1.

0 Cave Manual– A practical manual on block caving

This Cave manual is designed to cover most aspects of a block / panel caving operation.
The emphasis is on the practical and management aspects to make a massive caving
operation successful. Whilst this is not an academic exercise, there are certain academic
aspects that have to be addressed, but the coarseness of the operation means that empirical
results and interpretations are of great importance. There is a need to make comparisons
with mathematical modelling, but no major decisions should be made on modelling results
on their own. Contributions from N.J.W.Bell, T.G.Heslop, J.Jakubec and L. Loren are
acknowledged and are referred to in the text.

The format of the cave manual is such that it provides a design platform which should be
used during the exploration of any massive orebody. A massive orebody can be described
as any orebody where in plan the RMR divided by the hydraulic radius exceeds 1.5 and has
a draw height greater than 50m. The headings of each sub-section of a section form a
check list for planning purposes and there is provision for an assessment to be made at the
end of each section, the assessment can be regarded as a risk analysis throughout the
feasibility study. This is a very important aspect, because, lack of data or frailties in
the interpretation must be identified at as early a stage as possible and not left to the
final stages.

Caving is the lowest cost underground mining method, provided that drawpoint spacing,
drawpoint size and ore handling facilities are designed to suit the caved material and that the
drawpoint horizon can be maintained for the draw life. In the near future, several open pit
mines that produce in excess of 50 000 tons per day, will have to examine the feasibility of
converting to low cost, large scale underground operations. Several other large scale, low
grade underground operations will experience major changes in their mining environments as
large dropdowns to deeper extraction horizons are implemented.

These changes demand a more realistic approach to mine planning than has been the case in
the past, where existing operations have been projected to increased depths with little
consideration of the change in mining environment which might occur. As economics force the
consideration of underground mining of large, competent orebodies by low cost methods, the
role of cave mining will have to be re-defined. In the past caving has generally only been
considered for rock masses that cave and fragment readily.

The ability to define cavability and fragmentation, the availability of large, robust LHD's, a
better understanding of draw control requirements, improved drilling equipment for secondary
blasting and reliable cost data have shown that competent orebodies with coarse
fragmentation can be exploited by cave mining at a much lower cost than with drill and blast
methods.

Cave mining refers to all mining operations where the orebody has caved naturally after
undercutting and the caved material is recovered through drawpoints. This includes block
caving, panel caving, inclined drawpoint caving and front caving ( retreating brow cave ).
Caving is the lowest cost underground mining method provided the drawpoint size and
handling facilities are tailored to suit the caved material and the extraction horizon can be
maintained for the life of the draw.
 2

Daily production from cave mining operations throughout the world is approximately 450
000 tons per day with the following breakdown from different layouts:-

Grizzly 90 000 By comparison South African gold mines

Slusher 35 000 produce 350 000 tons per day.
LHD 325 000
Total 450 000

In the near future several mines that currently produce in excess of 50 000 tons per day from
open pit mines will have to examine the feasibility of implementing low cost, large scale
underground mining methods. Several cave mines that produce high tonnages from
underground, are planning to implement dropdowns of 200 metres or more. This will result in
a considerable change in their mining environments. These changes will necessitate detailed
mine planning rather than simply projecting current mining methods to greater depths.

As more attention is directed to the mining of large, competent orebodies by low cost
underground methods, it is necessary to define the role of cave mining. In the past caving has
been considered for rock masses that cave and fragment readily. The ability to better assess the
cavability and fragmentation of orebodies, the availability of robust LHD's, an understanding
of the draw control process, suitable equipment for secondary drilling and blasting and reliable
cost data, have shown that competent orebodies, with coarse fragmentation, can be cave
mined at a much lower cost than with drill and blast methods. However, once a cave layout
has been developed there is little scope to make changes. Aspects that have to be addressed
are cavability, fragmentation, draw patterns for different ore types, drawpoint or drawzone
spacings, layout design, undercutting sequence and support design. It is common to find
that old established mines, which have developed standards during the course of successfully
mining the easy tonnage in the upper levels of the orebody, have a resistance to change and do
not adjust to the ground control problems which occur as mining proceeds to greater depths,
or to the rock type changes.

Mines that have experienced continuous problems are more amenable to adopting new
techniques to cope with a changing mining situation. Detailed knowledge of local and regional
structural geology, use of an accepted rock mass classification to characterise the rock mass
and knowledge of the regional and induced stress environment are prerequisites for good mine
planning. It is encouraging to note that these aspects are receiving more and more attention.
 3

TABLE 1.0

There is still much to be learnt or discovered in block caving as is shown in table 1.0 above.
There is a lot of information available on operating mines, but, the analysis of this data needs
to be improved and shared.

Whilst any sound classification system needs to be employed the `Laubscher’ rock mass
classification system will provide both the rock mass ratings and the rock mass strength as
needed for the design of cave mining operations.. The in situ rock mass ratings (IRMR) define
the geological environment and the adjusted or mining rock mass ratings (MRMR) consider
the effect that the mining operation has on the rock mass. The ratings, details of the mining
environment and the way in which this affects the rock mass and the geological interpretation,
are used to define:

Cavability, subsidence angles, failure zones, fragmentation, undercut face shape, cave
front orientation, undercutting sequence, overall mining sequence, support design

The MRMR system is the means of communication between planning and production
personnel. A classification system must be understood by all involved in the mining
operation. It is only by concentrating on one system that this is achieved. There are
examples of large mines playing around with different systems and not really achieving at the
end of the day. Because of the size of block caving orebodies, there is often a variation in
rock mass properties within the orebodies. We have examples where the RMR varies from 30
to 70. It is thus important to define the orebody in zones of similar characteristics.

