Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
1 of 36
Revision
0
1
2
Approved
A. Vasey
D. Watts
D Watts
Date
19/04/1999
19/09/2005
23/05/07
Description
Approved and Current
Approved and Current
Approved and Current
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
2 of 36
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ 4
1.1 DOSSIER DETAILS ......................................................................................... 5
2.0 GUIDELINES FOR DATA COLLECTION .......................................................... 6
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 12
RISK ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................... 12
IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE FAILURE MECHANISMS ..................................... 12
SLOPE DATA COLLECTION AND INTERPRETATION ........................................... 13
STABILITY ANALYSIS METHODS .................................................................... 13
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 15
VISUAL INSPECTIONS................................................................................... 15
SURVEY MONITORING TECHNIQUES.............................................................. 15
INSTRUMENTAL MONITORING TECHNIQUES ................................................... 16
PIT W ALL AND PIT FLOOR PILLAR MONITORING ............................................. 16
MONITORING TECHNIQUE REVIEWS .............................................................. 16
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
3 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
4 of 36
1.0 OVERVIEW
A Slope Stability Dossier is a collection of data and documents on a slope or
group of slopes organised and stored in a standard way.
Its purpose is to make it easier to:
Rapidly access or check previous work on the slope
Keep track of the status of each slope
Monitor progress of work on slope stability issues.
It is a requirement of the Slope Stability Standard that a Slope Stability Dossier
be maintained for all slopes as part of the Slope Management System and that
all data and documents relating to slope stabilities be indexed and stored in the
slope stability dossier. The Slope Standard also requires that the Guidelines for
Data Collection be followed which in turn specifies the indexation and storage
of data, reports and documents in a slope dossier.
On a typical mine/project site there may be several dossiers covering different
groups of slopes, for example:
Dossier 1 Pit XXXX slopes
Dossier 2Pit YYYY slopes
Dossier 3 Stockpiles
Dossier 4Dumps
Dossier 5 Water and tailings storages
Dossier 6Natural and modified slopes
The grouping of slopes into different dossiers is recommended to allow ease of
access, reporting and clear identification of responsibilities. Grouping also
allows a dossier to be closed and archived.
For ease of use, all slope dossiers have a standard structure with the following
sections:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
All file notes, drawings, photographs, SWPs and relevant reports will be
contained in a document collection
The physical document collection should be securely stored in a cupboard or
filing cabinet with an index and a section for recording all material borrowed
from the collection (Item, borrower, date taken, date returned).
UNCONTROLLED COPY - PRINTED 23/06/10 REFER TO INTRANET FOR LATEST REVISION
Filename: http://sgmmoss.gfa.local/docs/Occupational Health and Safety/SIG-EHS-GU013.docx
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
5 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
6 of 36
Soil slopes, waste dumps, leach pads, stockpiles and earth embankments
(ordinary and water retaining structures)
Tailings storage embankments
Natural slopes
An example of a completed matrix, proformas for the four matrices and the
guidelines are given below. There are a variety of additional risk assessment
tools that can be used to compliment the Risk and Hazard Assessment.
Section 4 - Cross Reference Index of the Document Collection
The purpose of this index is to ensure that all related technical information/data
is clearly referenced and can be easily found when required.
Sites will need to develop their specific index headings. Suggested headings
include:
Slope Stability Analyses
Geological structures and structural analyses
Risk areas identified in reports requiring further investigation
Materials test work
Hydrology, hydrogeology and groundwater
Seismic risk assessments
Slope design parameters and slope reinforcement designs
Slope stability monitoring and leading indicators
Slope failures
Slope remedial works
Section 5 - Slope Incident Reports
This is a compilation of all incident reports.
Section 6 - Minutes of Slope Status Meetings
These may be the full minutes or extracts from the minutes of slope status
meetings.
Section 7 - Slope Management Instructions
This is a compilation of slope management instructions.
Section 8 - Action Plans
This is a compilation of action plans relating to slopes.
