Strategic Open Pit Mine Planning Course Outline (Perfect) PDF

LQS Latin America Avenida Luis Thayer Ojeda 0130 Ofi. 304, Providencia.
Santiago, Chile Tel: 562-6573898 Fax: 562-6573897
Toda la información contenida en este manual es de propiedad del Señor Kadri Dagdelen y cualquier reproducción parcial o total de la misma será 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.

Bingham Canyon Mine
Porphyry Copper
Surface Mine Design
Case Study
General Information
Surface Mine Design
2
General Information
•World’s first low grade copper mine.

•5 billion tons of material and 13 million tons of
copper produced since 1906.
Surface Mine Design
•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
•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.
Surface Mine Design
•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.
4
General Information
Layout
Surface Mine Design
5
General Information
Geology
Surface Mine Design
6
General Information
•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.
Surface Mine Design
•Development drilling on 400 by 600 ft centers.

•Density 2.58 t/m3 or equivalent tonnage factor of
12.38 ft3/ton.
7
Mine Plan
•Pushbacks range from 100 ft to 200 ft in width and

50 ft in height.
•Five ore shovel production faces to meet average
Surface Mine Design
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
Typical Mining Sequence
Surface Mine Design
9
Mine Plan
•Ore is being mined in lower 900 ft of the pit and

highest active waste stripping occurs 2000 ft higher
elevation.
Surface Mine Design
•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
•Slope angles for each of these sectors range from

29 to 50 degrees.
•Slope angles will be achieved by double benching
Surface Mine Design
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
Mine Plan
•The material in pushbacks sequentially mined by a

computerized mining simulator algorithm. Highest
relative profit margin ore is mined first.
Surface Mine Design
•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.
•8 Bucyrus-Erie 60R track-mounted electric drills.
Surface Mine Design
•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
•D75K drills are used in resilient (hard) formations

where closer patterns are necessary for proper
fragmentation.
Surface Mine Design
•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
•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.
Surface Mine Design
•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 down-
lines.
15
Blasting
•25 grain detonating cord is used for trunk lines and

cross ties.
•Surface delays of 17 ms are used between holes and
Surface Mine Design
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
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.
Surface Mine Design
•Ground motion due to blasting is limited to 25

in/sec at the planned final pit slopes.
17
Loading
•2 15-yd3 P&H2100; availability averages 78%; 10

Ktons per shovel shift.
•4 27-yd3 P&H2800 Mark II; availability averages
Surface Mine Design
80%; 15 Ktons per shovel shift.

•3 30-yd3 P&H 2800 XP; availability averages
• 2 34-yd3 P&H 2800 XPA; availability averages
•2 8-yd3 International; 1 12-yd3 Clark; 2 12-yd3
Caterpillar rubber tired FEL’s.
18
Loading
•Power is provided by 44-kva substations; radial

lines are then fed to smaller substations with voltage
reduced to 5500 V ac.
Surface Mine Design
•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
•Mainly trucks and some rail.

•Truck haulage utilizes a fleet of 44 trucks
composed of 28 190-ton CAT-785 mechanical
Surface Mine Design
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
•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
Surface Mine Design
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.
•20 dozers (CAT D9H, D9L, D10L).
Surface Mine Design
•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
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design
Colorado School of Mines

Terminology
• BENCH: Ledge that forms a single level of

operation above which mineral or waste materials
are mined from the bench face.
Surface Mine Design
2
Terminology (Cont.)
• 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
Surface Mine Design
regulations and safety.
3
Terminology (Cont.)
• BENCH SLOPE OR BANK ANGLE : Horizontal

angle of the line connecting bench toe to the bench
crest.
Surface Mine Design
4
Terminology (Cont.)
• 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
Surface Mine Design
determined by the geotechnical investigation.
5
Terminology (Cont.)
• 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.
Surface Mine Design
6
Terminology (Cont.)
• The overall pit slope angle is affected by the width

and grade of the haul road.
Surface Mine Design
7
Terminology (Cont.)
• HAUL ROADS: During the life of the pit a haul
road must be maintained for access.
• HAUL ROAD - SPIRAL SYSTEM: Haul road is
arranged spirally along the perimeter walls of the
Surface Mine Design
pit.
8
Terminology (Cont.)
• HAUL ROAD – SWITCH BACK SYSTEM:
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
Surface Mine Design
must be considered in the overall pit design.
9
Haul Road Effect on Pit Limits
Surface Mine Design
10
Terminology (Cont.)
• ANGLE OF REPOSE: Maximum slope of the
broken material.
• SUBCROP OR ORE DEPTH: Depth of waste

Surface Mine Design
removed to reach initial ore.
• PRE-PRODUCTION STRIPPING: Stripping done

to reach initial ore.
11
Terminology (Cont.)
• 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
Surface Mine Design
of the ore.
• PIT SCHEDULING: Material may be mined from

the pit either in 1) sequential pushbacks 2)
conventional pushbacks.
12
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

Surface Mine Design
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
Single Working Bench
Surface Mine Design
14
Shovel in Working Bench
Surface Mine Design
15
Two Working Benches
Surface Mine Design
16
Surface Mine Design
Final Pit Limit
17
Cresson Mine – Year 2001
Surface Mine Design
18
Surface Mine Design
19
Surface Mine Design
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
Section of Pit Sequence
Surface Mine Design
25
Open Pit Mine Planning and
Design: Fundamentals
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design
Source: Hustrulid and Kuchta

Open Pit Mine Planning and Design
Geometrical Considerations
Surface Mine Design
Cumulative frequency
distribution of measured
bench face angles (Call, 1986).
Parts of a bench
2
Surface Mine Design
Functioning of catch benches.

Section through a working bench.
3
Surface Mine Design
Double benches at final pit limits. Catch bench geometry (Call, 1986).
Typical catch bench design dimensions (Call, 1986).

Bench height Impact zone Berm height Berm width Minimum bench width
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
15 3.5 1.5 4 7.5
30 4.5 2 5.5 10
45 5 3 8 13
4
Surface Mine Design
Safety berms at bench edge
5
Surface Mine Design
Height of reach as a function of bucket size.

6
Surface Mine Design
Example orebody geometry.

Ramp access for the example orebody.
Blast design for the ramp excavation.

7
Shovel Working Range
Surface Mine Design
8
Surface Mine Design
Minimum width drop cut

geometry with shovel
alternating from side to side.
9
Surface Mine Design
Minimum width drop cut

geometry with shovel
alternating from side to side.
10
Surface Mine Design
Isometric view of the ramp in waste approaching the orebody.
Diagrammatic representation of the expanding mining front.

11
Surface Mine Design
Dropcut / ramp placement in ore. Expansion of the mining front.
12
Surface Mine Design
Plan view of an actual pit bottom

Showing drop cut and mining
Expansion (McWilliams, 1959).
13
Surface Mine Design
Extension of the current

Ramp close to the pit wall
(McWilliams, 1959).
14
Surface Mine Design
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
Detailed steps in the development of a new production level.

16
Surface Mine Design
Parallel cut with drive by.

17
Surface Mine Design
Parallel cut with the double spotting of trucks.

18
Surface Mine Design
Parallel cut with the single spotting of trucks.

19
Surface Mine Design
Time sequence showing shovel

loading with single spotting.
20
Surface Mine Design
(Continued).
21
Surface Mine Design
Time sequence showing shovel

loading with double spotting.
22
Surface Mine Design
(Continued).
23
Surface Mine Design
(Continued).
24
Surface Mine Design
Section and plan views through a working bench.
Simplified presentation of a safety berm.
25
Initial geometry for the push back example.
Cut mining from bench 1.

Surface Mine Design
Cut mining from bench 2.
26
Surface Mine Design
Safety bench geometry

showing bench face angle.
Overall slope angle.
27
Surface Mine Design
Overall slope angle with ramp included.
Interramp slope angles.
28
Surface Mine Design
Overall slope angle with

Working bench included.
Interramp angles associated with

the working bench.
29
Surface Mine Design
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
Overall slope angle for a slope containing two working benches.
31
Surface Mine Design
Slopes for each working group.
32
Surface Mine Design
Final overall pit slope.

33
Advances in Pit Slope Management Systems
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Professor
Mining Engineering Department
Golden, Colorado 80401
Pit Slope Failure Problems
l Continue to be the source of human and financial
losses
l 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
l 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)
l Plane must strike parallel or
nearly parallel (within 20o) to
the slope face.
l Less common than other
failure modes
Plane Failure in a Limestone
Quarry
Wedge Failure
• Most common mode of

failure for rock slopes
NON-DAYLIGHTING
WEDGE • Line of intersection
must daylight into
slope face
• Often, failure is sudden
DAYLIGHTING WEDGE
Circular Failure
l Soils
l Stock piles
l Reclamation piles
l Waste dumps
l Highly weathered overburden rocks
Toppling and Step-Path
Modes
Toppling Mixed modes
(e.g. Toppling & Step-Path)
Overall Slope Design
l Identify geological sectors; their strength
characteristics and possible mode of failures
l Determine maximum height and angle for inter-
ramp design
l Determine bench geometry
l Incorporate bench geometry into Inter-ramp
design
l Overall slope design
Failure Modes in Different
Sectors
Pit Slope Monitoring
- What to look for
l Overhang rock
l New geological structures
l Swell and/or increased rock fall activity on highwall
l Heavy precipitation
l Signs of stress
l Tension cracks
l Movement (acceleration)
l Increased water levels
Tension Crack Measurements
l The formation of cracks behind slope is a sign of instability
(Safety Factor ˜ 1)
l Monitoring changes in crack width and direction can provide
information on extent of unstable area
Inclinometers
l Inclinometers measure horizontal
deflections of a borehole
l 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.
l Measures changes in distance
between anchors, as well as collar
l Provides displacement
information across discontinuities.
New and Emerging Technologies
l Automated Total Station Network (robots)
l Non-reflective Laser scanners (Lidar systems:
Cyra, Riegl, I-Site)
l Radar Technologies
l GPS (Local sensors with multiple antenna)
l TDR (Time Domain Reflectometry)
l Digital photogrammetry
l 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
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
Motorized Station, Leica TCA2003 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
Caseta
Oeste
Caseta
Este
GPS Surveyed Control Stations in
S2
S3
S1 S4
S5
“D” (PR-1)
“E1” (PR-2) Matus (PR-3) PILAR GT-1

GT-1 PR-4
Morgan (PR-5) .
D1 APS-WEST. Norte : 2085.491

D2
D3 Este : 3870.863
Elev
D4
D5 Cota : 2846.745
ZONA-5 ZONA-6 ZONA-7
Coordenadas de la
Estación 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
Slip Area
02:04 9th October 2003
Displacement (mm)
ime
ith t
nt w

disp easing
me
lace
r
Inc

Slope Stability Radar Features
• High deformation precision (± 0.2 mm std. dev.)
• Broad area coverage (~1000’s pixels/scan)
• Continuous operation (~ 1’s 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 0.0mm movement over 45 hours

hours in Region 1 in Region 2
15mm movement over 45

hours in Region 3
Laser Scanning Technologies
There are Many 3D Laser Scanners
Major Companies with Products are:
l Cyrax (Leica) www.cyra.com (USA)

l Optech ILRIS (Canada)
l I-site (Maptek) www.isite3d.com (Australia)
l LMS 3D Scanning systems (Riegl) www.riegl.co.at
(Austria)
l Z+F Laser Measuring Systems (Zoller+ Fröhlich)
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 Wall Update Range Deployment All
Coverage Rate weather
SSR – ± 0.2 mm Broad ~ mins 850 m Easy Yes

GROUND Area (1.4km)
PROBE
Laser ~ 1’s cm Discrete Twice 2 km Difficult No
(Prisms) Points Daily
LIDAR ~ 1’s cm Broad ~ secs 900 m Easy No
SCANNER Area
Extenso- ~ 1’s mm Discrete ~ secs n/a Difficult Yes
meters Points
GPS ~ 1’s cm Discrete ~ secs n/a Difficult Yes
Points
Photogram ~ 1’s cm Broad ~ hours < 150 m Moderate No
-metry Area
Slide Management Options
l Reduce slope angle l Reduce slope height by
l Dewater unstable area segmenting the slope
l Leave unstable areas l Support unstable ground
l Continue mining l Contingency Planning
l Unload slide l Blasting
l Partial clean up l Erosion control measures
l Step-out (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
If the displacement rate is low and predictable,
living with the displacement while continuing to
mine may be the best action.
Displacement (cm)
150 May continue mining
(displacement rate is constant)
100
50
1/4/02 5/4/02 11/4/02 16/4/02

Time
Basic Principles of Drainage
l Prevent surface water from entering to the slope through
open tension cracks and fissures
l Reduce water pressure in the vicinity of the potential
failure surface
l Providing for gravity flow of water is the most common
method
l 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)
DO
RM
AN
T
55
60
BL
IND
EMILY
RO
60
DE
O
S
CR
JB
EE
K
CHRISTY
PATS
RO
DE
S
O T
CR
EE IGH
K DN
MI 60
N-00-B
G
60
DIN
60
PLO
75
EX
78
ANFO
85 LAST LA
UGH
PO
ST
60 25
FLOWER PATC
H
50
POW
AMANDA
ERF
AN
JE
D
UL
AN
GR
50
BL
IND
RO
DE
O
CR
RO EE
DE K1
O
CR
80 EE
T
K
OS
TIP
AN
Unload Side
l Even though unloading has been a common
response, in general it has been
unsuccessful.
l Infact, 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 Increasedhighwall stability due
to shallower slope angle It locks
up reserves
l Advantages of leaving step out
should be weighed against
cleaning by considering ore Failure Surface
Step out
lock up and having safer overall
slope
New Slope Design 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. Reinforced concrete dowel to
prevent loosening of slab at
crest
2. Tensioned rock anchors to
secure sliding failure along crest
3. Tieback wall to prevent sliding
failure on fault zone
4. Shotcrete to prevent raveling of
zone of fractured rock
5. Drain hole to reduce water
pressure within slope
6. 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
MOVEMENT IN (INCHES/DAY)
2/1
/0
-2.00
-1.80
-1.60
-1.40
-1.20
-1.00
-0.80
-0.60
-0.40
-0.20
0.00
0.20
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
#3
7/1 2
9/0
2
8/2
/02
8/1
6/0
8/3 2
0/0
DATE
9/1 2
3/0
9/2 2
7
10 /02
/11
10 /02
/25
/0
11 2
/8
11 /02
/22
PRISM DATA - All In Movement Area
/0
12 2
/6
12 /02
/20
/02
1/3
/0
1/1 3
7/0
1/3 3
1/0
2/1 3
Prism Data Feb 2002 to Feb 2003
4/0
2/2 3
#4
8/0
3
TN 98
TN 97
TN 72
TN 80
TN 149
TN 144
TN 127
TN 115
TN 114
TN 101
TN010119
TN010095
TN000089
TN000084
Blasting
Line
Production
drill
holes Face
holes
Use of less
Pre-splitting Line drilling 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
D5 300
DESPLAZAMIENTO (cm)
BENCH 250
y = 63.213x - 2E+06
200
150
y = 16.016x - 597363
SAFETY
y = 8.7432x - 326060
100
Failure
BERM
y = 5.6082x - 209126
Catch
50
Berm, ± 40
0
1/2/02 6/2/02 11/2/02 16/2/02 21/2/02
TIEMPO
Took out
m. H13 shovel
BENCH Access D5
& H13 closed
PUSHBACK
Contingency Planning
l Provide multiple access to production faces
l Maintain double access to working benches,
whenever possible
l Stockpile ore/rock
l Design to prevent noses in the plan geometry
l Provide for failure costs in scheduling and budgeting
l Add lag times in production scheduling
l 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 .
l 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
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design

Haul Road Design
• HAUL ROADS: During the life of the pit a haul
road must be maintained for access.
• HAUL ROAD - SPIRAL SYSTEM: Haul road is
arranged spirally along the perimeter walls of the
Surface Mine Design
pit.
2
Haul Road Design
• HAUL ROAD – SWITCH BACK SYSTEM:
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
Surface Mine Design
must be considered in the overall pit design.
3
Haul Road Effect on Pit Limits
Surface Mine Design
4
Considerations for Haul Road
Design
• Visibility
• Stopping distances
• Vertical alignment
Surface Mine Design
• Horizontal alignment
• Cross section
• Runaway-vehicle safety
provisions
5
Sight Distances and Stopping
Distances
• Vertical and horizontal curves designed
considering sight distance and stopping
distance
Surface Mine Design
• 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
• On vertical curves, road surface limits sight
distance
• Unsafe conditions remedied by lengthening curve
Surface Mine Design
• On horizontal curves, sight distance limited by

adjacent berm dike, rock cuts, trees, etc;
• Unsafe conditions remedied by laying back bank or
removing obstacles
7
Sight Distance Diagrams
⇒
Surface Mine Design
Sight distance diagrams for horizontal and vertical curves

(Kaufman and Ault)
8
Stopping Distances
• Stopping distances depend on truck breaking

capabilities, road slope and vehicle velocity
• Stopping distance curves can be derived
Surface Mine Design
based on SAE service break maximum

stopping distances
9
Stopping Distance
Characteristics
For example,
stopping
distance
characteristics
Surface Mine Design
of vehicles of
200,000 to
400,000 pounds
GVW
(Kaufman and Ault)
10
Stopping Distances
• Prior to final road layout, manufacturers of

vehicles that will use the road should be
contacted to verify the service brake
Surface Mine Design
performance capabilities
11
Vertical Alignment
• Establishment of grades and vertical curves that

allow adequate stopping distances on all segments
of the haul road
• Maximum sustained grades
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Vehicle Performance Chart
Surface Mine Design
13
Vehicle Retarder Chart
Surface Mine Design
14
Vertical Alignment

• Some states limit maximum grades to 15 to 20% and
sustained grades of 10%
• Most authorities suggest 10% as the maximum safe
Surface Mine Design
sustained grade limitation

• Manufacturer studies show 8% grades result in the
lowest cycle time exclusive of construction
consideration
15
Vertical Alignment

• Property boundaries, geology, topography, climate
must be considered on a case by case basis.
• Lower operating costs must be balanced against higher
Surface Mine Design
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
• Vertical curves smooth transitions from one

grade to another
• Minimum vertical curve lengths are based on
Surface Mine Design
eye height, object height, and algebraic

difference in grade
17
Stopping Distance vs. Vertical
Curve
For example,
vertical curve
controls 9 ft eye
height (usually
Surface Mine Design
minimum height
for articulated
haulage trucks of
200,000 to
400,000 pound of
GVW)
18
Horizontal Alignment
• Deals primarily with design of curves and

considers previously discussed radius, width,
and sight distance in addition to
Surface Mine Design
superelevation
• Cross slopes also should be considered in the
design
19
Curves, Superelevation, and
Speed Limits
• Superelevation grade recommendations vary
but should be limited to 10% or less because
of traction limitations
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Speed Limits
• CAT suggests higher slopes with traction
cautions and 10% maximum caution
• Again, where ice, snow, and mud are a
Surface Mine Design
problem, there is a practical limit on the

degree of superelevation
21
Curve Superelevation
Surface Mine Design
(CAT)
22
Recommended Superelevation
Rates
If superelevation is not used, speed limits should be set on curves.
Surface Mine Design
(Kaufman and Ault)
23
Speed Limits
• Centrifugal forces of vehicles on curves are
counteracted by friction between tire an road and
vehicle weight as a result of superelevation
Surface Mine Design
• 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

of a hill
• Avoid sharp horizontal curves near the bottom of
sustained downgrades
Surface Mine Design
• 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
• A stable road base is very important

• Sufficiently rigid bearing material should be
used beneath the surface
Surface Mine Design
• Define the bearing capacity of the material

using the California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
26
California Bearing Ratio
Surface Mine Design
27
Subbase Construction
Surface Mine Design
28
Cross Slopes
• Cross slopes provide adequate drainage and

range from ¼ to ½ inch drop per foot of
width (approximately .02 to .04 foot per foot)
Surface Mine Design
• Lower cross slopes used on smooth surfaces

that dissipate water quickly and when ice or
mud is a constant problem
29
Cross Slopes
• Higher cross slopes permit rapid drainage,

reduce puddles and saturated sub-base, and
are used on rough surfaces (gravel and
Surface Mine Design
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 Cross-
Slope Change
Slope change should be gradual.

