Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 1009

LQS Latin America Avenida Luis Thayer Ojeda 0130 Ofi. 304, Providencia.

Santiago, Chile Tel: 562-6573898 Fax: 562-6573897


Toda la informacin contenida en este manual es de propiedad del Seor Kadri Dagdelen y cualquier reproduccin parcial o total de la misma ser sancionada legalmente.

Introduction to Mining Practices- Case Studies


Open Pit Mining Terminology
Pit Geometry and Slope Angles
Open Pit Mine Planning Concepts - Circular Analysis
Geologic Block Modeling Techniques
Assay and Composite Sections and Block Modeling
Geostatistical Resource Estimation Techniques
Economic Definition of Ore
Break-even Cutoff Grades and Stripping Ratio Analysis
Economic Block Modeling, Cone and L&G Mining Analysis
Final Pit Limits, Nested Pits and Mining Sequence Determination
Cutoff Grade Policy, Scheduling and Stockpile Management
Mine Sequence, Cutoff Grade, Process Flow Determination

UNIT OPERATIONS AND EQUIPMENT SELECTION


Drilling Fundamentals and Drill Selection
Blasting Fundamentals
Front End Loaders; Hydraulic Shovels and Cable Shovels
Excavator Selection Considerations
Equipment Cost Calculations
Cat Handbook
Truck Haulage and Cycle Times
Fleet Size Determination

Dispatch Systems
In Pit Crushing and conveying systems
Mineral Processing

Mining Project Cash Flow Analysis


Net Present Value Calculations
Mine Sequence, Cutoff grade and Process Flow NPV optimization

Papers by Kadri Dagdelen.

Surface Mine Design

Bingham Canyon Mine


Porphyry Copper

Case Study

Surface Mine Design

General Information

General Information

Surface Mine Design

Worlds first low grade copper mine.


5 billion tons of material and 13 million tons of
copper produced since 1906.
Overall stripping ratio is 0.4:1.
Mine daily production is 111 Kton of ore and 99.2
Kton of waste. (40 and 36 Mton/year respectively).
Reserves are at 1.0 Btons @ 0.5% Cu per ton which
results in 25 years mine life.
3

General Information

Surface Mine Design

210 Kton of copper; 350 oz of gold; 2.5 MM oz of


silverand 6350 ton of moly per year.
2.5 miles long; 0.5 miles deep.
Truck haulage haul road 150 ft wide; also 3
tunnels for ore and waste haulage.
Mine operates three 8-hour shifts per day, 365 days
per year.

General Information

Surface Mine Design

Layout

General Information

Surface Mine Design

Geology

General Information

Surface Mine Design

Block model dimensions 100 x 100 x 50 ft. Each


block is assigned a value of Cu, Au, Ag, and Mo
using a geostatistical technique known as kriging.
Development drilling on 400 by 600 ft centers.
Density 2.58 t/m3 or equivalent tonnage factor of
12.38 ft3/ton.

Mine Plan

Surface Mine Design

Pushbacks range from 100 ft to 200 ft in width and


50 ft in height.
Five ore shovel production faces to meet average
grade and metallurgical blending requirements.
Five waste shovel production faces to meet long
range stripping requirements.
Operating interramp pit slope, including bench face
angles and catch benches, is 34o; catch benches are
50 ft wide.
8

Mine Plan

Surface Mine Design

Typical Mining Sequence

Mine Plan

Surface Mine Design

Ore is being mined in lower 900 ft of the pit and


highest active waste stripping occurs 2000 ft higher
elevation.
In extreme cases, mining room must be brought
down nearly 40 benches before new ore is exposed;
this process can take as long as seven years.
Slope angles for the ultimate pit limits are defined
by subdividing the pit surface in 26 sectors.

10

Mine Plan

Surface Mine Design

Slope angles for each of these sectors range from


29 to 50 degrees.
Slope angles will be achieved by double benching
or single benching and control blasting digging to
hard.
Slope dewatering using near horizontal drains
improves slope angles by 3 to 5 degrees in the
ultimate slope.
Mining plans are developed by defining the volume
of ore and waste between series of pushbacks.
11

Surface Mine Design

Mine Plan

The material in pushbacks sequentially mined by a


computerized mining simulator algorithm. Highest
relative profit margin ore is mined first.
Haulage roads are added to the incremental pits.
Mine plan is a series of annual plans for five-year
followed by five year plans to the end of mine life.

12

Drilling
Drills operate 5 days per week and two 8-hour
shifts per day.

Surface Mine Design

8 Bucyrus-Erie 60R track-mounted electric drills.


They can drill 57 to 65 ft in a single pass by
exerting 120 Klb thrust.
Rotary tricone bits with carbide inserts are used to
drill 12.25 in diameter holes.
One drill can drill 12 holes per 8-hour shift.
Two drilltech D75K track-mounted units; carbide
insert bits 9.875 in diameter 4 35-ft drill rods.
13

Drilling

Surface Mine Design

D75K drills are used in resilient (hard) formations


where closer patterns are necessary for proper
fragmentation.
One secondary drill uses 2.5-in and 12-ft drill rods
to drill boulders. Also mine has rubber-tired rock
breaker.
Drill patterns vary with the rock types but range
from 30 x 30 ft to 36 x 36 ft for 12.25-in holes. 25 x
25 ft to 30 x 30 ft for 9.875-in holes.
14

Blasting

Surface Mine Design

Two ANFO trucks blending of ammonium nitrate


prills and fuel oil occurs when bulk delivery trucks
deliver these material to the mine-site storage tanks.
Commercial bulk emulsion-blend explosives are
used in wet holes.
Holes are primed with two 0.75-lb boosters placed
near the bottom of the explosive column.
A 200-ms delay is inserted into each booster and
connected to individual 7.5-grain primaline downlines.
15

Blasting

Surface Mine Design

25 grain detonating cord is used for trunk lines and


cross ties.
Surface delays of 17 ms are used between holes and
100 ms between rows.
A single strand of detonating cord extended from
the pattern and initiated by a non-electric cap taped
to the cord.
Drill cuttings are used for stemming. Each hole
produces 2.4 to 3.7 tons of cuttings. These cuttings
are forced into loaded holes.
16

Surface Mine Design

Blasting

Powder factor varies between 0.13 to 0.25 lbs of


explosive per ton depending on rock type; average
0.16 lb per ton.
Ground motion due to blasting is limited to 25
in/sec at the planned final pit slopes.

17

Loading

Surface Mine Design

2 15-yd3 P&H2100; availability averages 78%; 10


Ktons per shovel shift.
4 27-yd3 P&H2800 Mark II; availability averages
80%; 15 Ktons per shovel shift.
3 30-yd3 P&H 2800 XP; availability averages
80%; 15 Ktons per shovel shift.
2 34-yd3 P&H 2800 XPA; availability averages
80%; 20 Ktons per shovel shift.
2 8-yd3 International; 1 12-yd3 Clark; 2 12-yd3
Caterpillar rubber tired FELs.
18

Surface Mine Design

Loading

Power is provided by 44-kva substations; radial


lines are then fed to smaller substations with voltage
reduced to 5500 V ac.
Electric connections between the switch houses and
shovels are made through trailing cables up 2000 ft
for shovels and 3000 ft for the drills.

19

Haulage

Surface Mine Design

Mainly trucks and some rail.


Truck haulage utilizes a fleet of 44 trucks
composed of 28 190-ton CAT-785 mechanical
drive; 8 170-ton Unit Rig diesel electric; 8 170-ton
Wabco diesel electric trucks.
In 1990 34 truck-shifts/shift are scheduled with
average availability of 94% for the new, larger
trucks; 84% for the smaller, older trucks.
All trucks are equipped with two-way radios to
assist appropriate dispatching.
20

In-Pit Crusher

Surface Mine Design

Movable, 60- by 109-in, 1000-hp Allis Chalmers


gyratory crusher that has a capacity of 120,000 tons
per day on continuous basis.
Two trucks at a time at a dumping rate of one truck
per minute.
3 to 4 weeks are required to move the crusher.
-10 in crushed rock is fed directly to a 72-in
conveyor.
The belt is 5 mile ling to Copperton concentrator
and capable of carrying 10,000 tph at 900 ft/min
speed.

21

Road Maintenance
28 miles of haulage roads and 40 miles of service
roads.
Surface Mine Design

20 dozers (CAT D9H, D9L, D10L).


11 graders (CAT 16G).
2 scrappers (CAT 631).
4 salt trucks (5.4 or 6 ton capacity).
6 water trucks (converted 65-ton or 59-ton haulage
trucks; 10,000 to 30,000 gallons capacity).
22

Open Pit Mining Fundamentals

Surface Mine Design

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen


Colorado School of Mines

Terminology
BENCH: Ledge that forms a single level of
Surface Mine Design

operation above which mineral or waste materials


are mined from the bench face.

Terminology (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

BENCH HEIGHT: Vertical distance between the


highest point on the bench (crest) and the lowest
point or the bench (toe). It is influenced by size of
the equipment, mining selectivity, government
regulations and safety.

Terminology (Cont.)
BENCH SLOPE OR BANK ANGLE : Horizontal
Surface Mine Design

angle of the line connecting bench toe to the bench


crest.

Terminology (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

BERM: Horizontal shelf or ledge within the


ultimate pit wall slope left to enhance the stability
of the a slope within the pit and improve the safety.
Berm interval, berm width and berm slope angle are
determined by the geotechnical investigation.

Terminology (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

OVERALL PIT SLOPE ANGLE: The angle measured from


the bottom bench toe to the top bench crest. It is the angle at
which the wall of an open pit stands and it is determined by:
rock strength, geologic structures and water conditions.

Terminology (Cont.)
The overall pit slope angle is affected by the width
Surface Mine Design

and grade of the haul road.

Terminology (Cont.)
HAUL ROADS: During the life of the pit a haul
Surface Mine Design

road must be maintained for access.


HAUL ROAD - SPIRAL SYSTEM: Haul road is
arranged spirally along the perimeter walls of the
pit.

Terminology (Cont.)
HAUL ROAD SWITCH BACK SYSTEM:
Surface Mine Design

Zigzag pattern on one side of the pit.


HAUL ROAD WIDTH: Function of capacity of the
road and the size of the equipment. Haul road width
must be considered in the overall pit design.

Surface Mine Design

Haul Road Effect on Pit Limits

10

Terminology (Cont.)
ANGLE OF REPOSE: Maximum slope of the
Surface Mine Design

broken material.

SUBCROP OR ORE DEPTH: Depth of waste


removed to reach initial ore.

PRE-PRODUCTION STRIPPING: Stripping done


to reach initial ore.
11

Terminology (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

ULTIMATE PIT LIMITS: Vertical and lateral


extend of the economically mineable pit boundary.
Determined on the basis of cost of removing
overburden or waste material vs. the mineable value
of the ore.

PIT SCHEDULING: Material may be mined from


the pit either in 1) sequential pushbacks 2)
conventional pushbacks.

12

Surface Mine Design

Terminology (Cont.)

STRIPPING RATIO: Expressed in tons of waste to tons of


ore in hard rock open pit operations. Critical and important
parameter in pit design and scheduling

AVERAGE STRIP RATIO: Total waste divided by total ore


within the ultimate pit.

CUTOFF STRIPPING RATIO: Costs of mining a ton of ore


and associated waste equals to net revenue from the ton of
ore.

13

Surface Mine Design

Single Working Bench

14

Surface Mine Design

Shovel in Working Bench

15

Surface Mine Design

Two Working Benches

16

Surface Mine Design

Final Pit Limit

17

Surface Mine Design

Cresson Mine Year 2001

18

Surface Mine Design

Cresson Mine Year 2007

19

Surface Mine Design

Cresson Mine Year 2011

20

Surface Mine Design

Pit Sequence (1)

21

Surface Mine Design

Pit Sequence (2)

22

Surface Mine Design

Pit Sequence (3)

23

Surface Mine Design

Pit Sequence (4)

24

Surface Mine Design

Section of Pit Sequence

25

Open Pit Mine Planning and


Design: Fundamentals

Surface Mine Design

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen


Colorado School of Mines
Source: Hustrulid and Kuchta
Open Pit Mine Planning and Design

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Parts of a bench

Cumulative frequency
distribution of measured
bench face angles (Call, 1986).

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Functioning of catch benches.


Section through a working bench.

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Double benches at final pit limits.

Catch bench geometry (Call, 1986).

Typical catch bench design dimensions (Call, 1986).


Bench height
(m)
15
30
45

Impact zone
(m)
3.5
4.5
5

Berm height
(m)
1.5
2
3

Berm width Minimum bench width


(m)
(m)
4
7.5
5.5
10
8
13

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Safety berms at bench edge

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Height of reach as a function of bucket size.


6

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Example orebody geometry.


Ramp access for the example orebody.

Blast design for the ramp excavation.


7

Surface Mine Design

Shovel Working Range

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Minimum width drop cut


geometry with shovel
alternating from side to side.

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Minimum width drop cut


geometry with shovel
alternating from side to side.

10

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Isometric view of the ramp in waste approaching the orebody.

Diagrammatic representation of the expanding mining front.


11

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Dropcut / ramp placement in ore.

Expansion of the mining front.

12

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Plan view of an actual pit bottom


Showing drop cut and mining
Expansion (McWilliams, 1959).

13

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Extension of the current


Ramp close to the pit wall
(McWilliams, 1959).

14

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Creating initial access / benches.

Shovel cut sequence when initiating


benching in a hilly terrain (Nichols, 1956).
Sidehill cut with a shovel.

15

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Detailed steps in the development of a new production level.


16

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Parallel cut with drive by.


17

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Parallel cut with the double spotting of trucks.


18

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Parallel cut with the single spotting of trucks.


19

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Time sequence showing shovel


loading with single spotting.

20

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

(Continued).
21

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Time sequence showing shovel


loading with double spotting.

22

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

(Continued).
23

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

(Continued).
24

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Section and plan views through a working bench.


Simplified presentation of a safety berm.

25

Geometrical Considerations

Surface Mine Design

Initial geometry for the push back example.

Cut mining from bench 1.

Cut mining from bench 2.

26

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Safety bench geometry


showing bench face angle.

Overall slope angle.

27

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Overall slope angle with ramp included.


Interramp slope angles.

28

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Overall slope angle with


Working bench included.
Interramp angles associated with
the working bench.

29

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Overall slope angle with


one working bench an a ramp section.
Interramp slope angles for a slope containing
a working bench and a ramp.

30

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Overall slope angle for a slope containing two working benches.


31

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Slopes for each working group.


32

Surface Mine Design

Geometrical Considerations

Final overall pit slope.


33

Advances in Pit Slope Management Systems

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen


Professor
Mining Engineering Department
Colorado School of Mines
Golden, Colorado 80401

Pit Slope Failure Problems


l
l

Continue to be the source of human and financial


losses
Recent examples from Wyoming coal mines and
Grasberg pit in Indonesia point to additional
research needs to be done in the area of pit slope
management
Pit slope monitoring research is undertaken at the
Colorado School of Mines using Lidar Scanners
with funding from Kennocott Energy and 3-DP

Plane Failure
l

Failure plane must daylight


in the slope face; i.e. its dip
must be smaller than slope
(S>P)
Plane must strike parallel or
nearly parallel (within 20o) to
the slope face.
Less common than other
failure modes

Plane Failure in a Limestone


Quarry

Wedge Failure

NON-DAYLIGHTING
WEDGE

DAYLIGHTING WEDGE

Most common mode of


failure for rock slopes

Line of intersection
must daylight into
slope face

Often, failure is sudden

Circular Failure
l
l
l
l
l

Soils
Stock piles
Reclamation piles
Waste dumps
Highly weathered overburden rocks

Toppling and Step-Path


Modes
Toppling

Mixed modes
(e.g. Toppling & Step-Path)

Overall Slope Design


l
l
l
l
l

Identify geological sectors; their strength


characteristics and possible mode of failures
Determine maximum height and angle for interramp design
Determine bench geometry
Incorporate bench geometry into Inter-ramp
design
Overall slope design

Failure Modes in Different


Sectors

Pit Slope Monitoring


- What to look for
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l

Overhang rock
New geological structures
Swell and/or increased rock fall activity on highwall
Heavy precipitation
Signs of stress
Tension cracks
Movement (acceleration)
Increased water levels

Tension Crack Measurements


l
l

The formation of cracks behind slope is a sign of instability


(Safety Factor 1)
Monitoring changes in crack width and direction can provide
information on extent of unstable area

Inclinometers
l
l

Inclinometers measure horizontal


deflections of a borehole
They can
-

Locate failure surface


Determine nature of failure surface
(rotational or planar)
Measure movement along failure
surface and determine if
movement is accelerating

Borehole extensometer
l

Consists of tensioned rods


anchored at different points in a
borehole.

Measures changes in distance


between anchors, as well as collar

Provides displacement
information across discontinuities.

New and Emerging Technologies


l

Automated Total Station Network (robots)

Non-reflective Laser scanners (Lidar systems:


Cyra, Riegl, I-Site)

Radar Technologies

GPS (Local sensors with multiple antenna)

TDR (Time Domain Reflectometry)

Digital photogrammetry

Arial photography (Kodak)

Automated Total Station Network in


Chuquicamata Mine, Chile
A network of automated total stations for geotechnical monitoring
of pit slopes that operate continuously 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week and during the 365 days a year.
Provide a reliable and quantitative information in real time that
allows to establish with anticipation the behavior of the rock mass
and geologic structures on the pit slopes.

Completely Automated Electronic


Station Network using Leica TCA2003

Motorized Station, Leica TCA2003

Characteristics
Reach with 1/3 prisms in average
atmospheric conditions : 2500/3500 mts.
Precision in distance : 1mm + 1 ppm
Angular precision : 0.3 (0.1 mgon)
Increase of lens : 30 x
Compartment for the insertedable
memory card PCMCIA.
Integrated application programs :
Reframing, orientation of horizontal circle
and drag of levels, reseccion and
distance of connection between two
points.
Capture of information in modality ATR
and DIST.

Wireless Communication Network


Bridge
Bluebox
Switch
Energy
SHELTER 2

ARTURO ESTE
ARTURO OESTE
SHELTER 1

SHELTER 4

SHELTER 6

SHELTER 5
SHELTER 3

CONTROL ROOM

ETHERNET NETWORK

Location of Stations and Integration of


Information
Software of Information Integration

Have a Computational Software that allows to totally integrate


and administer the acquisition of geotechnical data, procesing
and analisis of the information in real time originating from the
robotic system (TCA) intalled in each of the monitoring
stations.
SHELTER 2

ARTURO ESTE

ARTURO OESTE
SHELTER 1

SHELTER 4

SHELTER 6

SHELTER 5
SHELTER 3

CONTROL
CONTROL ROOM
ROOM

Total Station and Prism Locations in


Chuquicamata Mine, Chile

Caseta
Oeste

Caseta
Este

GPS Surveyed Control Stations in


Chuquicamata Mine, Chile
S2

S3
S4

S1

S5

D (PR-1)
E1 (PR-2)

PILAR GT-1

Matus (PR-3)
GT-1 PR-4
Morgan (PR-5)
D1

D2

APS-WEST.
D3
D5

ZONA-6

Norte : 2085.491
Este : 3870.863
Cota : 2846.745
Elev

D4

ZONA-5

ZONA-7

Coordenadas de la
Estacin de Monitoreo
APS(N;E;Z)

Slope Stability Radar Technology


from GroundProbe of Australia

Complete Pit Wall Coverage from


Remote Locations

Radar Scan Lines

Location and Time of Wall


Movements

Inc
r
disp easing
lace
me
nt w
ith t
ime

02:04 9th October 2003

23:22 8th October 2003

20:47 8th October 2003

18:13 8th October 2003

Displacement (mm)

Slip Area

Slope Stability Radar Features


High deformation precision ( 0.2 mm std. dev.)
Broad area coverage (~1000s pixels/scan)
Continuous operation (~ 1s min/scan, 24 hrs/day)
30-850m range
All weather operation (incl. dust, fog)
Rapid Deployment
Remote Operation via radio link and internet
High resolution CCD Camera
Custom software with alarm settings

SSRViewer Images Screen

SSRViewer Figures Screen

10mm movement over 45


hours in Region 1

15mm movement over 45


hours in Region 3

0.0mm movement over 45 hours


in Region 2

Laser Scanning Technologies


There are Many 3D Laser Scanners
Major Companies with Products are:
l
l
l
l
l

Cyrax (Leica) www.cyra.com (USA)


Optech ILRIS (Canada)
I-site (Maptek) www.isite3d.com (Australia)
LMS 3D Scanning systems (Riegl) www.riegl.co.at
(Austria)
Z+F Laser Measuring Systems (Zoller+ Frhlich)
www.zofre.de (Germany)
Cyrax 2400

Other Application in Laser Technologies


Riegl Z 210i Lidar Laser Scanner

Specifications
1200+ ft scan range
2.5cm accuracy @ 900 ft
5 cm accuracy > 900 ft
361 degrees x 80 degree scan
9000 Hz

Riegl LPM 800 HA


Specifications
3000 ft scan range
1cm accuracy @ 1250 ft
2 cm accuracy > 1250 ft
0.018 degrees step size
360 degrees of horizontal
rotation
180 degrees of vertical rotation
1000 Hz

Riegl Z 420 Lidar Laser Scanner


Specifications
2400+ ft scan range
1cm accuracy in topo mode
6 mm accuracy in detail mode
0.01 degree step size
361 degrees x 90 degree scan
window
8000 - 12000 Hz

High Wall Scan (Pre Blasting)

Post-Blast Scan

Pre Blast Triangles

Post Blast Triangles

Combined Pre / Post

Dynamic Cross Section

Complete Pit Scan using Riegl

Pit Wall Scan Using Riegl

Pit Wall Failure Scan - Riegle

Slope Monitoring Systems


Technology

Precision

SSR
GROUND
PROBE

0.2 mm Broad
Area

~ mins

850 m
Easy
(1.4km)

Yes

Laser
(Prisms)

~ 1s cm

Discrete
Points

Twice
Daily

2 km

Difficult

No

Broad
Area

~ secs

900 m

Easy

No

LIDAR
~ 1s cm
SCANNER

Wall
Coverage

Update
Rate

Range

Deployment

All
weather

Extensometers

~ 1s mm Discrete
Points

~ secs

n/a

Difficult

Yes

GPS

~ 1s cm

Discrete
Points

~ secs

n/a

Difficult

Yes

Broad
Area

~ hours

< 150 m Moderate

Photogram ~ 1s cm
-metry

No

Slide Management Options


l
l
l
l
l
l
l

Reduce slope angle


Dewater unstable area
Leave unstable areas
Continue mining
Unload slide
Partial clean up
Step-out

l
l
l
l
l

Reduce slope height by


segmenting the slope
Support unstable ground
Contingency Planning
Blasting
Erosion control measures
(reclamation)
- Geotextiles against erosion

and raveling
- Vegetating and planting

Leave Unstable Areas untouched


Instability can be left
alone if it is in
an abandoned area,
an inactive area,
an area that can be

avoided

Continue mining

Displacement (cm)

If the displacement rate is low and predictable,


living with the displacement while continuing to
mine may be the best action.
150

May continue mining


(displacement rate is constant)

100
50

1/4/02

5/4/02

11/4/02

Time

16/4/02

Basic Principles of Drainage


l
l
l
l

Prevent surface water from entering to the slope through


open tension cracks and fissures
Reduce water pressure in the vicinity of the potential
failure surface
Providing for gravity flow of water is the most common
method
Pumping is used on a temporary basis depending on the
urgency of the problem

Method of Slope Drainage


Bench section view

Benches sloped
toward toe

Bench face view


Slope crest

Inclined bench for gravity flow

Horizontal Drain Network


(303 drains/34 miles since 1999)
T
AN
RM
DO
55

O
DE
RO

S
EMILY

IND
BL

60

60

K
EE
CR

JB

PATS

S
CHRISTY

RO
DE
O

T
IGH
DN
MI

CR
EE
K

60

EX
PLO
DIN
G

N-00-B
60

60
75

78

ANFO

LAST LA

85

UGH

ST
PO

60

FLOWER PATC

25
H

50

UL
ERF
POW

AMANDA

AN
JE

50
BL
IND

RO
DE
O
AN
TIP
OS
T

D
AN
GR

80

CR
EE
K

RO
DE
O

CR
EE
K1

Unload Side
l Even

though unloading has been a common


response, in general it has been
unsuccessful.

l In

fact, there are situations involving high


water pressure where unloading actually
decreases stability.

Partial clean-up

Partial cleanup may be the best choice where


a slide blocks a haul road or fails onto a
working area

Only that material necessary to get back into


operation need be cleaned up

Step-out
l Increased

highwall stability due


to shallower slope angle It locks
up reserves

l Advantages

of leaving step out


should be weighed against
cleaning by considering ore
lock up and having safer overall
slope
New Slope Design

Failure Surface
Step out

Originally Planned Slope Design

Old Overall Slope Angle


New (Flatter) Overall Slope Angle

Reduce slope height by


segmenting slope

Support unstable ground

Buttress
Rock Bolts

Anchors, Tiebacks, and


Shotcrete
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Reinforced concrete dowel to


prevent loosening of slab at
crest
Tensioned rock anchors to
secure sliding failure along crest
Tieback wall to prevent sliding
failure on fault zone
Shotcrete to prevent raveling of
zone of fractured rock
Drain hole to reduce water
pressure within slope
Concrete buttress to support
rock above cavity

Mesh & Bolts

Buttressing

Buttressing

NE Wall Sept 2002


unwting cut
N-00-B
2% ramp & buttress
mudslide
4880 buttress
4640

4280

NE Wall Un-weighting Cut

2/1
/0
2/1 2
5/0
2
3/1
/0
3/1 2
5/0
3/2 2
9/0
4/1 2
2/0
4/2 2
6/0
5/1 2
0/0
5/2 2
4/0
2
6/7
/02
6/2
1/0
2
7/5
/0
7/1 2
9/0
2
8/2
/02
8/1
6/0
8/3 2
0/0
9/1 2
3/0
9/2 2
7
10 /02
/11
10 /02
/25
/0
11 2
/8
11 /02
/22
/0
12 2
/6
12 /02
/20
/02
1/3
/0
1/1 3
7/0
1/3 3
1/0
2/1 3
4/0
2/2 3
8/0
3

MOVEMENT IN (INCHES/DAY)

Prism Data Feb 2002 to Feb 2003


PRISM DATA - All In Movement Area

0.20

0.00
TN000084

-1.60
TN000089

-0.20
TN010095

TN010119

-0.40
TN 80

TN 72

-0.60
TN 97

TN 98

-0.80
TN 101

TN 114

-1.00
TN 115

TN 127

-1.20
TN 144

#4

-1.40

#3

-1.80

-2.00

DATE

TN 149

Blasting
Line
drill
holes

Pre-splitting

Production
holes
Face

Line drilling

Use of less
charges
next to toe

Slide Management Example


PUSHBACK DEVELOPMENT

Displacement rate

Normal

2 a 5 cm/day

Only ore production stripping

5 a 10 cm/day

Stop push-back development

> 10 cm/day
DESPLAZAMIENTO (cm)

D5
BENCH

300

250
y = 63.213x - 2E+06
200

150

Catch
Berm, 40
m.
H13
BENCH

SAFETY
BERM

y = 16.016x - 597363
y = 8.7432x - 326060

100

Failure

y = 5.6082x - 209126
50

0
1/2/02

6/2/02

11/2/02

16/2/02
TIEMPO

PUSHBACK

Access D5
& H13 closed

21/2/02

Took out
shovel

Contingency Planning
l
l
l
l
l
l
l

Provide multiple access to production faces


Maintain double access to working benches,
whenever possible
Stockpile ore/rock
Design to prevent noses in the plan geometry
Provide for failure costs in scheduling and budgeting
Add lag times in production scheduling
Plan step-outs

Conclusions
l

New Radar and Lidar based technologies applied


to pit slope monitoring appears to be very
promising in providing cost effective and accurate
real time data .
Accurate and reliable slope displacement
information coupled with proper pit slope
management practices has a potential to prevent
unexpected catastrophic pit slope failures.

Haul Road Design

Surface Mine Design

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen


Colorado School of Mines

Haul Road Design


HAUL ROADS: During the life of the pit a haul
Surface Mine Design

road must be maintained for access.


HAUL ROAD - SPIRAL SYSTEM: Haul road is
arranged spirally along the perimeter walls of the
pit.

Haul Road Design


HAUL ROAD SWITCH BACK SYSTEM:
Surface Mine Design

Zigzag pattern on one side of the pit.


HAUL ROAD WIDTH: Function of capacity of the
road and the size of the equipment. Haul road width
must be considered in the overall pit design.

