Saimm technical presentation
Download
1 / 41

SAIMM Technical Presentation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 225 Views
  • Uploaded on

SAIMM Technical Presentation . 15 July 2010. Index. Vision and Positioning APMOT Production Module at a glance Standard level and block Geology Scheduling Levelling – Team Sharing Costing Module Approach Rules Case Studies. What is APMOT?.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'SAIMM Technical Presentation ' - paul


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Index
Index

  • Vision and Positioning

  • APMOT Production Module at a glance

    • Standard level and block

    • Geology

    • Scheduling

    • Levelling – Team Sharing

  • Costing Module

    • Approach

    • Rules

  • Case Studies


What is apmot
What is APMOT?

  • Anglo Platinum Mining Optimisation Tool

    • APMOT was developed for Anglo Platinum and is a non-graphicalrules based production scheduling solution that allows a full production schedule to be done very quickly.

    • In this way many different mine design and production assumptions can be tested and the impact compared.

  • The APMOT solution also includes a financial module that calculates activity based costs and labouras well asvaluations for the given schedule.


Apmot vision
APMOT Vision

A solution that allows rapid generation of a reliable production schedule and associated economics so that multiple options/scenarios can be considered and thereby determine the ‘optimal’ deterministic schedule. This required a solution that had:

  • Enough flexibility and speed to study multiple options

  • Evaluation of grade at an acceptable level of confidence

  • Linking Labour and other costs to the production schedule to allow true activity based costing

  • Incorporating costs and capital to allow NPV optimisation

  • Incorporating Global Assumptions to allow trade-off’s

  • Allow iteration and dynamic changes without required re-work

  • Allow checking against constraints to ensure the production profile is realistic, these should include:

    • Ventilation

    • Men and material logistics

    • Scraping, tramming and hoisting constraints


Apmot positioning
APMOT Positioning

Short term

Long term

Business Plan Program

MES Options

Top Down Goals

Business Plan

Tons and Ounces

Budget

Iteration

APMOT PM

Trade Offs and Options

Cadsmine

Project Stage Gates

Scoping – L2C

Pre-Feasibility L2B

Feasibility – L2A

Execution – L1E

Desktop – L3

Operations – L1


Apmot positioning1
APMOT Positioning

Short term

Long term

APMOT PM

Operations Scheduling

Group Value

Optimisation

Business Plan Program

Iteration

Cadsmine

EssBase

MES Options

Top Down Goals

Business Plan

Tons and Ounces

Budget


Apmot positioning2
APMOT Positioning

Short term

Long term

APMOT PM

Asset Optimisation

Budget Driven by and linked to Cadsmine profile

Iteration

APMOT

Labour and Costs

Optimisation proven in APMot before incorporation in plan

Business Plan Program

Cadsmine

MES Options

Top Down Goals

Business Plan

Tons and Ounces

Budget

Project costs feeds into short and long term plans

Iteration

Opex modelling already done for projects

APMOT - Projects

Labour and Costs

APMOT PM

Trade Offs and Options

Cadsmine

Projects


Apmot positioning3
APMOT Positioning

Short term

Long term

APMOT PM

Operations Scheduling

Group Value

Optimisation

APMOT PM

Asset Optimisation

APMOT

Labour and Costs

Cadsmine

EssBase

MES Options

Top Down Goals

Business Plan

Tons and Ounces

Budget

APMOT - Projects

Labour and Costs

APMOT PM

Trade Offs and Options

Cadsmine

Project Stage Gates

Scoping – L2C

Pre-Feasibility L2B

Feasibility – L2A

Execution – L1E

Desktop – L3

Operations – L1


Summary apmot positioning
Summary APMOT Positioning

Current Ops

Geological Representation

Mine Design & Layout

Activity Scheduling

Production Plan Costing, Labour Comps & Valuation

New Projects

(BUDGET CREATION)

(BUDGET MANAGEMENT)

A

C

T

U

A

L

S

Variance Tracking

Multiple plans from multiple operations

Short Term Budget

Asset Level Performance Management

5Yr & Life of Mine Plan

Group Valuation & Long Term Strategy

Industry Dynamics Simulation

Portfolio Level Performance Management


Apmot a half level as a series of blocks of ground
APMOT – A Half Level as a series of Blocks of Ground

Half-level 1 EAST

Geological losses

Drive to Reef

Half-level 2 EAST

Foot Wall Drive

Raise Line

Shaft

1

2

3

4

5

Back length

Block Width

  • A standard half level and block

  • Standard Half Level - An area containing all the mining activities from the apex either east/west or north/ south on a level

  • Standard block - The smallest self-contained production unit encompassing development, ledging, equipping, stoping and sweepings, vamping and reclamation.


