Sei sulla pagina 1di 53
TAITA TAVETA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND MINERAL PROCESSING ENGINEERING P.O.BOX 635-80300 – VOI, KENYA

TAITA TAVETA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND MINERAL PROCESSING ENGINEERING P.O.BOX 635-80300 – VOI, KENYA

DESIGN AND OPTIMISATION OF AN OPEN PIT MINE AT KABINI AREA 5B

CASES STUDY “KABINI” LIMESTONE QUARRY OF EAST AFRICAN PORTLANT CEMENT COMPANY (EAPCC)

By

WAKABA JAMES BSc. (MMPE) Reg. No. TU01-EM211-0043/2012 And NGETICH VICTOR BSc. (MMPE) Reg. No. TU01-EM211-0035/2012

Supervisor: MR. MICHAEL KABUGU (Lecturer department of mining and mineral processing engineering)

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for award of the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Mining and Mineral Processing Engineering

SEPTEMBER 2017

DECLARATION

We declare that this project is our own work. It is being submitted in partial fulfilment for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Mining and Mineral Processing Engineering in Taita Taveta University (TTU). It has not been submitted for any degree or diploma in any other University.

Signature: ……………………………………

(WAKABA JAMES)

Signature: ………………………………………

(NGETICH VICTOR)

Date: …………………………

Date: ………………………….

SUPERVISOR CERTIFICATION

I certify that the above students carried out the work detailed in this report, under my supervision

Signature: ……………………….

(Mr MICHAEL KABUGU)

Date: ………………………

ii

DEDICATION

This research paper is dedicated to our parents, siblings and fellow classmates; MMPE class of 2012

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to express our deep gratitude to our project supervisor Mr. Michael Kabugu, who has always been a source of guidance and motivation for carrying out the project. His inspiration and ideas have helped us in shaping this project. With a thankful heart we acknowledge his tireless efforts even amidst tight schedules to ensure that our project was a success. We would, with specialty, like to express our gratefulness to Mr. Kimuyu, production manager in EAPCC for his tireless support to ensuring that we get the necessary data for the ultimate fulfilment of this project. We are also thankful to the entire EAPCC fraternity for believing in us and giving us an opportunity to do our project in EAPCC. We are also acknowledge the support work by all those authors mentioned in the reference section for giving shape to our thoughts through their path breaking endeavors. Lastly, we express our heartfelt gratitude to our God for giving us everything that we ever needed especially the strength to carry on and the inspiration to success and victory.

iv

ABSTRACT

Today’s mining industry is extremely competitive to earn a maximum profit for the mining company; operations must be low cost producers in order to compete with global players. This project was undertaken with an aimed of assisting EAPCC located at Athi River developed an appropriate surface mining method to ensure that the resource being mined is to be extracted in a safe, efficient, and profitable manner. The main objective of the project was to address the issue of open pit mine design and its optimization for the exploitation of the limestone in Kabini Hill at the lowest possible cost with a view of maximizing profits.

The East Africa Portland cement company had a concession with an area of approximately 30 km 2 situated 20kms off the main A109 Nairobi-Mombasa road and approximately 125kms SE of Nairobi, Kenya. Kibini Area 5B has shown, through adequate exploration, a possible and viable limestone deposit which the company has resolved to be the next mine site. The exploration data, assembled for area 5a, revealed a potential limestone resource and indicated that the deposit could be mined by using open pit mining method. The design of this pit would greatly determine the life of the mine and the production thereof. It would also solve the problem of back stripping (the current problem in area 7A) and ensure better and stable benches by establishing and putting in place better bench geometry.

In this project, an effort was made to design an optimal open pit to exploit the limestone deposit by using Surpac and Whittle software. By using the exploration data as the primary input, Surpac software was used to estimate the resource for ore modeling, export the block model to Whittle software for pit optimization, then export the optimal pit from Whittle back to Surpac software for detailed pit design incorporating a ramp and berms.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents

 

DECLARATION

ii

SUPERVISOR

CERTIFICATION

ii

DEDICATION

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

iv

 

ABSTRACT

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

viii

LIST OF TABLES

ix

LIST

OF SYMBOLS

x

1.

INTRODUCTION

2

1.1. Background to the Study

2

1.2. Area of Study

3

1.3. Research Questions

3

1.4. Open-Pit Design

Problem

4

1.5. Pit Optimization

Problems

5

1.6. Significance of

the Project

6

1.7. Scope of Work

6

1.8. Goal and Objectives of the Study

7

 

1.8.1. Introduction

7

1.8.2. Project

Goal

7

1.8.3. Project

Objectives

7

1.9.

Materials and Methods

7

1.9.1. Materials

7

1.9.2. Methodology

8

2.

LITERATURE REVIEW

10

2.1. Introduction

10

2.2. The major steps in development of an open pit mine

11

3.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

13

3.1. Type of Collected Data

13

 

3.2. Data

Analysis and Validation

13

3.3. Block Modelling of the Ore body Using Surpac Software

13

3.4. Creation of Database in Surpac

14

3.5. Basics statistics

16

vi

3.6.

The Ore Outline (3D Model)

17

3.7.

Block Model Creation

19

3.7.1. Modeling of empty block

19

3.7.2. Adding constraints

19

3.7.3. Assigning attribute values

20

3.8. Methods of Grade Estimations Used

21

3.9. Pit Optimization

24

3.10. Pit Design with Surpac

26

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

31

5. CONCLUSIONS

33

FIRST SEMESTER WORK PLAN

34

SECOND SEMESTER WORK PLAN

35

REFERENCES

36

APPENDIX A: VARIOGRAM, BLOCK STATISTICS AND KRIGING REPORT SAMPLES

38

APPENDIX B: WHITTLE VALIDATION REPORT AND BLOCK MODEL

42

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1:1map showing the location of the area of study (Google map)

3

Figure 1:2 A 2-D block model of a mine

4

Figure 1:3 Inter-relationship of multiple parameters involved in open pit optimization (Sevim & Lei

5

Figure

3:1

drill

holes location

15

Figure 3:2 drill hole location (3D space)

15

Figure 3:5 Drill hole display according to limestone percentages and their location in 3D space

15

Figure 3:6 Histogram of composited raw data showing the presence of bi-modal distribution of the

