Benjamin C. Koskiniemi A M A X Arizona, Inc.

Benjamin C . Koskiniemi i s currently the manager of mining and geology for AMAX Arizona, Inc. He graduated from Michigan College of Mining and Technology with a B.S. in mining engineering and a B.S. in engineering administration. He has occupied the following positions: mining engineer for Kennecott Copper Corp. in Salt Lake City, mine evaluation engineer of AMAX in Denver, and mining engineer and later chief mine engineer of ANAMAX Mining Co.

Introduction
When evaluating any ore body, one of the first questions concerns the ore reserves. In the case of an open plt mine, thls 1s not possible to answer reliably until the ultimate (final) pit limits have been established. Techniques used in designing an ultimate pit are classed as ( 1 ) manual, ( 2 ) computer, and ( 3 ) comb~ned manual-computer. This chapter will describe how manual techniques can be ut~lizedin designing an ultlmate pit Certaln economic and deslgn criteria must be established before the actual design begins In order to beg~ndesigning an ultimate pit, it wlll be assumed that the engineer already has the following data available (1 ) vertlcal sections, ( 2 ) horizontal sections for each level, ( 3 ) stripping curve, (4) bench height, (5) bank slope angle between levels, ( 6 ) level berm width, ( 7 ) roadway width, (8) pit slope angles at ultimate pit 11mits (estimated average including roads and ramps and between roads and ramps), and ( 9 ) mlnimum width of pit bottom.

SURFACE OVERBURDEN TOP OF ROCK

WASTE ROCK

O R E BLOCKS BY LEVEL WITH GRADE ( % I

Fig. 2. Vertical section.

wh~ch consist of cross, longitudinal, and radial sections as illustrated in Flg. 1. These sections should include the mineral block inventory and surface topography as minimum requirements. An example of a vertical section 1s presented in Fig. 2. If there are materials of significantly different specific gravity, these areas should also be identified. This is especially important when the stripping ratio is on a tonnage basis, metric tons waste:metric tons ore (short tons waste:short tons ore). The pit slope angles to be used when working with the vertical sections are the average angles, which include allowances for haul roads and ramps. These angles (see Fig. 3 ) are approximated, based on pre-

Design
Hand methods of ultimate pit design usually begin with vertical sections (Soderberg and Rausch, 1968) he pit limits are first located on the vertical sections,
LONGITUDINAL SECTION

HAUL ROAD

AVERAGE P I T SLOPE ANGL

ORE L I N E

P I T SLOPE ANGLE BETWEEN ROADS

-A

Fig. 1. Plan of ore body.

Fig. 3. Pit slope angles.

190

Open Pit Mine Planning and Design

REVENUE COVERS COSTS AND DEPRECIATION

REVENUE COVERS COST ONLY. DOES NOT PROVIDE A CONTRlBUTlON TOWARDS DEPRECIATION

Fig. 5. Economic pit limits (Halls, 1970).

stripping ratio is determined from the stripping curve. The lengths of ore and waste along the pit limits are measured, and the stripping ratio (W:O) is calculated on the basis of these measurements (adjusting, when necessary, for changes in specific gravity). The calculated stripping ratio is compared to the break-even stripping ratio for the grade calculated and if the calculated ratio is less than break-even, the pit limits are expanded; but, if the calculated ratio is greater, the pit limits are reduced in size. These approximations continue until the pit limit is found that conforms to the stripping curve. Each ore body and each section within an ore body usually presents a different set of conditions In Fig. 6, the pit bottom is in waste; therefore, only the ore grade
SURFACE

ORE

GRADE

% Cu

Fig. 4. Stripping curve.

Itminary estimates of anticipated p ~ dimensions, t road and ramp requirements, and pit slope stability studies t are located on each section so the ore The p ~ limits grade along the pit limit line supports a stripping ratio corresponding to the break-even or allowable stripping ratio. Illustrated In Fig. 4 is the stripping curve used to evaluate the typlcal sections. Break-even stripping ratio signifies that the costs used include all direct costs. Depreciation is usually also included Allowable stripping ratio usually signifies use of a profit factor in addition to direct costs and depreciation (Erickson, 1968) An illustration from Halls (1970) that depicts the pit limits based on use of these different cost assumptions is shown in Fig. 5. The design methods described apply to any of the cost assumptions. If the stripping curve includes depreciation and profit, it may be prudent to at least locate the surface intercept for the direct cost pit to ensure that permanent plant facilities and waste dumps are not planned within these limits Locatlng the pit limit on each vertical section is a trial and error process usually requiring a number of approximations. Considerable judgment is required on the part of the engineer during each phase of the design process. By visually observing the ore grade distribution on the sections and relating these to the break-even stripping ratios, a first pit limit approximation is arbitrarily made. The grade of the ore along the pit limit intercept selected is calculated, and the break-even

Fig. 6. Pit limits, bottom in waste.

