экономика и управление горным производством

УДК 622.232.8 DOI: 10.21440/0536-1028-2020-3-87-95

Economic and technological aspects of interrelation between open pit

mine depth and mining transport parameters
Dmitrii V. Kuznetsov1*, Aleksandr I. Kosolapov2
1LLC Polyus Project, Krasnoyarsk, Russia
2 Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk, Russia
*e-mail: kuznetsovdv@mail.ru

Abstract
Introduction. This paper presents the results of research on ore pit depth justification in relation to
mining transport parameters.
Research theory. Features of the current state and further development of deep pits are considered.
There is also the classification of fields by relative excavation difficulty depending on physico-technical
features of rock, conditions of their occurrence and climate severity. Besides, extractable ore reserves
are classified depending on its value. The indicators for joint justification of excavation difficulty, ore pit
depth, mining transport complexes parameters have been offered as well as their established optimal
regions.
Results and conclusions. The dependences have been obtained allowing to efficiently determine
excavator bucket capacity and dumptruck load-lifting capacity and validate pit depth taking into
account ore value. It has been determined that when mining a deposit of corresponding excavation
difficulty with an opencast method, cost behavior changes with depth due to the increase in power,
productivity, and power-weight ratio of drilling rigs, excavators, dump trucks, and bulldozers; cost
behavior is of an increasing nonlinear character. Rational uses of mining transport complexes based on
electric and hydraulic excavators have been singled out. The reasons of their probable change have
been estimated. Research results have been approved when planning the largest gold ore pit in Russia,
Vostochny pit of Olimpiadinsky gold ore field.

Key words: open pit mine depth; excavator bucket capacity; dump truck loading capacity; profit; net
present value; internal rate of return; ore value.

Introduction. At the present time effective operation of mining enterprises largely

depends on the type of location, properties of mined rock, condition of their occurrence,
applied mining transport, operation scale and world market requirements. Further
development of ore fields opencasting at such enterprises, as a rule, is conditioned on
the growth of pit depth and rock transportation distance; it is also connected with the
alternation of physical and mechanical characteristics of rock, content of commercial
elements in ore, and production cost behavior.
In fact, national and foreign experience together with the forecast from Grand View
Research (http://www.grandviewresearch.com), BMI Research (http://bmiresearch.
com), Parker Bay (http://parkerbaymining.com) etc. show that in the nearest future
opencasting will be the most economical and effective mining method. By means of
developing new equipment and technology, reducing extraction and overburden
removal costs [1, 2].
However, at the present time the depth of a range of ore pits throughout the world
has already exceeded 700 m, and rational equipment selection for these conditions
speciifed a lot of problems for mining theory and practice [3, 4].
88 "Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Gornyi zhurnal". No. 3. 2020 ISSN 0536-1028

In Russia the solution to this problem is greatly complicated by the fact that mining
activity is carried out in the regions with severe climate characterized by low air
temperatures with large temperature change over a 24-hour period and in the course of
a season, heavy precipitation and other adverse factors. For instance, in Yakutia and in
the north of the Krasnoyarsk region diamond and gold pits depth has already reached
500–600 m.
Pits are developed in hard rock using the technology which is based on excavating
and automobile complexes; development is carried out step-by-step with temporary
preservation of slopes and working benches. For the last 15–20 years the applied
schemes of mechanization, stripping and planning have ensured annual rock capacity
growth more than twofold under machine capacity growth by 1.5–2 times.

Table 1. Fields classification by relative excavation difficulty

Таблица 1. Классификация месторождений по относительной трудности разработки
Field parameters
Field class according
Category σcompr, γ, lm , Нp , Ltr, S,
to excavation difficulty
MPa t/m3 m m km mark
1. Easy 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ≤ 40 ≤ 1.8 ≤ 0.4 ≤ 200 ≤ 3.0 ≤ 50
> 40 > 1.8 > 0.4 >200 > 3.0 > 50
2. Intermediate 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
≤ 80 ≤ 2.4 ≤ 0.6 ≤ 320 ≤ 4.5 ≤ 65
> 80 > 2.4 > 0.6 >320 > 4.5 > 65
3. Difficult 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
≤ 120 ≤ 2.9 ≤ 1.0 ≤ 500 ≤ 7.0 ≤ 80
> 120 > 2.9 > 1.0 > 500 > 7.0 > 95
4. Very difficult 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
≤ 160 ≤ 3.3 ≤ 1.8 ≤ 700 ≤ 10.0 ≤ 110
5. Extremely difficult 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 > 160 > 3.3 > 1.8 >700 >10.0 > 110