Surface Mine Design
(Kaufman and Ault)
31
Width
• On straight or tangent segments, width

depends on
• Vehicle width
Surface Mine Design
• Number of lanes
• Recommended vehicle clearance, which ranges
from 44 to 50% of vehicle width
32
Minimum Road Design Widths
for Various Size Dump Trucks
Surface Mine Design
(Couzens, SME Open Pit Planning and Design)
33
Typical Design Haul Road
Width
Typical
design haul-
road width
for two-way
Surface Mine Design
traffic using
77.11-t (85-
st) trucks
(Couzens, SME Open Pit Planning and Design)
34
Typical Haulageway Sections
Surface Mine Design
(Kaufman and Ault)
35
Width
• Berm height and width as a function of

vehicle size and material type
• Ditch(es) added to basic recommendations
Surface Mine Design
• 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

material
• Stands at natural angle of repose of construction
Surface Mine Design
material
• Redirects vehicle onto roadway
• Minimum height at rolling radius of tire
38
Berms
• Larger boulders backed with earthen material

• Near vertical face deflects vehicle for slight
angles of incidence
Surface Mine Design
• Problems with damage and injury and

availability of boulders
• Minimum height of boulder at height of tire
allowing chassis impact
39
Runaway Provisions
• With adverse grades some safety provision should

be integrated to prevent runaway vehicles
• Primary design consideration is required spacing
Surface Mine Design
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
• Maximum permissible speed, equivalent

downgrade, and speed at break failure determine
distance between runaway truck safety provisions
Surface Mine Design
• For example, at an equivalent downgrade of 5% and

a maximum speed of 40 mph,
Speed at Failure 10 mph 20 mph
Provision Spacing 1,000 ft 800 ft
(Kaufman and Ault)
41
Runaway Precautions
Surface Mine Design
(Atkinson SME Handbook)
42
Median Runaway-Vehicle
Provision Berms
• Vehicle straddles collision berm and rides
vehicle to stop
• Made of unconsolidated-screened fines
Surface Mine Design
• Critical design aspects spacing between

berms and height of berm
• Height governed by height of undercarriage
and wheel track governed by largest vehicle
43
Median Runaway-Vehicle
Provision Berms
• Requires maintenance in freezing conditions
• Agitation to prevent damage to vehicle
• May cover berm in high rainfall areas
Surface Mine Design
44
Escape Lanes
• Good tool for stopping runaway but

expensive to construct
• Entrance from road is important; spacing,
Surface Mine Design
horizontal, vertical curve and superelevation

are all considered in design
• Deceleration mainly by adverse grade and
high rolling resistance material
45
Escape Lanes
• Length a function of grade and speed at

entrance and rolling resistance
• Stopping by level section median berm, sand
Surface Mine Design
or gravel or mud pits, road bumps or manual

steering
46
Surface Mine Design
Escape Lanes
47
Maintenance
• The road surface is

deformed by the constant
pounding of haulage
Surface Mine Design
vehicles.
• A good road maintenance
program is necessary for
safety and economics.
48
Safety Considerations
• Dust, potholes, ruts, depressions, bumps, and

other conditions can impede vehicular
control.
Surface Mine Design
49
Economic Considerations
• The wear on every component is increased when a

vehicle travels over a rough surface.
• If the vehicle brakes constantly, unnecessary lining
wear occurs as well.
Surface Mine Design
50
Dust Control
• Dust may infiltrate brakes, air filters,
hydraulic lifts, and other components of
machinery.
•
Surface Mine Design
The abrasive effect of dust will result in

costly cleaning or replacement of these
items.
51
Deterioration Factors
• Weather
• Vehicles follow a
similar path
Surface Mine Design
• Spillage
52
Motor Graders
• A motor grader
should be used to
maintain cross slopes,
Surface Mine Design
remove spills, and to

fill and smooth
surface depressions as
they occur.
53
Road Drainage
• To avoid overflow, roadside ditches and

culverts should be periodically cleaned.
•
Surface Mine Design
Avoid erosion or saturation of subbase

materials.
54
Haul Road Design
Open Pit Contour Maps

Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen
Source: Hustrulid and Kuchta

Example of Mapping Procedure
Surface Mine Design
2
Plan View of a Portion of the
Open Pit
Surface Mine Design
Crests denoted by dashed lines and toes by solid lines.
3
Example of Mapping Procedure
Surface Mine Design
4
Midbench Elevation
Surface Mine Design
5
Plan View of Midbench Elevation
Surface Mine Design
6
Map Based on Midbench Contours
Surface Mine Design
7
Procedure to Convert Midbench to
Toe and Crest Contours
Surface Mine Design
8
Representation of Crests and Toes
Surface Mine Design
9
Designing a Spiral Ramp Inside
the Wall
Surface Mine Design
10
Completing the new crest lines
Surface Mine Design
11
Pit Layout Including Ramp
Surface Mine Design
12
Design of a Spiral Ramp Outside
the Wall
Surface Mine Design
13
Surface Mine Design
14
Design of a Switchback
Surface Mine Design
15
Surface Mine Design
16
Surface Mine Design
17
Surface Mine Design
18
Example of Two Switchbacks
Surface Mine Design
19
Plan and Section Views of Pit
Without Ramp
Surface Mine Design
20
Plan and Section Views of Pit
With Ramp
Surface Mine Design
21
Road Volume in the Ramp
Surface Mine Design
22
Block Modeling and Ore Reserves
Estimation
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen
1
Basic Block Model Information
• Topography Data
• Drill Data
Surface Mine Design
• Sampling
• Assays
2
Topography Data
Surface Mine Design
3D Display (Color Coded Elevations)
3
Drill Data
Drill Hole Data Sources
•Collar Coordinates
Surface Mine Design
•Geologic Logs
•Down Hole Surveys
•Lab Tests
4
Samplings
Sampling Data
•Rock Types
Surface Mine Design
•Alteration Types
•Metal Grades
•Attributes
5
Samplings (Cont.)
Surface Mine Design
Data Collections
6
Assays
Surface Mine Design
Assay Data for Cu and Mo

Multiple Cutoffs
Rock Types
Alterations
7
Geological Interpretation
Surface Mine Design
Section View Showing

Topography and Alteration Types
8
Surface Mine Design
Boundaries for rock types
9
Surface Mine Design
Color Filled Display for Alteration Types
10
3D Geological View
Surface Mine Design
3D Display of Alteration Type Solids

(With Drill Hole Piercing Points)
11
Composites
Surface Mine Design
Composited Grade Data with Corresponding

Assay Interval Data
12
3D Block Models
Surface Mine Design
3D View of the Block Models
13
Block Estimation
Surface Mine Design
Kriging - Geological Interpolation Technique for

Ore Reserve Estimation
14
Block Values
Surface Mine Design
Block by Block Profit Values in Association with

Block Grade Data and Alteration Type Boundaries
15
Block Models
Surface Mine Design
Interpolated Grades from Drill Hole Data
16
Ore Reserve Estimation
Surface Mine Design
Interpolated Grades from Drill Hole Data
17
Economic Pit Limits
Surface Mine Design
Economic Pit Limits for Different Economic Scenarios
18
3D View of Economic Pit Limits
Surface Mine Design
3D View of Economic Pit Limits for Different

Economic Scenarios
19
Mine Planning Application
(Open Pit Mine)
Surface Mine Design
Yearly Maps for the Open Pit Mine Scheduling
20
Geologic Resource Modeling Techniques
• Exploratory Data Analysis

• Variogram Analysis
• Search Strategies
•
Surface Mine Design
Simple Kriging, Ordinary Kriging, Indicator

Kriging, Co-Kriging
• Cross Validation
• Uncertainty and Risk Evaluation
21
Frequency and Cumulative Frequency Plots
•Classical Statistics
•Data Posting and Display
Surface Mine Design
•Histograms
•Cumulative Histograms
•Probability Plots
22
Inverse Distance Technique
• Inverse distance technique is the simplest

interpolation method.
• Give more weight to the closest samples, and less
to those that are farthest away.
Surface Mine Design
1
• In general, n
vˆ = ∑ n
di p
vi
1
i =1
∑
i =1 d p
i
1
d ip n
wi = n
vˆ = ∑ wi vi
n
∑
1 ∑ wi = 1
i =1 d i
p i =1 i =1
23
(pg257)
• We can make the weights inversely

proportional to any power of the distance.
• If p=2, it is called Inverse Distance Square.
Surface Mine Design
v4 v2
v̂ Inverse Distance Square
d3 d2 1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
vˆ = v1 + v2 + v3 +
d1 d2 d3 d4
v4
d4 4 4 4 4
v1 d
1 ∑
i =1
1
di2 ∑
i =1
1
di2 ∑
i =1
1
di 2 ∑
i =1
1
di2
v3
24
Inverse Distance Square Example
• Estimate the unknown point v̂ by using the Inverse

Distance Square technique
V3=0.5
v1= 0.2 d1 =1
Surface Mine Design
V2=0.3 v2= 0.3 d2 =2

d3=4
v̂ d2=2 v3= 0.5 d3 =4
d1=1
V1=0.2
vˆ = ?
25
• First of all, calculate the weights w1, w2, w3

1
12 1 16
w1 = = =
1
+ 1
+ 1 21
21
12 22 42 16
Surface Mine Design
1 1
22 4
w2 = = 4
=
1
+ 1
+ 1 21
21
12 22 42 16
1 1
42 1
w3 = = 16
= Note:
1
+ 1
+ 1 21
21
12 22 42 w1 + w2 + w3 = 1
16
26
• Then, calculate v̂
16 4 1
vˆ = × 0.2 + × 0.3 + × 0.5 = 0.233
Surface Mine Design
21 21 21
27
Estimation Error
• Error estimation between estimation (Exploration data)

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

Surface Mine Design
e.g., Estimation Error for Block 1 = 0.463 – 0.433 = 0.031
28
Histogram of Errors
Surface Mine Design
29
Scatter Graph
True grades agai n s t E s t i mated grades
0.90
0.80
0.70
Surface Mine Design
0.60
E s t i mated (%)
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
Lecture 5
September 14, 2004
Surface Mine Design
Instructor
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen
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.
Surface Mine Design
• Use rectangular search neighborhood of 37.5ft x 37.5ft.
• Assume that the center of the block represents the block

grade.
2
• Estimate the grade of the block (block size 75ft x 75ft)
for exploration data set.
Estimate the
Surface Mine Design
center point
75ft
v̂1 v̂2
75ft
3
• Rectangular search neighborhood of 37.5ft x 37.5ft.
Surface Mine Design
37.5ft
75ft
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 is the simplest interpolation
method.
• Give more weight to the closest samples, and less to
those that are farthest away.
Surface Mine Design
• In general, 1
n
di p
vˆ = ∑ n vi
1
Unknown point
i =1
∑
i =1 d p
Sampling points
i
1 Weights
d ip n
wi = n
vˆ = ∑ wi vi
n
∑
1 ∑ wi = 1
i =1 d i
p i =1 i =1
5
• We can make the weights inversely proportional to any

power of the distance.
• If p=2, it is called Inverse Distance Square (IDS).
Surface Mine Design
v4 v2
v̂ Inverse Distance Square
d3 d2 1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
vˆ = v1 + v2 + v3 +
d1 d2 d3 d4
v4
d4 4 4 4 4
v1 d
1 ∑
i =1
1
di2 ∑
i =1
1
di2 ∑
i =1
1
di 2 ∑
i =1
1
di2
v3
6
• Estimate the unknown point v̂ by using the Inverse

Distance Square technique
V3=0.5
v1= 0.2 d1 =1
Surface Mine Design
V2=0.3 v2= 0.3 d2 =2

d3=4
v̂ d2=2 v3= 0.5 d3 =4
d1=1
V1=0.2
vˆ = ?
7
• First of all, calculate the weights w1, w2, w3

1
12 1 16
w1 = = =
1
+ 1
+ 1 21
21
12 22 42 16
1 1 Note:
w2 = 22
= 4
=
4 16 + 4 + 1
w1 + w2 + w3 = =1
Surface Mine Design
1
+ 1
+ 1 21
21 21
12 22 42 16
1 1
42 1
w3 = = 16
=
1
+ 1
+ 1 21
21
12 22 42 16
• Then, calculate v̂
16 4 1
vˆ = × 0.2 + × 0.3 + × 0.5 = 0.233
21 21 21
8
Surface Mine Design
d1
25
g1 25
d1 = 25 2 + 25 2 = 35.36
9
0.0008
0.0032
Surface Mine Design
Block1 X Y vi x dist y dist di 1/di 2 wi wi*vi

Centered on 12.5 12.5 0.42 25 25 35.35534 0.0008 0.25 0.105
(X=37.5, Y=37.5) 62.5 12.5 0.24 -25 25 35.35534 0.0008 0.25 0.06
37.5 62.5 0.41 0 -25 25 0.0016 0.5 0.205
0.0032 1 0.37
(Estimated Grade)
n
1
∑
i =1 di
2
10
• 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.
Surface Mine Design
11
Geologic Block Model
Reconciliation
• 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.
Surface Mine Design
Block 1 Grade
= (0.42+0.35+0.24+0.33+
… + 0.46) / 9
=0.35
12
Reconciliation
• Error estimation between estimation (Exploration data)
and true value (Blasthole data).
Error = Estimated Grade – True Grade

Surface Mine Design
e.g., Estimation Error for Block 1

= 0.37 – 0.35 = 0.02
13
Reconciliation
• Histogram of Error (Example of 100ft x 100ft estimation)
Histogram of Estimation Errors (Estimation - True)
Bin FrequencyCumulative % 3.5 100.00%

-0.2 0 0.00% 90.00%
3
Surface Mine Design
-0.15 0 0.00% 80.00%

-0.1 1 11.11% 2.5 70.00%
-0.05 1 22.22%
Frequency
60.00%
2
0 3 55.56% 50.00%
0.05 3 88.89% 1.5
40.00%
0.1 0 88.89%
1 30.00%
0.15 0 88.89%
0.2 1 100.00% 20.00%
0.5
0.25 0 100.00% 10.00%
More 0 100.00% 0 0.00%
-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 More
Bin Frequency
Cumulative %
14
Reconciliation
• Scatter Graph (Example of 100ft x 100ft estimation)
True grades agai n s t E s t i mated grades
0.90 Draw a diagonal line

0.80 (y=x) to show perfect
Surface Mine Design
estimation line.
0.70
0.60
E s t i mated (%)
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
• 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
Surface Mine Design
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
• We would like to see the error distribution has small
spread.
Surface Mine Design
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
Over and Under Estimation
Surface Mine Design
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
Good Estimation Over Estimation at Under Estimation at

High Grade Low Grade
Surface Mine Design
Estimation
Estimation
Estimation
True True True
Good Estimation: Falling closer to diagonal on

which perfect estimates would plot.
19
Scatter Diagrams in Estimation
Over Estimation at Under Estimation at

Low Grade Low Grade
Surface Mine Design
Estimation
Estimation
True True
20
Floating Cone Algorithm
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen
1
Basic Procedure
Top
-1 +1 -1 -1 -1
-1 -1 +3 -1 -1
Surface Mine Design
Bottom
Left Right
-1 -1
-1 -1 -1 -1
Heuristic procedure
2
Floating Cone Steps
• 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).
Surface Mine Design
• 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.
3
Example
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 Ore
-2 -2 +4 -2 -2
Surface Mine Design
+7 +1 -3 Waste
Initial Block Model
4
Example
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 Ore
-2 -2 +4 -2 -2 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+7 +1 -3 Mined
Step 1
5
Example
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 Ore
Surface Mine Design
-2 -2 +4 -2 -2 Waste
+7 +1 -3 Mined
Step 2
6
Example
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 Ore
-2 -2 +4 -2 -2 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+7 +1 -3 Mined
Step 3
7
Example
Final Pit
-1
Surface Mine Design
-2 -2
+1 -3
8
Shortcomings
Missing Combinations of Profitable Blocks
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Ore
-2 -2 -2 -2 -2
Surface Mine Design
+10 -3 +10 Waste
Initial Block Model
9
Shortcomings
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Ore
-2 -2 -2 -2 -2 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+10 -3 +10 Considered but rejected
Step 1
10
Shortcomings
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Ore
-2 -2 -2 -2 -2 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+10 -3 +10 Considered but rejected
Step 2
There are no blocks to be mined – wrong solution
11
Shortcomings
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Ore
-2 -2 -2 -2 -2 Waste
+10 -3 +10 Mined (Correct solution)

Surface Mine Design
Final Pit
-3
Correct solution
12
Shortcomings
Over-mining
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -2 -2
Surface Mine Design
+5 Waste
Initial Block Model
13
Shortcomings
Over-mining
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -2 -2 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+5 Mined
First block analyzed
The search process was started from bottom to top.

