| Literature DB >> 33265435 |
Baodong Ma1,2, Yuteng Chen1,2, Song Zhang1,2, Xuexin Li1,2.
Abstract
With the rapid development of the steel and iron industry, ultra-low-grade iron ore has been developed extensively since the beginning of this century in China. Due to the high concentration ratio of the iron ore, a large amount of tailings was produced and many tailings ponds were established in the mining area. This poses a great threat to regional safety and the environment because of dam breaks and metal pollution. The spatial distribution is the basic information for monitoring the status of tailings ponds. Taking Changhe Mining Area as an example, tailings ponds were extracted by using Landsat 8 OLI images based on both spectral and texture characteristics. Firstly, ultra-low-grade iron-related objects (i.e., tailings and iron ore) were extracted by the Ultra-low-grade Iron-related Objects Index (ULIOI) with a threshold. Secondly, the tailings pond was distinguished from the stope due to their entropy difference in the panchromatic image at a 7 × 7 window size. This remote sensing method could be beneficial to safety and environmental management in the mining area.Entities:
Keywords: Landsat 8 OLI image; entropy; spectral characteristics; tailings pond; texture; ultra-low-grade iron
Year: 2018 PMID: 33265435 PMCID: PMC7512862 DOI: 10.3390/e20050345
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1Location of the Changhe Mining Area (the right is the false-color-composite image, Landsat 8 OLI 654).
Figure 2A flowchart for detecting tailings pond in the mining area. ULIOI, Ultra-Low-Grade Iron-Related Objects Index.
Figure 3A comparison of spectral curve of different objects (i.e., vegetation, soil, iron ore, tailings, and water).
Figure 4Extraction of ultra-low-grade iron-related objects based on Ultra-low-grade Iron-related Objects Index (ULIOI). (a) ULIOI image; (b) ultra-low-grade iron-related objects (in white color) extracted with the threshold of 1.07; (c) high-resolution GeoEye image.
Figure 5The tailings pond and stope for comparison of the entropy value. (a) Stope in the panchromatic image (entropy was calculated in the red-color area); (b) tailings pond in the panchromatic image (entropy was calculated in red-color area); (c) stope in the GeoEye image; (d) tailings pond in the GeoEye image.
The entropy value of the tailings pond and stope in different directions (i.e., 0°, 45°, 90° and 135°) and different processing window sizes (i.e., 3 × 3, 5 × 5, 7 × 7, 9 × 9 and 11 × 11).
| Window Size | Tailings Pond | Stope | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0° | 45° | 90° | 135° | 0° | 45° | 90° | 135° | |
| 3 × 3 | 0.983 | 1.240 | 0.941 | 0.980 | 1.941 | 1.981 | 1.969 | 1.961 |
| 5 × 5 | 1.500 | 1.651 | 1.389 | 1.520 | 2.741 | 2.785 | 2.780 | 2.777 |
| 7 × 7 | 1.883 | 1.897 | 1.740 | 1.905 | 3.213 | 3.257 | 3.262 | 3.307 |
| 9 × 9 | 2.213 | 2.163 | 2.066 | 2.255 | 3.531 | 3.595 | 3.606 | 3.686 |
| 11 × 11 | 2.514 | 2.434 | 2.380 | 2.577 | 3.766 | 3.844 | 3.871 | 3.978 |
Figure 6The entropy difference between the tailings pond and stope in different processing window sizes.
Figure 7Extraction of tailings ponds based on entropy difference. (a) Tailings ponds (in white color) extracted with the threshold of 2.4; (b) high-resolution GeoEye image.