Step by step pit development has made it possible to defer significant part of
stripping activity to later periods and recover with newer and more advanced
equipment, but it’s also limited working zone and reduced working areas for the
equipment.
All the indicated circumstances together have defined that it is necessary to expand
some important scientific and practical solutions to justify the boundaries of ore fields
opencast mining and to rationally distribute equipment complexes over the depth of
pits; first, it should be done in relation to physical and technical characteristics of the
mined rock and their occurrence conditions, second, to the types and parameters
of the required equipment and workflows technology and organization [5, 6], and third,
to price volatility and inflation in the world market [7].
In this regard, the research has been carried out, the results of which have been
generalized and expanded in this article.
Research methodology. Labor intensity and technical and economic efficiency of
opencast mining is predetermined by a lot of factors and parameters. Rock strength,
planform depth and dimensions, ore and overburden transportation distance, and natural
and climatic characteristics are the most significant factors.
These factors influence can be traced according to figures provided in table 1, which
is the classification of fields obtained from the results of the research [8, 9]. In table 1
σcompr is the compressive strength, MPa; γ – rock density, t/m3; lm – mean size of
a block, m; Нp – pit depth, m; Ltr – transportation distance, km; S – climate severity
according to P. I. Kokh.
ISSN 0536-1028 «Известия вузов. Горный журнал», № 3, 2020 89

Therefore, the depth is a key parameter of a pit and in order to determine its rational
value it is principally required to establish the cost behavior of mining performance by
this or that combination of mining transport under a particular technology and rock
characteristic.
It is known that according to the practice of Russian design, ore pit depth is
traditionally established according to the break-even field development of this or that
structural
2 complex
“Izvestiya vysshikhmechanization.
uchebnykh zavedenii. Gornyi zhurnal”. No. 3. 2020 ISSN 0536-1028

а In Russia the solution to this problem is greatly b complicated by the fact that mining
activityEp, mis
3 carried out in the regions with severe
1 2 3 4 E p , m 3 climate characterized by low air
1 2 3 4
temperatures
65 with large temperature change over
65 a 24-hour period and in the course of
a season, heavy precipitation and other adverse factors. For instance, in Yakutia and in
the
55 north of the Krasnoyarsk region diamond 55 and gold pits depth has already reached
500–600 m.
45Pits are developed in hard rock using the45technology which is based on excavating
and automobile complexes; development is carried out step-by-step with temporary
preservation
35 of slopes and working benches. 35 For the last 15–20 years the applied
schemes of mechanization, stripping and planning have ensured annual rock capacity
growth
25 more than twofold under machine capacity 25 growth by 1.5–2 times.
Step by step pit development has made it possible to defer significant part of
stripping
15 activity to later periods and recover 15 with newer and more advanced
equipment, but it’s also limited working zone and reduced working areas for the
equipment.
5 5
All
250 the 300indicated
350 circumstances
400 450 together
Н500
p, m have
250 defined 300 that 350it is 400
necessary450 toНexpand
,m
p500

some important scientific and practical solutions to justify the boundaries of ore fields
opencast q, t mining1
and
2
to rationally
3 4
distribute equipmentq, t 1 2complexes
3 4 over the depth of
pits;
30 first, it should be done in relation to physical 30 and technical characteristics of the
mined rock and their occurrence conditions, second, to the types and parameters of the
required
85 equipment and workflows technology 85 and organization [5, 6], and third, to
price volatility and inflation in the world market [7].
140In this regard, the research has been carried 140 out, the results of which have been
generalized and expanded in this article.
195Research methodology. Labor intensity195 and technical and economic efficiency of
opencast mining is predetermined by a lot of factors and parameters. Rock strength,
planform
250 depth and dimensions, ore and 250 overburden transportation distance, and
natural and climatic characteristics are the most significant factors.
305These factors influence can be traced according 305 to figures provided in table 1,
which is the classification of fields obtained from the results of the research [8, 9]. In
360 1 σ 360 3
table compr is the compressive strength, MPa; γ – rock density, t/m ; lm – mean size
250 300 350 400 450 H500
p, m 250 300 350 400 450 500
Hp, m
of a block, m; Нp – pit depth, m; Ltr – transportation distance, km; S – climate severity
according to P. I. Kokh.
Fig. 1. Influence of an ore pit depth on the average electric excavators bucket capacity and dump
Therefore,
trucks loadingthecapacity
depth while
is a mining
key parameter
the III class of ofdifficulty
a pit and in relation
with the order to Lk /B
determine
k = 1 and its
rational value a it– Eis= principally distinction
required of
toindicators:
establish the cost behavior of mining
10%; b – Eco = 15%; 1 – B = 1; 2 – B = 1.25; 3 – B = 1.5; 4 – B = 1.75
performance by this
Рис. 1. Влияние
co
or that
глубины рудногоcombination
карьера на среднююof mining transport
вместимость ковшаunder a particular
электрических
technology
экскаваторов andиrock characteristic.
грузоподъемность автосамосвалов при разработке месторождения III класса
It is known that according
трудности to the Lpractice
с отношением к /Bк = 1 иof Russian
различии design, ore pit depth is
показателей:
a – Есо = 10 %;according
traditionally established b – Есо = 15 %;
to1the– В =break-even
1; 2 – B = 1,25;field
3–B= 1,5; 4 – B = 1,75 of this or that
development
structural complex mechanization.
For this
thispurpose,
purpose,economic
economic andand
incremental
incremental stripping ratiosratios
stripping are determined, and the
are determined,
following
and condition
the following is checked:
condition is checked:

H p  Ki  Ke .

