Comparison of three geostatistical approaches to quantify the impact of drill spacing on resource confidence for a coal seam (with a case example from Moranbah North, Queensland, Australia)

A. Cornah, John Vann, I. Driver

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    7 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Three approaches to characterising the uncertainty associated with coal resource estimates are presented and compared: global estimation variance (GEV); local confidence intervals via the discrete Gaussian model (DGM); and the conditional simulation (CS) approach. The methods are applied and compared for three variables (Thickness, Yield and Sulphur) in a coal deposit at Moranbah North.All three approaches result in a broadly similar characterisation of uncertainty, but each has associated strengths and weaknesses. GEV is appropriate for 2D situations (like coal seams), is fundamentally robust (if its assumptions are respected), it is straightforward and is quick to apply. However, being global the results are somewhat limited (although in some instances a global result may still be 'fit for purpose'), and importantly, it does not properly account for skewness and proportional effect. DGM is more sophisticated and accounts properly for skewness and proportional effect. It allows assessment of local uncertainty at the block scale whilst also being relatively computationally efficient but requires increased expertise to implement. CS also provides local results and conceptually is the most rigorous solution. However CS is the most computationally intensive solution and requires significant amounts of user input and validation. A short study on the influence of the number of realisations on the reliability of uncertainty assessments made from CS models is also documented. © 2012 Elsevier B.V.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)114-124
    JournalInternational Journal of Coal Geology
    Volume112
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

    Fingerprint

    coal seam
    spacing
    Coal
    skewness
    resource
    simulation
    Coal deposits
    coal
    confidence interval
    Sulfur
    sulfur
    comparison
    Uncertainty
    effect

    Cite this

    @article{6514ba3ca4c147fdaf0fa64a77192abe,
    title = "Comparison of three geostatistical approaches to quantify the impact of drill spacing on resource confidence for a coal seam (with a case example from Moranbah North, Queensland, Australia)",
    abstract = "Three approaches to characterising the uncertainty associated with coal resource estimates are presented and compared: global estimation variance (GEV); local confidence intervals via the discrete Gaussian model (DGM); and the conditional simulation (CS) approach. The methods are applied and compared for three variables (Thickness, Yield and Sulphur) in a coal deposit at Moranbah North.All three approaches result in a broadly similar characterisation of uncertainty, but each has associated strengths and weaknesses. GEV is appropriate for 2D situations (like coal seams), is fundamentally robust (if its assumptions are respected), it is straightforward and is quick to apply. However, being global the results are somewhat limited (although in some instances a global result may still be 'fit for purpose'), and importantly, it does not properly account for skewness and proportional effect. DGM is more sophisticated and accounts properly for skewness and proportional effect. It allows assessment of local uncertainty at the block scale whilst also being relatively computationally efficient but requires increased expertise to implement. CS also provides local results and conceptually is the most rigorous solution. However CS is the most computationally intensive solution and requires significant amounts of user input and validation. A short study on the influence of the number of realisations on the reliability of uncertainty assessments made from CS models is also documented. {\circledC} 2012 Elsevier B.V.",
    author = "A. Cornah and John Vann and I. Driver",
    year = "2013",
    doi = "10.1016/j.coal.2012.11.006",
    language = "English",
    volume = "112",
    pages = "114--124",
    journal = "International Journal of Coal Geology",
    issn = "0166-5162",
    publisher = "Elsevier",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Comparison of three geostatistical approaches to quantify the impact of drill spacing on resource confidence for a coal seam (with a case example from Moranbah North, Queensland, Australia)

    AU - Cornah, A.

    AU - Vann, John

    AU - Driver, I.

    PY - 2013

    Y1 - 2013

    N2 - Three approaches to characterising the uncertainty associated with coal resource estimates are presented and compared: global estimation variance (GEV); local confidence intervals via the discrete Gaussian model (DGM); and the conditional simulation (CS) approach. The methods are applied and compared for three variables (Thickness, Yield and Sulphur) in a coal deposit at Moranbah North.All three approaches result in a broadly similar characterisation of uncertainty, but each has associated strengths and weaknesses. GEV is appropriate for 2D situations (like coal seams), is fundamentally robust (if its assumptions are respected), it is straightforward and is quick to apply. However, being global the results are somewhat limited (although in some instances a global result may still be 'fit for purpose'), and importantly, it does not properly account for skewness and proportional effect. DGM is more sophisticated and accounts properly for skewness and proportional effect. It allows assessment of local uncertainty at the block scale whilst also being relatively computationally efficient but requires increased expertise to implement. CS also provides local results and conceptually is the most rigorous solution. However CS is the most computationally intensive solution and requires significant amounts of user input and validation. A short study on the influence of the number of realisations on the reliability of uncertainty assessments made from CS models is also documented. © 2012 Elsevier B.V.

    AB - Three approaches to characterising the uncertainty associated with coal resource estimates are presented and compared: global estimation variance (GEV); local confidence intervals via the discrete Gaussian model (DGM); and the conditional simulation (CS) approach. The methods are applied and compared for three variables (Thickness, Yield and Sulphur) in a coal deposit at Moranbah North.All three approaches result in a broadly similar characterisation of uncertainty, but each has associated strengths and weaknesses. GEV is appropriate for 2D situations (like coal seams), is fundamentally robust (if its assumptions are respected), it is straightforward and is quick to apply. However, being global the results are somewhat limited (although in some instances a global result may still be 'fit for purpose'), and importantly, it does not properly account for skewness and proportional effect. DGM is more sophisticated and accounts properly for skewness and proportional effect. It allows assessment of local uncertainty at the block scale whilst also being relatively computationally efficient but requires increased expertise to implement. CS also provides local results and conceptually is the most rigorous solution. However CS is the most computationally intensive solution and requires significant amounts of user input and validation. A short study on the influence of the number of realisations on the reliability of uncertainty assessments made from CS models is also documented. © 2012 Elsevier B.V.

    U2 - 10.1016/j.coal.2012.11.006

    DO - 10.1016/j.coal.2012.11.006

    M3 - Article

    VL - 112

    SP - 114

    EP - 124

    JO - International Journal of Coal Geology

    JF - International Journal of Coal Geology

    SN - 0166-5162

    ER -