Blast Fragmentation Management and its

Impact on Gold Mining Process

SAIMM Drilling and Blasting School
JUNE 2005
FJ Fourie and T Zaniewski
Agenda
Why optimize u/g blasting
Source of the gold losses
Cost implication of the gold losses
Some steps into gold loss research
Possible methods to reduce gold losses
Impact of explosives on fragmentation
Fragmentation evaluation and test results
Optimizing fragmentation
Future work
Conclusions and recommendations
Why Change ?
Inconsistent drilling and blasting discipline
Gold embedded in 2 - 5 mm thick bottom layer of
carbonaceous reefs (Vaal Reef)
Gold occurs in small particles ( - micron size)
During the blast gold is liberated and can be lost
Low MCF 58 % - 70 %, average 67.30 %
Improved safety
Lets accept that we lose 30% of gold
We need better gold carrier
Reef Appearance
2-5 mm
VAAL REEF CARBON VAAL REEF CARBON
SEAM SEAM
5 mm
5 mm
Scanning Electron Scanning Electron
Microscope Image Microscope Image
Gold association
50m
Au
resin
50m
Au
resin
Occluded
Occluded
Au
py
25m
Au
py
25m
Liberated
Liberated
100m
Au
qz
resin
py
100m
Au
qz
resin
py
Attached
Attached
Past Projects Aimed in Gold
Recovery Improvement
The mining
method
Reason for failure
1
Diamond Saw Cutting High cost, bulky equipment and
complicated logistics
2
Diamond Wire Cutting High cost and jamming of the wire
3
Selective Blasting Mining Contamination of the reef with waste too
high
4
Rock Splitter High cost and low reliability, efficiencies
low
5
PCF High cost, and high dust and gas
concentration
6
Threshold Blasting High dust concentration, stope drill rigs
needed for accurate drilling.
Objectives
To control the blast that gold particles are not
liberated
To improve MCF
To reduce amount of fines during the blast
To find a more effective transport medium for
gold from face to gold plant
To eliminate gold migration into cracks
To obtain uniform fragmentation of blasted
rock
To improve safety
The past
Powderised rock
Anfo blast
Powder Factor = 3.45 kg/m
Blast damage
Overcharging with Anfo
Implication of Gold Loss
May-05
R' 000 Mine per year
Mine Gold kg-04 MCF-04 1.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% @ 10 %
GNM 2,060 67.35 2,599,852 12,999,258 25,998,515 38,997,773 311,982,183
Kopanang 1,258 69.55 1,537,455 7,687,275 15,374,551 23,061,826 184,494,608
Tau Lekoa 760 80.87 798,813 3,994,065 7,988,129 8,252,401 95,857,549
Mponeng 1,136 85.75 1,126,064 5,630,321 11,260,641 8,252,401 135,127,697
Tautona 1,472 79.44 1,575,025 7,875,126 15,750,252 15,996,363 189,003,021
Savuka
408
84.02 412,759 2,063,794 4,127,589 4,637,205 49,531,064
Anglogold Total R/mth 8,049,968 40,249,838 80,499,677 99,197,969
Anglogold Total R/yr 96,599,612 482,998,061 965,996,122 1,190,375,624 965,996,122
Gold Price R/kg 85,000
Blast Optimisation Project - Potential financial gain due to improved MCF
Percentage improvement
Initial trails and test indicate a potential
for blast optimization to influence at this level
Assumed gold price R 85 000/kg
Project Stages
AEL Power Sieve Tests
Thumb Blocks
Gold dispersed in mining water and ventilation ducts
Screening and grading of the blasted rock (SGS
Lakefield Research)
Gold deportment study
Digital images fragmentation distribution analysis
RFID tags (CSIR)
Explosives testing Kubela, R 100 G, Rioflex
Power Sieve Test
Anfex Anfex Powergel Powergel
Tamping 813 810
Images 48 9 43 12
Xc 75.17 100.08 76.59 62.39
n 0.94 1.01 1.09 1.19
mm mm mm mm
P20 Size 14.29 19.98 22.70 25.96
P50 Size 46.24 73.25 61.92 60.66
P80 Size 127.65 157.90 104.57 103.10
Top Size 282.69 332.09 191.67 181.31
X
c
mean
fragmentation
size
n uniformity
index
P
20
mean
size at 20%
passing
Kopanang requirements
X = 125 mm
N =, > 1.2
Fragmentation
Uniformity Factor
n = 0.75
n = 1.50
n = 1.0
Digital imaging for Power Sieve
Non - uniform fragmentation with high content of fines
Power Sieve
Based on digital images of fragmented rock
AEL POWERSIEVE
FRAGMENTATION DISTRIBUTION
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
0 2 7
1
3
2
7
5
3
1
0
0
2
5
0
7
5
0
2
0
0
0
Size mm
%

p
a
s
s
i
n
g
Anfex
PG 813
PG 810
Increasing uniformity reduces oversize
and fines
After AEL
0 2 5 10 20 40 80 160
10
0
20
30
40
%

