Mine Planning and Design MN 471
CHAPTER 3
SURFACE FACILITIES AND PRIMARY DEVELOPMENT
LAYOUT
3.1 Objectives and Expected Outcomes
The objectives of this chapter are:
To discuss the criteria and principles by which the surface facilities of an
underground mine are sited.
To present the selection and layout design of primary and secondary openings of an
underground mine.
To explain the principles for determining shaft pillars.
To present the principles for determining mine inter-distance.
At the end of the chapter, the student is expected to:
Be able to select and site surface facilities for an underground mine.
Be able to work out and design the appropriate layout of primary and secondary
development openings.
Be able to determine shaft pillars and mine inter-level distances.
3.2 Siting of Surface Facilities
Surface facilities normally required by an underground mine include the following:
Shaft station.
Treatment plant.
Workshop.
Mine office.
Power station.
Tailings dam or dump.
Hospital.
School.
Road network.
Recreational area.
When required, other facilities like farms, commercial area and security offices may be part
of the surface facilities of an underground mine.
The sites of surface facilities depend on the location of the orebody, physiographic features
and the climate of the mine area. The basic principle is to site the facilities within the
boundaries of the mineral concession to avoid extra cost of land lease and in such a way that
they are easily accessible. The actual locations of the facilities may differ from one engineer
to another, but common sense and certain basic principles must be used as a guide in
selecting the locations or the sites. These principles include the following:
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-1
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Areas of subsidence should be avoided.
Shaft(s) should be sunk in the footwall to ensure stability and longer life.
Upcast shafts and tailings dumps/dams must be located in such a way that the wind
blows the polluted air from underground away from the mining and residential areas.
Workshops should be located near the intake shaft and the treatment plant to provide
quick access, service and equipment maintenance.
Mine offices may be centrally located for easy and quick access to all departments.
Hospital may be centrally located for easy and quick access to all departments.
Road network should be minimum but give maximum access to the surface facilities.
As an example of siting surface facilities, Fig. 3.1 is a simplified map showing the
physiographic features of a mining concession as well as the projection of the orebody on the
surface and wind direction.
Fig. 3.1 Relief of Mining Concession (Tarkwa Deposit)
Based on this information, (scanty through) suppose we are required to site the following
surface facilities considered necessary for an underground mine to exploit the deposit:
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-2
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Downcast shaft
Upcast shaft
Treatment plant
Workshop
Mine office
Residential area
Hospital
School
Mine farms.
We can apply the common sense principle discussed earlier in this chapter and site the
surface facilities. The result of such an exercise is shown in Fig. 3.2.
Fig. 3.2 Siting of Surface Facilities
Some of the principles and reasons used in siting the surface facilities are:
Subsidence area is avoided.
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-3
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
The shafts are located in the footwall for stability and longer life.
Upcast shafts are sited so that the wind blows the noxious air from underground
away from the mine facilities.
Treatment plant is near the upcast shaft.
Workshop location provides quick and easy access from the upcast shaft and
treatment plant.
Mine office is centrally placed for easy access from all departments.
Residential area is far from mine activities and near hilly areas for peace.
Hospital is accessible from all facilities.
Mine farms are along the rivers from where there is fertile land.
Important note:
We may not be lucky always to site all surface facilities within the mine concession
boundaries for a number of reasons including rugged nature of topography and
environmental restrictions. In such situations, some facilities may have to be constructed
outside the mine boundaries. Facilities like workshops or concentrators may be constructed
underground.
3.3 Layout of Primary Development Openings
The objective of primary or capital development openings is to gain access to the orebodies
and to provide ventilation. Primary development openings include:
Shafts, adits or ramps. In hilly areas, tunnels and adits.
Drives.
Cross-cuts.
Raises.
The selection of the type and the design of the layout of primary development openings are
dependent on factors such as:
Geological configuration of the deposit, i.e. the orebody model showing its shape,
size, location and grade distribution.
Geotechnical characteristics of the overburden, orebody and host rock such as
compressive strength and RQD.
Economic considerations i.e. cost of construction and distances over which ore and
waste may be hauled.
The primary development opening from surface to underground may be a vertical shaft, an
inclined shaft, an adit, a ramp or a combination of these openings depending on the
geological configuration of the orebody (see Figs. 3.3a, 3.3b, 3.3c, and 3.3d).
Let us discuss the condition under which we would choose any of the four methods of
opening a deposit from the surface and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each of
the four methods.
Figs. 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 show typical designs of the layout of primary development openings.
Let’s discuss the strength and weaknesses of the designs.
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-4
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Fig. 3.7 shows the configuration of an orebody in three perspective views.
Let’s try our hands on the design and layout of the primary development to exploit the
deposit.
3.4 Shaft Pillar Determination
The shaft pillar is a rock mass left around the entire length of the shaft to ensure stability of
the shaft and should not be mined so long as the shaft is in use. There are several formulae
for calculating the size of shaft pillar.
The following four empirical formulae, summarized by Young and Stoek (1916), are
applicable to flat or bedded deposits including coal seams:
D
Rp 0.6 Dt
20
R p 20 0.01D 0.3t
R p Dt
D
Rp
9
where D = depth of shaft, t = thickness of deposit, R p is the radius of pillar and B is safety
berm, all in meters (see Fig. 3.8a).
