Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mechanisation OF Underground Coal Mining Method
Mechanisation OF Underground Coal Mining Method
CIL
1400.00 4.15 337.35 681.34 923.21 49.51 36.54
(i)
WAGE COST PER TONNE OF COAL IS AS HIGH AS 50% APPROX. OF SALE VALUE OF COAL. (ii) GLOBALISATION & LIBERALISATION OF ECONOMY HAS RESULTED IN TO COMMERCIAL COMPETITION FROM IMPORTED COAL (iii) IMPORTED COAL AT COASTAL AREA IS CHEAPER THAN DOMESTIC POWER GRADE COAL WHEN COMPARED TO PER MILLION K.CAL. COAL. (iv) LANDED COST WILL BE AFFECTED BADLY IN FUTURE IF THE RAILWAY FREIGHT OR GOVT. LEVIES ARE INCREASED.
(v) MOST OF THE SUPERIOR GRADE OF COAL IS BLOCKED AT GREATER DEPTH BEYOND THE ECONOMIC REACH OF OPENCAST MINE (vi) OUT OF APPROX. 256 BILLION TONES OF COAL, APPROX. 80 BILLION TONES IS AMENABLE FOR OPENCAST MINE . BEFORE THE O/C RESERVES ARE EXHAUSTED , THERE IS IMMEDIATE NEED TO ESTABLISH APPROPRIATE MASS PRODUCTION TECHNOOGY
98
2002 - 03
46
M E C H A N IS E D M IN IN G P IC K M IN IN G 64 M A N U A L M IN IN G
2011 - 2012 1 0
M E C H A N IS E D M IN IN G P IC K M IN IN G M A N U A L M IN IN G
99
PRESENT TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE BORD & PILLAR METHOD WITH MANUAL LOADING BORD & PILLAR METHOD WITH SDL LOADING MASS PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY
UNDERGROUND PRODUCTIVITY
0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 MINE OMS 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 1 2 3 4 LOADER OMS Vs MINE OMS (LOADER : U/G MANPOW ER) Vs MINE OMS (SURFACE MAN : U/G MAN) Vs OMS
WHERE DO WE NEED TO MECHANISE 1. COAL WINNING OPERATION i) GETTING OF COAL FROM FACE ii) TRANSPORTATION OF COAL ALONG GATE SYSTEM iii)TRANSPORTATION OF COAL THROUGH TRUNK SYSTEM iv) HANDLING OF COAL AT SURFACE 2. COAL FACE MECHANISATION i) GETTING OF COAL ii) SUPPORT OF THE EXPOSED ROOF iii) LOADING OF COAL
STRENGTH OF CONTINUOUS MINER TECHNOLOGY BORD & PILLAR MINING CONTINUES TO BE THE BACK STAY OF U/G MINING OUR WORKMEN - SUPERVISORS ARE CONVERSANT WITH BORD & PILLAR MINING REQUIRES LESSER GEO-TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION THAN PSLW COST OF EQUIPMENT IS LESSER THAN PSLW NOS.OF EQUIPMENT IS LESSER & EASY TO MAINTAIN
DOES NOT REQUIRE MUCH TIME FOR INSTALLATION & FACE TRANSFER FACE IS EQUALLY PRODUCTIVE LIKE PSLW TECHNOLOGY IS FLEXIBLE IT IS CONTINUOUS IN OPERATION
CONFIGURATION OF EQUIPMENT 1. CONTINUOUS MINER 2. SHUTTLE CARS 3. MOBILE ROOF BOLTER 4. SCOOP/LHD 5. LUMP BREAKER 6. BELT CONVEYORS 7. ELECTRICALS
2 x 170kW Cutter Power 530 kW Installed Power 1.8 to 4.6m Cutting Range
Roadway Section
UK Coal Mine
Joy 12CM15
Belt
Feeder-Breaker
Shuttle Car
Continuous Miner
30 m
30 - 70 m
200m
30m
2000m
Highwall Mining:
