Gorbachev Kuzbass State Technical University, Kemerovo, Russia:

A. I. Kopytov, Professor, Doctor of Engineering Sciences, kai.spssh@kuzstu.ru
T. B. Rogova, Professor, Doctor of Engineering Sciences

Kemerovo Division, Institute of Computational Technologies, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kemerovo, Russia¹ ; Federal Research Center of Coal and Coal Chemistry, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kemerovo, Russia²:
S. V. Shaklein^1,2, Leading Researcher, Doctor of Engineering Sciences

The article describes geometrical methods available for estimating error of mining and geometric models of coal deposits, based on the determination of its execution ambiguity degree, performed by artificially creating indirect redundant definitions in grids of exploration drill holes. Redundant definitions are created in the contour of quadrangular cells of the exploration grids and represented by two values of the studied parameters at the intersection point of the cell diagonals, obtained by linear or spline interpolation along the diagonals. It is shown that the error of the model is directly proportional to the difference between these values (referred to as exploration criteria), and the value of the proportionality coefficient depends on the specified evaluation probability. It is indicated that in the conditions of operating deposits, the values of the proportionality coefficients could be clarified with the use of accumulated exploitation data. The use of geometric methods is valid only in the conditions of the legitimacy existence of the studied parameters interpolation in the space between the exploration drill holes. The procedure for such legitimacy establishing in the geometrization of the seam hypsometry, its thickness and coal quality parameters is considered. It is noted that the use of the expected geometrization errors allows improving the quality of categorizing coal resources three to four times in comparison with traditional expert estimates, which increases the validity and accuracy of public reporting of enterprises on coal reserves and resources. The proposed error estimation
methods are recommended to use by the state geological expertise body of Russia and the Society of Russian Experts on Subsoil Use, officially recognized by the CRIRSCO member countries as a Recognized professional organization.

1. Zaernyuk V. M., Chernikova L. I. On the role of risks and uncertainties in investing in the mining industry. Finansovaya zhizn. 2017. No. 3. pp. 47–54.
2. Rogova Т. B., Shaklein S. V. Risks of the Russian companies acting in sphere of bowels use. Menedzhment i biznes-administrirovanie. 2010. No. 1. pp. 90–95.
3. Daya Sagar B. S., Qiuming Cheng, Agterberg F. Handbook of Mathematical Geosciences. Fifty Years of IAMG. Cham : Springer, 2018. 914 p.
4. Kulak V. Yu., Voloshin V. A., Fryanov V. N. Evaluation of influence exerted by coal exploration quality on mine planning efficiency. GIAB. 2015. No. 5. pp. 13–22.
5. Dushin A. V., Yurak V. V. Authors’ approach to the Total Economic Value: Essentials, structure, evolution. Eurasian Mining. 2018. No. 1. pp. 11–15. DOI: 10.17580/em.2018.01.03
6. Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. The JORC Code. 2012 Edition. Joint Ore Reserves Committee, 2012. 44 p.
7. Russian ode for public reporting of exploration results, mineral resources and solid mineral reserves (NAEN Code). Moscow : NP NAEN, 2014. 107 p.
8. Shurygin D. N. Mining-geometrical estimation of stability of optimal technical solutions for mine planning and forecast risks of subsoil use. GIAB. 2016. No. 9. Special issue 22. Geometrical evaluation methodology for subsoil use risk management. pp. 22–41.
9. Pisarenko M. V. Mining-geometrical assessment development of preparedness coal deposits to rational industrial mining. Problemy nedropolzovaniya. 2016. No. 2(9). pp. 46–51.
10. Zulkarnain I., Bargawa W. S. Classification of Coal Resources Using Drill Hole Spacing Analysis (DHSA). Journal of Geological Resource and Engineering. 2018. Iss. 4. pp. 151–159.
11. Battalgazy N., Madani N. Categorization of Mineral Resources Based on Different Geostatistical Simulation Algorithms: A Case Study from an Iron Ore Deposit. Natural Resources Research. 2019. Vol. 28. No. 4. P. 1329–1351.
12. Available at: http://gkz-rf.ru/tverdye-poleznye-iskopaemye (accessed: 19.04.2019).
13. Evseenko V. V. Analysis of reserves estimation systems impact on the value of mining companies mineral assets. Ekonomika i predprinimatelstvo. 2017. No. 8–4. pp. 1219–1227.
14. Kopytov А., Rogova T., Shaklein S. Investment Risks Reduction of Developing Coal Deposits on the Basis of Quantitative Assessment Method of the Geological Information Confidence. Coal in the 21^st Century: Mining, Intelligent Equipment and Environment Protection : Proceedings of the 9^th China–Russia Symposium. Qingdao, 2018. Vol. 176. pp. 289–294.
15. Australian Guidelines for the Estimation and Classification of Coal Resources. 2014 edition. 2014. Available at: http://jorc.org/docs/coal_guidelines_2014_-_final_ratified_document.pdf (accessed: 19.04.2019).
16. Woolich А., Hutton N., Denny G. A rapidly evolving legal landscape. Mining Journal. 2014. November.
17. Tolkach O. M., Sobolevskiy R. V. Estimated accuracy of structural and quality indicators in the Kuryanovsky pyrophyllite shale deposit. Vestnik Zhitomirskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnologicheskogo universiteta. Seriya: Tekhnicheskie nauki. 2012. No. 2(61). pp. 185–190.
18. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/901928680 (accessed: 19.04.2019).
19. Rogova T. B., Nikiforova O. P., Shaklein S. V., Kotkin V. A., Malukhin V. G., Yarkov V. O. Guidelines for evaluation of compliance between geological models and real-life coal deposits. Moscow – Kemerovo, 2011. 86 p.