WP6 UPSTREAM SYSTEM VALIDATION AND PLANT OPERATION MONITORING

UPM (lead), 3GSM, ARNÓ, VA Erzberg GmbH, LTU, Maxam, MUL, MINERA ORGIVA, TU GRAZ

The objective of this work package is to assess whether the solutions developed in WPs 2 and 3 result in an overall operational benefit in terms of improved plant throughput, increased product grade and reduced energy consumption. A KPI approach is established in order to properly conduct the upstream/downstream monitoring and validation, and to guarantee SLIM’s technical excellence and replicability, as well as demonstrating its impact in the reduction of critical plant operating indicators, such as energy consumption and environmental footprint.

6.1. KPI DEFINITION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF TARGET VALUES

UPM, MUL, LTU, ARNO, ERZBERG (lead), ORGIVA, MAXAM

This task aims at providing the elements for a fair and transparent assessment of the real improvements obtained from the on-site deployment of the SLIM solution in a mine-to-mill scheme. A set of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) will be defined. Each indicator must be representative, measurable and, as far as possible, establish clear relationships with the framework boundary conditions of the monitoring and validation activities. The target value for each KPI will then successfully translate the project goals to quantified figures. The preliminary classification of relevant KPIs is shown below:
Scope 1 – Upstream (Field: Parameters)
Rock characterisation: Hardness, fracturing and geology, muck pile shape
Explosive characterisation: Energy, detonation velocity
Blast output: Muckpile shape, Size distribution
Blast damage: Depth of damage into the remaining rock mass. P-wave velocity of the remaining rock mass
Vibrations: PPV (Peak Particle Velocities at selected locations)
Environmental impacts: Explosive detonation fumes and nitrogen leakage ratios, dust emissions
Scope 2 – Downstream (Field: Parameters)
Processing plant performance: Plant feed critical particle sizes or percentage passings, Primary crusher throughput,
Energy consumption, Concentrate grade, Recovery rate; Plant overall yield.

6.2. TOOLS AND/OR METHODOLOGIES FOR KPI ASSESSMENT

UPM, MUL, LTU, ARNO, ERZBERG (lead), ORGIVA, MAXAM

Since the set of KPI and their target values have been established in Task 6.1, the goal of this task is to detail how all the KPI are going to be measured and assessed from the outcomes of the validation tests. This task will specify the chosen tool and methodology to be applied in the assessment execution, as can be seen in the table below:
Field Assessment methodology and techniques
Rock characterisation UAV and video photogrammetry for geometric and geomechanical modelling.
Photogrammetric and LIDAR measurements to quantify rock fracture intensity
Explosive characterisation Cylinder test energy data, in-hole detonation velocity measurement.
Blast output UAV muckpile survey and fragment size distribution. Digital image analysis / laser
Blast damage Crosshole sonic logging to assess rock damage in blastholes.
Vibrations Three-component velocity transducers (geophones), surface monitoring seismographs.
Environmental impacts Dust sampling, oxidizer/fuel composition analysis, nitrogen concentration in water readings
Processing plant performance Feed composition. Feed size distribution. Primary and/or secondary crusher motors current monitoring. Throughput or process time measurement. Grade analysis. Ore throughput record.

6.3. MONITORING KPIS DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE VALIDATION PHASE

UPM, MUL, LTU, ARNO, ERZBERG, ORGIVA (lead), MAXAM

The objective of this task is to monitor the obtained KPIs from 6.1 in a close-loop way (considering their values and their nature) to ensure that results of the scaling-up and replication analyses are coherent with the real outcomes while they are being tested iteratively. This task also includes the definition of the data portfolio needed from the validation phase and their default data formats.
Subtask 6.3.1. Commissioning of monitoring systems in the plant of Minera de Orgiva. (UPM, ORGIVA)
Belt scales will be installed at different places selected in task 6.1. Tentative options would be: amount of material that bypass the primary crusher, amount of material that is feed to the secondary crusher.
Current (Amp)-meters in primary and secondary crusher.
Key processing plant parameters monitoring.

6.4. SPECIFICATION, DEFINITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE UPSTREAM VALIDATION TRIALS

UPM (lead), MUL, LTU, ERZBERG, ORGIVA, 3GSM

In this task, the final outcomes of the validation phase are collected to ensure that the analyses performed are presented in a coordinated way. In order to facilitate the comparison of results and the elaboration of conclusions, a best practices manual will be delivered once all monitoring and validation activities are completed. The following subtasks will take place:

Subtask 6.4.1: Selection of 3 blast patterns towards different fragmentations to identify the design that optimizes the overall performance of the processing plant. Use of matched pairs technique for blasts at different places in mine. 10 validation blasts (VBs) will be carried out (UPM, ORGIVA). Extensive monitoring of validation blasts: geomechanical properties of rock mass, geometry, and explosive performance (UPM, ORGIVA).

Subtask 6.4.2: Verification of effect of blast minimization patterns on plant throughput
The goals of this subtask are (i) to verify that blasts with minimal vibrations yield production results that are not worse than those from previous standard blast patterns at ERZBERG, and (ii) to verify the blast fragmentation prediction methodology from WP2 with MWD/BlastMetrix based joint factor.
To achieve these goals the following actions will be carried out:
Planning of work; scientific and practical (ERZBERG, MUL, UPM)
Detailed geological characterization (ERZBERG, MUL)
MWD characterization of rock mass (LTU, MUL, ERZBERG)
Photogrammetry to measure jointing (MUL, LTU)
Choice of blast patterns for optimal vibrations, using matched pairs techniques (MUL, ERZBERG)
Drilling of rounds (ERZBERG)
Charging and blasting of rounds (ERZBERG)
Far-field blast vibrations measurements (MUL, ERZBERG)
Fragmentation; UAV (MUL+3GSM) and 2D digital images (LTU, UPM)
Muckpile digging and hauling times (MUL, ERZBERG)
Crushing energy (tons/hr and kWh/ton) of truck loads (all)
Downstream measurements (MUL, ERZBERG)
Analysis of throughput data (MUL, UPM, LTU, ERZBERG)
Evaluation of new fragmentation model with MWD/photogrammetry-based joint factor (MUL, UPM, LTU)
Reporting (MUL, UPM, LTU, ERZBERG)

6.5. DOWNSTREAM ASSESSMENT OF OVERALL PLANT OPTIMIZATION

UPM, LTU, ORGIVA (lead)

Fragmentation monitoring of ROM with image analysis and/or LIDAR (LTU, UPM, ORGIVA).
Monitoring of KPIs of the plant during the processing of ROM from VBs (ORGIVA)
Compilation of data, analysis and reporting (UPM).

WP OVERVIEW