Chapter 36 .

.
' .

A SERIES OF COMPREHENSIVE OPTIMIZATION MODELS FOR SURFACE MINE LONG-TERM PLANNING Zhang Youdi Li Kemin
..

Shang Tab

Department of Mining Engineering China Institute of Mining and Technology Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China

ABSTRACT According to general guidelines, deposits suitable for surface mining can be divided into two basic categories: horizontal or flat-bedded deposits and inclined or dip-buried deposits. A series of mathematical models for surface mine long-term planning (SMLTP) has been developed and can be used for any kind of deposit. The basic theory and methodology of the models are orientedgraph simulation which combines graph and network theory with a systems simulation technique to form a new approach. From the viewpoint of surface mining and long-term plan modeling, the main differences between the two categories of deposits are analyzed, an important algorithm is put forward, and the structure of the models and some results of applications are introduced. Dynamic and comprehensive optimizations have been completed by the SMLTP model series. Combining different OR branches, the new approach has been proved to be a powerful tool to solve the strategic problems of surface mine planning. O.R. IN LONG-TERM PLAYING The main task of mine long-term planning is to solve the strategic

problems of a mining-project. Once a decision on long-term planning (e.g., on the mining sequence or haulage system) has been carried out, it is very difficult to change the sequential short-range.planning and operations stage of the mine. Some O.R. methods have been employed in surface mine long-term planning. For instance, graph theory, dynamic programming and moving-cone simulation have been used in pit limit analysis (1,3,5); dynamic programming has also been used to optimize the scheduling of stripping and mining work (6) or cutoff grade and production rate ( 2 ) .
. .

In-many cases, however, the : application of a single O.R. approach has its limitations, especially for 4 ) the rigorous optimization methods ( which usually ask for strict constraints and obtain a single optimization solution. The limitation of methodol-ogyhas been an obstacle to the study of mine planning. In recent years there is a tendency to combine two or more different O.R. methods,together to solve complicated mining problems. A new approach, oriented-graph simulation, which combines graph and network theory with a systems

'

376

21st APCOM PROCEEDINGS

simulation technique,' has been developed for surface mine long-term 7 ) . Actually it is a method planning: ( of network simulation with a 3-D spatiality consideration. BASICS OF A MINING-ORIENTED GRAPH Mining areas at any location and any mining stage can be simulated and defined as an oriented.graph defined here as a cycle with clockwise direction. The basic parameters offan oriented graph are as follows (see Fig. 1 ) :

---

FIGURE 1.
,

Mining-oriented graph.

is the number of a node or a side, (xi, yi, zi) are the three-dimensional coordinates oftnode i, - is the phase angle of i side is is the .phase angle of Oi' the extension direction , of side i, and is the characteristic (Ai, Bi, C i ) , label of side i
-.

The spatial-oriented graph system can be developed from the bottom-oriented graph, as shown in Fig. 2.

The-characteristics labels are defined as: . . .r 0,. if i is an old side (mined border) 1, if i is a new side (mined border)

n
FIGURE 2. system.

Bottom ~ r i e n i e d Graph
Level. Oridnted Graphs
Spatial-oriented graph

0, final b . n k 'slope of rock 1, working slope of rock 2, final loose material slope . of rock 3,,re-stripping final slope of . . rock 4-7, for soil slope , correspondingly ,,

It has been found that thisapproach is a powerful tool to' describe the development of the open pit as time goes on.

'MINING CHA~CTERIS~TICS~ OF DIFFERENT DEPOSITS .

' '

1, located in top-wall 2, located in foot-wall 3, located in , pit end 1 4, located in pit end 2
b

the direction of
+

the direction of the direction of

According to mining technology, the characteristics of deposits suitable for surface mining can be divided into two basic categories: (A) horizontal or flat-bedded deposits, and (B) inclined or d'ip-buried' .deposits.

the direction of

SERIES OF COMPREHENSIVE OPTIMIZATION MODELS

A series of mathematical models for surface mine long-term planning (SMLTP) has been developed. The ; different corresponding models fo category of deposits are: SMLTPl SMLTPZ specified mining alternative, the vertical extending direction is defined as shown in Fig. 3.

