ArticleScientific reports2026
Study on isolation pillar thickness optimization and slope stability control in hanging wall ore mining.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aiming at the problems of easy disturbance to the overlying slope and difficulty in scientifically determining the thickness of the isolation pillar during the recovery of hanging-wall orebody under open-pit to underground mining conditions, this study takes Shizhuyuan Mine as the engineering background. FLAC3D numerical simulation and the strength reduction method (SRM) are adopted to conduct a comparative analysis of the stability response characteristics of the "slope-goaf-backfill" system under five working conditions with isolation pillar thicknesses ranging from 10 m to 50 m. The results show that although the safety factors of all working conditions meet the requirements for Grade I slope stability, the thickness of the isolation pillar exhibits a significant threshold effect on system deformation control: when the thickness increases to 30 m, the maximum system displacement is significantly reduced from the excessive level (> 80 mm) to approximately 34 mm, and the overall stability is obviously improved. However, the stability gain brought by further increasing the thickness gradually weakens. Under the recommended thickness, the stress distribution, displacement evolution, and plastic zone development of the goaf and backfill are all within the safe and controllable range. Considering both stability requirements and resource recovery rate, an isolation pillar thickness around 30 m can achieve a reasonable balance between safety and economy, which can provide a quantitative design reference for the safe recovery of hanging-wall orebodies under similar open-pit-underground coordinated mining conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.