Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advancements in coal mining methods and rates have led to the production of larger volumes of waste rock. Consequently, large waste rock dumps in B.C. are currently being constructed by end-dumping to heights of up to 400 m with face angles of 37-38°. Segments of the foundation slopes underlying these mine dumps are frequently as steep as 30°. These developments have resulted in an increase in the frequency and size of waste dump failures that have not been adequately predicted or explained in terms of conventional slope stability analysis. Failure is often rapid with runout distances of up to 2 km causing increased concern within the industry over potential impacts to the environment and risks to the safety of personnel, equipment and infrastructure. A comprehensive review of documented field behaviour carried out for the purpose of this study has indicated common patterns of deformation that suggest the concept of a unique 'double wedge' mode of failure responsible for these large runout events. This study focuses on the development of a numerical model capable of capturing the commonly observed patterns of deformation, and investigating the development of the ensuing failure mechanism. Stressdeformation numerical analyses carried out using the computer code FLAC have yielded a good correlation with observed field behaviour and provided significant insight into the coincident stresses and deformations within the dump. Analyses indicate that while creep effects in the waste dump could cause significant effects on the magnitudes of displacement, the overall dump stability is governed by the strength of the foundation soils underlying the toe region. Consideration of both the stress and velocity fields within the framework of nonassociated plasticity leads to factors of safety for various dump heights and foundation slopes that are approximately 66% less than predicted from limit equilibrium analysis. The results suggest potential inadequacies of conventional limit equilibrium analysis techniques when applied to the stability and design of waste dumps on steeply sloping terrain.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".