The Use of Particle Flow Code in Gravity Ore Flow Studies

G.J . VAN HOUT, De Beers Corporate Headquarters, Johannesburg, South-Africa

ABSTRACT: Very few numerical modelling codes are capable of modelling gravity flow. Despite cave mining methods being used
extensively in the industry, the mechanisms behind the flow process are not fully understood. The Particle Flow Code is used to
investigate granular flow and more recently, modelling studies are in progress to analyse cave mining principles in depth. It is
anticipated that numerical modelling will assist in a better comprehension of the caving processes and will be complementary to the
empirical guidelines used when designing a cave production lay out. This paper discusses some of the work carried out at De Beers
using the Particle Flow Code and references to some historical numerical and physical models.


1 INTRODUCTION

It is anticipated that numerical modelling of gravity flow in
general and caving processes in particular will result in a better
insight into the material flow mechanisms. Early gravity flow
studies by means of visual observations of laboratory scale
physical models, simulating the drain of hoppers and bins, are
the foundation of the fundamentals for bulk flow (Kvapil 1965).

However, the material used in these models was granular and not
irregularly shaped as in cave mining conditions. Non spherical
particles obviously complicate the flow process. It is difficult to
quantify angularity and even more strenuous to
determine/describe its effect on the flow mechanisms. Numerical
modelling is an excellent tool to get a better understanding on
this complex topic.

The application of the early gravity flow principles in the mining
industry is also limited by an important, often overseen bias: the
conclusions were derived for material flow froma single draw
point. Experimental work done at Shabani Mine, using a three
dimensional model under dynamic conditions, revealed that the
principles derived fromworking single draw points are not valid
when simultaneously drawing multiple draw points with
spacings kept below a minimum critical distance. (Marano
1980). This distance depends on the physical characteristics of
the material and has the utmost importance in cave mining
layout since it determines the drawbell spacings. Again,
numerical modelling can be the key towards a more
comprehensive approach to gravity flow mechanisms.

Despite the shortcomings of the granular single drawpoint
models, the concept of the draw ellipsoid is still the most widely
used approach to study ore gravity flow (J anelid & Kvapil 1966).

Powerful numerical models only became available to the mining
industry in the last two decades and cave mine design was based
almost purely on practical experience of trial-and-error methods.
The empirical design guidelines in the form of classification
tables and stability charts developed by D.H. Laubscher (1994)
are still the only reliable and practical set of rules widely used
and well accepted in the industry.

It must be emphasised that numerical packages appropriate for
gravity flow simulations, based on the Distinct Element Method
(Cundall & Strack 1979) can, at present, not be utilised to build
huge models and draw conclusions solely based on a single
model to design an optimal mine production layout. Initially,
numerical modelling should be employed as an instrument to
verify and confirmthe empirical design rules. The next step
would be a sensitivity analysis of these rules, improving the
current knowledge. This can only be achieved by investigating,
in smaller representative models, all the distinctive parameters in


the empirical rules. This modular approach of breaking up the
large complicated model in smaller and easier to study models is
the preferred way to assess the effect of each parameter.

In addition to this approach, an adaptive modelling process
(Starfield & Cundall 1988) should be practised where one
progresses slowly and painfully fromthe simplest model, adding
complexity once it is fully understood and the results are
confirmed by experimental or field data. From the simple
models, one should understand and be able to develop equations
based on the mechanisms revealed by these models. In the case
of gravity flow models these equations should be equivalent to
or confirm the empirical guidelines established by D.H.
Laubscher.

This paper describes the use of a numerical code in some of the
work carried out to better understand the gravity flow of non-
granular material.


2 THE PARTICLE FLOW CODE (PFC)

The Particle Flow Code (ITASCA 1995) is a discrete element
code used as an efficient tool to perform research into the
behaviour of granular material, gravity flow applications, caving
mechanisms, fracture studies, etc. PFC may operate in either two
or three-dimensions. There are three important features in PFC,
which make the code different fromother widespread numerical
programs. Firstly, it allows displacements and rotations of
discrete bodies, with virtually no limit to the magnitude of these
changes. Secondly, new contact detection between circular
elements is simpler than contact detection between angular
particles, thus making the code more efficient and thirdly, it is
possible to construct blocks capable of breaking.

