Caterpillar Product Information

Performance Report
September, 2000

Caterpillar 5110B ME

Job Purpose Compare productivity of Caterpillar 5110B ME to that of an

Hitachi EX1100

Job Site Gulf state lignite mine, U.S.A.

Study Date 15 August, 2000

Material Unconsolidated Overburden Sands 2500 lbs/LCY

Loading Tools Caterpillar 5110B Mass Excavator 9.4 yd (7.2 m)

Hitachi EX1100 Mass Excavator 8.5 yd (6.6 m)

For Dealer Sales Personnel

Haul Units Komatsu 330 (100 ton)

Observers John Ingle, Mining Shovel Group, Caterpillar Inc.

Grant Allen, Mining Shovel Group, Caterpillar Inc.
Scott Shaffer, Mining Shovel Group, Caterpillar Inc.
Joline Grose, Mining Shovel Group, Caterpillar Inc.

Written By James Humphrey, Mining Shovel Group, Caterpillar Inc.

Significant Results The 5110B was 25% to 32 % more productive than the Hitachi
EX1100. The 5110B advantage came from cycle time and bucket
payload.

Test Procedure Machine cycles were timed using a portable computer and software.
During each cycle four separate time segments were collected. The
sum of the segment averages was taken as the total cycle time per
pass, then a standard truck exchange time of 0.7 minutes was used to
develop the production estimate.

Trucks were loaded both on the bench with the shovel and on the
level below. Payload was gathered from a truck weigh scale system.

Machine Configuration 5110B

Boom 24.9 ft (7.6m)
Stick 11.1 ft (3.4m)
Bucket 9.4 yd (7.2 m)
Machine Weight 275,000 lb. (125 tonne)
Net Power 696 hp (519 kW)
Breakout Force 112,725 lb. (501 kN)
Crowd Force 98,775 lb. (439 kN)
Rated Bucket Payload 15.1 ton (13.7 tonne)

2000 Caterpillar PR00263

Job Description The EX1100 worked the same face as the 5110B, the face height
varied somewhat but was in the order of 10 12 feet (3.5 meters)
tall. Trucks were loaded from two different levels, one with the
trucks on the same level of the excavators and another with the
trucks on the floor of the cut, below the excavators. In both cases
the trucks were loaded in a pass-by style.

Example of Hitachi EX1100 loading on the same level

Example of 5110B loading below the level

2000 Caterpillar PR00263

Results As the summarized data in the tables show the, 5110B was
considerably more productive than the Hitachi EX1100. The 5110B
was from 25 to 32% more productive depending on the truck loading
position. The production advantage was primarily due to cycle time
and payload.

The 5110B was consistently faster in the swing component of the

cycle, approximately 15% faster on the average. This was
particularly evident when the machines were hoisting while
swinging to the trucks on the same level. The 5110B clearly showed
the benefit of superior horsepower and hydraulic flow rate with
better balanced hoist and swing motions. On same level loading the
EX1100 operator had to delay swing and wait for the boom to hoist.
Average cycle times for the 5110B ranged from 20 to 24 seconds.

The 5110B larger payload resulted in fewer passes, over 30% fewer
passes in the case when loading the truck below level.

It should be noted that the 5110B was configured with a rock bucket
and was operating below rated tonnage capacity. The productivity
would have been enhanced if it had been fitted with a lighter weight
medium duty bucket more suited to these unconsolidated sands.

Production Comparison

1800
Trucks on Same Level Trucks Below Level
1600
1400
Tons per 50 min hr

1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
EX1100 5110B 1
EX1100 5110B

2000 Caterpillar PR00263

Results

Trucks on Same Level

Hitachi EX1100 CAT 5110
Avg Dump Time (sec) 3.9 3.5
Avg Swing Empty Time (sec) 6.6 6.2
Avg Load Time (sec) 6.5 6.6
Avg Swing Loaded Time (sec) 9.1 8.2
Avg Cycle Time (sec) 26.17 24.46
Avg. Truck Cycle w/0.7 min exchange (min) 3.94 3.39
Avg. # of Passes 8.3 7.4
Avg. Bucket Load (tons) 11.1 13.3
Avg. Truck Load (tons) 91.8 98.9
System Production (tons/50 min. hr) 1166 1461
System Production (BCY/50 min. hr)* 706 885
Metric Summary
Avg. Bucket Load (tonnes) 10.1 12.1
Avg. Truck Load (tonnes) 83.3 89.7
System Production (tonnes/50 min. hr) 1058 1326
System Production (BCM/50 min. hr)* 540 677
* Volumes based on 3300 lbs/BCY (1.96 tonnes/BCM)

Trucks Below Shovel Level

Hitachi EX1100 CAT 5110
Avg Dump Time (sec) 2.6 3.3
Avg Swing Empty Time (sec) 5.5 5.0
Avg Load Time (sec) 6.6 6.6
Avg Swing Loaded Time (sec) 5.6 5.3
Avg Cycle Time (sec) 20.21 20.19
Avg. Truck Cycle w/0.7 min exchange (min) 3.4 2.7
Avg. # of Passes 8.8 6.7
Avg. Bucket Load (tons) 9.4 13.0
Avg. Truck Load (tons) 83.4 87.1
System Production (tons/50 min. hr) 1231.8 1625.1
System Production (BCY/50 min. hr) 746.5 984.9
Metric Summary
Avg. Bucket Load (tonnes) 8.6 11.8
Avg. Truck Load (tonnes) 75.7 79.0
System Production (tonnes/50 min. hr) 1118 1475
System Production (BCM/50 min. hr) 571 753
* Volumes are estimates based on 3300 lbs/BCY (1.96 tonnes/BCM)

The information contained herein is intended for circulation only to Caterpillar and dealer employees whose duties
require knowledge of such reports and is intended exclusively for their information and training. It may contain
unverified analysis and facts observed by various Caterpillar or dealer employees. However, effort has been made to
provide reliable results regarding any information comparing Caterpillar built and competitive machines. Effort has
been made to use the latest available spec sheet and other material in the full understanding that these are subject to
change without notice.
Any reproduction of this release without the foregoing explanation is prohibited.

2000 Caterpillar PR00263