MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

In situ behaviour of cemented hydraulic and paste backfills and the use of instrumentation in optimising efficiency

2014· article· en· W2612436481 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
B. D. Thompson, Tim Allsop Dave Hunt, Farid Malek, Murray Grabinsky, W.F. Bawden

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstrumentation (computer programming)In situGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Better understanding of in situ backfill behaviour can allow mines to optimise backfilling efficiency. To this end, a significant quantity of fieldwork has recently been conducted by University of Toronto (U of T) and Mine Design Engineering (MDEng.), focused on in situ measurements in cemented paste backfill. Using these ‘production friendly’ instrumentation approaches, new fieldwork data from two of Vale’s Canadian operations are presented, to demonstrate how instrumentation can be applied to better define the behaviour of cemented hydraulic backfills. Instrumentation consists of clusters of total earth pressure cells, piezometers (for pore pressure) and thermistors that are placed remotely in open stopes, and mounted on barricades. Backfilling with cemented hydraulic fill requires consideration of drainage and potential segregation affects, which are not associated with paste. In situ data demonstrates the transition of the backfill from a fluid to soil-like material at various locations in backfilling stopes. Within a relatively coarse grained (i.e. sand) cemented hydraulic fill, this transition occurred relatively quickly (after three hours). For a sand and tailings blend of cemented hydraulic fill however, the hydrostatic loading condition persisted for between 12 and 24 hours. During backfilling, this information, combined with barricade pressure data, was used to optimise requirements for the post-plug cure period, saving up to three days of stope cycle time. The measurements in hydraulic fill are contrasted with previous fieldwork data from cemented paste backfill. Strength gain mechanics differ between the fill types, through the requirement for drainage in hydraulic fills, whereas cement content and self-desiccation mechanisms appear to dominate in situ measurements in paste. Hydraulic fills exhibit particle size segregation which results in spatial variation in cement content, and so spatially distinct pressure and temperature responses for the interpreted coarse and fine grain zones were measured. A measured low temperature zone was interpreted to represent a coarse grain size fill with an at rest earth pressure coefficient similar to that of a dense sand. A high temperature zone was interpreted to represent a fine grain size fill which features higher cement content. The significantly greater temperature measured in the binder-rich areas are thought to induce ‘thermal expansion’ generated pressure increases. This work demonstrates the potential for instrumentation to feature as part of a considered quality control policy (that includes barricade construction and drainage checks) to safely optimise backfilling efficiency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207