The paper examines the conventional belief that angled holes are more detection effective than vertical holes with dipping targets. The examination uses a binomial probability framework.
Analysis in two and three dimensions shows that all holes can be evaluated for detection effectiveness in three dimensions but only standard vertical holes can be in two dimensions.
A programme of standard vertical holes using its two-dimensional advantage had a higher detection capability than one of standard angled holes irrespective of the target’s orientation. Although this outcome is at odds with the conventional model, the paper shows that the conventional model contains fundamental flaws. It identifies their source and explains why they occurred.
These flaws together with evidence provided by the binomial model lead the paper to conclude that the conventional belief cannot be sustained. The financial implications of this conclusion for the industry are significant.
This paper is a copy of the original abstract on the publisher’s web site. Formal abstract can be accessed through the following link. The complete paper can be accessed from libraries that have “Mining Technology”, or acquired from the publisher at the following link: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maney/mint/2009/00000118/00000001/art00002
- Note for Paul Gilding
- TRILLION DOLLAR BABY: How Norway beat the oil giants and won a lasting fortune
- COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE OF THE US ECONOMY
- Have Orthodox Economists, Misrepresented the ideas of Adam Smith and the Utilitarian Philosophers?
- Should selected industries be permitted to import foreign workers?