The two fundamental components making up a PFC model are
an assembly of balls and a set of walls. The particle assembly
parameters consist of the locations and size distribution of
particles. The number of balls is only limited by the RAM of the
computer on which the model is run (30,000 balls typically
require +/- 16 MB RAM in 2D).

Complex fragment shapes can be simulated by combining
several balls, bonded at their contact points. These fragments
then can act as autonomous entities and depending on the bond
strengths can split up into smaller, fragments depending on the
mechanical loading.

The contact behaviour and associated material properties dictate
the type of response the model will display upon disturbance.

In order to run a realistic simulation with PFC, after particle
generation and property declaration, boundary and initial
conditions must be specified to define the in situ state. The
planar walls or a string of boundary balls can be used to achieve
the model specific initial and boundary conditions.

PFC thus simulates the mechanical behaviour of a system
comprised of a collection of circular or arbitrarily shaped
particles. All that is needed to build even the most complex
model is a set of circular balls; some walls and bond properties.
The specification of the model geometry, element properties and
solution conditions is not straightforward in PFC. It is a thinking
process to identify ball and bond properties so that the simulated
solid matches with a real solid tested in the laboratory. Setting
the initial and boundary conditions is more complicated than for
continuummodels and the modeller has to rely on guidelines to
assist himin setting up realistic models.


3 GRANULAR FLOW MODELS

Because the mechanisms driving gravity flow operations are not
well understood, in the past effort has been directed towards
empirical methods to optimise mining methods. With increasing
computer power facilities, significant improvement in the design
process can be made through accurate computational PFC
modelling of gravity flow situations.

Before trying to model the flow of blocky fragments, granular
flow models were investigated. These tests permitted recognition
of the important parameters influencing the flow behaviour as
well as establishing their effect on the flow. Extrapolation of the
derived principles could then be verified with the more complex
irregular material models. It is anticipated that the obtained
postulations for the non-granular flow wont be similar to the
ones derived for the granular materials.

Several modelling exercises using PFC to simulate physical sand
models did not achieve calibration of the numerical model
satisfactorily (Lorig et al. 1995). However, this was mainly due
to the two dimensional approach of the problem, which turned
out to be a wrong assumption/approximation.

The conclusions based on physical granular flow analyses cannot
be extrapolated to cave mining conditions (primordial to the
current investigations). This is confirmed by different authors:

Experimental work done at Shabani Mine, using a three
dimensional model under dynamic conditions, revealed that
the principles derived fromworking single draw points are
not valid when drawing simultaneously multiple draw
points with spacings kept below a minimum critical
distance.
Large-scale test results do not indicate that the behaviour of
granular sand flow could be extrapolated to larger actual
laboratory conditions (McNearny 1991).
Yenge (1980) concluded that the flow of caved ore cannot
be described satisfactorily by theories developed for the
flow of sand. In the mining environment, particle sizes,
particle shapes, flow rates and boundary conditions are not
similar to those applying in the bins and bunkers.

4 NON GRANULAR FLOW MODELS

The two dimensional version of PFC was used successfully to
simulate a physical model of a block-caving mining method
(McNearny & Barker 1998). The physical model was
constrained to display blocky behaviour, common to block cave
environments, rather than the granular flow behaviour seen in
the sandbox models. This was achieved by closely packed layers
of concrete bricks, hammered into position with a rubber mallet.
The use of bricks permits a closer representation of a block cave
environment than the sand models. The sand particle sizes are
much smaller by comparison to the discharge opening holes in
the physical models than the rock fragment sizes by comparison
to the cave drawpoint dimensions. The brick model represents a
more realistic particle to opening size ratio.

In the PFC model, the bricks were created as two cylindrical
particles bonded together.

Figure 1 shows the PFC model at an intermediate stage in the
flow process.

The drawdown patterns and the rate of draw developed during
numerical modelling closely simulated the physical models. The
good match between physical and numerical models looks
promising for the success of future numerical modelling.



Figure 1. PFC flow model of brick material. (After McNearny &
Barker)


5 CAVE MINING MODELS STRATEGY

The ultimate goal of achieving a close similarity between large
cave mining layouts and 3D computer models is not for the
immediate future. It is not feasible yet to set up a 3D model,
which simulates accurately an extensive orebody incorporating
all the known geological features, the stress regime, the tunnels,
drawbells and other excavations. A more realistic way to analyse
cave behaviour and to design optimal layouts is to break the
entire process up into separate components. These components
can be studied better by using smaller models, concentrating on
one specific aspect of the whole cave. The modular approach
permits the designer to use other programs when and where
these are more appropriate than PFC. A suggested scheme of
separation into smaller models is shown in figure 2.





















































Figure 2: Modular approach to cave mining modelling.


