ARMA 15-852

Building a Rock Mass Model for a Large Open Pit

Felipe Capdeville-Pérez, P.Eng. (BC)
Piteau Associates Ltd., North Vancouver, BC, Canada

Copyright 2015 ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 49th US Rock Mechanics / Geomechanics Symposium held in San Francisco, CA, USA, 28 June-
1 July 2015.
This paper was selected for presentation at the symposium by an ARMA Technical Program Committee based on a technical and critical review of
the paper by a minimum of two technical reviewers. The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of ARMA, its officers, or
members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of ARMA
is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 200 words; illustrations may not be copied. The
abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgement of where and by whom the paper was presented.

ABSTRACT: This article proposes a methodology for building a rock mass model for the Toquepala Mine. This model will be
used as an input for analyses to evaluate the stability of the current and future open pit slopes. The rock mass modeling process can
be divided into two phases: a database building phase which involves gap analysis and data collection, compilation and validation;
and an analysis phase that involves data assessment and the definition of rock mass units (RMUs). This article briefly describes
each of these phases and how they have been applied at the Toquepala Mine, with emphasis on the data assessment and definition
of the different RMUs.
1. BACKGROUND In 2011, an update to the 2000 slope design criteria was
initiated by the mine. A Geotechnical Review Team
Toquepala is a large open pit copper mine owned and
(GRT) comprised of Itasca, Piteau and Mr. Peter Stacey
operated by Southern Copper Corporation. It is located
of Stacey MGL was formed to undertake the required
in Jorge Basadre Province in the south of Peru, about
studies. Following compilation of the available
160 km northeast of Tacna. The Toquepala Mine has
information, the GRT conducted a gap analysis which
been in operation since the late 1950s. In the 1980s,
was used to guide the design of a comprehensive field
Call and Nicholas Inc. (CNI) developed an early slope
data collection program that included bench mapping,
design. Later, in 2000, updated slope design criteria
geotechnical drilling (geomechanical logging, hydraulic
were prepared by a joint collaboration of Golder
testing and piezometer installation), and laboratory
Associates Ltd. (Golder), Itasca Consulting Group Inc.
testing. The program specifically targeted areas for
(Itasca) and Piteau Associates Engineering Ltd. (Piteau).
collection of structural fabric and fault orientations to
As part of this later study, the rock mass characterization
facilitate updating of the structural database and major
was updated.
fault models, geomechanical rock mass parameters for
The rock mass model developed for the 2000 slope updating the geomechanical database and rock mass
design study was based on a series of mapping, drilling model, and permeability estimates for updating the
and laboratory testing campaigns. The laboratory testing groundwater model.
program included a limited number of triaxial
The methodology used to compile and build the rock
compressive strength tests. Following compilation of
mass model is described in the following paragraphs.
these data, rock mass units (RMUs) were defined based
on lithology and the presence or absence of calcium
sulfates (i.e., gypsum and anhydrite). 2. DEPOSIT SCALE GEOLOGY [1]
During the last 15 years, the Toquepala pit has grown. The ore deposit at Toquepala is characterized as a copper
Pit slopes are currently on the order of 700 m high, and porphyry in which copper and molybdenum
the next phase of mine development (Phase 5) will mineralization is predominantly found in breccia
increase the slope height to approximately 950 m. Given intrusions (i.e., Angular Breccia (Bx), Diorite Breccia
this significant increase in slope height, and anticipated (Dibx), Tourmaline Breccia (Bxt) and Pebble Breccia
changes to the competency of the rock mass with (Px)), hosted within two igneous rocks (i.e., Quartz
increasing depth, it was considered prudent to update the Quellaveco Porphyry, (Qq) and an intrusion of Diorite
rock mass model and slope design. (Di)). Three additional, but barren, intrusions have been
identified at the site: Dacite Porphyry (Dp), Latite 3. AVAILABLE DATA AND GAP ANALYSIS
Porphyry (Lp) and Dacite Agglomerate (Da). A
The collaborative study conducted in 2000 included
sequence of younger volcanic rocks is located on top of
compilation of the available data and definition of new
the breccias and intrusives: Toquepala Andesite (Ta),
rock mass units (RMUs). This database included
Toquepala Dolerite (Td), Toquepala Quartz Porphyry
geomechanical core logging information collected from
(Tq), Toquepala Rhyolite (Tr) and Alta Andesite (Aa).
Accurate identification of these lithologies is challenging approximately 5000 m of core, laboratory testing of
intact rock core including 358 Unconfined Compressive
due to their complex interlayering. Figure 1 shows the
Strength (UCS), 43 Triaxial Compressive Strength
stratigraphic sequence as it is currently understood at the
(TCS) and 375 Splitting Tensile Strength (STS) tests,
Toquepala deposit.
and laboratory testing of discontinuity surfaces,
The main types of hydrothermal alteration produced by including 57 Direct Shear (DS) tests. Due to the length
the intrusion of the breccias and igneous bodies are of time over which the laboratory tests were conducted,
propylitic (Prop) and quartz-sericite (QS) alteration. The much of the original data sets were lost and as a result, it
intensity of the alteration has not been investigated in was not possible to review the quality of the test results
detail. or procedures. Table 1 summarizes the results of
Below approximately 3000 masl, gypsum and anhydrite laboratory testing in terms of the number of completed
are present as discontinuity infills and disseminated in tests and mean values.
the rock matrix as the result of calcium sulfate flooding Table 1. Summary of Laboratory Testing Data Available Prior
associated with hydrothermal processes. Their presence to the Current Study
has been identified in all of the rock types except the
sequence of younger volcanic rocks. The upper limit of Lithology UCS TCS STS DS
the presence of gypsum and anhydrite is known as the 129 100 12
Di 10
Tope de Yeso (TdY). 40MPa 6MPa 28° - 59kPa
15 18 3
Da -
67MPa 6MPa 23° - 105kPa
CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHIC
DIVISIONS LITHOSTRATIGRAPHIC DIVISIONS

SYSTEM MEMBER COLUMN DESCRIPTION 24 38 7

Dp 7
QUATERNARY
78MPa 6MPa 25° - 51kPa
Q - al +- 20m Alluvium and dump material.
UNCONFORMITY
6 4 -
Lp -
112MPa 15MPa -
67 67 13
Qq 16
ALTA ANDESITE
57MPa 8MPa 28° - 24kPa
Intercalation of andesitic to rhyolitic lavas, breccia flows,
4 3 -
Aa -
agglomerates and volcano clastic rocks; andesitic rocks
predominant.

Alta KsTi-Taa 100MPa 14MPa -

Series 10 10 2
Ta -
121MPa 13MPa 28° - 14kPa
UPPER CRETACEOUS - LOWER TERTIARY

10 18 2
Td -
61MPa 12MPa 24° - 79kPa
TOQUEPALA GROUP
Quellaveco Formation

TOQUEPALA RHYOLITE
11 20 1
Rhyolitic flows; white, grey, brown and red in colour.
Tq -
Prominent flow banding.
TOQUEPALA ANDESITE
94MPa 9MPa 28° - 134kPa
+- 900m
UNCONFORMITY
Andesitic flows, light grey to dark grey in colour.
15 17 4
+- 75m
Generally aphanitic in texture. Middle section is
Porphyritic with phenocrysts of feldspar. Magnetic. Tr -
Di
ksTi-Ttr

KsTi-Tta
73MPa 6MPa 25° - 15kPa
+- 60m
Toquepala TOQUEPALA QUARTZ PORPHYRY 35 48 10
Lp Rhyolitic flows, grey to greyish white in colour.
Bx 10
Series
KsTi-Ttq +-100m
Porphyritic texture with phenocrysts of quartz.
Generally well banded and tuffaceous. 78MPa 5MPa 29° – 53kPa
TOQUEPALA DOLERITE 32 32 3
KsTi-Ttd Andesitic flows, grey to greenish grey in colour. Px -
Da
aphanitic to fine grained. Flow banding generally
presents Agglomeratic towards the bottom, with 56MPa 7MPa 24°- 56kPa
boulders of Qq.
UNCONFORMITY
+- 75m
Note: The first number corresponds to the number of tests conducted prior to
QUELLAVECO QUARTZ PORPHYRY
Rhyolitic flows, white to greyish white in colour; hard dense.
2000 and the second number corresponds to the mean value.
Quellaveco Porphyritic texture with small, irregularly shaped
Quartz KsTi-Tqq phenocrysts of quartz. Characteristic aphanitic,
Porphyry Dp Bxs milky white groundmass.
As indicated in Table 1 the quantity of testing data for
some lithologic units is very limited. The lack of triaxial
testing on the younger volcanic units was identified as a
Di +-150m
INTRUSIVE AND HYDROTHERMAL ROCKS

Lp
Latite Porphyry particular weakness in the database as triaxial testing
data is a key input in the evaluation of the intact and
Da
Dacite Agglomerate

Breccias
Dp

Di
Dacite Porphyry

Diorite
rock mass shear strength of the material.