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
7 of 36
landslides and groundwater seeps. Copies of all reports, maps, logs, photographs
and records shall be preserved for future reference in a secure place. There are four
areas where opportunities to collect data may be lost due to the development of the
site:
2.1.1
All available exposures in the project area and vicinity are geologically and
geotechnically mapped and interpreted if sufficient data is available:
Feature checklist:
Rock or soil types
Nature and orientation of structures: faults and shear zones, joints,
veins, bedding and foliation.
Lineaments and drainage lines
Exposure checklist:
Outcrops and stream beds
Costeans
Road and drilling pad cuttings
Exploration adits and other workings.
2.1.2
Topographic Mapping
All topographic features should be mapped, and relevant local history regarding
the mapped features recorded. Aerial and site feature photographs should be
retained of the undisturbed site.
Feature checklist:
Topography and surface features
Sinkholes and caves
Mine workings
Landslides and slips
Surface water ponding, channels, springs and groundwater seeps.
2.1.3
Drill Cores
It is important that for any potential mining project, all drill holes are surveyed,
and the cores properly logged, photographed and stored, so that information
may have a bearing on the course of future investigations and ultimately slope
stability is not lost. The Guidelines for Core Logging and Exposure Mapping
(see below).shall be followed. The following basic geotechnical data shall be
logged:
Interval (from to)
Core recovery
Rock type
Alteration
Weathering
Fracturing, crushing or shearing
All the properties required for rock mass classification in all major classification
systems, vis the NGI (Bartons) Q system, CSIR (Bieniawskis) RMR system,
GSI (Hoek) and the MRMR (Laubschers) Mining Rock Mass Classification
system.
UNCONTROLLED COPY - PRINTED 23/06/10 REFER TO INTRANET FOR LATEST REVISION
Filename: http://sgmmoss.gfa.local/docs/Occupational Health and Safety/SIG-EHS-GU013.docx
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
8 of 36
2.1.4
2.2.1
Topographical Mapping
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
9 of 36
2.2.2
Geotechnical Model
2.2.3
Materials Testing
Tests are required to form the basis for estimates of the physical properties of
the soil or rock in each domain. Durability tests to check the potential for loss of
strength due to exposure, desiccation etc. may be required. Elastic moduli may
also be required for modelling of stress in rock slopes. The test work should
comprise both field index tests and laboratory tests on a suite of representative
samples of all major materials. The choice and numbers of tests are dependent
on the project ground conditions. Tests are to comply with Australian or
International Standards. Ideally, sufficient tests should be performed on each
material to provide confidence in the estimates of the material strengths.
2.2.4 Detailed Structural (Defect) Surveys and Analyses
In hard rock domains slope stability is likely to be structurally controlled with the
main failure mechanisms being toppling, planar, wedge or steppath failures on
UNCONTROLLED COPY - PRINTED 23/06/10 REFER TO INTRANET FOR LATEST REVISION
Filename: http://sgmmoss.gfa.local/docs/Occupational Health and Safety/SIG-EHS-GU013.docx
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
10 of 36
faults or shears, bedding and joints or a combination of these. For the design of
slopes in these materials the orientation, spacing, continuity and shear
strengths are required for:
Major structures, faults, shear and crush zones
Bedding planes and weak strata
Foliation partings
Joints and veins.
The data collection programme should include:
Structural and geotechnical line or face mapping of representative
exposures and costeans. Estimates of joint continuities can only be
obtained from
exposure mapping
Geotechnical and structural logs of orientated diamond drill cores which
are representative of the rock types in each of the hard rock domains
Special geotechnical drill holes where required to provide an unbiased
sampling of the structures and to fill in any gaps in the coverage
In poor ground where the core orientation is not possible, applicable
downhole geo-physical and sonic logging techniques such as the sonic.
Televiewer should be considered.
The Structural Mapping and Orientated Core Logging Guidelines (see below)
shall be used for the geotechnical mapping and logging. This also details
the requirements for orientated core drilling. The proportion of the surface
exposures, exploration and orientated cores that are mapped or logged, should
be sufficient to identify and characterise the joint sets and major structures in
each domain. The drill holes should be orientated to ensure that critical
joint sets and bedding or foliation planes are adequately sampled. In some
cases supplementary geotechnical holes may be required to investigate
specific structures or fill in gaps in drilling coverage.