-----

for category A and for category B.

SMLTPl is associated with a 2-D ore deposit model, while SMLTP2 is associated with a 3-D ore deposit. From the viewpoint of mining engineering, there are significant differences between the two categories of deposits, such as:

u
L,r

Characterized l e v e l s Other l e v e l s

--- The overburden can be dumped into the mined out area for a horizontal or flat-bedded deposit, while few possibilities to do so exist for an inclined or dip-buried deposit.
In addition to the horizontal advance of the mining front in the plan, the vertical extension work of the open pit for an inclined or dip-buried deposit always exists as the mine advances.

Angle o f v e r t i c a l extensiom
. .,

FIGURE 3. Mining section showing the vertical extension. Instead of giving the location and size of the box cut (working trench) at each mining level, we can only input the oriented-graph' parameters of a few characterized mining levels as shown in Fig. 3, while the other oriented graphs of the box cut at each level are developed by'means of a special interpolation subroutine. The. developed oriented graphs between two characterized drop levels are shoyn in Fig. 4 .

---

--- The open pit has a rather large final pit limit in plan but is usually rather small in depth for a horizontal or flat-bedded deposit, while a rather large depth may exist for an inclined or dip-buried deposit. --- Accordingly, .the mining sequence and the haulage development system are different in the two categories of deposits as well.
A few comments on the algorithm of long-term planning for inclined or dip-buried deposits will be briefly represented as follows. VERTICAL EXTENSION OF AN OPEN CUT It is well-known that the sequential extension of mining and stripping work in the vertical direction is an important link for inclined ore body mining. For a
.,

FIGURE 4. Perspective drawing of developing oriented graphs by interpolation.

-..378 . ..

21st APCOM PROCEEDINGS

MINING QUANTITY AND ORE QUALITY Based on the bottom-oriented graph at a specified box cut level as well as the open pit mining parameters, a frustum can be developed and the associated oriented graphs at each of the above.levels can be defined. Because of the continuous vertical extension of the open pit, a frustum of the last mining step might be overlapped, even wholly involved, by the frustum of the following mining step at some lower location (Fig. 5 ) . To obtain the exact mining and stripping volumes as well as the ore quality values at each level of each mining step, the mining topography has to be dynamically lowered to the mined-out boundary after the oriented graphs at each level have been scanned. As shown in Fig 5, after "mining" the frustum above level 7, the topography .is lowered from AEFC

to A ' E ' F ' C ' . The typical scanning area of an oriented graph at a level is also shown in Fig. 5. VERIFICATION OF MINE PRODUCTION A reasonable mine production is a very important factor in mining design work. Other than the consideration of market and economic factors, what is the maximum possible productivity of a surface mine according to the equipment selected and located in the open pit? It is quite convenient to solve this problem by means of a SMLTP model. An actual production in units of t/a of a surface mine at any mining step is decided by the following formula:

where:

Ai
AP.

AW;

n
H-M

AH

AD

is the actual annual production of the mine .at mining step i, t/a, . is the annual mine productivity limited by mining front advance intensity at mining step i, tla, is annual OB productivity limited by stripping front advance intensity at mining s.tep i, m3/a, , is the stripping ratio at mining step i, m3/t, is the annual mine productivity limited by the vertical extension rate at mining step i, t/a, and is the planning mine production at mining stgp i, t/a.

FIGURE 5. Volume scanning for a dip-buried deposit.

In the above formula, AP and AW can be derived from the mining an4 stripping front lengths by searching the oriented-graph side characteristic labels level by level, as well as the corresponding possibly allocated loading machines and their productivities (reference 8).

SERIES OF COMPREHENSIVE OPTIMIZATION MODELS

3-Dimonsiomal ore deposit

Final pit limit

+
Program oP vertical extension rate opti m i z a t i on

+
- Optimization program for
mini ng-by-stage

The maim program of surface mine long term planning

' 1

I'

Mining and stripping scheduling optimization program

1I

Investment estimation dnd ecbaomic effect evaluation program

FIGURE 7.