Surface Mine Design

Haul Road Effect on Pit Limits

Surface Mine Design

Considerations for Haul Road


Design

Visibility
Stopping distances
Vertical alignment
Horizontal alignment
Cross section
Runaway-vehicle safety
provisions
5

Sight Distances and Stopping


Distances

Surface Mine Design

Vertical and horizontal curves designed

considering sight distance and stopping


distance
Sight distance is the extent of peripheral area
visible to the vehicle operator
Sight distance must be sufficient to enable
vehicle traveling at a given speed to stop
before reaching a hazard
6

Sight Distances and Stopping


Distances

Surface Mine Design

On vertical curves, road surface limits sight

distance
Unsafe conditions remedied by lengthening curve
On horizontal curves, sight distance limited by
adjacent berm dike, rock cuts, trees, etc;
Unsafe conditions remedied by laying back bank or
removing obstacles

Sight Distance Diagrams

Surface Mine Design

Sight distance diagrams for horizontal and vertical curves


(Kaufman and Ault)

Stopping Distances

Surface Mine Design

Stopping distances depend on truck breaking

capabilities, road slope and vehicle velocity


Stopping distance curves can be derived
based on SAE service break maximum
stopping distances

Surface Mine Design

Stopping Distance
Characteristics
For example,
stopping
distance
characteristics
of vehicles of
200,000 to
400,000 pounds
GVW
(Kaufman and Ault)

10

Stopping Distances

Surface Mine Design

Prior to final road layout, manufacturers of


vehicles that will use the road should be
contacted to verify the service brake
performance capabilities

11

Vertical Alignment
Establishment of grades and vertical curves that
Surface Mine Design

allow adequate stopping distances on all segments


of the haul road

Maximum sustained grades

Reduction in grade significantly increases vehicle uphill speed


Reduction in grade decreases cycle time, fuel consumption, stress

on mechanical components and operating costs


Reduction in grade increases safe descent speeds, increasing
cycle time
The benefits of low grades offset by construction costs associated
with low grades

12

Surface Mine Design

Vehicle Performance Chart

13

Surface Mine Design

Vehicle Retarder Chart

14

Vertical Alignment
Maximum sustained grades
Surface Mine Design

Some states limit maximum grades to 15 to 20% and


sustained grades of 10%
Most authorities suggest 10% as the maximum safe
sustained grade limitation
Manufacturer studies show 8% grades result in the
lowest cycle time exclusive of construction
consideration

15

Vertical Alignment
Maximum sustained grades
Surface Mine Design

Property boundaries, geology, topography, climate


must be considered on a case by case basis.
Lower operating costs must be balanced against higher
capital costs of low grades.
Truck simulators and mine planning studies over the
life of mine should be used to make the determination
of the appropriate grades

16

Vertical Curves

Surface Mine Design

Vertical curves smooth transitions from one

grade to another
Minimum vertical curve lengths are based on
eye height, object height, and algebraic
difference in grade

17

Surface Mine Design

Stopping Distance vs. Vertical


Curve
For example,
vertical curve
controls 9 ft eye
height (usually
minimum height
for articulated
haulage trucks of
200,000 to
400,000 pound of
GVW)
18

Horizontal Alignment

Surface Mine Design

Deals primarily with design of curves and

considers previously discussed radius, width,


and sight distance in addition to
superelevation
Cross slopes also should be considered in the
design

19

Curves, Superelevation, and


Speed Limits

Surface Mine Design

Superelevation grade recommendations vary

but should be limited to 10% or less because


of traction limitations
Depending on magnitude of the side friction
forces at low speed, different values are
suggested for small radius curves
Kaufman and Ault suggest .04-.06 fpf
(basically the normal cross slope)
20

Curves, Superelevation, and


Speed Limits

Surface Mine Design

CAT suggests higher slopes with traction

cautions and 10% maximum caution


Again, where ice, snow, and mud are a
problem, there is a practical limit on the
degree of superelevation

21

Surface Mine Design

Curve Superelevation

(CAT)

22

Recommended Superelevation
Rates

Surface Mine Design

If superelevation is not used, speed limits should be set on curves.

(Kaufman and Ault)


23

Curves, Superelevation, and


Speed Limits

Surface Mine Design

Centrifugal forces of vehicles on curves are

counteracted by friction between tire an road and


vehicle weight as a result of superelevation
Theoretically, with superelevation, side friction
factors would be zero and centrifugal force is
balanced by the vehicle weight component
To reduce tire wear, superelevation or speed limits
on curves are required
24

Combinations of Alignments
Avoid sharp horizontal curvature at or near the crest
Surface Mine Design

of a hill
Avoid sharp horizontal curves near the bottom of
sustained downgrades
Avoid intersections near crest verticals and sharp
horizontal curvatures
Intersections should be made flat as possible
If passing allowed, grades should be constant and
long enough
25

Cross Section

Surface Mine Design

A stable road base is very important


Sufficiently rigid bearing material should be

used beneath the surface


Define the bearing capacity of the material
using the California Bearing Ratio (CBR)

26

Surface Mine Design

California Bearing Ratio

27

Surface Mine Design

Subbase Construction

28

Cross Slopes

Surface Mine Design

Cross slopes provide adequate drainage and

range from to inch drop per foot of


width (approximately .02 to .04 foot per foot)
Lower cross slopes used on smooth surfaces
that dissipate water quickly and when ice or
mud is a constant problem

29

Cross Slopes

Surface Mine Design

Higher cross slopes permit rapid drainage,

reduce puddles and saturated sub-base, and


are used on rough surfaces (gravel and
crushed rock) or where mud and snow are
not a problem
High cross slopes can be particularly
problematic with ice or snow on high grades
(+5%)
30

Recommended Rate of CrossSlope Change

Surface Mine Design

Slope change should be gradual.

(Kaufman and Ault)

31

Width

On straight or tangent segments, width


Surface Mine Design

depends on

Vehicle width
Number of lanes
Recommended vehicle clearance, which ranges
from 44 to 50% of vehicle width

32

Surface Mine Design

Minimum Road Design Widths


for Various Size Dump Trucks

(Couzens, SME Open Pit Planning and Design)

33

Surface Mine Design

Typical Design Haul Road


Width
Typical
design haulroad width
for two-way
traffic using
77.11-t (85st) trucks

(Couzens, SME Open Pit Planning and Design)

34

Surface Mine Design

Typical Haulageway Sections

(Kaufman and Ault)

35

Width

Surface Mine Design

Berm height and width as a function of

vehicle size and material type


Ditch(es) added to basic recommendations
Runaway provisions may also add to width
Road wider on curves because of overhang
Minimum turning radius considered on
curves (should be exceeded)
36

Haulageway Widths on Curves

Surface Mine Design

37

Safety Provisions - Berms

Triangular or trapezoidal made by using local


Surface Mine Design

material

Stands at natural angle of repose of construction


material
Redirects vehicle onto roadway
Minimum height at rolling radius of tire

38

Berms

Larger boulders backed with earthen material


Surface Mine Design

Near vertical face deflects vehicle for slight


angles of incidence
Problems with damage and injury and
availability of boulders
Minimum height of boulder at height of tire
allowing chassis impact

39

Runaway Provisions

Surface Mine Design

With adverse grades some safety provision should

be integrated to prevent runaway vehicles


Primary design consideration is required spacing
between protective provisions
Driver must reach a safety provision before truck
traveling too fast to maneuver
Maximum permissible speed depends on truck
design conditions and operator
40

Runaway Provisions

Surface Mine Design

Maximum permissible speed, equivalent

downgrade, and speed at break failure determine


distance between runaway truck safety provisions
For example, at an equivalent downgrade of 5% and
a maximum speed of 40 mph,
Speed at Failure
Provision Spacing

10 mph 20 mph
1,000 ft 800 ft

(Kaufman and Ault)


41

Surface Mine Design

Runaway Precautions

(Atkinson SME Handbook)

42

Median Runaway-Vehicle
Provision Berms

Surface Mine Design

Vehicle straddles collision berm and rides

vehicle to stop
Made of unconsolidated-screened fines
Critical design aspects spacing between
berms and height of berm
Height governed by height of undercarriage
and wheel track governed by largest vehicle
43

Surface Mine Design

Median Runaway-Vehicle
Provision Berms

Requires maintenance in freezing conditions


Agitation to prevent damage to vehicle
May cover berm in high rainfall areas

44

Escape Lanes

Surface Mine Design

Good tool for stopping runaway but

expensive to construct
Entrance from road is important; spacing,
horizontal, vertical curve and superelevation
are all considered in design
Deceleration mainly by adverse grade and
high rolling resistance material
45

Escape Lanes

Surface Mine Design

Length a function of grade and speed at

entrance and rolling resistance


Stopping by level section median berm, sand
or gravel or mud pits, road bumps or manual
steering

46

Surface Mine Design

Escape Lanes

47

Maintenance

Surface Mine Design

The road surface is

deformed by the constant


pounding of haulage
vehicles.
A good road maintenance
program is necessary for
safety and economics.
48

Safety Considerations

Surface Mine Design

Dust, potholes, ruts, depressions, bumps, and


other conditions can impede vehicular
control.

49

Economic Considerations
The wear on every component is increased when a
Surface Mine Design

vehicle travels over a rough surface.


If the vehicle brakes constantly, unnecessary lining
wear occurs as well.

50

Dust Control

Surface Mine Design

Dust may infiltrate brakes, air filters,

hydraulic lifts, and other components of


machinery.
The abrasive effect of dust will result in
costly cleaning or replacement of these
items.

51

Deterioration Factors

Surface Mine Design

Weather
Vehicles follow a

similar path
Spillage

52

Motor Graders

Surface Mine Design

A motor grader
should be used to
maintain cross slopes,
remove spills, and to
fill and smooth
surface depressions as
they occur.
53

Road Drainage

Surface Mine Design

To avoid overflow, roadside ditches and

culverts should be periodically cleaned.


Avoid erosion or saturation of subbase
materials.

54

Haul Road Design

Surface Mine Design

Open Pit Contour Maps


Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Source: Hustrulid and Kuchta

Surface Mine Design

Example of Mapping Procedure

Surface Mine Design

Plan View of a Portion of the


Open Pit

Crests denoted by dashed lines and toes by solid lines.

Surface Mine Design

Example of Mapping Procedure

Surface Mine Design

Midbench Elevation

Surface Mine Design

Plan View of Midbench Elevation

Surface Mine Design

Map Based on Midbench Contours

Surface Mine Design

Procedure to Convert Midbench to


Toe and Crest Contours

Surface Mine Design

Representation of Crests and Toes

Surface Mine Design

Designing a Spiral Ramp Inside


the Wall

10

Surface Mine Design

Completing the new crest lines

11

Surface Mine Design

Pit Layout Including Ramp

12

Surface Mine Design

Design of a Spiral Ramp Outside


the Wall

13

Surface Mine Design

Pit Layout Including Ramp

14

Surface Mine Design

Design of a Switchback

15

Surface Mine Design

Design of a Switchback

16

Surface Mine Design

Design of a Switchback

17

Surface Mine Design

Pit Layout Including Ramp

18

Surface Mine Design

Example of Two Switchbacks

19

Surface Mine Design

Plan and Section Views of Pit


Without Ramp

20

Surface Mine Design

Plan and Section Views of Pit


With Ramp

21

Surface Mine Design

Road Volume in the Ramp

22

Surface Mine Design

Block Modeling and Ore Reserves


Estimation

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design

Basic Block Model Information

Topography Data
Drill Data
Sampling
Assays

Surface Mine Design

Topography Data

3D Display (Color Coded Elevations)

Drill Data

Surface Mine Design

Drill Hole Data Sources

Collar Coordinates
Geologic Logs
Down Hole Surveys
Lab Tests

Samplings

Surface Mine Design

Sampling Data

Rock Types
Alteration Types
Metal Grades
Attributes

Surface Mine Design

Samplings (Cont.)

Data Collections

Surface Mine Design

Assays

Assay Data for Cu and Mo


Multiple Cutoffs
Rock Types
Alterations
7

Surface Mine Design

Geological Interpretation

Section View Showing


Topography and Alteration Types

Surface Mine Design

Geological Interpretation

Boundaries for rock types

Surface Mine Design

Geological Interpretation

Color Filled Display for Alteration Types

10

Surface Mine Design

3D Geological View

3D Display of Alteration Type Solids


(With Drill Hole Piercing Points)
11

Surface Mine Design

Composites

Composited Grade Data with Corresponding


Assay Interval Data

12

Surface Mine Design

3D Block Models

3D View of the Block Models

13

Surface Mine Design

Block Estimation

Kriging - Geological Interpolation Technique for


Ore Reserve Estimation

14

Surface Mine Design

Block Values

Block by Block Profit Values in Association with


Block Grade Data and Alteration Type Boundaries

15

Surface Mine Design

Block Models

Interpolated Grades from Drill Hole Data

16

Surface Mine Design

Ore Reserve Estimation

Interpolated Grades from Drill Hole Data

17

Surface Mine Design

Economic Pit Limits

Economic Pit Limits for Different Economic Scenarios

18

Surface Mine Design

3D View of Economic Pit Limits

3D View of Economic Pit Limits for Different


Economic Scenarios
19

Surface Mine Design

Mine Planning Application


(Open Pit Mine)

Yearly Maps for the Open Pit Mine Scheduling

20

Surface Mine Design

Geologic Resource Modeling Techniques

Exploratory Data Analysis


Variogram Analysis
Search Strategies
Simple Kriging, Ordinary Kriging, Indicator
Kriging, Co-Kriging
Cross Validation
Uncertainty and Risk Evaluation

21

Surface Mine Design

Frequency and Cumulative Frequency Plots

Classical Statistics
Data Posting and Display
Histograms
Cumulative Histograms
Probability Plots

22

Inverse Distance Technique

Surface Mine Design

Inverse distance technique is the simplest


interpolation method.
Give more weight to the closest samples, and less
to those that are farthest away.
In general,
1
d ip
wi = n
1

p
i =1 d i

1
n
di p
v = n
vi
1
i =1

p
d
i =1
i
n

v = wi vi
i =1

wi = 1
i =1

23

Inverse Distance Technique


(pg257)

Surface Mine Design

We can make the weights inversely


proportional to any power of the distance.
If p=2, it is called Inverse Distance Square.

v4
d3
v1 d
1

v2
d2
d4
v3

Inverse Distance Square


v =

1
2
d1
4

i =1

1
di2

v1 +

1
2
d2
4

i =1

1
di2

v2 +

1
2
d3
4

i =1

1
di 2

v3 +

1
2
d4
4

i =1

v4

1
di2

24

Inverse Distance Square Example

Estimate the unknown point


Distance Square technique

Surface Mine Design

V3=0.5

d3=4

by using the Inverse

v1= 0.2 d1 =1

d1=1
V1=0.2

V2=0.3
d2=2

v2= 0.3 d2 =2
v3= 0.5 d3 =4

v = ?
25

Inverse Distance Square Example

First of all, calculate the weights w1, w2, w3

Surface Mine Design

w1 =
w2 =
w3 =

1
12

1
12

1
12

+
+
+

1
12
1
22
1
22
1
22
1
42
1
22

+
+
+

1
42

1
42

1
42

21
16

16
=
21

1
4
21
16

4
=
21

1
16
21
16

1
=
21

Note:

w1 + w2 + w3 = 1
26

Inverse Distance Square Example

Surface Mine Design

Then, calculate v
v =

16
4
1
0.2 + 0.3 + 0.5 = 0.233
21
21
21

27

Estimation Error

Surface Mine Design

Error estimation between estimation (Exploration data)


and true value (Blasthole data).
Error = Estimated Grade True Grade

e.g., Estimation Error for Block 1 = 0.463 0.433 = 0.031

28

Surface Mine Design

Histogram of Errors

29

Scatter Graph
True grades agai n s t E s t i mated grades
0.90

0.70
E s t i mated (%)

Surface Mine Design

0.80

0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90
True (%)

30

Surface Mine Design


MNGN312 - MNGN512

Surface Mine Design

Lecture 5
September 14, 2004

Instructor
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design

Geologic Block Modeling

Assume that a geologic model to be created by using 75ft


by 75ft blocks from the exploration data set. Estimate the
grade of these blocks using the inverse distance square
(IDS) technique.

Use rectangular search neighborhood of 37.5ft x 37.5ft.

Assume that the center of the block represents the block


grade.

Geologic Block Modeling


Estimate the grade of the block (block size 75ft x 75ft)
for exploration data set.
Estimate the
center point

75ft

Surface Mine Design

v1

v2

75ft

Geologic Block Modeling


Rectangular search neighborhood of 37.5ft x 37.5ft.

75ft

Surface Mine Design

37.5ft

37.5ft

37.5ft

37.5ft

75ft
Use all the exploration holes within a given block (For this
block, use 3 exploration samples)
4

Inverse Distance Technique

Surface Mine Design

Inverse distance technique is the simplest interpolation


method.
Give more weight to the closest samples, and less to
those that are farthest away.
In general,

Unknown point

1
d ip
wi = n
1

p
i =1 d i

1
n
di p
v = n
vi
1
i =1

p
d
i =1
i

Sampling points
Weights

v = wi vi
i =1

wi = 1
i =1

Inverse Distance Technique

Surface Mine Design

We can make the weights inversely proportional to any


power of the distance.
If p=2, it is called Inverse Distance Square (IDS).

v4
d3
v1 d
1

v2
d2
d4
v3

Inverse Distance Square


v =

1
2
d1
4

i =1

1
di2

v1 +

1
2
d2
4

i =1

1
di2

v2 +

1
2
d3
4

i =1

1
di 2

v3 +

1
2
d4
4

i =1

v4

1
di2

Inverse Distance Square Example

Estimate the unknown point


Distance Square technique

Surface Mine Design

V3=0.5

d3=4

by using the Inverse

v1= 0.2 d1 =1

d1=1
V1=0.2

V2=0.3
d2=2

v2= 0.3 d2 =2
v3= 0.5 d3 =4

v = ?
7

Inverse Distance Square Example

First of all, calculate the weights w1, w2, w3

Surface Mine Design

w1 =
w2 =
w3 =

1
12

1
12

1
12

+
+
+

1
12
1
22
1
22
1
22
1
42
1
22

+
+
+

1
42

1
42

1
42

1
21
16

16
21

1
4
21
16

4
=
21

1
16
21
16

Note:

w1 + w2 + w3 =

16 + 4 + 1
=1
21

1
21

Then, calculate v
v =

16
4
1
0.2 + 0.3 + 0.5 = 0.233
21
21
21

Surface Mine Design

Geologic Block Modeling

d1

25

g1 25

d1 = 25 2 + 25 2 = 35.36
9

Geologic Block Modeling

Surface Mine Design

0.0008
0.0032

Block1
Centered on
(X=37.5, Y=37.5)

X
12.5
62.5
37.5

Y
12.5
12.5
62.5

vi
0.42
0.24
0.41

x dist
25
-25
0

y dist
25
25
-25

di
35.35534
35.35534
25

1/di 2
0.0008
0.0008
0.0016
0.0032

wi
wi*vi
0.25
0.105
0.25
0.06
0.5
0.205
1
0.37
(Estimated Grade)

2
i =1 di

10

Geologic Block Modeling

Surface Mine Design

Using the estimated block values, one normally


determines the overall estimated bench average grade of
the copper ore at some cutoff, i.e, 0.7%Cu.

11

Geologic Block Model


Reconciliation

Surface Mine Design

Determine the average grade of 75ft by 75ft grid blocks


for the blasthole data set (blasthole2004.txt) by averaging
the grades of 9 blast holes that fall within each block.

Block 1 Grade
= (0.42+0.35+0.24+0.33+
+ 0.46) / 9
=0.35

12

Geologic Block Model


Reconciliation

Surface Mine Design

Error estimation between estimation (Exploration data)


and true value (Blasthole data).
Error = Estimated Grade True Grade

e.g., Estimation Error for Block 1


= 0.37 0.35 = 0.02

13

Geologic Block Model


Reconciliation

Histogram of Error (Example of 100ft x 100ft estimation)


Bin
FrequencyCumulative %
-0.2
0
0.00%
-0.15
0
0.00%
-0.1
1
11.11%
-0.05
1
22.22%
0
3
55.56%
0.05
3
88.89%
0.1
0
88.89%
0.15
0
88.89%
0.2
1 100.00%
0.25
0 100.00%
More
0 100.00%

3.5

100.00%
90.00%

80.00%
2.5
Frequency

Surface Mine Design

Histogram of Estimation Errors (Estimation - True)

70.00%
60.00%

50.00%
1.5

40.00%
30.00%

20.00%

0.5

10.00%

0.00%
-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05

0.05 0.1
Bin

0.15 0.2

0.25 More

Frequency
Cumulative %

14

Geologic Block Model


Reconciliation

Scatter Graph (Example of 100ft x 100ft estimation)


True grades agai n s t E s t i mated grades

Draw a diagonal line


(y=x) to show perfect
estimation line.

0.80
0.70
E s t i mated (%)

Surface Mine Design

0.90

0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90
True (%)

15

Univariate Distribution of
Errors

Surface Mine Design

Error = Estimated Value - True Value


We also refer to these error as residuals.
If error is positive, then we have overestimated the true;
if error is negative, then we have underestimated the
true.
If m=0, then Unbiased Estimates
Overestimates and underestimates
are balanced.
We typically prefer to have a
symmetric distribution.
16

Univariate Distribution of
Errors

Surface Mine Design

We would like to see the error distribution has small


spread.

a)

b)

Both distributions are centered on 0 and are symmetric.


The distribution shown in a), however, has error that span
a greater range.
Therefore, b) is better estimation than a).
17

Surface Mine Design

Over and Under Estimation

a)

b)

a) Negative mean: A general tendency towards the


underestimation.

b) Positive mean: A general tendency towards the


overestimation.
18

Scatter Diagrams in Estimation

True

Under Estimation at
Low Grade

Estimation

Over Estimation at
High Grade

Estimation

Estimation

Surface Mine Design

Good Estimation

True

True

Good Estimation: Falling closer to diagonal on


which perfect estimates would plot.
19

Scatter Diagrams in Estimation


Under Estimation at
Low Grade

Estimation

Estimation

Surface Mine Design

Over Estimation at
Low Grade

True

True

20

Surface Mine Design

Floating Cone Algorithm

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Basic Procedure

Surface Mine Design

Top
-1

+1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

+3

-1

-1

Bottom
Left

Right

-1
-1

-1
-1

-1

-1

Heuristic procedure
2

Floating Cone Steps

Surface Mine Design

The cone is floated from left to right along the top row of blocks in the section. If
there is a positive block it is removed.
Move to the second row. Start from the left and search for the first positive block. If
the sum of all blocks falling within the cone is positive, the blocks are removed
(mined).
Follow the floating cone process moving from left to right and top to bottom of the
section until no more blocks can be removed. Then go back to the top again and repeat
the process for a second iteration. If during a given iteration no positive blocks can be
mined, stop.
The profitability of the mined area can be found by adding the values of the blocks
that are to be removed.
Overall stripping ration can be determined by dividing the number of positive blocks
by the total number of negative blocks.

Example

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

+1

-2

-2

+4

-2

-2

+7

+1

-3

-1

Ore

Waste

Initial Block Model

Example

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

+1

-2

-2

+4

-2

-2

+7

+1

-3

-1

Ore
Waste
Mined

Step 1

Example

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

+1

-2

-2

+4

-2

-2

+7

+1

-3

-1

Ore
Waste
Mined

Step 2

Example

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

+1

-2

-2

+4

-2

-2

+7

+1

-3

-1

Ore
Waste
Mined

Step 3

Example

Final Pit

Surface Mine Design

-1
-2
+1

-2

-3

Shortcomings
Missing Combinations of Profitable Blocks

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

+10

-3

+10

-1

Ore

Waste

Initial Block Model

Shortcomings
Missing Combinations of Profitable Blocks

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

+10

-3

+10

-1

Ore
Waste
Considered but rejected

Step 1

10

Shortcomings
Missing Combinations of Profitable Blocks

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

+10

-3

+10

-1

Ore
Waste
Considered but rejected

Step 2
There are no blocks to be mined wrong solution

11

Shortcomings
Missing Combinations of Profitable Blocks

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

+10

-3

+10

-1

Ore
Waste
Mined (Correct solution)

Final Pit

-3

Correct solution
12

Shortcomings
Over-mining

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

+5

-2

-2

+5

-1

Ore

Waste

Initial Block Model

13

Shortcomings
Over-mining

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

+5

-2

-2

-1

+5

Ore
Waste
Mined

First block analyzed


The search process was started from bottom to top.
Everything is mined out.
14

Shortcomings
Over-mining

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

+5

-2

-2

-1

Ore
Waste
Mined

+5
Final Pit
-1
-2

-1

-2

+5

Correct solution
15

Shortcomings
Combination of problems

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-4

-1

+5

-4

+5

+3

-1

Ore

Waste

Initial Block Model

16

Shortcomings
Combination of problems

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-4

-1

+5

-4

+5

+3

-1

Ore
Waste
Considered but rejected

First Step

17

Shortcomings
Combination of problems

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-4

-1

+5

-4

+5

+3

-1

Ore
Waste
Considered but rejected

Second Step

18

Shortcomings
Combination of problems

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-4

-1

+5

-4

+5

-1

+3

Ore
Waste
Mined

Wrong Solution
Everything is mined out.

19

Shortcomings
Combination of problems

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-4

-1

+5

-4

+5

+3

-1

Ore
Waste
Mined

Final Pit

-4
+3

Correct Solution
20

Surface Mine Design

Example
Initial Data
% recovery through mill and smelter
Value of recovered copper
Stripping and haulage to dump (level 1)
Mining and transportation to plant level
Haulage cost increase per ton per bench
Processing, smelting and refining
General overhead, administration, etc.
Ultimate Pit Slope

90.00%
$1.00
$0.50
$0.80
$0.10
$1.20
$1.20
1:1

per lb
per ton
per ton
per ton/bench
per ton
per ton

21

Example
Geologic Model

Surface Mine Design

0.00

1.15

0.08

0.05

0.00

0.00

0.00

1.25

1.15

1.13

0.00

1.13

1.15

0.50

0.05

Copper Grades (%)

22

Example
Block Values

Surface Mine Design

P = Price
s = Sales Cost

Ore Block:

c = Processing Cost

BV = ( P s) * g B * y c m

y = Recovery
m = Mining Cost
gB = Block Grade

Waste Block:

BV = m

BV = Block Value
23

Example
Economic Model

Surface Mine Design

-0.50

17.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.60

19.20

17.40

17.04

-0.60

16.94

17.30

-0.70

-0.50

Value per block ($/ton)

24

Example
Economic Model

Surface Mine Design

-0.50

17.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.60

19.20

17.40

17.04

-0.60

16.94

17.30

-0.70

-0.50

Value per block ($/ton)


BV = (1 0) *1.15 / 100* 2000* 0.9 2.4 0.8 = 17.5

25

Example
Economic Model

Surface Mine Design

-0.50

17.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.50

-0.60

19.20

17.40

17.04

-0.60

16.94

17.30

-0.70

-0.50

Value per block ($/ton)


BV ($ / ton) = (1 0) * 0.0 / 100* 2000* 0.9 2.4 0.8 = 3.2
BV ($ / ton) = 0.6

If mined as ore

If mined as waste

26

Example
Economic Model

Surface Mine Design

-1

18

-1

-1

-1

-1

-1

19

17

17

-1

17

17

-1

-1

Value per block ($/ton)


Values rounded to the nearest $

27

Example
Floating Cone Algorithm

-1

18

-1

-1

-1

-1

19

17

17

-1

17

17

-1

-1

Surface Mine Design

-1

1st Increment

28

Example
Floating Cone Algorithm

-1

18

-1

Surface Mine Design

-1

-1

-1

-1

17

17

-1

17

-1

19
17

-1

2nd Increment

29

Example
Floating Cone Algorithm

Surface Mine Design

-1

18
-1

-1

19

-1
17

17

-1
17

-1

-1

-1

17

-1

3rd Increment

30

Example
Floating Cone Algorithm

Surface Mine Design

-1

18
-1

-1
19
17

-1

17

-1

17
3

17

-1

-1

-1
4

-1

4th Increment

31

Example
Floating Cone Algorithm

-1

18

Surface Mine Design

-1
1

-1

-1
2

19

17

-1
2

17

-1
3

17
3

17

-1
4

-1
4

-1

5th Increment

32

Example
Floating Cone Algorithm

-1

18

Surface Mine Design

-1
1

-1

-1
2

19

17

-1
2

17

17
3

17
5

-1
3

-1
4

-1
4

-1
6

6th Increment

33

Example
Floating Cone Algorithm

Surface Mine Design

-1
-1
-1

Ultimate Pit Limit

34

Example
Total Economic Value

Surface Mine Design

-5,000

175,000
-6,000

-5,000

-5,000

-5,000

-5,000

192,000 174,000 170,400


169,400 173,000

Value Per block considering:


Tonnage/block = 10,000 tons

35

Example
Pit Reserves

Surface Mine Design

Bench

Ore tons

Waste tons

S.R.