Fig. 1 Stratigraphic sequence at Toquepala (modified from Some of the strength values in Table 1 appear low in
Luciano Prieto, 1977). comparison to the hardness and general rock mass
competency observed in the current pit. These reduced
strengths are attributed, in part, to sample location. Most
of the historic samples were obtained at higher
elevations and closer to the core of the deposit, and have
therefore likely been exposed to a greater degree of • Use of a secondary core orientation device (e.g.,
weathering and alteration. The current mining phase is ACT II, manufactured by Reflex™) as a
deeper, and the walls are farther away from the core of comparative check on approximately 25% of the
the deposit and are therefore less influenced by core,
weathering rock. • Geomechanical core logging for all drillholes
As one of the considerations used in the gap analysis, the using Rock Mass Rating, RMR (Bieniawski,
volume of each lithology that will be present in the pit 1976),
walls of the future mine phases (i.e., Phases 4 and 5) was • Point Load testing in all drillholes, for
estimated using Toquepala’s geological block model. correlation of Point Load Index (Is(50)) with
This allowed prioritization of field data collection laboratory UCS values,
methods to target the most predominant lithologies. The • Targeted laboratory sampling and testing
results of this assessment indicated the following units, program,
according to their priority: • Hydraulic testing at nominal 100m spacing using
double or triple packer system in each drillhole,
• Diorite, above and below TdY (38 and 28%, and
respectively), • Installation of two to three vibration wire
• All intrusive rocks, excluding Di (12%), piezometers in selected drillholes.
• All volcanic rocks (8%),
• All breccias (3%), including Pebble Breccia or
Px, which was targeted regardless its low 5. 2014 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM
percentage on the Phases 4 and 5 pit as it has The pre 2000 laboratory testing database and prioritized
been historically identified as an important list of lithologies expected in the Phase 4 and 5 pit walls
factor on the development of interramp level were used to prepare sampling targets for the laboratory
instabilities in the past). testing program. As part of this program, UCS, TCS,
It is important to note that Da is the most predominant STS and DS tests were identified as being required to
intrusive rock besides Di, and makes up 7% of the 12% obtain a reasonable characterization of the strength of
reported. the rock mass and joint fabric. The GRT provided the
target number of samples for each test type.
Based on review of this information, the GRT made
recommendations for a data collection program that As part of ongoing quality control efforts for the project,
targeted each rock type, the presence or absence of it was also recommended that approximately 20% of the
gypsum/anhydrite, and alteration. One of the goals of laboratory tests be completed at a different laboratory.
the program would be to determine whether alteration The primary laboratory testing program was conducted
has an important role in the mechanical behavior of the at the SGS Rock Mechanics Laboratory in Santiago,
rock mass. Chile, with the remained of the testing being conducted
at the Mecánica de Roca Ltda. laboratory in Calama,
Chile. Project engineers regularly visited the
4. 2013 DRILLHOLE PROGRAM laboratories during testing to confirm that the specified
The 2013 drillhole program consisted of 38 oriented testing procedures were being followed. [3].
boreholes distributed throughout the pit area and Following reception of laboratory test results, all results
targeted the Phase 4 and 5 pit walls, the most important were validated by reviewing the raw data, before and
lithologies, and major faults. In particular, four after photos, and comments and observations provided
drillholes were designed to help define the persistence, by the laboratories. The following list summarizes the
character and thickness of major faults. number of valid tests completed during the 2014
In addition to the proposed geotechnical drillholes, the program:
GRT also prepared recommendations to ensure the best • UCS: 154 (120 and 34 conducted at SGS and
quality of drilling. These recommendations included Mecánica de Rocas, respectively),
[2]: • TCS: 141 (133 and 8 conducted at SGS and
• Use of triple tube wireline drilling equipment to Mecánica de Rocas, respectively),
minimize core disturbance, • STS: 263 (6 and 257 conducted at SGS and
• 12hr/day drilling supervision, Mecánica de Rocas, respectively), and
• Geomechanical core logging at the drill platform • DS: 151 (121 and 30 conducted at SGS and