Everything is mined out.
14
Shortcomings
Over-mining
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -2 -2 Waste
+5 Mined
Surface Mine Design
Final Pit
-1 -1
-2 -2
+5
Correct solution
15
Shortcomings
Combination of problems
-1 -1 -4 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -4 +5
Surface Mine Design
+3 Waste
Initial Block Model
16
Shortcomings
-1 -1 -4 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -4 +5 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+3 Considered but rejected
First Step
17
Shortcomings
-1 -1 -4 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -4 +5 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+3 Considered but rejected
Second Step
18
Shortcomings
-1 -1 -4 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -4 +5 Waste
Surface Mine Design
+3 Mined
Wrong Solution
Everything is mined out.
19
Shortcomings
-1 -1 -4 -1 -1 Ore
+5 -4 +5 Waste
+3 Mined
Surface Mine Design
Final Pit
-4
+3
Correct Solution
20
Example
Initial Data
% recovery through mill and smelter 90.00%

Value of recovered copper $1.00 per lb
Stripping and haulage to dump (level 1) $0.50 per ton
Surface Mine Design
Mining and transportation to plant level $0.80 per ton

Haulage cost increase per ton per bench $0.10 per ton/bench
Processing, smelting and refining $1.20 per ton
General overhead, administration, etc. $1.20 per ton
Ultimate Pit Slope 1:1
21
Example
Geologic Model
0.00 1.15 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05
0.00 1.25 1.15 1.13 0.00

Surface Mine Design
1.13 1.15 0.50
Copper Grades (%)
22
Example
Block Values
P = Price
s = Sales Cost Ore Block:
BV = ( P − s) * g B * y − c − m
Surface Mine Design
c = Processing Cost
y = Recovery
Waste Block:
m = Mining Cost
gB = Block Grade
BV = −m
BV = Block Value
23
Example
Economic Model
-0.50 17.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50
-0.60 19.20 17.40 17.04 -0.60

Surface Mine Design
16.94 17.30 -0.70
Value per block ($/ton)
24
Example
Economic Model
-0.50 17.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50
-0.60 19.20 17.40 17.04 -0.60

Surface Mine Design
16.94 17.30 -0.70
BV = (1 − 0) *1.15 / 100* 2000* 0.9 − 2.4 − 0.8 = 17.5
25
Example
Economic Model
-0.50 17.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50
-0.60 19.20 17.40 17.04 -0.60

Surface Mine Design
16.94 17.30 -0.70

BV ($ / ton) = (1 − 0) * 0.0 / 100* 2000* 0.9 − 2.4 − 0.8 = −3.2 If mined as ore
BV ($ / ton) = −0.6 If mined as waste
26
Example
Economic Model
-1 18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
Surface Mine Design
-1 19 17 17 -1
17 17 -1

Values rounded to the nearest $
27
Example
-1 18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
1
Surface Mine Design
-1 19 17 17 -1
17 17 -1
1st Increment
28
Example
-1 18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
1 2 2
Surface Mine Design
-1 19 17 17 -1
2
17 17 -1
2nd Increment
29
Example
-1 18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
1 2 2 3
Surface Mine Design
-1 19 17 17 -1
2 3
17 17 -1
3rd Increment
30
Example
-1 18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
1 2 2 3 4
Surface Mine Design
-1 19 2
17 17 -1
3 4
17 17 -1
4th Increment
31
Example
-1 18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
5 1 2 2 3 4
Surface Mine Design
-1 19 17 17 -1
5 2 3 4
17 17 -1
5
5th Increment
32
Example
-1 18 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
5 1 2 2 3 4
Surface Mine Design
-1 19 17 17 -1
5 2 3 4
17 17 -1
5 6
6th Increment
33
Example
-1
Surface Mine Design
-1
-1
Ultimate Pit Limit
34
Example
Total Economic Value
-5,000 175,000 -5,000 -5,000 -5,000 -5,000
-6,000 192,000 174,000 170,400

Surface Mine Design
169,400 173,000
Value Per block considering:

Tonnage/block = 10,000 tons
35
Example
Pit Reserves
Bench Ore tons Waste tons S.R. $
1 10,000 50,000 5.00 150,000

Surface Mine Design
2 30,000 10,000 0.33 530,400

3 20,000 0 0.00 342,400
Total 60,000 60,000 1.00 1,022,800
36
Manual Pit Design
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen
1
Manual Pit Design
Stripping Ratio
Re cov ered Value ($ / ton) − Total Pr oduction Cost ($ / ton)

S .R.( Breakeven) =
Stripping Cost ($ / ton)
Surface Mine Design
UG Mining Cost ($ / ton ) − Surface Mining Cost ($ / ton)

Surface or Underground Breakeven =
Stripping Cost ($ / ton )
$5.04 / ore ton − $0.70 / ore ton

Surface or Underground Breakeven = = 6.58 : 1
$0.66 / waste ton)
2
Manual Pit Design
Example
Ore Grade (%Cu) 0.90 0.85 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.50 0.40
Conc. Recovery (%) 0.900 0.900 0.900 0.900 0.900 0.900 0.900
Smelt. Recovery (%) 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.980 0.980
Ref. Recovery (%) 0.990 0.990 0.990 0.990 0.990 0.990 0.990
Total Recovery (%) 0.873 0.873 0.873 0.873 0.873 0.873 0.873
Recovered Quantity (lb/ton) 15.7 14.8 13.1 12.2 11.3 8.7 7.0
Surface Mine Design
Costs per ton
Finance 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62

Mining 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70
Concentration 2.68 2.68 2.68 2.68 2.68 2.68 2.68
Smelter 1.70 1.48 1.38 1.29 1.21 1.19 1.18
Refining 1.80 1.57 1.36 1.27 1.20 1.16 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
Breakeven stripping ratio 15.7 lbs ∗ $0.90 / lb − $7.5 / ton of ore

BESR = = 10.07
Copper Price ($/lb) $0.66 / ton of waste
0.90 10.07 9.56 7.65 6.73 5.70 2.29 -0.02
0.75 6.50 6.19 4.67 3.95 3.13 0.30 -1.61
0.70 5.31 5.06 3.68 3.03 2.27 -0.36 -2.14
0.65 4.12 3.94 2.69 2.10 1.42 -1.02 -2.67
3
Manual Pit Design
Stripping Ratio – Grade - Price
S.R. - Ore Grades - Cu Prices
12.00
10.00
Surface Mine Design
8.00
Stripping Ratio
6.00 0.90 $/lb

0.75 $/lb
4.00
0.70 $/lb
2.00 0.65 $/lb
0.00
0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90
-2.00
-4.00
% Cu
4
Manual Pit Design
Hypothetical Cross Section
Topo
X'
Surface Mine Design
X
X'
SR =
Y' X
SR =
Y
Y' Orebody
Y
A B
5
Manual Pit Design
S.R. in Section
First First
X’ = 30 X = 10
Current Price = 0.90
Y’ = 5 Y=5
$/lb
S.R. = 6 S.R. = 2
Surface Mine Design
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 5 : 1 < 6.6 : 1 OK
G = 0.70% G = 0.70%
6
Manual Pit Design
Repeat for All Sections
Pit contour
Surface Mine Design
or Final pit
7
Cutoff Grade Optimization
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen
1
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

Surface Mine Design
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)
2
What Is Cutoff Grade
1. Cutoff Grade is defined as the grade that is normally used to
discriminate between ore and waste within a given deposit
2. Cutoff Grade is the dial that is used to adjust the cash flow
coming from the mining operations in a given year
3.
Surface Mine Design
The Cutoff Grade policy allows a mining company to fine tune

their operation with respect to a given financial objective
4. 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
5. The overall influence of Cutoff Grade policy on the economics
of an operation is profound
3
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.
Surface Mine Design
• 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.
4
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
Surface Mine Design
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.
5
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.
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Ultimate Pit Cutoff
• Price (P) $400/oz

• Sales Cost (s) $5 /oz
• Processing Cost (c) $ 10/ ton ore
Surface Mine Design
• Recovery (y) 90 %
• Mining Cost (m) $ 1.20/ ton
• Overhead
(Included in c and m )
7
Ultimate Pit Cutoff
Milling Cost + Mining Cost

gm =
(Pr ice − Sales Cost ) * Re cov ery
Surface Mine Design
$10 + $1.2
gm = = 0.0315 oz / ton
($400 − $5) * 0.9
8
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.
Surface Mine Design
• Any administrative overhead expense which would stop if

mining were stopped must be included in the cost
calculations.
9
Milling Cutoff
Milling Cost
gc =
Surface Mine Design
$10
gc = = 0.0281 oz / ton
($400 − $5) * 0.9
10
Block Value
Block Grade = gB
if gc < gm < gB then
Block Value = (P-S)* gB * y – c – m
Surface Mine Design
Else if gB < gm < gc then

Block Value = -m
11
Block Value
Block Grade = gB
if gc < gB < gm then
Block contains marginal ore.
Surface Mine Design
• Marginal ore pays for processing cost

but not for mining cost.
12
Block Value Calculation Example
a) Ore Block
Block grade = gB = 0.11 oz/ton
gc < gm < gB
Surface Mine Design
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
Block Value Calculation Example
b) Waste Block
Block Grade = gB = 0.01 oz/ton
gB < gc < gm
Surface Mine Design
0.01 < 0.0281 < 0.0315
therefore
Block Value = - $1.20/ton
= Mining Cost
14
Mine Design Parameters For The
Case Study
• Price (P) $600/oz
• Sales Cost (s) $5 /oz
• Processing Cost (c) $ 19/ ton ore
• Recovery (y) 90 %
•
Surface Mine Design
Mining Cost (m) $ 1.20/ ton

• Fixed Costs (fa) 8.35 M/year
• Mining Capacity (M) Unlimited
• Milling Capacity (C) 1.05 M
• Capital Costs (CC) 105 M
• Discount Rate (d) 15%
15
Calculation of Ultimate Pit
Cutoff Grade

gm =
Surface Mine Design
$19 + $1.2
gm = = 0.038 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
16
Calculation of Milling Cutoff
Grade
Milling Cost
gc =
Surface Mine Design
$19
gc = = 0.035 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
17
Grade Tonnage Distribution
Avg. Interval
Grade Interval KTons KTons Grade
Grade
0.000 - 0.020 70,000 0.0100
0.020 - 0.025 7,257 0.0225
89,167 Waste
0.025 - 0.030 6,319 0.0275
0.030 - 0.035 5,591 0.0325
Surface Mine Design
Cutoff Grade 0.035

0.035 - 0.040 4,598 0.0375
0.040 - 0.045 4,277 0.0425
0.045 - 0.050 3,465 0.0475 Ore
0.050 - 0.055 2,428 0.0525
0.055 - 0.060 2,307 0.0575
0.060 - 0.065 1,747 0.0625 36,348 0.1023
0.065 - 0.070 1,640 0.0675 Oz/ton
0.070 - 0.075 1,485 0.0725
0.075 - 0.080 1,227 0.0775
0.080 - 0.100 3,598 0.0900
0.100 - 0.358 9,576 0.2290
18
Constant Cutoff Grades.
Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules.
Table 3
Year Cutoff Avg QM Qc Qr Profits
Grade Grade $M/year
1 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
2 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
3 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
Surface Mine Design
4 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0

5 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
6 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
7 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
8 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
9 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
For 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 0.035 0.102 125.8 36.70 3365.9 1154.2
NPV $M 218.5
19
Profit
Profits ($M) = (P – s ) x Qr – Qc x c – Qm x m
P – Price
Surface Mine Design
S – Sales Cost
Qm – Total Material Mined
Qc – Ore Tonnage Processed By The Mill
Qr – Recovered Ounces
c – Milling Costs ($/ton)
m – Mining Costs ($/ton)
20
Shortcomings of the traditional
cutoff grades
• They are established to satisfy the objective of
maximizing the undiscounted profits from a given
mining operation.
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Milling Cost + Depreciati on + Minimum Pr ofit

gc =
Surface Mine Design
$19 + $10 + $3
gc = = 0.060 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
22
Nontraditional ????????
Milling Cost + Depreciation

gc =
Surface Mine Design
$19 + $10
gc = = 0.054 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
23
Constant Cutoff Grades
Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules
Table 4
Year Cutoff Avg Qm Qc Qr Profits
Grade Grade $M/year
1 0.060 0.153 6.90 1.05 144.60 57.8
2 0.060 0.153 6.90 1.05 144.60 57.8
3 0.060 0.153 6.90 1.05 144.60 57.8
4 0.060 0.153 6.90 1.05 144.60 57.8
Surface Mine Design
5 0.060 0.153 6.90 1.05 144.60 57.8

6 0.054 0.141 6.00 1.05 132.80 51.9
7 0.054 0.141 6.00 1.05 132.80 51.9
8 0.054 0.141 6.00 1.05 132.80 51.9
9 0.054 0.141 6.00 1.05 132.80 51.9
10 0.054 0.141 6.00 1.05 132.80 51.9
For 11 to 27 0.035 0.102 3.60 1.05 96.30 33.0
28 0.035 0.102 0.30 0.09 8.10 2.8
TOTAL 0.035 0.102 125.80 28.44 3032.10 1112.7
NPV $M 355.7
24
Declining Cutoff Grades
Milling Cost + Depreciation + Fixed Cost

gc =
Surface Mine Design
$19 + $10 + $7.95

gc = = 0.069 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
25
Milling Cost + Fixed Cost

gc =
Surface Mine Design
$19 + $7.95
gc = = 0.050 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
26
Milling Cost + Depreciation + Minimum Pr of . + Fixed Cost

gc =
Surface Mine Design
$19 + $10 + $3 + $7.95

gc = = 0.075 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
27
Milling Cost
gc =
(Pr ice − Sales Cost) * Re cov ery
Surface Mine Design
$19
gc = = 0.035 oz / ton
($600 − $5) * 0.9
28
Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules.
Table 5
Year Cutoff Avg QM Qc Qr **Profits
Grade Grade $M/year
1 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8

2 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
3 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
4 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
Surface Mine Design
5 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8

6 0.069 0.169 8.2 1.05 160.0 57.1
7 0.069 0.169 8.2 1.05 160.0 57.1
8 0.069 0.169 8.2 1.05 160.0 57.1
9 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
For 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 2562.5 885.6

NPV $M 357.7
**Profits ($M)= (P-s) x Qr – Qc x c – Qm x m – f a

29
Determination Of
Optimum Cutoff Grades
Surface Mine Design
When The Mill

Is Bottleneck
30
Formula for Optimum Cutoff
Grade
c + f + Fi
gc (i) =
(P − S ) * y
Surface Mine Design
• Where
Fi = d x NPVi /C
f = fa/C
and fa is annual fixed costs
31
Optimum Cutoff Grades
Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules
Table 6
Year Cutoff Avg QM Qc Qr **Profits NPV
Grade Grade $M $M
1 0.161 0.259 18.0 1.05 245.2 95.9 413.8

2 0.152 0.255 17.2 1.05 241.0 94.4 380.0
3 0.142 0.250 16.5 1.05 236.4 92.6 342.6
Surface Mine Design
4 0.131 0.245 15.7 1.05 231.3 90.5 301.4

5 0.120 0.239 14.9 1.05 225.7 88.1 256.1
6 0.107 0.232 14.1 1.05 219.6 85.4 206.4
7 0.092 0.213 12.1 1.05 200.9 76.7 152.0
8 0.079 0.188 9.8 1.05 177.9 65.9 98.1
9 0.065 0.163 7.6 1.05 153.6 53.9 46.9
TOTAL 125.8 9.45 1931.4 743.4

NPV $M 413.8
**Profits ($M)= (P-s) x Qr – Qc x c – Qm x m – f a

32
Summary
Avg Total Total Strip Profits NPV Life Undiscounted NPV

Grade Amount Amount Ratio % Reduction % Increase
mined processed INC CUM INC CUM
Qm Qr $M $M yrs
Traditional 0.102 125.8 36.70 2.43 4453.4 218.5 35 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Surface Mine Design
Heuristic 0.125 125.8 28.44 3.42 1127.4 355.7 28 3.6 3.6 63.0 63.0
(Depr)
Heuristic 0.164 125.8 18.11 5.95 885.6 357.1 18 20.4 23.3 0.3 63.4
(Depr and
Fixed Costs)
Lanes's 0.235 125.8 9.45 12.31 743.4 413.8 9 16.0 35.6 15.9 89.0
Approach
33
One Constraint
Cutoff Grade
Surface Mine Design
Optimization Algorithm
34
Steps Of The Algorithm
1. Start with Grade-Tonnage Curve.
2. Define: P - Price
C - Milling Capacity
Surface Mine Design
s - Marketing Costs
m - Mining Costs
c - Milling Costs
fa - Fixed Costs
d - Discount Rate
35
Steps Of The Algorithm (Cont.)
3. Determine the cutoff grade gc for year (i).