Mining a visible coal seam by making rectangular, mainly parallel, unsupported drives, using an unmanned cutter head and coal transport system, controlled from a mining unit positioned outside the drive, in front of the seam
Equipment
Base Unit
Length base approx. 20.1 meters Width base approx. 9.2 meters Weight base approx. 160 tonnes Length of pushbeams 6.27 meters 6 tonnes each 50 pushbeams per miner Max. force in: approx. 170 tonnes, out: approx. 350 tonnes
Tracks
Four hydraulically powered tracks articulate over 90 degrees for straight and cross travel Circle mode for accurate heading Each track 1 meter vertical movement for adjusting seam dip and floor contour Turning of each track is achieved automatically
Pushbeams
Pushing Cutterhead straight in Transporting coal Pulling Cutterhead back Enclosed Stackable
Pushbeams
Striker Plates
Cutter Heads
Interchangeable, for seams 0.8 to approx. 5 meters Width 2.9 to 3.5 metres Automatically following seam contour
Anchoring
Generator
Motor Generator Set Capacity 1550KW & 2000 KW
Controls
Touch screen technology Automatic shearing, various options Automatic sumping, various options Straight holes due to rigid string in horizontal direction Follows layers due to flexibility in vertical direction Accurate heading is important to ensure parallel cuts
Mobility
Public road transport: Operational within three days excluding travelling time. Optional: Machine movers for longer hauls, fully assembled Example: During 9 months SHM-20 was moved to 7 different mining pits - some moves over 6 kilometers in distance
Production
Penetration 300 meters Dip of up to 12 degrees Monthly production typically around 100,000 tonnes Operates with a 3 / 4 man crew Up to 70% recovery, subject to - Coal compression resistance - Overburden load - Seam height / Pillar stability
Video
Strength of Technology
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Recovers coal otherwise lost Safe: No man underground Economical: Cheaper than U/G mining Proven: 45 Machines working now Enclosed Pushbeams: No ash dilution Screw Conveyors: Simple, can handle wet coal Compact: Narrow bench or trench Tracks: Easy travelling and positioning Modular: Easy to relocate mine to mine
Mining Methods
Mining Methods
Contour Mining Trench Mining Bench mining Highwall Mining
Bench Mining
Blast Bench
Strip Seam 3
Strip Seam 3
Strip Seam 3
Ready!
Where to be Applied:
1.Thin Seams 2.Beyond Strip Limit 3.Coal Blocked in Boundaries 5.Spoils, Roads, Power Lines 6.Villages
Benefits
Coal otherwise lost can be recovered Low cost per ton compared to underground Up to 100.000 ton per month per machine
