Comparative Study of Localized Block Simulations and Localized Uniform Conditioning in the Multivariate Case

Part of the Quantitative Geology and Geostatistics book series (QGAG, volume 17)

Abstract

The general indirect estimation technique of recoverable resources during long-term planning derives the unknown Selective Mining Unit (SMU) distribution from the modeled distribution within large kriged blocks (panels). The Multivariate Uniform Conditioning (MUC) technique provides a consistent framework to achieve this task with the practical advantage, in that no specific hypothesis on the correlation between the respective secondary elements is required. The Localized MUC (LMUC) technique has been developed to enhance the indirect MUC by localizing the results at the SMUs scale. The paper investigates the possibility of improving the LMUC estimates through multivariate block simulations which incorporate all the correlations of the secondary and main elements. The tonnages and metals represented by the simulated grade tonnage curves are used to derive probable tonnages and metals, which are decomposed and distributed into the SMUs referred to as Localized Multivariate Simulated Estimates or LMSE. After a review of MUC, Direct Block Simulations (DBS), LMUC and LMSE a comparative case study based on a porphyry copper gold deposit in Peru is presented.

Keywords

Ordinary Kriging Variogram Model Gaussian Variable Sulphide Zone Recoverable Resource 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Gold Fields for permission to publish this paper based on a case study of the Group’s Cerro Corona mine.

References

  1. 1.
    Abzalov MZ (2006) Localised uniform conditioning (luc): a new approach for direct modelling of small blocks. Math Geol 38(4):393–411 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deraisme J, Rivoirard J, Carrasco P (2008) Multivariate uniform conditioning and block simulations with discrete Gaussian model: application to Chuquicamata deposit. In: VIII international geostatistics congress, GEOSTATS 2008, Santiago, Chile, 1–5 December 2008. Gecamin, Santiago, pp 69–78 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Emery X, Ortiz JM (2004) Internal consistency and inference of change-of-support isofactorial models. In: Geostatistics Banff 2004, pp 1057–1066 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lantuejoul C (2010) Geostatistical simulation: models and algorithms. Springer, Berlin, pp 192–204 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rivoirard J (1984) Une méthode d’estimation du récupérable local multivariable. Technical report N-894, CGMM Fontainebleau, Mines Paris-Tech, 1984. Edited under http://www.cg.ensmp.fr/bibliotheque
  6. 6.
    Rivoirard J (1994) Introduction to disjunctive kriging and non-linear geostatistics. Spatial information systems. Clarendon, Oxford Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deraisme J, Assibey-Bonsu W (2011) Localised uniform conditioning in the multivariate case—an application to a porphyry copper gold deposit. In: APCOM 2011 conference, Wollongong, Australia Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GeovariancesAvonFrance
  2. 2.Geostatistics & EvaluationGold Fields Ltd.West PerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations