IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Magnetoacoustic tomography with
Slope stability analysis at coal mining sites in magnetic induction (MAT-MI) for imaging
electrical conductivity of biological tissue: a
Central Kalimantan tutorial review
Xu Li, Kai Yu and Bin He

- TEMPERATURE STRUCTURE OF
To cite this article: H Prabowo et al 2023 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1173 012033 PROTOPLANETARY DISKS
UNDERGOING LAYERED ACCRETION
M. V. Lesniak and S. J. Desch

- Review—Recent Membranes for

Vanadium Redox Flow Batteries
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Baye Gueye Thiam and Sébastien
Vaudreuil

This content was downloaded from IP address 202.43.94.43 on 12/10/2023 at 08:07

3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

Slope stability analysis at coal mining sites in Central

Kalimantan

H Prabowo1, E Barlian1, N Syah1 and A T Sastra2

1
Environmental Science Doctoral Program, Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia
2
Department of Mining Engineering, Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia

E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. Slope stability is an important factor in the planning and operation of open pits and
mines. Currently the company has been mining up to a height of 20 meters. In the
implementation of mining activities, the potential for landslides on the side walls of the slopes
of sector X occurs on one of the slopes, namely at an elevation of +70 masl. The company
made two design choices, one of which was confirmed by researchers in overcoming the
potential for landslides. In carrying out slope analysis, information about the general properties
of rock mass consists of testing the physical properties of rocks and testing the mechanical
properties of rocks. The results of the safety factor analysis of the A-A cross-section with 2.476
saturated MAT (Stable) and dry MAT 3.159 (Stable), while the B-B cross-section with
saturated MAT 2.161 (Stable) and dry MAT MAT is 2.771 (Stable). Meanwhile, for the two
segments, A-A' with saturated MAT of 2,459 (Stable) and dry MAT of 3,131 (Stable), while
the B-B' section with saturated MAT of 1,653 (Stable) and dry MAT of 2,464 (Stable). The
researcher recommends using option 1 based on the safety factor value which shows a higher
value.

1. Introduction
One of the important problems in mining activities using the open pit mining method is the stability or
stability of the slopes (1). The process of excavation and stockpiling is an important problem because
it involves the safety of people, equipment, and buildings around the slope (2). Therefore, before
mining activities, it is necessary to conduct a study on slope stability and slope design that considers
the safety aspect (3). Referring to the rules in mining science, the basic principle that must be
understood in determining the design of a mine opening is to determine the optimal slope angle of the
mine opening, in the sense of determining a stable overall slope angle to the mining end (4).
A material in nature is in a stable state if the stress distribution on the material is in a state of
equilibrium. This balance can be disturbed by various activities, such as excavation, blasting, or
earthquakes, which causes the driving force to be greater than the resisting force (5). Coal mining
activities in open spaces in the form of excavation and stockpiling will always face slope stability
problems. Slope stability analysis is carried out to assess the level of stability of a slope (6). The term
Slope Stability can be defined as the resistance of the block on an inclined surface (measured from the
horizontal line) against collapsing and sliding (7).
Slope stability, both natural slopes and artificial slopes (man-made) and embankment slopes, is
influenced by several factors that can be stated simply as the resisting and driving forces that are

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

responsible for slope stability (8). When the retaining force (against landslides) is greater than the
driving force, the slope will be in a stable (safe) condition (9).
In dealing with landslides, so as not to interfere with mining activities, the company makes two
design options that will overcome the effects of avalanches (10). Of the two options, the author will
analyze which option is more optimal to be recommended to the company. The basis for selecting
recommendations is seen from the value of the safety factor for each option (11).

2. Literature review

2.1. Types of avalanches

Slope stability, both natural slopes and artificial slopes (man-made) and embankment slopes, is
influenced by several factors that can be stated simply as the resisting and driving forces that are
responsible for slope stability. When the retaining force (against landslides) is greater than the driving
force, the slope will be in a stable (safe) condition. However, if the resisting force is less than the
driving force, the slope is unstable and landslides will occur. (11)
A torrential slide is a characteristic interaction that occurs to obtain another oblique solidness
condition (new equilibrium), where the resisting force is more prominent than the main thrust. Torrent
slides can be ordered considering the accompanying torrent slide types: (12), (13). Types of landslides
that will occur include: Field avalanche, Wedge avalanche, Rolling avalanche, Bow avalanche field
avalanche.