Incremental stripping
Incremental stripping ratio
ratio i is found
Ki isKfound as between
as a ratio a ratio rock
between rock
volume volumeto
increment
increment
rock volumetoincrement
rock volume
under increment under
pit total depth rise pit totalbench,
by one depthand
rise by onestripping
economic bench,
ratio Ke, m3/t, is calculated from the production cost of a unit of mineral:

Сa  С p
Ke  ,
Сstr
 For this purpose, economic and incremental stripping ratios are determined, and the
following condition is checked:

H p  Ki  Ke .
90 "Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Gornyi zhurnal". No. 3. 2020 ISSN 0536-1028
Incremental stripping ratio Ki is found as a ratio between rock volume increment to
rock volume increment
and economic strippingunder
ratio pit
Ke,total
m3/t,depth rise by one
is calculated bench,
from and economic
the production cost stripping
of a unit
3
ratio Ke, m /t, is calculated from the production cost of a unit of mineral:
of mineral:
Сa  С p
Ke  ,
Сstr

where Сa – allowable cost-per-ton, ₽/t; Сp – cost of production, processing and

metallurgical extraction of 1 ton of ore and other costs without stripping, ₽/t; Сstr – cost
of stripping, ₽/m3.
Y (Yʹ), %
30 As a rule, profit P is used as a basic
economic criterion when setting ore
25 reserves limited by an open pit. If the
estimated value of profit is greater than or
20 4
3 equal to zero, than ore is ascribed to
15 2 commercial ore, i.e. reserves the use of
1 which is economically sound under
10 available or utilized engineering and
ISSN 0536-1028 technology of production
«Известия вузов. and №processing.
Горный журнал», 3, 2020 3
5
where Сa – allowable cost-per-ton, ₽/t;If Сthe p –estimated value of profit
cost of production, is less than
processing and
metallurgical
0 extraction of 1 ton of ore zero,
and than
other ore
costsis ascribed
without to
stripping, ₽/t;
unpayable С ore,
str –
3
cost1,00of stripping, 1,25 ₽/m . 1,50 Bp 1,75 i.e. reserves the use of which in the present
Fig.As a rule,forprofit
2. Graphs P is used
calculation an oreaspit adepth
basic economic
time is criterion when setting
economically ore reserves
inadvisable or
Fig.
limited 2.
according Graphs
by toan for
theopen calculation
pit.
ore value If
and an
theore pit depth
estimated
discount rate: value of profit is greater than or equal to zero,
1 according
than
to the
2 –oreEco value and3discount rate: technically or use
technologically impossible,
1 – Ecoore
– E = 5is %; ascribed to %;
= 10 commercial
– Eco = 15 ore,
%; i.e. reserves the of which is economically
co = 5 %; 2 – Eco = 10 %; 3 – Eco = 15 %; 4 –
sound
Рис. 2. Графики для
4 –
under available E = 20 %
= 20 % or
Ecoрасчета
co utilized engineering and technology of production into
глубины рудно-
but which can be further transformed and
processing.
Рис. 2. If
Графики the estimated
для
го карьера при различии ценности расчета value commercial
рудыofи profit
глубины [9, zero,
is less than 10]. than ore is ascribed to
рудного карьера
unpayable ore,
нормы при
i.e. различии
reserves ценности
дисконта: the use of which in theaspresent
As soon in thetime is economically
conditions of any
1 – Eco = 5руды
inadvisable %; or2 и– нормы
Eco = 10дисконта:
technically %; 3 –orEcotechnologically
= 15 %; impossible, but which can be
field it is possible to divide the reserves further
1 – Eсо = 5 %; 2 –4 E–соE= 10 %; 3 – Eсо = 15 %; 4 –
transformed into Eсоcommercial
co = 20 %
= 20 % [9, 10]. according to their value based on the given
As soon as in the conditions of any field it is possible to divide the reserves
classification, an expression has been
according to their value based on the given classification, proposed to calculateantheexpression
appraisal indicator
has been
of ore value:
proposed to calculate the appraisal indicator of ore value:

PCR(1  n)
В ,
(С p  Сstr Ki  С proc  Сother ) (1  n) (1  p)