2.2.5
Stress Regime
High stresses can affect pit slope stability. Evidence of high stresses may be
seen in discing in drill cores or borehole breakouts (frequently called caving).
If high stresses are indicated, stress measurements may be required.
2.2.6
Hydrogeology Investigations
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
11 of 36
2.2.7
Surface Hydrology
Slope stabilities can be affected by erosion arising from storm and floodwaters
and the replenishment of groundwater. Adequate drainage and floodwater
control measures should be incorporated in the site planning. The catchment
area should be monitored for changes, which may increase the flood risk or
modify the groundwater levels. Checklist of items to be investigated and
monitored:
Stream catchment areas
Rainfall data
Snow and ice accumulations
Stream gradient profiles, bed characteristics and debris accumulations
Lakes and depressions
Man made modifications bridges, dams, embankments, road
formations and subsequent alterations
Stormwater and water supply pipelines.
Reports and aerial photographs and/or GIS models of the catchment and
project areas shall be placed in the Slope Stability Dossier for the purposes of
change monitoring.
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
12 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
13 of 36
mechanisms:
3.3.1
Circular failures
Non circular failures
Combined failure slip circle and a weak substratum or fault
Two wedge e.g. for spoil piles
Liquefaction.
3.3.2
Rock Slopes
3.4.1
Granular Materials
3.4.2
Rock Slopes
Joint orientation data, joint spacing and continuity data, joint shear strength test
data, (or estimates of joint strength data from joint properties) are required.
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
14 of 36
3.5.1
Low-Risk Slopes
For these slopes it may be sufficient to use slope design charts such as
described in Hoek, E. and Bray, J. (1981), Rock Slope Engineering, revised
third edition, Institute of Mining and Metalurgy. Where there are no geological
complications, Haines and Terbrugges RMR (1995) based slope angle
charts can also be used. Haines A. (1993) Rock Slope Classification for
Optimum design of monitoring networks in Swedzicki, T. 1993 Geotechnical
Instrumentation and Monitoring in Open Pit and Underground Mining, Bulkema
ISBN 90 5410 3213).
3.5.2
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
15 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
16 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
17 of 36
Open pit mining can proceed safely and stopes or remaining pillars do not
collapse and destabilise the pit slopes above it
The pit floor does not collapse into an underlying stope and endanger the
safety of personnel operating in the pit
Dumps and tailings storage facilities are not constructed over potentially
unstable slopes
For the feasibility study, a first pass estimate of the location, size and nature of the
previous workings may be sufficient. This should include a review of the
underground mine plans and stoping data while recognising that the actual limits of
mining may differ from the plans due to subsequent mining or stope collapses.
Through out this guideline the titles of Pit Supervisor, Geotechnical Engineer and
Surveyor are used in a generic sense. Each operation may have a different title or
name for this duty eg may be called Production Engineer or Mine Manager. The
intent is clear in that a person shall designated to have specific responsibility for
each of the steps or activities and be accountable for compliance with the step or
process. It is critical that relevant experience or qualifications are held by the person
charged with the responsibility.
5.1.1
5.1.2
Advanced Stage
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
18 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
19 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
20 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
21 of 36
Photograph core after core recovery has been measured, depth blocks have
been checked and before the core is split
Photograph in full sun, but avoid midday sun, as it is difficult to eliminate the
photographers shadows, also avoid early morning and late afternoon as the
colours may be distorted. Photographs on overcast days can produce
acceptable results if colours are not critical to rock type differentiation
Use colour print film and print on 100 x 150 mm paper is preferable but digital
photos may be taken (1.3 to 1.5 megapixel/frame camera with prints
reproduced by a colour laser printer on photoquality paper) A colour chart
should be included in the header board to ensure consistent colours during
printing.
Use a frame to hold the camera directly above the centre of the core tray and
heading board for best results, hand held cameras even disposable cameras
can produce acceptable results if used with care
Check that depth blocks are the right way up and not in deep shadow
If the core is orientated, arrange core so that orientation line can be seen
Arrange core tray to avoid shadows across it
Use a heading board to record hole number, tray number and the start and
end depths in the core tray and other comments (precollar depths, core loss,
EOH etc.)