In inclined deposits, it is suggested to construct a cross-section showing surface object and
underlying orebody (see Fig. 3.8b). From the end of each object, draw lines cutting the
orebody towards the rise side and making an angle with the horizontal plane equal to the
angle of fracture. The portion enclosed within these lines is the pillar required. The angle of
fracture is taken as half way between the vertical and normal to the plane of stratification.
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-5
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Fig. 3.3 Opening of Deposit from Surface
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-6
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Fig. 3.4 Layout Design of Primary Development Openings
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-7
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Fig. 3.5 Schematic Layout of an Idealised Underground Mine (after Hamrin,
1982)
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-8
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Fig. 3.6 Layout of Primary Development Openings showing Shaft and Ramp
3.5 Mine Inter-level Distance Determination
The major factors that could influence the determination of mine inter-level distance are:
Economics.
Orebody configuration.
Ground condition.
Mining system.
Mining laws of the host country.
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-9
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Fig. 3.7 The Tarkwa Orebody
Large inter-level distance means fewer main levels need to be developed to serve the whole
mine and therefore the total cost of developing the deposit will be lower.
On the other hand, the greater the distance between the levels, the longer the vertical
distance through which all the ore being served by a level has to be hoisted to the surface.
Orepasses are also longer and need to be properly supported so that they will not collapse
during the life of the level. The extra cost of hoisting the ore and supporting orepasses means
more cost to the mine.
It is therefore prudent to determine the inter-level distance that gives the minimum cost or
maximum profit, assuming that the orebody configuration, ground conditions, the mining
system and the mining laws of the host country permit the distance that will be determined.
The following question and solution will illustrate how to determine the minimum cost inter-
level level distance.
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-10
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Fig. 3.8 Shaft Pillar Determination
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-11
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Illustrative question:
A steeply dipping orebody has a width of 50 m, a strike length of 2,000 m and depth 1,000
m. The average density is 3.5 t/m3. It is proposed to mine this deposit at a rate of 4.0 106
t/yr. It is estimated that the mining will require a capital investment of $50 million and
variable operating cost of $25 million per 100 m (50 + 0.25h) million dollars where h is the
depth of deposit being worked). The interest rate is 15%. If it is expected that there will be
20% ore losses during mining, recommend the mine inter-level distance. More precisely,
should the inter-level distance be 100 m, 150 m or 200 m? (see Fig. 3.9a)
Solution:
Amount of ore per level:
At 100 m: 50 m 2000 m 100 m 3.5 t/m3 = 35.0 million tonnes
At 150 m: 50 m 2000 m 150 m 3.5 t/m3 = 52.5 million tonnes
At 200 m: 50 m 2000 m 200 m 3.5 t/m3 = 70.0 million tonnes
Lifetime of Ore (actual ore is 20% less):
35.0 10 6 t 0.8
At 100 m : 7.0 years
4 10 6 t/a
52.5 10 6 t 0.8
At 150 m : 10.0 years
4 10 6 t/a
70.0 10 6 t/ 0.8
At 200 m : 14.0 years
4 10 6 t /a
Required Total Investment (Variable is $25 106/100 m):
100 m
At 100 m: $50 106 + $25 106 = $75.0 million
100 m
150 m
At 150 m: $50 106 + $25 106 = $87.0 million
100 m
200 m
At 200 m: $50 106 + $ 25 106 = $100.0 million
100 m
Average Capital Cost
i1 i
n
Recovery factor is =
1 in - 1
where: n = lifetime of ore or number of years mine
At 100 m: $75.0 106 0.240 = $18.0 million
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-12
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
At 150 m: $87.0 106 0.195 = $17.1 million
At 200 m: $100 106 0.175 = $17.5 million
On the basis of average capital cost per year, the optimal mine inter-level distance seems to
be about 150 m the results are illustrated in Fig. 3.9b
Fig. 3.9 Determination of Economic Inter-Level Distance
Some of the factors, which could militate against the decision include:
Configuration of the orebody: if the remaining orebody is at a distance of 180 m or
120 m below one level the decision would have to be different.
Rock conditions: if around 150 m some intrusive weak rock is intercepted the
decision will change.
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-13
Mine Planning and Design MN 471
Mining system employed: the decision will hold only so long as the mining system
permits the haulage level at that distance.
Economically, it is best to keep 150 m between haulage levels. Rock conditions around such
intervals should be checked to know if the stability of a haulage level is guaranteed (or
supporting cost can change the decision). The configuration of the orebody must be
established to make sure the last haulage level does not leave some ore below it which is too
small for another haulage level or that the haulage level does not lie too far beneath the lower
limit of the orebody otherwise extra hoisting facilities could mean great loss of money. The
question of whether the mining system employed will permit such interval should be solved
otherwise a sublevel could be too far from the haulage level; in all cases a change of (150 25
m) would be quite acceptable on economic basis but it is better to be safer alive than to die
with money. The best is to make a compromise where this is possible.
Notes prepared by Assoc. Prof. Raymond S. Suglo Course Lecturer: B. O. Afum 3-14