where
where PPisisthe theprice
price
of aofmineral
a mineral
in theinmarket, ₽/g; С –₽/g;
the market, С of
grade – grade
ore, g/t;ofRore, g/t; R –
– processing
processing recovery of a mineral, unit fraction; Сp – cost of ore opencast production,
recovery
₽/t; Сproc –ofcosta mineral,
of 1 tonunit fraction;
of ore Сp – ₽/t;
processing, costСof ore opencast production, ₽/t;
other – general business and other
С –
expenses,
proc cost of 1 ton of ore processing, ₽/t;
₽/t; n – the ratio of ore productionother С – general business
loss, unit fraction; p –and
oreother expenses,
dilution factor,
₽/t; nfraction.
unit – the ratio of ore production loss, unit fraction; p – ore dilution factor, unit fraction.
So, the following has become obvious: if PP ≥ 0, ≥ 0, then B ≥ 1; если
B ≥ 1; P <then
if P < 0, 0, then B < 1.
B < 1.
With this consideration in mind, it is proposed to divide divide the
the reserves
reserves according
according toto
value
value as as follows
follows [11]:
[11]:
BB << 11 –– ore
ore which
which does
does not
not possess
possess any
any value
value (unpayable
(unpayable ore);
ore);
11 << B < 1.25 – ore of little value (low-grade
B < 1.25 – ore of little value (low-grade ore); ore);
1.25 < B < 1.5 – ore of medium value (base ore);
1.25<<BB<<1.75
1.5 1.5 –– valuable
ore of medium value (baseore);
ore (run-of-mine ore);
1.5 < B < 1.75 – valuable ore (run-of-mine
B > 1.75 –ore of high value (high grade ore). ore);
B > soon
As 1.75 –asorenetofpresent
high valuevalue(high
NPV grade
andore).
internal rate of return IRR are currently
As soon as net present value NPV
generally accepted criteria of investment projects and internalabsolute
rate of and
return IRR are
relative currently
effectiveness
generally accepted criteria of investment projects absolute and
correspondingly, the dependences between them and the previously considered criteria relative effectiveness
have been established:

NPV  П  ; IRR
f f ( B).
 1 < B < 1.25 – ore of little value (low-grade ore);
1.25 < B < 1.5 – ore of medium value (base ore);
1.5 < B < 1.75 – valuable ore (run-of-mine ore);
B > 1.75 –ore of high value (high grade ore).
ISSN soon as net present value NPV«Известия
As0536-1028 and internal
вузов.rate
Горный return IRR
of журнал», № 3,are currently
2020 91
generally accepted criteria of investment projects absolute and relative effectiveness
correspondingly,
correspondingly, the dependences between them and the previously considered criteria
have
have been
been established:
established:

NPV  П  ; IRR
f f ( B).

The values
The values of of NPV
NPV and IRR have been calculated with the account of net present
value
value dynamics
dynamics and and annual expenditures. IRR has been determined as a positive norm
annual expenditures.
of E
of discount Eсо, with which NPV would
discount со , with which NPV would be be equal
equal toto zero.
zero.
Having assumed that under the most adverse conditions pit depth Нp will
correspond to this boundary condition and the least costly equipment complex, the
Table of
optimal regions 2. Rational uses of theparameters
the investigated equipment complexes with electric excavators
were forecasted.
Research results. As an illustration of the given methodology,оборудования
Таблица 2. Области рационального применения комплексов by way of example,
с электрическими экскаваторами
fig. 1 presents the dependences reflecting the influence of pit depth on the electric
excavator bucket capacity andOredump pit depth trucks loading
Нʹp, m, depending capacity
on the parameters in the estimated
Excavator
conditions.
bucket capacity Lp /Bb = 1–2 Lp /Bb = 2–5
It can
Еb, m3be seen from the graphs that with pit depth (and hence dimensions) growth,
B = 1.75 B = 1.5 B = 1.25 B=1 B = 1.75 B = 1.5 B = 1.25 B=1
the operating parameters of the mining transport must be larger. Excavator bucket
capacity and the associated dump
Fields of truckdifficulty
excavation loading capacity
class grow
I, Нp ≤ 200 m nonlinearly with the
growth
5–25.5 of the mine’s ≤ 200depth. It is due
≤ 180 ≤ 170to mining
≤ 150production
≤ 200 costs≤ 180which, first, depend
≤ 150 ≤ 130
on30–61.2
excavation difficulty,≤ 200 second,
≤ 180 on machine
≤ 170 capacity,
≤ 150 third,
≤ 200 on
≤ 190machine ≤ 170type, ≤model
140
and combination in a set. Meanwhile, these costs being included in ore value indicator
Fields of excavation difficulty class II, 200 < Нp ≤ 320 m
5 ≤ 280 ≤ 240 ≤ 220 ≤ 200 ≤ 270 ≤ 230 ≤ 200 ≤ 170
10–25.5 ≤ 290 ≤ 260 ≤ 240 ≤ 220 ≤ 290 ≤ 260 ≤ 230 ≤ 200
30–61.2 ≤ 320 ≤ 280 ≤ 250 ≤ 230 ≤ 320 ≤ 280 ≤ 240 ≤ 210
Fields of excavation difficulty class III,320 < Нp ≤ 500 m
5 ≤ 460 ≤ 410 ≤ 370 ≤ 350 ≤ 430 ≤ 370 ≤ 330 ≤ 280
10–25.5 ≤ 490 ≤ 450 ≤ 410 ≤ 380 ≤ 470 ≤ 410 ≤ 360 ≤ 320
30–61.2 ≤ 500 ≤ 460 ≤ 420 ≤ 390 ≤ 490 ≤ 420 ≤ 370 ≤ 330
Fields of excavation difficulty class IV, 500 < Нp ≤ 700 m
5 ≤ 630 ≤ 580 ≤ 540 ≤ 500 ≤ 600 ≤ 520 ≤ 480 ≤ 440
10–25.5 ≤ 690 ≤ 620 ≤ 560 ≤ 510 ≤ 680 ≤ 600 ≤ 540 ≤ 490
30–61.2 ≤ 700 ≤ 640 ≤ 590 ≤ 550 ≤ 690 ≤ 610 ≤ 550 ≤ 500
Fields of excavation difficulty class V, Нp > 700 m
5 > 630 > 580 > 540 > 500 > 600 > 520 > 480 > 440
10–25.5 > 690 > 620 > 560 > 510 > 680 > 600 > 540 > 490
30–61.2 > 700 > 640 > 590 > 550 > 690 > 610 > 550 > 500

Having assumed that under the most adverse conditions pit depth Нp will correspond
to this boundary condition and the least costly equipment complex, the optimal regions
of the investigated parameters were forecasted.
Research results. As an illustration of the given methodology, by way of example,
fig. 1 presents the dependences reflecting the influence of pit depth on the electric
excavator bucket capacity and dump trucks loading capacity in the estimated conditions.
It can be seen from the graphs that with pit depth (and hence dimensions) growth,
the operating parameters of the mining transport must be larger. Excavator bucket
capacity and the associated dump truck loading capacity grow nonlinearly with the
growth of the mine’s depth. It is due to mining production costs which, first, depend on
excavation difficulty, second, on machine capacity, third, on machine type, model and
combination in a set. Meanwhile, these costs being included in ore value indicator and
 92 "Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Gornyi zhurnal". No. 3. 2020 ISSN 0536-1028

market inflationary practices expressed as a varying discount rate can shift rational
parameters of equipment along the pit depth.
Rational uses of equipment sets based on the application of electric and hydraulic
excavators with the corresponding bucket capacity which have been obtain this way
have been combined in tables 2 and 3 and in fig. 2 (Lp – the length of the pit over the
ground surface, m; Bp – the width of the pit over the ground surface, m).

Table 3. Rational uses of the equipment complexes

with hydraulic excavators
Таблица 3. Области рационального применения комплексов оборудования
с гидравлическими экскаваторами
Ore pit depth Нpʹ, m
Excavator
bucket capacity Lp /Bb = 1–2 Lp /Bb = 2–5
Еb, m3
B = 1.75 B = 1.5 B = 1.25 B=1 B = 1.75 B = 1.5 B = 1.25 B=1
Fields of excavation difficulty class I, Нp ≤ 200 m
5–42 ≤ 200 ≤ 180 ≤ 170 ≤ 150 ≤ 200 ≤ 170 ≤ 140 ≤ 130
Fields of excavation difficulty class II, 200 < Нp ≤ 320 m
5–7 ≤ 310 ≤ 270 ≤ 240 ≤ 220 ≤ 310 ≤ 260 ≤ 220 ≤ 200
10–42 ≤ 320 ≤ 280 ≤ 240 ≤ 220 ≤ 320 ≤ 270 ≤ 230 ≤ 200
Fields of excavation difficulty class III,320 < Нp ≤ 500 m
5–7 ≤ 490 ≤ 460 ≤ 410 ≤ 380 ≤ 490 ≤ 420 ≤ 370 ≤ 320
10–42 ≤ 500 ≤ 480 ≤ 430 ≤ 390 ≤ 500 ≤ 440 ≤ 380 ≤ 340
Fields of excavation difficulty class IV, 500 < Нp ≤ 700 m
4 5–7 “Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Gornyi zhurnal”. No. 3. 2020 ISSN 0536-1028
≤ 690 ≤ 630 ≤ 580 ≤ 540 ≤ 680 ≤ 590 ≤ 520 ≤ 500
and market inflationary
10–42 ≤ 700 practices
≤ 640 ≤expressed
590 as a varying
≤ 550 ≤ 700 discount
≤ 610 ≤rate
540 can≤ 500
shift
rational parameters of equipment along the pit depth.
Fields of excavation difficulty class V, Нp > 700 m
hebnykh zavedenii.
Rational uses ofNo. equipment sets based
ISSN on the application of electric and hydraulic
0536-1028
5–7Gornyi zhurnal”.
excavators with the
3. 2020
> 690corresponding
> 630 > 580
bucket > 540 which
capacity > 680 have > 590 > 520 this
been obtain > 500
way
y practiceshaveexpressed
10–42 as a> varying
been combined 700in tables >discount
6402 and>3rate andcan
590 in>fig.shift
550 – the length
2 (L>p 700 > 610 of the pit over
> 540 the
> 500
quipment along
ground thesurface,
pit depth. m; Bp – the width of the pit over the ground surface, m).
uipment sets based on the
In order to application
determine the of electric
rationaland useshydraulic
of equipment, some possible pit variants
rrespondinghave Inbeen
bucket order to determine
capacity
modeled which the
withhavetherational
been
account uses
of offiled
obtain equipment,
this way some possible
development pitand
difficulty, variants have
planform
been
tables 2 anddepth
3 and modeled
and fig. with
2 (Lpthe
in dimensions. account
– the
A length
field ofofcompetition
offiled
thedevelopment
pit over hasthe
beendifficulty,
formed and planform
for the depth and
main variants of
the width of the pit over
dimensions.
drilling rigs,Athe ground
field
excavators, surface,
dump m).
of competition has been
trucks andformed for thewhich
bulldozers, main variants of drilling
are commercially
ne the rationalrigs,uses
available. of equipment,
excavators, dump truckssome and possible pit variants
bulldozers, which are commercially available.
th the accountCosts,of filed development
which considered
Costs, which considered both difficulty,
both and
operating planform
expenses and investment for every single
A field of competition
unit
unit of has beenwhen
equipment
of equipment formed
when for the main
calculating
calculating NPV
NPV variants
and and IRR, ofwere
IRR, were determined
determined using
using count-up
count-up and
rs, dump and trucks and
predicting bulldozers,
their dynamicswhich withare
predicting their dynamics with lifetime extension. commercially
lifetime extension.
The
The values
values ofofpitpitdepth
depth in in
tables
tables 2 and 3 correspond
2every
and 3 correspond to the
to basic discount
the basic rate Еrate
discount со =
ered both operating
10%. If Е expenses
со differs and investment
from the basic forvalue single
then pit depth should be calculated by
n calculating ЕсоNPV= 10%.
formulae: and IfIRR, differsdetermined
Есо were from the basic usingvalue
count-upthen pit depth should be calculated by
formulae:
amics with lifetime extension.
pth in tables 2 and 3 correspond to the basic discount Н p KЕebсо, =
Н p  rate
om the basic value then pit depth should be calculated by
 Keb Y  / 100  Y / 100,