2.2. Slope safety factor

The slope is said to be stable if the resisting force is greater than the pushing force. To express the
level of stability of a slope, known as the Safety Factor. Safety factor required to determine the
stability of a slope to prevent the danger of avalanches in times to come. Theoretically, the slope is
said to be stable at FK conditions > 1 (stable slope) (14).

Table 1. The level of theoretical FK scores.

FK Keterangan
>1 Stable
1 Critical
<1 Unstable

Table 2. Level of practice FK scores

FK Keterangan
> 1,3 Stable
1,07 < FK < 1,3 Critical
< 1,07 Unstable

3. Methodology
Mine slope stability analysis was carried out to evaluate and recommend the two designs that have
been made by the company (15). The design is made because there has been a landslide on one side
wall slope. The type of avalanche that occurs is a local arc avalanche (16). Landslides are local,
meaning that they only occur on a few slopes (single slope), not on the overall slope (17).
Referring to the problems that have occurred before, the landslide occurred not because of the
unstable value of the safety factor during the design, but because there were several anomalies on the
slope (18). Some of the causes of landslides, namely, the actual field does not match the design, the
material properties are weathered, blasting vibrations are close to the slope and there is a swamp
behind the slope which causes the slope to become more saturated (19).

2
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

The modeling is done by entering material property data with the help of slide v.6.0 software to
calculate the value of the single slope, intermediate slope, and overall slope safety factor values of the
A-A' and B-B' sections using the Bishop method (20).

3.1. Primary data

Primary data is data obtained directly from the field. Analysis of the data obtained from the field is as
follows:
a. Outcrop and slope geometry measurement data
b. Slope data
c. Actual groundwater level
d. Field documentation.

3.2. Secondary data

Secondary data are data obtained from PT. Asmin Bara Bronang to support research data, such as:
a. Rainfall data.
b. Area achievement map
c. Map of the research area
d. Regional geological map
e. Topographic maps
f. Pit situation map
g. Summary bor
h. Seismic Load
i. Parameter data of rock layers in the mining area (cohesion, density, and internal shear angle).
j. Mining plan section in area X.

Figure 1. Research location map.

3
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

3.3. Data analysis method

For data processing in this study, the calculation of the slope stability value can be done using the
boundary equilibrium method with Bishop with the help of Slide V.6.0 software (21). This program
can be used to calculate the value of the slope safety factor and can simulate the desired slope design.
Data processing and data analysis carried out include:
- Geotechnical Analysis
This stage is intended to determine the physical properties and mechanical properties of the
material through the material properties owned by the company (22).
- Modeling with Slide V.6.0. software
The modeling is carried out by entering material property data with the help of Slide v.6.0
software to calculate the value of the safety factor for single slope, intermediate slope, and overall
slope of the A-A' and B-B' sections using the Bishop method (23).
- To perform analysis using Slide V.6.0 Software, the required parameters are in the form of rock
mechanical properties data which is divided into three criteria (24) as follows:
a. Mohr-Coulomb strength, data required are cohesion and internal shear angle
b. Hoek-Brown Strength, the data needed are UCS and Hoek-Brown constant (s and m)
c. Generalized Hoek-Brown Strength, the data needed are UCS values, constants s, a and m,
and GSI values.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Results

4.1.1. Geological cross. The geological cross-section is an incision from rock layers that is used as a
reference for the overall slope stability analysis, namely:
- Cross section A-A' option 1
- Cross section B-B' option 1
- Cross section A-A' option 2
- Cross section B-B' option 2

Figure 2. Design option 1 with A-A' and B-B' cross-sections.

4
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

Figure 3. Design option 2 with sections A-A' and B-B'.