1
2
3

10,000
30,000
20,000

50,000
10,000
0

5.00
0.33
0.00

150,000
530,400
342,400

Total

60,000

60,000

1.00

1,022,800

36

Surface Mine Design

Manual Pit Design

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Manual Pit Design


Stripping Ratio

Surface Mine Design

S .R.( Breakeven) =

Re cov ered Value ($ / ton) Total Pr oduction Cost ($ / ton)


Stripping Cost ($ / ton)

Surface or Underground Breakeven =

UG Mining Cost ($ / ton ) Surface Mining Cost ($ / ton)


Stripping Cost ($ / ton )

Surface or Underground Breakeven =

$5.04 / ore ton $0.70 / ore ton


= 6.58 : 1
$0.66 / waste ton)

Manual Pit Design


Example

Surface Mine Design

Ore Grade (%Cu)

0.90

0.85

0.75

0.70

0.65

0.50

0.40

Conc. Recovery (%)


Smelt. Recovery (%)
Ref. Recovery (%)

0.900
0.980
0.990

0.900
0.980
0.990

0.900
0.980
0.990

0.900
0.980
0.990

0.900
0.980
0.990

0.900
0.980
0.990

0.900
0.980
0.990

Total Recovery (%)

0.873

0.873

0.873

0.873

0.873

0.873

0.873

15.7

14.8

13.1

12.2

11.3

8.7

7.0

Finance
Mining
Concentration
Smelter
Refining

0.62
0.70
2.68
1.70
1.80

0.62
0.70
2.68
1.48
1.57

0.62
0.70
2.68
1.38
1.36

0.62
0.70
2.68
1.29
1.27

0.62
0.70
2.68
1.21
1.20

0.62
0.70
2.68
1.19
1.16

0.62
0.70
2.68
1.18
1.12

Total cost ($/ton)

7.50

7.05

6.74

6.56

6.41

6.35

6.30

Stripping cost ($/ton)

0.66

0.66

0.66

0.66

0.66

0.66

0.66

Recovered Quantity (lb/ton)


Costs per ton

Breakeven stripping ratio


Copper Price ($/lb)
0.90
0.75
0.70
0.65

BESR =
10.07
6.50
5.31
4.12

9.56
6.19
5.06
3.94

15.7 lbs $0.90 / lb $7.5 / ton of ore


= 10.07
$0.66 / ton of waste
7.65
4.67
3.68
2.69

6.73
3.95
3.03
2.10

5.70
3.13
2.27
1.42

2.29
0.30
-0.36
-1.02

-0.02
-1.61
-2.14
-2.67

Manual Pit Design


Stripping Ratio Grade - Price
S.R. - Ore Grades - Cu Prices
12.00

8.00
Stripping Ratio

Surface Mine Design

10.00

6.00

0.90 $/lb
0.75 $/lb
0.70 $/lb
0.65 $/lb

4.00
2.00
0.00
0.40
-2.00

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

-4.00
% Cu

Manual Pit Design


Hypothetical Cross Section

Surface Mine Design

Topo
X'
X
SR =

X'
Y'
SR =
Y'

X
Y

Orebody
Y

Surface Mine Design

Manual Pit Design


S.R. in Section
First

First

X = 30

X = 10

Y = 5

Y=5

S.R. = 6

S.R. = 2

G = 0.67%

G = 0.48%

Second

Second

X = 39.6

X = 15

Y = 6

Y=3

S.R. = 6.6 (Breakeven)

S.R. = 5

G = 0.70%

G = 0.70%

Current Price = 0.90


$/lb

5 : 1 < 6.6 : 1 OK

Surface Mine Design

Manual Pit Design


Repeat for All Sections

Pit contour
or Final pit

Surface Mine Design

Cutoff Grade Optimization

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design

Factors Influencing The Cutoff


Grades

As the Cutoff Grade increases in a given operation cash flow


also increases

The ultimate adjustment of the dial is influenced by the


available capacities in the mining system

The Cutoff Grade is not only function of economic parameters


but also capacities of the mining system with respect to mining,
milling and the market (refining)

What Is Cutoff Grade


1.

Surface Mine Design

2.
3.
4.
5.

Cutoff Grade is defined as the grade that is normally used to


discriminate between ore and waste within a given deposit
Cutoff Grade is the dial that is used to adjust the cash flow
coming from the mining operations in a given year
The Cutoff Grade policy allows a mining company to fine tune
their operation with respect to a given financial objective
The Cutoff Grade dial also controls how much ore is available
to the mill from a given bench and how much of final product
to be produced in a given period
The overall influence of Cutoff Grade policy on the economics
of an operation is profound
3

Surface Mine Design

Economic Objectives And The


Cutoff Grade

The cash costs related to mining, milling and refining along with
the commodity price determines the lower limit to cutoff in a
given period.

If the financial objective of the company is to maximize


undiscounted profits, the cutoff grade should be lowered all the
way down to process breakeven cutoff grade.

Processing every ton of ore that pays for itself will maximize the
undiscounted profits for the operation.

Surface Mine Design

Economic Objectives And The


Cutoff Grade (Cont.)

If the financial objective of the company is to maximize the


discounted profits that is Net Present Value (NPV), the Cutoff
Grade in a given period has to be adjusted upwards to pay for
the opportunity cost of mining low grade ore now while the
higher grades are still available.

The mining rate, milling rate, the ultimate rate of production for
the commodity being sold, and the production costs determine
how far the cutoff grade has to be adjusted upwards to maximize
the NPV.

Surface Mine Design

Ultimate Pit Cutoff

Defined as the breakeven grade that equates cost of


mining, milling and refining to the value of the block in
terms of recovered metal and the selling price.

Any administrative overhead expense which would stop if


mining were stopped must be included in the cost
calculations.

Overhead costs should be divided between mining and


processing.
6

Surface Mine Design

Ultimate Pit Cutoff

Price (P)
Sales Cost (s)
Processing Cost (c)
Recovery (y)
Mining Cost (m)
Overhead
(Included in c and m )

$400/oz
$5 /oz
$ 10/ ton ore
90 %
$ 1.20/ ton

Surface Mine Design

Ultimate Pit Cutoff


Milling Cost + Mining Cost
gm =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery
$10 + $1.2
gm =
= 0.0315 oz / ton
($400 $5) * 0.9
8

Surface Mine Design

Milling Cutoff

Defined as the breakeven grade that equates cost of milling


and refining to the value of the block in terms of recovered
metal and the selling price.

Any administrative overhead expense which would stop if


mining were stopped must be included in the cost
calculations.

Surface Mine Design

Milling Cutoff
Milling Cost
gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery
$10
gc =
= 0.0281 oz / ton
($400 $5) * 0.9
10

Surface Mine Design

Block Value
Block Grade = gB
if gc < gm < gB then
Block Value = (P-S)* gB * y c m
Else if gB
Block Value = -m

<

gm

<

gc then

11

Surface Mine Design

Block Value
Block Grade = gB
if gc < gB < gm then
Block contains marginal ore.

Marginal ore pays for processing cost


but not for mining cost.

12

Block Value Calculation Example

Surface Mine Design

a)

Ore Block
Block grade = gB = 0.11 oz/ton
gc < gm < gB
0.0281 < 0.0315 < 0.11
Block Value = (P-S)* gB * y c m
Block Value = (400 - 5)*0.11*0.9 - 10 - 1.20
= $27.9/ton of block
13

Surface Mine Design

Block Value Calculation Example


b) Waste Block
Block Grade = gB = 0.01 oz/ton
gB < gc < gm
0.01 < 0.0281 < 0.0315
therefore
Block Value = - $1.20/ton
= Mining Cost
14

Surface Mine Design

Mine Design Parameters For The


Case Study

Price (P)
Sales Cost (s)
Processing Cost (c)
Recovery (y)
Mining Cost (m)
Fixed Costs (fa)
Mining Capacity (M)
Milling Capacity (C)
Capital Costs (CC)
Discount Rate (d)

$600/oz
$5 /oz
$ 19/ ton ore
90 %
$ 1.20/ ton
8.35 M/year
Unlimited
1.05 M
105 M
15%

15

Surface Mine Design

Calculation of Ultimate Pit


Cutoff Grade
Milling Cost + Mining Cost
gm =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery
$19 + $1.2
gm =
= 0.038 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9
16

Surface Mine Design

Calculation of Milling Cutoff


Grade
Milling Cost
gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery
$19
gc =
= 0.035 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9
17

Grade Tonnage Distribution

Surface Mine Design

Grade Interval
0.000
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
0.040
0.045
0.050
0.055
0.060
0.065
0.070
0.075
0.080
0.100

0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
0.040
0.045
0.050
0.055
0.060
0.065
0.070
0.075
0.080
0.100
0.358

KTons
70,000
7,257
6,319
5,591
4,598
4,277
3,465
2,428
2,307
1,747
1,640
1,485
1,227
3,598
9,576

Avg. Interval
Grade
0.0100
0.0225
0.0275
0.0325
0.0375
0.0425
0.0475
0.0525
0.0575
0.0625
0.0675
0.0725
0.0775
0.0900
0.2290

KTons

Grade

89,167

Waste
Cutoff Grade 0.035
Ore

36,348

0.1023
Oz/ton

18

Constant Cutoff Grades.


Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules.
Table 3

Surface Mine Design

Year
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
For 11 to 34
35
TOTAL

Cutoff
Grade
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035

Avg
Grade
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102
0.102

QM

Qc

Qr

3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.4
125.8

1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.00
36.70

96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
96.3
91.7
3365.9

Profits
$M/year
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
31.4
1154.2
NPV $M 218.5
19

Profit

Surface Mine Design

Profits ($M) = (P s ) x Qr Qc x c Qm x m
P
S
Qm
Qc
Qr
c
m

Price
Sales Cost
Total Material Mined
Ore Tonnage Processed By The Mill
Recovered Ounces
Milling Costs ($/ton)
Mining Costs ($/ton)
20

Surface Mine Design

Shortcomings of the traditional


cutoff grades

They are established to satisfy the objective of


maximizing the undiscounted profits from a given
mining operation.

They are constant unless the commodity price and


the costs change during the life of mine AND

They do not consider grade distribution of the


deposit.

21

Traditional

Surface Mine Design

Milling Cost + Depreciati on + Minimum Pr ofit


gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery

$19 + $10 + $3
gc =
= 0.060 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9

22

Surface Mine Design

Nontraditional ????????
Milling Cost + Depreciation
gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery
$19 + $10
gc =
= 0.054 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9

23

Constant Cutoff Grades


Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules
Table 4

Surface Mine Design

Year
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
For 11 to 27
28
TOTAL

Cutoff
Grade
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.054
0.054
0.054
0.054
0.054
0.035
0.035
0.035

Avg
Grade
0.153
0.153
0.153
0.153
0.153
0.141
0.141
0.141
0.141
0.141
0.102
0.102
0.102

Qm

Qc

Qr

6.90
6.90
6.90
6.90
6.90
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
3.60
0.30
125.80

1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
0.09
28.44

144.60
144.60
144.60
144.60
144.60
132.80
132.80
132.80
132.80
132.80
96.30
8.10
3032.10

Profits
$M/year
57.8
57.8
57.8
57.8
57.8
51.9
51.9
51.9
51.9
51.9
33.0
2.8
1112.7
NPV $M 355.7

24

Surface Mine Design

Declining Cutoff Grades


Milling Cost + Depreciation + Fixed Cost
gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery

$19 + $10 + $7.95


gc =
= 0.069 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9

25

Surface Mine Design

Declining Cutoff Grades


Milling Cost + Fixed Cost
gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery
$19 + $7.95
gc =
= 0.050 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9

26

Declining Cutoff Grades

Surface Mine Design

Milling Cost + Depreciation + Minimum Pr of . + Fixed Cost


gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery

$19 + $10 + $3 + $7.95


gc =
= 0.075 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9

27

Surface Mine Design

Declining Cutoff Grades

Milling Cost
gc =
(Pr ice Sales Cost) * Re cov ery

$19
gc =
= 0.035 oz / ton
($600 $5) * 0.9

28

Surface Mine Design

Declining Cutoff Grades


Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules.
Table 5
Year

Cutoff
Grade

Avg
Grade

QM

Qc

Qr

**Profits
$M/year

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
For 11 to 17
18

0.075
0.075
0.075
0.075
0.075
0.069
0.069
0.069
0.069
0.069
0.050
0.050

0.182
0.182
0.182
0.182
0.182
0.169
0.169
0.169
0.169
0.169
0.132
0.132

9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
5.4
1.3

1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
0.26

171.6
171.6
171.6
171.6
171.6
160.0
160.0
160.0
160.0
160.0
124.8
30.5

62.8
62.8
62.8
62.8
62.8
57.1
57.1
57.1
57.1
57.1
39.5
9.6

125.8

18.11

2562.5

885.6
NPV $M 357.7

TOTAL

**Profits ($M)= (P-s) x Qr Qc x c Qm x m f a

29

Surface Mine Design

Cutoff Grade Optimization


Determination Of
Optimum Cutoff Grades
When The Mill
Is Bottleneck

30

Surface Mine Design

Formula for Optimum Cutoff


Grade
c + f + Fi
gc (i) =
(P S ) * y

Where
Fi = d x NPVi /C
f = fa/C
and fa is annual fixed costs
31

Surface Mine Design

Optimum Cutoff Grades


Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules
Table 6
Year

Cutoff
Grade

Avg
Grade

QM

Qc

Qr

**Profits
$M

NPV
$M

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

0.161
0.152
0.142
0.131
0.120
0.107
0.092
0.079
0.065

0.259
0.255
0.250
0.245
0.239
0.232
0.213
0.188
0.163

18.0
17.2
16.5
15.7
14.9
14.1
12.1
9.8
7.6

1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05

245.2
241.0
236.4
231.3
225.7
219.6
200.9
177.9
153.6

95.9
94.4
92.6
90.5
88.1
85.4
76.7
65.9
53.9

413.8
380.0
342.6
301.4
256.1
206.4
152.0
98.1
46.9

125.8

9.45

1931.4

743.4
NPV $M 413.8

TOTAL

**Profits ($M)= (P-s) x Qr Qc x c Qm x m f a


32

Summary

Surface Mine Design

Avg
Grade

Total
Amount
mined
Qm

Total
Amount
processed
Qr

Strip
Ratio

Profits

NPV

$M

$M

Life Undiscounted
% Reduction
INC
CUM
yrs

NPV
% Increase
INC CUM

Traditional

0.102

125.8

36.70

2.43

4453.4

218.5

35

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Heuristic
(Depr)

0.125

125.8

28.44

3.42

1127.4

355.7

28

3.6

3.6

63.0

63.0

Heuristic
(Depr and
Fixed Costs)

0.164

125.8

18.11

5.95

885.6

357.1

18

20.4

23.3

0.3

63.4

Lanes's
Approach

0.235

125.8

9.45

12.31

743.4

413.8

16.0

35.6

15.9

89.0

33

Surface Mine Design

Cutoff Grade Optimization


One Constraint
Cutoff Grade
Optimization Algorithm

34

Surface Mine Design

Steps Of The Algorithm


1.

Start with Grade-Tonnage Curve.

2.

Define: P - Price
C - Milling Capacity
s - Marketing Costs
m - Mining Costs
c - Milling Costs
fa - Fixed Costs
d - Discount Rate
35

Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

3. Determine the cutoff grade gc for year (i).

c + f + Fi
gc (i) =
(P S ) * y

Where
Fi = d x NPVi /C
f = fa/C
and fa is annual fixed costs
36

Surface Mine Design

Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)

4.

For Cutoff Grade gmilling (i):

Determine Ore Tonnage Tc and Grade gc

Determine the Waste Tonnage Tw

Stripping Ratio (sr) = T w/Tc


37

Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

5.

Set
Qc = C
Qc = T c

if Tc > C
if Tc < C

And
Qm = Qc(1+sr)
38

Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

6. Determine the annual profit (Pi) by using the


following equation
Pi =(P-s) x Qc x gc x y Qc x (c + f) Qm x m
P - Price
s - Marketing Costs
Qm - Total material mined
Qc - Ore tonnage processed by the mill
c - Milling Costs ($/ton)
m - Mining Costs ($/ton)
gc - Average Grade (Opt)
y - Recovery
f - Fixed Cost ($/ton)

39

Surface Mine Design

Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)


7. Adjust the Grade-Tonnage Curve of the deposit
for Qc and
Qw = Qm Qc .
8. If Qc < C in year (i) go to step 9
otherwise
Set i = i+1 and go to Step 3.

40

Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

9.

Calculate incremental NPV for each year (i)


N

NPVi =
j =i

Pj
(1 + d )

j i +1

41

Surface Mine Design

Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)


10. If NPV1 for this iteration is not within some tolerance
(say plus-minus $500K ) on the NPV1 of the previous
iteration go to Step 1
otherwise
Stop the cutoff grade gc (i) for years i = 1,
1
N is Optimum Policy.

42

Surface Mine Design

Open Pit Sequencing and


Production Scheduling

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design

Open pit production scheduling


It is a timed sequence of extraction of the ore and waste
within the ultimate pit limits from the initial condition of
the deposit up to a predetermined stage that mat be
referred to as an intermediate of final pit limit.

It sets the relationship between quantity and quality of


the material to be mined, time, geometry of the orebody,
and the available resources.

Declining Stripping Ratio


Method
1

Surface Mine Design

2
3

3
4

4
5

5
6
7

6
7

Stripping
Volume

6
7

Time

Orebody
Waste

Surface Mine Design

Increasing Stripping Ratio


Method

Orebody
Waste

Surface Mine Design

Constant Stripping Ratio


Method

Orebody
Waste

Surface Mine Design

Long Term Production


Scheduling
Long term production scheduling is usually carried out
from the initial condition of the deposit (i.e. initial
topography) to the ultimate pit limit, in periods of at least
one year.
Its purpose is to determine ore reserves, stripping ratios,
future investments, and to conserve and develop owned
resources.
Long term production scheduling takes into account capital
availability, geometry and grade distribution of the orebody,
metallurgical and physical properties of the material, as well
as environmental and legal constraints.
6

Short Term Production


Scheduling

Surface Mine Design

Short term production scheduling is concerned with


schedules on a daily, weekly or monthly basis.
Its main objective is to furnish the requirements of the
processing plant with ore of uniform quality to ensure
operating efficiency.
To accomplish this objective, short term production
scheduling has to comply with restrictions imposed by the
long term plan, equipment availability, blending of different
materials from different sites within the mine, and the
availability of exposed ore.
7

Surface Mine Design

Objectives in Open Pit Mine


Planning
To ensure the tonnage required by the processing plant in order
to operate efficiently and to produce the expected amount of
concentrate per mining period.
To meet the grade specifications at the processing plant within a
given range for each ore parameter that has an effect on the
operating costs or the quality of the final product.

Surface Mine Design

Objectives in Open Pit Mine


Planning (cont.)
To minimize the pre-production stripping volume required to
expose enough ore at the beginning of the mine life in order to
ensure a continuous operation.

To defer waste stripping as long as possible to maximize cash


flow in the early years of the operation.

Surface Mine Design

Objectives in Open Pit Mine


Planning (cont.)
To ensure a feasible schedule in terms of mining practice. This
implies mining exposed material sequentially, keeping
appropriate mining widths, maintaining access to the mining
areas, and maintaining stable pit walls.

To ensure the schedule is compatible with the remaining


periods. In other words, the present schedule must ensure the
feasibility of the future extraction.

10

Objectives in Open Pit Mine


Planning (cont.)

Surface Mine Design

To mine the orebody in such a way that for each year the cost to
produce a given kilogram of metal is at minimum.
To develop an achievable start-up schedule with respect to
manpower training, equipment deployment, infrastructure and
logistical support in order to ensure positive cash flow as
planned.
To have enough exposed ore at the beginning of each
scheduling period to offset any problem that could arise in the
case of underestimation of ore tonnages and grades in the
reserves model.
11

Surface Mine Design

Objectives in Open Pit Mine


Planning (Cont.)
To maximize design pit slope angles in response to adequate
geotechnical investigations, and yet through careful planning
minimize the adverse impacts of any slope instability, should it
occur.
To properly examine the economic merits of alternative ore
production rate and cutoff grade scenarios.
To thoroughly subject the proposed mining strategy, equipment
selection, and mine development plan to what if contingency
planning, before a commitment to proceed is made.
12

Pit Sequence Planning

Surface Mine Design

Orebodies are normally mined in stages, so as to defer waste


stripping and maximize the net present value of the surface
mining venture.
These stages are commonly called sequences, expansions,
phases, working pits, slices, or pushbacks.
They are the basic building block on which more detailed time
period planning is subsequently made.
Phase planning should commence with mining that portion of
the orebody which will yield the maximum cash flow and then
proceed to mine other stages of lessening cash flow.
13

Procedure to obtain the


pushbacks
Generate nested pits by increasing and/or decreasing
Surface Mine Design

the product price.


According to the size of the deposit, pick a number of
phases that allow enough operating room for the
equipment.

14

Surface Mine Design

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks
% Recovery through mill and smelter

90%

Value of recovered copper

$1.10/lb

Stripping and haulage to dump (level 1)

$0.50/ton

Mining and transportation to plant level

$0.80/ton

Haulage costs increase per bench

$0.10/ton

Processing, smelting and refining

$1.20/ton

General overhead, administration, etc. (ore blocks only)

$1.20/ton

Ultimate pit slope

1:1

15

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Block Model showing copper grades in %


Level
1 0.00
2 0.00
3 0.05
4 0.04
5 0.05
6 0.08

0.10
0.22
0.05
0.15
0.08
0.10

0.15
0.08
0.12
0.12
0.15
0.08

0.08
0.25
0.13
0.45
0.12
0.01

0.05
0.15
0.02
0.08
0.30
0.05

0.00
0.13
0.14
0.09
0.21
0.34

0.00
0.10
0.11
0.25
0.09
0.45

0.05
0.13
0.08
0.20
0.79
0.02

0.03
0.45
0.22
0.29
0.10
0.01

0.00
0.20
0.09
0.14
0.45
0.04

0.05
0.20
0.08
0.15
0.32
0.38

0.05
0.32
0.15
0.04
0.23
0.00

0.05
0.10
0.22
0.24
0.01
0.00

0.05
0.15
0.20
0.05
0.01
0.00

0.05
0.24
0.14
0.02
0.01
0.01

0.05
0.21
0.05
0.04
0.01
0.15

16

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)
Economic Model showing block values in $/ton

Surface Mine Design

Original copper price of $1.10/lb


1
2
3
4
5
6

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
1.06
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
1.65
-0.70
5.41
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
2.34
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
0.56
3.03

-0.50 -0.50 -0.50


-0.60 -0.60 5.61
-0.70 -0.70 0.96
1.45 0.46 2.24
-0.90 12.04 -0.90
5.21 -1.00 -1.00

-0.50
0.66
-0.70
-0.80
5.31
-1.00

-0.50
0.66
-0.70
-0.80
2.74
3.82

-0.50
3.04
-0.70
-0.80
0.95
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
0.96
1.25
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
0.56
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
1.45
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
0.86
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

For ore blocks:


BV = ( P s ) * g B * y c m

For waste blocks:


BV = m

17

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

The floating cone algorithm was used to find


the ultimate pit limit
1
2
3
4
5
6

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
1.06
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
1.65
-0.70
5.41
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
2.34
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
0.56
3.03

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
1.45
-0.90
5.21

-0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50


-0.60 5.61 0.66 0.66 3.04
-0.70 0.96 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70
0.46 2.24 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80
12.04 -0.90 5.31 2.74 0.95
-1.00 -1.00 -1.00 3.82 -1.00

-0.50
-0.60
0.96
1.25
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
0.56
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
1.45
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

Pit
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

-0.50
0.86
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

The ore block left at the right cannot be mined due to slope constraints. All ore blocks are mined in the first iteration.
1
2
3
4
5
6

18

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

To find a smaller pit reduce the copper price to 0.60/lb


Economic block model
1
2
3
4
5
6

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
1.36
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
1.16

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
4.93
-1.00

-0.50
1.56
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
1.26
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
0.40

-0.50
0.16
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

For ore blocks:


BV = ( P s ) * g B * y c m

For waste blocks:


BV = m

19

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

The floating cone algorithm was used to find


the limit of the pit at $0.60/lb
1
2
3
4
5
6

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
1.36
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
1.16

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
4.93
-1.00

-0.50
1.56
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
1.26
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
0.40

-0.50
0.16
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

1
2
3
4
5
6

20

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

To find an intermediate pit reduce the copper price to $0.86/lb


Economic Block Model
1
2
3
4
5
6

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
0.11
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
0.57
-0.70
3.47
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
1.04
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
1.56

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
0.37
-0.90
3.27

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
8.63
-1.00

-0.50
3.67
-0.70
0.99
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
3.37
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
1.35
2.18

-0.50
1.65
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
0.22
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
0.42
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

21

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

To find an intermediate pit reduce the copper price to $0.86/lb


Economic Block Model
1
2
3
4
5
6

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
0.11
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
0.57
-0.70
3.47
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
1.04
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
1.56

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
0.37
-0.90
3.27

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
8.63
-1.00

-0.50
3.67
-0.70
0.99
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
3.37
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
1.35
2.18

-0.50
1.65
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
0.22
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
0.42
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-0.90
-1.00

Pit
1
2
3

The ore block left at the right cannot be mined due to slope constraints. All ore blocks are mined in the first iteration.
1
2
3
4
5
6

22

Example of how to obtain the


pushbacks (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

The three pits shown in together


1
2
3
4
5
6

$0.60/lb
$0.86/lb
$1.10/lb

23

Hypothetical Deposit and Pit


Development Sequence
Ultimate Pit

Surface Mine Design

Design Phase Limits

Rock Type I

Rock Type II

D
E

Ore

24

Tonnage Inventory by Phase


Thousands of tonnes

Surface Mine Design

Bench
5100
5050
5000
4950
4900
4850
4800
4750
4700
4650
4600
4550
Total

Phase "A"
Waste
Ore
15,000
32,000
50,000
38,000
15,000
4,000
10,000
3,000
9,000
2,000
8,000

159,000

27,000

Phase "B"
Waste
Ore

2,000
18,000
20,000
15,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000

9,000
9,000
7,000
6,000

65,000

31,000

Phase "C"
Waste
Ore

4,000
15,000
18,000
22,000
16,000
3,000
5,000
8,000
3,000
1,000
95,000

10,000
20,000
22,000
17,000
7,000
76,000
25

Summary by Phase

Surface Mine Design

Thousands of tonnes
Waste above
Waste on
Phase
first ore
ore
Ore
bench
benches
A
150,000
9,000
27,000
B
55,000
10,000
31,000
C
75,000
20,000
76,000
D
128,000
38,000
125,000
E
182,000
49,000
151,000
F
220,000
45,000
130,000
Total
810,000
171,000
540,000
*Assuming an annual milling rate 0f 25,000 tonnes

Ore
Cumulative
Life*
ore life
(years)
(years)
1.08
1.08
1.24
2.32
3.04
5.36
5.00
10.36
6.04
16.40
5.20
21.60
21.60

26

Time (Years)
-10
250

-5

10

15

Phase "D" ore = 125 M tonnes


Phase "D" life = 5 years
It requires 128 M tonnes stripping

25

Earlier ore development


due to the proposed
stripping schedule

Hypothetical Deposit and Pit


Development Sequence

200

100

150

50

100

B
C

31

0
-10

-5

3.04

27

1.08

50

76

1.24

Developed Ore
(Millions of tonnes)

20

Cumulative Stripping
(Millions of tonnes)

Surface Mine Design

1000
500

- Production period
50 M tonnes / year

A proposed stripping
schedule
- Pre-production period
4 yrs. Yr 1
25 M
2-3 50 M
4
75 M
200 M

750
E

500
D
C

250

75
A

50

Minimum waste stripping


required to sustain
ore deliveries

Pre-production
Period

5
10
Time (Years)

15

200

50
25

0
-5

1
50

250

B
A

0
-10

A proposed stripping
schedule
- Pre-production period
4 yrs. Yr 1
25 M
2-3 50 M
4
75 M
200 M
- Production period
50 M tonnes / year

20

25

-10

-5

2 3

4 0

Pre-production
Period

27

-10

Time (Years)
0

-5

10

Earlier ore development


due to the proposed
stripping schedule

Phase "D" ore = 125 M tonnes


Phase "D" life = 5 years
It requires 128 M tonnes stripping

150

Developed Ore
(Millions of tonnes)

D
Cushion = 0.34 years

100

Cushion = 0.80 years

125

Cushion = 0.66 years

50

76

A
31

27

0
3.04
1.24

5.00

750
E

Cumulative Stripping
(Millions of tonnes)

Surface Mine Design

1.08

500

- Production period
50 M tonnes / year
D

250

- Pre-production period
4 yrs. Yr 1
25 M
2-3 50 M
4
75 M
200 M

C
B

75

50
50

0
-10

Minimum waste stripping


required to sustain
ore deliveries

25

-5

1 2 3 40
Pre-production
Period

5
10
Time (Years)

28

Period 2
$72M

Period 1
$81M

Period 1
$50M
Period 8
$9M

Period 3
$63M
Period 4
$61M
Period 7
$43M

Period 5
$37M

Period 6
$32M

Period 2
$37M
Period 7 $52M
Period 8 $19M

($398M)

Period 4
$50M

Period 3 $60M
Period 5 $49M

Period 6
$50M

($366M)
Period 4
$65M

Period 1
$46M

Period 2
$32M

Period 2
$42M
Period 3
$63M
Period 5
$51M

($374M)

Period 3
$71M
Period 7 $43M
Period 8 $16M
Period 6
$48M

Period 1 $42M
Period 7 $57M
Period 8 $11M

Period 4 $51M
Period 5 $57M
Period 6 $52M

($372M)

Long Term Planning and


Sequencing

Surface Mine Design

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen


Colorado School of Mines

Long Term Planning and


Sequencing

Surface Mine Design

Objective is to determine the suitability of the limestone


resource for the subsequent processing by the cement plant
Life of mining and reclamation plans
Equipment Selection
Facility layout and Permitting

Long Term Planning and


Sequencing

Surface Mine Design

Create a geologic model

Define structural domains and stratigraphy


Chemistry
Long and short term variability

Long term reserves and average chemistry


Estimate the block chemical values
Estimate possible raw mix requirements

Quarry layout and operational plan yearly mine


plans
3

Surface Mine Design

Long Term Planning and


Sequencing

Determine mineable resource boundaries


Haul road layout
Define long term reclamation needs

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Cement Quarry:


Case Study
Current production 1.8 million tons of limestone
One 50ft to 60ft bench operation
In pit crushing - 1000 ton/per hour capacity
Expand the capacity to 3.6 million tons by bringing

the second bench into production


50 percent of the production from first 50ft bench
and another 50 percent from the second bench.
%SO 3 is not very good for the limestone coming
from the second bench. Blending of these two
benches are necessary.
5

Midlothian Cement Quarry:


Case Study

Surface Mine Design

Quarry currently operates 10 hours per shift,

5 days per week


1000 ton per hour Krubb In Pit Crusher
2000 ft long main movable belt conveyor
with 500 ft long extension belt
Komatsu 14 and 10 cubic yard loaders

Midlothian Cement Quarry:


Case Study

Surface Mine Design

Determine next 50 years life of mine plans


Sequencing plan to come up with the right

blend limestone that meets the minimum of


%1.3 SO3 requirements
Determine equipment and capital investment
needs for the next 10 years

Surface Mine Design

Quarry Development and


Sequencing

Surface Mine Design

Holnam Quarry Mining Sequence:


First Bench Development

Surface Mine Design

Holnam Quarry Mining Sequence:


Second Bench Development
During the First Three Years

10

Surface Mine Design

Holnam Quarry Mining Sequence:


First and Second Bench Development

11

Surface Mine Design

Holnam Quarry Mining Sequence:


First and Second Bench Development

12

Surface Mine Design

Holnam Quarry Mining Sequence:


First and Second Bench Development

13

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian North Area Quarry


Progress Contours Year1

14

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian North Area Quarry


Progress Contours Year 2

15

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian North Area Quarry


Progress Contours Year 3

16

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian North Area Quarry


Progress Contours Year 4

17

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Block


Model Definition

18

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Block


Model Definition

19

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 790

20

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 780

21

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 770

22

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 760

23

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 750

24

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 750

25

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 730

26

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 720

27

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 700

28

Surface Mine Design

Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One


Year Increments on Elevation 690

29

Equipment Selection
Three Different Options were Evaluated:
Surface Mine Design

One 15 yd3 Caterpillar 992G model loader working

with a 70 ton CAT 775D truck fleet.