Macro Structure of SMLTPZ.

380

21st APCOM PROCEEDINGS

t/a by:

AHi can be obtained in units of

AH i
= Pi

I
where

The programs with marked in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 might be optional in a given case. APPLICATION OF THE MODELS The model has been applied to a number of coal and iron ore open pits for optimizing different mining alternatives, with the total number of applications reaching nearly a hundred. The models can be used for either single-factor optimization or comprehensive optimization. Some case studies of single factor optimization are as follows.

V /h i i

Pi is the ore tonnage mined out at step i, t, Vi is the vertical extension rate of mining work at step i, m/a, and is the increment of mining hi m depth at step i,:

Here V is derived by a special i program in which PERT & CPM methods are used.to figure out the minimum circular time for developing and preparing a new bench completely under certain conditions of equipment allocation and mining 'extension ... sequence.
.

Mining Technology Selection In a flat-bedded coal mine, two mining alternatives have been tested with the same pit limit and about the same mining sequence. The difference between the two mining alternatives is mainly concerned with the in-pit one is railway haulage system haulage and another is truck haulage. The corresponding annual production rate: for railway haulage 7/Mt/a, for truck haulage --21/Mt/a.

STRUCTURE OF THE MODELS The macro-structure of model SMLTPl is shown in Fig. 6. It is applicable for horizontal or flat-bedded deposits.

---

2-D ore deposit program

main program of surface. mine l o n ~ term planning m i n i n ~and strippinu. scheduling optimization

3 .

..

..

final pit limit program

---

and economic effect evaluation program

FIGURE 6. Macro structure of SMLTP 1. For inclined or dip-buried deposits, the model SMLTPZ can be selected, the macro-structure of' which is illustrated in Fig. 7.

Thhumulated net present values vs. the mine's age for the two different mining alternatives derived from,~SMLTPl are shown in Fig. 8. Compared with railway haulage, it is faster to obtain the same net present value for the truck alternative because it has a higher mining intensity. However, the final net present value for the two mining alternatives are not significant (7.67%).

SERIES OF COMPREHENSIVE OPTIMIZATION MODELS

2=
0,
4. ) .

cl

Truck haulage
Liai lway haulage

1.

Ia
0-

- I.
-1.

20

So

60

60

I#,?

Mine's age, years

Mine's aRe, yo

FIGURE 8. Cumulated net present values for the two haulage alternatives. Taking the different mine productions into account, we use another index to evaluate the economic effect:

FIGURE 9 . Unit net present function,of the two values as a'. haulage alternatives. Mine'construction volume and duration can be easily obtained via this model. A shorter construction period (1 to 2 years) has resulted from the truck alternative compared with the railway alternative in this case. Pit Length Analysis In the above mine, comparison among mining alternatives with different pit lengths has been made to find the optimal pit length with a truck haulage system. The parameters of different mining alternatives as well as,the technical and economical results coming from SMLTPl are shown in Table 1 . Two factors --- the-stripping ratio and the overburden haulage distance --- have an opposite influence on the economic result, along with an increase of the pit length. Within the range of this study, the overburden haulage distance from the stripping face to the mined-out area appears to have a stronger impact on ,the mining cost. So the optimized mining alternative A with a short pit length of 1.2 km is derived.

where:

P is the unit net present

value, Yuan/t ,. CNPV is the cumulated NPV, Yuan, , . and T is the ccinulated tonnage of mined ore, t. The unit net present values vs. the mine's age are shown in Fig. 9. In the early years, it is more profitable for the railway haulage alternative because it has a rather low mining cost. But this advantage diminishes as the mine life increases.

TABLE 1.

Comparison among alternatives with different pit lengths.

