Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Chapter 14

    Uploaded by

    Wajid Hussain
    86 views40 pages
    introductory to mining

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    introductory to mining

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    86 views40 pages

    Chapter 14

    Uploaded by

    Wajid Hussain
    introductory to mining

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 40
    SUMMARY OF MINING METHODS AND THEIR SELECTION SS 141 INTRODUCTION In this, the final chapter of the book, it is our objective to offer in-depth comparisons of the various methods studied and to provide an objective basis for choosing a mining method. We first summarize the characteristics of the mining methods that will allow us to choose methods that are feasible and to eliminate those that are not suited for the subject deposit. We then develop an Outline of a procedure to choose a surface mining method and/or an under- ground method from the candidate methods. At this point in the selection Process, it is important to be aware of the costs for each method we are still Considering, Accordingly, the next section of the chapter discusses mining Method costs. The selection procedure may then require that we choose tween a surface method and an underground method. A procedure for Accomplishing this is outlined. A mine investment analysis method is also introduced to ensure the economic value of the deposit and to sell the project 'o the financial institutions. Finally, the chapter provides a Summary of the mining method selection process and a quick look at the future of mining and Mining engineering. 142 METHOD RECAPITULATION ‘grog Surface mining methods were covered in detail in “erground methods were described in Chapt iew the important characte! of for narrowing down Took atthe Pr 490 — SUMMARY OF MINING METHODS AND THEIR SELECTION States to see how well utilized the various methods are at the present time, General information on production is provided in Table 14.1. Note that the usage of the methods is provided in general terms only because Production statistics on mining methods are no longer readily available except for coal mining methods. Students may wish to consult the tables in Chapters 8 and 13 of Hartman (1987), which provide production statistics for the mid-1989s, More recent statistics are not readily available. In should be noted that some of the mining methods (like leaching and longwall mining) have been increasing in usage while others (such as shrinkage stoping, stull stoping, and square-set stoping) have been decreasing. Table 14.1 provides valuable information, as the methods that are often used are normally associated with suitable technology and production characteristics that make them economic for many deposits in today’s marketplace. We now turn to some of the pertinent characteristics of mining methods that will enable us to narrow the list of potential mining methods. To accomplish the process of reducing the field of candidate methods, we refer to the general discussion in Section 4.8 of factors that determine the mining method chosen for exploitation of the depcsit. These are grouped in six categories: 1. Spatial characteristics of the deposit 2. Geologic and hydrologic conditions Table 14.1 U.S. Mineral Production by Mining Method Method Production Open Pit High Quarrying Low Open cast mining High Auger mining Low Hydraulicking Low Dredging Low Borehole mining Low Leaching Moderate Room-and-pillar mining High Stope-and-pillar mining Moderate Shrinkage stoping Low Sublevel stoping Low Cut-and-fill stoping Low Stull stoping Low Square-set stoping Low Longwall mining High Sublevel caving Low Block caving _ Low METHOD RECAPITULATION 491 table 14.2 Classification of Ore and Rock Strength Compressive Strength, Mineral or Rock Relative Strength Ib/in.? (kPa) Coal, decomposed and badly altered Very weak <6,000 (<40,000) rock : : Frable sandstone, mudstone, weathered Weak 6,000- 14,500 rock, soft shale (40,000 100,000) Shale, limestone, sandstone, Moderate 14,500~20,000 schistose rock (100,000- 140,000) Most igneous rock, strong metamorphic Strong 20,000-32,000 rock, hard limestone and dolomite (140,000-200,000) Quartzite, basalt, diabase Very strong “> 32,000, (> 220,000) Source: Modified after Hanrin, 1982, By permission from the Soctety for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc, Littleton, CO. 3. Geotechnical properties 4, Economic considerations 5. Technological factors 6. Environmental concerns In this section, we attempt to outline a procedure that will eliminate methods that are not suitable for