See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/283334653

Study of Forsterite Skarn Movement in DOZ (Deep Ore Zone) Block Caving
Underground Mine, Papua, Indonesia

Conference Paper · November 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 568

4 authors, including:

Danny Wicaksono Iwan Sriyanto

Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Yogyakarta freeport indonesia
6 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Lasito Soebari

10 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Deep Ore Zone Block Caving Production Mine Geologis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Danny Wicaksono on 31 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Study of Forsterite Skarn Movement in DOZ (Deep Ore Zone) Block
Caving Underground Mine, Papua, Indonesia

Lasito Soebari, Iwan Sriyanto, Dhani Haflil and Danny Wicaksono

Underground Geology Operation, PT. Freeport Indonesia, Tembagapura, Papua
Email: Lasito_Soebari@fmi.com, Iwan_Sriyanto@fmi.com, Dhani_Haflil@fmi.com, and
Danny_Wicaksono@fmi.com

ABSTRACT

As a block caving underground mine exploiting a reserve of 140 million tons at grades 1.06%
copper and 0.81g/t gold with daily production rate up to 80,000 tons/day, Deep Ore Zone
(DOZ) is a major heartbeat for PT. Freeport Indonesia. The mine started in 2000 in middle
portion of giant deposit of the East Ertsberg Skarn System (EESS). EESS deposit is a
calcium-magnesium silicate skarn, formed by initiation of contact metamorphism during the
intrusion of the Ertsberg diorite with later metasomatic alteration during both prograde and
retrograde skarn.

Based on weekly regular quantitative rocktype mapping on DOZ drawpoints, underground

mine geology group defined three main rocktypes that are dominantly mined; forsterite skarn
in North, endoskarn in middle and diorite in South. Since 2nd quarter of 2012, it is observed
and mapped that consistently, forsterite rocktype is distributed to Southern drawpoints where
height of draw (HOD) of drawpoints are not high. This is assumed related with mining
pattern in DOZ and un-mucking, repair damage area activities at North. The appearance of
transported forsterite in diorite in-situ drawpoints has created numerous challenges in
operational point of view. Forsterite skarn tends to exist in fine grain fragmentation
especially when height of draw is already high and/or transported from its original location.
In wet drawpoints, forsterite skarn increased sticky material percentage and increase
wetmuck/ spilled out event. This will increase risk and effort in mucking drawpoints as well
as decreasing production rate.

This paper presents block caving practices in DOZ, area of fine grained forsterite skarn
distribution, cause of forsterite skarn movement and mitigation for wetmuck/ spilled out risk
in forsterite skarn at Southern diorite in-situ zone.

Key words: Forsterite Skarn, DOZ Block Cave Mine, East Ertsberg Skarn System, Papua,
Indonesia, Materials Movement.

INTRODUCTION

The Deep Ore Zone (DOZ) Block Caving Mine is an underground mine that utilizes the
gravity flow system, This mine is exploiting a reserve of 140 million tons at grades 1.06%
copper and 0.81g/t gold with daily production rate up to 65,000 tons/day. Deep Ore Zone
(DOZ) is a major heartbeat for underground mine PT. Freeport Indonesia. The cave zone of
the DOZ Block Cave Mine and overlaying the Gunung Bijih Timur (GBT) surface and the
Intermediate Ore Zone (IOZ) Block Cave Mines, have merged and penetrated to the surface
at about the 3900 meters elevation. The extraction level is the production area which is
composed of drawpoints with columns height up to 500 meters. The ore is mucked from
drawpoints, dumped into the grizzly, and delivered through to the haulage level by gravity
flow system for transports the ore to the conveyor (Laubscher, D., 2000).