in core tube splits, Mecánica de Rocas, respectively).
• Geophysical surveys (i.e., acoustic and optical The current study also included an assessment of the
televiewer) to obtain discontinuity orientations impact of alteration impact on the strength of the intact
in all drillholes, rock and rock mass. As part of this assessment,
laboratory test results were initially grouped according (i.e., friction angle between 23 and 29°). As indicated
lithology, the presence or absence of gypsum/anhydrite, above, it was thought that these samples may have been
and alteration type. selected from higher pit elevations and as such, may
have been adversely affected by a higher degree of
Table 2 shows the distribution of number of valid tests
weathering, due to proximity to the surface, and
conducted for each geological combination.
alteration, due to proximity to the core of the deposit.
As part of the GRT’s recommendations, multi-stage
Table 2. Distribution of Valid Results from the 2014 direct shear testing of discontinuities at 250, 500, 750
Laboratory Testing Program and 1000 kPa normal loads, were conducted to
characterize the non-linear behavior of representative
Lith. TdY Alt. UCS TCS STS DS
discontinuities under different levels of confinement.
Prop 18 19 26 11 From a total of 160 tests, 151 were considered valid and
Above
Di
QS 2 4 5 5 were used to establish design discontinuity shear
Prop 10 9 16 10 strengths based on the following attributes:
Below
QS 11 7 18 9
Prop 7 6 7 8
• Rock Type,
Above • Presence or Absence of Gypsum/Anhydrite,
QS 1 3 3 0
Da
Below
Prop 10 6 13 9 • Alteration, and
QS 0 3 6 2 • Joint Condition (JC76).
Above QS 1 3 5 1
Dp Prop 0 2 3 1 Results of this assessment indicated that rock type and
Below
QS 7 5 14 8 the presence or absence of gypsum/anhydrite have the
Prop 7 2 6 3 biggest impact on discontinuity shear strength.
Above
QS 3 2 5 2
Lp Alteration did not appear to have a significant effect. As
Prop 0 0 2 2
Below
QS 1 2 3 0 a result of this assessment, the shear strength of joint
Prop 0 0 4 1 discontinuities was characterized according to rock type
Qq Above
QS 6 5 12 10 and location relative to the TdY.
Aa Above Prop 12 11 19 7
Ta Above Prop 5 0 7 4 Figure 2 provides an example of an analysis conducted
Td Above Prop 4 4 9 4 for Di located above the TdY. The first segment of the
Tq Above
Prop 0 0 2 0 line shown in Fig. 2 (in red) is defined by the best fit of
QS 1 2 0 0 the residual strengths from the tests conducted at the
Tr Above Prop 10 13 19 9 lowest normal load (i.e., 250kPa). Residual strengths
Prop 2 5 6 7
Above
QS 0 3 6 0
did not consider cohesion and were intended to represent
Bx the behavior of structures close to surface (i.e.,
Prop 3 3 4 8
Below equivalent to bench scale) where discontinuities tend to
QS 10 7 17 9
Dibx Below QS 5 1 6 7 be open and shear strengths are adversely affected by
Prop 8 3 6 4 blasting and excavation. The second segment of the line
Above
QS 3 6 8 1 in Fig. 2 (in blue) is defined by the best fit of the peak
Px
Prop 5 3 4 9
Below
QS 2 2 2 0
strengths from the tests conducted at all the normal
loads. For peak strength, cohesion was included and this
was considered to represent the behavior of the
As can be seen in Table 2, in comparison to the prior structures at depth, equivalent to a multi-bench scale.
testing database (Table 1) the current database is much Discontinuities at depth are less likely to be affected by
large and better distributed according to rock type. blasting and excavation.
In addition to estimating the best lineal fit for residual
6. DISCONTINUITY STRENGTH and peak strengths, lower and upper bound strengths
In rock slope design, it is common to use the Mohr were estimated by using +/- one standard deviation of
Coulomb failure criterion to express the shear strength of the data set. These estimates are intended to support the
discontinuities as a linear envelope in terms of cohesion, upcoming stability analysis stage of study.
friction angle, normal stress (σn) and shear stress (τ) [4].
The slope design studies conducted in the 1980s
included some shear strength test results for some
lithologies, based on both large and small scale shear
box testing. Results of this early testing program are
summarized in Table 1. Assessment of this original data
set indicated relatively low discontinuity shear strengths
 intact rock core and rock mass characterization values
1500
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS AND BILINEAL FITS
Normal and Shear Residual Strength (from tests at 250kPa)
1400
Bench Scale Lineal Fit
Normal and Shear Peak Strength (from tests at 250, 500, 750 and 1000kPa)
(i.e., GSI) are also required to define this envelope. [5]
1300 Multi-Bench Scale Lineal Fit

