MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401480627 · doi:10.56952/arma-2024-0462

Tight Filling Challenges - Comparing Uncoupled and Coupled Backfilling of Underground Stopes with Cemented Paste Backfill

2024· article· en· W4401480627 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Veenstra, Murray Grabinsky, B. D. Thompson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsCooke Aquaculture (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Uncoupled filling is defined as when the underground distribution system (UDS) is not connected to the fill mass whereas coupled (or tight) filling is defined as when the UDS can connect to the fill mass. This paper will explain the development of an early-age undrained-drained analysis methodology based on laboratory testing and in situ instrumentation. This methodology will then be used to numerically simulate the filling of two stope shapes with different backfill recipes to examine the filling regimes within these stopes, with a focus on how the shotcrete barricade wall responds to both filling regimes. The goal of this paper is to explore the differences between uncoupled and coupled filling, and to present these differences so that the reader can understand the risks of containment wall/barricade failure associated with both types of filling. 1. INTRODUCTION Cemented paste fill (CPF) is a commonly utilized backfill material used to create artificial pillars that support the rock mass to allow maximal economic extraction of an orebody. This material is composed of full stream mill tailings (usually), water, and cementitious binder, combined into a relatively dense slurry or paste. CPF has several advantages in the material can be engineered (e.g., the paste recipe can be designed to produce a particular strength at a particular time) as well as being able to be reticulated through system of underground pipelines or underground distribution system (UDS) to the UG void or stope that needs to be filled. Since the CPF is a fluid when it enters the stope, it needs to be retained inside the void. This is commonly accomplished by building a backfill retaining wall across the stope access points that connect the stope to rest of the mine. These walls retain the backfill as the stope is filled. These walls have been built from a variety of material historically, but the most common current types are shotcrete structures (usually arched) or a waste rock berm. This paper will focus on the shotcrete arch type, which are termed "wall" in this paper and occasionally termed barricades elsewhere in literature. CPF is a versatile type of fill that can be used for many mining methods. CPF filling can be divided into two types: uncoupled and coupled. Uncoupled filling is defined as situation where the fill mass cannot connect to the UDS and the only pressure that is placed on the wall is due to the self-weight loading of the backfill itself. A coupled (or tight) filling situation means that the fill mass can connect to the UDS and the wall load consists of the deposited backfill's self-weight load plus the pressure within the UDS (see Figure 1). Understanding this loading system is critical to assessing barricade failure risks, particularly in the tight filling context, as will be discussed. Tight filling is usually completed in order to maximize the amount of confinement being placed against the crown of the stope, and is particularly common in cut and fill mining applications.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207