Parameters Mining Alternative No. Pit Mine Lonxth, Produckm tion, ~t/a 1.2 1.6 2.4

Output Results

Mine Aver. Haulage Life, Stripping Dist. CNPV , years Ratio, of OD, mil. Yuan m3/t km
31.83 32.79

p, yuan/t
*

12.0
16.8 21.0

2.87
2.76 2.82

1.67 -1.95 1.98 -2.47 2.18 -2.70

551.6
580.8 5?1,7

1.549 1.149 0.770

A

36.03

,J

Mining Sequence Selection In'an iron ore open pit with a dip-buried ore body, different mining sequence options have been studied. Fig. 10 show the different alternatives which a21 possess the same final pit limit. The locations of the intermediate pit limit(s) for alternative (c) and (d) are optimized by a special program. The results are shown in Table Compared with 'the-normal mining methods, a lower stripping ratio in the early period can be achieved for the bench group mining method. If the options of mining by stages with intermediate pit limit(s) were selected, further benefit would be obtained.
2.

Comprehensive Optimization.

..

A great number of mining alternatives can be comprehensively considered, compared and optimized via the model series.
In the feasibility study of a large surface coal mine, 24 mining alternatives have been put forward. They are different from each other, being characterized by the following technical factors: PIT LIMIT; EQUIPMENT SIZE: The bucket capacity of the shovel ranges from 8 to 27 m3; HAULAGE SYSTEM, including truck, railway or combined haulage system; MINE PRODUCTION, ranging from 6 . 0 to 24.0 mil. tons per year;

SERIES OF COMPREHENSIVE OPTIMIZATION MODELS

383

(a) (b)

Normal 'Mining Bench Group Mining

(c) (d)

Mining by Two Stages Mining by Three Stages

@ : working slope angle y : f i n a l slope angle

FIGURE 10.
TABLE 2 .

Mining sequence options.

Comparison among a l t e r n a t i v e s with d i f f e r e n t mining sequences.

I
Running Results (a) Norma 1 Mining

Mining Sequence Alternative

(b) Bench Group Mining

(c, Minin~ by 2 Stages

(a')
Mining by 3 Stages

Stripping Ratio in

The 1st Period, t/t

Total NPV, m i 1. Yuan

1
(

2.63

2.56

2.08 1933.0 3.89

1.80 1977.3 3.98

1754.7 3.53

1758.3 3.54

Unit NPV, ~ u a n / t

384

21st APCOM PRO-CEEDINGS

It is also possible to use the factor K as a main evaluation index for mining alternatives with quite large differences among their investment amounts, and to take factor P as the secondary evaluation index in this case. From Table 3, it is easy to see that if there were no limitation to the annual mine production, alternative 7 or alternative 21 should have been selected to obtain the largest NPV from unit investment. However, when an annual production of no less than 10 Mt/a is required, the best options turn out to be alternative 14 or ilternative 2. In this study, it takes 1 to 2 minutes of CPU time to run a comprehensive mining alternative on

PIT LENGTH, ranging from 1.2 to 2.4 km; MINING ADVANCE DIRECTION; LOCATION OF PREPARATION PLANT A M ) DUMPING AREA. The results are shown in Table 3. Other than the.NPV of unit tonnage of mined coal (P), another factor for evaluation of economic effect has been taken,as: . . K = CNPV/CNPI where K is the NPV of-unit net present investment, CNPV is the cumulated net present value, and CNPI is the cumulated,net present investment.

TABLE 3. Results for comprehensive optimization.

mining m i n i n g cost, a 1 t e r - a v e r . mine produc~uan/t n a t i r e Slt, ml/t tiom, No. Mt/a 2.78 12.0 8.44---12.84 2.78 18.0 8.44---12.84 2.78 24.0 8.44---12.81 3.48 12.0 10.03---17.93 2.76 16.8 9.84---12.88 2.91 7.0 5.57---6.72 2.80 7.0 5.93---6.27 2.80 6.0 5.93---6.27 3.14 10.5 10.89---15-70 3.14 '6.0 10.89---15.70 3.14 10.5 10.89---15.70 3.14 10.5 10.89---15-70 11.89---17.60 3.15 10.5 2.78 12.0 8.44---12.84 2.78 10.5 8.44---12.84 3.48 10.5 10.03---13.93 2.82 21.0 10.34---13.20 2.83 7.0 5.84---8.18 4.42 7.0 8.44---11.53 4.24 10.5 13.20---18.80 3.87 7.0 6.07---11.49 3.87 6.0 6.07---11.49 2.83 7.0 6.00---6.31 2.58 17.0 9.30---12.88