16

Figure 3:7 Histogram of composited raw data applying a top-cut of 40%

17

Figure 3:8 Digitised Ore Zone Sections

18

Figure

3:9

Solid Model of the

Orebody

18

Figure 3:10 block model with constraints

19

Figure 3:11 Constraint block model showing extent of deposit

20

Figure

3:12

Variogram 1

23

Figure 3:13A summarized flow chart for the pit optimization process

25

Figure 3:14 Pit Design with Switchback Road based on the position of the ore body

28

Figure 3:15 Pit Design with Switchback Road based on the position of the ore body with ore outline/solid

29

Figure 3:16 pit designed with surpac based on the position of the ore body including the surface

29

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3:1 Part of the Collar Text File (Collar.txt)

13

Table 3:2 Part of the Survey Text File (Survey.txt)

14

Table 3:3 Part of the Assay Text File (Assay.txt)

14

Table 3:4 Part of the Geology Text File (Geology.txt)

14

Table 3:5 Statistics of CaCO3 Composites

16

Table 3:6 Assigned Attributes

20

Table 3:7 A comprehensive table showing the attributes assigned to the block

21

Table 3:8 CaCO3 variogram parameters

22

Table 3:9 interpolation parameters

22

Table 3:10 Table containing the attributes that were to be exported to whittle for optimization

24

Table 3:11 Cost Figures and Parameters to be used for Optimization

26

Table 3:12 parameters used to undertake the final pit design

27

Table 4:1 Results from Final Pit Design using Surpac

31

ix

LIST OF SYMBOLS

EAPCC – East African Portland Cement Company

DTM – Digital Terrain Model

CSV – Comma Separated Excel file

VAR – Variogram

BM – Block Model

Max depth – maximum depth

GL – gridline

Hole_id – hole identity

MCAF – Mining cost adjustment factor

PCAF – Processing cost adjustment factor

SG – specific gravity

‘bm_model1_mdl’ – Block model file

Caco3_id – estimation of block value by inverse distance square method.

Caco3_ok – estimation of block value by inverse ordinary kriging method.

Caco3_nn– estimation of block value by nearest neighbor method.

x

CHAPTER - 1 INTRODUCTION

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1.Background to the Study

The essence of any mining operation in extracting minerals from the earth is to construct an opening that will serve as a means of entry from the surface to the ore deposit. The design of these openings is achieved by using scientific principles, technological knowledge, and managerial skills to brings a mineral deposit through the four stages in the life of a mine which are prospecting, exploration, development, and exploitation. These mineral deposit can be extracted from the earth crust by either surface mining methods or underground mining methods depending on their location and economic consideration. Surface mining operations can be classified into open pit, opencast, strip, alluvial and in-situ mining, depending on method of mining being considered (Hartman, 1987)

Strip mining is the practice of mining a seam of mineral, by first removing a long strip of overlying soil and overburden. It is most commonly used to mine coal and lignite (brown coal). It is only practical when the ore body to be excavated is relatively near the surface. Alluvial mining is the mining of stream bed deposits (also known as alluvial deposits) for minerals. These alluvial deposits are formed when minerals are eroded from their source, and then transported by water to a new locale. When the sediments are deposited, they settle according to their weight, with heavier, more valuable minerals like gold, diamonds and platinum often being deposited at the same time. In- situ mining, which is primarily used in mining uranium, involves dissolving the mineral resource in place then processing it at the surface without moving rock from the ground.

Open pit mining is a method of mining a near surface ore deposit by means of a surface pit excavation using one or more horizontal benches. It starts off with a small pit and over time gradually develops to take the final shape of pit called as ultimate pit. These ores in an open pit mine are overlaid by overburden and usually removed in benches ranging from height 9 m to 30 m. A thin deposit may require one or few benches but a thick deposit requires more number of benches and the pit in its production stage takes the shape of an inverted cone. At present open pit mining has proved to be the best method of total ore production in Kenya, owing to the advancement in technology which has increased the rate of production while ensuring safety of manpower

Over the years, East African Portland Cement Company had made some progress in its pit design in the extraction of Limestone, but it had encountered extreme challenges due to: inadequate design consideration (long term vs. short term), Failure to generate mine plans and lack of modern technology for surface mine design.

Kabini Area 5B had shown, through adequate exploration, a possible and viable limestone deposit which the company resolved to be the next mine site. The exploration data, assembled for area 5B, revealed a potential limestone resource and indicated that the deposit could be mined by using open pit mining method. Open pit mining method is generally considered to provide better recovery, grade control, flexibility, safety, and working environments than the other methods mining. The design of this pit would greatly determine the life of the mine and

2

the production rates thereof. It would also solve the problem of back stripping (the current problem in area 7a) and ensure better and stable benches by establishing and putting in place better bench geometry.

1.2.Area of Study

The study area is situated 20kms off the main A109 Nairobi-Mombasa road and approximately 125kms SE of Nairobi. It lies between latitudes 2° 1' 0" South, and longitude 37° 22' 0" East. It covers an area of approximately 30 km 2 . It lies at an altitude of 1264m above sea level. Several dry weather roads and footpaths serve the area including the murram road that connects the quarry to the main highway.

murram road that connects the quarry to the main highway. Figure 1:1map showing the location of

Figure 1:1map showing the location of the area of study (Google map)

1.3.Research Questions

The project sought to answer the following research questions:

How and where do we improve our productivity?

What design parameters can be put in place to optimize open pit mining?

How do we get an optimal pit model that presents a pit design with a reduced unit cost, an optimal mine plan, an increase in production and an increased mine life?

3

1.4.Open-Pit Design Problem

In 2004, Picard and Smith explain that an open-pit design problem is a problem of choosing an ultimate contour whose total profit, that is, the sum of the profits of all the blocks in the contour, is maximal among all possible contours. In 1965, Larch’s and Grossmann made an earliest attempt of solving this problem by presenting an algorithm to determine the optimum design for an open-pit mine.

In order that the walls of an open-pit shall not collapse during mining operations, miners are always mindful of how to dig the blocks from the ground. The slope requirement is the main physical restrictions in that all blocks on top and preventing the mining of a given block must be removed. In Figure, if the safe slope angles are assumed to be 45 0 and block 7 is to be removed, then we have to remove blocks 2, 3, and 4 first. The main aim here is to mine only the profitable blocks.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Figure 1:2 A 2-D block model of a mine.

