4.4 Article

Back Analysis of Short-Term Seismic Hazard Indicators of Larger Seismic Events in Deep Underground Mines (LKAB, Kiirunavaara Mine, Sweden)

期刊

PURE AND APPLIED GEOPHYSICS
卷 177, 期 2, 页码 763-785

出版社

SPRINGER BASEL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s00024-019-02352-8

关键词

Induced seismicity in mines; seismic hazards; rockbursts; mine seismology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Back analysis for evaluation of the merits of the short-term seismic hazard indicators (precursors) used in the mines and their potential application for early warning was carried out for fourteen seismic events that potentially caused damage in Kiirunavaara Mine, Sweden, selected according to our designed criteria. Five short-term hazard indicators: Seismic Activity Rate (SAR), Cumulative Seismic Moment (CSM), Energy Index (EI), Cumulative Apparent Volume (CAV) and Seismic Apparent Stress Frequency (ASF) were tested. The behaviour of the indicators was studied using the parameters of all seismic events within a sphere around the hypocenter location of the analyzed seismic source within one month before the main (damaging) event. The size of the sphere equals the estimated radius of the analyzed seismic source (area of inelastic deformation). mXrap software (Australian Centre for Geomechanics) was used for data visualization, manipulation, analysis and extraction. The results from the main analysis showed a good agreement between the expected and actual behaviour of the SAR, CSM and CAV indicators. In overall, CSM and CAV ranked the highest positive/expected behaviour followed by SAR (Table 3). The EI and ASF ranked lowest and showed to be sensitive to the number of events within the source sphere. The rate of false warnings and missed warnings was also investigated for the 25 days-long period before the damaging events. A similar trend was observed as for the main analysed event. The results from this study can be used for further improvement of the short-term hazard estimations and early warning system in deep underground mines.

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

4.4
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