A measured risk approach to managing the design and operation of a tailings storage facility

J. Coffey, J. Plunkett
{"title":"A measured risk approach to managing the design and operation of a tailings storage facility","authors":"J. Coffey, J. Plunkett","doi":"10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_10_COFFEY","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tailings storage facility (TSF) design has long been based on deterministic limits. By extension, the TSF owner accepts a Probability of Failure (PF) associated with these deterministic limits which are assessed against ‘industry norms’ with respect to investigation/analysis and design assumptions related to the operation of the facility. If the Probability of Failure of a design that is derived in this way is taken as the likelihood related to the tolerable risk limit, it follows that the same, or a lower PF, should be maintained during operations. \nExamples of operational controls include pond management and inspections/monitoring. Upset conditions arise when operational controls are not being implemented. Therefore, by comparing the calculated PF of the TSF complying with the design assumptions and the PF for the same TSF in an upset condition, the required PF of operational controls can be estimated. This concept assists the TSF owner in determining what is required to safely operate the facility and communicate the geotechnical risk to all stakeholders. By extension, scenarios where a TSF owner cannot achieve the required PF of operational controls can be addressed with: \n1. Greater rigor applied to operational controls. \n2. Addition of more operational controls. \n3. A change to the design assumptions, where the timing of the project allows. \nThis method provides a measured approach to risk management in the design and operational phases, without a TSF owner having to quantify an acceptable risk tolerance. Instead, the design is based upon widely accepted practice and industry/business accepted safety, economic and environmental risk levels. Subsequently, the design PF can be calculated and then applied as a benchmark for operations. This approach serves to reduce uncertainty through alignment of the design and operation phases. \nThe concept is explored for three different tailings storage methods: upstream raised TSF, downstream raised TSF, and impoundment by mine waste dumps, to estimate how sensitive each storage method is to the type and effectiveness of operational controls implemented by the dam owner.","PeriodicalId":337751,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the First International Conference on Mining Geomechanical Risk","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_REP/1905_10_COFFEY","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Tailings storage facility (TSF) design has long been based on deterministic limits. By extension, the TSF owner accepts a Probability of Failure (PF) associated with these deterministic limits which are assessed against ‘industry norms’ with respect to investigation/analysis and design assumptions related to the operation of the facility. If the Probability of Failure of a design that is derived in this way is taken as the likelihood related to the tolerable risk limit, it follows that the same, or a lower PF, should be maintained during operations. Examples of operational controls include pond management and inspections/monitoring. Upset conditions arise when operational controls are not being implemented. Therefore, by comparing the calculated PF of the TSF complying with the design assumptions and the PF for the same TSF in an upset condition, the required PF of operational controls can be estimated. This concept assists the TSF owner in determining what is required to safely operate the facility and communicate the geotechnical risk to all stakeholders. By extension, scenarios where a TSF owner cannot achieve the required PF of operational controls can be addressed with: 1. Greater rigor applied to operational controls. 2. Addition of more operational controls. 3. A change to the design assumptions, where the timing of the project allows. This method provides a measured approach to risk management in the design and operational phases, without a TSF owner having to quantify an acceptable risk tolerance. Instead, the design is based upon widely accepted practice and industry/business accepted safety, economic and environmental risk levels. Subsequently, the design PF can be calculated and then applied as a benchmark for operations. This approach serves to reduce uncertainty through alignment of the design and operation phases. The concept is explored for three different tailings storage methods: upstream raised TSF, downstream raised TSF, and impoundment by mine waste dumps, to estimate how sensitive each storage method is to the type and effectiveness of operational controls implemented by the dam owner.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
管理尾矿储存设施的设计和操作的风险测量方法
长期以来,尾矿储存库的设计都是基于确定性极限。通过扩展,TSF所有者接受与这些确定性限制相关的故障概率(PF),这些确定性限制是根据与设施运行相关的调查/分析和设计假设的“行业规范”进行评估的。如果以这种方式导出的设计的失败概率被视为与可容忍风险限制相关的可能性,则在操作期间应保持相同或更低的PF。操作控制的例子包括池塘管理和检查/监测。当操作控制没有得到实施时,就会出现异常情况。因此,通过比较符合设计假设的TSF的PF计算值与同一TSF在扰动条件下的PF计算值,可以估计出运行控制所需的PF。这一概念有助于TSF业主确定安全操作设施所需的条件,并向所有利益相关者传达岩土工程风险。通过扩展,TSF所有者无法实现所需PF的操作控制的场景可以通过以下方式解决:更严格地应用于操作控制。2. 增加了更多的操作控制。3.在项目时间允许的情况下,对设计假设进行更改。该方法为设计和操作阶段的风险管理提供了一种可测量的方法,TSF所有者不必量化可接受的风险承受能力。相反,设计是基于广泛接受的实践和行业/商业接受的安全,经济和环境风险水平。随后,可以计算设计PF,然后将其作为操作的基准。这种方法通过设计和操作阶段的一致性来减少不确定性。本文探讨了三种不同的尾矿储存方法:上游堆高尾砂堆、下游堆高尾砂堆和矿山排土场蓄水,以估计每种储存方法对大坝所有者实施的操作控制的类型和有效性的敏感性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Geotechnical risk-informed decision-making in mining Using qualitative risk assessment as a leading indicator for geotechnical risk in mining Construction of a damage risk model for footwall drifts Quantifying uncertainty in mining geomechanics design Development of the Mine Geotechnical Risk Index
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1