1/ To receive coal from shearer and carry it along the coal face. 2/ To provide base for the Shearer and anchorage for Shearer chain 3/ To provide anchorage to powered support or advance 4/ To enable a system of continuous mines because the conveyor being flexible MAIN COMPNENTS OF AFC 1/ Drive Unit 2/ Return Unit
ANCIALLARY EQUIPMENT SPILL PLATE TO TO TO TO PREVENT SPILLAGE OF COAL ANCHOR POWERED SUPPORT GUIDE POWER LOADER PROTECT CABLE & HSES RAM PATE
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 1990 1991 1992 1993 Production year wise 1994 1995 2004
4.5
80
2.5 60 2
40
1.5
1 20 0.5
Productivity
USA -14 tonne per hour -14800 tonne per man year
70
60
% drivage system
40
30
20
10
Higher up time
5000
3500
1500
1000 1 500
20
15
D=0 D = 30 D = 60 D = 120
10
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Panel Length
80
70
60
Number of Panels
20
10
5000
3000
2000
1000
0 Seam Height Uni directional Bi directional Cutting sequence Half Opening Half Web
ECONOMICS
S l. N o . e s c rip t io n D
R a je n d r a C o llie r y (L o n g w a l
1 9 9 7 -9 8 1 9 9 8 -9 9 U p t o J u ly '9 9 U p t o J u ly '9 8 R s . / T % o f t o tR s . / T % o f t o tR s . / T % o f t o tR s . / T % o f t o t a al al al cost cost cost cost 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 O .M .S 0 .7 6 -E .M .S . 3 9 1 .9 5 -W a g e C o s t 5 2 4 .8 1 4 6 .5 O /H C o s t 4 5 .9 1 4 .0 7 S t o re C o s t 1 5 8 . 1 8 1 4 . 0 2 P o w e r C o s t 1 6 8 .6 8 1 4 .9 5 C o a l T ra n . c o s t3 0 . 8 1 2 . 7 3 In t e re s t 1 1 3 .9 9 1 0 .1 D e s c rip t io n 5 8 . 0 4 5 . 1 5 M is c . c o s t 2 8 .1 2 .4 9 P ro d . c o s t 1 1 2 8 . 5 2 -S a le va lu e 8 9 0 . 8 5 -P ro fit (-) 2 3 7 . 6 7 -1 .9 2 -- 2 . 9 4 4 4 8 .3 1 -- 4 3 4 . 5 7 2 3 5 .1 1 3 3 .5 7 1 4 8 .6 4 4 3 .8 8 6 .2 7 4 0 .9 4 3 .5 5 6 .2 2 3 4 .6 6 7 7 .8 4 1 1 .1 1 6 9 .5 7 3 3 .7 9 4 .8 2 4 1 .8 2 0 6 .6 5 2 9 .5 5 0 .4 7 5 4 .5 6 7 .7 9 7 7 .1 9 5 .0 7 0 .0 1 2 1 .2 3 7 0 0 .4 5 -- 4 8 4 . 4 6 930 -- 8 7 4 . 6 3 2 2 9 .5 5 -- 3 9 0 . 1 7 --3 0 .6 8 8 .4 4 7 .1 5 1 4 .3 6 8 .6 2 1 0 .4 2 1 5 .9 3 4 .3 8 ---0 .7 1 3 6 6 .0 5 5 1 8 .0 7 3 9 .2 3 8 0 .3 1 8 8 .1 9 3 1 .2 4 2 6 .1 4 5 .2 6 3 1 .1 3 9 5 9 .5 2 977 1 7 .2 8 --5 3.99 4 .0 9 8 .3 7 1 9.61 3 .2 6 2 .7 2 4 .7 2 3 .2 4 ---
S l. N o . e s c rip t io n D
B a lr a m p u r C o llie r y (L o n g w a l s ta r te d fr o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 9 9 7 -9 8 1 9 9 8 -9 9 U p t o J9u9ly '9 9 U p t o J u ly '9 8 R s . / T % o f t o tR s . / T % o f t o tR s , / T % o f t o tR s . / T % o f t o t a al al al cost c ost cos t cost O .M .S . 1.04 -- 1 . 3 9 -- 3 . 8 6 -- 1 . 6 7 -E .M .S . 3 1 9.27 -- 3 6 1 . 3 4 -- 3 7 5 . 9 -- 3 2 1 . 