Н p Нʹ
where
where Нpp –K–eb
pit, depth
pit depth under
under discount rate ЕЕсосо == 10%
discount rate 10% according to tables 2 and 3, m;
KKеb –– coefficient for
for pit depth calculation under discount rate
pit depth calculation under discount rate Е > 10% or Есо < 10%;
 Y  / coefficient
Keb Y and
еb 100
Yʹ –  Y / 100,
coefficients accounting for the discount rate and ore со > 10% or Есо < 10%;
Есо
value when calculating
calculating
Y and Y ' – coefficients accounting for the discount rate and ore value when
pit depth
pit rate
depthЕсо(Yʹ under
(Y ' under Е со = 10%, and Y under Есо > 10% or Есо < 10% in accordance with
Есо = 10%,toand Y under Есо3,> m;10% or Есо < 10% in accordance with
under discount
graphs at fig.= 3).10% according tables 2 and
graphs
depth calculation at fig. 3).
under discount
In article [12] therate Есо > 10%
conditions Есо < 10%;
oforrational reduction in the capacity of mining
accounting for the discount
transport have been rate and ore value
shown when when calculating
developing deep pits or their intermediate stages.
= 10%, and Y under Еwith
Together со > 10%that or Есо < 10%
in order to tryinpreviously
accordance with
introduced data, at fig. 3 the results of pit
development variants justification have been presented for Vostochny pit of
conditions Olympiadinsky
of rational reduction goldfieldinwhich
the capacity
has a roundof form
mining on a plan.
ISSN 0536-1028 «Известия вузов. Горный журнал», № 3, 2020 93

In article [12] the conditions of rational reduction in the capacity of mining transport
have been shown when developing deep pits or their intermediate stages. Together with
that in order to try previously introduced data, at fig. 3 the results of pit development
variants justification have been presented for Vostochny pit of Olympiadinsky goldfield
which has a round form on a plan.
In this case pit borders have been established because of the mining transport
parameters influence on the parameters of development system elements and ore value.
Up to the project depth of 600 m (variant 2) it is advisable to mine using the complexes
of equipment based on the excavators with 10–15 m3 bucket capacity. With mean
capacity of a bucket increased up to 20–35 m3, together with the increased power and
economic efficiency of a complex in general, it is possible to come down to the depth
of 710 m (according to variant 4 in accordance with the data from table 2).

