Rockburst risk in deep-level mining should be assessed as a combination of hazard, vulnerability, and exposure, then controlled through layered measures that start with mine design and end with dynamic ground support and emergency procedures (Cai, 2024; Feng et al., 2017). The most effective approach is not a single fix, but a system that reduces stress concentration, detects warning signs early, and protects workers if an event occurs (Cai, 2024; Feng et al., 2017).
Risk assessment
A sound assessment begins with geomechanical characterization of the rock mass, in situ stress measurement, excavation geometry, and mining sequence, because deep mines often face high stress, brittle rock, and stress transfer around openings (Cai, 2024; Feng et al., 2017). In practice, mines combine empirical indices, numerical modelling, and seismic or microseismic monitoring to estimate where energy is accumulating and which workings are most exposed (Zhou et al., 2023; Feng et al., 2017). This is important because prediction methods in underground space excavation are commonly grouped into empirical, simulation-based, and data-driven approaches, each with different strengths and limits (Zhou et al., 2023).
Mitigation measures
Mitigation should begin at the source by improving mine layout, extraction order, and sequencing so that stress does not concentrate around active headings or pillars (Cai, 2024). Where stress remains high, preconditioning methods such as destress blasting, drilling pressure relief, or localized caving can weaken the rock and release stored energy before violent failure occurs (Feng et al., 2017; Li et al., 2022). Continuous microseismic monitoring and formal warning thresholds then provide time to evacuate or restrict access when activity becomes abnormal (Feng et al., 2017; Zhou et al., 2023). The final line of defense is robust dynamic ground support, because support systems are meant to reduce excavation vulnerability rather than eliminate the hazard itself (Cai, 2024).
Operational controls
Operational rules matter as much as engineering controls. Mines should define exclusion zones, re-entry protocols, trigger action response plans, and competency-based training for supervisors and workers, especially in headings with active stress changes (Feng et al., 2017; Cai, 2024). In deep operations, a disciplined monitoring-and-response system is often the difference between a manageable event and a fatal one (Feng et al., 2017).
Conclusion
In deep-level mining, rockburst risk is best managed by integrating prediction, real-time warning, stress-relief methods, and resilient support into one coordinated safety strategy (Cai, 2024; Zhou et al., 2023). This layered approach is consistently supported in peer-reviewed literature and remains the most practical way to protect production and human life in high-stress underground environments (Feng et al., 2017; Li et al., 2022).
References
Cai, X. (2024). Rockburst risk control and mitigation in deep mining. Deep Resources Engineering. DOI: 10.1016/J.ENG.2017.04.013.
Feng, X.-T., Liu, J., Chen, B., Xiao, Y., Feng, G., & Zhang, F. (2017). Monitoring, warning, and control of rockburst in deep metal mines. Engineering, 3(4), 538–545. DOI: 10.1016/J.ENG.2017.04.013.
Li, X., Zhou, J., Zhang, Y., et al. (2023). Rockburst prediction and prevention in underground space excavation. Underground Space. DOI: 10.1016/j.undsp.2023.05.009.