4

1.5.

Pit Optimization Problems

Open pit mine planning is a multi-parameter optimization problem which requires simultaneous solution (Sevim & Lei, 1998). The parameters involved in open pit production planning are interrelated hence if one parameter is affected it affects all other related parameters, so without determining the value of one parameter the next parameter cannot be determined. Mine life is determined as the probable time required to mine all pits present in ultimate pit limit (UPL) design, in a proper sequence in order to ensure maximum profit.

For profit to be maximized, a cut-off grade is determined based on factors like, market price of processed ore, mining and processing cost, overhead charges like royalty, compensation, etc. Cut-off grade must be fixed during planning stage as it will be the driving factor in determining block economic value (BEVs), based on the BEVs ultimate pit is determined making use of various graph closure algorithms available like minimum cut algorithm, and subsequently production schedule is developed by analyzing various pushback designs in order to optimize the sequence by hit and trial method keeping in mind annual targets to be achieved, final mining sequence is one which give maximum economic return subjected to all operational constraints (Sevim & Lei,1998).

Cut-off Grade Ultimate pit Mining and limit processing cost Production Production Mine life scheduling rate
Cut-off
Grade
Ultimate pit
Mining and
limit
processing cost
Production
Production
Mine life
scheduling
rate

Figure 1:3 Inter-relationship of multiple parameters involved in open pit optimization (Sevim & Lei 1998).

5

1.6.

Significance of the Project

The manual method of designing an open pit mine involves considerable time and judgment on the part of the engineer. The procedure was tedious, though, and also difficult to use on large ore deposits. As a result of the lengthiness of the procedure, the number of alternatives that could be examined was limited and incase of any change in the design parameters the entire process could be repeated for accuracy. Hence, open pit mine design became one of the most important topics for researchers.

There has been tremendous advancement in the use of information technology in mining industry for the last five decades and this has enabled faster, better and more creative work of mine design. Almost all modern methods for designing and modeling are based on the integration of IT with mining activities. Modern computer programs including Lerchs- Grossmann 3D algorithm (Lerchs & Grossmann, 1965), Floating Cone Method and dynamic programming have helped mine planners in developing mine plans which are accurate and reliable.

The main advantages of using this software’s are that they are simple to formulate and use, requires lesser computational time and are user friendly, i.e. they can be customized as per users need and can incorporate real time complexities like mining constraints, working slope angle, time value of money, etc. (Dowd & Onur, 1992). With the advancements in optimization algorithms even low grade deposits can be mined successfully which earlier was not possible. Generally, modern methods of mine design have a far greater advantages over the manual, and in the future they will be more and more applied in order to bridge the gap between supply of raw materials and demand of finished product.

1.7. Scope of Work

Mining is often considered to be a high risk business in terms of both safety and economics. There is always the possibility that an excavated slope, may not perform as predicted and could fail with significant and even catastrophic results. But with the gradual development in technology, mining industry is seeking for automation of their operations in order to achieve adequate level of design that will meet the required safety while maximizing output.

This project will aim at designing the open pit mine that ensure the exploitation of mineral deposit at the lowest possible cost with a view of maximizing output. Use of technology have made mine design and planning accurate and reliable and thus steady production. Even the low grade deposits can now be mined successfully, which earlier was not possible, with the available optimization software such as Whittle.

6

1.8.

Goal and Objectives of the Study

1.8.1. Introduction

Mining is an activity in economics that consists of the discovery, valuation, development, exploitation, processing, and marketing of useful minerals such as iron, coal, limestone, or precious metals. Mining industry locates these minerals and seek to remove them in the most economical and efficient way possible for use by various industries such as construction, production and Energy. With the evolvement of new computer software’s incorporating geostatistics based modeling of pit and development of optimization algorithms, mining industries are seeking the analysis done by this software in planning their mine to ensure that the resource being mined is to be extracted in a safe, efficient, and profitable manner in order for them to compete with others worldwide.

1.8.2. Project Goal

The goal of the project is to design an optimal open pit to exploit the deposit in the most economical and efficient way possible.

1.8.3. Project Objectives

The objective of the project is to model the deposit using Surpac and provide the pit optimization Using Whittle software in order to achieve maximum ore recovery at the lowest possible cost and thus derive maximum profit.

1.9. Materials and Methods

1.9.1. Materials

In this project work, the pit optimization and design were carried out using Surpac and Whittle software. Surpac software was used for the design of Kabini open pit mine while Whittle used for the optimization process. The project work was based on data gathered from the exploration drilling programme executed by the East African Portland Cement company (EAPCC) as at 2010.

The methods that were used for data collection at Kabini Hill quarry include:

Photographs that was taken to illustrate the real situation on the ground.

Reference to the mine operations records filed by the company

Information recorded on the ground during external attachment in the company.

Information on the current mining operating costs.

Exploration and survey data files of the proposed site from the company.

7

1.9.2. Methodology

The process of pit optimization and design entailed three essential steps as follows:

Block modelling of the ore body, using Surpac software

Exportation of the block model to Whittle software for pit optimization

Exportation of the optimal pit from Whittle back to Surpac software for detailed pit design.

PROCESS OVERVIEW

In Whittle In Surpac Validate geological parameters Add cost & slope info Generate reports for
In Whittle
In Surpac
Validate geological
parameters
Add cost & slope info
Generate reports for validation
Export block model
In Surpac
Import model and validate
Reblock & extend framework
Add slopes
Optimise
Define operational scenario
Analyse pits using
graphs,schedules & spider
diagrams
Select pits
Export res or msq or pit shells
Import res or msq or dxf
Design pits

8

CHAPTER- 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

9

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

A lot of research has been carried out to understand and present the theoretical overview of open pit planning and

design and also to appreciate the past research and design work carried out by other researchers and designers in the field of mining. In the context, extensive research was carried out based on the technological advancement and the economic implication of open pit planning and design alongside the advancement. Adequate research has been carried out by researchers which has led to the development and improvement of the mining industry, decreasing unit cost of mining and increasing production output and ultimately revenue from the mines.

