Practical Geostatistics For Resource Estimation: Last Update: July 2014
Practical Geostatistics For Resource Estimation: Last Update: July 2014
Practical Geostatistics For Resource Estimation: Last Update: July 2014
Resource Estimation
Overview
Georges
g Verly
y
Resource Modeling is
Creating a resource block model …
4 g/t
100
100
Au
2.0
0.5
0
0
-100
-100
Wst
-200
200
0.0
-2
PARADISE INC.
DDH
-300
SECTION: 9200 N
-300
Ultimate Pit
CO & CM
MEAS/IND RESOURCES
-400
-400
lc_013a
2
Mar-2010
2
200
200
0
4 g/t
100
100
Au
2.0
0.5
0
0
-100
-100
Wst
-200
200
0.0
-2
0
PARADISE INC.
DDH
-300
-300
-400
-400
lc_011
3
Mar-2010
Content
Resource Modelling Steps
• Data Collection
• Geological Modelling
• Block Grade Model Estimation
– EDA: Exploratory Data Analysis
– Variogram: Spatial Variability
– Block grade Distribution
– Estimation / Simulation
– M d lV
Model Validation
lid ti
– Classification
Other
• Course / Notes Format
• Appendix 1: Exercise solutions 4
May-2014
Data Collection
• Data collection is most important
because:
– It is the first step in resource
modeling
– There is a significant risk
associated to data collection
– Poor data collection practice may
result in huge loss of value
• We have to collect the right data
and the data must be of good
quality!
6
Oct-2013
f163
7
Jul-2014
Database
8
May-2012
Geological Model
Geological Model 21400 21600 21800 22000 22200 22400
200
200
4 g/t
Au
2.0
created
created.
-1
-100
100
Wst
-200
-200
understood:
-400
-400
lc_011
Ox. Saprolite
Sul. Saprolite
100
100
Saprock
S k
1
2.0 Au
-200
-200
SECTION: 9200 N
GEOLOGY + DDH SAMPLES 0.0
DDH
-400
-400
lc_012
Geological Model
10
Sep-2012
12
Mar-2010
30
P(2. < Au < 4.) 10
20
10 f. 3a 1.0
0
0 4 8 12 16 Au (g/t) f.115
0.1
99.99 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 6050 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.1 0.01
Scattergram
f. 89
x
13
Mar-2010
EDA – Statistics
Freq
• Location (%)
30
– Mean or average Dispersion
20
– Median (middle)
10 f. 3f
0
0 4 8 12 16 Au (g/t)
• Dispersion (Spread) Location
– Variance
– Standard deviation = Variance
14
Sep-2012
Smoothed Regression
S
LC - TRENCHES
100. ORIGINAL AU VERSUS REJECT
NB. OF DATA 477
X VAR: MEAN 5.814
Good STD. DEV. 6.110
REJECT AU
10. CORRELATION 0.935
S
Poor
f107
1.
Au 1. 10. 100.
33b
ORIGINAL AU
15
Mar-2010
• Sampling quality
– Look at QA/QC results
• Geological domains
– Different mineralization characteristics?
– Checking character of boundaries (firm?, soft?)
• Compositing
• Declustering
• Top
Top-cutting
cutting
16
Apr-2013
2
8 6 2
1
1
f.184
17
Mar-2010
EDA – Quiz 2
2
1
1 8 2
1
f.184a
18
Mar-2010
19
Apr-2014
EDA – Top-cutting
• Potential problem:
Outliers are “common” – Overestimation of mean grade
0.3 y
and of variability.
• Solution (top-cutting):
– Restrict high-grade zone of
0.2 No. Data 99688
influence during estimation; or
mean 2.17
std. dev 4.95 – Top-cut high assay values
0.1
Max. 330.0 ? • Combination of tools
Min. 0.100
– Histogram, Probability plot
– Indicator correlation plot
f62
f62a – Metal at risk
Metal-at-risk
0.0
? – Decile analysis
0.0 4.0 8.0 12. 16. 20.
BH Au (g/t) • Impact
– high-grade smearing reduced
– Lower average grade
Important to record how much
metal removed by top-cutting 20
Oct-2010
Quiz – 3
9m
3m
Saprolite A B C
Zone 3m
D f05_01
• Questions
1) Which pair of samples probably shows the smallest grade difference?
• “A-B”, “A-C”, or “A-D” ?
2) Same question for …
• Why is it useful?
– To improve accuracy of block grade estimates
– To analyze block model selectivity (“in situ (dist)
dilution”)
– To assess risk
– For simulation
Sill
• In fact, the variogram is essential 0
f.78
0 Distance
Range
No variogram No geostat
No guts No glory
(H. Parker)
23
May -2013
24
25
May-2013
5
0.8
4
0.6
Tonnage
Grade
3
0.4
2
0.2
1
Tonnes (SB) Tonnes (LB)
Tonnes (SB)
Tonnes (SB) Grade (SB)
Grade (SB)
Grade (SB) Grade (LB)
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Cut‐off Grade
SB = Small Blocks
LB = Large Blocks
28
Feb-2014
29
May-2013
Estimation - Purpose
• Estimate grade at a given location using surrounding
information
• Choice of method depends on deposit shape, mineralization
variability, data availability, etc.