Preferably place the heading board at the top of the tray, with the start of the
core in the tray at the top left.
Set camera focal length or distance so that the tray almost fills the frame.
Check the other camera settings
A light spray of water will enhance colours and help in rock type identification,
however, if the rock is dark or black, structures are easier to see in photos of
dry core
Avoid artificial lighting (flash or fluorescent), especially if cores are wet.
Standard Terminology for Geotechnical Mapping and Logging Drill Cores
6.2.1
Introduction
Geotechnical data forms the basis for modelling and is essential in the efficient
running of mines. This guideline outlines the standard terminology for data.
Several terms used in the descriptions below to describe natural breaks in the
rock mass. Defects include schistosity, foliation, bedding, veins, joints and
faults. Discontinuity and fracture exclude schistosity, foliation, but include
bedding, veins, joints and faults. Joints is used in the normal geotechnical
sense ie the common discontinuities which define the shape and size of rock
blocks.
6.2.2
Data Fields
The following are a list of all the data fields currently used for geotechnical data.
The codes only relevant to in-situ measurements are outlined:
Recovered Core Length: total length of core recovered from interval
(Recovery is calculated from it)
Core > 10 cm: total length of all core > 10 cm (RQD may be calculated from
it)
UNCONTROLLED COPY - PRINTED 23/06/10 REFER TO INTRANET FOR LATEST REVISION
Filename: http://sgmmoss.gfa.local/docs/Occupational Health and Safety/SIG-EHS-GU013.docx
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
22 of 36
6.2.3
Q modified
RMR
MRMR
()
Structure
()
()
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
23 of 36
holes that intersect the current or possible future pit walls should be
geotechnically logged.
Logging forms shall designed to capture the following data to allow the rock
mass to be rated in any of the above classification systems. For the hole:
HOLE ID: Hole number
LOGGED BY: Name of the logger
DATE: Date of logging
DIAMETER: The diameter of drill core. (Can be obtained from other drill
hole information)
HOLE COMMENT:Comment for hole.
For logging intervals (specific to geotechnical logging-does not require to be the
same as assay intervals)
FROM: The start of the downhole interval for similar rockmass
TO: The end of the downhole interval for similar rockmass
CORE10: The total length of core greater >10 cm for RQD
NO / FRACTURES: The number of fractures for interval for fracture
frequency (FPM)
QSI: The ISRM category for estimated UCS
TYPE: The nature of the dominant fracture
NO OF SETS: The number of discontinuity sets
JOINT INFILL:The type of joint infill and its wall rock alteration (gouge,
breccia carbonate cement, weathering, chloritic alteration, talcification,
argillic or propylitic alterations must be recorded. The nature of the
dominant infill if infill > 1 mm and wall rock alteration if infill < 1 mm
THICKNESS: The thickness of the fracture
ROUGH: The topography of the continuity
COMMENT: Comment for interval.
The above format is very similar to most current geotechnical core logging forms
currently used within WMC. It has to be mentioned that the core recovery and
dip and dip direction are not included. The recovery measuring the recovered
core length can be either captured for the logged interval or for different intervals
on a different form e.g. between the drillers core blocks. The dip and dip
direction for oriented cores should also be included with the alpha and beta
angles.
6.2.4
Exposure Mapping
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
24 of 36
6.3.1
The recovered core length is the length (in metres) of core recovered for an
interval. The most accurate way to measure it is by measuring the length of core
between blocks. The recovery may have to be input by itself because the interval
between the blocks is unlikely to fit the geotechnical domain interval.
6.3.2
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
25 of 36
Core > 10 cm
The core >10 cm is the total of all the core greater than 10 cm in length, ignoring
end of run and core tray breaks, within the interval. Joints that run parallel to the
core axis are to be ignored.
6.3.3
Weathering
Weathering field records the degree of weathering on the rocks. The data entry
system uses the following codes:
6.3.4
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
26 of 36
The qualitative strength index is an estimating rock strength by index tests as listed
below.
6.3.5
The fracture number per interval is the number of discontinuities for the interval.
The fracture number per interval is processed to provide fractures per metre.