Open pit mining accounts for approximately 60% of the production from surface mines (Hartman, 1987). The planning and design of any open pit mine is basically an exercise in economics, constrained by certain geologic and mining engineering aspects that calls for an extensive research in order to avails results which are accurate and reliable. An extensive literature review was carried out to find various approaches which researchers have used in the past in the field of open pit design and its optimization. In this project work, technological advancement in the designing and optimization of open pit has been widely reviewed.

Lerchs and Grossmann (1965) were the first to put forward a method to solve the open pit mine problem. They

presented an algorithm to determine the optimum design for an open-pit mine. The aim was to design the contour of a pit that maximizes the difference between total mine value of the extracted ore and the total cost of extraction of ore and waste materials. They also gave the mine graph model of the problem and showed that an optimal solution

of the ultimate pit problem is the same as finding the maximum closure of their model.

Since then, many researchers have tried to formulate various optimization models and developed algorithms to solve the problem. Others have also made efforts to solve the problem by applying existing optimization techniques. However, in spite of all the work done, researchers are still looking for better models and algorithms in this field of study.

In 1982, Picard and Queyranne gave a binary quadratic programming formulation of the minimum cut problem and

mention that it is of considerable importance in the determination of the optimal contour of an open-pit mine.

Whittle 1990, has done extensive work using meta-heuristic approach and have developed an algorithm which is most widely used throughout for open pit optimization.

Zhao and Kim (1992) present a graph theory oriented algorithm for optimum pit design. Their algorithm produces an optimal solution and maximizes the total undiscounted net profit for a given 3-D block mine model. In terms of the reduction in computation time and computer memory requirements, they view their algorithm to be of better performance as compared to the well-known Lerchs and Grossmann Algorithm.

10

Hochbaum and Chen (2000) viewed the open-pit mining problem as a problem to determine the contours of a mine, based on economic data and engineering feasibility requirements in order to yield maximum possible net income. They mentioned that this problem needs to be solved for very large data sets. They noted that in practice, it is necessary to test multiple scenarios taking into account a variety of realizations of geological predictions and forecasts of ore value.

Picard and Smith (2004) describe the open-pit design problem as a problem of choosing an ultimate contour whose total profit, that is, the sum of the profits of all the blocks in the contour, is maximal among all possible contours.

Zhang (2006) approaches the problem of large number of blocks in a mine by combining a genetic algorithm and topological sorting to find the extraction schedule of a mine. For a given ore body, the approach simultaneously determines an ultimate pit of a mine and an optimal block extraction schedule that maximizes the net present value by specifying whether a block should be extracted and if yes, when to dig it out and where to send it (i.e., the waste dump or the processing plant), subject to a number of constraints including maximum wall slope, mining and processing capacities.

Also, Bley et al. (2010) consider the integer linear programming formulation presented by Caccetta and Hill (2003) that maximizes net present value subject to precedence and multiple upper bound resource constraints; cutoff grade is fixed. Again, developed variable reduction techniques and cuts based on the precedence-constrained knapsack structure of the problem and demonstrate how their developments significantly reduce solution time for problems containing hundreds of blocks and 5–10 time periods.

2.2.The major steps in development of an open pit mine

Determining the three-dimensional distribution of mineralization and grade (Barnes, 1980; Barnes, 1989); Establishing the economic limits for the pit (Soderberg and Rausch, 1968; Koskiniemi, 1979; Robb, 1979); Selecting suitable sites for waste embankments and soil stockpiles (McCarter, 1985; McCarter 1990); (4) clearing vegetation from the land intended as sites for pit and waste embankments; siting of processing, maintenance, office, and transport facilities close to the pit but outside potential pit limit expansion (Myntti, 1979); Selecting equipment; laying out haulage roads; Initiating “pioneering” cuts. These initial cuts may be in the form of “box cuts” (Hartman, 1987) or access roads on steep hillsides that are enlarged to form mine benches.

11

CHAPTER- 3

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

12

3. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

3.1. Type of Collected Data

Exploration; drill hole log sheets for drill holes within gridlines 11, 12 and 13. The drill hole spacing is 100m between gridlines and 50m hole to hole.

Geotechnical; limestone density, top soil characteristics and overburden properties.

Production data; collected and used to constrain the ore to produce an optimal pit.

Others; includes the climatic conditions that affect slope determination and designs and economic constraints.

3.2. Data Analysis and Validation

Data collected was classified as collar, assay, geology and survey data, arranged in excel tables. The data was then subjected to a close analysis to assess the reliability of the exploration data. This was done in order to reveal any errors or miss-presentation of the given data that might affect the database to be created and the efficient reporting of resource tonnage, grade and classification. The data was analyzed for inconsistencies such as duplication of collar data, erroneous entry of drill hole depth and assay values. No errors were detected thus providing a satisfactory basis for the use of this database in its original form for reserve estimation

3.3. Block Modelling of the Ore Body Using Surpac Software

The exploration data obtained from Kabini Hill Quarry was used as the primary input for block modelling of the deposit. The drill hole data was organized as a Surpac readable access file using Microsoft Excel to facilitate the modelling process, then classified under the titles collar, survey, assay and geology text files formats required by Surpac software. The arrangement of the fields and records was presented in Tables 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 as shown.

Table 3:1 Part of the Collar Text File (Collar.txt)

Hole_id

Easting

Northing

Altitude

Max_depth

Hole_path

GL10DH1

9762599

309413

1303

83.4

LINEAR

GL10DH2

9762585

309434

1303

116.66

LINEAR

GL10DH3

9762574

309457

1302

48.67

LINEAR

GL11DH1

9762581

309503

1304

60.9

LINEAR

GL11DH2

9762546

309531

1303

81.4

LINEAR

13

Table 3:2 Part of the Survey Text File (Survey.txt)

Hole_id

Max depth

Dip

Azimuth

GL10DH1

83.4

-90

0

GL10DH2

116.66

-90

0

GL10DH3

48.67

-90

0

GL11DH1

60.9

-90

0

GL11DH2

81.4

-90

0

Table 3:3 Part of the Assay Text File (Assay.txt)

Hole_id

Sample_id

Depth from

Depth to

CaCO 3

MgCO 3

Recovery

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

0

17.32

0

0

0

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

17.32

19.16

0

0

47

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

19.16

31.32

0

0

47

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

31.32

34.36

0

0

47

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

34.36

42.16

0

0

88

Table 3:4 Part of the Geology Text File (Geology.txt)