5.1 Primary fragmentation size model

An initial model incorporating the rock mass properties such as
the joint geometry, rock mass ratings, groundwater
characteristics and stress levels should produce a primary
fragmentation distribution for that orebody to be mined by
means of caving.

The Block Cave Fragmentation (BCF) program (Esterhuizen,
1994) is a reliable programto give an accurate prediction of the
primary fragmentation. This BCF programis based on expert
knowledge of cave behaviour, rock mass structural data and
operating experience within block caving operations. Another
advantage of BCF is that it evaluates a situation much faster and
modelling is straightforward. A major disadvantage of the BCF
is that the block creation does not take place within a well-
defined volume in space. The output information fromBCF,
block sizes and block shapes, does not include the relative
position of these blocks in real space. It is therefore not possible
to construct within the finite orebody boundaries a numerical
rock mass model, comprised of blocks with the shapes and sizes,
determined in BCF. Nevertheless, BCF can still be used to
calibrate the PFC models that have the same input as fed into
BCF. The most important of this data is the joint set geometry
data: angle, spacing and persistence statistics. In PFC the
facilities exist to determine fragmentation size distributions in an
easy way. The calibration would be successful once there is a
close match between the fragmentation distribution curves
obtained fromBCF and the ones determined in PFC.

The primary fragmentation size distribution of a specific
orebody is essential input data for two independent numerical
models: undercut models (5.2) and communition models (5.3).


5.2 Undercut layout model

In addition to the primary fragmentation size distribution,
accurate stress values and appropriate material properties are the
most important input data required setting up a numerical model
investigating undercut layouts. PFC is the preferred code to
performthese investigations as it can easily handle distribution
curves as an input, but also, simulate excavation sequences and
investigate the rock mass response in one and the same model.
Initially, the study should concentrate on the cavability of the
orebody so as to quantify the required hydraulic radius to induce
caving.
Thereafter, different undercut techniques and undercut sequences
should be modelled to investigate the cave propagation potential
for each of the undercut layouts considered. An example of a
comparative study between two types of undercut techniques is
discussed in section 6.
An important aspect of undercutting operations is the existence
of abutment stresses. The magnitude and orientation of these
stresses are dependent on the virgin stresses and the undercut
direction. The investigation of these stresses could be done more
efficiently with the aid of other numerical codes as the abutment
stresses mainly affect the stability of the rock below and ahead
of the undercut, thus, outside the region of interest where gravity
flow occurs. Continuumcodes are better suited to model the
stresses and their important effects on the stability of the
major/minor apex, and tunnels at extraction or undercut level.


5.3 Communition model

The fragment size distribution of the ore drawn froma drawpoint
is a function of the age of a drawpoint. When a drawpoint comes
in production, the ore flowing out of the drawpoint is coarse and
is classified as the primary fragmentation stage. The virgin stress
state and geological features such as joint sets mainly determine
the primary fragmentation distribution. As the drawpoint ages,
the material reporting to the drawpoint has travelled a substantial
distance towards the drawpoint. During the draw down, the
fragments are broken up by communition in the cave, resulting
in a smaller fragment size distribution. This process is called the
secondary fragmentation and is influenced by the stress state in
the cave, material properties (strength), the path the primary
fragments travelled and the production rate of the drawpoint.




J oint geometry and statistics
Rock mass ratings
Stress levels
Groundwater characteristics

Primary fragmentation distribution models (5.1)
Undercut simulations (5.2) Communition simulations (5.3)
Hangup simulations (5.4)
secondary fragmentation distributions
drawbell geometry
Drawbell interaction simulations (5.5)
Hydraulic radius
Optimal undercut sequence
Drawbell spacing Hangup statistics
Secondary blasting requirements
Draw rates
With a primary fragmentation size distribution as an input
(derivation described in 5.1), numerical models can be set up to
investigate communition processes in the cave. PFC is extremely
well suited to do this type of modelling: PFC is one of the very
few codes that can model the interaction between realistic
shaped blocks including the communition of these blocks as they
move towards a drawpoint. High mechanical forces at the
contact points between these blocks cause destruction of bonds
between some balls making up the block, simulating thus
fragmentation. The model should be kept as simple as possible
by only investigation the ore flow to only one drawbell. The
studies investigating the interaction of several drawbells is
described in 5.5.