c + f + Fi
gc (i) =
(P − S ) * y
Surface Mine Design
• Where
Fi = d x NPVi /C
f = fa/C
and fa is annual fixed costs
36
4. For Cutoff Grade gmilling (i):
• Determine Ore Tonnage Tc and Grade gc

Surface Mine Design
• Determine the Waste Tonnage Tw
• Stripping Ratio (sr) = T w/Tc
37
5. Set
Qc = C if Tc > C
Surface Mine Design
Qc = T c if Tc < C
And
Qm = Qc(1+sr)
38
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
Surface Mine Design
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
7. Adjust the Grade-Tonnage Curve of the deposit

for Qc and
Qw = Qm – Qc .
Surface Mine Design
8. If Qc < C in year (i) go to step 9

otherwise
Set i = i+1 and go to Step 3.
40
9. Calculate incremental NPV for each year (i)
N Pj
Surface Mine Design
NPVi = ∑ j −i +1
j =i (1 + d )
41
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
Surface Mine Design
otherwise
Stop the cutoff grade gc (i) for years i = 1,
1
N is Optimum Policy.
42
Open Pit Sequencing and
Production Scheduling
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

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
Surface Mine Design
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.
2
Declining Stripping Ratio
Method
1 1 1
2 2 2
Stripping
3 3 3
Volume
Surface Mine Design
4 4 4
5 5 5
6 6 6
7 7 7
Time
Orebody
Waste
3
Increasing Stripping Ratio
Method
Surface Mine Design
Orebody
Waste
4
Constant Stripping Ratio
Method
Surface Mine Design
Orebody
Waste
5
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.
Surface Mine Design
•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
•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
Surface Mine Design
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
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.
Surface Mine Design
• 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.
8
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.
Surface Mine Design
• To defer waste stripping as long as possible to maximize cash

flow in the early years of the operation.
9
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.
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Planning (cont.)
• 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
Surface Mine Design
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
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.
Surface Mine Design
• 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
• 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,
Surface Mine Design
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

the product price.
Surface Mine Design
• According to the size of the deposit, pick a number of

phases that allow enough operating room for the
equipment.
14
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
Surface Mine Design
•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
pushbacks (Cont.)
Block Model showing copper grades in %
Level
Surface Mine Design
1 0.00 0.10 0.15 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
2 0.00 0.22 0.08 0.25 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.45 0.20 0.20 0.32 0.10 0.15 0.24 0.21
3 0.05 0.05 0.12 0.13 0.02 0.14 0.11 0.08 0.22 0.09 0.08 0.15 0.22 0.20 0.14 0.05
4 0.04 0.15 0.12 0.45 0.08 0.09 0.25 0.20 0.29 0.14 0.15 0.04 0.24 0.05 0.02 0.04
5 0.05 0.08 0.15 0.12 0.30 0.21 0.09 0.79 0.10 0.45 0.32 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
6 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.01 0.05 0.34 0.45 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.15
16
pushbacks (Cont.)
Economic Model showing block values in $/ton
Original copper price of $1.10/lb
1 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50
2 -0.60 1.06 -0.60 1.65 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 5.61 0.66 0.66 3.04 -0.60 -0.60 1.45 0.86
Surface Mine Design
3 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 0.96 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 0.96 0.56 -0.70 -0.70
4 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 5.41 -0.80 -0.80 1.45 0.46 2.24 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 1.25 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80
5 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 2.34 0.56 -0.90 12.04 -0.90 5.31 2.74 0.95 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90
6 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 3.03 5.21 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 3.82 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00
For ore blocks:

BV = ( P − s ) * g B * y − c − m
For waste blocks:

BV = − m
17
pushbacks (Cont.)
The floating cone algorithm was used to find
the ultimate pit limit
Pit
1 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 1
2 -0.60 1.06 -0.60 1.65 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 5.61 0.66 0.66 3.04 -0.60 -0.60 1.45 0.86 2
3 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 0.96 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 0.96 0.56 -0.70 -0.70 3
Surface Mine Design
4 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 5.41 -0.80 -0.80 1.45 0.46 2.24 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 1.25 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 4
5 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 2.34 0.56 -0.90 12.04 -0.90 5.31 2.74 0.95 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 5
6 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 3.03 5.21 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 3.82 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 6
7
The ore block left at the right cannot be mined due to slope constraints. All ore blocks are mined in the first iteration. 8
9
1 10
2 11
3 12
4 13
5 14
6 15
18
pushbacks (Cont.)
To find a smaller pit reduce the copper price to 0.60/lb
Economic block model
1 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50
2 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 1.56 -0.60 -0.60 0.16 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60
3 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70
Surface Mine Design
4 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 1.36 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80
5 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 4.93 -0.90 1.26 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90
6 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.16 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 0.40 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00
For ore blocks:

BV = ( P − s ) * g B * y − c − m
For waste blocks:

BV = − m
19
pushbacks (Cont.)
The floating cone algorithm was used to find
the limit of the pit at $0.60/lb
1 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50
2 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 1.56 -0.60 -0.60 0.16 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60
3 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70
4 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 1.36 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80
Surface Mine Design
5 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 4.93 -0.90 1.26 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90
6 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.16 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 0.40 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
20
pushbacks (Cont.)
To find an intermediate pit reduce the copper price to $0.86/lb
Economic Block Model
1 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50
Surface Mine Design
2 -0.60 0.11 -0.60 0.57 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 3.67 -0.60 -0.60 1.65 -0.60 -0.60 0.42 -0.60
3 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70
4 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 3.47 -0.80 -0.80 0.37 -0.80 0.99 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 0.22 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80
5 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 1.04 -0.90 -0.90 8.63 -0.90 3.37 1.35 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90
6 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.56 3.27 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 2.18 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00
21
pushbacks (Cont.)
To find an intermediate pit reduce the copper price to $0.86/lb
Economic Block Model
1 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 Pit
2 -0.60 0.11 -0.60 0.57 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 3.67 -0.60 -0.60 1.65 -0.60 -0.60 0.42 -0.60 1
3 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 2
Surface Mine Design
4 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 3.47 -0.80 -0.80 0.37 -0.80 0.99 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 0.22 -0.80 -0.80 -0.80 3
5 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 1.04 -0.90 -0.90 8.63 -0.90 3.37 1.35 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90 -0.90
6 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.56 3.27 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 2.18 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -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
22
pushbacks (Cont.)
The three pits shown in together
1 $0.60/lb
2
3 $0.86/lb
4 $1.10/lb
Surface Mine Design
5
6
23
Hypothetical Deposit and Pit
Development Sequence
Design Phase Limits Ultimate Pit
Surface Mine Design
Rock Type I
B A D
F C
Rock Type II E
Ore
24
Tonnage Inventory by Phase
Thousands of tonnes
Phase "A" Phase "B" Phase "C"

Bench
Waste Ore Waste Ore Waste Ore
5100 15,000
5050 32,000
Surface Mine Design
5000 50,000 2,000 4,000

4950 38,000 18,000 15,000
4900 15,000 20,000 18,000
4850 4,000 10,000 15,000 22,000
4800 3,000 9,000 4,000 9,000 16,000
4750 2,000 8,000 3,000 9,000 3,000 10,000
4700 2,000 7,000 5,000 20,000
4650 1,000 6,000 8,000 22,000
4600 3,000 17,000
4550 1,000 7,000
Total 159,000 27,000 65,000 31,000 95,000 76,000
25
Summary by Phase
Thousands of tonnes
Waste above Waste on Ore Cumulative

Phase first ore ore Ore Life* ore life
bench benches (years) (years)
A 150,000 9,000 27,000 1.08 1.08
Surface Mine Design
B 55,000 10,000 31,000 1.24 2.32

C 75,000 20,000 76,000 3.04 5.36
D 128,000 38,000 125,000 5.00 10.36
E 182,000 49,000 151,000 6.04 16.40
F 220,000 45,000 130,000 5.20 21.60
Total 810,000 171,000 540,000 21.60
*Assuming an annual milling rate 0f 25,000 tonnes
26
Time (Years)
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
250
Phase "D" ore = 125 M tonnes Earlier ore development
Hypothetical Deposit and Pit

Phase "D" life = 5 years due to the proposed
It requires 128 M tonnes stripping stripping schedule D
200
(Millions of tonnes)
100
Development Sequence
Developed Ore
150 E
C
F
D
100 50
B 76
C
A
50 27 31
B
A 0
-10 -5 0 5
1.08
1.24
3.04
0
1000
500
Surface Mine Design
- Production period
F 50 M tonnes / year
A proposed stripping D
schedule
750 - Pre-production period
Cumulative Stripping
4 yrs. Yr 1 25 M
A proposed stripping 2-3 50 M

E schedule 4 75 M 1
- Pre-production period 200 M 50 C
500 4 yrs. Yr 1 25 M
2-3 50 M
250
D
4 75 M B
200
200 M
- Production period 75
C A
250 50 M tonnes / year
B
50
A Minimum waste stripping
required to sustain 50
ore deliveries
25
0 0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 -10 -5 1 2 3 4 0 5
Time (Years)
Pre-production Pre-production
Period Period
27
Time (Years)
-10 -5 0 5 10
Earlier ore development
Phase "D" ore = 125 M tonnes due to the proposed
Phase "D" life = 5 years stripping schedule
It requires 128 M tonnes stripping
150 E
Developed Ore
Cushion = 0.34 years
100
Cushion = 0.80 years C

125
Cushion = 0.66 years
50
B 76
A
27 31
0
1.08 3.04
1.24 5.00
Surface Mine Design
750
E
Cumulative Stripping
- Production period
50 M tonnes / year
500
D
- Pre-production period
4 yrs. Yr 1 25 M
2-3 50 M
4 75 M
C
250 200 M
B
75 A Minimum waste stripping
50 required to sustain
ore deliveries
50
25
0
-10 -5 1 2 3 40 5 10
Time (Years)
Pre-production
Period 28
Period 2 Period 1
$72M $81M
Period 1
$50M
Period 3 Period 8
$63M $9M
Period 2
Period 4 $37M Period 4
$61M Period 5 Period 6 Period 7 $52M Period 3 $60M $50M
Period 7 $37M $32M Period 5 $49M
Period 8 $19M Period 6
$43M $50M
($398M) ($366M)
Period 4
$65M
Period 1
$46M Period 2
$32M
Period 2
$42M Period 3
$71M
Period 3
$63M
Period 7 $43M Period 4 $51M
Period 1 $42M
Period 5 Period 8 $16M
$51M Period 6
$48M
($374M) ($372M)
Long Term Planning and
Sequencing
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design

Sequencing
• Objective is to determine the suitability of the limestone
resource for the subsequent processing by the cement plant
• Life of mining and reclamation plans
•
Surface Mine Design
Equipment Selection
• Facility layout and Permitting
2
Sequencing
• Create a geologic model
• Define structural domains and stratigraphy
• Chemistry
• Long and short term variability
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Sequencing
• Determine mineable resource boundaries
• Haul road layout
• Define long term reclamation needs
Surface Mine Design
4
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
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Case Study
• Quarry currently operates 10 hours per shift,
5 days per week
• 1000 ton per hour Krubb In Pit Crusher
Surface Mine Design
• 2000 ft long main movable belt conveyor

with 500 ft long extension belt
• Komatsu 14 and 10 cubic yard loaders
6
Case Study
• Determine next 50 years life of mine plans
• Sequencing plan to come up with the right
blend limestone that meets the minimum of
Surface Mine Design
%1.3 SO3 requirements

• Determine equipment and capital investment
needs for the next 10 years
7
Quarry Development and
Sequencing
Surface Mine Design
8
Holnam Quarry Mining Sequence:
First Bench Development
Surface Mine Design
9
Second Bench Development
During the First Three Years
Surface Mine Design
10
First and Second Bench Development
Surface Mine Design
11
Surface Mine Design
12
Surface Mine Design
13
Midlothian North Area Quarry
Progress Contours Year1
Surface Mine Design
14
Progress Contours Year 2
Surface Mine Design
15
Surface Mine Design
16
Surface Mine Design
17
Midlothian Quarry Block
Model Definition
Surface Mine Design
18
Midlothian Quarry Block
Model Definition
Surface Mine Design
19
Midlothian Quarry Sequence: One
Year Increments on Elevation 790
Surface Mine Design
20
Surface Mine Design
21
Surface Mine Design
22
Surface Mine Design
23
Surface Mine Design
24
Surface Mine Design
25
Surface Mine Design
26
Surface Mine Design
27
Surface Mine Design
28
Surface Mine Design
29
Equipment Selection
Three Different Options were Evaluated:

• One 15 yd3 Caterpillar 992G model loader working
with a 70 ton CAT 775D truck fleet.
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Loader - Truck Fleet Evaluation
and Cost Analysis Year 1
Surface Mine Design
31
Surface Mine Design
32
Surface Mine Design
33
Loader - Truck Fleet Evaluation &
Cost Analysis Haul Road Profile
Surface Mine Design
34
Loader - Truck Productivity
Calculations
Assumptions
• 90 % Loader and truck availability resulting
in 81 % fleet availability
Surface Mine Design
• 92 % Operator efficiency
• 75 % bucket fill factor
• 2400 scheduled hrs
• 0.55 min. loader cycle time
35
Loader - Truck Productivity
Calculations
Assumptions (Cont.)
• 0.1 min. first bucket dump time
• 0.7 min. hauler exchange time
Surface Mine Design
• 2492 lbs/yd3 density

• 14 ton/pass; 5 passes per truck
• 2400 hours per year
36
Equipment Productivity & Cost
Estimation
• For CAT 992G

Surface Mine Design
Loader - 775D Trucks
37
Option 1: Cat 992G Loader -
775D Trucks
The truck cycle time for four different
conditions:
• Year 1: 9.67 minutes
Surface Mine Design

38
Option 1: Cat 992G Loader - 775D
Trucks Fleet Productivity in Tons
# of 775D's Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 7

1 825,332 808,107 801,532 808,669
Surface Mine Design
2 1,540,565 1,524,899 1,504,316 1,525,959

3 2,111,530 2,108,190 2,070,839 2,109,657
4 2,586,695 2,644,575 2,580,165 2,644,575
39
777D Trucks
The truck cycle time for four different
conditions
Surface Mine Design

40
777D Trucks
# of 777's Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 7

1 945,127 903,286 920,644 934,223
Surface Mine Design
2 1,731,661 1,667,466 1,695,274 1,715,981

3 2,285,652 2,234,289 2,254,834 2,275,379
4 2,737,983 2,714,476 2,724,550 2,731,266
41
Operating Cost for the Loader
and Trucks
Model Operating Cost

Surface Mine Design
CAT 992G $125/hr

CAT 775 D $63/hr
CAT 777 $82/hr
42
Operating Cost for the Loader
and Trucks
Model Operating Cost

Surface Mine Design
CAT 992G $125/hr

CAT 775 D $63/hr
CAT 777 $82/hr
43
Loader - Truck Capital
Requirements
Model Purchase Price

Surface Mine Design
CAT 992G $1,270,000

CAT 775 D $740,000
CAT 777 $1,060,000
44
Loader - Truck Capital
Requirements
• At the start of the production from bench
two, $2.1 M is needed to purchase 1 Cat
992G Loader and 775D truck.
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Comparative Analysis
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Source: J. Wiebmer, Caterpillar Incorporated

Hydraulic Shovel Applications
• Hard Digging
• Poorly shoot material
• Selective loading
Surface Mine Design
• Wet, jagged floor

• Pitching floor
• Single face operation
2
Hydraulic Shovel Selection
Considerations
• Multiple loading fronts
• Fast cycle time (25 to 30
seconds)
Surface Mine Design
• Low capital costs

• Moderate mobility
• Highly productive
3
Hydraulic Shovel
Favorable Site Conditions
• Single loading face
• Tight digging materials
• Face height equals to stick
Surface Mine Design
length
• Some will dig below and
above
• Soft floors
4
Hydraulic Shovel
Unfavorable Site Conditions
• Requires clean-up support

• Excessive tramming
Surface Mine Design
• High benches
5
Wheel Loader Applications
• Mobility and versatility

• Well blasted material
• Low pile profile
Surface Mine Design
• Smooth, level floor

• No clean-up support equipment
• Short mine life
6
Wheel Loader
Selection Considerations
• Highly mobile/versatile
• High bucket fill factors
Surface Mine Design
• Low capital costs

• No clean-up support
7
Wheel Loader
Favorable Site Conditions
• Good loading materials

• Lower face profile
Surface Mine Design
• Multi-face loading
8
Wheel Loader
Unfavorable Site Conditions
• Poor underfooting (tire cost)

• Soft floor
Surface Mine Design
• Tight load area
9
Comparison Shovels vs.
Loaders
Hydraulic Shovel Wheel Loader
% Operating Weight
8-11% 18-21%
as bucket payload
Cost/CY of capacity
100-120 60-80
Surface Mine Design
($1000)
Economic life (1000
30-60 30-60
hours)
Operating Cost/ton 0.07 - 0.12 0.07 - 0.12
Market Share (1980) 15% 85%
Market Share (1990) 30% 70%
10
Mobility
Wheel Loader
Surface Mine Design
Hydraulic
Shovel
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Feet Traveled in One Minute
11
Breakout Force
• 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.
Surface Mine Design
• The shovel can apply the force over its reach of the face.
12
Bucket Fill Factors
Hydraulic Front Shovels 80-85%

Surface Mine Design
Hydraulic backhoes 100%
Caterpillar wheel loaders 100-115%
Other wheel loaders 85-95%
13
Power and Fuel
• Hydraulic shovels burn less fuel per hour

than wheel loaders.
Surface Mine Design
• But considering tons moved per gallon

burned, wheel loaders and hydraulic shovel
compare very favorable to each other.
14
Two-to-Three Minute Rule
• A truck does not make money when its tires

are not running.
• Truck load times should be in the two to
Surface Mine Design
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
Region
Surface Mine Design
North & South America 85% 15%
Europe, Africa, Middle East 60% 40%
Australia, Far East 50% 50%
16
Hydraulic Shovel Production
Range
Operating Weight Production Range

(Tons) (tons/hour)
140 800 - 1,100

Surface Mine Design
230 1,100 - 1,800
340 1,600 - 2,400
620 3,000 - 4,000
17
Wheel Loader Production
Range
Production Range
Model
(tons/hour)
Cat 994 2,700 - 3,100

Surface Mine Design
Cat 992D 1,300 - 1,700
Cat 988B 700 - 900
Cat 980F 500 - 700
Cat 966F 300 - 500
18
Conclusions
• No two pits are the same.