R
e
t
a
i
n
e
d

o
n

s
i
e
v
e
0 2 5 10 20 40 80 160
n=0.75
n=1.00
n=1.50
Si eve si ze, X c m
Uni f or mi t y,
n
X
c

Gold dispersed in mine water

Determine whether gold is
getting lost through water as
used underground
Determine whether gold is
getting lost through airways
Try and quantify the losses
Real losses are the focus,
not apparent losses
Gold unaccounted for
(28.6%)
Recovered Gold
(69%)
Real losses
(0.4%)
Air Borne Dust Migration during the Blast
AU concentrati on and di stri buti on
i n venti l ati on ai r di rectl y after the bl ast
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
3.5 5.6 6.4 7.0 8.5
Di stance from face, m
m
g
/
m

0.0E+00
1.0E-05
2.0E-05
3.0E-05
4.0E-05
5.0E-05
6.0E-05
7.0E-05
g
r
a
m
s
AU in area (g)
AU concetration
Tot al AU in air
dir ect ly af t er blast
Assumptions:
Air flow - 8 m/sec
Blast duration - 24 sec
Dust air born - 10 min after blast
Bulk Fragmentation Sampling
Collection of samples for Fragmentation and Gold Analysies
3.0 m
Pan position during the blast
Pan position after the blast
Legend
Prop
Camlock
Air hoist
Plank
By T Zaniewski
Monorope
Pack marked for AU
sampling
Collection of samples for Fragmentation and Gold Analysies
3.0 m
Pan position during the blast
Pan position after the blast
Legend
Prop
Camlock
Air hoist
Plank
By T Zaniewski
Monorope
Pack marked for AU
sampling
Taking Sample for
Physical Screening and Grading
High accuracy
Trusted results as screening
and grading is done by third
party
3 D representation
High cost
Labour intensive
Long waiting time for the results
Bulk pan sampling method
Done in conjunction with SGS Lakefield Research Laboratories
Gold Deportment Study
Anfo vs Kubela -75 um
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<
5
0
0
5
0
0
-
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
-
5
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
-
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
-
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
-
4
0
0
0
0
%

p
a
s
s
i
n
g
Anfo -Lib Anfo non - Lib
Kubela lib Kubela non lib
Screening and grading cont
Explosives
Fines < 1.0 mm,
%
Au, %
Anfex 9.7 24.0
R100 G 7.9 17.5
Powergel 5.7 14.0
Kubela 420 4.2 7.5
Gold balance in fines
vs. explosives type
Explosives
type
AU
liberated
%
AU
Occluded
%
AU
Attached
%
AU in Floats
%
Anfex
34.6 13.1 16.9 35.4
Kubela 420
19.6 21.0 7.6 51.9
Gold balance in fines cont
If mines gold called for is 1676 kg per month than:
Explosives
type
AU in < 1.0
mm
%
AU in < 1.0
mm
kg
AU potential at
loss , kg
Anfex
24.0 401
% of AU at risk
162.8
Kubela 420
7.5 126
% of AU at risk
29.2
Kubela 420 Conversion Results
Target Achieved
Fines production
< 5 % 4.2 %
7.5 %
19.6 %
1.2
12.94 R/m

Safer than Anfo - no explosives

related incidents
0 0
Gold contents in fines after blast
< 10 %
Gold liberation
?
Fragmentation distribution
N > 1
Explosives Cost R/m
No wastage
Neutral
< 12.5 R/m
Ease to use
User friendly
Acceptance by the crew
high
Implementation process
Within 1 month
Results with the Kubela 420
Conversion complete in Sep 04
2000 boxes of explosives per month less
Powder factor down from 3.45 kg/m to 2.2 kg/m
Production up - 6 %
Fragmentation changed in right direction
Stope grade down
Belt grade up
MCF up from - 67 % to - 71% avg.
Gold plant lower consumption of the steel balls and
further optimization of the milling process
Fragmentation Down Stream
Benefits
Area Mined M
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
m

m
32010 41512 38880 39985 38962 41914 40107 38103 39719 43275 42972 42223 40193 43266 37437 36838 43439
J 04 F04 M04 A04 M04 J 04 J 04 A04 S04 O04 N04 D04 J 05 F05 M05 A05 M05
Jan Aug 04 avg 38 479
Sep 04 May 05 41 040
Improvement 6.7 %
Fragmentation Down Stream
Benefits
Mine Call Factor 2004/2005
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
80.00
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
MCF 60.90 70.19 67.61 66.78 64.10 67.90 73.60 67.13 67.68 69.99 71.43 74.41 67.01 76.53 70.49 70.47
F04 M04 A04 M04 J 04 J 04 A04 S04 O04 N04 D04 J 05 F05 M05 A05 M05
Feb Jul 04 avg 67.30 %
Aug 04 May 05 Avg 70.92%
Var 3.6 % (5.3 % improvement)
Fragmentation Down Stream
Benefits
Total Cost R/m
500
700
900
1100
1300
1500
R
/
m