Based on geology condition and mineral deposition DOZ reserve divided in two Rock mass
characteristic, (1) DOZ skarn system characterized by forsterite, diopside, forsterite-
magnetite, marble and endoskarn generally fair-poor RQD condition and MRMR ranged to
30-55 (2) DOZ east stockwork zone (ESZ) characterized by diorite and endoskarn rocktype
with joint infill by quartz, chalcopyrite, pyrite and anhydrite generally good RQD and
MRMR ranged 70-75. Two rocktypes in DOZ with two different hardness/competency;
therefore form different fragmentation character, (1) fine-medium fragmentation at northern
DOZ area and (2) coarse-medium fragmentation in southern DOZ. This condition makes
DOZ mine has special condition which raises different challenges in block caving operational
issues.

EAST ERTSBERG SKARN SYSTEM (EESS)

The DOZ Block Cave Mine lies at the southern area of the Jayawijaya mountain range,
Papua. This mine is the third lift of block cave mines in the East Ertsberg Skarn System
(EESS) after the GBT Surface (active production from 1980 to 1993) and IOZ Block Cave
(active production from 1994 to 2003) Mines. Underneath the DOZ Block Cave Mine, there
is the Deep Mill Level Zone (DMLZ) Block Cave Mine that will be active production in
2015. See figure 1.

Fig.1 – The EESS map (red circle at Papua legend) showing location of GBT Surface, IOZ,
DOZ, and DMLZ Block Cave Mines.

The EESS is located at the southern limb part of a northwest trending syncline. It is the
calcium-magnesium silicate skarn, which is formed by alteration reaction of carbonate rock
from Tertiary Waripi and Faumai Formations. Both of formations were tectonically deformed
following deposition at the northern Australian passive margin that created fold striking 1100
tens of kilometers. As the deformation continues, the development of strike slip faults (NE –
SW) that formed during development of fold and thrust faults (NW – SE) most likely post-
date fold formation continued with several hundred meters off-set. These features deformed
during first stage of deformation, approximately from 12 to 4 million ages. The second stage
of deformation began after 4 million ages and resulted in some local zones of NW trending
strike slip faults with left lateral offset and brecciated zones for about 10 meters. In DOZ
Block Cave Mine, left strike slip faults are known as Erstberg 1, Erstberg 2, and South Faults.
Those faults controlled emplacements of Ertsberg Diorite, a 3.25 Ma intrusive, which
intruded the southern flank of syncline and obliterating those pre-existing faults. The
intrusion of Ertsberg Diorite initiate contact metamorphism and followed by metasomatic
alteration (Coutts et al., 1999). Copper and gold solutions migrated into and controlled by
faults to produce the EESS complex of mineralization from GBT Surface, IOZ, DOZ, and
DMLZ Block Cave Mines. See table 1.

Deposit Footwall (Southwest) → Hangingwall (Northeast)

GBT Monticellite → Calcite - Garnet → Marble

Forsterite →Forsterite - Magnetite → Calcite -

IOZ
Garnet → Marble

Forsterite - Diopside → Forsterite - Magnetite →

DOZ
Magnetite → Marble

Forsterite - Diopside → Forsterite - Magnetite →

DMLZ
Magnetite - Anhydrite → Marble

Tab. 1 – The EESS mineralizations from GBT Surface, IOZ, DOZ, and DMLZ Block Cave
Mines.

The alteration zone that develops in DOZ Block Cave Mine is grouped based on skarn
mineral assemblages such as Forsterite Skarn, Forsterite-Magnetite Skarn, Magnetite Skarn,
HALO (High Altered Locally Ore) and Hornfels, with unskarn materials at southwest
(Footwall) Stockwork Diorite (East Stockwork Zone). (See Figure 2)

Fig.2 – Geology overview of GBT-IOZ-DOZ(ESZ)-DMLZ Mine.