• There is a wide array of loading tools to meet
Surface Mine Design
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
SURFACE UNDERGROUND
Loading Hauling Combination Loading Hauling Combination
Front End Loader Front End Load Haul
Trucks Trucks
Rubber Wheel Loader Scrapers Loader Dump
Bulldozers
Over Shot
Back Hoe Graders
Loaders
Track Track
Bulldozers
Crawler Loader Loaders
Hydraulic Bucket Wheel Hydraulic
Shovel Excavator Shovel s
Cable Over Shot
Shovel Loaders
Drag Line
Back Hoe
Conventional Over Shot Mine Cars/
Rail Rail Cars Loaders Locomotives
Walking Pneumatic/ Pneumatic/
Slusher
Other Drag Line Hydraulic Hydraulic
Dredge Conveyer Conveyers
Skips
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.

Dozer Powered Functions

Typical Dozer Production Cycle

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.

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.

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

Scrapers

Scraper Powered Functions

Scrapers

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.

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.

x
Terex S-24B tandem scraper self loading overburden.

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

Truck Powered Functions

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.

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.

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.
Rimpull three axel bottom dump coal hauler.

(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)
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.
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%.

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

Hydraulic Excavator Powered Functions

Applications
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

Typical Hydraulic Hoe Production Cycle

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.

Steam Shovel Mining Virginia Minnesota, circa 1910
Electric Shovels

Electric Shovel Powered Functions

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.
Loading Plans

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 Company’s Leahy Mine in Illinois.

Draglines

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

Dragline Powered Functions

The world’s largest operating dragline (one of two), the Bucyrus
2570-WS with 160 yard bucket at the Black Thunder Mine, WY.

The 100 yard Marion 8800 loading in Kentucky

Bucyrus International’s Big Muskie’s 220-yard bucket easily
accommodates a high school band. Photo taken in 1969.

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.

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.

Bucket Wheel Excavator Powered Functions

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)

Rhineland Lignite Mine, Germany
www.mining- technology.com
Förderanlagen Magdenburg (FAM) bucket wheel excavator.
World Mining Equipment, September 2002

Loading Equipment
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design

Surface Mine Design
Excavators
2
Hydraulic Shovels
Specifications
Surface Mine Design
3
Excavator Specifications
Surface Mine Design
4
Digging Envelopes
Front Shovels
Surface Mine Design
5
Curl and Crowd Forces
Front Shovels
Surface Mine Design
6
Digging Envelopes
Excavators
Surface Mine Design
7
Surface Mine Design
Excavators Bucket
8
Surface Mine Design
Loaders
9
Breakout Force
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
10
Breakout Force from Rackback
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
11
Carry Position
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
12
900 Series II – Dimensions
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
13
900 Series II – Dimensions
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
14
Specifications
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
15
Specifications
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
16
Travel Time – Loaded
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
17
Travel Time – Empty
Loaders
Surface Mine Design
18
Excavator Production
Calculations
A standard formula for cyclic excavators can be

employed:
Surface Mine Design
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
Bucket Load
B x BF x D/(1 + S) < Recommended

Operating Capacity
• With wheel loaders:
Surface Mine Design
50% of full turn static tipping load for

a specific bucket type
• With front shovels:
Maximum load
20
Bucket Load
• Bucket weight depends on size, duty and

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

• Bucket fill (BF) decreases with increasing
material consolidation
21
Wheel Loader Bucket Fill
Factors
Surface Mine Design
(CAT)
22
Weight of Materials
Surface Mine Design
(CAT)
23
Bucket Load
• % Swell increases and load factor decreases

with degree of consolidation
• In place density (D) important and should be
Surface Mine Design
a measured number
• Loose density (D/(1 + S)) important and
should be a measures number
24
Buckets/Period
• Average cycle time (C) based on standard

cycle time adjusted for:
• Material
Surface Mine Design
• Material fragmentation
• Material size distribution
• Pile configuration
25
Buckets/Period
• Average cycle time (C) based on standard

cycle time adjusted for:
• Consistency of operation
Surface Mine Design
• Swing angle (Shovels)

• Travel distance (Loaders)
• Operator ability
26
Wheel Loader Cycle Time
Average cycle time for truck loading

increases with machine size
Loader Size (cy) Cycle time (min)
Surface Mine Design
1.7-4.5 .45-.50
5.0-7.5 .50-.55
7.5-11 .55-.60
15-21 .60-.70
27
Cycle Time
• Hours scheduled (HS) usually a given, based

on management preferences and required
output
Surface Mine Design
• Longer shifts appear to be trend to minimize

start-up, shut-down impact
28
Cycle Time
• Job factor (J) depends on:

• Truck assignment
• Management issues
Surface Mine Design
• Job layout (Blending, etc.)
29
Cycle Time
• Mechanical availability (A) depends on:

• Material
• Management/suppliers
Surface Mine Design
• Age of machine
• Schedule
30
Loading Methods
• Loading method impacts cycle time and job factor

• Wheel loaders
• Y pattern used with machine digging point left to right
Surface Mine Design
• 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
Loading Methods
Surface Mine Design
(Mining Magazine)
33
Shovels:
Double Back-Up
Options include
• Double back-up
• Single back-up
Surface Mine Design
• Drive-by
• Modified drive-by
34
Shovels:
Double Back-Up
• Trucks loaded on both sides
• Average swing angle reduces
• Clean-up allowed on one side while loading
Surface Mine Design
continues
• Moves required as shovel penetrates bank
35
Shovels:
Double Back-Up
Surface Mine Design
36
Shovels:
Double Back-Up
Requires
balance of
Surface Mine Design
move time
versus
cycle time
(Oslund and Russell)
37
Shovels:
Single Back-Up
• Truck loaded on one side
• Larger swing angle
• Potential clean-up delays
Surface Mine Design
• Potential spotting delays depending on

excavator first cycle
38
Shovels:
Single Back-Up
Surface Mine Design
39
Shovels:
Drive-By
• Used with tractor trailers
• Large swing angles
Surface Mine Design
• Minimal amount of shovel moves

• Blending problems
40
Surface Mine Design
Shovels:
Drive-By
41
Shovels:
Modified Drive-By
• Truck backs in to reduce swing angle
• Minimal amount of shovel moves
Surface Mine Design
• Blending problems
• Depth of cut effects cycle time and move
time
42
Shovels:
Modified Drive-By
Surface Mine Design
43
Modified Drive-By:
Optimum Width
Surface Mine Design
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
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.
The maximum productivity of an earthmover should be derated to meet
actual conditions. Typical deration factors are found in the following
table:
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).
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.
Loading and Hauling
Fleet Productivity
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Surface Mine Design
Source : Hrebar – Lafarge 2000 Presentation

Truck Selection
• Number and type of trucks selected should

be based on overall system economics
• Lowest cost fleet selected considering
Surface Mine Design
operating and capital coats
2
Truck Selection
• Production requirement and operating

schedule
• Material characteristics
Surface Mine Design
• 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

• Effect of altitude on engine efficiency
• Effect of ambient temperature on engine cooling, tire
performance, and use of lubricants
Surface Mine Design
• Effect of rainfall, frost, snow, fog, etc. on road conditions

and travel
• Haul road characteristics
• Length, grade, and surface condition of
segment
4
Truck Selection
• Loading
• Space and ground conditions at loading point
• Type and size of loading equipment
• Total availability of loading equipment
Surface Mine Design
• 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
5
Truck Selection:
Rear Dump
• High horsepower to weight ratio
• Deep pits, high grades, maneuverability required
high impact and rough in pit conditions.
Surface Mine Design
• 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
6
Truck Selection:
Bottom Dump
• Low HP/weight ratio
• Free flowing material
• Dumping over hopper or in windrow
Surface Mine Design
• 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
• The prime mover delivers a force that

propels the haulage vehicle plus the load
• The force the drive wheels deliver to the
Surface Mine Design
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
• Maximum velocity is reached when rimpull

is equal to resisting forces of gravity, rolling
resistance. etc.
Surface Mine Design
Horsepower x 375 x Efficiency

Available Rimpull =
Speed in MPH
9
Rimpull vs. Velocity
Surface Mine Design
10
Rolling Resistance
• 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
Surface Mine Design
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
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%
Surface Mine Design
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
vehicle uphill. Expressed in % vehicle weight (adds
power to vehicle downhill).
• Percent Grade = Vertical rise or drop (ft) x 100
Surface Mine Design
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.
• Function of vehicle weight, rated capacity (CY), and
density of material hauled, number of passes of
Surface Mine Design
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
Coefficient of Traction Factors
Surface Mine Design
(CAT)
15
Altitude Deration
Surface Mine Design
(CAT)
16
Speed Limits
• Speed Limits: limits on curves, in pit, and on

main haul roads
• Curves based on radius and super elevation
Surface Mine Design
• In pit, ramp, and main haul roads, the speed limit

depends on haul road width and conditions
17
Acceleration, Deceleration,
Operator
• Speeds obtained from performance curves indicate
maximum velocity under optimum conditions on a
given profile.
•
Surface Mine Design
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
• Limit capability of machine to perform by

limiting load and speed
• Ton-mile-per-hour ratings should not be
Surface Mine Design
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
Average Tire Load = Empty Tire Load + Loaded Tire Load (tons)
2
Surface Mine Design
Average Speed = Round Trip (mi) x Trips/Shift

Total Hours (hr)
Limits by tire type and limits may also include maximum

speed
20
Ton-MPH Data
Surface Mine Design
(CAT)
21
Estimating Cycle Time
• 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
Surface Mine Design
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
• Loading time is a function bucket size, fill factor,

excavator cycle time, loose material density, and
truck capacity
•
Surface Mine Design
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)

• Truck payload / Truck cycle time x Operating
efficiency x Hours/shift
•
Surface Mine Design
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

• Units Required Operating (Not rounded) /
Mechanical availability
Surface Mine Design
25
Match Factor and System
• Production of the excavator truck system

dependent on the number of trucks assigned
Surface Mine Design
to the excavator
26
Match Factor and System
Allocations based on at least two approaches:
• Number of trucks = Truck cycle time / Load time
(excluding first pass)
Surface Mine Design
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

compared to first method. For example:
Loader cycle tim e . 5 m in
N o . of passes 7
Surface Mine Design
Effective loading tim e (7-1)x.5 3 .0 0 m i n

Truck spot tim e (exchange tim e) 1 .3 0 m i n
H aul, dump and return 12 .7 1 m in
Truck cycle tim e 17 .0 1 m in
N o . T ru c k s ( 1 7 . 0 1 / 3 . 0 0 ) 5.67
N o . T ru c k s ( 1 7 . 0 1 / ( 3 . 0 0 + 1 . 3 0 ) ) 3.96
28
System Production
• System production must consider number of trucks,

unit production and excavator availability.
• System production
Surface Mine Design
• 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
TRUCK SELECTION AND
PRODUCTION CALCULATIONS
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Calculations
• Example:
Calculate the output in tons/hr of a 990 Wheel
Loader with a 11cy bucket with .55 min. cycle time
Surface Mine Design
and 95% bucket fill factor loading material with

3100 lbs. per LCY.
Assume 85% mechanical availability and 83.3% job
factor.
2
Calculations (Cont.)
• Equation to estimate the production per hour:
O = BC*BF*D*MA*JF*3,600sec
(1+SF)*CT hour
Where,
Surface Mine Design
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
• Solution:
O = 11*0.95*1.55*0.85*0.833*3,600sec
Surface Mine Design
33sec
= 1252 tons/hr
4
Loader-Truck Production
Calculations
• 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.
Surface Mine Design
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
Tons / cycle = 11CY/cycle * 0.95*3100lb/cy / 2000lb
= 16.2T/cycle
# of cycles/truck = 65T / truck / 1 cycle/16.2T

Surface Mine Design
= 4 cycles
Loading time = (4-1) cycles * 0.55min / cycle = 1.65 min
6
Cycle time
Load 1.7min
Haul 3.8min
Surface Mine Design
Dump 1.0min
Return 1.8min
Spot 0.6min
Total Cycle time 8.9min
7
• Number of Trucks/ Loader

No. of Trucks = Truck cycle time / Load time
Surface Mine Design
= 8.9 min / 1.65 min

= 5.4 trucks
(Assume 6 trucks)
8
• Total Production
Assume – 50 min / hour, and 85% availability
65T/cycle*1cycle/8.9min*50min/hr*0.85/unit = 312T/hr
Surface Mine Design
Total Production = No. of trucks * tons/hr – unit

= 5.4 trucks * 312T/hr per truck
= 1685 tons/ hr
9
Calculations
• Example:
A quarry works with CAT769D flat floor trucks (Max
payload 41T, Engine+-450hp) that is loaded by 8cy loader.
Surface Mine Design
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
• Example (Cont.):
Loader data:
Capacity: 8cy
Surface Mine Design
Fill factor: 80%

Cycle time: 0.5 min/pass
Mechanical availability: 88%
11
Truck cycle time data:
Spot time: 0.8 min
Surface Mine Design
Dump time:1.5min
Truck mechanical availability: 85%
12
Road profile:
Segment Length (m) Speed limit Grade (%) Rolling

Surface Mine Design
(km/hr) resistance (%)

1 122 45 0 4
2 762 20 8 2
3 152 45 0 4
Road condition: Firm
13
Tons / cycle = 8CY/cycle * 0.8*2800lb/cy / 2000lb
= 9T/cycle
Surface Mine Design
# 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
Haul Speed:
Segment1
Surface Mine Design
Total Resistance = 4%
Max speed = 42km/h
< Speed limit (45km/hr)
42
15
Conversion of Max Speed to Average Speed
Weights to HP ratio:
Surface Mine Design
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
Haul Speed :
Segment2

Surface Mine Design
Max speed = 16km/h

Conversion factor = 1
Avg speed = 16km/hr
16
17
Haul Speed :
Segment3
Max speed = 42km/h
Surface Mine Design
Conversion factor = 0.68

Avg speed
= 42km/hr*0.68=28.6km/hr
42
18
Haul Time:
Segment1:
0.122km / 21.4km/hr * 60min = 0.34 min
Surface Mine Design
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
Return Speed:
Segment1
Surface Mine Design
Max speed = 73km/h

> Speed limit (45km/hr)
So, choose 45km/hr
Avg speed
= 45km/hr*0.68=30.6km/hr
73
20
Return Speed :
Segment2
Total Resistance = -8%+2% = -6%

Surface Mine Design
Max speed = 69km/h

> Speed limit (20km/h)
6%
Choose 20km/hr
Avg speed = 20*0.95

= 19km/h
69
21
Return Speed :
Segment3
Surface Mine Design
Max speed = 73km/h

> Speed limit (45km/hr)
So, choose 45km/hr
Avg speed
= 45km/hr*0.54=24.3km/hr
73
22
Return Time:
Segment1:
0.122km / 30.6km/hr * 60min = 0.24 min
Surface Mine Design
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
Haul and Return Time Summary:
Haul
Length Total Resistance Speed Limit Avg. Speed
Segment (m) Grade(%) RR (%) (%) (km/hr) (km/hr) Conversion (km/hr) time (min)
1 122 0 4 4 42 45 0.51 21.42 0.34

2 762 8 2 10 16 20 1 16 2.86
Surface Mine Design
3 152 0 4 4 42 45 0.68 28.56 0.32
Return
Length Total Resistance Speed Limit Avg. Speed
Segment (m) Grade(%) RR (%) (%) (km/hr) (km/hr) Conversion (km/hr) time (min)
1 122 0 4 4 73 45 0.68 30.6 0.24

2 762 -8 2 -6 69 20 0.95 19 2.41
3 152 0 4 4 73 45 0.54 24.3 0.38
Total time = 3.52min(haul)+3.02(return)=6.54 min
24
Truck cycle time (min)
Load 2.0 min

Surface Mine Design
Haul 3.5min
Dump 1.5min
Return 3.0min
Spot 0.8min
Total 10.8min
25
• Slip condition check (Segment2):

Available Rimpull
Surface Mine Design
=(Grade resistance + Rolling resistance)

* Gross Vehicle Weight
= (8% + 2%) * (34050kg + 41000kg)
= 10%*75050kg
= 7505kg
26
Usable Rimpull: Function of road surface and weight

on the drive wheels
Surface Mine Design
Usable Rimpull
= Coefficient of Traction * Weight on Wheel
27
Typical Coefficient of Traction