the deposit at hand, using the six factors listed. This will help to reduce our analysis in the later stages of method selection, It is also important at this point to consider whether the deposit can be mined by surface methods, by underground methods, or by a combination of both. It may be possible to limit the search for a mining method to either surface or underground methods simply by considering the depth of the deposit. Although there are many mining method, one of the most factors that can be used in the selection of a { important categories is the geotechnical properties of the ore and rock. Thus, the strength of the ore deposit and the surrounding rocks is of prime importance in the selection of the mining method. To help in this effort, we introduce Table 14.2, which defines the compressive strength of rocks for our qualitative strength descriptions from very weak to very strong. This table will help the student to determine what rock strengths are amenable for each mining method. 14.2.1 Surface Mining Methods A variety of factors should be considered in reviewing the surface mining methods for suitability in exploiting a given ore deposit. In addition to the six 492 SUMMARY OF MINING METHODS AND THEIR SELECTION (sige ae 2s 20g pobaabtag categories of factors listed earlier, the selection effort sho A i to be employed, the healt sequence of development, the unit operations ‘onsithiaae eee safety aspects of the methods, and the auxiliary operations se. in the mining operation. ee rf aieetite a rejecting a given mining method, the first set of factors to be considered are the deposit conditions and how they relate to the various mining methods. To aid in this endeavor, information on many of the physical characteristics of the eight surface mining methods is listed in Table 14.3. The deposit characteristics can be compared with the entries in this table to choose mining methods that are compatible. Note that the initial methods singled out using Table 14.3 can be further reduced in number by referral to Table 144, where the advantages and disadvantages of the surface methods are outlined. A detailed study of this table may reveal additional methods that can be eliminated from the list of candidates because they have a particularly adverse set of disadvantages or a lack of advantages, as compared with other methods. It may be advisable at this point to limit the methods to the two most logical surface methods. The selection of suitable surface mining methods may be easier than choosing suitable underground methods, because the surface mining procedures are more highly dependent on what forms of geologic deposits they will economically extract. 14.2.2 Underground Mining Methods Consideration of underground mining methods proceeds in a manner similar to that for surface methods. The first step is to compare the deposit conditions with the method characteristics in Table 14.5. The obj is to eliminate those methods that are not suitable to the deposit conditions. The advantages and disadvantages of the underground mining methods, shown in Table 14.6, may also be used to eliminate methods that are not suited to the mineral deposit. Note that the underground methods used for coal are relatively small in number, consisting of room-and-pillar mining, longwall mini of id occa- sionally shortwall mining (a subcategory of longwall minin NOI ite ther hand, these three methods can often be used in nonmetal a lat along with all the other underground methods. och es cae The choice of an underground minin that for surface mining, and mining en decision procedures to help in the is outlined in Table 14.7, jective of this comparison a is often more difficult than : eers have frequently sought logical selection. One of these selection procedures sion of this table was oduc th aiqeueA unopun Kare. mopreys £19, ‘wyoyiun Kure ayetpauiowuy sso] {29 mol A19, ssouyry 9830) sare §—uryy quanxo 0) a1RsapoW aresapow porwr (dip mor, dears Aiqesajead) Auy dtp mo7 dip wo kuy aemnqey, arinqe snorsodu = snorasadurt parep porep uaedwoy = jusjaduioy = -yosuosu, =—-tjosuooun, arty siopinog, ayqvatused autos si9pinoq, ‘]qearo ‘parep may ‘povept Jo poziiggny —parepyjosuog = -sosuoour), -Josuoou, suryoeay ajoyaiog Suisparq — Surjoynesphy_ uonoenxq snoanby uonoenxg [eoueyoayy, nae SpoureN aoejiNg o} aiqe10Ae4 SUOM|PUOD yISOdaq JO | sore1youag 1s0q 3809 3809 soo ayvos-a8 1] ys09 _ edeyraig ou adeyeoig ou adeyeaiq ou {soo aBeyROIQ YsIY spoamnbor spostnbor spoumnbax 1209 8vyRoiq SoaisuoqUut aayeM orem oem queuuies MOl “1092, ysodap ‘usodap susodop. Jo} pasn ‘aSepney saaisuaqut te Parepljosuosuy