Apmot standard block for scattered breast
APMOT - Standard Block for Scattered Breast

Standard Block

ASG

ASG

All Block Dimensions are on strike and dip

ASG

ASG

Raise Line

ASG

ASG

Foot Wall Drive

Block Length on Dip

Cross cut

Cubbies

ASG

ASG

Travelling Way

Dip

Step over

Block Width on Strike





Natural schedule
Natural Schedule

36 000

2021


Team sharing
Team Sharing

Choose what to level

Choose which excavations to include and assign priorities

Choose which levels, half levels or blocks to include and assign priorities


Team sharing levelling
Team Sharing – “Levelling”

With team sharing it is possible to introduce constraints and priorities for:

  • Any mining activity – Limit the number of drop-raise crews

    • Easy to demonstrate that one crew is enough on average, but two crews are too little to meet the proposed stoping schedule – multiple drop raises may be required simultaneously.

  • Include different excavations, only flat development, all development, on reef only, haulages only.

  • Assign priorities, haulage never stops, or on-reef always takes precedence.

  • The above configuration can be applied to any portion off-, or the whole mine.

  • Areas of the mine can be prioritised

    • Shaft over-stoping higher priority

    • Big strike levels higher priority for tail management

    • Each half level can be levelled individually, or a global levelling can be done.


Levelled schedule
Levelled Schedule

17 500

2021



Modelling detail

Data

Modelling

Modelling Detail

High-level modelling

Extrapolation

Tonnage and m2 profiles only

Detailed Analysis of Cost Drivers

Assumed Fixed Variable Splits

Variable and flat labour modelling of teams

Actual Fixed Variable Cost Splits

Assumed Fixed Variable Splits

Labour modelling per designation

Assumed Fixed Variable Splits

No Labour Modelling

Tonnage and m2 profiles only

Detailed CADSMine schedule

Detailed APMOT schedule



Labour modelling labour rules
Labour Modelling - Labour Rules

  • Rules can be embedded “if” and conditional statements

  • These types of rules are derived and validated per designation, per activity, per entity

  • Labour in essence is derived from first principles.

  • For Concept and Desktop studies, Labour teams are modelled as either fixed teams for LoM or 100% variable with production. The approach can be summarised as follows:

Process followed per activity, per entity

Derive team from designation list

Compile cost per team

Decide on Fixed or variable

Apply drivers to team cost and counts


Define labour structure
Define Labour Structure

Customized Job Grade Definitions


Define labour rules
Define Labour Rules

Define Rule that drives number of teams




Case study 1 mothballed shaft re evaluated

Questions/Concerns regarding 2007 planning

Production levels were too low to justify the overhead costs.

There was uncertainty regarding the ramp up period and desired level of production.

Since there were several levels with limited remaining production, it was not clear for how long any particular production level could be maintained.

There were opinion differences regarding suitable crew efficiencies.

Previous scheduling resulted in a large unprofitable tail.

The Mining Engineer was tasked to:

Determine a suitable production level.

Schedule an appropriate ramp-up period.

Evaluate the impact of using several different crew efficiencies – was there enough face length for additional crews?

Optimise the tail.

Case Study 1– Mothballed shaft Re-Evaluated


Case study 1 mothballed shaft re evaluated1
Case Study 1– Mothballed shaft Re-Evaluated

Development completed

Details of Scheduling durations for selected activity

Details of delays in selected activity - Raise


Case study 1 mothballed shaft re evaluated2
Case Study 1– Mothballed shaft Re-Evaluated

Peak of 36 000m²

Levels with little mining remaining

Separate Decline

Long life levels

Higher grade


Case study 1 mothballed shaft re evaluated3
Case Study 1– Mothballed shaft Re-Evaluated

18 000 m² can be maintained

Second decline as replacement

  • Once the model has been built it is easy to iteratively:

  • Change crew efficiencies to a consensus level and check the impact on production level and costs

  • Improve the grade model for more accurate ounces

  • Change the sequence of mining or add additional construction, equipping or capital activities.