The primary output of a PFC model is a series of fragmentation
size distributions, as a function of drawpoint age or of remaining
column height. The PFC models can give additional information
such as the evolution of the draw ellipsoid boundaries, stress
distribution within the cave, velocity profiles, etc.

BFC can also be used to investigate communition in caving
conditions. The BCF simulation does not model the physical
block fragmentation as in PFC, but the communition process is
controlled by empirical rules. These rules are based on practical
experience and field data and require the height of the column
that a block has to travel before it arrives at the drawpoint. The
BCF output is again a fragmentation size distribution with a
description of the block sizes and shapes.

The BCF models should be used to calibrate PFC as the BCF
model relies on real field data. Once PFC simulations produce
adequate fragmentation size distributions as predicted by the
BCF program, studies investigating drawbell geometry can start.
These studies should concentrate on the influence of the
drawbell geometrical parameters (width, height, and length) on
the flow process, more specifically on the draw ellipsoid shape
and the communition process in terms of fragmentation size
distributions.


5.4 Hangup models

In competent orebodies with coarse fragmentation large rocks
often formhangups above the drawpoints, particularly at the
initial stage of production. A poor draw layout that shows little
or no interaction between drawbells also results in an increasing
number of hangups. To avoid low draw rates hangups are
removed by blasting or breaking the fragments forming the
hangup. This secondary blasting or breakage is an expensive and
labour intensive operation and can also damage the drawbell, the
brow and drawpoint support. Therefore, for planning purposes it
is useful to have a prediction of the percentage distribution of the
hangups. This enables the designer to plan for extra drilling
machines and secondary blasting requirements needed to remove
the hangups. It would also be beneficial to know if the incidence
of hangups is temporary, at the early stages of a drawpoint only,
or if it is expected to occur all. Because the draw rate is affected
by the number of hangups in a drawpoint, a mine plan should
have the provision for more drawpoints when many hangups are
predicted.

Hangup studies in PFC are easy once the communition models
(see 5.3) are calibrated. The communition models are appended
with an extra algorithmthat not only detects and removes the
hangups but also classifies each hangup together with
information of the blocks forming the hangup. The classification
is based on the position of the hangup (high or low) and the type
of hangup (cluster of blocks or single block). The algorithmis
also appropriate for the multiple drawbell simulations (see5.5).
BCF can also be used to do hangup investigations with
simulation times many orders of magnitudes smaller than those
of the PFC models. But the advantage of the PFC simulations is
that the models demonstrate the physical process of hangup
development. The PFC models give more information than just
hangup statistics. The models show the conditions under which
hangups are formed, what the effects are on draw rate, stress
state and other cave characteristics. Furthermore, it is possible to
investigate the effect of the drawbell geometry on the hangup
statistics.


5.5 Drawbell interaction models

It should be emphasised that all the PFC models described up to
this section involve only the action of one single drawbell. Once
the behaviour of a single drawbell is fully understood, studies
can be done to investigate the more complex interaction between
the drawbells. At this stage, there is no other programthan PFC
available to the geotechnical engineers to carry these multiple
drawbell ore flow studies.

The model can be used to investigate the most important
parameters in a cave layout, the height of interaction and the
drawpoint spacing. These critical parameters are shown in figure
3.



















Figure 3. Important geometrical parameters.


Good flow into the drawbell can only be achieved by correct
drawbell geometry combined with effective interaction occurring
between the drawpoints. Interaction between drawpoints can be
achieved by adequate drawpoint spacing. The drawpoint spacing
should be chosen so that the isolated draw zones from the
drawpoint overlap. The isolated draw zones have conical shapes
that, at a certain distance above the extraction level, can be
approximated by a cylindrical volume. The drawpoints should be
spaced on a pattern so that these cylinders at least are touching to
ensure drawpoint interaction. This means that there is a direct
relationship between the isolated draw zone diameter and the
drawpoint spacing. The isolated draw zone diameter depends on
the ore fragmentation characteristics.

