Slide 1
MINE505 Introduction to Mining
Paper and Project Options
Dr. Davide Elmo PhD PEng
Slide 2
 As indicated in the course syllabus, students will need to complete either a final project or submit a research paper. The
two options are described in the following slides.
 Students will need to confirm either Option A (Research Paper) or Option B (Project) by October 18th.
 Submission deadline for both option is December 16th.
 Option A
 Literature review of a topic of interest (for MASc students that could mean writing a literature review on the
researched topic).
 Option B
 Slope stability analysis and intact rock bridge failure simulation in RS2.
Project and Paper Options
Objectives and Learning Outcomes
Slide 3
Option A (Paper)
Slide 4
Provide a literature review on a topic of interest (for MASc students that could mean writing a literature review on the
researched topic). The objective is to provide a synthesis of conceptual knowledge that contribute to a better understanding
of the problem under consideration, and additionally highlights the most recent research on the subject.
Deliverables
Write a document of (length between 3000-4000 words) that includes a critical summary of all the sources being consulted,
including figures where necessary, properly referenced.
Option A (Paper)
Slide 5
Option B (Project)
Slide 6
The parameters controlling the influence of rock bridges on brittle fracture propagation and final rock slope failure include:
 Geometry of the discontinuities and rock bridges (orientation, persistence, spacing, overlap of discontinuities and
location/extent of rock bridges).
 Discontinuity and rock mass properties.
The effects that these parameters may have on slope failure can be demonstrated by the pit-face proximity (or toe-
breakout) problem. The objectives of this project is to understand the importance of non-continuous discontinuities and
providing estimates of the critical proximity of the discontinuity/intact rock bridge to the slope face prior to occurrence of
intact rock fracture and consequent kinematic release for slope failure.
Option B (Project)
Slide 7
As part of the project, you are required to analyze a conceptual 500 m high open pit slope, including a very persistent
discontinuity, as shown in Figure 1. Whereas the occurrence of a single 700 m long discontinuity may not be truly
representative of field conditions, the modelled discontinuity is chosen here to explicitly simulate a fully connected, closely
spaced, step-path structure in the field. You should assume a rock bridge (RB) length of 5 m, 10 m, 15 m and 20 m in the
analysis (see Figure 1).
Material properties used in the analysis are assumed to be representative of a limestone rock type (intact rock strength of
120 MPa, parameters mi and MR equal to 12 and 425 respectively), with Geological Strength Index (GSI) values varying
between 75 and 90 (Use GSI=75, 80, 85, and 90). Rock mass cohesion and friction should be calculated using the GSI-
RocLab approach and assuming σ3max equal to 15MPa. Residual values could be calculated subtracting 15 points from the
corresponding GSI value. The shear strength of the predefined joint surface is defined according to a Mohr-Coulomb
criterion (Table 1). Assume a unit weight of 0.027 MN/m3 and a stress ratio (k) of 1. A series of excavation stages (5 or
more stages) should be used in the RS2 model to simulate the excavation of the open pit.
Option B (Project)
Table 1: Joint Surfaces
Cohesion (MPa) Friction (degrees) Normal Stiffness (GPa/m)
Shear Stiffness
(GPa/m)
0.0 35.0 4.0 0.4
Slide 8
Figure 1: Geometry of the pit-face proximity problem. RB indicates the rock bridge length; a length of 5 m, 10 m, 15 m and
20 m should be assumed in the analysis.
Option B (Project)
1039.1m
500m
50º
40º
RB
Slide 9
Deliverables
Investigate the toe-breakout problem using the continuum code RS2 (Rocscience) and the Shear Strength Reduction (SRF)
method (note that continuum models are unable to simulate post failure kinematics). The SRF corresponds to the
percentage of reduction in shear strength which leads to instability and in this context represents an analogue of the slope
Factor of Safety (FoS).
 Show the variability of the FoS value as a function of rock bridge length and rock mass properties defined by the
selected GSI value.
 Write a short technical to discuss the results of the RS2 analysis. Include all relevant figures, diagrams and tables, as
necessary.
Option B (Project)