R/m
1396 1139 1222 1180 1188 1125 1165 1226 1135 1053 1053 1019 1144 1069 1050 1136 990
J 04 F04 M04 A04 M04 J 04 J 04 A04 S04 O04 N04 D04 J 05 F05 M05 A05 M05
Jan Aug 04 avg 1205 R/m
Sep 04 Apr05 Avg 1072 R/m
Improvement 11 %
Fragmentation Down Stream
Benefits
Kopanang - Mill Balls Consumption G/Ton vs Tons Milled
10
210
410
610
810
1,010
1,210
1,410
J

'
0
4
F
M A M
J J
A S O N D
J
'
0
5
F
M A M
J J
A S O N D
B
a
l
l
s

G
/
T
o
n
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Note: Mill Balls = 9% of total Treatment cost
T
o
n
s

(
T
'
0
0
0
)
Kop Balls G/ton
TL Balls G/ton
Kop T '000
TL T'000
Log. (Kop T '000)
Log. (Kop Balls G/ton)
Log. (TL Balls G/ton)
Jan - Aug 04 480
Sep - May 05 440
Var % 8.7%
Fragmentation Down Stream
Benefits
Met al l u r g y Tr eat m en t Co s t R/To n - K o p an an g v s Tau L ek o a
10
15
20
25
30
35
J

'
0
4
F
M A M
J J
A S O N D
J
'
0
5
F
M A M
J J
A S O N D
R
/
T
o
n

M
i
l
l
e
d
0
50
100
150
200
250
T
o
n
s

(
T
'
0
0
0
)
Kop
TL
Kop T '000
TL T'000
Log. (Kop)
Log. (TL)
K op
t d
Jan - Aug 04 25.26 R/t
Sep - May 05 24.00 R/t
Var % 5.00 %
R 2.7 M saving/year
Explosives Efficiencies
Kopanang Mine
Explosives Efficiencies 2005
-
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
50.00
55.00
60.00
R
/
m

Others 0.60 0.16 0.26 0.80 0.317 0.43

Tamping 0.87 0.65 0.86 1.00 1.081 0.89
Init Sys 36.80 39.40 26.63 34.01 38.34 33.885 34.45
Expl 12.55 13.31 10.99 13.68 11.99 14.524 12.90
2004 J an Feb Mar Apr May J un J ul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD
R/m
2004 49.35
2005 47.14
Var 2.21
Var % 4.5 %
Saving/year R1.03 M
From Anfex to Kubela 420
Rock blasted with ANFO PF 3.45 kg/m Rock blasted with Kubela 420 PF 2.2 kg/m
On line fragmentation monitoring
Status
System operational
Pictures in real time to surface
Wipfrag computer on surface
Objectives
Control tool
Monitor changes due to
blasting malpractice
Warning system
Optimization of the milling
process
Analog vs. digital
Analog
Quality 0.5 Mp
Resolution > 2.0 mm
Cost R 50 K
Digital
Quality 6 Mp
Resolution < 0.6 mm
Cost R 20 K
2.0 mm
0.6 mm
Benefits on Line Fragmentation
Monitoring
Through intensive on line and in real time
monitoring of the blasting parameters and
fragmentation it is possible to make beneficial
adjustments to blasting practices and achieve
significant improvement in operating cost by:
Reduction of explosives cost
Increased production rates
Lower steel ball and power consumption in the milling
process
Improved Mine Call Factor
Forward planning
Interface TRICON ore flow monitoring system with
WIPFRAG on line fragmentation monitoring system
Interface WIPFRAG system with gold plant controls
Collect Kubela 420 calibration belt sample - J une 05
Assess ore degradation during scraping, tramming
and transport process
Conclusions
Successful project (R 100 M )
Money well spent on research (R 0.7 M)
Mine Call Factor on the right path
Explosives change impacted on many
aspects of the mining process
Safer conditions in working place
Wheel of change
Acknowledgement
AnglogoldAshanti
Kopanag Mine Team
AMT
UEE-Dantex
AEL
SGS Lakefield Research
CSIR