An increase in drawpoint spacing has several advantages:

Improvement of the strength of the extraction level.
Provision for larger and longer drawpoints.
Potential for larger size LHD.
Reduction of development requirements.
height of
interaction
zone
isolated
draw
drawpoint spacing
drawzone diameter
interaction



However, possible disadvantages are:

Too little interaction between drawpoints.
Insufficient number of drawpoints.
Unacceptable dilution entry.

The current design parameters are based on three dimensional
sand model tests, ore fragmentation, marker experiments and
empirical data from underground observations (Laubscher,
1999). PFC models should be used initially to confirm the
accuracy of these empirical guidelines. After this calibration
stage, sensitivity studies on the drawpoint spacing, draw profiles,
etc. should provide sound design principles. More complex
geological situations with zones of different fragmentation
characteristics will be a challenge to model. These studies will
provide a better insight of how the cave will propagate
preferentially, the optimal draw control layout to manage
different geological zones where the fragmentation differences
play an important role. Draw control studies should also result in
strategies to minimise dilution entries.

The ultimate objective of PFC in block cave simulations: is to
come up with accurate design graphs for every possible orebody
mined by caving methods.


6 UNDERCUT SIMULATIONS

Care must be taken that there is no stacking of large blocks on
the major apex as this could prevent cave propagation. A rule of
thumb introduced years ago was that the top of the undercut had
to be 45 fromthe edge of the major apex above the brow.

PFC can be used to investigate the performance of different
undercut layouts and an optimal strategy can be derived from
these studies. Undercutting is the initial and important operation
before full production can start. A good undercut sequence is
essential to the caving process, as the undercut has to destabilise
the overlying orebody by creating a void underneath the ore
column. Pillars are not allowed to formin the undercut horizon,
as these pillars will transmit the high stresses down to the
production level where the tunnels can be damaged under high
stress environment.

The void created by the undercut fills up by bulking of the
material as ore fragments detach fromthe roof. Stacks of large
blocks on the major apex should be avoided since it prevents
cave propagation.

A series of PFC models was set up to study a flat undercut in
comparison with an inclined undercut. The simulations
suggested that at the initial stages of the cave, when the extent of
bulked material (failing zone) grows upwards, the inclined
undercut layout is the preferred option.
This confirms the rule of thumb, introduced years ago, that the
top of the undercut had to be 45 fromthe edge of the major
apex above the brow.



























Figure 4. Model geometry used for undercut simulations.


Figure 4 shows the model geometry with two 8m wide
drawbells, spaced at a distance of 30 min this instance. Further
parametric studies, not discussed in this paper looked at varying
the drawbell spacing.

Figure 5 shows the flat two metres high undercut layout and the
extraction sequence. Initially, a six metres wide undercut was
excavated above the drawbells and in the centre on the pillar
between the two drawbells. The model was then run for some
calculation cycles before excavating the second cut which mined
the rest of the undercut.

The undercut was not modelled as an entire excavation of the
rock within the zone of the undercut height. As shown in figure
5, the original intact material was replaced at the bottom75 % of
the undercut height by loosened material and the top 25 % was
left as void. This was done to adjust the two dimensional model
representing the three dimensional reality.

The undercut height in the models described in this paper was set
to 2 mbut parametric studies looked at variable heights.



















Figure 5. Flat undercut sequence.


First cut
Second cut
75%
void
loose material
(2 m)
60 m
8 m
(60 m)

8 m
(30 m)
The second layout represented an undercut flat above the
drawbells but inclined at the sides, towards the centre of the
pillar between them. This is shown in figure 6.















Figure 6. Inclined undercut sequence.

The generic model consists of two joint sets with a specific joint
spacing, angle and persistency for both joint sets. This is shown
in figure 7 where both joints were modelled as through going
(hundred percent persistency).

The initial models have one horizontal and one vertical joint set
considered. The fragments formed by these continuous joints
were three metres by three metres rectangular blocks, modelled
as indestructible. This was justified since the purpose of this
exercise was only to determine to what vertical extent both
undercuts could destabilise the rock. During this initial loosening
process, there is almost no communition or breakage taken place
in the rock.

















Figure 7. Two joint sets in rock mass in two dimensional model.