 

Hole_id

Sample_id

Depth_from

Depth_to

Rock_type

 

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

0

17.32

GNEISS

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

17.32

19.16

GNEISS

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

19.16

31.32

GNEISS

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

31.32

34.36

LIMESTONE

WITH

PEGMATITE

GL10DH1

GL10DH1S1

34.36

42.16

LIMESTONE

WITH

PEGMATITE

3.4. Creation of Database in Surpac

The first step was creating a geological database and loading the CSV files into it. This is a data validation process whereby any data input that was not matching with the definitions made in the database was automatically rejected. After loading the database, drill hole layout and sections of the deposit were extracted from the database for plotting and display using the display module of Surpac. The main purpose of drill hole layout is to help Mining engineers

14

and geologists to familiarize with the plan and drill hole pattern and make conclusions as to which plane to take the sections through.

conclusions as to which plane to take the sections through. Figure 3:1 drill holes location Figure

Figure 3:1 drill holes location

take the sections through. Figure 3:1 drill holes location Figure 3:2 drill hole location (3D space)

Figure 3:2 drill hole location (3D space)

Collar details Legend 88<Grade>100 85<Grade>88 80<Grade>85 65<Grade>80
Collar details
Legend
88<Grade>100
85<Grade>88
80<Grade>85
65<Grade>80
0<Grade>65
Maximum depth
65<Grade>80 0<Grade>65 Maximum depth Figure 3:3 Drill hole display according to limestone

Figure 3:3 Drill hole display according to limestone percentages and their location in 3D space.

15

3.5. Basics statistics

This was done using surpac to determine the statistical properties of the data to be used for geostatistical evaluation and modelling of the ore body. The best means of statistically grouping data is graphical examination using histograms and box plots (Howarth 1984, Garrett 1989). Histograms were generated to be used in detection of multi- modalism and outliers in the data. Statistical measures (e.g. mean, mode, variance, standard deviation and skewness) were computed to show the characteristics of the distribution of the data which indicate the spread and symmetry of the distribution. Statistics of values of composited data in the mineralized zone are shown in Table 3.1. A histogram showing the distribution is shown in Fig 3.3.

Table 3:5 Statistics of CaCO3 Composites

Number of samples

424

Minimum value

40

Maximum value

98.52

Mean

86.306267

Median

90.9112

Variance

200.424415

Standard Deviation

14.157133

Coefficient of variation

0.164034

14.157133 Coefficient of variation 0.164034 Figure 3:4 Histogram of composited raw data showing the

Figure 3:4 Histogram of composited raw data showing the presence of bi-modal distribution of the data.

16

The histogram plot is seen to show a double population (bi-modal distribution) and a co-efficient of variation of 0.164034. The high number of “zeros” seen from the statistical analysis of the data clearly indicates that a lot of data was miss-presented, that is assumed, as zeroes during data entry. Initially the problem is solved by revisiting and re- examining the samples and determining the actual values for the data. However, the case was not possible as the data supplied and being used was taken from the field approximately 20yrs ago and another contact with the samples may not be available. Following the advice from the company, the data was used the way it was received. A top-cut of 40% was applied to boast in advanced estimation of block values and the new histogram formed is shown below in figure 3.4.

and the new histogram formed is shown below in figure 3.4. Figure 3:5 Histogram of composited

Figure 3:5 Histogram of composited raw data applying a top-cut of 40%

3.6. The Ore Outline (3D Model)

From the drill hole layout sections were extracted and ore delineation done by on-screen digitization of points in the clockwise directions to form closed segments. From the wireframe. Sections were created and checked for;

String direction; was changed so that all the string direction was clockwise.

Fold-backs (also called spikes); all spikes were removed.

Excessive number of points.

duplicate points

The closed segments were then joined together, by triangulation methods, to form a wireframe model which was validated to form a solid model that represented the ore outline. The figures below show the segments and the ore/solid model generated from the digitized segments. The solid model thus obtained is shown in figure 2 below.

17

Figure 3:6 Digitised Ore Zone Sections Figure 3:7 Solid Model of the Orebody 18

Figure 3:6 Digitised Ore Zone Sections

Figure 3:6 Digitised Ore Zone Sections Figure 3:7 Solid Model of the Orebody 18

Figure 3:7 Solid Model of the Orebody

18

3.7.Block Model Creation

Steps taken to create the block model are:

Creating an empty block model;

Add constraints; and

Fill the created model with attribute values.

3.7.1. Modeling of empty block

The following information was used to create an empty block model:

block model identification name,

Block model origin,

Block model extent, and

Block size. A user block size of 50 m × 25 m × 3.5 m was used.

3.7.2. Adding constraints

Constraints were added primarily to control the selection of blocks from which interpolation were made or from which information was obtained. The constraints used include topography, where the blocks falling inside the topography were considered as ore and waste while those falling outside the topography were considered as air- blocks, ore/solid model and grade (blocks with grade less than 85%, cutoff grade, were considered as waste while those equals to or above 85% were considered as ore).

considered as waste while those equals to or above 85% were considered as ore). Figure 3:8

Figure 3:8 block model with constraints

19

Legend 85% Grade> 100% 80%<Grade>85% 40%<Grade>80% 20%<Grade>40% 0<Grade>20% Figure

Legend 85% Grade> 100%

80%<Grade>85%

40%<Grade>80%

20%<Grade>40%

0<Grade>20%

Figure 3:9 Constraint block model showing extent of deposit

3.7.3. Assigning attribute values

Attributes used were the properties given/assigned to the blocks that were employed during the optimization process in Whittle software. Some values were assigned directly and others like the grade by interpolation. The assigned attributes are listed in the table below. Table 3:6 Assigned Attributes

ATTRIBUTE NAME

VALUE

Grade

Got by interpolation

Specific gravity(sg) of the rock

1.76

Mining cost adjustment factor(MCAF)

1

Processing cost adjustment factor(PCAF)

1

Rock code

WAST, AIR & ORE

Weathering

Air, waste & ore

20

Table 3:7 A comprehensive table showing the attributes assigned to the block model.