4.1.2. Pit X slope stability analysis. Investment field conditions actual conditions in pit X coal
mining are carried out from the west to the east, and the current mining position is at an
elevation of +30 masl with a total depth of 70 meters. In-pit X, investigations of several types
of landslides were found namely arc slides and transverse faults along the side wall slopes.
Geotechnical Section Modeling Geotechnical cross section is made from topographic data and coal
seam height obtained from exploration data. The analyzed sections are sections A-A' and BB'.
Furthermore, the cross-section will be inputted into the Slide V 6.0 software. The input data in the
Slide V 6.0 program is the data on the Mechanical Properties of Rocks. In this program, information is
needed on the overall idea of rock mass consisting of specific gravity (unit weight), immersed weight
(wet weight), pore tension, and vibration or tremor coefficient (seismic load coefficient). In addition,
different information is also required, depending on what power standard is used.

4.1.3. Side wall pit X slope stability analysis. January The analysis was carried out to determine the
actual slope conditions in January 2022. At the time of the research on the slope conditions,
an arc-type landslide had occurred. On the side wall slope, the landslide effect only occurs on
one slope, namely at an elevation of +70 masl. Figures 18 to 20 are the area for conducting
research where landslides have occurred at an elevation of +70 on the side wall slope.

Figure 4. Slope side wall.

5
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

4.1.4. Slope Stability Analysis of Two Design Options in Pit X

The analysis carried out is to determine the level of the safety factor of the two design options that
have been made. From this design, two cross sections were made to show the shape and direction of
the coal seams to facilitate the actual description of the slopes in the field and can perform simulations
with the help of slide V.6.0 software.
a. Option One
1) Section A-A' Saturated Groundwater Condition
In saturated groundwater conditions, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) cross-section A-A'
overall slope (Overall) is 2,476 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 26 degrees and a height
of 68.3 meters.

Figure 5. Option 1 segment A-A' saturated MAT.

2) Segment A-A' Dry Ground Water Level

In dry groundwater conditions, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) cross-section A-A' overall
slope (Overall) is 3,159 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 26 degrees and a height of 68.3
meters.

Figure 6. Option 1 segment A-A' dry MAT.

6
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

3) Segment B-B' Saturated Groundwater Condition

In a wet groundwater level, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) across segments B-B' overall
slope is 2.161 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 28 degrees and a height of 78.8 meters.

Figure 7. Option 1 segment B-B' saturated MAT.

4) Segment B-B' Dry Ground Water Level

In dry groundwater conditions, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) cross-section B-B' overall
slope (Overall) is 2.771 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 28 degrees and a height of 78.8
meters.

Figure 8. Option 1 segment B-B’ dry MAT.

7
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

5) Segment A-A' Saturated Groundwater Condition

In a wet groundwater level, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) across segments A-A' general
slope (Overall) is 2,459 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 26 degrees and a height of 68.3
meters.

Figure 9. Option 2 segment A-A' MAT saturated.

6) Segment A-A' Dry Ground Water Level

In a wet groundwater level, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) across segments A-A' overall
slope (Overall) is 3.131 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 26 degrees and a height of 68.3
meters.

Figure 10. Option 2 section A-A' dry MAT.

8
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

7) B-B' Cross-section of Saturated Groundwater Condition

In a wet ground water table, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) across segments B-B' The
overall slope (Overall) is 1.653 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 28 degrees and a height
of 78.8 meters.

Figure 11. Option 2 Segment B-B' saturated MAT

8) Segment B-B' Dry Ground Water Level

In a wet groundwater level, the value of the Safety Factor (FK) across segments B-B' overall
slope (Overall) is 2.464 (stable), with an overall slope angle of 27 degrees and a height of 78.8
meters.

Figure 12. Option 2 section of dry B-B’ MAT.

9
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

Table 3. Groundwater Level along with Safety Factor (FK), Overall Angle, and Slope Height

Opsi Section Condition MAT FK Overall Angle Height (m)

Saturated water 2,476 26o 68,3
A – A’
Dry 3,159 26o 68,3
1
Saturated water 2,161 28o 78,8
B – B’
Dry 2,771 28o 78,8
Saturated water 2,459 26o 68,3
A – A’
Dry 3,131 26o 68,3
2 Saturated water 1,653 28o 78,8
B – B’ Dry 2,464 27o 78,8