After running both models for a same number of calculation
cycles, a comparison between the two layouts was made. Figures
8 and 9 show the material after the undercut has taken place. It is
clear fromthese plots that the inclined undercut has loosened
more material than the flat undercut. This is confirmed by figure
10 showing for both models, the accumulated tons passed
through the draw bells as a function of calculation cycles. The
inclined undercut layout shows a substantial larger amount of
tons.
PFC simulations also revealed that the zone of mobilised
material in the inclined undercut layout also extends further
outwards in the lateral direction. This can be seen in figure 9
where the zone of immobile material, above the centre of the
pillar, is smaller than in figure 8. A very important practical
implication is that modelling indicates that for the same width of
the undercut the inclined layout mobilises a larger area of rock
positioned above the minor or major apex of the drawbells. In
the flat undercut layout, the material above the apex tends to
formstacks of blocks filling up the void created by the undercut.
This would prevent the cave to propagate upwards. In the
inclined undercut layout the formation of a stable pile of
fragments on the apex is prevented as the material can slide
down the inclined walls.




Figure 8: resulting profile in flat undercut case. The vertical
dotted lines mark the zone of immobile material and the curves
above the drawbells outline the zone of loosening.





Figure 9. Resulting profile in inclined undercut case The vertical
dotted lines mark the zone of immobile material and the curves
above the drawbells outline the zone of loosening. Note the
vertical displacement at the top right of the model.


draw down t ons i n time
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
loop number after u-cut
to
ns
dr
aw
n



Figure 10. Tons drawn as function of time for both layouts.
First cut
Second cut


S2
2
S1
1
J J O OI IN NT TE ED D
R RO OC CK KM MA AS SS S: :

S S1 1, ,S S2 2: : j jo oi in nt t s sp pa ac ci in ng g
1, , 1: : j jo oi in nt t a an ng gl le e
inclined undercut
flat undercut


7 ORE FRAGMENT FLOW SIMULATIONS

Large-scale models were constructed to investigate the flow of
irregular shaped ore fragments in a bin geometry (figure 11).




Figure 11. A multiple drawpoint large scale PFC geometry.


The objective was to keep the models generic enough to
investigate a wide range of possible applications. Initially, only
two-dimensional modelling was done only to keep the
simulation time within acceptable limits during the stage when
the datafiles were written. The datafiles contain the command
lines to build the whole PFC model and is rather a difficult task.
It is not a straightforward process to immediately achieve a
correct set up. The datafiles are very similar for the two
dimensional models and the three dimensional models. Since the
two dimensional models require much less computer time than
the three dimensional models, debugging and checking the
validity of the datafiles was done with PFC
2D
. This does not
mean that further studies would use the conclusions fromthe two
dimensional models for establishing design graphs. Modification
of the input files for three dimensional modelling is very simple
and should be run once computers become powerful enough to
handle large three dimensional models in an acceptable time
period. However, the two dimensional did show some interesting
phenomenons expected to be confirmed and quantified in the
three dimensional models.

The following points were investigated in detail.

The first input of the model was the construction of the bin
geometry with five drawpoints, a straightforward process.
The creation of non-spherical fragments in a simple way
was a second, more complicated, step.
After fragment generation, the integration of a draw control
practice was written to cater for all possible combinations
of opening and closing off the drawpoints.
Hangups at the drawpoints can be identified and removed.
Size distribution data is monitored during the whole draw
process.

The use of a programming language, embedded in PFC, is
essential to create generic models. The model geometry was
constructed by walls spaced at variable distances and angles.

A front-end programis used to create Voronoi polygons filling
up the bin. The PFC model consists of balls, all bonded together
and packed in a regular pattern as shown in figure 12. The
polygon outlines are used in PFC to delete bonds or balls at both
sides of a polygon boundary line. This process of deleting balls
or bonds is repeated for all polygons, resulting in the formation
of Voronoi shaped particles. The front-end program requires
several parameters such as the bin geometry plus Voronoi shape
and size variables, making it a very generic application tool.




Figure 12. Creation of Voronoi fragments in bin flow models.

After creating the Voronoi polygons, the model is brought to
equilibrium. Figure 13 shows the model after opening all
drawpoints and running the model for a few time steps.

Each polygon is thus a set of balls, bonded together. The bond
strengths were considered to be weak enough to allow breakage
when the mechanical forces acting upon the balls are high
enough to initiate failure. The ability of PFC to cater for this
communition process is of utmost importance to the realistic
simulation of ore flowing towards the drawpoints. Fragments in
the model did brake up, especially at the two bottomcorners of
the bin where. At these locations high stresses are present and
the material cannot move to the drawpoints. The high stress state
and the material immobilisation induce failure.