Surface Mine Design
28
Weight of Wheel:
769D: Rear 66.7%, Front 33.3% Distribution
(by CAT Performance Book)
Weight on Rear Tire is
Surface Mine Design
75050kg * 0.667 = 50058kg
Then, Usable Rimpull is

0.6*50058kg*Cos(8%) = 29939kg
29
• CONDITION CHECK
Usable Rimpull > Available Rimpull
Surface Mine Design
There is no slip condition.
30
• Unit Production
Assuming 50min / hour
Surface Mine Design
Productivity:
41T/cycle*1cycle/10.8min*50min/hr*0.85 = 161T/hr
31
• Number of Trucks/ Loader

For maximum productivity: 10.8min / 2.0min = 5.4
Surface Mine Design
(6trucks)
To achieve 260T/hr: 260 / 161 = 1.61 (2 trucks)
32
Fleet Size Determination Using
Binomial Distribution
by
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Example
Consider the following fleet:

One loader, 80% mechanical availability and an
Surface Mine Design
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
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
3
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.
Surface Mine Design
However, since the loader production is dependent

on available haul trucks, the truck downtime
distribution must be considered.
4
Binomial Distribution
n!
⋅ p x (1 − p) n− x
x! (n − x)!
Surface Mine Design
This formula gives the fraction of time x units are

available out of a fleet of n units with a given
availability of p.
5
Binomial Distribution for
Trucks
Availability = 70%
Fleet Number of Units Available (x)

Size (n) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 0.30 0.70
Surface Mine Design
2 0.09 0.42 0.49

3 0.03 0.19 0.44 0.34
4 0.01 0.08 0.26 0.41 0.24
5 0.00 0.03 0.13 0.31 0.36 0.17
6 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.19 0.32 0.30 0.12
Fraction of the time

2! that 1 truck out of a
⋅ 0.71 (1 − 0.7)2−1 = 0.42 fleet of 2 will be
1! (2 − 1)! operating
6
Fleet Capacity
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.
Surface Mine Design
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
7
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
Surface Mine Design
fleet.
8
Haul Truck Requirement
Determination
Annual target objective 1,800,000 tons

Shifts scheduled 250 shifts
Surface Mine Design
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
9
Determination
It could be incorrectly assumed that 3 trucks would be
sufficient.
However, if the loading fleet contains only 1 loader , then
Surface Mine Design
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
Determination
250 shifts x 0.80 x 0.34 x 9,000 tons = 612,000 tons
Surface Mine Design
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
by
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Hourly owning and operating
cost estimate
Analyst Antonio Peralta
Date 11/7/2005
1 2
Machine Designation Track-type Tractor Wheel Loader
Estimated Ownership Period (Years) 7 5
Estimated Usage (Hours/Year) 1200 1500
Ownership Usage (Total Hours) 8400 7500
Surface Mine Design
Owning Costs
1. a. Delivered Price (including attachments) 135,000 1,200,000

b. Less Tire Replacement Cost if Desired 4,000
c. Delivered Price Less Tires 135,000 1,196,000
2. a. Residual Value - % of original deliverd price 35% 48%
b. Less Residual Value at replacement 47,250 574,080
3. a. Value to be recovered through work 87,750 621,920
b. Cost per hour 10.45 82.92
4. a. Interest rate 16% 16%
b. Interest costs 10.29 76.54
5. a. Insurance rate 1% 1%
b. Insurance Costs 0.64 4.78
6. a. Tax rate 1% 1%
b. Property tax 0.64 4.78
7. Total hourly owning cost 22.02 169.03
2
Hourly owning and operating
cost estimate
Operating Costs
8. a. Fuel unit price 2.20 2.20

b. Fuel consumption 5 4
c. Fuel cost 11.00 8.80
9. Lube oils, filters, grease 0.46 0.43
10. a. Life of tires (Hours) 3,500
Surface Mine Design
b. Tires replacement cost 1.14

c. Impact factor 0.20
d. Abrasiveness factor 0.20
e. Z factor 0.30
f. Basic factor 6.20
g. Under carriage 4.34
11. a. Extended use multiplier for repair reserve 1.00 1.00
b. Basic repair factor for repair service 4.50 4.00
c. Repair reserve 4.50 4.00
12. a. Special wear items 1.32 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
3
9A. Lube Oils, Filters, Grease
Track-type tractor Wheel Loader

Unit Price Consumption Cost/Hour Unit Price Consumption Cost/Hour
Engine
Transmission
Surface Mine Design
Final Drives
Hydraulics
Grease
Filters
Total 0 Total 0
4
12A. Special Wear Items
Track-type tractor Wheel Loader

# Cost Life $/Hour Cost Life $/Hour
1 105 150 0.70 50 165 0.30
2 165 450 0.37 80 450 0.18
Surface Mine Design
3 125 500 0.25 70 600 0.12

4
5
6
Total 1.32 Total 0.60
5
Drilling
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Drilling Methods
• Top hammer drilling

Hydraulic self-contained drills
Pneumatic drills with portable air compressors
Surface Mine Design
• 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 Drilling Methods and
Applications
Surface Mine Design
3
Components of Surface Drilling
Methods
Surface Mine Design
4
Top Hammer Drilling
• Soft to hard rock

• Diameter from 7/8” to 10”
• Top hammer drills can be classified according to their size
and principle of operation:
Surface Mine Design
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
Percussion
Surface Mine Design
Feed
Rotation
Flushing
• Parameters that affect the penetration rate:

Impact energy, impact frequency, rotation speed, feed force, and
flushing of the hole
6
Relative Penetration Rate as a Function
of Percussion Pressure
Surface Mine Design
7
The Optimal Adjustment of Drilling
Parameters Means Maximum Penetration
Surface Mine Design
8
Surface Mine Design
Flushing
9
Surface Mine Design
Flushing
10
Penetration Rates Between Pneumatic
and Hydraulic Top Hammer Drilling
Surface Mine Design
11
Bench Drilling Rig
Surface Mine Design
12
Bench Drilling Rig
A modern surface crawler drill should fulfill the

following requirements, to make the operation
economical:
Surface Mine Design
• High penetration rate

• Short cycle times
• High quality holes
• High availability
• Low operating cost
13
Choice of Bit Type
Surface Mine Design
14
Application Range of Tube Drill Steels
Surface Mine Design
15
DTH Drilling
• It is more efficient than top hammer drilling

• A DTH hammer follows immediately behind the bit
• Good drilling accuracy
Surface Mine Design
• DTH drills are used in bench drilling of 3½” to 6½” holes

on benches up to 150 feet
• DTH hammer life is dependent on:
Hammer size, operating pressure, rock abrasiveness, and rock
drillability
16
Principle of DTH Drilling
Surface Mine Design
17
A Typical DTH Hammer
Surface Mine Design
18
Features of DTH Hammer
Surface Mine Design
19
Truck Mounted DTH Drill
Surface Mine Design
20
Surface Mine Design
DTH Bit Designs
21
Rotary Drilling
• It is used in most major open pit mining operations

• Diameter from 4” to 17½”, depth up to 150 feet
• The key elements in rotary drilling are:
Surface Mine Design
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
Principle Rotary Drilling
Surface Mine Design
23
Surface Mine Design
Rotary Drills
24
Surface Mine Design
Rotary Drills
25
Principles of Rotation
Surface Mine Design
26
Rotary Power versus Hole Diameter
Surface Mine Design
27
Pull Down versus Hole Diameter
Surface Mine Design
28
Principles of Feed Systems
Surface Mine Design
29
Thrust and Pulldown Force
Surface Mine Design
30
Flushing Air Compressor Size
Surface Mine Design
31
Carrousel Type Pipe Changer
Surface Mine Design
32
Rotary Drilling Accessories
• Drill bits
• Drill pipes
Surface Mine Design
• Shock subs
• Stabilizers
• Saver subs
• Bit subs
33
Rotary Drill Bit Components
Surface Mine Design
34
Rotary Bit Selection Parameters
Type of ground Tooth or insert spacing Tooth depth Cutting action

Soft formations with low
compressive strengths and Large: Inserts Mostly gouging and scraping by
high drillability: shales, High extended chisel skew cone action, with little
unconsolitaded sands, shaped chipping and crushing
calcites
Surface Mine Design
Partly by gouging and scraping

Medium Formations: harder Medium: Inserts
but with significant chipping and
shales, limestone, Medium, close short or blunt
crushing action especially at
sandstones, dolomites chisel shaped
harder end of type
Hard formations: siliceous
Low: Inserts
limestones, hard Mostly by chipping and crushing
Close with low intermesh spherical or
sandstones, porphyry by cutter rolling action
conical
copper ores
Very low: Insert

Very hard formations: Very close with low Nearly all excavation by true
hemispherical
taconites, quartzites intermesh rolling action of cutters
conical or ovoid
35
Bit Selection for Rotary Drilling
Surface Mine Design
36
Insert Shapes for Tricone Bits
Surface Mine Design
37
Penetration Rate versus Bit Load
Surface Mine Design
38
Principles of Rotary Cutting
Surface Mine Design
39
Drilling
Surface Mine Design
Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Penetration Rate
W rpm
P = (61 − 28 log10 Sc) ⋅ ⋅
φ 300
Surface Mine Design
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
⋅W 1.5
Where:
Surface Mine Design
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
⋅d 1/ 2
Where:
Um =
Surface Mine Design
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
Bailing Velocities
Surface Mine Design
5
Bailing Velocities
Surface Mine Design
6
Air Requirements Chart
Surface Mine Design
7
Optimal Bit Load
C×D
OptimumBitLoad =
5
Where:
Surface Mine Design
C = Rock compressive strength

D = bit diameter in inches
Source: R. Baker, Tamrock
8
Total Work
Total Work (WT ) = W × R × 2π × N × T
Where:
Surface Mine Design
W = bit load (lbs)

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

9
Rotary Horsepower
4.95 × D × R × (W / 1000)1.6
Horse Power (hp) =
C
Where:
Surface Mine Design
hp = rotary horsepower
R = bit rotational speed
D = bit diameter (inches)
W = optimum bit load (lbs)
C = rock compressive strength

10
Maximum Bit RPM
hp × C
Maximum Bit RPM ( R ) =
4.95 × D × (W / 1000)1.6
Where:
Surface Mine Design
hp = rotary horsepower
R = bit rotational speed
C = rock compressive strength

11
Volume CFM
 0.25πD 2   0.25πD 2 
Volume CFM =  P ×  × SF +  P × 
 144   144 
Where:
Surface Mine Design
P = penetration rate
SF = swell factor (0.6 sedimentary or 0.4 Igneous/metamorphic)
12
Air Velocity
183× CFM
Air Velocity =
D2 − d 2
Where:
Surface Mine Design
d = pipe diameter (inches)

CFM = effective compressor volume (CFM)
13
Compressive Strength
2.18 × W × R
Compressive Strength (C ) =
0.2 × (1 / 10000) × P × D 0.9
Where:
Surface Mine Design
P = average pure penetration rate (feet/hour)

W = average bit load (lbs)
R = average bit rotation

14
Pure Penetration
2.18 × W × R
Pure Penetratio n ( P ) =
0.2 × C × D 0.9 × (C / 10000)
Where:
Surface Mine Design
P = average pure penetration rate (feet/hour)

R = optimum bit rotation speed
C = average compressive strength

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.
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.
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.
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.
1894-PETN
•The explosive PETN (C5H8N4O12) was discovered in 1894.
•It was not widely used until the 1940’s 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.
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.
1960’s -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
1970’s-Nonel
•In the late 1970's we saw new non-electrical initiating systems
like Nonel being developed.
1970’s -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 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.

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 parallel-
series and for the final check before
firing.
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).
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 Air Space
Non Electric Cap
Fuse
Element
Shell Crimps Ignition Priming Base
Plug Charge Fuse Charge
Powder Charge
Bridge
Closure
Wire
Electric Cap
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.
Blasting Theory
Before Blasting
After Blasting
Leaves Un-
fractured Toe
Partial
Reflected
Wave
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
Total
Reflected
Tensile
Inclined holes cause total Waves
reflective tensile waves at
the toe of the bench. This
causes a flat lower bench
and is a more efficient use
of explosives.
Vertical Holes vs. Inclined Holes
Vertical Holes Inclined Holes

• Easier to drill • Commonly drilled between 10 &
• Avoids difficulties in 15 degrees
fractured rock • 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
Anderson Pearse
B = K(d*L)**2 B = K*d*(P/T)**2
Ash Fraenkel (meters & mm)

B = K*d/12 ((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.
Langefors/Kihlström
d p*s
Bmax =
33 c * f * S/B
Bmax = maximum burden (m)

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

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

CONCEPTUALIZED SYSTEM
• Software for dump edge recognition
• Trimble GPS
• Trimble 900 MHz radios
• Introduction to 802.11b
10/29/2006 5

MORENCI TEST PREVIOUS WORK
Field Tests at the Morenci

Copper Mine - Arizona
10/29/2006 6

CURRENT WORK
• LAFARGE QUARRY IMPLEMENTATION
OptiTrack
• Real Time
• Design of the System
• Hardware Development
• Software Development
• Robustness of the System
10/29/2006 7

OptiTrack SYSTEM CURRENT WORK
10/29/2006 8

Description of the System (Infrastructure)
OptiTrack Network at Lafarge
Quarry
GPS Differential Correction Service
GPS
Data, DTM Wireless Communication
Transmitting Truck Position
GPS data Wireless Communication
Between Lafarge Quarry and CSM
GPS Differential
DTM
Control Base
10/29/2006 9

OptiTrack (Lafarge) CURRENT WORK
• Mobile Clients
• Haul Trucks
• Manager Trucks
• PDAs
• Central Points
• Repeaters
• Trailer
10/29/2006 10

OptiTrack Mobile Clients CURRENT WORK
10/29/2006 11

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

Amplifier 1wt
DC Injector WAF2400-1000
N-Female N-Female N -Female
N-Female
GPS Device & Antenna GPS Satellites
RS 232
10/29/2006 12

OptiTrack Central Points CURRENT WORK
• Repeater at Mechanic House
• Repeater on the Trailer
10/29/2006 13

OptiTrack Repeater CURRENT WORK
10/29/2006 14

OptiTrack Trailer CURRENT WORK
10/29/2006 15

OptiTrack Trailer CURRENT WORK
10/29/2006 16

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 Coax Cable
V Pol N-Male 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

Amplifier 1wt
WAF2400-1000
DC Injector N-Female N-Female
Cisco N-Female
AP 350 N-Female
RPTNC-male
10/29/2006 17

OptiTrack (CSM) CURRENT WORK
OptiTrack at CSM GPS Laboratory
Server
10/29/2006 18

OptiTrack Antenna CURRENT WORK
Point to Point Antenna (Brown Building)
10/29/2006 19

Schematic Representation of OptiTrack (CSM)
CURRENT WORK
Amplifier 1wt Antenna on the roof of

WAF2400-1000 Brown Building
N-Female N-Female
Jumper Cable RF Coax Cable

N-Male N-Male N-Male
RPTNC -Female
LMR600 Lighting Arrestor

N-Male N-Male WRLA-1.2/1.8
N-Female N-Female
Cisco
AP 350
RPTNC-male
DC Injector Barrel Adapter
N-Male N-Male
N-Female
N-Female
10/29/2006 20

OptiTrack Software CURRENT WORK
10/29/2006 21

Future Work
• New Mobile Clients

• PDAs
• Sensors
• Radar Implementation
• Mobile Adhoc Network

(MANET)
10/29/2006 22

Description of the System (Ad Hoc)
OptiTrack Network at Lafarge
Quarry
GPS Differential Correction Service
GPS
Data, DTM
GPS data Wireless Communication

Between Lafarge Quarry and CSM
Wireless Communication
GPS Differential Transmitting Truck Position
DTM
Control Base
10/29/2006 23

Broadcast Protocols Future Work
Existing Protocols
• Flooding
• Adaptive-SBA
• AHBP-EX
OptiTrack Protocols
• Naive Bayes
• Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost)
10/29/2006 24

Existing Protocols Future Work
10/29/2006 25

Machine Learning Approach Future Work
Classification
Rebroadcast
Incoming
Packet
Discard
10/29/2006 26

OptiTrack Protocols Future Work
10/29/2006 27

Simulation Comparison Future Work
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 1 2 3 4 5
Number of Nodes 40 50 60 70 90
Average Speed (m/sec) 1 5 10 15 20
Pkt. Src. Rate (pkts/sec) 10 20 40 60 80
10/29/2006 28

Delivery Ratio of the Protocols
Future Work
Delivery Ratio
100
95
90
85
Adaptive SBA
Delivery Ratio
AHBP-EX
80 Flooding
AdaBoost
Naive Bayes
75
70
65
60
1 2 3 4 5
Trial
10/29/2006 29

Number of Retransmitting Nodes
Future Work
Number of Retransmitting Nodes
60
50
NumberofRetransmittingNodes
40
Adaptive SBA
AHBP-EX
30 Flooding
AdaBoost
Naive Bayes
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5
Trial
10/29/2006 30

End-to-End Delay Future Work
End-to-End Delay
2,5
2
End-to-EndDelay
Adaptive SBA
AHBP-EX
1,5 Flooding
AdaBoost
Naive Bayes
0,5
0
1 2 3 4 5
Trial
10/29/2006 31

ADHOC & INFRASTRUCTURE Future Work
Infrastructure
ADHOC
10/29/2006 32

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

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; SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
• Future oriented paradigm, and;
SOCIAL ECOLOGICAL
• A process of change.
This concept reflects a compromise between the

world’s 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.

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.

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.