Table 2.0, at the end of the text summarises the interactive factors that affect a caving
operation

Planning a block caving operation is a complex exercise particularly if the orebody has a
limited area and there might be caving problems. It is essential that all data is properly
plotted and presented on both long and cross sections. The modern tendency to flash up
 4

sections or 3D presentations on a computer screen is not satisfactory. Sections and plans

must be studied.

The chance of success is a function of the commitment to laid down standards.

There are numerous examples where bad management has resulted in failure or poor
performance of operations in spite of having the potential to do well. The poor
management takes the form of lack of appreciation of the requirements, a lack of interest
resulting from limited ‘on the job’ experience or inexperience or allowing short term
interests to prejudice the long term goal. Management must realise their responsibilities,
after all the final decision and the success of the operation rests with them.

It will be noted throughout this manual that what can be defined as good mining practice is
in many cases, not implemented and often done with little effort. The reasons being that
it is not convenient or owing to poor planning, the short term targets cannot be met and
production calls are allowed to overrule correct long term procedure. Support is often
poorly installed even though the correct ingredients are used.

Mathematical modelling has been looked at as the possible solution for solving some of the
caving design parameters instead of the empirical approach that is now adopted. There is
reference through Cave Base where it is considered that mathematical modelling could be
of assistance, however, results to date are not that encouraging. It is for this reason that a
section titled ‘ Role of mathematical modelling in block caving design’ is included. The
important consideration is the degree of accuracy that can be obtained with the empirical
approach and can modelling improve on this. After all the accuracy of the input data
required for modelling might not be achieved or the modelling program or computers do
not have the capability to model the number of drawpoints in 3-D. Empirical results can
be accurate to ± 15%.

TABLE 2.0

Parameters to be considered before the implementation of cave mining

CAVABILITY PRIMARY FRAGMENTATION DRAWPOINT/DRAWZONE SPACING
Rockmass strength (RMR / MRMR) Rockmass strength ( RMR /MRMR ) Fragmentation of ore and overlying rock
Rockmass structure-condition Geological structures Overburden load and direction
geometry Joint/fracture spacing & geometry Friction angles of caved particles
In situ stress Joint condition ratings Practical excavation size
Induced stress Stress or subsidence caving Stability of host rockmass (MRMR)
Hydraulic radius of orebody Induced stress Induced stress
Water
DRAW HEIGHTS LAYOUT. ROCKBURST POTENTIAL
Capital Fragmentation Regional and induced stresses
Orebody geometry Drawpoint spacing and size Variations in rockmass strength/modulus
Excavation stability Method of draw - gravity or LHD Structures
Effect on ore minerals Orientation - structures / joints Mining sequence
Method of draw Ventilation, ore handling, drainage
SEQUENCE UNDERCUTTING SEQUENCE INDUCED CAVE STRESSES
(pre/advance/post)
Cavability - poor to good or vice versa Regional stresses Regional stresses
Orebody geometry Rockmass strength Area of undercut
Induced stresses Rockburst potential Shape of undercut
Geological environment Rate of advance Rate of undercutting
Rockburst potential Ore requirements Rate of draw
Production requirements Completeness of undercut
Influence on adjacent operations Shape - lead /lag
 5

Water inflow Height of undercut

DRILLING AND BLASTING DEVELOPMENT EXCAVATION STABILITY
Rockmass strength Layout Rockmass strength ( RMR / MRMR )
Rockmass stability (drillhole closure) Sequence Orientation of structures and joints
Required fragmentation Production Regional and induced stresses
Hole diam., lengths, rigs Drilling and blasting Rockburst potential
Patterns and directions Excavation size - orientation and shape
Powder factor Draw point
Swell relief Mining sequence
SUPPORT PRACTICAL EXCAVATION SIZE METHOD OF DRAW
Excavation stability Excavation stability Fragmentation
Rockburst potential Induced stress Practical drawpoint spacing
Brow stability Caving stresses Practical size of excavation
Timing of support - initial, secondary Secondary blasting Gravity or mechanical loading
and production Equipment size
RATE OF DRAW DRAWPOINT INTERACTION DRAW COLUMN STRESSES
Fragmentation Drawzone spacing Draw-column height
Method of draw Critical distance across major apex Fragmentation
Percentage hangups Fragmentation Homogeneity of ore fragmentation
Secondary breaking / blasting Time frame of working drawpoints Draw control
Seismic events Draw-height interaction
Air blasts - drawpoint cover Height-to-short axis base ratio
Direction of draw
SECONDARY FRAGMENTATION SECONDARY DILUTION
BLASTING/BREAKING
Rock-block shape Secondary fragmentation Orebody geometry
Draw height Draw method Mining geometry
Draw rate-time-dependent failure Drawpoint size Fragmentation size distribution
Rock block workability - rock block Gravity grizzly aperture Fragmentation range of unpay ore and waste
strength Size of equipment and grizzly spacing Grade distribution of pay and unpay ore
Range in fragmentation size - fines Ore handling system - size restrictions Mineral distribution in ore
cushioning Drawpoint interaction
Draw-control program Secondary breaking
Draw control - techniques / predictions
Draw markers
TONNAGE DRAWN SUPPORT REPAIR ORE/GRADE EXTRACTION
Level interval Tonnage drawn Mineral distribution
Shut-off grade Point and column loading Method of draw
Drawpoint spacing Brow wear Rate of draw
Dilution percentage Floor repair Dilution percentage
Controls Secondary blasting Cut-off grade to Plant
Redistribution Ore losses

SUBSIDENCE
RMR / MRMR Minimum and maximum spans Depth of mining
Height of caved column Major geological structures Topography
 6

WHERE ALL THE MINE PLANNING WAS DONE