Figure 13. Bin filled with non-spherical fragments.

Figure 14 shows the same model after which approximately fifty
percent of the ore were pulled through all the open drawpoints.
The crushing of material in the model corners and close to the
drawpoint boundaries can also be observed.



Figure 14. Fragments left in bin after 50 % of material drawn
out. The dotted lines delineate the crushed zones.

The integration of a generic draw control layout was useful to
investigate and compare different draw practices.

A few models were run, each with a different opening and
closing sequence of the drawpoints.

The first model ran a layout in which all drawpoints were
continuously open. The second model was set up so that from
the left to the right drawpoint, the opening times were 0%, 25%,
50%, 75%, 100%.

A third model only had the middle drawpoint pulling ore while
the other drawpoints remained closed.

A useful tool to compare the different layouts was the use of
markers in the model for which the trajectories were
monitored during the whole draw down process. Tracking the
position of markers within the cave gives an insight to the cave
behaviour whilst being drawn.

Figures 15, 16 and 17 show the trajectories of the markers during
the extraction process for the three models. The plots show that
the ore fragments can travel a substantial distance in the
horizontal direction if a differential draw profile is applied.



Figure 15. All drawpoints open all the time.







Figure 16. Drawpoints to the right longer opening time
(gradually from0 % at left to 100 % at right)







Figure 17. Only middle drawpoint open.



In these simulations, block hangups at drawpoints can be
detected and eliminated in an easy way. A hangup is detected
when no more ore has flown through that drawpoint over a given
period. The fragments forming the hangup are then automatically
blasted out, allowing the drawpoint to continue working. A
typical occurrence of a hangup in the models is shown in figure
18. The bars in the figure represent contact forces between the
fragments. The width of the bar is equivalent to the magnitude of
the force. In this instance, a high hangup in the drawpoint is
formed by arching of several smaller ore fragments.





Figure 18. A typical hangup occurring at a drawpoint.


After the study of the three different models, concepts were
developed to keep track of the fragment size distributions of the
material flowing out of each drawpoint. This could be very
useful to investigate the secondary fragmentation process as the
size of the fragments reporting at the drawpoints indicate how
much communition has taken place during the stay in the cave.


8 CONCLUSIONS

The application of PFC modelling shows great potential in
assisting to understand gravity flow of non-granular material.
This knowledge can be translated in principles to be used when
designing a cave mining operation, in conjunction with the
presently available empirical guidelines.


9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The permission of the Director, Operations and the Consulting
Geotechnical Engineer, De Beers Consolidated Mines Limited,
to present this paper is gratefully acknowledged.


10 REFERENCES

Kvapil, R. 1965. Gravity flow of granular materials in hoppers
and bins, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Vol. 2, pp. 35-41.
Marano, G. 1980. The interaction between adjoining draw points
in free flowing materials and its application to mining.
Chamber of Mines Journal.
J anelid, I & Kvapil, R 1966. Sublevel Caving. Int. J Rock Mech.
Min. Sci, Vol. 3, pp 129-153.
Laubscher, D.H. 1994. Cave mining, the state of the art. Journal
of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.
Cundall, P. & Strack, O. 1979. A discrete numerical model for
granular assemblies. Geotechnique, Vol. 29, pp. 47-65.
Starfield, A & Cundall, P 1988.Towards a methodology for rock
mechanics modelling. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., Vol. 25,
pp 99-106.
ITASCA Consulting Group, 1995. PFC
2D
Users Manual,
Version 1.1.
Lorig, L. et al. 1995. Gravity flow simulations with the particle
flow code (PFC). Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., Vol. 3, pp 18-
24.
McNearny, R. 1991. Large Scale Two Dimensional Block
Caving Model Test. Thesis for the Degree of PhD, Colorado
School of Mines Golden U.S.A.
Yeng, L. 1980. Analysis of bulk flow of materials under gravity
caving process. Part 1.Sublevel caving in relation to flow in
bins and bunkers. Colo. School of Mines 75 (4), 1-45
McNearny, R. & Barker, K. 1998. Numerical modeling of large-
scale block cave physical models using PFC
2D
. Mining
Engineering, Vol. 50, No 2.
Esterhuizen, G. 1994. A program to predict block cave
fragmentation-Technical reference and users guide, report to
Rio Tinto South Africa
Laubscher, D. 1999. CaveBase Manual (Unpublished).