• Usually a weighted average of surrounding sample grades
Au1 Au2
Samples:
Au1 = 2.3 g/t
• Estimation methods:
Au3 Au2 = 6.7 g/t – Polygonal
Etc. – Inverse distance
Block – Sectional
f.183a
0 Error
Jun-2013
Estimation Error
Cu2= 0.2 Best Continuity
5m f.141a
? Cu1= 0.5
5m
W t
Worst A bit Even
better better
f.152c
0 0 0
NN2 NN1 ID
Cu0* = 0 x Cu1 + 1 x Cu2 Cu0* = 1 x Cu1 + 0 x Cu2 Cu0* = 0.5 x Cu1 + 0.5 x Cu2
Jun-2013
1.20 STDV(Error)
1.15 "NN 2"
1.10
1.05
Estimation: Kriging
• Kriging picks the set of weights such that the spread of the error is
minimized.
• Kriging is:
– Best Minimize the spread (variance) of the error
– Linear Weighted average of surrounding sample grades
– Unbiased Mean of the error is 0
– Estimator
BLUE
34
Feb-2012
• Co-Kriging
– More than one variable
35
Mar-2010
Estimation: Kriging
4 g/t
100
100
Au
2.0
0.5
0
0
-100
-100
Wst
-200
-200
0.0
PARADISE INC.
DDH
-300
SECTION: 9200 N
300
Ultimate Pit
-3
CO & CM
MEAS/IND RESOURCES
-400
-400
lc_013a
36
Mar-2010
37
May-2013
Validation
Why
• Estimated block model must be reasonable
Tools
• Visual checks
• Statistical checks
– Block model VS. sample mean grades
– Block model variability Selectivity
– Local accuracy (kriging efficiency)
– Grade profiles across geological contacts
• Cross-validation
• Reconciliation
– With previous model
– With production
38
Mar-2010
11400
11400
Au (g/t)
Look at the trends,
0. 1 2 3 4 5.
geological contacts,
xval_map_ok
22400 22500
estimated grades vs.
sample values
39
Feb-2012
40
41
May-2013
Regulation / Classification
42
Jun-2013
2
200
200
0
4 g/t
100
100
Au
2.0
0.5
0
0
-100
-100
Wst
-200
200
0.0
-2
0
PARADISE INC.
DDH
-300
SECTION: 9200 N
-300
Ultimate Pit
CO & CM
MEAS/IND RESOURCES
-400
-400
lc_013a
43
Sep-2012
Summary (2/4)
When information consists of drill hole samples
that have been logged and assayed.
4 g/t
100
100
Au
2.0
0.5
0
0
-100
-100
Wst
-200
200
0.0
-2
PARADISE INC.
DDH
-300
-300
lc_011
44
Sep-2012
45
Feb-2014
Summary (4/4)
• Resource estimation steps
Variogram
4. Variogram: Spatial variability analysis
• Quantify grade spatial correlation GT Curves
46
Jun-2013
47
May-2012
48
Apr-2013
50
51
Oct-2010
Example
E l off sections:
ti
Format – Variography
– Estimation
52
Oct-2010
Appendix 3 – Formulas
Appendix 2 – Variances (1/6)
Univariate & Bivariate Statistics
1N
X
Y
xi xi
m
yi
mY
C
O
V
,
,
• For the same element (e
(e.g.
g Cu)
Cu), there are
N
X
f. 3f
several variances
1N
Variance
sX
yi
m
mY
Values
1 1
X
xi mX N xi2 mX2
2
sX2
N
X
Y
C
Os
V X
, sY
• Section “Univariate Statistics”
X
Y
rX
C
O
R
,
• Population variance: /N ︵ ︶
Y
VAR(Z ) Other notations: sZ2 , Z2
Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation
• The sample grade variance is sX Variance s
CVX X
obtained at the stage of EDA statistics mX
21
Nov 2012
13
Oct-2009
53
Apr-2013
54
55
Mar-2010
Appendix 1 – Quiz 1
2
8 6 2
1
1
f.184
56
Mar-2010
• Naïve average 2
6
8 2
1 2 + 8 + 6 + 2 + 1 1
3.3 1
6
f.184
57
Mar-2010
Appendix 1 – Quiz 2
2
1
1 8 2
1
f.184a
58
Mar-2010
1 2 + 1 + 2 + 1
1.4
5
59
Mar-2010
Quiz – 3
9m
3m
Saprolite A B C
Zone 3m
D f05_01
• Questions
1) Which pair of samples probably shows the smallest grade difference?
• “A-B”, “A-C”, or “A-D” ?
2) Same question for …
D f05_01
A D
Likely grade
profiles
Q1) Which pair of samples probably shows the smallest grade difference?
– “A B” “A-C”,
“A-B”, “A C” or “A-D”
“A D” ?
A1) “A-B” because separating distance is:
– Smaller than “A-C”
– Same as “A-D”, but “A-B” is the direction of better continuity
61
Oct-2013
Variogram1––Solution
Appendix Quiz 3 1Solution
(3/3)
Situation
9m
3m
Saprolite A B C
Zone 3m
D f05_01
62
May-2014