4.2. Discussion
From the results of the analysis of the two options, the value of the safety factor is categorized as
stable, with the overall slope angle and slope height between option 1 and option 2, the cross-sections
A-A' and B-B' are the same. From these results, we can judge if using option 1 is more profitable in
terms of the value of the safety factor.
Not only that, if using option 1, the slope that has been landslide can be peeled back which will
then increase the strength of the slope. This is in line with the weathering of rocks caused by climate
change that has not occurred. Judging from the theory of factors that affect slope stability, namely
weathering. If the weathering is higher, the strength of the rock will decrease (25).
If using option 2, we must first calculate the ability of the widened bench to withstand the event of
an even larger avalanche. In option 2, we only do prevention so that landslides do not interfere with
mining activities below, not dealing with existing landslides [22]. In addition, if using option 2 there is
coal that cannot be mined due to being under the widened bench and that can be detrimental to the
company.
Judging from the results of the analysis of option 2 cross-section B-B' with a saturated MAT the
value of the safety factor shows 1.653. Meanwhile, in the initial design with a safety factor value of
1.941, landslides occurred. If option 2 is used, the risk of landslides is even higher [15].

5. Conclusion
The actual slope conditions at the time of the research were arc landslides on the side wall slopes,
precisely at an elevation of +70 masl. After analyzing the condition of the landslide, it shows a safety
factor value of 4.86 which in theory has reached new stability. The results of the safety factor analysis
of the A-A' cross-section with saturated MAT 2,476 (Stable) and dry MAT 3,159 (Stable), while in
section B-B' with saturated MAT 2,161 (Stable) and dry MAT 2,771 (Stable). Meanwhile, for the
option of two sections A-A' with a saturated MAT of 2,459 (Stable) and a dry MAT of 3,131 (Stable),
while a section B-B' with a saturated MAT of 1,653 (Stable) and a dry MAT of 2,464 (Stable). Of the
two options with saturated and dry MAT showing the safety factor, all of them are in stable condition.
Based on the value of the safety factor, option 1 indicates a higher value and can prevent
landslides. Because with the cutback, the strength of the slope can increase along with the opening of
new material. Meanwhile, if using option 2, the widened slope must be ensured in advance of the
ability to hold the material in the event of an even larger landslide. In addition, if option 2 is used,
there is a loss of coal that can harm the company. Not only that, in option 2 cross-section B-B' with
saturated MAT the slope safety factor value is 1.653 in the initial design with a safety factor value of
1.941 the slope landslide occurs. So to overcome landslides at an elevation of +70 masl on the slopes
of the Pit X side wall, the author recommends using option 1.