1200
Range Within Friction Angle and Cohesion Could Vary
7.1. Intact Rock Strength
Characterization of the intact rock strength utilized data
1100
from the 2014 laboratory testing program. Previous data
1000
were not considered applicable to the current rock mass
900 because of the different intensity of weathering and
800 alteration between samples located close to the surface
700 and the ones located at depth. It was also not possible to
600
validate earlier test results.
500 Tables 4 to 7 summarize the mean UCS and STS results
400 (based on valid tests) by lithology, the presence or
300
absence of gypsum/anhydrite, and alteration type. For
Bench Scale:
Lower Bound: 0kPa - 39°
Best Fit: 0kPa - 43°
each of these combinations, at least three triaxial tests
200 Upper Bound: 21kPa - 48°

Multi-Bench Scale:
were conducted at three different confining stresses (i.e.,
100 Lower Bound:
Best Fit:
59kPa - 29°
135kPa - 35°
Upper Bound: 212kPa - 41°
at approximately 15, 25 and 50% of design UCS defined
0
for the 2000 study).
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
NORMAL STRESS (kPa) Table 4. Mean Values of UCS and STS from 2014 Laboratory
Testing Program for Diorite
Fig. 2 Example of bi-linear fit (bench and multi-bench
scale) for Diorite located above TdY.
Lithology TdY Alteration UCS STS
Table 3 presents the Mohr Coulomb parameters (i.e.,
friction angle and cohesion) determined from the best fit Prop 192MPa 5MPa
(bench and multi-bench scale) for the different rock Above
types above and below the TdY. QS 168MPa 5MPa
Di
Table 3. Mohr Coulomb Parameters (Best Fit) for Rock Prop 166MPa 5MPa
Type and Presence or Absence of Gypsum/Anhydrite Below
QS 132MPa 4MPa
Bench Multi-Bench
Rock Tope de Scale Scale
Type Yeso
φ Cohesion φ Cohesion
Table 5. Mean Values of UCS and STS from 2014 Laboratory
Above 42° 0kPa 36° 61kPa Testing Program for Intrusives
Diorite
Below 43° 0kPa 35° 135kPa Lithology TdY Alteration UCS STS

