4.5 Article

Industry Survey on the Current State of Stope Design Methods in the Underground Mining Sector

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en15010240

关键词

stope design; geomechanics; mine design; underground mining; industry; survey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzes the current state-of-the-art of stope design and finds that the dominance of empirical methods in stope design research is slowly shifting towards numerical methods. The survey results show that there is no single dominant stope design method globally, and empirical methods and personal expertise are still widely used. However, 87% of the respondents indicate a readiness for change in stope design practice.
Stope design is a core discipline within mining engineering. This study analyzes the current state-of-the-art of stope design through a survey addressed to mining industry professionals. In stope design research the dominance of empirical methods has slowly shifted towards numerical methods. Recent advancements have mostly focused on the development of stope optimization algorithms. The survey consisted of 19 questions and was distributed to stope design experts via email, LinkedIn messages, and the Mining Industry Professionals network forum. In total, 36 responses of satisfying quality from 20 countries were received and analyzed. No dominance of a single stope design method was recognized. Empirical methods and personal expertise are still used widely. However, a readiness for change in stope design practice was indicated in 87% of responses. The current needs of the stoping-based underground mining sector are to increase the amount of geotechnical data, automate stope design and implement related software, and integrate these into general mine planning. According to 70% of the participants, acquired geotechnical data should be available within three days to be employed in design practice. The industry is ready to implement more efficient stope design methods if they offer results proven in case studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据