payeprjosucoup, parepljosucoun, fQaTIOUISay alsem ON -O1SE AN poop poop aed, poop poop poop JOUIW, atsuaIXg a1eJopo OUON OUI a1e1apojN| ayesapoyy B19ARS 912405 MOT ysry A19q, ayesopow ys aIB1epoy arRiopoy, ys yi says MOT MOT are1apoy, Moy K19A arvsepoy, Moy UsIH ysIH ustH MOT MOT MOT MOT ysiy are1apow aqe1po, ys usin MOT MOT alesopoyw MOT MOT ysl pomunun parry party pany pawn pawunrT, a1B1apojnl ore10poyw pidey pidey pidey aresepojA, o81e7, sie] yews yews gue] jeug ysy £10, 1soy3tH Wai uBry faa, ustH Moy A19A 9ye1apo ajeos-a8187] 91B19poW aiesapo ayeos-o81e | 9[eos-][BUS, (Qsomol) Qsoysiy) ~%S ~S> %S %S %ol 001 ajoysiog Suisparq suryoynespsH, Zuuasny ase uadg, Surdarend uonoexg snoanby uonoraxg [eorueyoo, doap_ doog a19pow —_01 218 9pOW ‘a1ei9pow, signa aiqnurea aque, “arespoy ‘arerpowy —uoyrun Aste yaiy or 2189p OW WH uy Aug uty Aste ‘arerpoW. quarxe yeare yes a1esapour ‘a1eropour Bue "uy, ——_Aqqensn ‘Kuy uy, ovum, — 01 yoru Syste rey doays daais Aisrey dans Aste doors Kure 4 Aiquisjed ‘Moy Aiqeiajad Muy on arerpowy, — 01 aveI9poW — dows Atuteg ‘aIsseUtt sejniaust sendourt sejnonuay 40 zenqey, seinge fuy orsengey, on song ‘senge, srejnqel, aiqeavo ‘aqqearo ‘seapom —“Buons Aystey ‘oresopout yram £198 eam Atte Buosis or —-Buons Arey 01 eM 0am 01 109M on eam, a1espoyy, o1ywam — Suons dure qemsu07y yag-arenbg ims Mma pue ang, aaiqns aequuys pol paaians BurarD, paroddng peyoddnsug uonejuan sonour Jaquin poyzour pod, _ pot onrsuadxa ay ojduns 11ys9eq, syseq “pis “oatsuaqur “ontsta} saumbar BR] “anjsuoqut ‘snonunuoo -10qP “Jog ‘paziueyoau — ‘paziuryoout ‘paznueyoout ‘adoys ur adors ut ‘edons ut ‘adors ut ‘adous ut ABI Moy AuaeID MOY AUARIQ Moy AAI Moy AUABID MOY AaIAEID poor Wood arwapow ——-a1BIapoW poopy poop, ua Mo] a1eI9POW MOT ‘oT MOT arexpown, ust us = 1e19poW ua ua 8H arexopow, NOT ua yar arepoW MoT aEI=pOW arexpoW, Moy 30MO] MOT MoT a1e12p0WW ‘NOT as1H ustH 3soystH UH WstH ares2poW, ua MOT MOT StH aH wat mo] -arerapoyy, eieiopo = areIapoW—spartamyqun pour] ayesapoN == aIBIAPOP. pouty aIeiopow —=—aTPIOPOW mols pidey —aaes9poyy-=—aTeF@POW pidey a1e19pow uate MOT MoT —-ateIaPOW——IEIOPOW NOT a1EIapoW ust MoT MOT ‘a1eIOPOW ust MOT Bate] 281¢7] jews jews ——-1e10poW, fie] ~——-aTBI9pOWW %SI %SI %001 YL vss 0% Sb perses BuiaeD jeauoy —ag-arenbs lms {4 pue ing Paving aBequLYS G ; pod pesaqns re 2 om pauoddng paoddnsup, spouyjeN punosBiepun 30 seBequeapesiq pue seb METHOD RECAPITULATION 497 Table 14.7 Selection Chart for All Underground Mining Methods Deposit Deposit Deposit. Ore Rock Applicable Shape Orientation Thickness Strength Strength Method) Tabular Horizontal, Thin Strong Strong__-—-Room-and-pillar mining, flat stope-and-pillar mining Weak, Weak Longwall mining strong Thick Strong Strong __Stope-and-pillar mining Weak, Weak Sublevel caving strong Vertical, Thin Strong Strong Shrinkage stoping, steep sublevel stoping Strong Weak Cut-and-fill stoping, square-set stoping, stull stoping Weak Strong Square-set stoping Weak Weak Square-set stoping Thick Strong Strong Shrinkage stoping, sublevel stoping Strong Weak Cut-and-fill stoping, sublevel caving, square-set stoping Weak Strong _Sublevel caving, block caving, square-set stoping Weak Weak Sublevel caving, block caving, square-set stoping Massive = — Strong Strong-—_—Shrinkage stoping, sublevel stoping Weak Weak, Sublevel caving, block strong caving, square-set stoping Sources: Modified after Peele, 1941; Lucas and Haycocks, 1973; Thomas, 1978. 14.2.3 Novel Versus Traditional Methods Because their characteristics and applications differ significantl difficult to compare traditional methods with novel methods than “Underground methods. By their very nature, novel 10 meet the unique requirements of a particular mine the unusual features of a new technology. In addi é iti ods m 498 ‘SUMMARY OF MINING METHODS AND THEIR SELECTION 1. Coal. Hydraulic mining and underground gasification are novel that compete with conventional underground methods like Toom-and4 and longwall mining. Both methods have been used in various places aroy the world, though they are not currently used in the United States, These t methods may find more acceptance in the future, but significantly increaseg near-term utilization is not anticipated. 