Above 42° 0kPa 34° 128kPa Prop 82MPa 3MPa

Intrusives Above
Below 41° 0kPa 35° 117kPa QS 128MPa 8MPa
Da
Volcanics Above 43° 0kPa 38° 25kPa Prop 91MPa 4MPa
Below
Above 42° 0kPa 38° 47kPa QS - 4MPa
Breccias
Below 43° 0kPa 39° 64kPa Above QS 165MPa 4MPa
Note: All volcanic rocks are located above the TdY. Dp Prop - 8MPa
Below
QS 107MPa 4MPa

Prop 90MPa 5MPa

7. ROCK MASS CHARACTERIZATION Above
QS 102MPa 4MPa
The 2002 Hoek-Brown failure criterion represents the Lp
shear strength of the rock mass as a non-linear (curved) Prop - 3MPa
failure envelope expressed in terms of minor and major Below
principal stresses (σ3 and σ1) and three rock mass QS 130MPa 6MPa
constants (i.e., mb, s and a). Laboratory test results from
 Table 6. Mean Values of UCS and STS from 2014 Laboratory
Testing Program for Volcanics

Lithology TdY Alteration UCS STS

Aa Above Prop 172MPa 6MPa

Ta Above Prop 152MPa 5MPa

Td Above Prop 185MPa 8MPa

Prop - 7MPa
Tq Above
QS 122MPa -

Tr Above Prop 187MPa 6MPa

Prop - 4MPa
Qq Above
QS 139MPa 5MPa

Table 7. Mean Values of UCS and STS from 2014 Laboratory

Testing Program for Breccias

Lithology TdY Alteration UCS STS

Fig. 3 Example of Hoek-Brown envelope for volcanic rocks.
Prop 87MPa 4MPa
Above
QS - 3MPa Table 8. Intact Rock Hoek-Brown Parameters
Bx
Prop 145MPa 6MPa Lith. TdY Alt. σci mi
Below
Prop 161MPa 30
QS 128MPa 5MPa Above
QS 112MPa 31
Di
Dibx Prop 138MPa 27
Below QS 131MPa 5MPa Below
QS 90MPa 17
Prop 57MPa 13
Prop 95MPa 4MPa Above
QS 86MPa 7
Above Da
Prop 72MPa 12
QS 95MPa 3MPa Below
QS 97MPa 26
Px Above QS 116MPa 24
Prop 90MPa 3MPa Dp Prop 155MPa 17
Below
Below QS 88MPa 20
QS 80MPa 2MPa Prop 81MPa 12
Above
QS 67MPa 15
Lp
Prop - -
Below
QS 113MPa 15
Figure 3 shows the Hoek-Brown failure envelope for Prop - -
intact rock based on valid results of tests conducted on Qq Above
QS 126MPa 22
volcanic rocks. The blue curve represents the fit of all Aa Above Prop 150MPa 20
the data. The dispersion of the test results is attributed to Ta Above Prop - -
the heterogenic nature of the rocks. Table 8 shows the Td Above Prop 134MPa 14
Prop - -
Hoek-Brown parameters (σci and mi) for intact rock Tq Above
QS 122MPa 17
derived for each combination of lithology, TdY and Tr Above Prop 146MPa 17
alteration. Prop 65MPa 18
Above
QS 69MPa 18
Bx
Prop 141MPa 20
Below
QS 95MPa 16
Dibx Below QS 108MPa 15
Prop 81MPa 14
Above
QS 51MPa 17
Px
Prop 74MPa 14
Below
QS 42MPa 7
7.2. Rock Mass Rating (RMR76) Table 9. Weighted Mean RMR76 Values for Each
Bieniawski’s RMR was developed as a rating system Geological Combination
based on five parameters. Numerical values assigned to
Rock Type Lith. TdY Alt. RMR76
each parameter are then summed to obtain a single rating
value, wherein values of between 8 and 100 are possible. Above
Prop 66
These five parameters are: QS 53
Diorite Di
Prop 65
Below
• Intact Rock Strength (IRS), QS 72
• RQD, Above
Prop 71
QS 70
• Fracture Frequency (FF), Da
Prop 72
• Joint Condition (JC76), and Below
QS 73
• Groundwater. Above QS 67
Intrusives Dp Prop 72
Below
Data collected during the 2013 drilling and mapping QS 75
Prop 65
campaigns were compiled and used to assess RMR76. Above
QS 65
After compiling each component of RMR76, mean values Lp
Prop 67
were determined for each geological combination. The Below
QS 63
following is a description of the results for each Prop 69
Qq Above
component: QS 67
• Intact Rock Strength (IRS): Laboratory UCS Aa Above Prop 70
Ta Above Prop 70
results were used to assess the IRS. These Volcanics
Td Above Prop 71
results do not show significant differences Prop 67
amongst the various geological combinations. Tq Above
QS 55
The majority of mean values lie above 100MPa Tr Above Prop 63
(see tables 4 to 7). In some combinations the Above
Prop 69
presence of gypsum/anhydrite improves the QS 69
Bx
Prop 72
UCS (e.g. Bx), while in other cases; the presence Below
QS 74
of the calcium sulfates decreases the UCS (e.g. Breccias Dibx Below QS 78
Di). Prop 69
Above
• RQD: Weighted mean values range from 80 to Px
QS 70
100%; however, most mean values are above 90. Prop 73
Below
RQD tends to increase below the TdY, which is QS 69
likely a result of gypsum/anhydrite acting as a
cement within fractures. 7.3. Rock Mass Unit Definition
• Fracture Frequency (FF): Weighted mean values Definition of rock mass units (RMUs) for the Toquepala
of FF generally lie between about 1 and 3 rock mass model considered the intact rock strength,
fractures per meter, with lower values associated RMR76, and the various combinations of lithology,
with geological combinations located below the gypsum/anhydrite and alteration. Ultimately, eleven
TdY. unique RMUs were defined as follows:
• Joint Condition (JC76): Weighted mean values • Diorite Prop: diorite located above and below
range between 12 and 18. The presence of the TdY with propylitic alteration.
gypsum/anhydrite does not appear to • Diorite Above TdY – QS: diorite located above
significantly affect in the joint condition of the the TdY with quartz-sericite alteration.
open structures. • Diorite Below TdY – QS: diorite located below
• Groundwater: Considered dry for the purposes the TdY with quartz-sericite alteration.
of calculating RMR76. • Dacite Prop: dacite located above and below the
TdY with propylitic alteration.
These four components do not show significant
• Dacite Above TdY – QS: dacite located above
difference amongst geological combinations within the
the TdY with quartz-sericite alteration.
same rock type. Table 9 shows the resulting weighted
• Dacite Below TdY – QS: dacite located below
mean RMR76 values for each geological combination
(which ranges from approximately 55 to 80). As the TdY with quartz-sericite alteration.
indicated in Table 9, there does not appear to be a • Intrusives Prop: Dp and Lp located above and
significant difference in RMR for the majority of the below the TdY with propylitic alteration.
