1976
DOI: 10.1016/0148-9062(76)90757-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bulkhead pressures due to cemented hydraulic mine backfills

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, as underground mining activity increased and stopes became larger, the lack of field or numerical data on bulkhead pressures generally forced mines to over-design barricades; an expensive operational consideration that was required in the absence of any barricade pressure data. An example of such over design gave rise to a barricade that consisted of a 1 m thick heavily reinforced concrete bulkhead with interior drain pipes (Mitchell and Smith 1979;Mitchell et al 1975). The design strength of this barricade exceeded the measured horizontal pressures; for example in this instance, the primitive timber fill fences designed for a working pressure of 100 kN/m 2 were found to be sufficient according to their historical success.…”
Section: Underground Barricade Historymentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, as underground mining activity increased and stopes became larger, the lack of field or numerical data on bulkhead pressures generally forced mines to over-design barricades; an expensive operational consideration that was required in the absence of any barricade pressure data. An example of such over design gave rise to a barricade that consisted of a 1 m thick heavily reinforced concrete bulkhead with interior drain pipes (Mitchell and Smith 1979;Mitchell et al 1975). The design strength of this barricade exceeded the measured horizontal pressures; for example in this instance, the primitive timber fill fences designed for a working pressure of 100 kN/m 2 were found to be sufficient according to their historical success.…”
Section: Underground Barricade Historymentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Underestimation of friction angle will result in underestimation of the arching effect in hydraulic fills and hence the overall stability of the material (Mitchell et al, 1975). Due to limited access and safety issues, it is often difficult to carry out in situ tests within the stopes.…”
Section: Friction Angles Of Hydraulic Fillsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In other words, the sample prepared by the above sedimentation process will give a good representation of the in situ hydraulic fill. Mitchell et al (1975) determined the permeability of cemented hydraulic fill using 152 mm diameter and 305 mm high samples prepared in the laboratory. They found that the drainage characteristics in the mine stope agreed with the predictions based on the permeability values measured in the laboratory.…”
Section: Test Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Relating Rankine Theory to backfill design was previously proposed by Mitchell et al [2], Revell and Sainsbury [12], Marcinyshyn et al [13] and Dehn et al [14]. Rankine Theory relates the horizontal pressure to the vertical pressure based on a coefficient which determines whether the soil is active, passive or at rest [11].…”
Section: Loading Mechanics Of the Pastementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous barricade studies have focused on timber barricades [1], concrete barricades [2,16] and brick barricades [3]. Previous studies have addressed the loading mechanics of hydraulic fill [1,4], however until recently the performance of barricades under paste loading has not been studied.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%