NPV I mil. Y u a n
551.64 832.10 1037.40 247.17 580.88 433.80 519.60 448.44 11.63 -9.43 203.97 97.78 213.52 534.49 479.83 117.77 521.76 484.59 277.83 -36.18 530.58 453.81 331.05 461.70

NPV of unit tonnage

cotzl,

NPV o f unit
investmen ~uan/Yuan

~unn/t 1.55 2.34 2.91 0.38 1.15 2.15 2.12 ' 53 r.34 -0.03 0.70 0.34 0.72 1.50 1.35 0.29 0.73 ' 0.68 0.79 -0.15 0.75 0.64 1.34 0.85

0.563 0.61 1 0.595, 0.102 0.501 0.581 0.712 . 0.659 40.011 -0.013 0.212 0.092 0.205 0.631 0.6?8 0.117 0.331 0.706 0.263 -0.035 0.71 8 0.661 0.476

- .

SERIES OF COMPREHENSIVE OPTIMIZATION MODELS

the IBM-4341 computer. It took only one month to complete the above-mentioned work for the feasibility study, including all preparation work. This is a significant saving of labor and time, yet the results are more accurate and reliable. CONCLUSIONS Combining different O.R. approaches, the new method has been proven as a powerful tool to simulate the time-and-space varying development of open pit mine engineering. Taking the main program of SMLTP as the central model, a number of subprograms with various functions by means of different O.R. approaches might be involved in the model. Further extension can be conveniently made, if necessary. Traditional models related to surface mine long-term planning are usually based on a single objective and a static form. Among them the typical ones are existing pit limit , optimization models'which look for an optimum final pit limit not taking the time factor of value into account. In adaition to the functions of the traditional form, dynamic and comprehensive optimization for surface mine long-term planning can be completed by the SMLTP model series. Further widespread applications of the SMLTP model series for surface mine long-term planning are anticipated. REFERENCES 1 . 'Crawford, J. T., and Davey, R. K., 1979, "Case Study in Open-pit Limit Analysis,"

385

2 .

Dowd, P., 1976, "Application of Dynamic and Stochastic Programming to Optimize Cutoff Grades and Production Rates," Transactions/Section A of IMM, Vol. 85. Johnson, T. B., 1973, "A Comparative Study of Methods for Determining the Ultimate Open Pit Mining Limit," Proceedings, 11th Annual Symposium on Computer ~pplicationsin the Mineral Industry, Tucson, Arizona. Analysis, Technical Overview,"

3.

4 . Kim, Y. C., 1979, "Open-Pit Limit

5.

Lerchs, H., and Grossman, I. F., 1965, "Optimum Design'of O~en- it ~ines." Canadian . Institute of Mining Bulletin, Vol. 58.

. .

6.

Zhang, Y. G., Yun, Q. X., Gui, E. Y., and Xu, L. J., 1986, "A New Approach for Production Scheduling in Open-pit Mines," Proceedings, 19th International Symposium on Application of Computers and Operations Research'in the Mineral Industry, SME, Littleton, Colorado. Zhang, You-di, Li Ke-min and. Shang Tao, 1986, "Oriented-Graph Simulation For . Long-Range Surface Mine Planning," Proceedings, .19th International Symposium on Application of Computers and Operations Research in the Mineral Industry, SME,' Littleton, Colorado. zhang Youdi, Li Kemin and Shang Tao, 1987, "System Simulation for Open Pit Planning," Mining Science and Technology, Trans Tech Publications, Clausthal-Zellerfeld.

7.

8.

York.