geological combinations listed. • Intrusives QS: Dp and Lp located above and
below the TdY with quartz-sericite alteration.
 • Volcanics: all volcanic rocks (i.e., Qq, Aa and 9. CONCLUSIONS
the Toquepala Series).
The Toquepala deposit present 13 different lithologies
• Breccias Above TdY: all breccias (Bx, Dibx,
which can be combined into four primary rock type
Bxt and Px) above the TdY with propylitic and
groups according their genesis: Breccias, Diorite,
quartz-sericite alteration. Intrusives and Volcanics.
• Breccias Below TdY: all breccias (Bx, Dibx, Bxt
and Px) below the TdY with propylitic and Over the next few years it is expected that the Toquepala
quartz-sericite alteration. pit walls reach approximately 950 m (Phase 5) height.
Southern Copper recognized that to support this
Di was characterized as a separate RMU, to enable better expansion and deepening of the pit, updating of the rock
definition of this unit throughout the Phase 4 and 5 pit mass model, design shear strength parameters and slope
walls. Da was characterized as a separate unit due to its design criteria was necessary to support future mine
relation to current meta-stable zones. All of the younger planning and optimization efforts. A consortium of
volcanic rocks were considered together as a single specialist consultants and slope design experts (the
RMU due to their complex interlayering, which makes GRT) was assembled to undertake this task
reliable identification of individual lithologies very In 2012, the GRT conducted a gap analysis to define
difficult. Pebble Breccia (Px) is not considered an areas where the additional structural, hydrogeological
independent unit as it is expected to be mined out during and rock mass information was needed to support this
Phases 4 and 5 and will not be present on the pit wall. study. A comprehensive investigation and laboratory
testing program was subsequently conceived and
8. DISCUSSION executed. This program included mapping, drilling, core
logging, sampling, insitu packer testing testing,
The RMUs defined for the Toquepala mine for the piezometer installation and rock mechanics laboratory
purposes of the current slope design update study were testing.
based on a geomechanical database compiled from the
2013 drilling and field mapping campaigns and a Based on assessment of the data obtained from this
comprehensive laboratory testing program. As program, it was determined that both lithology and
anticipated, the result of these data collection campaigns presence or absence of gypsum/anhydrite have the
revealed strength values that are significantly different greatest impact on the intact rock strength. However,
from those obtained from the pre-2000 geomechanical this influence was not found to be the same for all rock
database and limited laboratory testing data available at types. For example, there was no material difference in
that time. the intact strength of the Diorite propilitic above or
below TdY, whereas a substantial difference was
The result of this rock mass characterization campaign observed for quartz-sericite altered Diorite.
will be used to support ongoing slope stability
assessments and design of the next generation of slopes The laboratory results and the geotechnical logging data
for the Toquepala mine that will be up to about 950 m. were used to support the definition of 11 unique RMUs
based on lithology and the presence of gypsum/anhydrite
The joint shear strength parameters defined in Section 6 Rock mass shear strength parameters were derived for
of this study are the result of laboratory testing on core each of these RMUs. Joint shear strength parameters
samples (61mm), which are considerably smaller than were derived based on an extensive direct shear testing
the actual structures at a bench scale. These parameters program of natural joints obtained from core. The
will be used as a starting point back-analysis and for results of this study will be used for ongoing slope
calibration purposes, taking into consideration the actual stability analysis and design and optimization of future
performance of discontinuities on bench faces. slopes at the Toquepala mine.
While the current geological model does include
alteration type, it does not allow spatial assessment of
the degree or intensity of alteration. Future modelling
efforts should include alteration intensity so that the
impact of the combination of alteration type and
intensity on rock mass properties can be rationally
evaluated. Similarly, the intensity of gypsum/anhydrite
below the TdY should be quantified to better understand
its influence on rock mass strength.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would like to thank the following for their
support and input during the current study:
Geotechnical Review Team: Messrs. P. Mark Hawley,
Brent Gilmore, John Fedorowich, Loren Lorig, Patricio
Gómez and Álex Cabrera; and the reviewer Peter Stacey.
Southern Copper Corporation: Geotechnical
Superintendence (Enrique Sanca, Henry Revilla and
Dante Barriga), Geology Superintendence (Julio Rojas),
and Toquepala Operation Manager, Fernando Mejía C.

REFERENCES
1. Stacey, P.F., L.J. Lorig, and P.M. Hawley. Toquepala
Pit Slope Design Recommendations, February 2000,
Golder Associates, Itasca S.A. and Piteau Associates,
20–28.
2. Capdeville, F., and B.W. Gilmore. Recommendations
and Geotechnical Support for the 20,000m
Geotechnical Drilling Program for the Prefeasibility
Pit Slope Designs for Phases 4 and 5, 2012,
Geotechnical Review Team.
3. Geotechnical Review Team. Protocolos para el
Desarrollos del Programa de Pruebas de Laboratorio,
January 2014.
4. Wyllie, D.C and C.W. Mah. Rock Slope Engineering,
2004, ed. Spon Press, 79–80.
5. Hoek, E., C. Carranza-Torres, and B. Corkum. Hoek-
Brown Failure Criterion – 2002 Edition. In Proceedings
of the NARMS-TAC Conference, Toronto, 2002. 1, 267
– 273.