2. Coalbed methane. As a source of natural gas, methane drainage competes more with conventional natural gas extraction than with traditional mining methods. It is currently both technologically and economically competitive and is used to make underground coal mining safer and to produce a second product to be marketed from a mining operation. It should be considered for any coal mining operation with more than 100 ft*/ton (2.57 m3/tonne) of methane in the seam. 3. Hydrocarbons. Kerogen contained in oil shale and bitumen in tar sands are natural hydrocarbons that can be converted to petroleum products following recovery. Tar sands are now being recovered in North America, and increased recovery seems possible in the future. However, both the under- ground retorting of oil shale and the mining and surface processing of oil shale appear to be economically infeasible. Only a large increase in oil prices will encourage oil shale utilization. 4. Metallic and nonmetallic minerals. Four novel methods appear to be applicable to noncoal mineral deposits: automation and robotics, rapid exca- vation, ocean mining, and extraterrestrial mining. The most attractive ate automation and robotics, which are now coming into their own in metal mining. Also of great interest in metal mining is rapid excavation, which is limited to low- to moderate-strength rock and uniform conditions, However, it competes very well with conventional development methods, particularly for vertical openings. It should find increased use in the future. Both ocean mining and extraterrestrial mining are futuristic methods with unknown promise. Ocean mining appears more likely, particularly for the large unconsolidated deposits located in the major ocean basins. Extraterrestrial mining depends 0” plans to colonize the moon or other entities in space. It will be used only under those conditions because of the adverse economics of delivering materials earth via rocket ships. 5, All minerals. Automation and robotics an ra "methods that are applicable to a wide rade iaiecoa eae amp however, peal at present because oe health. Ai c usage and in | MINING METHOD SELECTION success Of current applications. The ; i : jnereased use are automation and role cee Re pais drainage. Novel procedures that have promise but ae hee fi Ghee lic mining, underground retorting, and ocean mining. THES Th tae ae ae more utilization in the future. Finally, the methods that a a ‘b ee able in the future are nuclear mining and catrateiceethad aie ee A problem with novel methods lies in the difficulty of producing quantitat- iye comparisons of these methods with the traditional methods. On the other hand, a new procedure may be the salvation of an operation that is not producing in an optimal manner. Accordingly, these methods should be considered as possibilities in all new mine ventures. Although they may be eliminated from consideration after careful analysis, they represent methods of improving the pros of mining and reducing the costs of mineral products when they are successful. 14.3 MINING METHOD SELECTION The final choice of a mining method should be carefully considered and the mining costs estimated before a mining company commits its monetary fesources to the mine. The procedures described in the previous sections can be used to eliminate unsuitable methods and identify candidate methods for further analysis. In this section, we outline some selection methods that may be more definitive in the selection of mining methods. In doing so, we identify tWo procedures that are likely to isolate one method as a prime candidate or that choose one surface method and one underground method to be inves- tigated further. A The first selection method has been designed by Hartman (1987) and is a qualitative procedure oriented toward both surface and underground mines. The procedure is outlined in Figure 14.1. For each selection, it is assumed that the analyst knows the ore strength, the rock strength, and the complete 8eometry of the ore body. Note that the first choice is to decide whether ihe mine should be located on the surface or underground. If the choice is bs ol es the logical thing to do is to choose a surface method and an undergroun Method that best fit the ground conditions and then eae ene ne Sconomically. This will be discussed in the next oe a 1e oe ae Surface and underground is obvious, then the method wi ee e hoice in most cases. This choice can then be evaluated on u son allow mine management and financing agencies a review of th Project so that an objective decision on the project can be m e luse many engineers prefer a more quantitative fo a numerical scheme aluation scheme. The ezjs eBsel 4O1Uy ‘deajs ‘edeys Auy : 5 ezis Bye) ‘yO!U) “dip Aue ‘edeys Auy aiqesullediso : [pNipgaua }— azis e612} SNO3NOV |— peyepyjosuooun “yorun Wey UBINGeL ezIs jews. SNIMOMNVEGAH maneraiieseinca queue! pees: ‘uluy ‘Jeyp “ZeINGeL I ez{s e618} ‘ [Dyin asv0 N340 }—suy ‘dip moj ‘seINgeL psieaipedes > ezis eyesopow ‘4O1U2 ‘IP [ avoiNvHto3n | ‘yyBues Auy : SNIABHVNO Aue ‘eaissew 10 seingeL ezis