DOZ BLOCK CAVING MINING PRACTICES

Process of block caving mining depends on gravity flow. The fundamentals of gravity flow
for panel caving began with sand experiments performed by Marano (1980), Heslop and
Laubscher (1981). The experiment is conducted in different drawpoints spacing to see
interaction between drawpoints and material mixing in draw column and for dilution matters.
The experiment showed effects of retrieval or mining in ellipsoid shape and interaction
between ellipsoids in any existing drawbells. It is shown that any withdrawal will provide an
overview of mining material flow that moves in a vertical and minor horizontal changes
caused by interaction on existing ellipsoid. The study of fragmentation should also conducted
prior drawpoints designing to gain better knowledge and to manage ore recovery and
dillution risk.

Fig.4 – Typical sand model showing the draw ellipse, Kravi; (1965, 1982)

Fig.5 – Gravity flow experiment (Marano, 1980)

DOZ block caving mine is an underground mine that utilizes the gravity flow system at three
main levels, which are (1) the Undercut Level at 3146 meters, (2) the Extraction Level at
3126 meters, and (3) the Haulage Level at 3079 meters (See Figure 6). The undercut level is
useful for inducing cave and providing a facility to reduce effects of the induced abutment
stress. The ore is mucked from drawpoints, dumped into the grizzly, and delivered through to
the haulage level by gravity flow system for transports the ore to the conveyor (Laubscher,
D., 2000).

Fig.6 – Schematic overview of mining operations at DOZ block caving.

Cavability of DOZ, like any other block caving mine, is determined from empirical
relationship between modified rock mass rating (MRMR). Cave is developed in East first
within skarn as dominant rocktype as the weakest ground that was the most suitable for cave
initiating. Extraction process started at panel 13 and developed to East untill panel 27.
Gradually since 2004, after IOZ reserve has been fully mined, extraction of Panel 11 to West
started and DOZ reserve and cave are merged with ESZ reserve in South West. Two different
rock mass rating then were mined, competent diorite rocktype in South and less competent
skarn rocktype in North. Undercut progressed from East and to the West of DOZ. Advanced
undercutting technique implemented in order to develop drawbell in de-stressed ground and
to reduce abutment stress damage on extraction level that will minimize cost and time of
repair effort.

The ore production in drawpoints then projected vertically by Height of draw (HOD) rate.
After HOD is overlayed with block model rock type, it will provide an overview of materials
that will be drawn in drawpoint. Any dilution material simply can be traced by observing
HOD compare to geological drawpoint mapping.

FORSTERITE MATERIAL MOVEMENT

In block caving mine, it is very common to have non-insitu material found in drawpoints.
Interacting drawbells between panels can create material migrated in several direction as
gravity flows. High mucking in only several areas, especially at good MRMR value,
potentially creates unbalanced rock flow into drawpoints.
UG geology department of PT. Freeport Indonesia conducts drawpoints mapping in weekly
basis. The mapping records rocktype distribution, minerals percentage, sticky material
percentage, wetness condition, fragmentation distribution and drawpoint condition.
Observing rocktype distribution and mineral percentage, combined with grade control data, is
important for geologist to grade control purpose. Low grade assay result in drawpoint sample
is often correlates with distribution of dilution material observed in drawpoint (such as
marble). Observing wetness, sticky material and fragmentation percentage has mutual
relationship for potential wetmuck hazard purposes.

Since 2nd quarter of 2012 till now, Forsterite distribution is observed and mapped in diorite
in-situ zone in Southern panel 03-07 (figure 7). Based on drawpoints mapping since then,
forsterite is consistently observed in 10-30% percentage and spreading laterally in drawpoints
16-23. Forsterite is commonly mapped in fine grain fragmentation (<5cm) and very
distinguishable compare to coarse fragmentation (>5cm) diorite and endoskarn insitu
rocktype.

Fig 7 – Map showing forsterite percentage in drawpoints during 2nd and 3rd quarter 2012.

With the forsterite appearance in Southern drawpoints of panel 03-07, it is also observed that
wetness condition and sticky material content are also spreading on those drawpoints. Fine
grained forsterite is also conducting as water channel way. As consequences of increasing of
fine grain material, wetness and sticky material, wetmuck hazard potential is also increasing
to the South. This will force cave management to implement remote loader to operate on
those drawpoints. This will reduce production rate as tonnes production from remote loader is
commonly lower compare to manual loader.