Principal Mining and Environmental Actions
During Each Phase of Mine Development
PHASE IN MINE
PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL
PROJECT PRINCIPAL MINE PLANNING ACTION
MANAGEMENT ACTION
DEVELOPMENT
Exploration road construction
Rock core drilling Environmental assessment
Exploration Geochemical analysis Rehabilitation plan
Geostatistical analysis Exploration permit application
Orebody evaluation
Initial mine and minerals process planning

Environmental baseline study
Facilities siting
Environmental assessment
Pre-feasibility study Scheduling
“Fatal Flaw” analysis
Econometric analysis
Initiation of permitting process
Initial technology selection
Comprehensive EIA and review

Plan of operations
Mitigation planning
Technology selection
Reclamation and closure planning
Feasibility study Conceptual to final designs
Conceptual design for closure
Costing and cost benefit analysis
Reclamation and closure costing
Investment brokerage
Closure fund design

Principal Mining and Environmental Actions
During Each Phase of Mine Development (cont.)
PHASE IN MINE
PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL
PROJECT PRINCIPAL MINE PLANNING ACTION
MANAGEMENT ACTION
DEVELOPMENT
Access and haul road development
Installation of pollution control facilities
Site clearing and grubbing
General environmental management (air,
Earth moving and surface water management
Construction water, land)
Mine dewatering
Construction phase reclamation and
Utilities installation closure
Building and infrastructure construction
General environmental management
Ore extraction Performance assessment/audit
Size reduction Monitoring
Production Minerals processing Concurrent reclamation
Smelting and refining Final closure design
Maintenance and upgrade Partial closure
Partial bond release
Facilities decommissioning
Dismantling Implementation of closure plan
Decontamination Site cleanup
Closure Burial Final reclamation
Removal Final impact assessment
Asset recovery Post closure planning
Recycling
Treatment
Maintenance
Post closure
Monitoring
Final bond release

Elements of Environmental Planning
A). INITIAL PROJECT EVALUATION
B). THE STRATEGIC PLAN
C). THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING TEAM

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.

(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.

(cont.)
C). THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING TEAM

The team shall be multidisciplinary:
Ø Mining engineers
Ø Metallurgical engineers
Ø Biologists
Ø Environmentalists
Ø Toxicologists
Ø etc.

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?

Cost Analysis
By considering:
Ø Capital costs
Ø Operating costs
Ø Closure costs
Ø Potential costs for retrofits associated with
regulatory compliance
Ø Potential cost for remediation
Ø Life-cycle environmental costs

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

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

Location of the McLaughlin Mine in California

Facilities map of the McLaughlin Mine

Mine waste management
1) 2)
M
c
L
a
u
g
Early stage for waste disposal & AMD control facilities Advance of the waste disposal works
h
3) 4)
l
i
n
Final limit of the waste dump Erosion control by revegetating is started

Mine waste management (cont.)
05/04/ 92 05/04/ 93
5) 6)
M
c
L
a
u
g
Advance on the erosion control & and pit backfilling East waste dump is completely covered
h 7) 05/10/ 93 8) 06/14/ 98
l
i
n
South pit is backfilled & west dump is almost covered Waste dumps encapsulation is finished

Acid Mine Drainage Control
AMD control facilities at the west waste dump

Revegetation
Supervising the revegetation works on the west waste dump

(notice the AMD control facilities on the right side)

Minimizing AMD in open pit mining
through mine planning
by
Antonio Peralta

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

q Interpretation of rock types

q 3D view of two interpreted sections

q 3D view of two interpreted sections

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
éExpected pit development
q Development phasing
éPeriod of development
éAreas 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 non-
reactive 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 Capital Cost of the mill

Grade of the mine product Exploration and development cost
Mill recovery Mining rate, tons per day
Sale price of the metal or mineral Depreciation method used
Cost of mining per ton Depletion allowance
Cost of milling per ton Working capital necessary
Royalties Miscellaneous costs of operation
Capital cost of the mine 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 15-
percent 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:
ΣPV cash inflows = ΣPV cash outflows (3)

DCF-ROR
The DCF-ROR can be calculated by:
N
CFn (4)
∑
n = 0 (1 + i)
n
=0
where:
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. Select a mining method

2. Select a production rate
3. Calculate Capital and Operating Costs
4. Select cutoff grade and tonnage
5. Calculate cash flow and return
Change steps 4, 2, and 1 and select the alternative that gives the
highest return.
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 post-
production 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
Depletion
One of the features that distinguish a mining enterprise from many
other businesses is that during production, the company’s 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total
Exploration *1 2,000 4000 4000 0 0 0 0 10,000
Development *2 0 0 0 4000 8000 8000 0 20,000
Mine/Mill 0 0 0 15000 36000 36000 0 87,000
Working Capital 0 0 0 0 0 2600 9,300 11,900
Total Investment (2,000) (4,000) (4,000) (19,000) (44,000) (46,600) (9,300) (128,900)
Tax Savings *3 800 1600 1600 1600 3200 3200 0 12,000
Net Cash Flow (1,200) (2,400) (2,400) (17,400) (40,800) (43,400) (9,300) (116,900)
*1 Expensed under Section 617 of IRS Code

*2 Expensed
*3 Assume federal, state, and local tax rate = 40% of net after depletion
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 = $425.43/ton
Deductions:
Base Charge 170.00
Price Adjustment
(47- 40)c * $3.00/c = 21.00
Total Deductions: (191.00)
Freight:
Truck 5.00
Rail 15.00
Total Freight: (20.00)
Net Smelter Return/Ton Concentrate (NSR/T) $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 7 8 9 10 11 12-21
Revenues 73,684 73,684 73,684 73,684 73,684 73,684
Operating Costs (34,500) (34,500) (34,500) (34,500) (34,500) (34,500)
Net Before D & D 39,184 39,184 39,184 39,184 39,184 39,184
Depreciation (5,800) (5,800) (5,800) (5,800) (5,800) (5,800)
Net After Depr. 33,384 33,384 33,384 33,384 33,384 33,384
Depletion (6,211) (16,211) (16,211) (16,211) (16,211) (16,211)
Taxable Income 27,173 17,173 17,173 17,173 17,173 17,173
Tax @ 40% (10,869) (6,869) (6,869) (6,869) (6,869) (6,869)
Net After Tax 16,304 10,304 10,304 10,304 10,304 10,304
Depreciation 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800
Depletion 6,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211
Cash Flow 28,315 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315
Working Capital (9,300) 0 0 0 0 0
Net Cash Flow 19,015 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315
Depletion Calculation: 7 8 9 10 11 12-21

Initial Recapture 10,000
22% Revenue 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211
50% Net After Depr. 16,692 16,692 16,692 16,692 16,692 16,692
Depletion Earned 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211
Depletion Recaptured 10,000 0 0 0 0 0
Recapture Balance 0 0 0 0 0 0
Depletion Claimed 6,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 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 7 8 9 10 11 12-21
Revenues 73,684 73,684 73,684 73,684 73,684 73,684
Operating Costs (34,500) (34,500) (34,500) (34,500) (34,500) (34,500)
Net Before D & D 39,184 39,184 39,184 39,184 39,184 39,184
Depreciation (5,800) (5,800) (5,800) (5,800) (5,800) (5,800)
Net After Depr. 33,384 33,384 33,384 33,384 33,384 33,384
Depletion (6,211) (16,211) (16,211) (16,211) (16,211) (16,211)
Taxable Income 27,173 17,173 17,173 17,173 17,173 17,173
Tax @ 40% (10,869) (6,869) (6,869) (6,869) (6,869) (6,869)
Net After Tax 16,304 10,304 10,304 10,304 10,304 10,304
Depreciation 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800
Depletion 6,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211
Cash Flow 28,315 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315
Working Capital (9,300) 0 0 0 0 0
Net Cash Flow 19,015 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315 32,315
Depletion Calculation: 7 8 9 10 11 12-21

Initial Recapture 10,000
22% Revenue 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211
50% Net After Depr. 16,692 16,692 16,692 16,692 16,692 16,692
Depletion Earned 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211
Depletion Recaptured 10,000 0 0 0 0 0
Recapture Balance 0 0 0 0 0 0
Depletion Claimed 6,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 16,211 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 Present Value Present Value Present Value
Year (j) Net CF 1/(1+.20)^j CF @ 20% 1/(1+.25)^j CF @ 25% 0.21509 CF @ 21.509%
1 (1,200) 0.833 (1,000) 0.800 (960) 0.823 (988)
2 (2,400) 0.694 (1,667) 0.640 (1,536) 0.677 (1,626)
3 (2,400) 0.579 (1,389) 0.512 (1,229) 0.557 (1,338)
4 (17,400) 0.482 (8,391) 0.410 (7,127) 0.459 (7,982)
5 (40,800) 0.402 (16,397) 0.328 (13,369) 0.378 (15,403)
6 (43,400) 0.335 (14,535) 0.262 (11,377) 0.311 (13,485)
7 19,015 0.279 5,307 0.210 3,988 0.256 4,862
8 32,315 0.233 7,515 0.168 5,422 0.210 6,800
9 32,315 0.194 6,263 0.134 4,337 0.173 5,597
10 32,315 0.162 5,219 0.107 3,470 0.143 4,606
11 32,315 0.135 4,349 0.086 2,776 0.117 3,791
12 32,315 0.112 3,624 0.069 2,221 0.097 3,120
13 32,315 0.093 3,020 0.055 1,777 0.079 2,567
14 32,315 0.078 2,517 0.044 1,421 0.065 2,113
15 32,315 0.065 2,097 0.035 1,137 0.054 1,739
16 32,315 0.054 1,748 0.028 910 0.044 1,431
17 32,315 0.045 1,457 0.023 728 0.036 1,178
18 32,315 0.038 1,214 0.018 582 0.030 969
19 32,315 0.031 1,011 0.014 466 0.025 798
20 32,315 0.026 843 0.012 373 0.020 657
21 32,315 0.022 702 0.009 298 0.017 540
22 3,900 0.018 71 0.007 29 0.014 54
367,726 3,580 (5,666) 0
By Linear Interpolation
DCF-ROR = 20% + 3580/(3580+5666)*(25-20)% = 21.9%
Exact Solution 21.5090%

Projected Cash Flows For Bedded Zinc Deposit
40000
30000
20000
10000
$ *1000
0
11
13
15
17
19
21
-10000
-20000
-30000
-40000
-50000
Year
Present Value of Cash Flows

at 21.5% Discount Rate
10,000
5,000
0
$ *1000
11
13
15
17
19
21
(5,000)
(10,000)
(15,000)
(20,000)
Year
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
Golden, Colorado 80401
OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION
For Each Block in The

Model
l If a given block of
material should be
mined?
l When it Should be
mined?
APCOM 2005
l Once it is mined what to

do with the block of
Material
Start
Physical Capacities
Production Extraction
Costs Scheduling
Ultimate pit Cutoff Grade

APCOM 2005
Design Of Cuts
Steps of Traditional Planning by Circular Analysis

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

ones should be left in the ground.
l Defines the lateral and vertical extent to which a given
deposit can economically be mined to
l 3-D Breakeven Analysis
l Moving Cone algorithm gives sub-optimum results
l Lerchs and Grossmann algorithm gives true
APCOM 2005
breakeven pit that maximizes the undiscounted profits

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
APCOM 2005
technique
ULTIMATE PIT LIMITS
l Common practice is to apply Lerchs and

Grossmann’s algorithm to the economic block model
that is generated to discounted block values
l Economic block model is generated by discounting

block values based on a rough initial production
schedule
APCOM 2005
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
l NPV analysis on the last incremental pushbacks

always results in elimination of non-contributing
incremental pits
APCOM 2005
Start
Physical Capacities
Costs Scheduling

APCOM 2005
Design Of Cuts

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
APCOM 2005
l Each outline is then used as pushbacks

DESIGN OF PUSHBACKS
APCOM 2005
PHASE 1
PHASE 2
PHASE 3
DESIGN OF PUSHBACKS
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
APCOM 2005
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
DESIGN OF PUSHBACKS
APCOM 2005
Start
Physical Capacities
Costs Scheduling

APCOM 2005
Design Of Cuts

CUTOFF GRADES
APCOM 2005
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.
2005 SME Annual Meeting
l 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
Waste Ore and waste discrimination

Waste
dumps Ore
Cutoff grade
Stockpiles
Autoclave Mill
Round Mountain Gold Mine
Oxide Waste
Low grade
stockpiles Waste
Ore
dumps
Sulfide
Crusher
Stockpiles
CIP Mill
Leach Pads
Breakeven Mill Cutoff Grade
l The lowest economic grade where mining, milling,

and administration cost are equal to revenues obtained
from the metal produced.
Milling Cost
Breakeven cutoff grade =
(Price – Refining Cost - Sales Cost) * Recovery
l Traditionally, this breakeven cutoff grade has been

widely used in a production scheduling.
McLaughlin Mine Case Study
l The economic and operational parameters:
Price (P) 600 $/oz

Sales Cost (s) 5 $/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)
l If one uses breakeven cutoff grade for a production
scheduling:
$19/ton
Breakeven cutoff grade =
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.035 oz/ton
l All the materials above 0.035oz/ton goes to process,

and below goes to waste dump.
McLaughlin Case Study
l Consider a case study from McLaughlin Mine in California
where an epithermal gold deposit was mined by an open pit.
l The grade distribution within the ultimate pit limit is:
Grade Category
From To midpoint Ktons
0 0.02 0.0100 70,000

0.02 0.025 0.0225 7,257
0.025 0.03 0.0275 6,319
89,167 tons
COG 0.03 0.035 0.0325 5,591
Tons
0.035 0.04 0.0375 4,598

0.04 0.045 0.0425 4,277 SR=2.45
0.045 0.05 0.0475 3,465
0.05 0.055 0.0525 2,428
Grade intervals 0.055 0.06 0.0575 2,307
0.06 0.065 0.0625 1,747 36,346 tons
0.065 0.07 0.0675 1,640
0.07 0.075 0.0725 1,485 @0.102oz/ton
0.075 0.08 0.0775 1,227
0.08 0.1 0.0900 3,598
0.1 0.358 0.2290 9,576
125,515
Yearly Mining and Milling Rates
l Assuming the deposit is homogeneously distributed,
yearly mining rate is given as follows:
l Yearly ore tons: 1.05Mtons (Limited by process capacity)

l Yearly ounces recovered: 1.05Mtons x 0.102 oz/ton x 0.9
= 96.3koz
l Yearly waste tons: 1.05Mtons x 2.45 (SR) = 2.58Mtons
l Yearly mining rates: 1.05M + 2.58M = 3.62Mtons
Yearly Schedules by Breakeven
Cutoff Grade (Cont.)
l 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)
1 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0

2 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
3 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
4 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
5 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
6 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
7 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
8 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
9 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
Shortcomings of the Traditional
Cutoff Grades
l They are established to maximizing the undiscounted
profits from a given mining operation.
l They are constant unless the commodity price and the

costs change during the life of the mine.
l They do not consider grade distribution of the deposit.

CUTOFF GRADES
l Many open pit mines are still designed and operated

using cutoff grades based on breakeven economic
analysis which maximizes undiscounted profits
l The cutoff grades should be set to much higher

levels than the breakeven cutoff during the initial
APCOM 2005
years of the operation

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
l Applying this method to a given project results in

higher NPV for a project specially if capacities are
APCOM 2005
not in harmony with the grade distribution of the

deposit
Declining Cutoff Grade
l Traditional cutoff grade (constant cutoff grade) does
not maximize the NPV.
l Many approaches have been suggested to improve

NPV of the project.
l 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 Lane’s
Algorithm
l Lane’s approach considers the mining operation to be
constrained by the capacities of mine, mill, and
refinery.
l 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.
l This approach has been successfully used in the
mining industry for many years.
Optimum Cutoff Grades by OptiPit ®
l Linear Programming (LP) based algorithm and
software is being developed to optimize cutoff grades
under complex mining and process constraints.
l Mathematical programming approach is very powerful
and provides complete flexibility in modeling complex

operating environments.
l This approach will be described and demonstrated
using four case studies coming from gold mines in
Western United States.
Round Mountain Gold Mine
Oxide Waste
Low grade
stockpiles Waste
Ore
Sulfide
dumps
Crusher
Stockpiles
CIP Mill
APCOM 2005
Leach Pads
COMPLICATED PROCESSES AND
CAPACITIES limited by
10M crusher
ROM
tons/yr
Dump Leach
Cr
1 Leach
roc
P 2
roc
P
Phase
Proc 3
1 Cr Autoclave
Phase2
Pr
oc
1.05M
Mine 4
20% tons/yr
5M
APCOM 2005
tons/yr Flot.
80%
Mining Capacity: 12M tons/yr
2M
Refining Capacity: 350 koz/yr tons/yr
Tailings
Stockpile available
CUTOFF GRADES
l Linear Programming (LP) based algorithm and

software is being developed to optimize cutoff grades
under complex mining and process constraints.
l Mathematical programming approach is very powerful

and provides complete flexibility in modeling complex
APCOM 2005
operating environments.
CUTOFF GRADE FORMULATION
Index d
Dump
Cutoff Mill
Grade
Tons
McLaughlin mine Grade intervals
l Decision variables:
APCOM 2005
Mine
t
X igd
Index g
Index i Index t: Years