10
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

References

[1] Zhu H, Azarafza M, Akgün H. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Deep
learning-based key-block classification framework for discontinuous rock slopes. J Rock Mech
Geotech Eng [Internet]. 2022;14(4):1131–9.
[2] Steger S, Mair V, Kofler C, Pittore M, Zebisch M, Schneiderbauer S. Correlation does not
imply geomorphic causation in data-driven landslide susceptibility modelling – Benefits of
exploring landslide data collection effects. Sci Total Environ. 2021;776.
[3] Moussas VC, Diamantis K. Predicting uniaxial compressive strength of serpentinites through
physical, dynamic and mechanical properties using neural networks. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng
[Internet]. 2021;13(1):167–75.
[4] Zhang W, Ji J, Gao Y, Li X, Zhang C. Spatial variability effect of internal friction angle on the
post-failure behavior of landslides using a random and non-Newtonian fluid based SPH
method. Geosci Front [Internet]. 2020;11(4):1107–21. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2020.02.003
[5] Rechberger C, Fey C, Zangerl C. Structural characterisation, internal deformation, and
kinematics of an active deep-seated rock slide in a valley glacier retreat area. Eng Geol
[Internet]. 2021;286(May 2020):106048.
[6] Stanley Rungwa, Arpa G, Sakulas H, Harakuwe A, Timi D. Phytoremediation – An Eco-
friendly and Sustainable Method of Heavy Metal Removal from Closed Mine Environments in
Papua New Guinea. Procedia Earth Planet Sci [Internet]. 2013;6:269–77.
[7] Ali SA, Parvin F, Vojteková J, Costache R, Linh NTT, Pham QB, et al. GIS-based landslide
susceptibility modeling: A comparison between fuzzy multi-criteria and machine learning
algorithms. Geosci Front. 2021;12(2):857–76.
[8] Kardani N, Zhou A, Nazem M, Shen SL. Improved prediction of slope stability using a hybrid
stacking ensemble method based on finite element analysis and field data. J Rock Mech
Geotech Eng [Internet]. 2021;13(1):188–201.
[9] Wistuba M, Gorczyca E, Malik I. Inferring precipitation thresholds of landslide activity from
long-term dendrochronological and precipitation data: Case study on the unstable slope at
Karpenciny, Poland. Eng Geol. 2021;294.
[10] Malan D, Napier J. A limit equilibrium fracture zone model to investigate seismicity in coal
mines. Int J Min Sci Technol [Internet]. 2018;28(5):745–53.
[11] Pradhan SP, Siddique T. Stability assessment of landslide-prone road cut rock slopes in
Himalayan terrain: A finite element method based approach. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng
[Internet]. 2020;12(1):59–73.
[12] Steger S, Schmaltz E, Glade T. The (f)utility to account for pre-failure topography in data-
driven landslide susceptibility modelling. Geomorphology [Internet]. 2020;354:107041.
[13] González Tejada I, Monteiro-Alves R, Morán R, Toledo M. Cellular automata modeling of
rockfill dam failure caused by overtopping or any other extreme throughflow. Eng Struct
[Internet]. 2021;245:112933.
[14] Beni T, Casagli N, Gigli G, Lombardi L, Carl T. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences A method for full three-dimensional kinematic analysis of steep rock walls
based on high-resolution point cloud data. 2022;157(May).
[15] Rafiei Renani H, Martin CD. Factor of safety of strain-softening slopes. J Rock Mech Geotech
Eng. 2020;12(3):473–83.
[16] Tatnell L, Dyson AP, Tolooiyan A. Coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian simulation of a modified
direct shear apparatus for the measurement of residual shear strengths. J Rock Mech Geotech
Eng [Internet]. 2021;13(5):1113–23.
[17] Achour Y, Pourghasemi HR. How do machine learning techniques help in increasing accuracy
of landslide susceptibility maps? Geosci Front [Internet]. 2020;11(3):871–83.
[18] Zhang J, Fu M, Hassani FP, Zeng H, Geng Y, Bai Z. Land use-based landscape planning and

11
3rd International Conference on Disaster Management IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1173 (2023) 012033 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1173/1/012033

restoration in mine closure areas. Environ Manage. 2011;47(5):739–50.

[19] Wang Z, Cheng Y, Qi Y, Wang R, Wang L, Jiang J. Experimental study of pore structure and
fractal characteristics of pulverized intact coal and tectonic coal by low temperature nitrogen
adsorption. Powder Technol [Internet]. 2019;350:15–25.
[20] Li BQ, Casanova M, Einstein HH. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering
Laboratory study of fracture initiation and propagation in Barre granite under fl uid pressure at
stress state close to failure. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng [Internet]. 2022;(xxxx):4–17.
[21] Ng CWW, Crous PA, Zhang M, Shakeel M. Static liquefaction mechanisms in loose sand fill
slopes. Comput Geotech [Internet]. 2022;141:104525.
[22] Zhao T, Crosta GB, Liu Y. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
Analysis of slope fracturing under transient earthquake loading by random discrete element
method. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci [Internet]. 2022;157(December 2021):105171.
[23] Balogun AL, Rezaie F, Pham QB, Gigović L, Drobnjak S, Aina YA, et al. Spatial prediction of
landslide susceptibility in western Serbia using hybrid support vector regression (SVR) with
GWO, BAT and COA algorithms. Geosci Front. 2021;12(3).
[24] Butcher A, Stork AL, Verdon JP, Kendall JM, Plenkers K, Booth F, et al. Evaluating rock mass
disturbance within open-pit excavations using seismic methods: A case study from the Hinkley
Point C nuclear power station. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng [Internet]. 2021;13(3):500–12.
[25] Morikawa DS, Asai M. A phase-change approach to landslide simulations: Coupling finite
strain elastoplastic TLSPH with non-Newtonian IISPH. Comput Geotech.
2022;148(January):104815.

12