One 15 yd3 Caterpillar 992G model loader working
with a 98 ton CAT 777D truck fleet.
One 11 yd3 Caterpillar 990series II model loader
working with a 70 ton CAT 775D truck fleet

30

Surface Mine Design

Loader - Truck Fleet Evaluation


and Cost Analysis Year 1

31

Surface Mine Design

Loader - Truck Fleet Evaluation


and Cost Analysis Year 2

32

Surface Mine Design

Loader - Truck Fleet Evaluation


and Cost Analysis Year 3

33

Surface Mine Design

Loader - Truck Fleet Evaluation &


Cost Analysis Haul Road Profile

34

Loader - Truck Productivity


Calculations
Assumptions
Surface Mine Design

90 % Loader and truck availability resulting

in 81 % fleet availability
92 % Operator efficiency
75 % bucket fill factor
2400 scheduled hrs
0.55 min. loader cycle time
35

Loader - Truck Productivity


Calculations

Surface Mine Design

Assumptions (Cont.)

0.1 min. first bucket dump time


0.7 min. hauler exchange time
2492 lbs/yd3 density
14 ton/pass; 5 passes per truck
2400 hours per year
36

Surface Mine Design

Equipment Productivity & Cost


Estimation

For CAT 992G


Loader - 775D Trucks

37

Option 1: Cat 992G Loader 775D Trucks

Surface Mine Design

The truck cycle time for four different


conditions:

Year 1: 9.67 minutes


Year 2: 11.05 minutes
Year 3: 10.86 minutes
Year 7: 11.04 minutes
38

Surface Mine Design

Option 1: Cat 992G Loader - 775D


Trucks Fleet Productivity in Tons
# of 775D's
1
2
3
4

Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 7
825,332 808,107 801,532 808,669
1,540,565 1,524,899 1,504,316 1,525,959
2,111,530 2,108,190 2,070,839 2,109,657
2,586,695 2,644,575 2,580,165 2,644,575

39

Option 2: Cat 992G Loader 777D Trucks

Surface Mine Design

The truck cycle time for four different


conditions

Year 1: 12.16 minutes


Year 2: 12.63 minutes
Year 3: 12.42 minutes
Year 7: 12.27 minutes
40

Surface Mine Design

Option 2: Cat 992G Loader 777D Trucks


# of 777's
1
2
3
4

Year 1
945,127
1,731,661
2,285,652
2,737,983

Year 2
903,286
1,667,466
2,234,289
2,714,476

Year 3
920,644
1,695,274
2,254,834
2,724,550

Year 7
934,223
1,715,981
2,275,379
2,731,266

41

Surface Mine Design

Operating Cost for the Loader


and Trucks
Model
Operating Cost
CAT 992G
$125/hr
CAT 775 D
$63/hr
CAT 777
$82/hr

42

Surface Mine Design

Operating Cost for the Loader


and Trucks
Model
Operating Cost
CAT 992G
$125/hr
CAT 775 D
$63/hr
CAT 777
$82/hr

43

Surface Mine Design

Loader - Truck Capital


Requirements
Model
Purchase Price
CAT 992G $1,270,000
CAT 775 D
$740,000
CAT 777
$1,060,000
44

Loader - Truck Capital


Requirements

Surface Mine Design

At the start of the production from bench

two, $2.1 M is needed to purchase 1 Cat


992G Loader and 775D truck.
In year 2, additional $1.5M is needed to
purchase 2 more Cat 775D trucks.
For the Cat 992G loader, Cat 777D truck
combination, $2.35M and $2.12M would be
needed at the start and beginning of year 2.
45

Loaders and Shovels

Surface Mine Design

Comparative Analysis
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen
Colorado School of Mines
Source: J. Wiebmer, Caterpillar Incorporated

Surface Mine Design

Hydraulic Shovel Applications

Hard Digging
Poorly shoot material
Selective loading
Wet, jagged floor
Pitching floor
Single face operation
2

Hydraulic Shovel Selection


Considerations

Surface Mine Design

Multiple loading fronts


Fast cycle time (25 to 30

seconds)
Low capital costs
Moderate mobility
Highly productive

Surface Mine Design

Hydraulic Shovel
Favorable Site Conditions

Single loading face


Tight digging materials
Face height equals to stick

length
Some will dig below and
above
Soft floors
4

Surface Mine Design

Hydraulic Shovel
Unfavorable Site Conditions

Requires clean-up support


Excessive tramming
High benches

Surface Mine Design

Wheel Loader Applications

Mobility and versatility


Well blasted material
Low pile profile
Smooth, level floor
No clean-up support equipment
Short mine life
6

Surface Mine Design

Wheel Loader
Selection Considerations

Highly mobile/versatile
High bucket fill factors
Low capital costs
No clean-up support

Surface Mine Design

Wheel Loader
Favorable Site Conditions

Good loading materials


Lower face profile
Multi-face loading

Surface Mine Design

Wheel Loader
Unfavorable Site Conditions
Poor underfooting (tire cost)
Soft floor
Tight load area

Comparison Shovels vs.


Loaders

Surface Mine Design

Hydraulic Shovel Wheel Loader


% Operating Weight
as bucket payload

8-11%

18-21%

Cost/CY of capacity
($1000)

100-120

60-80

Economic life (1000


hours)

30-60

30-60

Operating Cost/ton

0.07 - 0.12

0.07 - 0.12

Market Share (1980)

15%

85%

Market Share (1990)

30%

70%
10

Mobility

Surface Mine Design

Wheel Loader

Hydraulic
Shovel

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Feet Traveled in One Minute

11

Breakout Force

Surface Mine Design

For similar bucket capacities, a hydraulic shovel and a wheel


loader will show approximately the same breakout force.
However, because the difference in bucket shapes, the
shovel can apply twice as much force.
The shovel can apply the force over its reach of the face.

12

Bucket Fill Factors

Surface Mine Design

Hydraulic Front Shovels


Hydraulic backhoes
Caterpillar wheel loaders
Other wheel loaders

80-85%
100%
100-115%
85-95%

13

Power and Fuel

Hydraulic shovels burn less fuel per hour


Surface Mine Design

than wheel loaders.

But considering tons moved per gallon


burned, wheel loaders and hydraulic shovel
compare very favorable to each other.

14

Two-to-Three Minute Rule

Surface Mine Design

A truck does not make money when its tires

are not running.


Truck load times should be in the two to
three minute range.
Loading times are reduced by the use of the
right loading tool, better rock fragmentation,
operator training, and face supervision.
15

Loading Tool Preferences

Surface Mine Design

Region

North & South America

85%

15%

Europe, Africa, Middle East

60%

40%

Australia, Far East

50%

50%

16

Surface Mine Design

Hydraulic Shovel Production


Range
Operating Weight
(Tons)

Production Range
(tons/hour)

140

800 - 1,100

230

1,100 - 1,800

340

1,600 - 2,400

620

3,000 - 4,000

17

Surface Mine Design

Wheel Loader Production


Range
Model

Production Range
(tons/hour)

Cat 994

2,700 - 3,100

Cat 992D

1,300 - 1,700

Cat 988B

700 - 900

Cat 980F

500 - 700

Cat 966F

300 - 500

18

Conclusions

Surface Mine Design

No two pits are the same.


There is a wide array of loading tools to meet
operational needs.

Analysis, not luck, will yield the winner for


your operation
19

Types of Mobile Surface Mining Equipment


Dozers
Scrapers
Trucks
Front-end Loaders
Hydraulic Excavators
Electric Shovels
Draglines
Bucket Wheel Excavators
Blast Hole Drills

Other Bulk Material Handling Systems

Surface and Underground Mining


Belt Conveyors
Rail Haulage

Types of Underground Mining Equipment


Blast Hole Drills
Roofbolters
Slushers
Overshot Loaders
Load-Haul-Dump Units (LHDs)
Trucks
Belt Conveyors
Rail Transportation
Hoisting Systems

Loading & Hauling Equipment


Loading
Rubber Wheel

Front End
Loader

SURFACE
UNDERGROUND
Hauling Combination Loading
Hauling Combination
Trucks

Back Hoe

Crawler

Loader
Scrapers
Bulldozers
Graders

Track
Loader
Hydraulic
Shovel
Cable
Shovel
Drag Line

Bulldozers
Bucket Wheel
Excavator

Front End
Loader

Trucks

Load Haul
Dump

Over Shot
Loaders
Track
Loaders
Hydraulic
Shovel s
Over Shot
Loaders

Back Hoe
Conventional
Rail Cars

Rail
Other

Over Shot
Mine Cars/
Loaders Locomotives

Walking
Drag Line

Pneumatic/
Hydraulic

Pneumatic/
Hydraulic

Dredge

Conveyer

Conveyers
Skips

Slusher

Comparative Equipment Size

Transport Distances

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Dozers
The dozer, or bulldozer is a crawler or wheel driven tractor with a
front mounted blade for digging and pushing material.
It is used to both excavate and transport material over short
distances.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Dozer Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Typical Dozer Production Cycle

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
Land clearance: The dozer can be sized to provide sufficient
power, and with proper operating techniques can move most
obstacles in its path, including boulders, trees, etc. This makes it the
primary tool in clearing land prior to mining. Special blades are
available for this application.
Stripping overburden: Some mine plans utilize scrapers and
dozers for overburden removal. The dozer, in these operations,
moves a portion of the overburden by pushing it over the highwall.
Grading and leveling mining benches: Draglines, electric shovels
and wheel excavators require a flat work surface free of boulders;
dozers are commonly used in this clean-up operation.
(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
Feeding a belt conveyor: The dozer can be effectively employed to
push material into a "belt loader" which in turn feeds a belt
conveyor.
Trapping for loaders: The efficiency of small to medium sized
loading equipment can be improved by using a dozer to rip and
position material to be loaded.
Reclamation: Dozers are a basic tool for leveling and recontouring
mined out land. Special blades and special wheel models are
available for this type of work.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Fait-Allis 41B with single shank ripper leveling dragline spoil piles.

CAT D11, Black Thunder Mine, Wyoming, Spring 2002

CAT D11, Black Thunder Mine, Wyoming, Spring 2002

CAT D11, Black Thunder Mine, Wyoming, Spring 2002

Scrapers
The scraper is a rather unique machine because of its ability to
excavate material in thin horizontal layers, transport the material a
considerable distance, and then discharge it in a spreading action.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Scrapers

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Scraper Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Scrapers

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
Topsoil removal: The scraper is broadly used in those activities
which involve selective removal of horizontal horizons and
transport to storage.
General reclamation: The scraper is applied in the rough leveling
and contouring phase and for replacement of the upper horizons
prior to revegetation.
Ore/Coal removal (with or without ripping): Scrapers are
employed in cases where the seams are thin and other types of
excavating equipment are inefficient.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
Overburden removal (with or without prior ripping): These can
be either initial cuts or prebenching operations for other excavating
equipment, or complete overburden removal.
The latter case requires a well planned circular operational layout to
minimize travel distances and utilize downgrade loading and
dumping.
Typically, operations of this type use dozers for preshaping,
supplementary material transport and push-pull scraper
loading techniques.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Terex S-24B tandem scraper self loading overburden.


(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Trucks
A truck is simply a mobile piece of equipment for hauling material.
It is often an integral part of the material handeling activities in the
mine for either transport of ore from the face to processing or
stockpile, or for transport of overburden to spoil.

Trucks

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Truck Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
These trucks are used exclusively for material transport. The
material can be just about anything but, in mining, the broad
classifications are:
Overburden
Ore/Coal
When trucks are used to haul overburden, the mine normally has an
open pit or area mine plan with dumping off of spoil benches.
Trucks can be used to haul ore/coal to a hopper or stockpile, in
virtually any surface mine plan.
Dumping to stockpile is generally done in shallow lifts.
(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
Bottom dump units, driving over a grizzly, are used to feed a
hopper.
A back-in hopper station is utilized with rear dumps.
In some cases the trucks carrying coal directly to a nearby power
plant will on the return trip transport ash back into the pit for burial.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Large Haul Trucks, Cripple Creek Victor, Colorado, Fall 2002

Large Haul Truck, Cripple Creek Victor, Colorado, Fall 2002

Wabco 3200B, 250 ton, three axel rear dump.


(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Rimpull three axel bottom dump coal hauler.


(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

(World Mining Equipment, September 2002)

(World Mining Equipment, March 2003)

Front-End Loaders (FEL)


The front-end loader is a wheel or crawler mounted tractor with a
front mounted bucket and is utilized in excavating, loading, and
transporting material.
Because of its versatility, the front end loader is found in a wide
variety of mining applications.

FEL Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

(Source: Surface
Mining Equipment,
Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
The wheel loader is a competitive excavator, loader and transporter.
It competes with shovels, dozers and, over short transport distances,
with scrapers and trucks.
Being quite fast, mobile, and versatile, it can be used in a number of
mine applications.
Because the FEL has generally not been considered to have the
digging ability of a shovel in consolidated digging faces, it finds
many of its applications in softer formations, coal/ore and
stockpile work.
The larger sizes are more rugged and powerful, and are proving
themselves in difficult digging.
(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
The primary mine applications are the following:
Loading and/ or transporting topsoil
Loading and/ or transporting coal/ ore from the digging face
Loading and/or transporting coal/ore from stockpile
Loading and/or transporting overburden and waste
In all of the above loading can be into trucks, hoppers, railroad cars,
or belt loaders.
Transport can be for distances up to 1000 feet on the level or grades
up to 12%.
(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

CAT 994D loading a haul truck

Heavy Equipment, John Tipler, 2000

Hydraulic Excavators
Hydraulic shovels, primarily a European development, have
proven themselves on construction projects.

The have now reached a level of


reliability and have increased in
size to the point where units are
common in surface mining
applications.

Digging Profile

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Hydraulic Excavator Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Hydraulic machines are employed in overburden removal, coal/ore


loading or, in the smaller sizes, for utility work generally related to
mine drainage systems.
The hydraulic shovel is primarily an excavating and loading device.
While it can swing and/or propel to transport material short
distances, it is used almost exclusively to load trucks or, in some
cases, hoppers/crushers.
Hoes have similar uses to shovels. However, their below grade
digging capability makes them particularly suited to tasks such as
trenching or excavating under water.
Hoes are utilized in mining when floor conditions warrant keeping
machines off the bottom of the pit.

Typical Hydraulic Shovel Production Cycle

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Typical Hydraulic Hoe Production Cycle

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

CAT 5230 hydraulic excavator loading a haul truck

Heavy Equipment, John Tipler, 2000

Electric Shovels
The shovel is one of the oldest types of excavating equipment.
With time, the machines grew in capacity , steam power was
replaced by gas, then diesel fuel and finally, in the larger units used
in mining today, by electricity.
In recent years, smaller shovels below 5 cubic yards in capacity are
being replaced by front-end loaders and hydraulic machines.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Steam Shovel Mining Virginia Minnesota, circa 1910

Electric Shovels

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Electric Shovel Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
Electric shovels generally have the same applications as hydraulic
shovels although the electric units are considered to be particularly
suited to more severe digging conditions.
They are available in larger sizes and have a proven service record
in multi-shift mining operations. Electric shovels also tend to have
longer range capabilities.
These shovels are applied in benching operations in either
overburden or coal/ore.
Discharge is commonly into trucks but can also be into mobile
hoppers.
The larger models and/or those equipped with long range front ends
may be applied in direct spoiling overburden removal operations.
(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Loading Plans

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

The Bucyrus-Erie 1850-B


Brutus with 90-yard dipper
at Pittsburg and Midway
Coal Mining Company in
1961.
This shovel is currently
maintained by a
preservation group.

Extreme Mining Machines, Keith Haddock, 2001

The last stripping shovel produced was this 105-yard Marion 5900,
sold in 1971 to Amax Coal Companys Leahy Mine in Illinois.

Extreme Mining Machines, Keith Haddock, 2001

Draglines

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Draglines
Through the years, the dragline has remained a unique
excavating tool and has experienced a dramatic growth in
maximum size.
With its long reach and ability to dig to substantial depths below
itself, it has had broad applications on many irrigation
projects and, in more recent years, in surface mining.
The hydraulic hoe has, to some extent, replaced the smaller sized
diesel draglines but the larger diesel and/ or electric machines
retain their popularity.
Draglines, along with the bucket wheel excavators, are the
largest pieces of mobile equipment currently manufactured.

Draglines

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Dragline Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

The worlds largest operating dragline (one of two), the Bucyrus


2570-WS with 160 yard bucket at the Black Thunder Mine, WY.

Extreme Mining Machines, Keith Haddock, 2001

The 100 yard Marion 8800 loading in Kentucky

Extreme Mining Machines, Keith Haddock, 2001

Bucyrus Internationals Big Muskies 220-yard bucket easily


accommodates a high school band. Photo taken in 1969.

Extreme Mining Machines, Keith Haddock, 2001

Bucket Wheel Excavators


Wheel excavators dig with a rotating bucket wheel that discharges
the material onto a belt conveyor.
The material is transported on this conveyor or a series of belt
conveyors until it is discharged from the machine.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Bucket Wheel Excavators


Wheel excavators have been used, in limited numbers, for
continuous excavation of unconsolidated materials starting back in
the mid 1920's.
Interest in the machines has been much greater overseas with the
Germans, in particular, performing extensive application studies and
machine development.
Overall use within the United States has been very limited.

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Bucket Wheel Excavator Powered Functions

(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Applications
There are currently very few bucket wheel excavators in service in
the US. They have been used for:
Overburden excavation with direct spoiling
Overburden excavation with conveyor or truck loading,
prestripping for a large dragline or stripping shovel
Large earthmoving projects
(medium size or small fixed wheels)
Coal excavation with conveyor or truck loading
(medium size or small fixed wheels)
Topsoil removal and Reclamation leveling (small fixed wheels)
(Source: Surface Mining Equipment, Martin, et. al., 1982)

Rhineland Lignite Mine, Germany


www.mining- technology.com

Frderanlagen Magdenburg (FAM) bucket wheel excavator.

World Mining Equipment, September 2002

Loading Equipment

Surface Mine Design

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen


Colorado School of Mines

Surface Mine Design

Excavators

Surface Mine Design

Hydraulic Shovels
Specifications

Surface Mine Design

Excavator Specifications

Surface Mine Design

Digging Envelopes
Front Shovels

Surface Mine Design

Curl and Crowd Forces


Front Shovels

Surface Mine Design

Digging Envelopes
Excavators

Surface Mine Design

Excavators Bucket

Surface Mine Design

Loaders

Surface Mine Design

Breakout Force
Loaders

10

Surface Mine Design

Breakout Force from Rackback


Loaders

11

Surface Mine Design

Carry Position
Loaders

12

Surface Mine Design

900 Series II Dimensions


Loaders

13

Surface Mine Design

900 Series II Dimensions


Loaders

14

Surface Mine Design

Specifications
Loaders

15

Surface Mine Design

Specifications
Loaders

16

Surface Mine Design

Travel Time Loaded


Loaders

17

Surface Mine Design

Travel Time Empty


Loaders

18

Surface Mine Design

Excavator Production
Calculations
A standard formula for cyclic excavators can be
employed:
O = B x BF x D x HS x J x A x 3,600 seconds
(1+S)
C
hour
Bucket Load
Buckets/Period

19

Surface Mine Design

Bucket Load
B x BF x D/(1 + S) < Recommended
Operating Capacity
With wheel loaders:
50% of full turn static tipping load for
a specific bucket type
With front shovels:
Maximum load
20

Bucket Load

Surface Mine Design

Bucket

weight depends on size, duty and


ground engaging tools
Bucket size depends on reach
Bucket size (B) based on 2:1 heap

Bucket fill (BF) decreases with increasing


material consolidation

21

Surface Mine Design

Wheel Loader Bucket Fill


Factors

(CAT)
22

Surface Mine Design

Weight of Materials

(CAT)

23

Bucket Load

Surface Mine Design

% Swell increases and load factor decreases

with degree of consolidation


In place density (D) important and should be
a measured number

Loose density (D/(1 + S)) important and


should be a measures number

24

Buckets/Period

Average
Surface Mine Design

cycle time (C) based on standard


cycle time adjusted for:

Material
Material fragmentation
Material size distribution
Pile configuration

25

Buckets/Period

Average
Surface Mine Design

cycle time (C) based on standard


cycle time adjusted for:

Consistency of operation
Swing angle (Shovels)
Travel distance (Loaders)
Operator ability
26

Wheel Loader Cycle Time

Surface Mine Design

Average cycle time for truck loading


increases with machine size
Loader Size (cy)
1.7-4.5
5.0-7.5
7.5-11
15-21

Cycle time (min)


.45-.50
.50-.55
.55-.60
.60-.70
27

Cycle Time

Surface Mine Design

Hours scheduled (HS) usually a given, based

on management preferences and required


output
Longer shifts appear to be trend to minimize
start-up, shut-down impact

28

Cycle Time

Surface Mine Design

Job factor (J) depends on:


Truck assignment
Management issues
Job layout (Blending, etc.)

29

Cycle Time

Surface Mine Design

Mechanical availability (A) depends on:


Material
Management/suppliers
Age of machine
Schedule

30

Loading Methods

Surface Mine Design

Loading method impacts cycle time and job factor


Wheel loaders
Y pattern used with machine digging point left to right
Truck spotting location important
With a limited truck fleet and excess loader capacity,
staggered and chain loading can be utilized

31

Surface Mine Design

Loading Methods

32

Surface Mine Design

Loading Methods

(Mining Magazine)

33

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Double Back-Up
Options include
Double back-up
Single back-up
Drive-by
Modified drive-by

34

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Double Back-Up

Trucks loaded on both sides


Average swing angle reduces
Clean-up allowed on one side while loading

continues
Moves required as shovel penetrates bank

35

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Double Back-Up

36

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Double Back-Up
Requires
balance of
move time
versus
cycle time

(Oslund and Russell)

37

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Single Back-Up

Truck loaded on one side


Larger swing angle
Potential clean-up delays
Potential spotting delays

depending on

excavator first cycle

38

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Single Back-Up

39

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Drive-By

Used with tractor trailers


Large swing angles
Potential clean-up delays
Minimal amount of shovel moves
Blending problems

40

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Drive-By

41

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Modified Drive-By

Truck backs in to reduce swing angle


Potential clean-up delays
Minimal amount of shovel moves
Blending problems
Depth of cut effects cycle time and

move

time

42

Surface Mine Design

Shovels:
Modified Drive-By

43

Surface Mine Design

Modified Drive-By:
Optimum Width

44

Production Estimating of Material


Movement With Earth Moving Equipment
There are five factors which need to be considered in preparing a
production estimate of earthmoving equipment for any particular job.

These factors include:


1. Earthmoving Cycle Components
2. Job Efficiency Factors
3. Material Weights & Swell Factors
4. Vehicle Payloads
5. Selection of Equipment

1. Earthmoving Cycle Components


The productivity cycle of any earthmoving job may be separated
into six components:
1. load,
2. haul or push,
3. dump,
4. return,
5. spot,
6. and delay.
Each of these components is responsible for a certain percentage of the
total cycle time.
The factors affecting these components will determine the time each
component will require.

Load Factors

Size and type of loading machine


Type & condition of material to be loaded
Capacity of unit
Skill of the loading operator

Haul/Push Factors

Performance ability of unit


Hauling distance
Haul road condition
Grades
Miscellaneous factors affecting haul speed

Dump Factors

Destination of material -Hopper, Over Bank, Fill, Stockpile, etc.


Condition of dump area
Type & maneuverability of hauling unit
Type & condition of material

Return Factors

Performance ability of unit


Return distance
Haul road condition
Grades
Miscellaneous factors affecting return speed

Spot Factors

Maneuverability of unit
Maneuver area available
Type of loading machine
Location of loading equipment

Delay Factors

Time spent waiting on loading unit or pusher


Time spent waiting to dump at crusher

2. Job Efficiency Factors


An estimate must indicate sustained, or average earthmoving production
over a long period of time.
Overly optimistic hourly production estimates will result in failure to
maintain forecasted production, and an insufficient number of units
assigned to the job.
It is necessary to allow for the unavoidable delays encountered on all
operations such as night operating, shovel moving, blasting, weather,
traffic, shutdowns, or for factors such as management and supervision
efficiency, operator experience, proper balance of auxiliary equipment
such as tamping roller, pusher or spreader bulldozers, proper crusher
capacity, etc.

2. Job Efficiency Factors


The maximum productivity of an earthmover should be derated to meet
actual conditions. Typical deration factors are found in the following
table:

3. Material Weights & Swell Factors


The weight of material is most often expressed in pounds per cubic yard.
Undisturbed or in place material is called
a bank cubic yard (BCY).
Material in a loose, broken, or blasted state is called
a loose cubic yard (LCY).

3. Material Weights & Swell Factors


The relationship between bank and loose cubic yards is established by
the swell factor or percent swell.
For example, the percent swell of shale is 33% indicating that one
bank cubic yard of shale will swell to 1.33 cubic yards in the loose
state.
Shale weighs 2800 pounds per bank cubic yard. At a swell factor of
0.75 (inverse of 1.33) the weight of one loose cubic yard of shale is
2100 pounds (2800 pounds * 0.75).

Note: Earthfill projects employ mechanical means such as rolling,


tamping and adding water to compress the deposited loose cubic yard
back to the state it was in the bank. This compaction may reduce the
volume of the bank cubic yard by as much as 15%.

4. Vehicle Payloads
The rated payload of hauling units is given on the specification sheets in
pounds, struck (water level) capacities and SAE capacities.
For haulers the SAE heaped capacity is for a load at a 2: 1 slope. For
scrapers the SAE heaped capacity is for a load at a 1: 1 slope.
For estimating purposes, the payload in pounds should not be exceeded.

Vehicle Payloads Should Not Be Exceeded

4. Vehicle Payloads
Loaders, scrapers and haulers all carry material in the loose condition.
To assure adequate volumetric capacity, the pounds payload should be
divided by the weight per loose cubic yard and compared to the heaped
capacity as shown below:

5. Selection of Equipment
After the estimator has examined the job requirements and operating
conditions and decided to investigate earthmoving equipment, a tentative
equipment selection will be made.
The final decision will, of course, depend on which method offers the
lowest cost per yard or ton.
In some cases, methods such as draglines, belt conveyors, etc. will also
be considered.

Example
Rock density: 11 cubic feet per short ton
Swell factor: 1.6
Shovel
Bucket capacity:
18.8 cubic yards
Digging cycle time: 30 seconds per pass
Bucket fill factor: 0.92
Truck
Load capacity:

62 cubic yards struck


88 cubic yards at 2:1 SAE
140 tons payload capacity

a) Calculate the number of passes to load the truck.


b) Calculate the total time required to load a truck.

Surface Mine Design

Loading and Hauling


Fleet Productivity

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen


Source : Hrebar Lafarge 2000 Presentation

Truck Selection

Surface Mine Design

Number and type of trucks selected should

be based on overall system economics


Lowest cost fleet selected considering
operating and capital coats

Truck Selection

Surface Mine Design

Production requirement and operating

schedule
Material characteristics

Density in place and loose, swell


General size distribution, particularly maximum
and minimum sizes and percentage of total
Hardness and texture
Ease of handling
3

Truck Selection
Physical and climatic conditions
Surface Mine Design

Effect of altitude on engine efficiency


Effect of ambient temperature on engine cooling, tire

performance, and use of lubricants


Effect of rainfall, frost, snow, fog, etc. on road conditions
and travel

Haul road characteristics

Length, grade, and surface

condition of

segment

Truck Selection

Surface Mine Design

Loading

Space and ground conditions at loading point


Type and size of loading equipment
Total availability of loading equipment

Dumping

Dumping arrangements: rear dump into hopper, drive


over hopper, edge of spoil, windrow, etc.
Space and ground condition at dump point
Total availability of down stream equipment

Truck Selection:
Rear Dump

Surface Mine Design

High horsepower to weight ratio


Deep pits, high grades, maneuverability required

high impact and rough in pit conditions.