8 5 -W a g e c o s t 3 1 0 .6 2 3 7 .3 2 3 6 2 .5 5 3 1 .6 9 9 7 .8 4 2 2 .4 7 1 9 3 .8 2 3 4 .5 4 O /H C o s t 4 9 .8 8 5 .9 9 5 6 .0 4 6 .7 6 4 3 .4 3 9 .9 7 7 1 .0 6 1 2 .6 6 S t o re c o s t 1 2 9 .9 7 1 5 .6 2 1 1 7 .7 3 1 4 .2 1 7 2 .9 1 1 6 .7 4 1 0 9 .3 1 1 9 .4 8 P o w e r c o s t 1 7 1 .1 9 2 0 .5 7 1 2 0 .7 5 1 4 .5 7 7 0 .9 3 1 6 .2 9 9 5 .1 8 1 6 .9 6 C o a l T ra n s . c o s2t 6 . 7 8 3 . 2 1 1 9 . 3 2 2 . 3 3 2 1 . 3 6 4 . 9 1 1 7 . 9 8 3 .2 In t e re s t 5 6 .6 2 5 .1 2 1 3 4 .1 9 1 6 .2 3 8 .1 9 8 .7 7 1 7 .6 9 3 .2 D e p re c ia t io n 4 2 . 5 1 5 . 1 1 8 1 . 7 4 9 . 8 7 6 1 . 4 4 1 4 . 1 1 3 2 . 0 6 5 . 1 1 M is c . c o s t 4 4 .7 2 5 .3 7 3 6 .2 4 4 .3 7 2 9 .3 6 6 .7 4 2 3 .9 9 4 .2 8 P ro d . c o s t 8 3 2.29 -- 8 2 8 . 5 6 -- 4 3 5 . 4 6 -- 5 6 1 . 0 9 -S a le va lu e 8 5 2.02 -- 8 8 8 . 1 7 -- 8 3 7 . 3 7 -- 9 1 9 . 8 9 -P ro fit 1 9.73 -- 5 9 . 6 1 -- 4 0 1 . 9 1 -- 3 5 8 . 8 --
BANGWAR SDL
1.99 D 0.90 386.76 46.14% 433.83 136.96 108.10 53.98 97.85 940.19 740.59 -199.60
BALRAMPUR LONGWALL
6.79 C 2.82 375.58 23.51% 133.61 86.47 94.35 59.19 82.54 568.40 818.95 250.55
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Rev.Production (LT) Grade OMS (Te) EMS (Rs.) Wages cost as % of Total Wages Cost ( Rs./Te) Power Cost ( Rs/Te) Store Cost ( Rs/Te) Interest (Rs/Te) Depreciation (Rs/Te) Total Cost ( Rs/te) Sale Price (Rs/Te) Profit/Loss ( Rs / Te)
THANK YOU
What is Support Capacity What is Rated Load Density or Load Density at yield
Overall Rated Load density = X .RLD X Depends on 1) System Hydraulic Leakage 2) Deviation of span 3) Deviation of setting load & yield load
What is Load on the support What is the caving height Height of extraction Caving height = H = -----------------------------Bulk factor - 1
Strata above goaf can be divided in three zones :1. Caving zone 2. Fractured zone 3. Subsidence zone Stress on Pillar = d g H equivalent to 0.025H Mpa What is RQD
EXPERIENCE AT JHANJRA i) Support density of 55 T/Sq.m.(KM 130) was less. ii) Where H/t ratio more than 10 - no significant strata problem. iii) Panel experienced strata problem where H/t 8 or less. iv) Support density of 88T/Sq.m. proved better for strata control point of view. v) MLD/RLD was 0.8 with 55 T/sq.m. vi) MLD/RLD was 0.6 with 88 T/sq.m. vii) Subsidence 57% to 58% of Height of Extraction viii)Convergence 7%- 8% of Height of Extraction
Borehole Number BH 1 BH 2 BH 5 BH 6 BH 7
Position of centre from start of face 30m 150m 300m 600m 1050m
47.5
49.3
53.6
54.0
26.3
26.5
40.05
40.05
2.4 (2..25)
2.4 (2.25)
2.25 (2.25)
2.25 (2.25)
10.9
11.0
17.8
17.8
BALRAMPUR
i) Higher average RQD - 81-90 ii) Higher H/t. ratio 10.9 - 17.8
RAJENDRA
i)
RQD average 70. Lesser than Balrampur & same in the range of Jhanjra. However, the high RQD(84) was above the coal seam 3 - 5 mtrs.