Fracture Type
A fracture is defined as any plane or surface which is now or has been in the
past been broken. Fracture type include joints, veins, faults, shears and bedding
planes. Care must be taken in identifying major structures such as faults and
shears as these are the key controlling features in slope stability.
Code
joi: Joint
con: Lithological Contact
zon: Fault or Shear Zone
fol: Foliation Discontinuity
bed: Bedding Plane Discontinuity
vei: Vein Parallel Discontinuity
dis: Discrete Fault or Shear
Joint Sets
The joint sets field define the number of joint sets present.. Joints are common
discontinuities which define the shape and size of rock blocks. The codes
are based on the Barton Tunnelling Quality Index Q.
UNCONTROLLED COPY - PRINTED 23/06/10 REFER TO INTRANET FOR LATEST REVISION
Filename: http://sgmmoss.gfa.local/docs/Occupational Health and Safety/SIG-EHS-GU013.docx
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
27 of 36
Code
mnf: Massive or few joints
1js: One joint set
1jr: One joint plus random
2js: Two joint sets
2jr: Two joint sets plus random
3js: Three joint sets
3jr: Three joint sets plus random
4js: Four or more joint sets, random, heavily joined
cre: Crushed rock, earth like
Joint Roughness
Joint roughness refers to the nature of the discontinuity walls and to the small
irregularities on the fracture surface. The codes are based on the Barton
Tunnelling Quality Index Q. The RMR rating for joint condition is a combination
of joint roughness, fracture infill and fracture infill thickness.
Code
rad: Rough and discontinuous
smd: Smooth and discontinuous
rau: Rough and undulatory
ssd: Slickensided and discontinuous
smu: Smooth and undulatory
rap: Rough and planar
ssu: Slickensided and undulatory or gouge filled and
discontinuous
smp: Smooth and planar
gpu: Gouge filled with nor rock wall contact and planar and
undulatory
ssp: Slickensided and planar
Fracture Infill
The fracture infill records the type of joint fill and its alteration. The codes are
based on the Barton Tunnelling Quality Index Q.
Code
non: None or tightly healed or hard, nonsoftening, impermeable,
unweathered filling e.g.quartz
una: Unaltered joint with surface staining only
sli: Slightly altered or weathered joint walls, hard mineral coating,
may include small clay free sandy particles
mod: Silty or sandy clay coating, small clay fraction
sof: Soft infill including low friction clay, platy mica, talc, gypsum
and graphite
bad: Soft and highly weathered swelling clay filling e.g.
Montmorillonite
Fracture Infill Mineral
The fracture infill mineral field records the mineral in the fracture. The mineral
codes are the standard WMC legend mineral codes. There are 586 mineral
codes stored in the min.val file.
Fracture Thickness
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
28 of 36
The fracture thickness records the thickness of the fracture measure at right
angle to the fracture.
Code
t<1: Thickness of infill < 1 mm
t<5: Thickness of infill 1 5 mm
t>5: Thickness of infill > 5 mm
nwc: Sheared with no wall contact or thick zones of decomposed
or highly weathered material.
Fracture Length
The fracture length records the length of the fracture in metres. This is recorded
in mapping by in-situ measurements.
Code
l<.5: Length (m) < 0.5
l<1: Length (m) 0.5 1
l<2: Length (m) 1.0 2.0
l<3: Length (m) 2.0 3.0
l<5: Length (m) 3.0 5.0
l<7: Length (m) 5.0 7.0
l<10: Length (m) 7.0 10.0
l<20: Length (m) 10.0 20.0
l<40: Length (m) 20.0 40.0
l>40: Length (m) > 40.0.
Joint Spacing
The joint spacing records the spacing between the joints in metres. This is
recorded in mapping by insitu measurements.
Code
sna: N/A - discrete feature
s>8: Spacing >8.0 m
s<8: Spacing 4.0 8.0 m
s<4: Spacing 2.0 4.0 m
s<2: Spacing 1.2 2.0 m
s<1.2: Spacing 0.6 1.2 m
s<.6: Spacing 0.4 0.6 m
s<.4: Spacing 0.2 0.4 m
s<.2: Spacing 0.06 0.2 m
s<.06: Spacing <0.06 m.