Variants 1, 2.
Current and design borders of the
3rd stage of the pit (d1 = 216–250
mm; Е1 = 10–15 m3; q1 = 90–136 t)

Variants 3, 5.
Design borders of
Variant 4. Design additional phases of the
border of the 4th 4th stage of the pit
stage of the pit (d2 = (d3 = 216–250 mm;
250–270 mm; Е3 = 5–10 m3; q3 = 40 t)
Е2 = 20–35 m3;
q2 = 220 t)

Fig. 3. Rational dynamics of the mining and conveyor equipment parameters on “Vostochny” pit
depth:
1 – 450 m; 2 – 600 m; 3 – 660 m; 4 – 710 m; 5 – 830 m; d1, d2, d3 is a diameter of a drilling bit;
E1, E2, E3 – the excavator bucket capacity; q1, q2, q3 is dumptruck loading capacity
Рис. 3. Рациональная динамика параметров горнотранспортного оборудования по глубине
карьера «Восточный»:
1 – 450 м; 2 – 600 м; 3 – 660 м; 4 – 710 м; 5 – 830 м; d1, d2, d3 – диаметр долота бурового станка;
Е1, Е2, Е3 – вместимость ковша экскаватора; q1, q2, q3 – грузоподъемность автосамосвала

Further application of excavators and articulated dump trucks with reduced bucket
capacity and loading capacity (variants 3 and 5) allows to reach the depth of 660 and
830 m. Minimum width of such dump trucks together with their ability to cope with
high haulage slopes make it possible to distinguish between two mining-engineering
stages in mining, reduce and defer significant part of stripping activity to later periods,
and increase the volume of the produced minerals and their value.
Summary. The above states testifies to the fact that the parameters of mining
transport and ore pit depth are interconnected with a number of factors: first, physical
and technical characteristics of the mined rock and their occurrence conditions, second,
equipment types and workflow organization and technologies, third, price volatility and
inflation processes in the world market.
To generally estimate these constituents, the fields have been classified according to
the relative difficulty of excavation, while the produced ore reserves have been classified
94 "Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Gornyi zhurnal". No. 3. 2020 ISSN 0536-1028

according to their value. Five classes of fields have been singled out according to excavation
difficulty up to pit depth of 200 m, 320 m, 500 m, 700 m, and more than 700 m.
For each field class ore reserves division has been established by value within the
following limits: B < 1; 1 < B < 1.25; 1.25 < B < 1.5; 1.5 < B < 1.75; B > 1.75.
Considering this, rational uses of equipment complexes with electric and hydraulic
excavators have been determined; it has been stated than with pit planform depth and
dimensions growth it is advisable to apply more powerful and less costly equipment.
Under the base discount rate of 10%, the ultimate pit depth for each class can vary up
to 20–25%. This tendency is true under normal advance of mining, while at the stage of
developing a deep and power pit it is advisable to transfer to equipment with smaller
dimensions because of the reduced working zone.
REFERENCES
1. Market Analysis and Forecast Loading & Haulage Equipment. Parrker Bay Company, December,
2015. 129 p.
2. Runge I. Economics of mine planning and equipment selection. Mine Planning and Equipment
Selection (MPES). 2010; 93–100.
3. Burt C. Equipment selection for surface mining: a review. Interfaces. 2014; 44(2): 143–162.
4. Burt C., Cacceta L. Equipment selection for mining: with case studies. Cham: Springer International
Publishing AG; 2018. 155 p.
5. Rzhevskii V. V. Opencast mining. Technology and integrated mechanization. Moscow: Librocom
Publishing; 2010. (In Russ.)
6. Rzhevskii V. V. Mining sciences. Moscow: Nedra Publishing; 1985. (In Russ.)
7. Matsko N. A. Developing the methods of estimating and controlling the dynamic availability of
mineral resources: DSc in Engineering abstract of diss. Moscow; 2002. (In Russ.)
8. Anistratov Iu. I. Workflows at open pits. Energy theory of opencast mining. Moscow: Globus
Publishing; 2005. (In Russ.)
9. Kosolapov A. I., Kuznetsov D. V. Assessment methodology relative of opencast mining difficulty in
severe climatic conditions. Gornyi informatsionno-analiticheskii biulleten (nauchno-tekhnicheskii
zhurnal) = Mining Informational and Analytical Bulletin (scientific and technical journal). 2017;
4: 74–81. (In Russ.)
10. Trubetskoi K. N., Kaplunov D. R. Mining. Terminology. Moscow: IPKON Publishing; 2016.
(In Russ.)
11. Kuznetsov D. V., Kosolapov A. I. Criterion for setting open pit mine depth and mining-transport
equipment parameters. Fundamental and Applied Problems of Mining. 2018; 5 (1): 83–87. (In Russ.)
12. Kuznetsov D. V., Kosolapov A. I. Estimation of the advisability of the transition into new complexes
of mining-and-transport equipment under deep open pits development. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh
zavedenii. Gornyi zhurnal = News of the Higher Institutions. Mining Journal. 2018; 4: 4–12. (In Russ.)
Received 4 December 2019

Information about authors:

Dmitrii V. Kuznetsov – PhD (Engineering), leading engineer, Mining and Geological Department, LLC
Polyus Project. Е-mail: kuznetsovdv@mail.ru
Aleksandr I. Kosolapov – DSc (Engineering), professor, Head of the Department of Opencast Mining,
Siberian Federal University. Е-mail: kosolapov1953@mail.ru

УДК 622.831.24 DOI: 10.21440/0536-1028-2020-3-87-95

Экономико-технологические аспекты взаимосвязи глубины

рудных карьеров и параметров горнотранспортного оборудования
Кузнецов Д. В.1, Косолапов А. И.2
1 Компания «Полюс Проект», Красноярск, Россия.
2 Сибирский федеральный университет, Красноярск, Россия.