ii) Moderately cavable (CI - 3513) against Jhanjra (2426 - 3076 ). iii) Higher H/t ratio 13.2 - 14.2
EXPERIENCE AT BALRAMPUR 1ST PANEL UPTO FACE ADVANCEMENT OF 160 MTRS. i) Panel started 11.5.98 ii) Periodic fall varies 20 -25 mtrs. interval iii) First main fall at 80 mtrs.- extracted area 12000 sq.m. 16 supports in the mid zone collared. iv) 2nd main all at 160 mtrs. when exposed area 24000 sq.m. -- Convergence max. 630 mm -- Peak leg pressure - 400 kg./sq.cm. -- 13 supports got collared. v) Face was re-started after taking the following actions: -- To increase yield fro 35 MPa to 40 MPa -- To provide max. hydraulic travel in leg
-- To induce caving by deep hole blasting from surface. -- To restrict the overhang to max. 36 mtrs. & Blasting to at an interval of 15 m from face. vi) First blasting was done at 178 m from strart of face when face was at 191 mtrs. vii) During blasting PPV at 15 m face on surface -67 mm/sec. PPV at centre of face at U/G -149 mm/sec. PPV at main gate at U/G - 51 mm/sec. PPV at tail gate at U/G - 31 mm/sec. viii) Radial distance from the edge of chock to blast hole - 22m
SURFACE GROUND MOVEMENT STUDY Subsidence Grid At start of panel at 6m interval along centre of panel from (-) 30m to 56m From 56m onwards at 15m interval
in
45-65
65-70
70-75
75- YL
Total
Frequency Percentage
98 80 29 94 69 74
13 10 2 6 13 14
8 6 6 7
5 4 5 5
Before blasting
5%
67 %
28 %
After blasting
14 %
81 %
5%
Complete panel
11 %
76 %
13 %
the
3rd day
9th day
14th day
Before blasting
3.7 to 13.5
83 to 96
98 to 100
After blasting
50 to 70
84 to 99
95 to 100
Panel
Percentag e
56
11
11
22
100
Weighting Behevior
Convergence mm/hr Before Blasting After Blasting Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
< 40 1 20 16 76
40-60 1 20 3 14
60-80 1 20 1 5
> 80 2 40 1 5
Observation
-----
Magnitude of weighting on support reduce. Smoothening of subsidence profile. Support performance improved Maximum subsidence 118 cm i.e. 52.4% of seam extracted when face advanced 3.4 D and length of face 2.9 D
-- In low RQD regime, subsidence used to reach closer to the Longwall face and crack on surface had appeared within 4 mtrs. of face. -- Frequency of periodic weighting increased. -- Pressure Profile of leg circuit did not change. -- Convergence in leg redued. -- % subsidence reduced from over 50% to 42.3% after blasting due to increase of bulking factor. -- At 15 mtrs. interval blasting 12% of max. on 3rd day ater blasting. 60% of max. on 7th day after blasting
--
--
--
At 20 mtrs. interal blasting: 17% of max. on 3rd day 63% of max. on 7th day At 30 mtrs. interval 11% of max. on 3rd day 33% of max. on 7th day At 60 mtrs. interval 3% of max. on 3rd day 7% of max. on 7th day
CONCLUSION
--------
p1 - initial support resistance after cut was 69 T/sq.m. & increased to 79 T/sq.m. p2- started with 79T/sq.m. P16- started with 79 T/sq.m. Before blasting, high convergence 126 mm/min. was observed. Due to presence of stony bed with 9/10 times the thickness of extraction, the caving was incomplete. H/t ratio was 11, 18 & 14 in different panels. Induced caving by blasting, reduced the intensity of convergence but loading on support was higher.
--
---
Rate of face advance proved to have direct influence on convergence i.e. higher rate over 9/10 m/day contributed to roof control problem. Average rate of advance of 6/7 mtrs./day had better strata control. Ratio of MLD/RLD was high in the mid zone ie. 35 to 80 nos. supports. It is almost equal during major weighting.
--
Induced caving had i) Increased loading on supports ii) Reduced convergence iii) Increased periodicity of weighting between 10 - 20 m iv) Reduced periodicity beyond 30 m. v) Increased initial subsidence vi) Blasting increased better bulk factor vii) Blasting interval 20 m is established to be optimum. viii) Support resistance should be around 105-110T/sq.m.
---
H/t ratio should be more than 15 if support resistance is less than 90 T/sq.m. Higher support resistance may reduce the H/t ratio.