Fracture Termination
Fracture termination is a measure of the continuity of the fracture. A fracture may
be continuous across the core, terminate in the rock or terminate on another
fracture. This measure is used in the in-situ mapping.
Code
tir: Terminates in rock
low: Terminates in another set at <20 degrees
hig: Terminates in another set at >20 degrees
flo: Terminates by floor
roo: Terminates by roof
wal: Terminates by wall
log: Indeterminable (logistically)
UNCONTROLLED COPY - PRINTED 23/06/10 REFER TO INTRANET FOR LATEST REVISION
Filename: http://sgmmoss.gfa.local/docs/Occupational Health and Safety/SIG-EHS-GU013.docx
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
29 of 36
Document No:
Document Owner:
Engineer
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
Senior Geotechnical
2
23/05/07
30 of 36
3. Send the transaction files either from the GLS or from the geotechnical data
entry system to the Geodata logging update directory.
4. The data is then automatically loaded to the Geodata database (e.g. Once a
day)
5. Geodata geotechnical logging information is then down loaded automatically
to the drill_geotech table in Geobase
6. Data can be then retrieved automatically or inter actively to a
Datamine/Surpac format and include in the current Datamine extract used by all
operations.
7. Geotechnical data can be retrieved on plans and sections with Geoview.
8. Data can be extracted to a text file to load to Excel spreadsheet or other
software package.
9. Added value can be input back into the database. For example, it is quite
common to assign lode codes to an interval (e.g. Hole XXXX from 100.6
to 112.00 lodecode = HV1). Similar practices could applied to geotechnical data
and domain codes could be defined and stored in the database.
7.0 APPENDICES
Document No:
Document Owner:
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
OHS Coordinator
1
08/09/2005
31 of 36
Location
Rd]
Date of
Last
Inspection
31/3/98
Action Status
Action complete
- earth bunds
constructed
across haul road
at two sections
A N Other
25Oct1998
Review of
stability analysis
required
T. Li
3/11/98
25 Oct1998
Crack observed on
berm at RL 220
on30/10/98 - crack
about 35m long and 5
mm wide
Monitor slope
movement
Develop and
implement SWP
for work in
vicinity of slope
Review of
analysis under
way - complete
by 3/11/98
Action plan to be
reviewed and
approved by RM
and SEQ
manager SWP
under
compilation
Temporary
safety measures
implemented
D Milton - Action
Plan
P Arthur - SWP
1.
2/1i/98
Redeemer east
wall
Rd4
Redeemer west
wall, southern
section
Action
by
Date
Action
Redeemer
North wall
Rd3
Responsible
Person/s
Slope Status
Safety Issues
Erect warning signs at
bunds - no further
monitoring - no personnel
allowed in vicinity of north
side of pit. D Milton to
observe daily and report to
RM
None
Barriers to be erected to
prevent vehicular access
onto berm
Document No:
Document Owner:
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
OHS Coordinator
1
08/09/2005
32 of 36
ROCK SLOPES
Slope Sector 1 South East
Revision No - 5
Multiple
Category
Steep/ high
Vulnerable / High
Highly likely
Batters 350-500m
Date 2 Feb 1998
X
None
Regard as an action priority ranking
1
2
3
4
5
Low
X
Not Vulnerable
X
Unlikely
X
Rank
Rigorous
Known
Known
Known
Rigorous
Rank
Sound
Good
Wide and Clear
3
X
5
None
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Not Considered
X
X
X
X
2
Not required
Good condition
Operating satisfactorily
In force
5
X
X
X
Poor/ deteriorating
Poor/ deteriorating
Narrow or full
Required
X
X
X
Incomplete/ faulty
Planned/ suspended
Pending
Document No:
Document Owner:
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
OHS Coordinator
1
08/09/2005
33 of 36
7.3 Appendix 2 Example 2 Slope Risk and Hazard Matrix Natural Slopes
SLOPE RISK AND HAZARD MATRIX
Pit
Assessor
ROCK SLOPES
Slope
Revision No
Height
Date
Multiple
Category
Steep/ high
High/ critical
Hazardous
Critical
Highly likely
X
Regard as an action priority ranking
1
2
3
4
5
X
X
X
X
X
Rank
Known
Known
Known & Considered
Rank
Sound
Good
Wide and Clear
PROTECTION MEASURES
Protection fences and warning signs
Slope stability inspection and monitoring
Slope specific SWPs
Not required
X
X
X
2
X
X
X
2
X
X
None
Low
Low
Sound
Minimal
Unlikely
Assumed
Assumed
Ignored
Poor/ deteriorating
Poor/ deteriorating
Narrow or full
Required
Good condition
Operating satisfactorily
In force
Incomplete/ faulty
Planned/ suspended
Pending
Document No:
Document Owner:
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
OHS Coordinator
1
08/09/2005
34 of 36
7.4 Appendix 2 Proforma Slope Risk and Hazard Matrix Rock Slopes
SLOPE RISK AND HAZARD MATRIX
Pit
Assessor
POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE
Potential Human exposure to failure
SLOPE VULNERABILITY CATEGORY
Slope height and steepness
Vulnerability & probability of natural events
Likelihood of failure
ROCK SLOPES
Slope
Revision No
Batters
Date
Multiple
None
Regard as an action priority ranking
Category
1
2
3
4
5
Steep/ high
Low
Vulnerable / High
Not Vulnerable
Highly likely
Unlikely
Rank
Rigorous
Known
Known
Known
Rigorous
Rank
Sound
Good
Wide and Clear
Not required
None
Assumed
Assumed
Assumed
Not Considered
Poor/ deteriorating
Poor/ deteriorating
Narrow or full
Required
Good condition
Operating satisfactorily
In force
Incomplete/ faulty
Planned/ suspended
Pending
Document No:
Document Owner:
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
OHS Coordinator
1
08/09/2005
35 of 36
Multiple
fatalities in a
major failure
Single fataility
in a major
failure
Serious LTI
Possible LTI or
MTI
No injuries or
loss
SLOPE
VULNERABILITY
FoS<1.2 or
PoS>50% or
severe
cracking or
failing
FoS=1.2-1.5 or
PoS>20-50%
or minor
cracking
FoS=1.5-2 or
PoS>5-20%
Apparently
stable
FoS=2-3 or
PoS>0-5%
Apparently
stable
Vulnerability &
probability of natural
events
Critical and
>=1 in slope
life
Vulnerable
and >=1 in
slope life
Vulnerable
and >=1 in 100
Years
Vulnerable or
>=1 in 100
Years
SLOPE STABILITY
DATA
Slope design
methods
Rigorous
design
Specific
design
Ground water
conditions
Assumed
Assumed
Known
phreatic
surface and no
seepage
Unknown
phreatic
surface and no
seepage
No drainageseepage visible
No drainagefree flowing
water visible
Face mapping
interpretation
Limnited face
mapping
Borehole data
Assumed
Probability and
magnitude
assessed and
incorporated in
design
Probability and
magnitude
assumed and
included in
design
Probability and
magnitude
assumed and
considered in
design
Considered
inconsequential
and ignored in
design
Not
considered
SLOPE SAFETY
ASSESSMENT
Crest and wall
condition
Based on
Procedure
Natural event
hazards and Slope
design
considerations
Not vulnerable
or <1 in 100
Years
Material strengths
Geological structure
and interpretation
FoS>3 or
PoS>0-5%
Stable
Sound
batters and
crests
Mild blast
damage
cracking
Moderate
blast
damage/
Friable or
Heavy
damage
Weathering
Unravelling
severely
cracked
Document No:
Document Owner:
Revision No:
Issue Date:
Page:
SIG-EHS-GU013
OHS Coordinator
1
08/09/2005
36 of 36
fractured
rock
Condition of cable bolting, mesh, shear pins or catch fences
Mild
corrosion or
deterioration
Moderate
corrosion or
deterioiration
Heavy
corrosion
Severely
corroded
Fall Capacity
20 BCM/m
Fall Capacity
10 BCM/m
Fall Capacity
5 BCM/m
Narrow/ full