Attribute_name

Type

Decimals

Background

Caco3_id

Float

-

0.000

Caco3_nn

Float

5

0.000

Caco3_ok

Float

5

0.000

Prob06

Float

5

-9999.000

Rock

Calculated

-

iif(weathering=”air”,”

AIR”,

iif(weathering=”ore”,”

ORE”,”WAST”))

Weathering

Character

-

 

Sg

Real

2

1.76

3.8. Methods of Grade Estimations Used

To give the assigned attributes value, estimations of block grade was done using;

Ordinary kriging (ok)

Nearest neighbor (nn)

Inverse distance (id)

Each method was considered against the other and the best (ordinary kriging) was used for assigning estimated block value to the block model to be used for optimization in whittle software. The variogram and interpolation parameters used for estimation by Ordinary Kriging are shown in Tables below:

21

Table 3:8 CaCO3 variogram parameters

Variogram Model

Model Type

: Spherical

Nugget

: 26.331755

Structure

Sill

Range

1 54.715260

60.000m

ANISOTROPY FACTORS Major Axis

Azimuth

= 240o

Dip = 60o

Semi-major Axis

Azimuth

= 240o

Dip = 60o

Minor Axis

Azimuth

= 0o

Dip = 63o

Semi/major ratio

1.00

Minor ratio

1.00

Angle of rotation First Axis

246.00

Second axis

67.73

Third Axis

60.00

Table 3:9 interpolation parameters

Max search distance of major axis

31.000

Max vertical search distance

999

Maximum number of informing samples

15

Minimum number of informing samples

3

22

Figure 3:10 Variogram 1 Limestone (CaCO3) estimated by the OK, ID and NN methods were

Figure 3:10 Variogram 1

Limestone (CaCO3) estimated by the OK, ID and NN methods were reported by applying constraints to the block model such that only kriged/estimated blocks within the constrain file ‘bm_model1_mdl’ were taken into consideration during grade-tonnage calculations. Modeled variogram parameters for these, variogram report files, statistic report files for the block and anisotropic report files are included in the Appendix A section of this report.

Of the block grades estimated by the three methods, only one attribute per grade item is exported to Whittle. For this project only the attribute “prob06” for grade, which contained block value estimated by OK was used for the block model constrained and validated for whittle. The validation and export reports of the block model for whittle are attached to this report on appendix B section. The summarized attributes that were exported to whittle are given in the table below.

23

Table 3:10 Table containing the attributes that were to be exported to whittle for optimization.

Attribute_name

Type

Decimals

Background

Prob06

Float

5

-9999.000

Rock

Calculated

-

iif(weathering=”

air”,”

AIR”,

iif(weathering=”ore”,”

ORE”,”WAST”))

Weathering

Character

-

 

Sg

Real

2

1.76

MCAF

Real

2

1

PCAF

Real

2

1

The weathering attribute was used as the basis for the rock code required by Whittle. Mining cost adjustment factor (MCAF) and processing cost adjustment factors (PCAF) were added as attributes to represent factors for cost adjustments in all blocks for all processing and mining costs referred from a reference block. Mode and parameter whittle export files were generated to be used as import to whittle software for optimization.

3.9. Pit Optimization

Based on the ordinary kriging on the constraint model, 8950 blocks are0 found to be present within the deposit in constraint block model thus obtained, the data is then exported and analyzed using Whittle software to calculate the block economic value of the individual blocks. Once the block economic values have been found, the minimum cut algorithm is used to calculate the blocks present in feasible ultimate pit giving maximum production. Pit optimization is carried out, using Whittle software. The resource block model and the economic and technical parameters are used to produce a set of nested pits. Fig. 4 depicts a summarized flow chart for the pit optimization process.

24

Importation of • Exportation of the parameter file and the content of the block model
Importation of
• Exportation of the parameter file and the content of the block model to whittle using
the "block model to whittle" interface in the surpac software for pit optimization.
block model
into Whittle
• Setting upthe parameter file containing essential economic and technical parameters
as well as the appropriate range of revenue factors needed for optimisation using
FXED in Whittle software.
Preparation of
parameter file
• The factors considered include milling and mining recovery factors, cost figures,
overall pit slopes, mining dilution factors and categories of ore to be processed.
• Microsoft excel is used to prepare a graph from the output data to enhance easy
interpretation.
• The optimal pit is selected based on worst case and best case scenarios.
Generation of
• The best case scenario involves mining out the first pit (the smallest pit)b and then
mining out each subsequent pit shell from the top down, before starting the next pit
shell.
structure arcs
• The worst case scenario consists of mining each bench completely before starting
on the next bench.
• Net Present Value (NPV) is used as the criterion for the selection of the optimal pit
Generation of
pit outlines
• Based on the selected optimal nested pit, the effect of varying the limestone price
while keeping all other economic parameters constant is examined to check the
effect of the changes in limestone price on the NPV.
Analysis of pit
outlines
• Based on the selected optimal nested pit, the effect of varying the mining cost while
keeping all other economic parameters constant including the limestone price is also
examined to check the effect of the changes in mining cost on the NPV.
Exportation of
pit outline into
Surpac for
detailed pit
design
• The optimal pit outline generated by Whittle is exported into Surpac for the detailed
pit design

Figure 3:11A summarized flow chart for the pit optimization process

25

Table 3:11 Cost Figures and Parameters to be used for Optimization

Current mining cost per tone

Ksh 350

Selling price of limestone per tone

Ksh 1200

Capital cost

Ksh 400000000

Mining dilution

20%

Revenue factor range

1

Crushing/processing cost

Included in the mining cost >0

3.10. Pit Design with Surpac

The optimal pit outline generated by Whittle is exported into Surpac for the detailed pit design. However, for this project the whittle software window developed an unexpected problem so that it could not produce the block model details as required for optimization and hence the pit optimization process summarized in figure… could not be carried out. Thus, the optimal pit outlines could not be generated using whittle software with the given constraints for optimal pit design in surpac. Given such a scenario, designing of the open pit can be done in surpac software by first generating the proposed final pit outline. This is obtained by considering the lowest minable point within the ore solid. To get the lowest minable point, the ore solid is first oriented in the Z-X direction then using the sectioning part, a section is selected from which the lowest point will be obtained. The lowest point is then digitized to form a string of the final pit design. However, the generation of a proposed final pit outline in surpac software is based on the extraction of all the limestone ore without the consideration of the economic implications and to a larger extend the resultant effect on the stripping ratio. For the continuation of this project, the design of the final pit outline was carried out in surpac software following the stated procedures. Using the pit design menu in Surpac software, designing of the pit was carried out which involved adding berms, benches and haul roads to the pit outline generated. Table 3.1.3 contains the parameters used in the design of the final pit.