HOW TO MAKE MECHANISATION A SUCCESS EFFECT OF DELAYS IN LOGWALL PERFORMANCE FACTORS WHICH GUIDE PRODUCTION DELAY ANALYSIS
D O W N T IM E A N A L Y S IS O F M E C H A N IS E D L O N G W A L L O P E R A T IN G W IT H IN C IL - O T H E R T H N M O O N ID IH
N a m e o f M P a n e l N M. R T in in e o M A T lo s t d e t o b re a k d o w n in % a g e M A T lo s t d u e ino%daegla y in % t e % g e o f S h e a re r F C / S TLa t e P . p a c kE le c t . To t a l inS h ift B a d g e o - o w e rF a c e p re - u t b y T o t a l A G / P O e MAT b e lt c h o c k % a g e ocf h a n g e in in g fa ilu re p a ra t io n c le a r- in % g e m M A T t im e c o n d it and ance of M A T io n o t h e rs D H E M O W -8 3 0 .5 1 0 .0 7 1 5 .5 3 5 .0 3 1 .1 3 3 .9 1 3 5 .6 7 4 .9 3 4 .8 9 5 .9 8 6 .19 1 1 .9 33 .98 M A IN W -9 3 8 .4 6 1 .6 3 1 2 .6 7 .8 2 .9 2 -2 4 .9 5 --- 1 . 7 5 1 1 . 4 8 2 3 . 3 4 3 6 . 5 9 S E TA L P U R H -2 P P H -3 P A TH A KHE RA 3 7.8 1 6.44 1 0 .9 5 6 .16 2 0.2 6 6.86 1 1 .2 2 1 0.4 5 .84 2 4.9 4 .2 5 3 3 .6 4 1 0 .9 8 4 .8 9 5 8 .2 7 3 .8 6 --5 .0 4 5 .1 3 5.96 7.82
6 .5 7 28 .55 4 .6 6 21 .47
11 .8 9 .26 1 .13 1 7.22 7 .15 0 .86 12 .9 1 2 .9 5 1 .25 13 .5 7 .19 0.7 34 8 .88 0.6
3 3 .4 9 4 0 .0 3 4 4 .2 9 3 2 .4 9 5 2 .3 2
------
D E L A Y A N A L Y S IS O F L O N G W A L L F A C
NAM E O F M IN E
M R T IN M A T L O S T D U E T O B R E A K D O W A T L O S T D U E T O D % M N O F M A T S H .F C / B S GL BS U P E L C T O T A LH IF TB A D P O W E R C EC O A L A P . S FA C H A R GG EE O F A IL U PR R E PC AL -E A E T IM E L O G Y R A T IO N N C RA A V E R A G E O F2 7 . 0 7 4 . 6 2 8 . 3 3 3 . 5 4 1 . 3 9 0 . 8 41 8 . 7 2 5 . 2 9 1 7 . 2 7 2 . 6 9 1 8 . 5 8 9 . 5 8 A LL P A NE LS O F M O O N ID IH (1 0 P A N E L S ) A V R A G E O F 3 3 . 7 31 2 . 7 1 1 0 . 6 43 . 7 7 5 . 6 8 6 . 6 63 9 . 4 6 2 . 2 1 . 4 4 2 . 2 2 1 3 . 7 5 7 . 2 A L L C IL M IN E S O TH E R N TH A N M N D (9 P A N E L S )
A L L C IL 3 0 . 8 8 . 6 6 5 9 . 4 8 5 . 6 5 3 . 5 3 53 . 7 52 9 . 0 9 3 . 7 4 5 9 . 3 6 2 . 4 4 51 6 . 1 7 8 . 3 9 3 5 (1 9 P A N E L S )
D O W N T IM E A N A L Y S IS O F M E C H N IS E D L O N G W A L L
P anel N o. M A T los t due to break dow n in perc entage M A T lodtdue totodelay los t due delay M R T in % hearer A F C /S TLG ate/beltP .P ac k / E lec t. Total in S hift S B ade G eo-ut by e O of M A T C hoc k % of M A T hange m ining delay C c onditioninc luding P ow er failure B alram pur 54.49 11.53 1.88 0.07 0 0.78 14.26 0 21.02 10.23 P -2
D O W N T IM E A N A L YS IS O F M E C H N IS E D L O N G W A L L F A C E S
M A T los t due to break dow n in perc entage M A T lodtdue totodelay los t due delay P anel N o. R T in % hearer A F C /S TLG ate/beltP .P ac k / E lec t. Total in S hift M S B ade G eo-ut by e O of M A T C hoc k % of M A T hange m ining delay C c onditioninc luding P ow er failure R ajendra P -16 panel 51.98 14.63 4.04 0.68 0.18 1.86 21.39 0 16.69 9.94
D E L A Y A N A L Y S IS B A L R A M P U R P -1 P A N E L
28%
M RT
54%
B /D O W N
ID L E H R S
18%
D O W N T IM E A N A L Y S IS B A L R A M P U R P -2 P A N E L 12% 2% 4%
S HEARER A F C /S T L G ATE BEL T
19% 63%
P O W ER P AC
E L E C T R IC A L
MONTH
M O N T H W IS E F A C E O M S R A J E N D R A P -1 6 P A N E L
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 MARC H'99 APRIL'9 9 MAY'99 DEC'98 JUNE'9 9 JAN'99 FEB'99 JULY'9 9
M O NTH
PROFIT/TE IN RS.