efse) 4914) ‘dip Aue ‘odes Auy ssv10 Gua. Aayewoed ae ; aed “Sousueroesey ysodep uo peseg ‘poujeui BSuyujw eyeudosdde jo uonoajes 40) WEY “pL aunts = ezis obie) 5 [pniavo 0078] 4214) ‘desis ‘enissayy 8218 e618} ‘yo1y) ‘desys @1qeAeD ‘yeem [Dwavo wansrens | SNIAvO TaASTENS | “@AIssew 40 seInge, aa | SNIAVO | 0} syBsepoW, ox [Bunn TMNT [ NININ T¥MONO? | Foetal “Ulu Qe) ueInge, > 9z1s Aue ‘yoru, _[ PNidois 135 Suvnos | Tinks eee ae © queyedwoouy % DNIdOLS TINS apes eine 2 GaGeaE e8 5 0} eyeepoy Piste ONIdOLS Ts LAO aa cece ‘dees ‘edeys ejqeue, ezIs ebse| SNIdOLS 13A37ENS 491M) ‘dees ‘seinges ezis Aue SNIdOLS SDvyNINHS Jap eae cainct quajeduioa G3LYOddASNN 502 SUMMARY OF MINING METHODS AND THEIR SELECTION 1981). In Stage 1, the mining company identifies candidate deposi terms, such as the rough target size, grade, and geotechnical pro i generally in keeping with the company’s corporate philosophy al term development plan. In Stage 2, mining and capital costs ar well as production rate, recovery, labor supply. and environme: Finally, in Stage 3, the most likely candidate methods are costed grades and reserves are calculated, and economic comparisons are to determine the most feasible mining method and overall plan of exploi In this section, we outline the methodology of Stage 1. To initiate activity, three or four factors each are selected that are descriptive of (1) ¢ geometry and grade distribution (shape, thickness, dip, depth and g uniformity) and (2) geotechnical properties (ore strength, rock strength, ture spacing, and fracture shear strength). Each mining method is then re numerically as to its suitability for each category of factors. Nicholas (1 uses four ranks: preferred, probable, unlikely, and unsuitable (eliminat Numerical values are assigned to each rank, for example: Preferred 3-4 Probable Lae Unlikely 0 Unsuitable —49 The values used are designed to obtain answers that are definitive. example, the value of 0 neither adds to nor subtracts from the chance of a method, and —49 ensures elimination of a method even though other fact are rated high. Using these values, a table of rankings is prepared for all the methods under consideration. Any with negative values are dropped, remaining are rank ordered to reveal the most attractive. The analysis completed in Stages 2 and 3, resulting in the quantitative selection of th suitable method. The following numerical example is derived from Nicholas (19 ten mining methods are ranked for suitability with a given deposit. ‘TI has the following characteristics: Deposit type: tabular, flat, very thick Depth: 425 ft (130 m) Footwall characteristics: Moderate strength Close fracture spacing Weak fracture shear strength To evaluate the mining methods for suitability to various deposit types, the suitability scores outlined in Table 14.8 are used. Rankings are also assigned fer a range of geotechnical conditions. For purposes of keeping the discussion brief, these are not shown here. The rankings are then gathered by category in Table 14.9 for the deposit described earlier. The methods are then listed in rank order of suitability in Table 14.10. (Note to students: Top slicing is a high-cost method similar to sublevel caving that is seldom used today.) Two or three of the top-ranked methods can be evaluated further using technological, eco- nomic, and environmental considerations. Assuming that open pit and block caving were to be evaluated further, the decision-making would move on to the next stage, which would involve completing detailed cost estimates for the two methods. The beauty of a quantitative selection procedure such as this is that it lends itself to rapid, objective evaluation of a few factors or equally to computer analysis of myriad complex factors in a more precise study of the mining methods. Having narrowed the choices to two or three methods, each is now examined in Stage 2 for technological, economic, and environmental consider- ations. The final selection will be made only after definitive cost estimates are made for each possible method during a detailed examination in Stage 3. 144 MINING COSTS 14.4.1 Mining Method Costs In estimating the costs of mining methods, it is worthwhile to enh basic sefnitions of the types of estimates used in industry. The American Association of Cost Engineers has established the following cost ee ee (Humphreys and Katell, 1981): Type of Estimate ce On < ee a a Se tes Ox OF ae es cea te S ae) puonnginsid aprin & v e © e v v € v € dat ig OS 1 PN i aaa ta amnantraore aD y n te 1A sdid 10 gSSOUyoIYL AO podeys, s10joe4 epesy pue Ajewi0e5 ROD BORNE “UL Poneocert pur

    You might also like