Can be used with any type of material ( e.g.,
blocky, free flowing, etc. )
Used for dumping into hoppers or over bank or fill
Economic distance limited

Surface Mine Design

Truck Selection:
Bottom Dump

Low HP/weight ratio


Free flowing material
Dumping over hopper or in windrow
Operational advantages: Dump on the move,

More favorable tire and axle loading, high


speed hauling on level hauls
Moderate grade and long distance hauls
7

Production Calculations

Surface Mine Design

The prime mover delivers a force that

propels the haulage vehicle plus the load


The force the drive wheels deliver to the
ground is referred to as rimpull
This force is a function of: the torque
developed by the engine, the ratio of the
gears, and the size of the wheels
8

Production Calculations

Surface Mine Design

Maximum velocity is reached when rimpull


is equal to resisting forces of gravity, rolling
resistance. etc.
Horsepower x 375 x Efficiency
Available Rimpull =
Speed in MPH

Surface Mine Design

Rimpull vs. Velocity

10

Rolling Resistance

Surface Mine Design

Measure of the force required to overcome internal

bearing friction and the retarding effect between the


tires and the ground (i.e., tire penetration and tire
flexing).
Expressed in terms of lb/ton vehicle weight or %
vehicle weight
Haul Road Resistance can be estimated by:
RR = 2%+1.5% per inch of tire penetration

11

Surface Mine Design

Rolling Resistance Factors


TYPICAL ROLLING RESISTANCE FACTORS
Various tire sizes and inflation pressures will greatly reduce or increase the rolling resistance. The
values in this table are approximate, particularly for the track and track+ tire machines. These values
can be used for estimating purposes when specific performance information on particular equipment
and given soil conditions is not available See Mining and Earthmoving Section for more detail:
ROLLING RESISTANCE, PERCENT`
Tires
Track
Track
UNDERFOOTING
Bias
Radial
**
+Tires
A very hard, smooth roadway, concrete, cold asphalt
or dirt surface, no penetration or flexing
1.5%*
1.2%
0%
1.0%
A hard; smooth, stabilized surfaced roadway
without penetration under load; watered; maintained 2.0%
1.7%
0%
1.2%
A firm, smooth, rolling roadway with dirt or light
surfacing, flexing slightly under load or undulating,
maintained fairly regularly, watered
3.0%
2.5%
0%
1.8%
A dirt roadway, rutted or flexing under load; little
maintenance, no water, 25 mm (1) tire penetration
or flexing
4.0%
4.0%
0%
2.4%
A dirt roadway; rutted or flexing under load; little
maintenance, no water, 50 mm (2) tire penetration
or flexing
5.0%
5.0%
0%
3.0%
Rutted dirt roadway, soft under travel, no
maintenance, no stabilization 100 mm (4) tire
penetration or flexing
8.0%
8.0%
0%
4.8%
Loose sand or gravel
10.0% 10:0%
2%
7.0%
Rutted dirt roadway, soft under travel, no
maintenance, no stabilization, 200 mm (8) tire
penetration and flexing
14.0% 14.0%
5%
10:0%
Very soft, muddy, rutted roadway, 300 mm (12)
tire penetration, no flexing
20.0% 20.0%
8%
15%
*Percent of combined machine weight.
**Assumes drag load has been subtracted. to give Drawbar Pull for good to moderate conditions.
Some resistance added for soft conditions.
(CAT)

12

Grade Resistance
Force required to overcome gravity when moving
Surface Mine Design

vehicle uphill. Expressed in % vehicle weight (adds


power to vehicle downhill).

Percent Grade = Vertical rise or drop (ft) x 100


Horizontal Distance (ft)
e.g., 60 ft rise in 1,000 ft, Grade = 60/ 1,000 x 100 = 6%
Horizontal Distance =
(Horizontal distance2 + vertical distance2)1/2
e.g., (1,0002 +602)1/2 = 1,001.8 ft

13

Weights and Traction


Weights: determines the force required to propel
vehicle.
Surface Mine Design

Function of vehicle weight, rated capacity (CY), and


density of material hauled, number of passes of
excavator

Traction: force deliverable can be limited by


traction conditions

Usable rimpull is a function of road surface and weight


on the drive wheels
Usable Rimpull =
Coefficient of Traction x Weight on Drive Wheels
14

Surface Mine Design

Coefficient of Traction Factors

(CAT)

15

Surface Mine Design

Altitude Deration

(CAT)
16

Speed Limits

Speed Limits: limits on curves, in pit, and on


Surface Mine Design

main haul roads

Curves based on radius and super elevation


In pit, ramp, and main haul roads, the speed limit
depends on haul road width and conditions

17

Acceleration, Deceleration,
Operator

Surface Mine Design

Speeds obtained from performance curves indicate

maximum velocity under optimum conditions on a


given profile.
These speeds must be corrected for acceleration,
deceleration, and operator performance to yield
reasonable haul and return times.

F=Ma Simulation utilized to account for acceleration and

deceleration
Time studies indicate that simulated haul times are less
than actual haul times
18

Tires

Surface Mine Design

Limit capability of machine to perform by

limiting load and speed


Ton-mile-per-hour ratings should not be
exceeded and depend on:

Weight (Flex/revolution)
Speed (Flexes/period)
Ambient Temperature
Road Surface Temperature
19

Tires
TMPH = Average Tire Load x Average Speed for Shift

Surface Mine Design

Average Tire Load = Empty Tire Load + Loaded Tire Load (tons)
2
Average Speed = Round Trip (mi) x Trips/Shift
Total Hours (hr)
Limits by tire type and limits may also include maximum
speed
20

Surface Mine Design

Ton-MPH Data

(CAT)
21

Estimating Cycle Time

Surface Mine Design

Limiting factors are considered in developing an


estimate of the cycle time. The cycle time consists
of variable or travel time (haul and return time) plus
the fixed time (load, dump, and spot times).

Travel time (haul and return times) is a function of


payload, vehicle weight, HP/weight ratio, haul road
segment lengths, rolling and grade resistance, speed
limits, etc.

22

Estimating Cycle Time

Surface Mine Design

Loading time is a function bucket size, fill factor,

excavator cycle time, loose material density, and


truck capacity
Other fixed times depend on loading method and
dump configuration

Spot and maneuver in loading area (typically .6-.8 min)


Dumping (typically 1-1.2 min)

Unit production calculated considering truck


payload, truck cycle time, hours per shift, and
operating efficiency
23

Unit Production
Unit Production (Tons/shift)
Surface Mine Design

Truck payload / Truck cycle time x Operating

efficiency x Hours/shift
Units required are a function of total shift tonnage
requirements and unit production and mechanical
availability

Units Required Operating


Tons required/shift / Unit truck production/shift
(Usually rounded up)
24

Unit Production

Units Required Purchased


Surface Mine Design

Units Required Operating (Not rounded) /


Mechanical availability

25

Match Factor and System

Surface Mine Design

Production of the excavator truck system


dependent on the number of trucks assigned
to the excavator

26

Match Factor and System


Allocations based on at least two approaches:

Number of trucks = Truck cycle time / Load time


Surface Mine Design

(excluding first pass)


This calculation approach reduces excavator delays

Number of trucks =
Truck cycle time
Load time (excluding first pass) + Truck exchange time

27

Match Factor Approach


Match factor approach reduces truck delays
Surface Mine Design

compared to first method. For example:


Loader cycle tim e
N o . of passes
Effective loading tim e (7-1)x.5
Truck spot tim e (exchange tim e)
H aul, dump and return
Truck cycle tim e
N o . T ru c k s ( 1 7 . 0 1 / 3 . 0 0 )
N o . T ru c k s ( 1 7 . 0 1 / ( 3 . 0 0 + 1 . 3 0 ) )

3
1
12
17

. 5 m in
7
.0 0 m i n
.3 0 m i n
.7 1 m in
.0 1 m in
5.67
3.96

28

System Production

Surface Mine Design

System production must consider number of trucks,

unit production and excavator availability.


System production

Number of truck/shift x Unit production (Tons/shift)


x Excavator availability

Complexity of calculations and variability of times


leads to use of fleet production simulators such as
FPC and TALPAC
29

Surface Mine Design

The End

30

Surface Mine Design

TRUCK SELECTION AND


PRODUCTION CALCULATIONS

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Wheel Loader Production


Calculations

Surface Mine Design

Example:
Calculate the output in tons/hr of a 990 Wheel
Loader with a 11cy bucket with .55 min. cycle time
and 95% bucket fill factor loading material with
3100 lbs. per LCY.
Assume 85% mechanical availability and 83.3% job
factor.

Wheel Loader Production


Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Equation to estimate the production per hour:

O = BC*BF*D*MA*JF*3,600sec
(1+SF)*CT
Where,

hour

O =Production, tons/hr
BC =Bucket Size, CY (Usually heaped at 2:1)
BF =Bucket Fill Factor, %
D =In Place Density, tons/CY
MA=Mechanical Availability, %
JF =Job Factor, %
SF =Material Swell, %100
CT =Average cycle time, seconds
3

Wheel Loader Production


Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Solution:
O = 11*0.95*1.55*0.85*0.833*3,600sec
33sec
= 1252 tons/hr

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations

Surface Mine Design

Example:
CAT775 truck (65ton) is loaded with a 11.0CY 990
loader with 0.55min cycle time with 95% fill factor.
For truck cycle time, use the following table.
Determine the number of trucks needed for the loader and
the total production per hour.
Truck cycle time
Haul

3.8min

Dump

1.0min

Return

1.8min

Spot

0.6min
5

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Tons / cycle = 11CY/cycle * 0.95*3100lb/cy / 2000lb


= 16.2T/cycle
# of cycles/truck = 65T / truck / 1 cycle/16.2T
= 4 cycles
Loading time = (4-1) cycles * 0.55min / cycle = 1.65 min

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Cycle time
Load

1.7min

Haul

3.8min

Dump

1.0min

Return

1.8min

Spot

0.6min

Total Cycle time

8.9min
7

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Number of Trucks/ Loader


No. of Trucks = Truck cycle time / Load time
= 8.9 min / 1.65 min
= 5.4 trucks
(Assume 6 trucks)

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Total Production
Surface Mine Design

Assume 50 min / hour, and 85% availability


65T/cycle*1cycle/8.9min*50min/hr*0.85/unit = 312T/hr
Total Production = No. of trucks * tons/hr unit
= 5.4 trucks * 312T/hr per truck
= 1685 tons/ hr

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations

Surface Mine Design

Example:
A quarry works with CAT769D flat floor trucks (Max
payload 41T, Engine+-450hp) that is loaded by 8cy loader.
The material density is 2800lb/LCY and the quarry is located
at the sea level, sending material at 260tons/ hour to the
crusher.
Calculate truck loading time, productivity, and number or
trucks required.

10

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Example (Cont.):
Loader data:
Capacity: 8cy
Fill factor: 80%
Cycle time: 0.5 min/pass
Mechanical availability: 88%

11

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Example (Cont.):
Truck cycle time data:
Spot time: 0.8 min
Dump time:1.5min
Truck mechanical availability: 85%

12

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Example (Cont.):

Surface Mine Design

Road profile:
Segment

Length (m)

Speed limit
(km/hr)

Grade (%)

Rolling
resistance (%)

122

45

762

20

152

45

Road condition: Firm


13

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Tons / cycle = 8CY/cycle * 0.8*2800lb/cy / 2000lb


= 9T/cycle
# of cycles/truck = 41T / truck / 1 cycle / 9T
= 4.6 cycles (5 cycles)
Loading time = (5-1) cycles * 0.5min / cycle = 2.0 min

14

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Haul Speed:
Surface Mine Design

Segment1
Total Resistance = 4%
Max speed = 42km/h
< Speed limit (45km/hr)

42

15

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Conversion of Max Speed to Average Speed

Weights to HP ratio:
75050kg = 165456lb
165456lb / 450hp = 368lb/hp
Haul load length:
122m = 401ft
Conversion factor = 0.51

Avg speed = 42km/hr*0.51=21.4km/hr


16

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Haul Speed :

Surface Mine Design

Segment2
Total Resistance = 10%
Max speed = 16km/h
< Speed limit (20km/hr)

Conversion factor = 1
Avg speed = 16km/hr
16

17

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Haul Speed :

Surface Mine Design

Segment3
Total Resistance = 4%
Max speed = 42km/h
< Speed limit (45km/hr)

Conversion factor = 0.68


Avg speed
= 42km/hr*0.68=28.6km/hr
42

18

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Haul Time:

Surface Mine Design

Segment1:
0.122km / 21.4km/hr * 60min = 0.34 min
Segment2:
0.762km / 16km/hr * 60min = 2.86 min
Segment3:
0.152km / 28.6km/hr * 60min = 0.32 min
Total Haul Time:
0.34+2.86+0.32 = 3.52 min
19

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Return Speed:

Surface Mine Design

Segment1
Total Resistance = 4%
Max speed = 73km/h
> Speed limit (45km/hr)
So, choose 45km/hr

Avg speed
= 45km/hr*0.68=30.6km/hr
73

20

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Return Speed :

Surface Mine Design

Segment2
Total Resistance = -8%+2% = -6%
Max speed = 69km/h
> Speed limit (20km/h)
6%

Choose 20km/hr

Avg speed = 20*0.95


= 19km/h

69

21

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Return Speed :

Surface Mine Design

Segment3
Total Resistance = 4%
Max speed = 73km/h
> Speed limit (45km/hr)
So, choose 45km/hr

Avg speed
= 45km/hr*0.54=24.3km/hr
73

22

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Return Time:

Surface Mine Design

Segment1:
0.122km / 30.6km/hr * 60min = 0.24 min
Segment2:
0.762km / 19km/hr * 60min = 2.41 min
Segment3:
0.152km / 24.3km/hr * 60min = 0.38 min
Total Return Time:
0.24+2.41+0.38 = 3.02 min
23

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)
Haul and Return Time Summary:

Surface Mine Design

Haul
Segment

Length
(m)

Grade(%)

RR (%)

Total Resistance
(%)

Speed
(km/hr)

Limit
(km/hr)

Conversion

Avg. Speed
(km/hr)

time (min)

122

42

45

0.51

21.42

0.34

762

10

16

20

16

2.86

152

42

45

0.68

28.56

0.32

Segment

Length
(m)

Grade(%)

RR (%)

Total Resistance
(%)

Speed
(km/hr)

Limit
(km/hr)

Conversion

Avg. Speed
(km/hr)

time (min)

122

73

45

0.68

30.6

0.24

762

-8

-6

69

20

0.95

19

2.41

152

73

45

0.54

24.3

0.38

Return

Total time = 3.52min(haul)+3.02(return)=6.54 min


24

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Truck cycle time (min)

Load

2.0 min

Haul

3.5min

Dump

1.5min

Return

3.0min

Spot

0.8min

Total

10.8min
25

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Slip condition check (Segment2):


Available Rimpull
=(Grade resistance + Rolling resistance)
* Gross Vehicle Weight
= (8% + 2%) * (34050kg + 41000kg)
= 10%*75050kg
= 7505kg
26

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Usable Rimpull: Function of road surface and weight


on the drive wheels
Usable Rimpull
= Coefficient of Traction * Weight on Wheel

27

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Typical Coefficient of Traction

28

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Weight of Wheel:
769D: Rear 66.7%, Front 33.3% Distribution
(by CAT Performance Book)
Weight on Rear Tire is
75050kg * 0.667 = 50058kg

Then, Usable Rimpull is


0.6*50058kg*Cos(8%) = 29939kg

29

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

CONDITION CHECK
Usable Rimpull > Available Rimpull
There is no slip condition.

30

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Unit Production
Surface Mine Design

Assuming 50min / hour


Productivity:
41T/cycle*1cycle/10.8min*50min/hr*0.85 = 161T/hr

31

Loader-Truck Production
Calculations (Cont.)

Surface Mine Design

Number of Trucks/ Loader


For maximum productivity: 10.8min / 2.0min = 5.4
(6trucks)
To achieve 260T/hr: 260 / 161 = 1.61 (2 trucks)

32

Fleet Size Determination Using


Binomial Distribution

Surface Mine Design

by

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Example

Surface Mine Design

Consider the following fleet:


One loader, 80% mechanical availability and an
estimated productivity of 9,000 tons per
operating shift.
Three haul trucks, 70 percent mechanical
availability and an estimated productivity 0f
4,000 tons per operating shift.
2

Surface Mine Design

Example
Assume that the fleet is scheduled 100% of the
time and will only be inoperative if either the
loader or all the trucks are down for repairs.

Surface Mine Design

Wrong Assumption
One could incorrectly assume that the average
loader production would be 80% of 9,000 tons per
shift, or 7,200 tons per shift.
However, since the loader production is dependent
on available haul trucks, the truck downtime
distribution must be considered.

Surface Mine Design

Binomial Distribution
n!
p x (1 p) n x
x! (n x)!
This formula gives the fraction of time x units are
available out of a fleet of n units with a given
availability of p.

Binomial Distribution for


Trucks

Surface Mine Design

Availability = 70%
Fleet
Size (n)

Number of Units Available (x)


0

0.30

0.70

0.09

0.42

0.49

0.03

0.19

0.44

0.34

0.01

0.08

0.26

0.41

0.24

0.00

0.03

0.13

0.31

0.36

0.17

0.00

0.01

0.06

0.19

0.32

0.30

2!
0.71 (1 0.7)21 = 0.42
1! (2 1)!

0.12

Fraction of the time


that 1 truck out of a
fleet of 2 will be
operating
6

Fleet Capacity

Surface Mine Design

The fleet capacity can be stated as follows:


The loader operates 80% of the time and during this time,
34% will be at 9,000 tons per shift, 44% will be at 8,000
tons per shift, and 19% will be at only 4,000 tons per shift.
0.80 x 0.34 x 9,000 = 2,448 tons
0.80 x 0.44 x 8,000 = 2,816 tons
0.80 x 0.19 x 4,000 =

608 tons

TOTAL = 5,872 tons

Surface Mine Design

Fleet Capacity
From this example, it can be seen that production from the
loader would be 18% short of the initial estimate of 7,200 tons
per shift that was determined without consideration of the haul
fleet.

Surface Mine Design

Haul Truck Requirement


Determination
Annual target objective

1,800,000 tons

Shifts scheduled

250 shifts

Tonnage requirements per shift

7,200 tons

Average truck productivity

4,000 tons per shift

Need 1.80 operating trucks per shift


3 trucks at 70% availability will average 2.1 shifts

Haul Truck Requirement


Determination

Surface Mine Design

It could be incorrectly assumed that 3 trucks would be


sufficient.
However, if the loading fleet contains only 1 loader , then
20% of the time the haul fleet would be idle waiting for the
loader to be repaired.
It is also known that the loader could not keep up with three
trucks and production would be limited to 9,000 tons per shift,
not the 12,000 tons indicated by the haulage capacity.

10

Surface Mine Design

Haul Truck Requirement


Determination
250 shifts x 0.80 x 0.34 x 9,000 tons =

612,000 tons

250 shifts x 0.80 x 0.44 x 8,000 tons =

704,000 tons

250 shifts x 0.80 x 0.19 x 4,000 tons =

152,000 tons

TOTAL = 1,468,000 tons per year

The solution in this case would be to purchase another loader


or work more shifts.

11

Estimating Owning and Operating


Costs

Surface Mine Design

by

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Hourly owning and operating


cost estimate

Surface Mine Design

Analyst
Date

Machine Designation
Estimated Ownership Period (Years)
Estimated Usage (Hours/Year)
Ownership Usage (Total Hours)

Antonio Peralta
11/7/2005
1
Track-type Tractor
7
1200
8400

2
Wheel Loader
5
1500
7500

Owning Costs
1. a. Delivered Price (including attachments)
b. Less Tire Replacement Cost if Desired
c. Delivered Price Less Tires
2. a. Residual Value - % of original deliverd price
b. Less Residual Value at replacement
3. a. Value to be recovered through work
b. Cost per hour
4. a. Interest rate
b. Interest costs
5. a. Insurance rate
b. Insurance Costs
6. a. Tax rate
b. Property tax
7. Total hourly owning cost

135,000
135,000
35%
47,250
87,750
10.45
16%
10.29
1%
0.64
1%
0.64
22.02

1,200,000
4,000
1,196,000
48%
574,080
621,920
82.92
16%
76.54
1%
4.78
1%
4.78
169.03

Hourly owning and operating


cost estimate

Surface Mine Design

Operating Costs
8. a. Fuel unit price
b. Fuel consumption
c. Fuel cost
9. Lube oils, filters, grease
10. a. Life of tires (Hours)
b. Tires replacement cost
c. Impact factor
d. Abrasiveness factor
e. Z factor
f. Basic factor
g. Under carriage
11. a. Extended use multiplier for repair reserve
b. Basic repair factor for repair service
c. Repair reserve
12. a. Special wear items

2.20
5
11.00
0.46

2.20
4
8.80
0.43
3,500
1.14

0.20
0.20
0.30
6.20
4.34
1.00
4.50
4.50
1.32

1.00
4.00
4.00
0.60

13. Total hourly operating cost

21.62

14.97

14. Maching Owning plus operating

43.64

184.01

15. Operator's hourly wage (include fringes)

30.00

30.00

16. TOTAL OWNING AND OPERATING COST

73.64

214.01

9A. Lube Oils, Filters, Grease

Surface Mine Design

Track-type tractor
Wheel Loader
Unit Price Consumption Cost/Hour Unit Price Consumption Cost/Hour
Engine
Transmission
Final Drives
Hydraulics
Grease
Filters
Total

Total

12A. Special Wear Items

Surface Mine Design

#
1
2
3
4
5
6

Track-type tractor
Cost
Life
$/Hour
105
150
0.70
165
450
0.37
125
500
0.25

Total

1.32

Wheel Loader
Cost
Life
50
165
80
450
70
600

$/Hour
0.30
0.18
0.12

Total

0.60

Surface Mine Design

Drilling

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Drilling Methods
Top hammer drilling
Hydraulic self-contained drills

Surface Mine Design

Pneumatic drills with portable air compressors

Down-the-hole (DTH) drilling


Pneumatically operated carriers with portable air compressors
Hydraulically operated self-contained carriers

Rotary drilling
Drills for rotary crushing
Drills for rotary cutting
2

Surface Mine Design

Surface Drilling Methods and


Applications

Surface Mine Design

Components of Surface Drilling


Methods

Top Hammer Drilling


Soft to hard rock

Surface Mine Design

Diameter from 7/8 to 10


Top hammer drills can be classified according to their size
and principle of operation:
Hydraulic or pneumatic handheld drills
Light hydraulic drills mounted on feeds for mechanized drilling in
different types of boom applications
Pneumatic crawler drills operated by a separate portable air
compressor
Hydraulic crawler or wheel-based drills operated by a powerpack
onboard
5

Principle of Top Hammer Drilling


It can be hydraulic or pneumatic
It combines four functions
Surface Mine Design

Percussion
Feed
Rotation
Flushing

Parameters that affect the penetration rate:


Impact energy, impact frequency, rotation speed, feed force, and
flushing of the hole
6

Surface Mine Design

Relative Penetration Rate as a Function


of Percussion Pressure

Surface Mine Design

The Optimal Adjustment of Drilling


Parameters Means Maximum Penetration

Surface Mine Design

Flushing

Surface Mine Design

Flushing

10

Surface Mine Design

Penetration Rates Between Pneumatic


and Hydraulic Top Hammer Drilling

11

Surface Mine Design

Bench Drilling Rig

12

Bench Drilling Rig

Surface Mine Design

A modern surface crawler drill should fulfill the


following requirements, to make the operation
economical:
High penetration rate
Short cycle times
High quality holes
High availability
Low operating cost
13

Surface Mine Design

Choice of Bit Type

14

Surface Mine Design

Application Range of Tube Drill Steels

15

DTH Drilling
It is more efficient than top hammer drilling
A DTH hammer follows immediately behind the bit
Surface Mine Design

Good drilling accuracy


DTH drills are used in bench drilling of 3 to 6 holes
on benches up to 150 feet
DTH hammer life is dependent on:
Hammer size, operating pressure, rock abrasiveness, and rock
drillability

16

Surface Mine Design

Principle of DTH Drilling

17

Surface Mine Design

A Typical DTH Hammer

18

Surface Mine Design

Features of DTH Hammer

19

Surface Mine Design

Truck Mounted DTH Drill

20

Surface Mine Design

DTH Bit Designs

21

Rotary Drilling
It is used in most major open pit mining operations
Diameter from 4 to 17, depth up to 150 feet
Surface Mine Design

The key elements in rotary drilling are:


Sufficient torque to turn the bit in any strata encountered
Sufficiently high bit loading capability (pulldown force) for optimum
penetration
Sufficient flushing air volume to remove the cuttings during
penetration, as well as to provide cool air to the drill bit bearings
Selection of the proper type of bit for the material being drilled

22

Surface Mine Design

Principle Rotary Drilling

23

Surface Mine Design

Rotary Drills

24

Surface Mine Design

Rotary Drills

25

Surface Mine Design

Principles of Rotation

26

Surface Mine Design

Rotary Power versus Hole Diameter

27

Surface Mine Design

Pull Down versus Hole Diameter

28

Surface Mine Design

Principles of Feed Systems

29

Surface Mine Design

Thrust and Pulldown Force

30

Surface Mine Design

Flushing Air Compressor Size

31

Surface Mine Design

Carrousel Type Pipe Changer

32

Rotary Drilling Accessories

Drill bits
Surface Mine Design

Drill pipes
Shock subs
Stabilizers
Saver subs
Bit subs

33

Surface Mine Design

Rotary Drill Bit Components

34

Rotary Bit Selection Parameters

Surface Mine Design

Type of ground
Tooth or insert spacing
Tooth depth
Soft formations with low
Large: Inserts
compressive strengths and
High
extended chisel
high drillability: shales,
unconsolitaded sands,
shaped
calcites

Cutting action
Mostly gouging and scraping by
skew cone action, with little
chipping and crushing

Medium: Inserts
short or blunt
chisel shaped

Partly by gouging and scraping


but with significant chipping and
crushing action especially at
harder end of type

Hard formations: siliceous


limestones, hard
Close with low intermesh
sandstones, porphyry
copper ores

Low: Inserts
spherical or
conical

Mostly by chipping and crushing


by cutter rolling action

Very hard formations:


taconites, quartzites

Very low: Insert


hemispherical
conical or ovoid

Nearly all excavation by true


rolling action of cutters

Medium Formations: harder


shales, limestone,
sandstones, dolomites

Medium, close

Very close with low


intermesh

35

Surface Mine Design

Bit Selection for Rotary Drilling

36

Surface Mine Design

Insert Shapes for Tricone Bits

37

Surface Mine Design

Penetration Rate versus Bit Load

38

Surface Mine Design

Principles of Rotary Cutting

39

Surface Mine Design

Drilling

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Penetration Rate

Surface Mine Design

W rpm
P = (61 28 log10 Sc)
300
Where:
P = penetration rate (ft/hr)
Sc = uniaxial compressive strength, in thousands of psi
W/F = Weight per inch of bit diameter, in thousands of pounds
rpm = revolutions of drill pipe per minute
Bauer and Calder, 1967 (Surface Mining Handbook)
2

Horse Power

hp = K rpm D

2.5

1.5

Surface Mine Design

Where:
D = bit diameter (in.)
W = weight on the bit in thousands of pounds
K = constant that varies with rock type.
As material strength decreases, the value of K increases. This caters for the
greater teeth penetration experienced in soft rocks. Values vary from 14 x 10-5
for soft rocks down to 4 x 10-5 for high-strength materials.
Surface Mining Handbook
3

Balancing Air Velocity

Um = 264 p

1/ 2

1/ 2

Surface Mine Design

Where:
Um =
2420 fpm for 13 mm (1/2 in.) diameter platelets with a
density of 2.7 g/cc
d = diameter of the chip in inches
p = density of the chip in lb/ft 3

Surface Mining Handbook


4

Surface Mine Design

Bailing Velocities

Surface Mine Design

Bailing Velocities

Surface Mine Design

Air Requirements Chart

Optimal Bit Load


CD
OptimumBitLoad =
5
Surface Mine Design

Where:
C = Rock compressive strength
D = bit diameter in inches

Source: R. Baker, Tamrock


8

Total Work
Total Work (WT ) = W R 2 N T
Surface Mine Design

Where:
W = bit load (lbs)
R = penetration rate (feet/min)
N = bit rotation speed
T = torque (foot lbs)

Source: R. Baker, Tamrock


9

Rotary Horsepower
4.95 D R (W / 1000)1.6
Horse Power (hp) =
C
Surface Mine Design

Where:
hp = rotary horsepower
R = bit rotational speed
D = bit diameter (inches)
W = optimum bit load (lbs)
C = rock compressive strength
Source: R. Baker, Tamrock
10

Maximum Bit RPM


Maximum Bit RPM ( R ) =

hp C
4.95 D (W / 1000)1.6

Surface Mine Design

Where:
hp = rotary horsepower
R = bit rotational speed
D = bit diameter (inches)
W = optimum bit load (lbs)
C = rock compressive strength
Source: R. Baker, Tamrock
11

Volume CFM

0.25D 2
0.25D 2
SF + P

Volume CFM = P
144
144

Surface Mine Design

Where:
P = penetration rate
D = bit diameter (inches)
SF = swell factor (0.6 sedimentary or 0.4 Igneous/metamorphic)

Source: R. Baker, Tamrock


12

Air Velocity
183 CFM
Air Velocity =
D2 d 2
Surface Mine Design

Where:
d = pipe diameter (inches)
D = bit diameter (inches)
CFM = effective compressor volume (CFM)

Source: R. Baker, Tamrock


13

Compressive Strength
Compressive Strength (C ) =

2.18 W R
0.2 (1 / 10000) P D 0.9

Surface Mine Design

Where:
P = average pure penetration rate (feet/hour)
W = average bit load (lbs)
R = average bit rotation
D = bit diameter (inches)

Source: R. Baker, Tamrock


14

Pure Penetration
Pure Penetratio n ( P ) =

2.18 W R
0.2 C D 0.9 (C / 10000)

Surface Mine Design

Where:
P = average pure penetration rate (feet/hour)
W = optimum bit load (lbs)
R = optimum bit rotation speed
D = bit diameter (inches)
C = average compressive strength
Source: R. Baker, Tamrock
15

Explosives
Definitions
Explosive -A chemical mixture that releases gasses and heat at
high velocity, causing very high pressures.
Explosion Thermochemical process in which mixtures of gasses,
solids, or liquids react with almost instantaneous formation of
gaseous pressures and heat release.
Detonation Supersonic explosive reaction which creates a high
pressure shock wave, heat, and gasses.