MONTH
HOW TO REDUCE MACHINE DOWNTIME -- ANALYSIS OF BREAKDOWN -- PREVENTION -- APPRAISAL -- FAILURE RECTIFICATION /--------------------\ : Prevention : : 3% : : -------------------:/----------------------\ : Appraisal : : Prevention : : 7-10% : : 6-8% : : ------------------- : : ----------------------- : : Failure : : Appraisal 1-2% : : 15-22% : : Failure 2-5% : : -- ----------------------------------------------------- :
M AIN T E N AN C E P R O C E S S
100 90 80 70 AVAILABILITY 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 B reak D ow n P reventing P redic tive S eries 1
1. IDENTIFICATION AND DETECTION OF TROUBLE QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. 2. GETTING THE EQUIPMENT RIGHT AT FIRST AND WITH MINIMUM POSSIBLE TIME 3. PREVENTION AGAINST OCCURRENCE OF EQUIPMENT FAILURE 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ON QUALITY
AS
DEFICIENCY IN P.P.M. (i) It is basically time-based maintenance (ii) It is regardless of its operating condition and based on past performance. (iii)It relies on judgment and skill of the maintenance crew (iv) It stands on the theory of probability and definite prediction is not possible. (v) Internal inspection is time consuming. (vi) Over and under maintenance are quite common (vii)Inspection is carried out when machine is idle and not in running condition.
RELIABLITY LONGWALL EQUIPMENT WORKS IN A CHAIN. ROLL OF MANAGEMENT 1. PROPER INFRASTRUCTURAL FACILITY 2. TRAINED AND SKILLED WORK FORCE 3. PROPER LIAISON AND INTERACTION WITH EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS 4. INTRODUCTIN OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM TO GENERATE AND MONITOR OPERATION DATA 5. GENERATION OF AN EFFECTIVE MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT CULTURE -- TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT CONCEPT -- CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
DATA GENERATIONS FREQUENCY OF INSPECTION INSPECTION REPORTS FAILURE REPORTS SPARES CONSUMED TIME TO RECTIFY EFFICIENT PROGRAMME FOR REFURBISHMENT REDUCE TURN AROUND TIME. JUST IN TIME CONCEPT OF SPARE TESTING BY STIMULATION INDIGENOUS DEVELOPMENT OF SPARES
REGULAR EVALUATION USE OF COMPUTER -- DELAY ANALYSIS (EASY) -- OWNERSHIP COST. REPCOST. -- PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE TREND -- MACHINE PERFORMANCE -- RCM -- SPARE MANAGEMENT.
TRAINING
BASIC TRAINING SCHEME 1. CLASS ROOM THEORETICAL TRAINING FOLLOWED BY 2. CLOSE SUPERVISION ON JOB TRAINING. 3. ADVANCED THEORETICAL CLASS ROOM TRAINING 4. DEPLOYMENT ON ACTUAL JOB. 5. REFRESHERS TRAINING.
-- TEAM BUILDING
------PROBLEM ANALYSIS COMMUNICATION SKILL LISTENING SKILL WORK STANDARD SAFETY AWARENESS FORWARD PLANNING.