Abstract
Risk assessment has been seen as an important tool in reducing accidents. Use of risk assessment tools also has its significant presence in the underground mining industry in preventing work related hazards. Geotechnical uncertainty however is among the leading cause behind major accidents such as roof collapse, airblast etc., which leads to multiple fatalities and financial loss. Geotechnical risk assessment done at stages as early as mine design can help justify a different mine design aspect such as support methods for a risky area different from the rest of the mine. The aim of this paper is to organize the geotechnical risk assessment process to suit the underground mining needs. A numerical ranking system has been developed to plan the risk assessment process and choose amongst the risk assessment tools. The risk assessment process has been redefined into four sections namely — hazard identification tool, risk assessment approaches, risk assessment parameters and risk representation tool. Risk identification tools have been shortlisted to suit underground mining needs through literature review. Risk assessment approaches have been defined into deterministic, probabilistic and possibilistic approaches with relevance to geotechnical assessment. Elements to be considered in an underground mine for a geotechnical risk assessment have been structured into classes. Establishment of scope of a geotechnical risk assessment based on these classes has been explained. Selection guideline for the appropriate risk identification tool has been defined based on the scope of risk assessment. The significance of the risk assessment approach has been explained and a numerical ranking system has been formulated which can be used by an underground mine to choose among the probabilistic, possibilistic and deterministic approaches.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Crawford, R.L., European Oil Industry Guideline for Risk-Based Assessment of Contaminated Sites, CONCAWE Water Quality Management Group, 2003.
Joy, J., Mineral Industries Risk Management (MIRM) Framework, Minerals Industry Safety and Health Centre Web site, 2006.
Risk Assessment Workbook for Mines, NSW Government—Mine Safety Operations, 2009.
Iannacchione, A., Varley, F., and Brady, T., The Application of Major Hazard Risk Assessment (MHRA) to Eliminate Multiple Fatality Occurrences in the US Minerals Industry, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Spokane, WA, 2008.
Roberts, C.E., Report on the Upper Big Branch Mine Disaster [Online]. Available: http://www.umwa.org/files/documents/134344-Upper-Big-Branch.pdf.
Robertson, A. and Shaw, S., Risk Management for Major Geotechnical Structures on Mines, Proceedings of Computer Application in the Mineral Industry, Calgary, Alberta, CA, 2003.
Iverson, S., Kerkering, J.C., and Coleman, P., Using Fault Tree Analysis to Focus Mine Safety Research, A Mining Odyssey—SME Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado, 2001.
Iannacchione, A.T., Prosser, L.J., Esterhuizen, G., and Bajpayee, T.S., Assessing Roof Fall Hazards for Underground Stone Mines: A Proposed Methodology, SME Annual Meeting, St. Louis, MO, 2006.
Mathews, K.E., Hoek, D.C., Wyllie, D.C., and Stewart, S,B.V., Prediction of Stable Excavation Spans for Mining at Depths below 1000 Metres in Hard Rock—Report to Canada Centre for Mining and Energy Technology (CANMET), Department of Energy and Resources, Ottowa, 1980.
A. Victoria Government, Accident Compensation Act 1985, 1985.
Blumenstein, D., Ferriter, R., Powers, J., and Reiher, M., Accidents —The Total Cost: A Guide for Estimating Total Costs of Accidents, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, 2011.
Ball, D.J. and Floyd, P.J., Societal Risks, Final Report, Health and Safety Executive, United Kingdom, 1998.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The article is published in the original.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mishra, R.K., Rinne, M. Guidelines to design the scope of a geotechnical risk assessment for underground mines. J Min Sci 50, 745–756 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1062739114040152
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1062739114040152