Hand Methods

191

and ore waste intercepts along the slope lines are used In determining the break-even strrpping ratios and locatlng the final plt limits. Each slope is evaluated ~ndependently.On the right side, the grade is estimated at 0 8% Cu, and thls supports a break-even stripping ratio of 6:1 (waste:ore) as determined from the stripping curve in Fig. 4. Assuming that this grade wlll be the same along any slope llne in this area, the line is found that gives a 6:l ratio at the designed average final plt slope angle: length of X Y waste -6 length of Y Z ore - 1 ' On the left side, the estimated 0 6% Cu grade supports a 3.2.1.0 break-even stripping ratio, and the slope line meeting this condition is located. If the ore grade changes as the slope llne is moved, the required break-even stripping ratio is also changed. In Fig 7, the ore extends to depth, and therefore, the plt bottom w~llbe In ore. The pit bottom IS designed at ~ t s minimum width, and the ore along the bottom is also used to calculate the break-even stripping ratios. Each slope is assumed to be ~nfluenced by one-half of the ore exposed along the pit bottom From Fig. 4, a grade of 0.52% Cu has a break-even str~pping ratio of 2.1,and the ult~mate pit slope meetIng this condition 1s located:

Fig. 8. Pit limits, bottom and slope in ore.

The pit bottom is designed at its minimum width, and the ore along the entire bottom IS used to calculate the break-even stripping ratio for the slope in waste. Equating pit limit distances directly is acceptable when working with parallel sections, but it can be very Inaccurate when dealing with radial sections. Fig. 9

2 length of X Y waste -1 length of Y Z 2' ore

In Fig. 8, the ore extends to depth on an incline wlth the pit bottom and one slope completely In ore.
SURFACE
/

WASTE

Fig. 7. Pit limits, bottom in ore.

Fig. 9. Radial section, area of influence.

192

Open Pit Mine Planning and Design

illustrates, in plan, why it IS not feaslble to locate the final pit limlt on a vertical radial section simply by dlvldlng the waste dlstance by the ore dlstance when determining the break-even strlpplng ratlo. On the basis of simple geometrlc shapes, the stripping ratio in plan is approximately 7.5: 1, if the waste length XY IS twlce the ore length YZ The stripplng ratlo on the vertical sectlon would actually be measured at 2.1. If the surface Intercept was at X' with X ' Y being equal to YZ, the stripplng ratio in plan is 3: 1. On the vertical sectlon, ~t would measure at 1 : 1. This means that the break-even strlpping ratio as determined from the strlpping curve must be adjusted before being applied to a vertical radial sectlon. In this example, Flg. 10 illustrates the correction factors required to measure distances directly In locating the pit llmits on the radlal sectlons. When the ultlmate plt limits have been located on each of the vertical sections, a preliminary ore reserve can be estimated from the sectlons Flrst, the plt 11mlt on each section must be compared to the adjolnlng sections to see that a logical relationship exlsts in regard to mlnabillty of the ore body. When calculating tonnages, parallel sectlons usually do not present a problem, and the area of influence is taken as halfway between adjolnlng sections In the case of radial sections, the tonnages can be calculated by methods dlscussed by Popoff (1966) or by the sector methods first discussed by Soderberg (1959).

The final ore reserve estlrnates are calculated from level plans (horizontal sections) wlth the plt limits for each level determined from a composite mlne plan map. The mine plan map IS constructed from the vertical sections. As the first step In preparing the composite, the locations of the pit bottom and the surface mtercepts of the plt l~mitsare transferred from the vertlcal sectlons to the plan map. If a vertical section does not have a single continuous slope llne from the pit bottom to the surface intercept, any changes are also transferred to the plan map. The ore Intercepts can also be located, if desired. The actual designing of the composite plan generally begins with the pit bottom. The points from the sections usually present a very irregular pattern, both vertically and horizontally. In smooth~ng these and designing the bottom bench, the engineer has several things to keep in mind. ( 1 ) averaging the break-even stripping ratios for adjoining sections, (2) use of simple geometrlc patterns for ease of design, ( 3 ) location of ramp to pit bottom, and (4) watching for patterns that mlght lead to slope stability problems. It should be remembered that the design is Intended to optimize ore recovery and maximize profits; therefore, the design configuration must follow the ore, but because thls is usually a cut and try method, the simpler the geometric shape of the bottom level, the easier it is to deslgn the remainder of the plt. The llne plotted for each level on the composite plan is generally the median line, which is the contour elevation midway between the level elevation and the elevation of the next higher level, as shown in Flg. 11. The final pit limit dewgn will also usually include any roads that wlll be in the final pit slope. In prellmlnary designs, the roads sometimes are not shown, and the
X

- DENOTES
LEVEL

LOCATION OF MEDIAN LINES

nap~~fl ,
ANGLE LEVEL BERM W l DTH FINAL PIT LIMIT

MEASURED

STRIPPING

RATIO

BENCH HEIGHT

ON RADIAL

SECTION

Fig. 10. Stripping curve for radial section.

Fig. 11. Location of median lines, section A-A of Fig. 12.