Theory of Blasting
The rock is affected by a detonating explosive in three principal
stages.
In the first stage, starting from the initiation point, the blasthole
expands by crushing the blasthole walls. This is due to the high
pressure upon detonation.
In the second stage, compressive stress waves emanate in all
directions from the blasthole with a velocity equal to the sonic
wave velocity in the rock. When these compressive stress waves
reflect against a free rock face, they cause tensile stresses in the
rock mass between the blasthole and the free face. If the tensile
strength of the rock is exceeded, the rock breaks in the burden
area, which is the case in a correctly designed blast.

Mechanics of Detonation
Tensile Shock Waves

Compressiv
e Shock
Waves

Mechanics of Detonation
In the third stage, the released
gas volume "enters" the crack
formation under high pressure,
expanding the cracks.
If the distance between the
blasthole and the free face is
correctly calculated, the rock
mass between the blasthole
and the free face will yield and
be thrown forward.

Bench Blast

(Atlas Copco)

History of Explosives Development


1000 -Black Powder
Discovered in China around 1000 A.D.
Mixture of potassium nitrate (saltpeter), sulfur and charcoal.
The combustion of charcoal (C) and sulfur (S) is the fuel, and
oxygen is contained within the nitrate ion (NO3).
Marco Polo brought it to Europe where it was originally used
for military purposes.
The first blasting application was in Hungary in 1627 and by
the end of the 17th century most of the European miners used
black powder to loosen rock.
The first black powder mills were established in America
around the year 1775.

History of Explosives Development


1831-Safety Fuse
William Bickford, an Englishman, patented the Miners Safety
Fuse, in 1831.
Safety fuse gave blasters a safe and reliable means of initiating
black powder.
1846 -Nitroglycerin
In 1846, Ascanio Sobrero, an Italian, discovered nitroglycerin
(C3H5N3O9), but he considered it too unpredictable and
hazardous for anyone to use.

History of Explosives Development


1867 -Blasting Caps
The main problem with nitroglycerin was to get it to shoot
consistently.
Alfred Nobel, a Swede, solved this problem with the invention
of the fulminate of mercury blasting cap in 1867.
Use together with safety fuse, the blasting cap provided an
excellent initiating system for nitroglycerin.

History of Explosives Development


1866 Dynamite
In his efforts to make nitroglycerin safer to handle, Alfred
Nobel in 1866 discovered that Kieselguhr (a diatomaceous
earth) not only absorbed three times its own weight of
nitroglycerin, but also rendered it less sensitive to shock.
After kneading and shaping it into a cartridge, it was wrapped
in paper and the Dynamite was invented.

History of Explosives Development


1894-PETN
The explosive PETN (C5H8N4O12) was discovered in 1894.
It was not widely used until the 1940s and today it is the
primary explosive compound in modern initiators and boosters.
1922-Electric Blasting Caps
In the beginning of the 20th century the electric initiation was
introduced, and by 1922 the first electric delay detonator (with
1 sec. delay) came into practical use.
The introduction of the short delay detonator 10-100
milliseconds) in the late 1940's has had the greatest importance
in the development of modern blasting techniques.

History of Explosives Development


1956 ANFO
In 1956, ANFO (Ammonium Nitrate and Fuel Oil) was
introduced to the U.S. market.
The success of the ANFO in U.S.A. is indisputable, from a
consumption rate of almost nil in 1956, the consumption had
increased to over 1,000,000 tons by 1975, the consumption of
dynamites has, during the same time, declined from 340,000
tons to 135,000 tons.

History of Explosives Development


1960s -Water gels and slurries
In the 1960's, we have seen the development of water gels,
also called slurries.
A slurry explosive is a high density aqueous explosive
containing ammonium nitrate which is an oxidizer.
Water gels contain 10 to 30 percent water and are sensitized by
carbonaceous fuels, TNT, aluminum, or certain organic
compounds like methylamin nitrate.
Both cap sensitive and non-cap sensitive water gel explosives
are available

History of Explosives Development


1970s-Nonel
In the late 1970's we saw new non-electrical initiating systems
like Nonel being developed.
1970s -Emulsions
1970's the development of emulsion explosives.
Emulsion explosives are composed of separate, very small
drops of ammonium nitrate solution and other oxidizers,
densely dispersed in a continuous phase, which is composed of
oil and wax.
The oil/wax mixture, which is the fuel, is in this way given a
very large contact surface to the oxidizer, the ammonium nitrate
solution .

Properties of Explosives
In the ideal conditions of dry blastholes a simple explosive can be
used, while under wet conditions, more sophisticated products are
called for .
The most important characteristics of an explosive are:
velocity of detonation (VOD)
strength
detonation stability
sensitiveness (propagation ability)
density
water resistance
sensitivity
safety in handling
resistance to freezing
oxygen balance
shelf life

Classification of Explosives
The explosives used in civil engineering and mining can nowadays
be classified as:
High explosives
Blasting agents
High explosives are characterized by high velocity of detonation
(VOD), high pressure shock wave, high density and by being
cap sensitive.
Blasting agents are mixtures consisting of a fuel and oxidizer
system, where none of the ingredients are classified as an explosive
and when unconfined cannot be detonated by means of a #8 test
blasting cap (1.0 grams of high explosives). Blasting agents have to
be initiated by a primer. ANFO is a typical blasting agent.

Firing Devices
Firing methods can be divided into two main groups:
Non-electric
Safety Fuse and Blasting Cap
Detonating Cord
Nonel system
Electric
Electronic Blasting Caps

Safety Fuse and Blasting Cap


The safety fuse consists of a black powder core that is tightly
wrapped with coverings of textile and waterproofing materials.
Safety fuse has a steady well controlled burning speed, usually
around 40 seconds per foot.

Safety Fuse and Blasting Cap


To initiate the explosive, a plain detonator has to be attached to the
safety fuse.
Detonators of different strengths expressed as a number are
available, currently #6 or #8 caps.
The #8 detonator contains approximately 1.0 grams of high
explosives, and the #6 about 0.8 grams.

Detonating Cord
Detonating cord consists of a PETN core which is wrapped in
coverings of textiles and waterproofing materials.
Detonating cord may be initiated
with a #6 detonator and
detonates along its entire length
at about 7000 meters/second.
It initiates most explosives.
Does not work well with ANFO
in small to medium sized
blastholes, (incomplete
detonation).

Firing pattern for detonating cord blast.

Electric Blasting Caps


Electric detonators can be divided into three different classes
according to their timing properties:
instantaneous
millisecond delays
half second delays
The millisecond delay detonator has a built-in millisecond delay
element. Delays are usually available in 25 ms delay intervals.

Electric Blasting Caps


Electric detonators may be
connected in series or parallel
depending on the number of
detonators in the round, and
the current available in the
blasting machine.

Parallel series circuit.

Electric Blasting Caps

The testing instruments for blasting


circuits have to be specially designed
for their purpose and be approved by
the authorities concerned.
An Ohm-meter is used to control the
resistance of single electric detonators,
detonators in series and in parallelseries and for the final check before
firing.

Electric Blasting Caps


The series are connected in parallel and subsequently measured.
The resistance of the parallel connection is in accordance with
Kirckhoffs law:
1
1
1
1
=
+
+ ... +
R R1 R 2
Rn

As the difference in resistance between the series must not exceed


5 percent, the resistance of the parallel connection will be:
Resistance/series
R=
Number of series

Example
Assume a blast of 250 V A-detonators with a resistance of 3.6 Ohms each. (The
resistance is always 3.6 Ohms independent of legwire length.) The firing cable
has a resistance of 5 Ohms and a CID 330 V A blasting machine is used.
In accordance with the instructions on the blasting machine, the round may be
connected in 5 parallel series.
Number of detonators in each series: 50.
Resistance per series: 50x3.6=180 Ohms.
Resistance after parallel connection :

Resistance/series 180
R=
=
= 36 Ohms
Number of series
5
Resistance at the firing point is the resistance of the parallel-series connection
plus the resistance of the firing cable.
36 + 5 = 41 Ohms.

Possible errors during measuring:


Resistance too high:
* Larger number of detonators than calculated.
* Sub-division into series wrongly carried out.
* Poor contact ill some connection or detonator .
Resistance too low:
* All detonators are not connected into the circuit.
* Sub-division into series wrongly carried out.
* Some part of the round not connected into the circuit.
Infinite resistance:
* Interruption in series through incomplete connection.
* Faulty detonator (usually torn off legwire).

Electric Blasting Caps


Blasting machines of various
types are used to fire the
rounds.
Shown is the model CI 50
which is designed for firing a
maximum of 50 conventional
detonators.

Nonel system
The NONEL detonator functions as an electric delay detonator, but
the legwires and the fuse head have been replaced by a plastic tube
through which a shock wave is transmitted.
The endsplit of of the shockwave from the plastic tube initiates the
delay element in the detonator.
The 3mm diameter plastic tube is coated on the inside with a thin
layer of reactive material which transmits the shockwave with a
velocity of about 2000 meters per second.

Non-Electric vs. Electric


Tubing

Shell

Closure

Air Space

Non Electric Cap

Fuse
Element

Crimps
Ignition
Plug Charge Fuse
Powder

Bridge
Wire

Priming
Charge

Electric Cap

Base
Charge

Nonel system
A connector with a strength of 1/3 a #8 cap is used to connect and
initiate the detonators.

Nonel system

NONEL connected for bench blasting.

Nonel system
NONEL detonators may also be connected to a detonating cord
using a specially designed clip if noise is not a problem.

Nonel system
A NONEL round may be fired using a plain detonator and safety
fuse, or by using a specially designed NONEL system blasting
machine.

Bench Blasting
Bench blasting is the most common kind of blasting work.
It can be defined as blasting of vertical or nearly vertical blastholes in
one or more rows towards a free surface.
The blastholes can have free breakage of fixed bottom.

Fixed bottom
Free breakage

Bench Blasting
The tensile, compressive and shearing strengths of a rock mass vary with
different kinds of rock and may vary within the same blast.
As the rock's tensile strength has to be exceeded in order to break the
rock, its geological properties will affect its blastability.
Faults and dirt-seams may change the effect of the explosive in the blast.
Faulty rock containing voids, where the gases penetrate without giving
full effect, may be difficult to blast even though the rock may have a
relatively low tensile strength.

Bench Blasting
The requisite specific charge, (kg/m3 ) provides a first-rate measure of
the blastability of the rock.
By using the specific charge as a basis for the calculation, it is possible
to calculate the charge which is suitable for the rock concerned.
The distribution of the explosives in the rock is of the utmost
importance. A closely spaced round with small diameter blastholes gives
much better fragmentation of the rock than a round of widely spaced
large diameter blastholes, provided that the same specific charge is used.

Basic Definitions
Burden -the distance between
the drill hole and the nearest
parallel free face.

Spacing - the distance between


holes along rows that are parallel
to the face.

Stemming -non-explosive
material that is placed in the bore
hole to confine the explosives
(usually placed near the collar of
the hole).

Sub-drilling is the amount of


hole that is drilled below the
intended new bench level.

After Blasting

Partial
Reflected
Wave

Before Blasting

Blasting Theory
Leaves Unfractured Toe

Un-reflected
Compression
Wave

When hole depth equals the bench height masses of rock are often
left at the toe of the bench because of lack of reflected tension
energy from the free face. The solution for this is either sub-drilling
or inclined holes.

Blasting Theory

Inclined holes cause total


reflective tensile waves at
the toe of the bench. This
causes a flat lower bench
and is a more efficient use
of explosives.

Total
Reflected
Tensile
Waves

Vertical Holes vs. Inclined Holes

Vertical Holes

Inclined Holes

Easier to drill
Avoids difficulties in
fractured rock

Commonly drilled between 10 &


15 degrees
Causes more productive
reflected shock wave in toe of
bench

Bench Height Factors


Bench Height is a function of both hole diameter and burden distance.
Zone of optimal fragmentation

Research indicates that


bore hole length should
be approximately 3
times the burden
distance.
-Ash & Smith, Society of
Explosives Engineers, 1976

Burden Spacing Equations

Burden Spacing Equations


Anderson
B = K(d*L)**2

Pearse
B = K*d*(P/T)**2

Ash
B = K*d/12

Fraenkel (meters & mm)


((R*L)**0.3)*(l**0.3)*(d**0.8)
B=
50

B burden distance (inches)


d hole diameter (inches)
L hole length (feet)
T ultimate tensile strength of rock (pounds per square inch)
P stability pressure of explosive (pounds per square inch)
K constants (empirically determined)

Rock characteristics are difficulty to mathematically model since rock


is never really homogeneous.

Burden Spacing Equations


Langefors/Kihlstrm
Bmax

Bmax
d
p
s
c
c
f
S/B

d
p*s
=
33 c * f * S/B

= maximum burden (m)


= diameter in the bottom of the blasthole (mm)
= packing degree (loading density) (kg/liter or g/c3 )
= weight strength of the explosive (ANFO = 1)
= rock constant, 0.3 to 0.5
= c + 0.05 for Bmax between 1.4 and 15.0 meters
= degree of fixation, 1.0 for vertical holes
and 0:95 for holes with inclination 3:1
= ratio of spacing to burden

Terminology

Charge Calculations
The maximum burden in the
bottom of the blasthole depends on:
weight strength of the actual
explosive (s)
charge concentration (lb)
rock constant (c)
constriction of the blasthole (R1)

Table 1a.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN VEHICLE PROXIMITY


WARNING AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEMS
USING GPS AND WIRELESS NETWORKS

Kadri Dagdelen
Fuat Bilgin
Mining Engineering Department
Colorado Shool of MInes

OUTLINE
INTRODUCTION
PREVIOS WORK
CURRENT WORK

MAIN

FUTURE WORK
CONCLUSIONS

10/29/2006

2
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

INTRODUCTION

Surface Mining Safety Research Program

Safety Issues
Truck Proximity Warning
Collision Avoidance

Global Positioning System (GPS)


Wireless Network Technology

10/29/2006

3
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

The Problem We Face


E-Mail Requesting Help
Jim:
You may or may not be aware that at couple of
weeks ago El Abra suffered a fatal accident
when a truck driver backed through the berm.
Shortly after that happened, I was asked by
Dennis Barlett and Hunter White to lead a team
of representatives from North American
operations to make sure that this was the last
accident of this type that we had to suffer. .
..
Thanks,
Ferol

10/29/2006

4
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

CONCEPTUALIZED SYSTEM
Software for dump edge recognition
Trimble GPS
Trimble 900 MHz radios
Introduction to 802.11b

10/29/2006

5
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

MORENCI TEST

PREVIOUS WORK

Field Tests at the Morenci


Copper Mine - Arizona

10/29/2006

6
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

CURRENT WORK
LAFARGE QUARRY IMPLEMENTATION
OptiTrack
Real Time
Design of the System
Hardware Development
Software Development
Robustness of the System

10/29/2006

7
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack SYSTEM

10/29/2006

CURRENT WORK

8
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Description of the System (Infrastructure)


OptiTrack Network at Lafarge
Quarry
GPS Differential Correction Service

GPS
Wireless Communication
Transmitting Truck Position

Data, DTM

Wireless Communication
Between Lafarge Quarry and CSM

GPS data
GPS Differential

DTM
Control Base
10/29/2006

9
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack (Lafarge)

CURRENT WORK

Mobile Clients
Haul Trucks
Manager Trucks
PDAs

Central Points
Repeaters
Trailer

10/29/2006

10
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Mobile Clients

10/29/2006

CURRENT WORK

11
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Haul Trucks

CURRENT WORK

Omni Antenna

Lighting Arrestor
WRLA-1.2/1.8
N-Female N -Female

Barrel Adapter
N-Male N -Male

Wireless PCMCI Card


Cisco LMC 352
Jumper Cable

LMR600

N-Male RPTNC-Female

N-Male N-Male

DC Injector
N-Female
N-Female

GPS Device & Antenna

Amplifier 1wt
WAF2400-1000
N-Female N -Female

GPS Satellites

RS 232

10/29/2006

12
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Central Points

CURRENT WORK

Repeater at Mechanic House

Repeater on the Trailer


10/29/2006

13
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Repeater

10/29/2006

CURRENT WORK

14
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Trailer

CURRENT WORK

10/29/2006

15
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Trailer

CURRENT WORK

10/29/2006

16
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Schematic Representation of OptiTrack Trailer


CURRENT WORK
Point to Point Antenna
WR2400-24M H Pol
N-Female
Coax Cable
LMR600
Directional Antennas N-Male N-Male
WRPA2400 11-AM
V Pol N-Male

Coax Cable
LMR600
N-Male N-Male

Coax Cable
LMR600
N-Male N-Male

Lighting Arrestor
WRLA-1.2/1.8
N-Female N-Female
Power Supplies
Solar Panels

Barrel Adapter
N-Male N-Male

Jumper Cable

LMR600

N-Male RPTNC-Female

N-Male N-Male

Cisco
AP 350

DC Injector
N-Female
N-Female

Amplifier 1wt
WAF2400-1000
N-Female N-Female

RPTNC-male

10/29/2006

17
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack (CSM)

CURRENT WORK

OptiTrack at CSM GPS Laboratory

Server

10/29/2006

18
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Antenna

CURRENT WORK

Point to Point Antenna (Brown Building)

10/29/2006

19
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Schematic Representation of OptiTrack (CSM)


CURRENT WORK

Amplifier 1wt
WAF2400-1000
N-Female N-Female

Antenna on the roof of


Brown Building
RF Coax Cable
N-Male N-Male

Jumper Cable
N-Male
RPTNC -Female
LMR600
N-Male N-Male

Lighting Arrestor
WRLA-1.2/1.8
N-Female N-Female

Cisco
AP 350
RPTNC-male
DC Injector
N-Female
N-Female

Barrel Adapter
N-Male N-Male

10/29/2006

20
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Software

10/29/2006

CURRENT WORK

21
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Future Work
New Mobile Clients
PDAs
Sensors

Radar Implementation

Mobile Adhoc Network


(MANET)
10/29/2006

22
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Description of the System (Ad Hoc)


OptiTrack Network at Lafarge
Quarry
GPS Differential Correction Service

GPS
Data, DTM
Wireless Communication
Between Lafarge Quarry and CSM

GPS data

Wireless Communication
Transmitting Truck Position

GPS Differential

DTM
Control Base
10/29/2006

23
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Broadcast Protocols

Future Work

Existing Protocols
Flooding
Adaptive-SBA
AHBP-EX

OptiTrack Protocols
Naive Bayes
Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost)
10/29/2006

24
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Existing Protocols

10/29/2006

Future Work

25
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Machine Learning Approach

Future Work

Classification

Rebroadcast
Incoming
Packet
Discard

10/29/2006

26
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

OptiTrack Protocols

10/29/2006

Future Work

27
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Simulation Comparison
Simulation Parameter

Value

Simulator

NS-2 (1b7a)

Network Area

350 x 350 meter

Node Tx Distance

100 meter

Data Packet Size

64 bytes payload

Node Max. IFQ Length

50

Simulation Time

100 seconds

Number of Trials

10

Confidence Interval

95 %

Trial

Number of Nodes

40

50

60

70

90

Average Speed (m/sec)

10

15

20

Pkt. Src. Rate (pkts/sec)

10

20

40

60

80

10/29/2006

Future Work

28
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Delivery Ratio of the Protocols


Future Work
Delivery Ratio

100

95

90

Delivery Ratio

85
Adaptive SBA
AHBP-EX
80

Flooding
AdaBoost
Naive Bayes

75

70

65

60
1

Trial

10/29/2006

29
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Number of Retransmitting Nodes


Future Work
Number of Retransmitting Nodes

60

NumberofRetransmittingNodes

50

40

Adaptive SBA
AHBP-EX
30

Flooding
AdaBoost
Naive Bayes

20

10

0
1

Trial

10/29/2006

30
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

End-to-End Delay

Future Work

End-to-End Delay

2,5

End-to-EndDelay

Adaptive SBA
AHBP-EX
1,5

Flooding
AdaBoost
Naive Bayes

0,5

0
1

Trial

10/29/2006

31
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

ADHOC & INFRASTRUCTURE

Future Work

Infrastructure
ADHOC

10/29/2006

32
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Conclusions
1. The tests that are being carried out at CSM as well
as in Lafarge Quarry indicate that OptiTrack soft
ware system can be used as a proximity warning d
evice to avoid collisions between off highway truck
s and the other vehicles as well as to monitor truck
positions with respect to dump edge on a 3-D topo
graphy map.
2. Integration of the developed GPS based system wit
h other systems based on concepts such as RFID, r
adar, and video cameras need to be pursued to hav
e a complete and reliable collision avoidance syste
m.
10/29/2006

33
COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES

Sustainability Issues in Mining


by
Antonio Peralta

Source: Rozgonyi and Ramirez, January 2003

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

What is Sustainable Development?


Sustainable development is:

ECONOMICAL

A concept of needs;
Idea of limitations;
Future oriented paradigm, and;
A process of change.

SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
SOCIAL

ECOLOGICAL

This concept reflects a compromise between the


worlds tripartite aspirations:

ECONOMICAL: Promoting economic betterment


but preserving of options for future generations.

ECOLOGICAL: Protecting, maintaining and


restoring of environmental quality.

SOCIAL: Promoting and improving social and


community stability and values.

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Sustainable Development in Mining

Applying the concepts of sustainable development and


sustainable natural resource management to energy and
mineral resources is not an oxymoron.

Energy and mineral resources are mostly not renewable;


sustaining any given deposit or mine is not possible.
However, SD involves designing, developing and managing
resources in a way that is conducive to long-term wealth
creation. Minerals are a form of natural capital and thus of
endowed wealth.

Therefore, mining projects can serve sustainability objectives


if they are designed and implemented in ways that build viable
long-term capacities, strengthen communities and rehabilitate
damaged ecosystems.

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Global Mining and Mineral Industry Trends

International mergers, and globalization,

Shifts in supply availability and recycling,

Consumer demand (responsibility for the whole life cycle of


the minerals, metals),

Political restructuring,

Economic transformations,

Social and cultural developments,

Public attitudes about mining and minerals,

The new paradigm of sustainable development,

An era of increasing regulations affecting all phases of


activity from exploration and extraction to processing and
products.

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Principal Mining and Environmental Actions


During Each Phase of Mine Development
PHASE IN MINE
PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT

PRINCIPAL MINE PLANNING ACTION

PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT ACTION

Exploration road construction


Exploration

Pre-feasibility study

Rock core drilling


Geochemical analysis
Geostatistical analysis
Orebody evaluation
Initial mine and minerals process planning
Facilities siting
Scheduling
Econometric analysis
Initial technology selection
Plan of operations
Technology selection

Feasibility study

Conceptual to final designs


Costing and cost benefit analysis
Investment brokerage

Environmental assessment
Rehabilitation plan
Exploration permit application

Environmental baseline study


Environmental assessment
Fatal Flaw analysis
Initiation of permitting process
Comprehensive EIA and review
Mitigation planning
Reclamation and closure planning
Conceptual design for closure
Reclamation and closure costing
Closure fund design

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Principal Mining and Environmental Actions


During Each Phase of Mine Development (cont.)
PHASE IN MINE
PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT

PRINCIPAL MINE PLANNING ACTION

PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT ACTION

Construction

Access and haul road development


Site clearing and grubbing
Earth moving and surface water management
Mine dewatering
Utilities installation
Building and infrastructure construction

Installation of pollution control facilities


General environmental management (air,
water, land)
Construction phase reclamation and
closure

Production

Ore extraction
Size reduction
Minerals processing
Smelting and refining
Maintenance and upgrade

General environmental management


Performance assessment/audit
Monitoring
Concurrent reclamation
Final closure design
Partial closure
Partial bond release

Closure

Facilities decommissioning
Dismantling
Decontamination
Burial
Removal
Asset recovery
Recycling

Implementation of closure plan


Site cleanup
Final reclamation
Final impact assessment
Post closure planning

Post closure

Treatment
Maintenance
Monitoring
Final bond release

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Elements of Environmental Planning

A). INITIAL PROJECT EVALUATION


B). THE STRATEGIC PLAN
C). THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING TEAM

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Environmental Planning Procedures (EPP)


A). INITIAL PROJECT EVALUATION:
1.

Prepare a detailed outline of the proposed action.

2.

Identify permit requirements.

3.

Identify major environmental concerns.

4.

Evaluate the opportunity for and likelihood of public participation in the


decision making process.

5.

Consider the amount and effect of delay possibly resulting from public
participation during each stage of the project.

6.

Evaluate the organization and effectiveness of local citizens groups.

7.

Determine the attitudes and experiences of governmental agencies.

8.

Consider previous industry experience in the area.

9.

Consider recent experience of other companies.

10.

Identify possible local consultants and evaluate their ability and


experience.

11.

Consider having a local consultant check the conclusions of the initial


evaluation.

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Environmental Planning Procedures (EPP)


(cont.)
B). THE STRATEGIC PLAN:
1.

Outline of technical information needed to obtain permits and to address


legitimate environmental, land use and socio-economic concerns.
Permitting process is quite long and complex.

2.

Categorically assign responsibilities for the acquisition of the technical


information and hire necessary consultants.

3.

Prepare a schedule for obtaining information and data and for submitting
permit applications to the appropriate agencies.

4.

Select local legal, technical and public relations consultants.

5.

Avoid hostile confrontations with environmental groups.

6.

Develop a consistent program for the generation of credible factual


information.

7.

Perform risk assessment.

8.

Perform cost analysis.

9.

Prepare mine reclamation plan.

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Environmental Planning Procedures (EPP)


(cont.)
C). THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING TEAM
The team shall be multidisciplinary:
Mining engineers
Metallurgical engineers
Biologists
Environmentalists
Toxicologists
etc.

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Risk Assessment
1.

Data collection and hazard evaluation.

2.

Toxicity assessment.

3.

Exposure assessment.

4.

Risk characterization.
a). Non carcinogenic risks.
b). Carcinogenic risks.

5.

Risk assessment / management by considering:


a). What types of problems or failures could occur, and
what is the probability that each one will occur?
b). What types of environmental impacts could result?
c). What types of compliance-related retrofits or
remediation methods could be required?
d). What are the possible fines or remediation costs?

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Cost Analysis
By considering:

Capital costs

Operating costs

Closure costs

Potential costs for retrofits associated with


regulatory compliance

Potential cost for remediation

Life-cycle environmental costs

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Mine Reclamation
i.

Surface and groundwater


management

ii.

Mine waste management

iii.

Tailings management

iv.

Cyanide heap and vat leach systems

v.

Acid Mine Drainage Control

vi.

Landform reclamation

vii.

Revegetation

viii. Site stability


ix.

Subsurface stabilization

x.

Erosion prevention

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Mine Reclamation
i.

Surface and groundwater


management

ii.

Mine waste management

iii.

Tailings management

iv.

Cyanide heap and vat leach systems

v.

Acid Mine Drainage Control

vi.

Landform reclamation

vii.

Revegetation

viii. Site stability


ix.

Subsurface stabilization

x.

Erosion prevention

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Location of the McLaughlin Mine in California

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Facilities map of the McLaughlin Mine

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Mine waste management


M

1)

2)

c
L
a
u
g
h

Early stage for waste disposal & AMD control facilities

3)

Advance of the waste disposal works

4)

l
i
n

Final limit of the waste dump

Erosion control by revegetating is started

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Mine waste management (cont.)


M

5)

05/04/ 92

6)

05/04/ 93

c
L
a
u
g
Advance on the erosion control & and pit backfilling

7) 05/10/ 93

East waste dump is completely covered

8) 06/14/ 98

l
i
n

South pit is backfilled & west dump is almost covered

Waste dumps encapsulation is finished

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Acid Mine Drainage Control

AMD control facilities at the west waste dump

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Revegetation

Supervising the revegetation works on the west waste dump


(notice the AMD control facilities on the right side)

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

Minimizing AMD in open pit mining


through mine planning
by

Antonio Peralta

Surface Mine Design MNGN312/512

q It encompasses all issues associated with

the environmental effects of sulphide


oxidation resulting from mining activities.

q Its significant potential for long-term


environmental degradation makes it one of the
biggest environmental issues facing the
mining industry.

Acid Mine Drainage (AMD)

Acid Mine Drainage Examples

q Primary factors are directly involved in the

generation of sulphide oxidation products.


q Secondary factors consume or alter those
products.
q Tertiary factors are the physical conditions
that influence the process.

Contributing Factors

q Impact on mine water quality.


q Impact on aquatic ecosystems.
q Impact on riparian communities.
q Impact on groundwater quality.
q Impairment of the use of waterways.
q Revegetating and stabilizing mine wastes.
q Long term liability.

Problems for Mine Operators

q There is a number of well established

principles for minimizing AMD.


q Mine planning to minimize AMD is the most
cost effective and desirable solution to the
problem.
q Treatment is less desirable due to the long
term nature of AMD and associated high
treatment costs.

Acid Mine Drainage Control

q Exclusion of oxygen from wastes.

q Control of water flux within wastes.


q Minimize transport of oxidation products.
q Neutralization of AMD with alkaline materials.
q Monitoring to determine the effectiveness of
remediation measures.

Principles to Prevent Acid Mine Drainage

q Geological assessment.

q Geochemical tests, classified as static and


kinetic tests.
q Static testing evaluates the acid generating and
acid neutralizing processes.
q Kinetic testing evaluates the rate of sulphide
oxidation, AMD characteristics, and assess
potential management techniques.

1st Step Characterization of Rock Types

q Acid generation characteristics of similar ore

bodies and host rocks.


q Relevant information should be logged and
recorded from drill core during the exploration
stage.
q Core samples must be retained for further
testing.