26

Table 3:12 parameters used to undertake the final pit design.

Parameter

Description (brief)

Value used

Bench Slope Angle (Degrees)

Was chosen based on the stability and mechanical ability of the rock both waste and limestone.

75°

Bench Height

As a thumb rule, a bench height is equal to the economic bucket height of an excavator (like shovel or loader) plus 3 m.

10m

Ramp and Haul Road Width

Was decided based on the operating parameters of the trucks and other hauling equipment used in the mine

20m

Ramp Gradient

determine by the bench height and bench slope

10%

Berm Width

Based on the type of haulage equipment to be used

5m

Final Slope Angle

Was dictated largely by the geo-technical stability of the rocks in the mine, bench height and bench slope

45°

Bench Width

Was decided based on the space required for the operation of the equipment on it.

15m

The optimal pit was designed as follows:

(i) Design process;

The method used was to expand the pit by bench height from the pit bottom to the surface topography. Design slope

angles were used as controls for the process to ensure that the pit edge was inclined at the specified design slope angles. Safety berms were inserted at the edge of every bench. A ramp was also inserted following the given parameters and started at the bottom of the pit up to the surface. The ramp also includes a switchback to facilitate better design of the pit.

(ii) Pit-topography intersection;

A Digital Terrain Model (DTM) surface of the designed pit was produced which intersected the topography DTM. The results of the two DTMs intersection were extracted to form pit-topography sting file and a DTM.

(iii) Addition of Haul Road

A ramp to be used for haulage of ore and waste was created on the high elevations as shown in figure 3.1.3 below.

27

A switchback road Final pit bottom
A switchback road
Final pit bottom

Figure 3:12 Pit Design with Switchback Road based on the position of the ore body

28

Figure 3:13 Pit Design with Switchback Road based on the position of the ore body

Figure 3:13 Pit Design with Switchback Road based on the position of the ore body with ore outline/solid

based on the position of the ore body with ore outline/solid Figure 3:14 pit designed with

Figure 3:14 pit designed with surpac based on the position of the ore body including the surface topography.

29

CHAPTER- 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

30

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From the final pit designed in Surpac the volumes of ore and waste as well as the respective tonnages were calculated. The volume of the final pit = 19,611,610 m3

The volume of the ore The volume of waste

Tonnes of ore to be mined

= 2,653,764 m3 = volume of pit – volume of ore

= 19,611,610 – 2,653,764

= 16,957,846 m3 = 2,653,764 × 1.76

= 4,670,624.64 t

Tonnes of waste to be moved = 16,957,846 × 1.2 = 20,349,415.2 t

Stripping ratio

= tonnes of waste to be moved to expose one tonne of ore.

= 20,349,415.2 ÷ 4670624.64

= 4.357

Therefore, 4.357 t of waste will be moved to expose 1t of limestone that is 1:4.357 is the overall stripping ratio.

The designed pit contains 4,670,624.64t of ore at an average grade of 90.27286%. The differences in the tonnages of ore and waste and the average grade of ore in the designed pit and optimal pit are due to the fact that during the pit design, the pit bottom is widened to give adequate room for equipment maneuverability, a ramp is introduced to facilitate haulage of ore and waste and berms were added for safety purposes, all of which lead to the addition of some waste, some ore loss and dilution.

Table 4:1 Results from Final Pit Design using Surpac

Volume (m3)

Tonnage (t)

Caco3 (%)

Ore

4,670,624.64

90.27286%

Waste

20,349,415.2

0

Total

25,020,039.84

 

Stripping Ratio:

Expected Revenue:

1

: 4.357

Ksh. 5,604,749,568

31

CHAPTER- 5 CONCLUSIONS

32

5. CONCLUSIONS

The main basis for process control in the open pit mines design today are majorly computer software and programs for defining and optimizing the open pit mine contour, landfill and production planning. Currently there are many professional software and programs, which include economic evaluation of open pit mine, the geology of the ore body, transport communications and other technological processes. Surpac, as a computer program, is used for the design solutions of surface and underground exploitation, with the presentation of exploration works. To work in the program, a database is created and updated during the unfolding of the process of exploitation. From the database, input data are used to generate computational models in 2D or 3D. Surpac contains tools for data management, geostatistics, modeling, analyzing computer model, defining the quantity and quality of deposits, planning of the ore body exploitation by using different types of computer models, production control and automation of certain processes of exploitation

Whittle program represent a standard for optimization of open-pit mines, or harmonizing of financial viability and optimal exploitation strategy for the open-pit. This program is best used to determine and plan for the life cycle of the mine. It helps present the best way to exploit a deposit without making undue or unexpected losses up to the end of the mine life.

In this project surpac and whittle software were used. From the study, we ascertained the applications of the software and how best they can be used for economic viability of mines. Over and above the stated benefits of using the combination of the two software, the following conclusions were drawn:

(i)

Given any exploration data, Surpac and Whittle software can be used to design an optimal open pit;

(ii)

The final pit designed using the Surpac software contains 4,670,624.64 tonnes of ore at an average grade of 90.27286% and a total volume of material (waste and ore) of 19,611,610 m3. However, the designed pit is not optimal as other factors in the design, especially economic factors, were not successfully included in the design to dictate the shape of the ultimate pit. This was due to the failure of whittle software to perform optimization. The designed pit therefore contains more of waste and more loss of limestone due to dilution than it would be were the pit to be optimized successfully in whittle prior to designing of the final pit in surpac.

(iii)

The overall stripping ratio for the pit was calculated as 1: 4.357.

33

FIRST SEMESTER WORK PLAN

MONTH January February March April May WEEKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
MONTH
January
February
March
April
May
WEEKS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Proposal writing
Introduction
Literature
review
Materials
and
Methods
Progress
presentation,
Preparation
for
presentation.
Final
proposal
defending

34

SECOND SEMESTER WORK PLAN

MONTH June July August September WEEKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
MONTH
June
July
August
September
WEEKS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Design
using
surpac
Data
collection and
Analysis
(Kabini)
Pit
Optimization,
Discussion
and
Conclusion
Report
Writing
Progress
presentation
Final
presentation

35

REFERENCES

Armstrong, D. (1990), Definition of Mining Parameters, Surface Mining (2nd Edition), SME-Online Digital Library.

