailings mixed with small amounts of cement are placed hydraulically into mined-out voids (“stopes”) to stabilize the rockmass and allow full extraction of adjacent ore. A containment barricade is constructed to block the access point at the base of the stope, the design of which requires calculation of the total stress on the barricade during and following filling. For fine-grained backfill containing cement, the rate of development of stresses is governed by the rates of filling, consolidation, and cement hydration, each with its own timescale. As “consolidation” in backfill undergoing hydration can be dominated by “self-desiccation”, this mechanism must also be incorporated. Interaction between the backfill and the stope walls (“arching”) also has an influence. The paper describes a finite element (FE) model (“Minefill-2D”) that can model these interactions, although only in a two-dimensional (plane–strain or axisymmetric) fashion. It is shown that arching significantly influences the total stress distribution in a typical stope during filling, but only if and when effective stress develops. For cemented backfill, arching sometimes does not fully mobilize the cement bond strength, so that assessment of arching using traditional limit equilibrium methods is often not appropriate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".