Higher grade up front – close of levels

Long life levels as base


Case study 2 improving a business case in a capital constrained environment
Case Study 2 – Improving a business case in a capital constrained environment

  • Two decline shafts ramping up to 3 million tons annually from 9 levels each.

  • It was requested to:

    • Reduce or postpone capital.

    • Reduce costs.

    • Reduce perceived risks due to the development and stoping rates.

  • This translated into the following options which would be modelled in APMOT:

    • Reducing the number of levels from 9 to 7, thereby reducing capital and working cost development.

    • Consider the effect of reduced development rates on each option

    • Consider the effect of reduced stoping rates on each option.


Case study 2 improving a business case in a capital constrained environment1
Case Study 2 – Improving a business case in a capital constrained environment

  • The following were built in APMOT

    • 6 options were scheduled depicting all the permutations of

      • high/conservative development rates

      • high/conservative stoping rates and

      • 7/9 levels



Case study 2 conclusions
Case Study 2 Conclusions constrained environment

  • The 7 level option ramps up 1-2 years slower than the 9 level option.

  • Regardless of the production rates, it was possible to man to full production.

  • The higher development rates yielded slightly higher total annual production.

  • The lower stoping rates had less of a tail.

    This allowed an informed decision to be made regarding the postponing or reducing of capital and the impact of these decisions on the business case of the project.


Case study 3 decline position
Case Study 3 – Decline position constrained environment

  • A decision had to be made regarding the position of a decline for the next phase of a project. Additional considerations were:

    • Mining through a major fault

    • Total strike length and length of conveyors

    • Production in the tail

    • Capital required

    • Surface infrastructure required


Case study 3 decline position1
Case Study 3 – Decline position constrained environment

  • 9 Different models were scheduled and costed in APMOT

  • The results showed that:

    • Capital estimates did not vary significantly across the options.

    • Cost were impacted by the duration that a steady state could be maintained

    • There were not any great variances in working cost rates.

    • Option 1,3,5,8,9 were chosen to be optimised further at a higher total volume.


Case study 3
Case Study 3 constrained environment

  • Improving the production rates and volume of mining resulted in:

    • Significantly better tail management with the total mine maintaining the higher volume of production.

    • Life of mine was shortened by 5-6 years.

    • Significantly increased NPV.

    • This allowed the option with the best NPV to be put forward with confidence.

    • Upside and downside scenarios could be quantified through actual scheduling and the impact evaluated in the cost model.

    • All work was completed within a three month period.


Trade off between time and level of detail

39 constrained environment

Trade-Off Between Time and Level of Detail.

- Time Axis +

Current Operations

Feasibility

  • Low Level of Detail –

  • - Hand Drawn Mine Design or existing design

  • - Large single Geozones

  • Average Grade

  • Standard Block Sizes

  • High Level Activities i.e. Stoping, on-reef dev and off reef dev

  • Can replicate scheduling to all blocks

  • No Significant Data gathering required

Time – 2 to 3 weeks per unique option including data

Pre-feas

- Level of Detail of Input Variables +

  • High Level of Detail–

  • - Detailed Mine Design

  • - Individual Geozones

  • Grade per horizon per geozone

  • Individual block sizing

  • Detailed Activities i.e. stoping, ledging, equiping, FWD, breakway etc

  • All activities scheduled

  • Replication of schedule to blocks in same Geozone and design

  • Significant data gathering required

Time – 1 to 2 weeks per unique option including data

Concept Study

Time – 3 days to 2 Week per unique option including data

Desk Top Study

Time – 1 day to 1 Week per unique option including data


Conclusions
Conclusions constrained environment

In conclusion APMOT has achieved the following for Anglo Platinum:

  • Ability to produce a production schedule for a particular mine design within days to weeks depending on level of detail.

  • Therefore the generation of multiple production options and production schedules to determine ‘optimal’ that meets strategic objectives required.

  • Quick adjustment of schedule to test different ‘what-if’ scenarios (change team efficiencies, back lengths etc).

  • Linking of economics to the production schedule (activity costs, labour complements, revenue, profit and value).

    Anglo Platinum are now able to rigorously test different production strategies and optimise the mine design and schedule within the constraints defined.


Thank you and questions
Thank you and Questions constrained environment

Thank you to the SAIMM for this opportunity to do this presentation and expose to other mining houses the work that we are doing to improve our mining business.

Questions?


ad