Dowd P. A, Onur A. H,1992, Optimizing Open Pit Design and Sequencing, Proc. 23rd International APCOM Symposium,1992, pp- 411-422.

Lerchs, H. and Grossmann, I. F. (1965), Optimum Design of Open-Pit Mines, Transactions, Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Vol. LXVIII, pp. 17–24.

Sevim H, Lei D.D., 1998, Problem of production planning in open pit mines. INFOR J. vol. 36, 1–12.

Barnes, M.P., 1980, Computer-Assisted Mineral Appraisal and Feasibility, SME-AIME, New York, pp. 1–167.

Barnes, M.W., 1989, “The Limitations of Popular Techniques for Preproduction Reserve Estimation,” MS thesis, University of Utah, pp.1–86

Bley, A., Boland, N., Fricke, C., and Froyland, G. (2010), A Strengthened Formulation and Cutting Planes for the Open Pit Mine Production Scheduling Problem, Computers and Operations Research, Vol.37, pp. 1641–1647.

Caccetta, L. and Hill, S. P. (2003), An Application of Branch and Cut to Open Pit Mine Scheduling, Journal of Global Optimization, Vol. 27, pp. 349–365.

Hartman H. L. (1987) “Introductory mining engineering” John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 149-150.

Hartman, H.L., 1987, Introductory Mining Engineering, Wiley, New York, pp. 177–187.

Hochbaum, D. and Chen, A. (2000), Performance Analysis and Best Implementations of Old and New Algorithms for the Open-Pit Mining Problem, Operations Research, Vol. 48, No. 6, pp. 894–914.

Koskiniemi, B.C., 1979, “Pit Limit Shell Generation—Hand Methods,” Open Pit Mine Planning and Design, J.T. Crawford and W.A. Hustrulid, eds., SME-AIME, New York, pp. 189–194.

Lerchs, H. and Grossmann, I. F. (1965), Optimum Design of Open-Pit Mines, Transactions, Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Vol. LXVIII, pp. 17–24.

McCarter, M.K., ed., 1985, Design of Non-Impounding Mine Waste Dumps, SME-AIME, New York, pp. 1–192.

McCarter, M.K., 1990, “Operating Considerations for Mine Waste Embankments,” Section 9.2, Surface Mining, 2nd ed., SME-AIME, Littleton, CO.

Myntti, D.C., 1979, “Maintenance and Ancillary Facilities,” Open Pit Mine Planning and Design, J.T. Crawford and W.A. Hustrulid, eds., SME-AIME, New York, pp. 273–278.

36

Newman, A. M., Rubio, E., Caro, R., Weintraub, A., and Eurek, K. (2010), A Review of Operations Research in Mine Planning, Interfaces, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 222–245.

Picard, J.-C. and Smith, B. T. (2004), Parametric Maximum Flows and the Calculation of Optimal Intermediate Contours in Open Pit Mine Design, INFOR Journal, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 143–153.

Picard, J-C. and Queyranne, M. (1982), Selected Applications of Minimum Cuts in Networks, Information Systems and Operational Research (INFOR), Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 394–422.

Soderberg, A., and Rausch, D.O., 1968, “Pit Planning and Layout,” Surface Mining, 1st ed., AIME, New York, pp.

141–165.

Whittle, J. (1990), Open Pit Optimization, Surface Mining (2nd Edition), SME Online Digital Library.

Zhang, M. (2006), Combining Genetic Algorithms and Topological Sort to Optimize Open-Pit Mine Plans, Mine Planning and Equipment Selection (MPES) – Cardu, M., Ciccu, R., Lovera, E. and Michelotti, E. (eds.), Proceedings of 15th International Symposium, pp. 1234–1239.

Zhao, Y. and Kim, Y. C. (1992), A New Optimum Pit Limit Design Algorithm, Application of Computers and Operations Research in the Mineral Industry, Vol.23, pp. 423–434.

37

APPENDIX A: VARIOGRAM, BLOCK STATISTICS AND KRIGING REPORT SAMPLES

APPENDIX A: VARIOGRAM, BLOCK STATISTICS AND KRIGING REPORT SAMPLES Variogram block report 38
APPENDIX A: VARIOGRAM, BLOCK STATISTICS AND KRIGING REPORT SAMPLES Variogram block report 38

Variogram block report

38

Block model report Block model report continuation 39
Block model report Block model report continuation 39

Block model report

Block model report Block model report continuation 39

Block model report continuation

39

Block model report continuation Ordinary Kriging report for the block 40

Block model report continuation

Block model report continuation Ordinary Kriging report for the block 40

Ordinary Kriging report for the block

40

Ordinary Kriging report for the block continuation 41

Ordinary Kriging report for the block continuation

41

APPENDIX B: WHITTLE VALIDATION REPORT AND BLOCK MODEL REPORT.

Surpac to Whittle Block Model Validation Report

Aug 16, 2017

Execution Timestamp: 2017-08-16 14:28:26

Testing number of exported blocks in all directions

Validation that number of blocks less than 1000 passed.

Testing each block for validation

Grade values greater than 0 passed.

Mcaf values greater than 0 passed.

Pcaf values greater than 0 passed.

Rock code is of character or integer type passed.

Rock code names less than 5 characters passed.

Rock code names not null passed.

Rock code names not "rock" or "ROCK" passed.

Sg attribute is of real type passed.

Sg values not negative or null passed.

Air blocks all have a 0 sg value passed.

Zone attribute is of integer type passed.

Zone values are not negative passed.

Grade values are not negative passed

Volume adjustment attribute is of real type passed.

Volume adjustment between 0 and 1 passed.

Validation of block model passed.

42

Gemcom Software International Aug

16 2017

Block model report

 

Block Model: bm_model1.mdl

Constraints used

Unconstrained

Weathering

Volume

Tonnes

Prob06

Sg

waste

10956914

12392

0

1.76

ore

1083086

1906231

0.862

1.76

air

840000

0

0

0

Grand Total

12880000

1918623

0.85643

1.76