Hand Methods

193

medlan llnes will be based on the flatter average overall pit slope. Once the bottom level has been established, the p ~ t deslgn progresses toward the surface. Polnts for the level median lrnes are located on the plan map, and these are usually uniformly spaced and are dependent on the angles of the final plt slopes. The points for each level are connected to complete the design, as shown In Fig. 12. Care must be exercised, especlally if dlfferent areas of the pit have dlfferent slope angles. It IS also Important that condltlons that can lead to slope fallures are not incorporated Into the pit deslgn. An example of thls would be an area that bulges Into the plt, especlally in a potentially unstable area When the composlte ultlmate plt plan IS completed, the plt llm~tsare transferred to the lndlv~duallevel plans (see Flg. 13). The plt can then be dlvlded Into sectors to determine whether the break-even stripping ratlo requirements have been achieved. Thls can be done by measuring the lengths of ore and waste on each level at the pit llm~twlthin a glven sector This wlll provide the data for calculating the actual strlpplng ratio along the plt limit intercept. The ore grade is calculated by measuring the lengths of the dlfferent ore zones exposed in the sector and gettlng a weighted
W

y MEDIAN

LINE

- WASTE

BLOCK ASSAYS (%j

Fig. 13. Level plan with ultimate pit limit.

average grade. The strlpplng curve IS checked to determine what break-even strlpplng ratlo goes with the calculated grade, and thls ratio is compared to the calculated stripplng ratlo. If there are any anomalous sectors, the plan can be revlewed to see how ~t m~ght be affected ~f ~t were shlfted In a given direction. The stripplng ratlos at the plt llmlts can also be determlned for each sector by overlaying the composlte plan on the individual level plans and marking the ore contacts on the composlte plan and planlmeterlng the ore and waste zones. The stripping rat~oscan also be compared by transferring the plt limits from the ultimate plt plan to the vertlcal sectlons It should be kept in mind that the break-even and allowable strlpplng ratlos are the ratlos at the final plt surface and do not reflect the overall stripplng ratlo for a sectlon, sector, or the entire ore body. The final ore reserves and overall strlpplng ratios are determlned from the level maps. The ore tons and grade, and the waste tons wlthln the ultlmate plt Ilm~ts, are determined for each level, and these are accumulated to arrive at the mlne totals. Ore 1s considered to be that material within the pit limits havlng a grade equal to or greater than the grade from the stripping curve at a break-even stripping ratlo of zero. Thls 1s

Fig. 12. composite ultimate pit plan.

194

Open Pit Mine Planning and Design

generally called the ore reserve cutoff grade. In Fig. 4, the cutoff grade is 0.3% Dividing the total mine waste tons by the total ore tons results in the overall average str~pping ratio for the ore body. Open pit vs. underground mlnlng is also a consideratlon when h ~ g h strlpplng ratlos are involved. Glll ( 1966), although not mentlonlng underground mlnlng, states, "high waste to ore ratios should not be avoided if there 1s enough grade, or value, to mine the materlal at a suitable profit." Pana and Davey (1973) state further that, "The dlstinctlon can best be made by determinlng which minlng method generates the largest net profit."

dolng some hand deslgn. Thls should give h ~ m more confidence in the results obtalned from computer techniques, if that IS his primary method of deslgn.

References
Enckson, J. D , 1968, "Long-Range Open Pit Plannlng," Mining Engrneerrtlg, Apr~l, pp. 75-78 G111, D. K., 1966, "Open Pit Plannlng," Mrtling Congress Journal, July, pp. 48-51 Halls, J L., 1970, "The Bas~cEconomics of Open Plt Minlng," Proceedrngs, Sympos~umon the Theoretical Background to the Plannlng of Open Pit Mlnes w ~ t h Specla1 Reference to Slope Stabdlty, South Afrlcan Inst~tute of Mlnlng and Metallurgy, Johannesburg Pana, M T , and Davey, R K , 1973, "Pit Plannlng and Des~gn," S M E Minrng Engrneerrng Handbook, A. B. Cummins and Gwen, I A , eds., AIME, New York, pp
10-17, 17-19.

Conclusions
The ultimate (final) plt limits must be determined before the ore reserves can be estimated. Hand methods are still widely used, and although they are gradually being replaced by computer methods, it is surely the computer, some not becomlng a lost art. Even w ~ t h amount of hand des~gnis required In the prellm~nary stages of evaluation and as a check on the final project In fact, there is probably no better way for an englneer to get to know the ore body he IS worklng wlth than by

Popoff, D. C , 1966, "Comput~ngReserves of Mlneral Deposits Prlnc~plesand Conventional Methods," Information Clrcular 8283, US Bureau of Mlnes Soderberg, A , 1959, "Elements of Long-Range Open Plt Plann~ng," M i r l ~ t ~Congress g Jorlrnal, Aprll, pp. 54-58.
62.

Soderberg, A , and Rausch, D. O., 1968, "Plt Plannlng and Layout," Surface Mining, E P. Pflelder, ed., AIME, New York, pp. 141-165