Geological Assessment Information Sources

q Sampling should be representative, based on

accepted statistical procedures.


q Representative profiles of all geological units
should be sampled.
q The number of samples will depend on
geological variability, complexity of rock types,
and level of confidence required.

Geological Assessment Sampling

q Samples should be stored in a cool, dry

environment to minimize sulphide oxidation prior


to testing.
q Static tests may require as little as 2 grams of
sample.
q Kinetic tests require a minimum of 500 grams of
sample.

Geological Assessment Handling of Samples

q Topography and drillholes

Geological Assessment Interpretation

q Cross section of the drillholes

Geological Assessment Interpretation

q Interpretation of rock types

Geological Assessment Interpretation

q 3D view of two interpreted sections

Geological Assessment Interpretation

q 3D view of two interpreted sections

Geological Assessment Interpretation

q Acid base accounting or net acid producing

potential (NAPP) test.


q Net acid generation (NAG) test.
q Saturated paste pH and conductivity (EC).
q Total and soluble metal analysis

Geochemical Tests Static Tests

q NAPP is determined by subtracting the

estimated acid neutralizing capacity of a sample


from the estimated potential acidity of the sample.
q It has three components:
Maximum potential acidity (MPA)
Acid neutralizing capacity (ANC)
Sample classification.

Net Acid Producing Potential

q NAG comprises the addition of a strong

oxidizing agent such hydrogen peroxide to a


prepared sample and the measurement of the
solution pH and acidity after the oxidation reaction
is complete.
q This test can provide and indication of sulphide
reactivity and available neutralizing potential
within 24 hours.

Net Acid Generation Test

q The test gives a preliminary indication of the in situ

pH and the reactivity of the materials present in the


sample.
q A crushed sample (<1 mm) is saturated to create a
paste and the pH and EC is determined after a period
of equilibration.

Saturated paste pH and conductivity

q Initial screening should compare metal

concentration in the solids with that of the


background soils and country rocks in the area.
q Statistical methods are available to determine
whether any enrichment is significant.

Total and soluble metal analysis

q They simulate weathering and oxidation of rock

over time under exposure to moisture and air.


q They provide an indication of the oxidation rate
and time periods for onset of acid generation (lag
time).
q Columns and humidity cells are the most used
kinetic test techniques.

Geochemical Tests Kinetic Tests

Classification for regulatory and permitting purposes.

q Acid Generating (AG)

q Potentially acid generating (PAG)


q Potentially acid consuming (PAC)
q Potentially neutral (PN)

Rock Classification

q AMD waste materials includes overburden, waste

rock, pit walls, pit floor and tailings.


q A database of the AMD parameters determined in
the tests is required.
q A predictive AMD block model should be created
using the information available in the database.

2nd Step Quantifying the Materials to be disposed

q A block model is a three-dimensional spatial

representation of an ore body.


q It is used to quantify the geology an economics of
the deposit.
q It is developed by dividing the ore body and the
host rock into regularly shaped blocks representing
the smallest mineable unit.

Block Modeling

q Ore grades.

q Contaminants.
q Metallurgical recoveries.
q Physical parameters of the ore.
q Economic parameters.
q Environmental parameters.

Information in the Block Model

q Produce a detailed geologic interpretation.

q Create drill hole composites per material type.


q Perform statistical analysis.
q Perform spatial analysis if sufficient data exist.
q Interpolate a value into each block, for each of the
required variables.

Steps to create a block model

q Block model includes waste and ore blocks.

Complete Block Model

q Block model includes only ore blocks.

Constrained Block Model

q Blocks inside and outside the final pit limit.

Block Model and Mine Design

q Site potential and reserves


Expected pit development
q Development phasing
Period of development
Areas of extraction
by phase

3rd Step - Mining Development

2005

2020

2035

2050

Maps for different time periods

q Clearing / Vegetation removal


q Topsoil management
q Overburden / Waste rock
management
q Grading principles
q Erosion control
q Revegetation

Coordination with Reclamation

q The objective is to isolate reactive wastes for

selective disposal either separately or within nonreactive materials.


q In some cases, it may be preferable to segregate
highly reactive wastes within a separate facility to
permit intensive treatment and control strategies.

Isolation Strategy

q AMD waste is selectively handled and surrounded

with non-acid producing materials to limit flow of air


and water into waste and AMD flow out.
q A cell structure is formed. The surface is covered
with compacted benign material, usually clay.

Waste Encapsulation

q Similar in concept to encapsulation. Method is

useful where a mined out pit of sufficient size is


available.
q With effective mine planning an early closure of
one of a series of mined pits allows for in-pit disposal
of AMD wastes.

In -Pit Disposal

q Involves the blending/mixing and co-disposal of

AMD wastes with benign non-acid producing


materials or even acid neutralizing materials.
q Small cells within a waste dump are rapidly filled
and covered to reduce AMD generation and water
ingress.

Co-disposal and Blending of Waste

q A low permeability cover is constructed over an

existing waste dump, mainly using locally available


borrow or benign waste, to reduce the infiltration of
surface water and infusion of air into the dump.

Covers

q Option for marginal acid producing wastes where

subsequent acid drainage is recovered and treated


downstream.
q Collection/recovery systems can include
catchment ponds, drains, trenches and groundwater
bores.

Recovery and Treatment

q Mine planning can be a cost effective method to

control AMD in open pit mines.


q There are three basic steps to achieve AMD
control: characterize the rock types, quantify the
amount and content of the rocks, and develop a mine
plan according to the previous steps.
q The mine plan should include waste management
strategies to minimize AMD: isolation, encapsulation,
in-pit disposal, co-disposal, blending, covers, and
treatment.
q A combination of these strategies could be highly
effective to control AMD.

Conclusions

Questions and comments???????

Summitville, Colorado

According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency


(US EPA), mining generates twice as much waste as all other
American industries put together.
So-called "hard rock" mining wastes are acidic and contaminated
with toxic heavy metals which have poisoned more than 12,000
miles of streams and rivers and 180,000 acres of lakes.
EPA estimates the public cost to clean up the more than 550,000
abandoned mines in America at between $32-72 billion.
The very scale of today's massive open-pit mining operations
means that sometimes cleanup costs will outstrip the value of the
metals pulled out of the ground, as happened with the $232 million
cleanup of the Summitville mine in southern Colorado.

Summitville, Colorado

At Eagle mine, a zinc, copper and silver operation, ten million tons
of mine waste and mine tailings were left along the banks of the
Eagle River in Gilman Colorado.
Cleanup costs exceeded $55 million which totaled more than $5.50
per ton of mine waste.
A zinc, lead and silver mine at Smuggler Mountain in Pitkin
Colorado. The estimated cost for environmental recovery is $7.2
million. This equals $2.40 per ton of waste.

Examples, Colorado

Feasibility Studies
The formal feasibility study includes an economic analysis of the rate of
return that can be expected from the mine at a certain rate of production.
Some of the factors considered during such an economic analysis are:
Tons in the deposit
Grade of the mine product
Mill recovery
Sale price of the metal or mineral
Cost of mining per ton
Cost of milling per ton
Royalties
Capital cost of the mine

Capital Cost of the mill


Exploration and development cost
Mining rate, tons per day
Depreciation method used
Depletion allowance
Working capital necessary
Miscellaneous costs of operation
Tax rate

Risk
Mining is a very risky business.
The most serious risks in any mining project are those associated
with:
Geology: the actual size and grade of the minable portion of
the deposit,
metallurgical factors: how much of the orebody can be
recovered, and
Economics: metal markets, interest rates, mining, processing,
ect.

Return on Investment
In order to compensate for risk, a mining organization will require
a minimum acceptable rate of return on investment.
The cost of borrowing capital for the mine or of generating the
needed capital internally within the company must be considered.
If a company has a number of attractive investment opportunities,
the rate of return from the proposed mine venture may be
compared with the rate expected on a different mining venture
elsewhere, or with some other business opportunity unrelated to
mining.
Management has an obligation to its stockholders or investors to
select projects with the best rate of return.

As a general rule of thumb, a project must have better than a 15percent rate of return to be considered by a major company.
An individual commonly expects a 30- to 50 percent rate of return
to consider investing in a mining venture.
Among other uses of the cash flow generated by the mine, these
funds must finance:
continuing exploration elsewhere,
pay for past failures, and
contribute to the mine's portion of main office and general
overhead.

Time Value of Money


Money has a time value. The future value of an investment can be
calculated by:

F = P(1 + i) N
where:
P = Present value of investment
F = Future value of investment
i = interest rate
N = number of years
For example $100 invested at 10% interest for 1, 2, and 3 years would
yield:
F = 100(1 + .10) 1 = $110.00
F = 100(1 + .10) 2 = $121.00
F = 100(1 + .10) 3 = $133.10

Time Value of Money


Conversely money received in the future is not as valuable as money
received today. If money is received in the future:

P = F / (1 + i) N
Using the same example:
P = 110.00/(1 + .10) 1 = $100.00
P = 121.00/(1 + .10) 2 = $100.00
P = 133.10/(1 + .10) 3 = $100.00

DCF-ROR
The criterion most commonly employed in the minerals industry
when evaluating the rate of return on an investment proposal is
called the discounted cash flow rate of return (DCF-ROR).
The term is a special version of the more generic term, internal rate
of return (IRR).
The internal rate of return is defined a that interest rate which
equates the sum of the present value in cash inflows with the sum
of the present value of cash outflows for a project:
PV cash inflows = PV cash outflows

(3)

DCF-ROR
The DCF-ROR can be calculated by:
N

where:

CFn
=0

n
n = 0 (1 + i)

(4)

CFn = Amount of cash in or out in a given year


n = Year
N = Project life
i = DCF-ROR
Once the cash flows for a project have been determined, the
interest rate i can be solved for using an iterative process, i.e. guess
at an initial value for i and then solve Equation 4 until a result of 0
is obtained.

Steps Involved in Cash Flow Analysis


The evaluation of a mining project is usually an iterative process
using the following steps:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Select a mining method


Select a production rate
Calculate Capital and Operating Costs
Select cutoff grade and tonnage
Calculate cash flow and return

Change steps 4, 2, and 1 and select the alternative that gives the
highest return.

Steps Involved in Cash Flow Analysis


In a feasibility study, attempt to quantify all geologic, technical,
marketing, environmental, political, etc. factors. Many of these
variables are dependent on each other. A feasibility study are
usually divided into the pre-production, production, and postproduction phases:
1. Preproduction Period
Exploration
Water and land acquisition
Mine and mill capital
Working capital, etc
2. Production Period
Revenue less costs
Calculation Of Annual Cash Flow
3. Postproduction Period
Equipment salvage
Working capital liquidation

Steps Involved in Cash Flow Analysis

Depletion
One of the features that distinguish a mining enterprise from many
other businesses is that during production, the companys assets,
i.e. the ore, is consumed.
The percentage depletion allowance is based on the idea that as
minerals are extracted, the mine is worth less.
The percentage depletion allowance permits mining companies to
deduct a certain percentage from their gross income to reflect the
mine's reduced value over time.

Depreciation
Depreciation is an allowable deduction when computing taxable income
that represents the exhaustion, wear, and tear of property used in a trade or
business, or of property held for the production of income.
The purpose of the depreciation deduction is to provide a means by which a
business or trade can recapture the capital needed to keep itself in business.
Therefore depreciation allowances for capital assets are deducted from
taxable income in an orderly manner such that the property owner has
deducted the initial investment in the asset by the time it wears out or
becomes exhausted.
Having recaptured the initial asset cost from the annual tax deductions, the
owner can, in theory, replace the worn-out piece of equipment with a new
one and keep himself in business.

Case Study
The calculation of the cash flow and DCF-ROR is illustrated using a
bedded zinc deposit, producing 6000 tons per day, with total reserves of
22.5 MM Tons @ 14% zinc.
Simplifying and other assumptions:
1. No royalty
2. No investment tax credits
3. Straight line depreciation and depreciation life equal to life of property
4. Federal, state, and local taxes equal to 40% net after depletion
5. No replacement or additional equipment requirements
6. No start-up costs or learning curve
7. Uniform grade mined over mine life
8. Uniform production rate over mine life
9. Operating costs constant over mine life
10. Mine would be division of large profitable corporation with 100% of exploration
and development expensed
11. No consideration of cost depletion
12. Price/cost differential constant over life of mine with no consideration of escalation
and inflation

Cash Flow Calculations


Cash Flow Calculations ($1,000)
Pre-Production Period
Year
1
Exploration *1
2,000
Development *2
0
Mine/Mill
0
Working Capital
0
Total Investment
(2,000)
Tax Savings *3
800
Net Cash Flow
(1,200)

2
4000
0
0
0
(4,000)
1600
(2,400)

3
4000
0
0
0
(4,000)
1600
(2,400)

4
0
4000
15000
0
(19,000)
1600
(17,400)

5
0
8000
36000
0
(44,000)
3200
(40,800)

6
0
8000
36000
2600
(46,600)
3200
(43,400)

*1 Expensed under Section 617 of IRS Code


*2 Expensed
*3 Assume federal, state, and local tax rate = 40% of net after depletion

7
0
0
0
9,300
(9,300)
0
(9,300)

Total
10,000
20,000
87,000
11,900
(128,900)
12,000
(116,900)

Zinc Smelter Schedule


Payments
Silver: Deduct 2 Troy oz., pay for 80% of remainder at
Handy & Harman quotation for refined silver in
Metals Week, averaged for the calendar month
following delivery, less $.055 per oz.
Lead: No payment.
zinc:

Pay for 85% of zinc content at delivery price for


prime western zinc published in Metals Week,
averaged for the calendar month following delivery,
less $.015 per pound.

Zinc Smelter Schedule


Deductions
Smelter Charge:
$170/dry ton
Price Adjustment:
Increase by $3.00 per ton for each $.01 that the zinc
quotation exceeds $.40 per pound. Fractions in
proportion.
Decrease by $2.00 per ton for each $.01 that the zinc
quotation decreases below $.40 per pound. Fractions
in proportion.

Smelter Schedule Calculations


Concentrate Grade = 55%
zinc Price = $0.47/lb
Payments:
2,000 lb/ton * 0.55 * 0.85 * $(0.47- 0.015)/lb =
Deductions:
Base Charge
Price Adjustment
(47- 40)c * $3.00/c
Total Deductions:
Freight:
Truck
Rail
Total Freight:

$425.43/ton

170.00
= 21.00
(191.00)

5.00
15.00

Net Smelter Return/Ton Concentrate (NSR/T)

(20.00)
$214.43/ton

Revenue and Operating Calculations


Revenue/year = Tons/year Concentrate * NSR/ton
Tons/year Concentrate = (Tons/year Ore * Grade * Mill Recovery)/(Conc. Grade)
Mine Schedule = 250 Days/year
Mill Recovery = 90%
Tons/year Concentrate = 6,000 T/D * 250 D/Y * 0.14 * 0.9/0.55
= 343,636 Tons/year Concentrate .
Revenue/year ($1,000) = 343,636 T/Y * $214.43/1,000 = $73,684/Year
Direct Operating cost/Year = Tons/year Ore * Operating Costs/Ton Ore
Direct Operating Costs
Mining $15.00 /Ton Ore
Milling
5.00
Overhead
3.00
Total
23.00 /Ton Ore
Operating Cost/Year ($1,000) = 6,000 T/D * 250 D/Y * $23.00/T/1,000
= $34,500/Year

Production Period
Year
Revenues
Operating Costs
Net Before D & D
Depreciation
Net After Depr.
Depletion
Taxable Income
Tax @ 40%
Net After Tax
Depreciation
Depletion
Cash Flow
Working Capital
Net Cash Flow
Depletion Calculation:
Initial Recapture
22% Revenue
50% Net After Depr.
Depletion Earned
Depletion Recaptured
Recapture Balance
Depletion Claimed

7
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(6,211)
27,173
(10,869)
16,304
5,800
6,211
28,315
(9,300)
19,015

8
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

9
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

10
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

11
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

12-21
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

7
10,000
16,211
16,692
16,211
10,000
0
6,211

10

11

12-21

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

Depreciation and Depletion


Depreciation/Year = (Mine & Mill capital)/Mine Life
Mine Life = Reserves/Annual Production
= 22,500,000 Tons/(6,000 T/D * 250 D/Y) = 15 years
Depreciation/Year ($1,000) = $87,000,000/15 Yr/1,000 = $5,800/Year
Depletion ($1,000):
Statutory % * Revenue or 50% Net after Depreciation, Select Smaller
zinc Depletion Rate = 22%
22% * $73,684 = $16,211 <=== Select Smaller
OR
50% * $33,384 = $16,692

Production Period
Year
Revenues
Operating Costs
Net Before D & D
Depreciation
Net After Depr.
Depletion
Taxable Income
Tax @ 40%
Net After Tax
Depreciation
Depletion
Cash Flow
Working Capital
Net Cash Flow
Depletion Calculation:
Initial Recapture
22% Revenue
50% Net After Depr.
Depletion Earned
Depletion Recaptured
Recapture Balance
Depletion Claimed

7
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(6,211)
27,173
(10,869)
16,304
5,800
6,211
28,315
(9,300)
19,015

8
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

9
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

10
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

11
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

12-21
73,684
(34,500)
39,184
(5,800)
33,384
(16,211)
17,173
(6,869)
10,304
5,800
16,211
32,315
0
32,315

7
10,000
16,211
16,692
16,211
10,000
0
6,211

10

11

12-21

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

16,211
16,692
16,211
0
0
16,211

Post-Production Period
Year
22
Working Capital
11,900
After-Tax Reclam.
-8,000
Net Cash Flow
3,900

DCF-ROR or Internal Rate of Return


Year (j) Net CF
1
(1,200)
2
(2,400)
3
(2,400)
4 (17,400)
5 (40,800)
6 (43,400)
7
19,015
8
32,315
9
32,315
10
32,315
11
32,315
12
32,315
13
32,315
14
32,315
15
32,315
16
32,315
17
32,315
18
32,315
19
32,315
20
32,315
21
32,315
22
3,900
367,726

1/(1+.20)^j
0.833
0.694
0.579
0.482
0.402
0.335
0.279
0.233
0.194
0.162
0.135
0.112
0.093
0.078
0.065
0.054
0.045
0.038
0.031
0.026
0.022
0.018

Present Value
CF @ 20%
(1,000)
(1,667)
(1,389)
(8,391)
(16,397)
(14,535)
5,307
7,515
6,263
5,219
4,349
3,624
3,020
2,517
2,097
1,748
1,457
1,214
1,011
843
702
71
3,580

1/(1+.25)^j
0.800
0.640
0.512
0.410
0.328
0.262
0.210
0.168
0.134
0.107
0.086
0.069
0.055
0.044
0.035
0.028
0.023
0.018
0.014
0.012
0.009
0.007

Present Value
CF @ 25%
(960)
(1,536)
(1,229)
(7,127)
(13,369)
(11,377)
3,988
5,422
4,337
3,470
2,776
2,221
1,777
1,421
1,137
910
728
582
466
373
298
29
(5,666)

By Linear Interpolation
DCF-ROR = 20% + 3580/(3580+5666)*(25-20)% = 21.9%
Exact Solution

21.5090%

0.21509
0.823
0.677
0.557
0.459
0.378
0.311
0.256
0.210
0.173
0.143
0.117
0.097
0.079
0.065
0.054
0.044
0.036
0.030
0.025
0.020
0.017
0.014

Present Value
CF @ 21.509%
(988)
(1,626)
(1,338)
(7,982)
(15,403)
(13,485)
4,862
6,800
5,597
4,606
3,791
3,120
2,567
2,113
1,739
1,431
1,178
969
798
657
540
54
0

Projected Cash Flows For Bedded Zinc Deposit

17

19

21

17

19

21

15

13

11

10000
0
-10000
-20000

$ *1000

40000
30000
20000

-30000
-40000
-50000
Year

Present Value of Cash Flows


at 21.5% Discount Rate
10,000

(10,000)
(15,000)
(20,000)
Year

15

13

11

(5,000)

0
1

$ *1000

5,000

Definitions of troy ounce on the Web:


ounce: a unit of apothecary weight equal to 480 grains or one twelfth of a pound

he traditional unit of weight for gold is the troy ounce, named, it is


thought, after a weight used at the annual fair at Troyes in France in the
Middle Ages.
Although the metric system is used increasingly in mining and the gold
business, the troy ounce remains the basic unit in which the price of 995
gold is quoted.
One troy ounce = 31.1034807 grams,
32.15 troy ounces = 1 kilogram,
1 troy ounce = 480 grains,

Mine Production Scheduling


Optimization
- The State of Art -

K. Dagdelen
Professor
Mining Engineering Department
Colorado School of Mines
Golden, Colorado 80401

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

APCOM 2005

l
l

For Each Block in The


Model
If a given block of
material should be
mined?
When it Should be
mined?
Once it is mined what to
do with the block of
Material

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


Start

APCOM 2005

Physical Capacities
Production
Costs

Extraction
Scheduling

Ultimate pit

Cutoff Grade
Design Of Cuts

Steps of Traditional Planning by Circular Analysis

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

APCOM 2005

ULTIMATE PIT LIMITS

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


ULTIMATE PIT LIMITS
l Identifies What blocks should be mined and which
l
l
APCOM 2005

l
l

ones should be left in the ground.


Defines the lateral and vertical extent to which a given
deposit can economically be mined to
3-D Breakeven Analysis
Moving Cone algorithm gives sub-optimum results
Lerchs and Grossmann algorithm gives true
breakeven pit that maximizes the undiscounted profits

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

APCOM 2005

ULTIMATE PIT LIMITS


The Lerchs and Grossmann Algorithm
l Only finds the maximum profit pit boundary
l No time value of money is considered
l The pit that maximizes discounted profits (NPV) by
taking into account time value of money is much
smaller than the ultimate pit found by this
technique

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


ULTIMATE PIT LIMITS
l Common practice is to apply Lerchs and

Grossmanns algorithm to the economic block model


that is generated to discounted block values

APCOM 2005

l Economic block model is generated by discounting

block values based on a rough initial production


schedule

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


ULTIMATE PIT LIMITS
l If the schedule is not defined by identifying effect of

waste stripping on the overall cash flows then the


ultimate pit limit may not be correct

APCOM 2005

l NPV analysis on the last incremental pushbacks

always results in elimination of non-contributing


incremental pits

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


Start

APCOM 2005

Physical Capacities
Production
Costs

Extraction
Scheduling

Ultimate pit

Cutoff Grade
Design Of Cuts

Steps of Traditional Planning by Circular Analysis

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

APCOM 2005

DESIGN OF PUSHBACKS
Economic block models are developed by varying either
l Metal Price
l Cutoff Grade
l Minimum profits required per ton of ore
l Some ratio in block evaluation equation
l As these variables change the pit outline also changes
l Each outline is then used as pushbacks

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

APCOM 2005

DESIGN OF PUSHBACKS

PHASE 1

PHASE 2
PHASE 3

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


DESIGN OF PUSHBACKS

APCOM 2005

l The concept is based on mining next best ore

without considering impact of stripping to be done


ahead of time
l First incremental pit contains the ore that has the
highest average overall value per ton. The
subsequent pits have lower and lower average value
per ton of ore
l The push back designs do not take into account
effect of timing of waste stripping on the NPV
l Blending requirements can not be taken into
account

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

APCOM 2005

DESIGN OF PUSHBACKS

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


Start

APCOM 2005

Physical Capacities
Production
Costs

Extraction
Scheduling

Ultimate pit

Cutoff Grade
Design Of Cuts

Steps of Traditional Planning by Circular Analysis

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

APCOM 2005

CUTOFF GRADES

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Cutoff Grades
l

A cutoff grade is the grade that is used to


differentiate between ore and waste in a given
mining environment. Although the definition of
cutoff grade is straight forward, the determination
of it is not.

To determine if a block of material should be milled


or taken to the waste dump, breakeven mill cutoff
may be used.
Milling cutoff grade

McLaughlin Gold Mine


California, USA
Pit
Ore and waste discrimination

Waste

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Waste
dumps

Ore
Cutoff grade

Stockpiles

Autoclave Mill

Round Mountain Gold Mine

Oxide

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Low grade
stockpiles

Ore
Sulfide

Crusher

Stockpiles

CIP Mill
Leach Pads

Waste

Waste
dumps

Breakeven Mill Cutoff Grade

2005 SME Annual Meeting

The lowest economic grade where mining, milling,


and administration cost are equal to revenues obtained
from the metal produced.

Breakeven cutoff grade =

Milling Cost
(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Traditionally, this breakeven cutoff grade has been


widely used in a production scheduling.

McLaughlin Mine Case Study

2005 SME Annual Meeting

The economic and operational parameters:


Price

(P)

600

$/oz

Sales Cost

(s)

$/oz

Processing Cost

(c)

19

$/ton ore

Recovery

(y)

0.9

Mining Cost

(m)

1.2

$/ton

Fixed Cost

(fa)

8.35M

$/year

Mining Capacity

(M)

Unlimited

Processing Capacity

(C)

1.05M

tons

Discount Rate

(d)

15

Production Scheduling By
Breakeven Cutoff Grade (Case1)

2005 SME Annual Meeting

If one uses breakeven cutoff grade for a production


scheduling:
Breakeven cutoff grade =

$19/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.035 oz/ton

All the materials above 0.035oz/ton goes to process,


and below goes to waste dump.

McLaughlin Case Study


l
l

Consider a case study from McLaughlin Mine in California


where an epithermal gold deposit was mined by an open pit.
The grade distribution within the ultimate pit limit is:
From

Tons

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Grade Category

Grade intervals

0
0.02
0.025
COG 0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.055
0.06
0.065
0.07
0.075
0.08
0.1

To

0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.055
0.06
0.065
0.07
0.075
0.08
0.1
0.358

midpoint
0.0100
0.0225
0.0275
0.0325
0.0375
0.0425
0.0475
0.0525
0.0575
0.0625
0.0675
0.0725
0.0775
0.0900
0.2290

Ktons
70,000
7,257
89,167 tons
6,319
5,591
4,598
4,277
SR=2.45
3,465
2,428
2,307
1,747 36,346 tons
1,640
1,485 @0.102oz/ton
1,227
3,598
9,576
125,515

Yearly Mining and Milling Rates

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Assuming the deposit is homogeneously distributed,


yearly mining rate is given as follows:

l
l

l
l

Yearly ore tons: 1.05Mtons (Limited by process capacity)


Yearly ounces recovered: 1.05Mtons x 0.102 oz/ton x 0.9
= 96.3koz
Yearly waste tons: 1.05Mtons x 2.45 (SR) = 2.58Mtons
Yearly mining rates: 1.05M + 2.58M = 3.62Mtons

Yearly Schedules by Breakeven


Cutoff Grade (Cont.)

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Mining the deposit with breakeven cutoff grade of


0.035oz/ton at 1.05M tons process capacity:
Avg

Qm

Qc

Qr

Profits

Year (i)

COG

Ore Grade

(Mtons)

(Mtons)

(ktons)

($M)

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

10

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

11 to 34

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

35

0.035

0.102

3.4

1.00

91.7

31.4

Total

125.8

36.7

3,365.9

1,154.2
(NPV@15%)
$218.5

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Shortcomings of the Traditional


Cutoff Grades
l

They are established to maximizing the undiscounted


profits from a given mining operation.

They are constant unless the commodity price and the


costs change during the life of the mine.

They do not consider grade distribution of the deposit.

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


CUTOFF GRADES
l Many open pit mines are still designed and operated

using cutoff grades based on breakeven economic


analysis which maximizes undiscounted profits

APCOM 2005

l The cutoff grades should be set to much higher

levels than the breakeven cutoff during the initial


years of the operation

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


CUTOFF GRADES
l The heuristic algorithm to define optimum declining

cutoff grades that maximize the NPV of a given


project was developed by Kenneth Lane in 1965

APCOM 2005

l Applying this method to a given project results in

higher NPV for a project specially if capacities are


not in harmony with the grade distribution of the
deposit

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Declining Cutoff Grade


l

Traditional cutoff grade (constant cutoff grade) does


not maximize the NPV.

Many approaches have been suggested to improve


NPV of the project.

K. F Lane in 1964 suggested an heuristic algorithm to


obtain cutoff grades higher than breakeven grades
during the early years that maximize the Net Present
Value (NPV) of a project

Optimum Cutoff Grades by Lanes


Algorithm

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Lanes approach considers the mining operation to be


constrained by the capacities of mine, mill, and
refinery.
The cutoff grades are optimized by considering the
grade distribution of the deposit in providing highest
quality of ore to the mill subject to three capacity
constraints.
This approach has been successfully used in the
mining industry for many years.

Optimum Cutoff Grades by OptiPit

2005 SME Annual Meeting

Linear Programming (LP) based algorithm and


software is being developed to optimize cutoff grades
under complex mining and process constraints.
Mathematical programming approach is very powerful
and provides complete flexibility in modeling complex
operating environments.
This approach will be described and demonstrated
using four case studies coming from gold mines in
Western United States.

Round Mountain Gold Mine

Oxide

Low grade
stockpiles

Ore
Sulfide

APCOM 2005

Crusher

Stockpiles

CIP Mill
Leach Pads

Waste

Waste
dumps

COMPLICATED PROCESSES AND


CAPACITIES
limited by
ROM
Leach

Dump

10M
tons/yr

crusher
Cr
Leach

1
oc
r
P

2
oc
r
P

Phase
1

Cr

Proc 3

Autoclave

APCOM 2005

Phase2

Mine

Pr
oc
4

5M
tons/yr

20%
Flot.

1.05M
tons/yr

80%

Mining Capacity: 12M tons/yr


Refining Capacity: 350 koz/yr
Stockpile available

2M
tons/yr

Tailings

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


CUTOFF GRADES
l Linear Programming (LP) based algorithm and

software is being developed to optimize cutoff grades


under complex mining and process constraints.

