A comparison of strategic mine planning approaches for in-pit crushing and conveying, and truck/shovel systems

TLDR

Rising energy and labor costs have prompted the development of In‑Pit Crushing and Conveying (IPCC) systems as a viable alternative to conventional truck haulage, though their implementation in hard‑rock open‑pit mines demands more comprehensive planning. The study examines how different planning approaches affect the deployment of IPCC systems on a basic metalliferous open‑pit deposit. A strategic life‑of‑mine plan was used to generate economic indicators for each planning approach and compare them with traditional truck haulage systems. The analysis indicates that IPCC systems can increase overall resource recovery and identifies the operational scale, orebody type, and associated issues that determine their feasibility versus truck haulage.

Abstract

In a global environment where energy and labor are becoming increasingly expensive, continuous mining systems such as In-Pit Crushing and Conveying (IPCC) systems have been advanced as offering a real alternative to conventional truck haulage systems. The implementation of IPCC systems in hard rock operations in open pit mines however requires different and more comprehensive planning approaches in order to adequately reflect the practical aspects associated with these. This paper investigates the impact that these approaches may have on the implementation of IPCC systems on a basic metalliferous deposit amenable to open pit exploitation. A strategic life of mine plan to provide numerous economic indicators for each approach is analyzed and compared to traditional truck haulage systems. The mine planning and evaluation process highlights the increased overall resource recovery that may accompany the use of IPCC systems. This investigation also provides insights into the issues associated with IPCC and the scale and type of operation and orebody that is likely to provide a feasible alternative to truck haulage.