采礦外文翻譯--澳大利亞充填開采的土力學(xué)因素

1、中文 中文 6340 字出處： 出處：Journal of Cleaner Production, 2006, 14(12): 1168-1175英文原文Geotechnical considerations in mine backfilling in AustraliaN. Sivakugan a,*,R.M. Rankine b, K.J. Rankine a, K.S. Rankine aa School of Engineer

2、ing, James Cook University, Townsville 4811, Australiab Cannington Mine, BHP Billiton, P.O. Box 5874, Townsville 4810, AustraliaAbstract :Mine backfilling can play a significant role in the overall operation of a mine op

3、eration. In the Australian mining industry, where safety is a prime consideration, hydraulic systems are the most common backfills deployed.Many accidents reported at hydraulic fill mines worldwide have mainly been attri

4、buted to a lack of understanding of their behaviour and barricade bricks.This paper describes the findings from an extensive laboratory test programme carried out in Australia on more than 20 different hydraulic fills an

5、d several barricade bricks. A limited description of paste backfills is also provided, and the usefulness of numerical modelling as an investigative tool is highlighted. Keywords: Hydraulic fills; Mining; Backfills; Past

6、e fills; Geotechnical 1．IntroductionIn the mining industry, when underground ore bodies are extracted, very large voids are created, which must be backfilled. The backfilling strategies deployed often make use of the was

7、te rock or tailings that are considered by-products of the mining operation. This is an effective means of tailing disposal because it negates the need for constructing large tailing dams at the surface. The backfilling

8、of underground voids also improves local and regional stability, enabling safer and more efficient mining of the surrounding areas. The need for backfilling is a major issue in Australia, where 10 million cubic metres of

9、 underground voids are generated annually as a result of mining [1]. There are two basic types of backfilling strategies. The first, uncemented backfilling, does not make use of binding agents such as cement, and their c

10、haracteristics can be studied using soil mechanics theories. A typical example of uncemented backfilling is the use of hydraulic fills that are placed in the form of slurry into the underground voids. The second category

11、, cemented backfilling, makes use of a small percentage of binder such as Portland cement or a blend of Portland cement with another pozzolan such as fly ash, gypsum or blast furnace slag. The purpose of this paper is to

12、 analyse the findings from an extensive laboratory test programme carried out in Australia on hydraulic fills and several barricade bricks. Hydraulic fills are uncemented techniques, and are one of the most widely used a

13、mount of water to be drained from the hydraulic fill stope. To contain the fill, the horizontal access drives created during mining are generally blocked by barricades constructed from specially made porous bricks (Fig.

14、2). Porous barricade brick wallHorizontal access driveSlurry entersstopeHorizontal access driveDecant waterHydraulic fillFig. 2. An idealised stope with two sublevel drains.The access drives, which are made large enou

15、gh to permit the entry of machinery during mining, are blocked by the barricades during filling. The drives are often located at more than one level. Initially, the drives located at upper levels act as exit points for t

16、he decanted water, and also serve as drains when the hydraulic fill rises in the stope. 2.1 Drainage considerations Drainage is the most important issue that must be considered when designing hydraulic fill stopes. There

17、 have been several accidents (namely, trapped miners and machinery) worldwide caused by wet hydraulic fill rushing through horizontal access drives. Several reasons, including poor quality barricade bricks, liquefaction,

18、 and piping within the hydraulic fill are attributed to such failures [2]. Therefore, permeability of the hydraulic fill in the stope is a critical parameter in the design; continuous effort is made during mining to ensu

19、re that it is kept above a threshold limit in the vicinity of 100 mm/h [3]. Larger permeability leads to quicker removal of water from the stope, thus improving the stability of the fill contained within the stope. Perme

20、ability tests for mine fills and barricade bricks are discussed by Rankine et al. [4]. The constant head and falling head permeability tests carried out on the hydraulic fill samples give permeability values in the range

21、 of 7---35 mm/h. In spite of having permeability values much less than the 100 mm threshold suggested by Herget and De Korompay [3], each of these hydraulic fills has performed satisfactorily. Anecdotal evidences and bac