Реферат
Введение. В статье приведены результаты исследований по обоснованию глубины рудного карьера в
увязке с параметрами горнотранспортного оборудования, представленного на рынке России.
Теория исследований. Рассмотрены особенности современного состояния и дальнейшего
развития глубоких карьеров. Дана классификация месторождений по относительной трудности
разработки в зависимости от физико-технических характеристик пород, условий их залегания и
ISSN 0536-1028 «Известия вузов. Горный журнал», № 3, 2020 95

жесткости климата, а также извлекаемых запасов руды в зависимости от ее ценности.

Предложены показатели для совместного обоснования трудности разработки, глубины рудного
карьера, параметров комплексов горнотранспортного оборудования и установлены области их
оптимальных значений.
Результаты и выводы. Получены зависимости, позволяющие оперативно определять
вместимость ковша экскаватора, грузоподъемность автосамосвала и обосновывать глубину
карьера с учетом ценности руды. Установлено, что при открытой разработке месторождения
соответствующего класса трудности разработки динамика затрат с глубиной обусловлена
увеличением мощности, производительности и энерговооруженности буровых станков,
экскаваторов, автосамосвалов, бульдозеров и имеет возрастающий нелинейный характер.
Выделены области рационального применения комплексов горнотранспортного оборудования,
основанных на электрических и гидравлических экскаваторах. Оценены причины вероятного их
изменения. Результаты исследований апробированы при проектировании самого крупного
золоторудного карьера «Восточный» в России по разработке Олимпиадинского золоторудного
месторождения.

Ключевые слова: глубина рудного карьера; вместимость ковша экскаватора; грузоподъемность

автосамосвала; прибыль; чистый дисконтированный доход; внутренняя норма доходности;
ценность руд.

БИБЛИОГРАФИЧЕСКИЙ СПИСОК
1. Market Analysis and Forecast Loading & Haulage Equipment. Parrker Bay Company, December,
2015. 129 p.
2. Runge I. Economics of mine planning and equipment selection // Mine Planning and Equipment
Selection (MPES), 2010. P. 93–100.
3. Burt C. Equipment selection for surface mining: a review // Interfaces. 2014. No. 44(2). P. 143–162.
4. Burt C., Cacceta L. Equipment selection for mining: with case studies. Cham: Springer International
Publishing AG, 2018. 155 p.
5. Ржевский В. В. Открытые горные работы. Технология и комплексная механизация. М.:
Либроком, 2010. 552 с.
6. Ржевский В. В. Горные науки. М.: Недра, 1985. 96 с.
7. Мацко Н. А. Разработка методов оценки и управления динамической доступностью
минерально-сырьевых ресурсов: автореф. дис. … д-ра техн. наук. Москва, 2002. 34 с.
8. Анистратов Ю. И. Технологические потоки на карьерах. Энергетическая теория открытых
горных работ. М.: Глобус, 2005. 304 с.
9. Косолапов А. И., Кузнецов Д. В. Методология относительной оценки трудности открытой
разработки месторождений в суровых климатических условиях // ГИАБ. 2017. № 4. С. 74–81.
10. Трубецкой К. Н., Каплунов Д. Р. Горное дело. Терминологический словарь. М.: ИПКОН
РАН, 2016. 635 с.
11. Кузнецов Д. В., Косолапов А. И. О критерии для обоснования глубины рудного карьера и
параметров комплексов горнотранспортного оборудования // Фундаментальные и прикладные
вопросы горных наук. 2018. Т. 5, кн. 1. С. 83–87.
12. Кузнецов Д. В., Косолапов А. И. Оценка целесообразности перехода на новые комплексы
горнотранспортного оборудования при доработке глубоких карьеров // Известия вузов. Горный
журнал. 2018. № 4. С. 4–12.

Поступила в редакцию 4 декабря 2019 года

Сведения об авторах:

Кузнецов Дмитрий Владимирович – кандидат технических наук, ведущий инженер горно-

геологического отдела Компании «Полюс Проект». Е-mail: kuznetsovdv@mail.ru
Косолапов Александр Иннокентьевич – доктор технических наук, профессор,
заведующий кафедрой открытых горных работ Сибирского федерального университета.
Е-mail: kosolapov1953@mail.ru

Для цитирования: Кузнецов Д. В., Косолапов А. И. Экономико-технологические аспекты

взаимосвязи глубины рудных карьеров и параметров горнотранспортного оборудования // Известия
вузов. Горный журнал. 2020. № 3. С. 87–95 (In Eng.). DOI: 10.21440/0536-1028-2020-3-87-95
For citation: Kuznetsov D. V., Kosolapov A. I. Economic and technological aspects of interrelation
between open pit mine depth and mining transport parameters. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii.
Gornyi zhurnal = News of the Higher Institutions. Mining Journal. 2020; 3: 87–95. DOI: 10.21440/0536-
1028-2020-3-87-95