APCOM 2005

l Mathematical programming approach is very powerful

and provides complete flexibility in modeling complex


operating environments.

CUTOFF GRADE FORMULATION


Index d
Cutoff
Grade

Tons

Dump

APCOM 2005

McLaughlin mine

Grade intervals

Decision variables:
Mine

Index g

igd
Index i

Index t: Years

Mill

OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION


FUTURE

APCOM 2005

l NO scheduler in the market that incorporates

shortcomings discussed
l There are efforts to develop methods that will overcome
these shortcomings
l The advancements in hardware and software
technology in recent years is providing an unique
opportunity to solve this problem by way of Linear
Integer Programming techniques
l In the mean time, the use of computer programs that
optimizes sub-problems will give you higher NPV for a
given project if not the optimum.

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Push Backs or Phases

Defines how the pit will evolve with time.

Defines ore tons and its quality for different time periods.

Defines waste tons for removal schedules.

Defines the cash flows and overall project economics.

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Push Backs or Phases Example

Phase 1

Phase 2
2

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Push Backs or Phases Example


(Cont.)

Phase 3

Phase 4
3

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Push Backs or Phases Example


(Cont.)

Cross Section

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Cutoff Grade

Minimum grade of the material for processing.

Normally used to discriminate between ore and waste within


a given orebody.

Cutoff grade is Dynamic.

Read Cutoff Grade Optimization by Dr. Dagdelen

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Breakeven Cutoff Grade

The lowest economic grade where mining, milling, and


administration cost are equal to revenues obtained from the
metal produced.

Cutoff grades in the pit are normally much higher than the
breakeven cutoff grade.

Cutoff grades decline as the mine matures, and approaches


the breakeven cutoff.

Hypothetical Case Study


MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Consider a hypothetical case study where an epithermal gold


deposit will be mined by an open pit.
The grade distribution within the ultimate pit limit is:
Grade Category
From

To

0
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.055
0.06
0.065
0.07
0.075
0.08
0.1

0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.055
0.06
0.065
0.07
0.075
0.08
0.1
0.358

midpoint
0.0100
0.0225
0.0275
0.0325
0.0375
0.0425
0.0475
0.0525
0.0575
0.0625
0.0675
0.0725
0.0775
0.0900
0.2290

Ktons
70,000
7,257
6,319
5,591
4,598
4,277
3,465
2,428
2,307
1,747
1,640
1,485
1,227
3,598
9,576
125,515

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Mine Design Parameters

Capacities and Costs are:


Price (P)

600 $/oz

Sales Cost (s)

5.00 $/oz

Processing Cost (c)

19.0 $/ton ore

Recovery (y)

90 %

Mining Cost (m)

1.2 $/ton

Fixed Costs (fa)

8.35 $M/yr

Mining Capacity (M)

Unlimited

Milling Capacity (C)

1.05 M

Capital Costs (CC)

105 $M

Discount Rate (d)

15 %

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Traditional Cutoff Grades

Traditionally, a cutoff grade is used to determine if a block


of material should be mined or not.
Ultimate pit cutoff grade

And, another cutoff is used to determine whether or not it


should be milled or taken to the waste dump.
Milling cutoff grade

Ultimate Pit Cutoff Grade


MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Ultimate pit cutoff grade is defined as the breakeven grade


that equates cost of mining, milling, refining and marketing
to the value of the block in terms of recovering metal and
the selling price.

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

Milling Cost + Mining Cost


(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

$19/ton + $1.2/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.038 oz/ton
10

Milling Cutoff Grade


MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Milling cutoff grade is defined as the breakeven grade that


equates cost of milling, refining and marketing to the value
of the block in terms of recovering metal and the selling
price.

Milling cutoff grade =

Milling Cost
(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Milling cutoff grade =

$19/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.035 oz/ton
11

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Milling Cutoff Grade (Cont.)

In the milling cutoff grade, no mining cost is included since


this cutoff is basically applied to those blocks that are
already selected for mining.

The depreciation costs, general and administrative costs (G


& A) and the opportunity costs are not included in the cutoff
grade.

The basic assumption is that all of these costs including


fixed costs defined as G & A will be paid by the material
whose grade is much higher than the established cutoff
grades.

12

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Summary of the Traditional Cutoff


Grades

The ultimate pit limit cutoff is used to ensure that no


material (unless they are in the way of other high grade
blocks) is taken out of the ground unless all of the direct
costs associated with gaining the metal can be recovered.
(This assurance is automatically built into the ultimate pit
limit determination algorithms like Learchs Grossmann
and Moving Cone)

The milling cutoff is used to ensure that any material that


provides positive contribution beyond the direct milling,
refining and marketing costs will be milled.
13

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Shortcomings of the Traditional


Cutoff Grades

They are established to satisfy the objective of maximizing


the undiscounted profits from given mining operation.

They are constant unless the commodity price and the costs
change during the life of the mine.

They do not consider grade distribution of the deposit.

14

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Yearly Tons and Grades Schedules by


Constant Cutoff Grades

Define:
Qm: Amount of total material mined in a given year (Mtons)
Qc: The ore tonnage processed by the mill (Mtons)
Qr: The recovered gold (koz)

The annual cash flows:


Profits ($M) = (P - s) * Qr Qc * c Qm * m
15

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules by


Constant Cutoff Grades

Mining the deposit with traditional milling cutoff grade of


0.035oz/ton at 1.05M tons milling capacity (Table3):
Avg

Qm

Qc

Qr

Profits

Year (i)

COG

Ore Grade

(Mtons)

(Mtons)

(ktons)

($M)

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

10

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

11 to 34

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

35

0.035

0.102

3.4

1.00

91.7

31.4

Total

125.8

36.7

3,365.9

1,154.2
(NPV@15%)
$218.5

16

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Yearly Tons and Grades Schedules by


Constant Cutoff Grades (NPV Calculation)

NPV of the project:


33.0
(1 + 0.15)1

33.0
(1 + 0.15)2

33.0
(1 + 0.15)4

33.0
(1 + 0.15)5

33.0
31.4
+
(1 + 0.15)34
(1 + 0.15)35

NPV =

33.0
(1 + 0.15)3

= $218.5M
17

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Summary of Constant Cutoff


Grade

Total 28.44M tons is mined (Avg. grade 0.102 oz/ton)

Overall stripping ratio: 1: 2.42

Mine life: 35 years

Undiscounted profits: $1154.2M

NPV: $218.5M
18

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Declining Cutoff Grade

Traditional cutoff grade (constant cutoff grade) does not


maximize the NPV.

Many approaches have been suggested such that NPV is


improved.

Using cutoff grade higher than breakeven grades during the


early years for a faster recovery of capital investments and
using breakeven grades during the later stages has been
practiced in the industry.
19

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade

The traditional cutoff grade is modified so that they include


depreciation, fixed costs and minimum profit per ton
required for a period of time to obtain a much higher cutoff
grade during the early years.

After the end of the initial period, minimum profit


requirement is removed from the equation to lower the
cutoff grades further until the plant is paid off.

At that point, the depreciation charges are also removed.


20

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Concept of Heuristic Cutoff


Grade

The concept is demonstrated pictorially as follows:

Idealized cross section of a series of pits for


various cutoff grades

21

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Capital Cost

Assume:
Capital Cost: $105M (Depreciated during the first 10 years)

Depreciation cost per year


$105M / 10 yrs = $10.5M / yr

Depreciation cost per ton


$10.5M / 1.05M tons = $10 / ton of ore

22

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Minimum Profit

Assume:
Minimum profit of $3.0 per ton will be imposed to
increase the cash flows further during the first five years

23

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade


Calculation

The milling cutoff grades will be:

Yr 1 to 5
g milling =

Milling Cost + Depreciation + Minimum Prof.


(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

$19/ton + $10/ton + $3/ton


($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.060 oz/ton
24

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade


Calculation (Cont.)
Yr 6 to 10
g milling =

Milling Cost + Depreciation


(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

$19/ton + $10/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.054 oz/ton
25

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade


Calculation (Cont.)
Yr 11 to Depletion
Milling Cost

g milling =

(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

$19/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.035 oz/ton
26

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Yearly Tons and Grade


Schedules

The year by year tons and grade schedule obtained modified


cutoff grade policy (Table4):
Avg

Qm

Qc

Qr

Profits

Year (i)

COG

Ore Grade

(Mtons)

(Mtons)

(ktons)

($M)

0.060

0.153

6.9

1.05

144.6

57.8

0.060

0.153

6.9

1.05

144.6

57.8

0.060

0.153

6.9

1.05

144.6

57.8

0.060

0.153

6.9

1.05

144.6

57.8

0.060

0.153

6.9

1.05

144.6

57.8

0.054

0.141

6.0

1.05

132.8

51.9

0.054

0.141

6.0

1.05

132.8

51.9

0.054

0.141

6.0

1.05

132.8

51.9

0.054

0.141

6.0

1.05

132.8

51.9

10

0.054

0.141

6.0

1.05

132.8

51.9

11 to 27

0.035

0.102

3.6

1.05

96.3

33.0

28

0.035

0.102

0.3

0.09

8.1

2.8

Total

125.8

28.44

3,032.1

1,112.7
(NPV@15%)
$355.7

27

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Summary of Modified Cutoff


Grade

Again, a total 28.44M tons is mined (Avg. grade 0.106 oz/ton)

Overall stripping ratio: 1: 3.88

Mine life: 25 years

Undiscounted profits: $1112.7M (3.6% reduction from Table3)

NPV: $355.7M (63% increase from Table3)


28

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade


(Including G & A)

In the previous calculations, the G & A costs were not


included in the cutoff grade and profit calculations.

Assume:
Fixed Costs per year: $8.35M / year
Fixed Costs per ton: ($8.35M/year) / (1.05Mtons/year)
= $7.95 / ton

29

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade Calculation


(With G & A)

The milling cutoff grades will be:

Yr 1 to 5
g milling =

Milling Cost + Depreciation + Minimum Prof. + Fixed cost


(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

$19/ton + $10/ton + $3/ton + $7.95/ton


($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.075 oz/ton
30

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade Calculation


(With G & A) (Cont.)
Yr 6 to 10
g milling =

Milling Cost + Depreciation + Fixed cost


(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

$19/ton + $10/ton + $7.95/ton


($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.069 oz/ton
31

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Heuristic Cutoff Grade Calculation


(With G & A) (Cont.)
Yr 11 to Depletion
g milling =

Milling Cost + Fixed cost


(Price Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery

Ultimate pit cutoff grade =

$19/ton + $7.95/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90

= 0.050 oz/ton
32

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Yearly Tons and Grades


Schedules

The year by year tons and grade schedule obtained modified


cutoff grade policy that includes fixed costs (Table5):
Avg

Qm

Qc

Qr

Profits

Year (i)

COG

Ore Grade

(Mtons)

(Mtons)

(ktons)

($M)

0.075

0.182

9.2

1.05

171.6

62.8

0.075

0.182

9.2

1.05

171.6

62.8

0.075

0.182

9.2

1.05

171.6

62.8

0.075

0.182

9.2

1.05

171.6

62.8

0.075

0.182

9.2

1.05

171.6

62.8

0.069

0.169

8.2

1.05

160.0

57.1

0.069

0.169

8.2

1.05

160.0

57.1

0.069

0.169

8.2

1.05

160.0

57.1

0.069

0.169

8.2

1.05

160.0

57.1

10

0.069

0.169

8.2

1.05

160.0

57.1

11 to 17

0.050

0.132

5.4

1.05

124.8

39.5

18

0.050

0.132

1.3

0.26

30.5

9.6

Total

125.8

18.11

2,562.5

885.6
(NPV@15%)
$357.1

33

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Summary of Modified Cutoff Grade


with Fixed Cost Included

The policy of declining cutoff grades calculated with


depreciation, minimum profit, and the G & A cost further
improved the NPV of the deposit by 1% ($355.7M vs.
$357.5M)

Overall undiscounted profits were adversely reduced by 20%


($1112.7M vs. $885.6M)

34

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Lanes Approach

Declining cutoff grades throughout the mine life gives


higher NPV.

The question is, How should the cutoff grades be


determined to obtain the highest NPV?

K. F. Lane discussed the theoretical background, a general


formulation, and a solution algorithm.

Read Choosing the Optimum Cutoff Grade by K.F. Lane


35

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Lanes Approach (Cont.)

Lane showed that cutoff grade calculations that maximize


NPV have to include the fixed costs associated with not
receiving the future cash flow quicker due to the cutoff
grade decision taken now.

Underlying philosophy in inclusion of the opportunity


cost is that every deposit has a given NPV associated with
it at a given point in time and that every ton of material
processed by the mill during a given year should pay for
the cost of not receiving the future cash flows by one year
sooner.
36

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Cutoff Grade Equation for


Lanes Approach

The cutoff grade equation that maximizes the NPV of the


deposit constrained by the mill capacity is:
g milling (i) =

c + f + Fi
(P - s) * y

Where i = 1, , N (mine life),


gmilling(i) is the cutoff grade to be used in Year i.

37

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Cutoff Grade Equation for


Lanes Approach (Cont.)

Fi is the opportunity cost per ton of ore in Year i and it is


defined as:
Fi = d * NPVi / C

f is defined as:
f = fa / C

Where
d is the discount rate;
NPVi is the NPV of the future cash flows of the years (i) to the end
of mine life;
fa is the annual fixed costs
38

Yearly Tons and Grades


Schedules
MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

The year by year tons and grade schedule resulted from


Lanes approach (Table6):
Avg

Qm

Qc

Qr

Profits

NPV

Year (i)

COG

Ore Grade

(Mtons)

(Mtons)

(ktons)

($M)

($M)

0.161

0.259

18.0

1.05

245.2

95.9

413.8

0.152

0.255

17.2

1.05

241.0

94.4

380.0

0.142

0.25

16.5

1.05

236.4

92.6

342.6

0.131

0.245

15.7

1.05

231.3

90.5

301.4

0.120

0.239

14.9

1.05

225.7

88.1

256.1

0.107

0.232

14.1

1.05

219.6

85.4

206.4

0.092

0.213

12.1

1.05

200.9

76.7

152.0

0.079

0.188

9.8

1.05

177.9

65.9

98.1

0.065

0.163

7.6

1.05

153.6

53.9

46.9

Total

125.8

9.45

1,931.4

743.4
(NPV@15%)
$413.8

39

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Steps to Obtain Table 6 (1st Iteration)


Year (i)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

21
22
23
Total

NPVi
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Cog
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050

0
0
0

0.050
0.050
0.050

Avg
Waste
Ore Grade (Mtons)
0.133
101.5
0.133
97.1
0.133
92.6
0.133
88.2
0.133
83.7
0.133
79.3
0.133
74.9
0.133
0.133
0.133

12.7
8.3
3.8

Ore
(Mtons)
24.0
23.0
21.9
20.9
19.8
18.8
17.7

SR

3.0
2.0
0.9

4.2
4.2
4.2

4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2

Year 1:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(0*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.050

Year 2:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(0*0.15)/1.05

0.050

Qm
(Mtons)
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5

Qc
(Mtons)
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05

Qr
(ktons)
125.7
125.7
125.7
125.7
125.7
125.7
125.7

Profits
($M)
39.9
39.9
39.9
39.9
39.9
39.9
39.9

NPV
($M)
$255.0
$253.4
$251.5
$249.3
$246.8
$243.9
$240.6

5.5
5.5
5.1
125.8

1.05
1.05
0.91
24.0

125.7
125.7
108.9
2,874.0

39.9
39.9
33.1
910.8
(NPV@15%)
$255.0

$86.6
$59.7
$28.7

(600-5)*0.9

40

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Steps to Obtain Table 6 (2nd Iteration)


2nd iteration
Year (i)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total

NPVi
$255.0
$253.4
$251.5
$249.3
$246.8
$243.9
$240.6
$236.8
$232.4

Cog
0.118
0.118
0.117
0.117
0.116
0.115
0.115
0.114
0.112

Avg
Ore Grade
0.238
0.238
0.236
0.236
0.236
0.236
0.236
0.235
0.234

Waste
(Mtons)
116.6
102.9
89.1
74.5
61.6
48.2
34.8
20.0
7.0

Ore
(Mtons)
8.9
7.9
6.8
5.7
4.8
3.8
2.7
1.6
0.5

SR
13.1
13.1
13.1
13.1
12.9
12.9
12.9
12.9
15.6

Qm
(Mtons)
14.8
14.8
14.8
14.8
14.6
14.5
14.6
14.6
7.5
125.0

Qc
(Mtons)
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
0.45
8.9

Qr
(ktons)
224.9
224.9
223.0
223.0
223.0
223.0
223.0
222.1
94.8
1,881.8

Profits
($M)
87.8
87.8
86.6
86.7
86.8
86.9
86.9
86.3
30.5
726.4

NPV
($M)
$399.5
$371.7
$339.7
$304.0
$262.9
$215.5
$160.9
$98.2
$26.6

(NPV@15%)

$399.5
Year 1:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(255*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.118

Year 2:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(253.4*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.118

41

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Steps to Obtain Table 6 (3rd Iteration)


3rd iteration
Year (i)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total

NPVi
$399.5
$371.7
$339.7
$304.0
$262.9
$215.5
$160.9
$98.2
$26.6

Cog
0.157
0.149
0.141
0.131
0.120
0.108
0.093
0.077
0.057

Avg
Ore Grade
0.257
0.253
0.250
0.245
0.238
0.232
0.215
0.189
0.158

Waste
(Mtons)
118.1
101.2
84.8
69.0
54.7
40.7
27.5
15.3
7.1

Ore
(Mtons)
7.4
6.6
5.9
4.9
4.2
3.3
2.5
1.7
0.9

SR
15.9
15.4
14.4
14.1
13.2
12.3
11.1
9.0
8.4

Qm
(Mtons)
17.7
17.3
16.2
15.8
14.9
14.0
11.7
9.5
8.8
125.8

Qc
(Mtons)
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
9.5

Qr
(ktons)
242.9
239.1
236.3
231.5
224.9
219.2
203.2
178.6
149.3
1,925.0

Profits
($M)
94.9
93.2
92.8
90.5
87.7
85.3
78.6
66.6
50.0
739.7

NPV
($M)
$411.8
$378.7
$342.2
$300.7
$255.4
$206.0
$151.6
$95.7
$43.5

(NPV@15%)

$411.81
Year 1:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(399.5*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.157

Year 2:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(371.7*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.149

42

Steps to Obtain Table 6 (4th Iteration)


MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

4th iteration
Year (i)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total

NPVi
$411.8
$378.7
$342.2
$300.7
$255.4
$206.0
$151.6
$95.7
$43.5

Cog
0.160
0.151
0.142
0.131
0.118
0.105
0.091
0.076
0.062

Avg
Ore Grade
0.259
0.255
0.250
0.245
0.238
0.230
0.213
0.182
0.162

Waste
(Mtons)
117.0
101.4
85.2
70.0
55.9
41.8
28.0
16.5
8.0

Ore
(Mtons)
7.8
6.7
5.9
5.1
4.2
3.3
2.7
2.0
1.2

SR
15.0
15.1
14.4
13.7
13.3
12.7
10.4
8.3
6.7

Qm
(Mtons)
17.8
17.0
16.2
15.6
14.6
13.9
12.0
10.2
8.5
125.8

Qc
(Mtons)
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
9.5

Qr
(ktons)
244.8
241.0
236.3
231.5
224.9
217.4
201.3
172.0
153.1
1,922.1

Profits
($M)
96.0
94.7
92.8
90.7
88.0
84.3
77.1
61.8
52.6
738.0

NPV
($M)
$412.3
$378.2
$340.2
$298.4
$252.4
$202.3
$148.3
$93.5
$45.7

(NPV@15%)

$412.30
Year 1:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(411.8*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.160

Year 2:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(378.7*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.151

43

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Table 6
Table 6
Year (i)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total

NPVi
$413.8
$380.0
$342.6
$301.4
$256.1
$206.4
$152.0
$98.1
$46.9

Cog
0.161
0.152
0.142
0.131
0.119
0.105
0.091
0.077
0.063

Avg
Ore Grade
0.259
0.255
0.250
0.245
0.239
0.232
0.2131
0.188
0.163

Waste
(Mtons)

Ore
(Mtons)

SR

Qm
(Mtons)
18.0
17.2
16.5
15.7
14.9
14.1
12.1
9.8
7.6
125.8

Qc
(Mtons)
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
9.5

Qr
(ktons)
244.8
241.0
236.3
231.5
225.9
219.2
201.4
177.7
154.0
1,931.7

Profits
($M)
95.7
94.4
92.5
90.6
88.2
85.2
77.0
65.7
54.3
743.7

NPV
($M)
$413.8
$380.2
$342.8
$301.7
$256.3
$206.6
$152.3
$98.2
$47.2

(NPV@15%)

$413.82
Year 1:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(413.8*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.161

Year 2:

Cog=

19+8.35/1.05+(380.0*0.15)/1.05
(600-5)*0.9

0.152

44

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Summary of Lanes Approach

Lanes approach gives 90% higher NPV and 35% lower


undiscounted profits than constant cutoff grade (Table3).

Total tons mined are the same.

Tons milled is lower (36.7Mtons vs. 9.45Mtons)

Ounces of gold recovered is lower (3.37Moz vs. 1.93Moz)

Mine life is significantly shorter (36yrs vs. 10yrs)


45

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Cutoff Grade Optimization 2

How to determine a cutoff grade policy where


Mining capacity, milling capacity, and refining capacity may
be limited,
And
Maximizing NPV of the projects

Read An NPV Maximization Algorithm For Open Pit


Mine Design by Dr. Dagdelen
1

Definition of the Problem


MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

The problem is to maximize the NPV subject to production


constraints:
N
Maximize

NPV = profit(i ) * (1+1d ) i


i =1

Subject to

Qm (i ) M

for i = 1,N

Qc (i) C

for i = 1,N

Q (i ) R

for i = 1,N

r
Where
i: Year indicator

N: Mine life in years


Qm: Amount of total metal mined in a given year (Ore + Waste)
Qc: Ore tonnage processed in a given year
Qr: Recovered metal (in tons) in a given year
M: Annual mining capacity in tons
C: Annual milling capacity in tons
R: Annual refinery capacity in tons

Derivation of Opportunity Costs of


Mining Low Grades
MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Define:

V:

Maximum possible present value of future profits


(cash flows) from the operation (NPV of total operation)

Profits ($M):

Profits (Cash flow) from mining Qm amount of material

Vq:

Maximum possible present value of future profits


(cash flows) after the next Qm amount of material has been
mined

v=V-Vq:

Marginal increase in present value to be achieved by


mining next Qm of material

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Derivation of Opportunity Costs of


Mining Low Grades (Cont.)
V=

( profits ($M ) + Vq )
(1 + d )T

V * (1 + d )T = ( profits ($ M ) + Vq)

If i is relatively small, then

(1 + d ) i = (1 + d * T )

V * (1 + d * T ) = profits ($ M ) + Vq
V + V * d * T = profits ($M ) + Vq
V Vq = profits ($M ) V * d * T
4

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Derivation of Opportunity Costs of


Mining Low Grades (Cont.)
Let v=V-Vq then
v = profits ($M ) d * V * T

The opportunity cost of taking low grades


now when higher grades are still available

We need to set cutoff grade so that we do


not delay high grade
5

Basic Present Value Expression


MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Annual profits can be calculated as follows:


v = ( P r s ) * Qr c * Qc m * Qm f * T d * V * T
Where
P: Metal price per ton of product
r: Marketing cost per ton of product
s: Sales cost per ton of product
c: Processing cost per ton of ore
m: Mining cost per ton of ore
f: Annual fixed administrative costs
T: Number of time periods that will take to mine, concentrate and
refine Qm amount of material from the pit (i.e. years)

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Mine Limiting Case

When the mining capacity is the bottleneck in the system:


Qm
T=
M

( f + d *V )

vm = ( P r s) * Qr c * Qc m +
* Qm
M

vm

vm is a function of
cutoff grades
COG

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

COG of Mine Limiting Case

Cutoff grade of mine limiting case is:


gm =

c
(P r s ) * y

where
y: Metallurgical recovery

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Concentrator Limiting Case

When the concentrator capacity is the bottleneck in the system:


Qc
T=
C

( f + d *V )

vc = ( P r s) * Qr c +
* Qc m * Qm
C

Cutoff grade of concentrator limiting case is:


( f + d *V )
c+
C
gc =
( P r s) * y
9

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Refinery Limiting Case

When the refinery capacity is the bottleneck in the system:


Qr
T=
R
vr = ( P r s

( f + d *V )
) * Qr c * Qc m * Qm
R

Cutoff grade of refinery limiting case is:


gr =

c
( f + d *V )

Pr s
* y
R

10

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Balancing Cutoff Grade (Cont.)


Mine - Mill

C/M

g mc

11

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Balancing Cutoff Grade (Cont.)


Mine - Refinery

R/M

g mr

12

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Balancing Cutoff Grade (Cont.)


Mill - Refinery

R/C

g rc

13

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Open Pit Copper Case Study


Deposit Reserves
(%Cu)

(Mtons)

14

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

First Year Production Reserves


(%Cu)

(Mtons)

15

Open Pit Copper Case Study


MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Unit of mining: ton

Price

(P):

$25/ 1%Cu of one unit of mining

(=$25/1%Cu*1ton = $25/0.01tonCu = $25/20lbsCu


= $1.25/lbCu)
Mining Cost

(m):

$1/ one unit of mining = $1/ton

Concentrator Cost

(c):

$2/ one unit of mining = $2/ton

Refinery Cost

(s):

$5/ 1%Cu of one unit of mining

Fixed Cost

(f):

$300M /yr

Mine capacity

(M):

100M one unit of mining /yr = 100Mtons/yr

Concentrator capacity (C):

50M one unit of mining /yr = 50Mtons/yr

Refinery capacity

40M of 1%Cu of one unit of mining /yr

(R):

(=40M*0.01tonCu /yr = 400k tons Cu /yr)


Recovery

(y):

100%

Discount rate

(d):

15%
16

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Mine Limited Case


(V=0)

(V=1174)

17

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Concentrator Limited Case


(V=0)

(V=1174)

18

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Refinery Limited Case


(V=0)

(V=1174)

19

Balancing Cutoff Grades (V=0)


gm

gr

500

gc

400
300
200
Profit

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Balancing Cutoff Grade

vm

Gopt

100

vc
vr

0
-100

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

-200
-300
COG

Feasible Region

20

Balancing Cutoff Grade


300
250
200
150
100
Profit

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Balancing Cutoff Grades (V=1174)

vm

50

vc

0
-50 0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

vr

-100
-150

Gopt

-200
-250
COG

21

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Limiting Economic Cutoff Grades

Cutoff grade of mine limiting case is (V=0):

c
2($ / ton)
2
gm =
=
=
%Cu = 0.10%Cu
( P s) * y ( 25 5)($ / 1%Cu *1ton) *1 ( 25 5) *1

Cutoff grade of concentrator limiting case is (V=0):

300 M ($ / yr )
( f + d *V )
300
2
($
/
ton
)
+
c+
2+
50 M (ton / yr)
C
50 %Cu = 0.40%Cu
gc =
=
=
( P s) * y
(25 5)($ / 1%Cu * 1ton) * 1 (25 5) * 1

22

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Limiting Economic Cutoff Grades


(Cont.)

Cutoff grade of refinery limiting case is (V=0):

gr =

c
2($ / ton)
=
( f + d *V )

300M ($ / yr)
Ps
* y (25 5)($ / 1%Cu *1ton)
*1
R
40 M (1%Cu *1ton / yr))

2
300

25 5
*1
40

%Cu = 0.16%Cu

23

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Grade Tonnage Curve

24

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Average Grade Above Cutoff

25

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Ore : Material Ratio

26

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Product : Material Ratio

27

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Product : Ore Ratio

28

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Grade Tonnage Relationship


Cutoff
(%Cu)

Quantity
(Mtons)

Tons Below Tons Above Avg Grade


Cutoff
Cutoff
Above Cutoff
(Mtons)
(Mtons)
(%Cu)
(C )

Cu Produced

Product to
Material
Ratio
(R/M)

Product to
Ore
Ratio
(R/C)

Ore to
Waste
Ratio

( R)

Ore to
Material
Ratio
(C/M)

(%Cu of
1ton of Material)

0.00

100

1000

0.500

500

1.0

0.500

0.500

0.00

0.10

100

100

900

0.550

495

0.9

0.495

0.550

0.11

0.20

100

200

800

0.600

480

0.8

0.480

0.600

0.25

0.30

100

300

700

0.650

455

0.7

0.455

0.650

0.43

0.40

100

400

600

0.700

420

0.6

0.420

0.700

0.67

0.50

100

500

500

0.750

375

0.5

0.375

0.750

1.00

0.60

100

600

400

0.800

320

0.4

0.320

0.800

1.50

0.70

100

700

300

0.850

255

0.3

0.255

0.850

2.33

0.80

100

800

200

0.900

180

0.2

0.180

0.900

4.00

0.90

100

900

100

0.950

95

0.1

0.095

0.950

9.00

29

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Balancing Economic Cutoffs


gmc: Ore : Material

= C:M = 50M/100M =0.5

Then, from the table above gmc= 0.50 %Cu


gmr: Product : Material

= R:M = 40M/100M =0.4

Then, from the table above gmr= 0.45 %Cu


grc: Product : Ore

= R:C = 40M/50M =0.8

Then, from the table above grc= 0.60 %Cu

30

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Choosing Optimum Cutoff Grade

31

MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis

Choosing Optimum Cutoff Grade

Gmc = 0.40%Cu
Grc = 0.40%Cu
Gmr = 0.16%Cu

Then,
Gopt = 0.40%Cu

32