The major contributing factor of forsterite movement to the South is the mining pattern. DOZ
mining pattern during 2nd quarter of 2012 till 2nd quarter of 2013 indicates that there are
several non-production drawpoints in Northern of panel 03-07. Damaged and repaired panel
have forced cave management and production group to close those drawpoints and increase
mining rate in Southern drawpoints to maintain tonnage target (figure 8). As draw rate
(HOD) is progressing in middle to South of Panel 03-07, drawbells is believed overlapping
and interacting, which can increase chance for rocktype to move/ migrate Northern insitu
forsterite, to the South. Less propagation cave in middle to South is interpreted also as
contributing forsterite movement to the South. It is a rule of thumb in block caving mining, to
sustain good and balanced caving, draw rate of drawpoints must match caving rate based on
rock mass properties (MRMR) of each rocktypes. Otherwise, it will create airgaps and riling
material. Diorite in DOZ has highest MRMR value (75) compare to other rocktype such as
forsterite (55) (figure 9), therefore production rate in diorite insitu rocktype drawpoints
shouldn’t be higher than other rocktypes to achieve good cavability.

Fig.8 – Map showing rock mine pattern during 2nd and 3rd quarter2012.

Fig.9 – MRMR and cave rate ratio

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

Forsterite rocktype distribution is observed and mapped consistently in diorite in-situ

drawpoints in panel 03-07. Forsterite tends to form in fine grain fragmentation (<5cm),
contain sticky material and often conducts as water channel way. The forsterite distribution
map is also used for cave management group as guidance for wetmuck hazard potential and
remote loader operation as well as other data such as wetness and fine grain distribution. This
effort is a contribution by UG Geology department for optimizing DOZ mine production.

Mucking pattern in DOZ is the major contributing factor of forsterite movement. High
mucking pattern in Southern drawpoints is contradictive with low mucking pattern in
Northern drawpoints. Damage and repaired panel as well as remote loader operation in
Northern drawpoints is the main reason for this pattern which will increase forsterite
movement to middle and Southern area. Less cave propagation can also increase forsterite
distribution in South as forsterite will become riling material. Balance mucking, especially in
 middle to North drawpoints, is the key to reduce lateral forsterite movement to the South,
which will implicate in balance cave propagation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank PT. Freeport Indonesia Geo Services division management
for permission to publish this paper as well as DOZ mine geology group for all the effort and
the hard work.

REFERENCES

Coutts, B.P., Flint, D., Belluz, N., Susanto, H., Edwards, A., 1999, Geology of The Deep Ore
Zone Erstsberg East Skarn System Irian Jaya, Indonesia, pp. 2-8.

Laubscher, D., 2000, A Practical Manual On Block Caving, ICS, pp. 47-56, 125-133, 155,
307.

Sahupala, H., Annavarapu, S., 2007, Assessment of Pillar Damage at the Extraction Level in
The Deep Ore Zone (DOZ) PT Freeport Indonesia, 1st International Symposium on
Block and Sub-Level Caving Cave Mining, Cape Town, South Africa, pp. 205-206.

Wicaksono, D., Silalahi, P., Sriyanto, I., Soebari, L., Ekaputra, A., Jong, G., 2012, Potential
Hazard Map for The Wet Muck Flow Prevention at The Deep Ore Zone (DOZ) Block
Cave Mine, Papua, Indonesia, TPT XXI PERHAPI, Jakarta, Indonesia, pp. 1-2.

Lonergan, J. E., Nicholas, D. E., 2004, DOZ Cavability Study, Internal Report, pp. 64-68.

Hustrulid, W., Kvapil, R., 2004, Sublevel Caving – Past and Future, Massmin 2008, pp. 02-
03.

View publication stats