FUTURE
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
APCOM 2005
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.
Push Backs or Phases
• Defines how the pit will evolve with time.
MNGN 433 Mine Systems Analysis
• Defines ore tons and its quality for different time periods.
• Defines waste tons for removal schedules.
• Defines the cash flows and overall project economics.
1
Push Backs or Phases Example
Phase 1 Phase 2
2
(Cont.)
Phase 3 Phase 4
3
(Cont.)
Cross Section
4
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
5
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.
6
Hypothetical Case Study
• 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 midpoint Ktons
0 0.02 0.0100 70,000
0.02 0.025 0.0225 7,257
0.025 0.03 0.0275 6,319
0.03 0.035 0.0325 5,591
0.035 0.04 0.0375 4,598
0.04 0.045 0.0425 4,277
0.045 0.05 0.0475 3,465
0.05 0.055 0.0525 2,428
0.055 0.06 0.0575 2,307
0.06 0.065 0.0625 1,747
0.065 0.07 0.0675 1,640
0.07 0.075 0.0725 1,485
0.075 0.08 0.0775 1,227
0.08 0.1 0.0900 3,598
0.1 0.358 0.2290 9,576
125,515 7
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 %
8
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
9
Ultimate Pit Cutoff Grade
• 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 =
$19/ton + $1.2/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.038 oz/ton
10
Milling Cutoff Grade
• 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 Cost
Milling cutoff grade =
$19/ton
Milling cutoff grade =
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.035 oz/ton
11
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
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
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
Yearly Tons and Grades Schedules by
• 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
Yearly Tons and Grade Schedules by
• Mining the deposit with traditional milling cutoff grade of

0.035oz/ton at 1.05M tons milling capacity (Table3):

1 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
2 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
3 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
4 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
5 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
6 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
7 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
8 0.035 0.102 3.6 1.05 96.3 33.0
9 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
Yearly Tons and Grades Schedules by
Constant Cutoff Grades (NPV Calculation)
• NPV of the project:

NPV = 33.0 33.0 33.0

+ +
(1 + 0.15)1 (1 + 0.15)2 (1 + 0.15)3
33.0 33.0 …
+ +
(1 + 0.15)4 (1 + 0.15)5
33.0 31.4
+ +
(1 + 0.15)34 (1 + 0.15)35
= $218.5M
17
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
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
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
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
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
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
Calculation
• The milling cutoff grades will be:
Yr 1 to 5
Milling Cost + Depreciation + Minimum Prof.

g milling =
$19/ton + $10/ton + $3/ton

($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.060 oz/ton
24
Calculation (Cont.)
Yr 6 to 10
Milling Cost + Depreciation

g milling =
$19/ton + $10/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.054 oz/ton
25
Calculation (Cont.)
Yr 11 to Depletion
Milling Cost
g milling =
$19/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.035 oz/ton
26
Yearly Tons and Grade
Schedules
• The year by year tons and grade schedule obtained modified
cutoff grade policy (Table4):

1 0.060 0.153 6.9 1.05 144.6 57.8
2 0.060 0.153 6.9 1.05 144.6 57.8
3 0.060 0.153 6.9 1.05 144.6 57.8
4 0.060 0.153 6.9 1.05 144.6 57.8
5 0.060 0.153 6.9 1.05 144.6 57.8
6 0.054 0.141 6.0 1.05 132.8 51.9
7 0.054 0.141 6.0 1.05 132.8 51.9
8 0.054 0.141 6.0 1.05 132.8 51.9
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
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
(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
Heuristic Cutoff Grade Calculation
(With G & A)
• The milling cutoff grades will be:

Yr 1 to 5
Milling Cost + Depreciation + Minimum Prof. + Fixed cost

g milling =
$19/ton + $10/ton + $3/ton + $7.95/ton

($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.075 oz/ton
30
(With G & A) (Cont.)
Yr 6 to 10
Milling Cost + Depreciation + Fixed cost

g milling =
$19/ton + $10/ton + $7.95/ton

($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.069 oz/ton
31
(With G & A) (Cont.)
Yr 11 to Depletion
Milling Cost + Fixed cost

g milling =
$19/ton + $7.95/ton
($600/oz - $5.0/oz) * 0.90
= 0.050 oz/ton
32
Yearly Tons and Grades
Schedules
• The year by year tons and grade schedule obtained modified
cutoff grade policy that includes fixed costs (Table5):

1 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
2 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
3 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
4 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
5 0.075 0.182 9.2 1.05 171.6 62.8
6 0.069 0.169 8.2 1.05 160.0 57.1
7 0.069 0.169 8.2 1.05 160.0 57.1
8 0.069 0.169 8.2 1.05 160.0 57.1
9 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
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
Lane’s 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
Lane’s 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
Cutoff Grade Equation for
Lane’s Approach
•
The cutoff grade equation that maximizes the NPV of the

deposit constrained by the mill capacity is:
c + f + Fi
g milling (i) =
(P - s) * y
Where i = 1, …, N (mine life),

gmilling(i) is the cutoff grade to be used in Year i.
37
Cutoff Grade Equation for
Lane’s 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
• The year by year tons and grade schedule resulted from
Lane’s approach (Table6):

Avg Qm Qc Qr Profits NPV
Year (i) COG Ore Grade (Mtons) (Mtons) (ktons) ($M) ($M)
1 0.161 0.259 18.0 1.05 245.2 95.9 413.8
2 0.152 0.255 17.2 1.05 241.0 94.4 380.0
3 0.142 0.25 16.5 1.05 236.4 92.6 342.6
4 0.131 0.245 15.7 1.05 231.3 90.5 301.4
5 0.120 0.239 14.9 1.05 225.7 88.1 256.1
6 0.107 0.232 14.1 1.05 219.6 85.4 206.4
7 0.092 0.213 12.1 1.05 200.9 76.7 152.0
8 0.079 0.188 9.8 1.05 177.9 65.9 98.1
9 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
Steps to Obtain Table 6 (1st Iteration)
Avg Waste Ore SR Qm Qc Qr Profits NPV

Year (i) NPVi Cog Ore Grade (Mtons) (Mtons) (Mtons) (Mtons) (ktons) ($M) ($M)
1 0 0.050 0.133 101.5 24.0 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $255.0
2 0 0.050 0.133 97.1 23.0 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $253.4
3 0 0.050 0.133 92.6 21.9 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $251.5
4 0 0.050 0.133 88.2 20.9 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $249.3
5 0 0.050 0.133 83.7 19.8 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $246.8
6 0 0.050 0.133 79.3 18.8 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $243.9
7 0 0.050 0.133 74.9 17.7 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $240.6
…
21 0 0.050 0.133 12.7 3.0 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $86.6
22 0 0.050 0.133 8.3 2.0 4.2 5.5 1.05 125.7 39.9 $59.7
23 0 0.050 0.133 3.8 0.9 4.2 5.1 0.91 108.9 33.1 $28.7
Total 125.8 24.0 2,874.0 910.8
(NPV@15%)
$255.0
Year 1: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(0*0.15)/1.05 = 0.050

(600-5)*0.9
Year 2: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(0*0.15)/1.05 = 0.050

(600-5)*0.9
40
Steps to Obtain Table 6 (2nd Iteration)
2nd iteration

1 $255.0 0.118 0.238 116.6 8.9 13.1 14.8 1.05 224.9 87.8 $399.5
2 $253.4 0.118 0.238 102.9 7.9 13.1 14.8 1.05 224.9 87.8 $371.7
3 $251.5 0.117 0.236 89.1 6.8 13.1 14.8 1.05 223.0 86.6 $339.7
4 $249.3 0.117 0.236 74.5 5.7 13.1 14.8 1.05 223.0 86.7 $304.0
5 $246.8 0.116 0.236 61.6 4.8 12.9 14.6 1.05 223.0 86.8 $262.9
6 $243.9 0.115 0.236 48.2 3.8 12.9 14.5 1.05 223.0 86.9 $215.5
7 $240.6 0.115 0.236 34.8 2.7 12.9 14.6 1.05 223.0 86.9 $160.9
8 $236.8 0.114 0.235 20.0 1.6 12.9 14.6 1.05 222.1 86.3 $98.2
9 $232.4 0.112 0.234 7.0 0.5 15.6 7.5 0.45 94.8 30.5 $26.6
Total 125.0 8.9 1,881.8 726.4
(NPV@15%)
$399.5
Year 1: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(255*0.15)/1.05 = 0.118

(600-5)*0.9
Year 2: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(253.4*0.15)/1.05 = 0.118

(600-5)*0.9
41
Steps to Obtain Table 6 (3rd Iteration)
3rd iteration

1 $399.5 0.157 0.257 118.1 7.4 15.9 17.7 1.05 242.9 94.9 $411.8
2 $371.7 0.149 0.253 101.2 6.6 15.4 17.3 1.05 239.1 93.2 $378.7
3 $339.7 0.141 0.250 84.8 5.9 14.4 16.2 1.05 236.3 92.8 $342.2
4 $304.0 0.131 0.245 69.0 4.9 14.1 15.8 1.05 231.5 90.5 $300.7
5 $262.9 0.120 0.238 54.7 4.2 13.2 14.9 1.05 224.9 87.7 $255.4
6 $215.5 0.108 0.232 40.7 3.3 12.3 14.0 1.05 219.2 85.3 $206.0
7 $160.9 0.093 0.215 27.5 2.5 11.1 11.7 1.05 203.2 78.6 $151.6
8 $98.2 0.077 0.189 15.3 1.7 9.0 9.5 1.05 178.6 66.6 $95.7
9 $26.6 0.057 0.158 7.1 0.9 8.4 8.8 1.05 149.3 50.0 $43.5
Total 125.8 9.5 1,925.0 739.7
(NPV@15%)
$411.81
Year 1: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(399.5*0.15)/1.05 = 0.157

(600-5)*0.9
Year 2: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(371.7*0.15)/1.05 = 0.149

(600-5)*0.9
42
Steps to Obtain Table 6 (4th Iteration)
4th iteration

1 $411.8 0.160 0.259 117.0 7.8 15.0 17.8 1.05 244.8 96.0 $412.3
2 $378.7 0.151 0.255 101.4 6.7 15.1 17.0 1.05 241.0 94.7 $378.2
3 $342.2 0.142 0.250 85.2 5.9 14.4 16.2 1.05 236.3 92.8 $340.2
4 $300.7 0.131 0.245 70.0 5.1 13.7 15.6 1.05 231.5 90.7 $298.4
5 $255.4 0.118 0.238 55.9 4.2 13.3 14.6 1.05 224.9 88.0 $252.4
6 $206.0 0.105 0.230 41.8 3.3 12.7 13.9 1.05 217.4 84.3 $202.3
7 $151.6 0.091 0.213 28.0 2.7 10.4 12.0 1.05 201.3 77.1 $148.3
8 $95.7 0.076 0.182 16.5 2.0 8.3 10.2 1.05 172.0 61.8 $93.5
9 $43.5 0.062 0.162 8.0 1.2 6.7 8.5 1.05 153.1 52.6 $45.7
Total 125.8 9.5 1,922.1 738.0
(NPV@15%)
$412.30
Year 1: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(411.8*0.15)/1.05 = 0.160

(600-5)*0.9
Year 2: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(378.7*0.15)/1.05 = 0.151

(600-5)*0.9
43
Table 6
Table 6

1 $413.8 0.161 0.259 18.0 1.05 244.8 95.7 $413.8
2 $380.0 0.152 0.255 17.2 1.05 241.0 94.4 $380.2
3 $342.6 0.142 0.250 16.5 1.05 236.3 92.5 $342.8
4 $301.4 0.131 0.245 15.7 1.05 231.5 90.6 $301.7
5 $256.1 0.119 0.239 14.9 1.05 225.9 88.2 $256.3
6 $206.4 0.105 0.232 14.1 1.05 219.2 85.2 $206.6
7 $152.0 0.091 0.2131 12.1 1.05 201.4 77.0 $152.3
8 $98.1 0.077 0.188 9.8 1.05 177.7 65.7 $98.2
9 $46.9 0.063 0.163 7.6 1.05 154.0 54.3 $47.2
Total 125.8 9.5 1,931.7 743.7
(NPV@15%)
$413.82
Year 1: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(413.8*0.15)/1.05 = 0.161

(600-5)*0.9
Year 2: Cog= 19+8.35/1.05+(380.0*0.15)/1.05 = 0.152

(600-5)*0.9
44
Summary of Lane’s Approach
• Lane’s 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
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
• 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
r
for i = 1,…N
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 2
Derivation of Opportunity Costs of
Mining Low Grades
• 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
3
Mining Low Grades (Cont.)
( profits ($M ) + Vq )
V=
(1 + d )T
V * (1 + d )T = ( profits ($ 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
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
• 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)
6
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
7
COG of Mine Limiting Case
• Cutoff grade of mine limiting case is:

c
gm =
(P − r − s ) * y
where
y: Metallurgical recovery
8
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+
gc = C
( P − r − s) * y
9
Refinery Limiting Case
• When the refinery capacity is the bottleneck in the system:

Qr
T=
R
( f + d *V )
vr = ( P − r − s − ) * Qr − c * Qc − m * Qm
R
• Cutoff grade of refinery limiting case is:

c
gr =
 ( f + d *V ) 
P−r −s − * y
 R 
10
Balancing Cutoff Grade (Cont.)
Mine - Mill
C/M
g mc
11
Mine - Refinery
R/M
g mr
12
Mill - Refinery
R/C
g rc
13
Open Pit Copper Case Study
Deposit Reserves
(%Cu) (Mtons)
14
First Year Production Reserves
(%Cu) (Mtons)
15
Open Pit Copper Case Study
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 (R): 40M of 1%Cu of one unit of mining /yr
(=40M*0.01tonCu /yr = 400k tons Cu /yr)
Recovery (y): 100%
Discount rate (d): 15%
16
Mine Limited Case
(V=0) (V=1174)
17
Concentrator Limited Case
(V=0) (V=1174)
18
Refinery Limited Case
(V=0) (V=1174)
19
Balancing Cutoff Grade
Balancing Cutoff Grades (V=0)

gm
gr
500 gc
400
300
200
vm
Profit
Gopt
100
vc
0 vr
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-100
-200
-300
COG Feasible Region
20
Balancing Cutoff Grade
Balancing Cutoff Grades (V=1174)
300
250
200
150
100
vm
50
Profit
vc
0
vr
-50 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-100
Gopt
-150
-200
-250
COG
21
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):

( f + d *V ) +
300 M ($ / yr ) 300
c+ 2 ($ / ton ) 2+
C 50 M (ton / yr) 50 %Cu = 0.40%Cu
gc = = =
( P − s) * y (25 − 5)($ / 1%Cu * 1ton) * 1 (25 − 5) * 1
22
Limiting Economic Cutoff Grades
(Cont.)
• Cutoff grade of refinery limiting case is (V=0):

c 2($ / ton)
gr = =
 ( f + d *V )   
 * y  (25 − 5)($ / 1%Cu *1ton) −
300M ($ / yr)
P−s−  *1
 R   40 M (1%Cu *1ton / yr)) 
2
= %Cu = 0.16%Cu
 300 
 25 − 5 −  *1
 40 
23
Grade – Tonnage Curve
24
Average Grade Above Cutoff
25
Ore : Material Ratio
26
Product : Material Ratio
27
Product : Ore Ratio
28
Grade – Tonnage Relationship
Cutoff Quantity Tons Below Tons Above Avg Grade Cu Produced Ore to Product to Product to Ore to
(%Cu) (Mtons) Cutoff Cutoff Above Cutoff (%Cu of Material Material Ore Waste
(Mtons) (Mtons) (%Cu) 1ton of Material) Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio
(C ) ( R) (C/M) (R/M) (R/C)
0.00 100 0 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
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
Choosing Optimum Cutoff Grade
31
Choosing Optimum Cutoff Grade
Gmc = 0.40%Cu
Grc = 0.40%Cu
Gmr = 0.16%Cu
Then,
Gopt = 0.40%Cu
32

Strategic Open Pit Mine Planning Course Outline (Perfect) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategic Open Pit Mine Planning Course Outline (Perfect) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

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

Economic Definition of Ore

UNIT OPERATIONS AND EQUIPMENT SELECTION

Mining Project Cash Flow Analysis

Papers by Kadri Dagdelen.

•World’s first low grade copper mine.

•Overall stripping ratio is 0.4:1.

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

•Truck haulage – haul road 150 ft wide; also 3

•Block model dimensions 100 x 100 x 50 ft. Each

•Development drilling on 400 by 600 ft centers.

•Pushbacks range from 100 ft to 200 ft in width and

grade and metallurgical blending requirements.

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

•In extreme cases, mining room must be brought

•Slope angles for each of these sectors range from

or single benching and control blasting – “digging to

•The material in pushbacks sequentially mined by a

•Haulage roads are added to the incremental pits.

•Drills operate 5 days per week and two 8-hour

•They can drill 57 to 65 ft in a single pass by

•D75K drills are used in resilient (hard) formations

•One secondary drill uses 2.5-in and 12-ft drill rods

•Two ANFO trucks – blending of ammonium nitrate

•Commercial bulk emulsion-blend explosives are

•25 grain detonating cord is used for trunk lines and

100 ms between rows.

•Powder factor varies between 0.13 to 0.25 lbs of

•Ground motion due to blasting is limited to 25

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

80%; 15 Ktons per shovel shift.

•Power is provided by 44-kva substations; radial

•Electric connections between the switch houses and

•Mainly trucks and some rail.

drive; 8 170-ton Unit Rig diesel electric; 8 170-ton

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

•28 miles of haulage roads and 40 miles of service

•11 graders (CAT 16G).

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Colorado School of Mines

• BENCH: Ledge that forms a single level of

regulations and safety.

• BENCH SLOPE OR BANK ANGLE : Horizontal

determined by the geotechnical investigation.

• OVERALL PIT SLOPE ANGLE: The angle measured from

• The overall pit slope angle is affected by the width

must be considered in the overall pit design.

• SUBCROP OR ORE DEPTH: Depth of waste

removed to reach initial ore.

• PRE-PRODUCTION STRIPPING: Stripping done

• PIT SCHEDULING: Material may be mined from

• AVERAGE STRIP RATIO: Total waste divided by total ore

within the ultimate pit.

• CUTOFF STRIPPING RATIO: Costs of mining a ton of ore

Final Pit Limit

Pit Sequence (1)

Pit Sequence (2)

Pit Sequence (3)

Pit Sequence (4)

Dr. Kadri Dagdelen

Colorado School of Mines

Source: Hustrulid and Kuchta