Mechanisms Influencing Timber Support Integrity for Rock Collapse Mitigation in Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Catastrophic rock collapses pose a significant threat to the safety and sustainability of Artisanal and Small-scale Mining (ASM), endangering workers and the supply of critical minerals vital for technological progress. While regulation discussions continue, engineered solutions to mitigate rock collapse stability in ASM remain underexplored. This novel study mechanistically investigates the potential of timber as an innovative and alternative underground support system to mitigate rock collapse in ASM by assessing how timber type, size, and support patterns (uniform vs. staggered) influence rock integrity, and further determine the optimal support configurations that can yield efficient mechanical integrity in rock masses to mitigate long-term collapse in ASM. Experimental tests (uniaxial compression test) with and without timber-embedment in the rock specimens, alongside Finite Element Method (FEM) simulations, were conducted to obtain the parameters that were upscaled to mining-field settings to validate laboratory findings. Results indicate that timber support can increase bulk uniaxial compressive strength ( UCS ) by up to 62% and bulk Young’s modulus ( E ) by 156%. Larger timber size tends to induce more brittle failure modes, combining shear and tensile fractures. Finally, thin-sized soft timber with a uniform support pattern in rock mass is the most efficient and optimal support system for rock collapse mitigation in ASM, yielding +56% UCS . The findings highlight timber’s potential to significantly improve stability and sustainable mining in ASM operations, in addition to advancing rock mechanics studies in ASM.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".