Long-term production scheduling optimization and 3D material mixing analysis for block caving mines

Khodayari, Firouz; Pourrahimian, Yashar

doi:10.1080/25726668.2018.1563742

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They considered the hang-up and grade uncertainty to be a major constraint for block cave production scheduling. Khodayari and Pourrahimian (2019) considered the effect of horizontal and vertical mixing in long-term production scheduling using a 3D moving cone to improve the NPV. Khodayari and Pourrahimian (2019) showed the improvement of 2-4% for NPV compared to the best case generated by PCBC (2018).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Khodayari and Pourrahimian (2019) considered the effect of horizontal and vertical mixing in long-term production scheduling using a 3D moving cone to improve the NPV. Khodayari and Pourrahimian (2019) showed the improvement of 2-4% for NPV compared to the best case generated by PCBC (2018). Noriega (2019) presented a SIP model considering the grade uncertainty and material flow optimization to address the optimized and profitable undercut elevation.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Simultaneous multi-sector block cave mine production scheduling considering operational uncertainties

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of this study is to provide a practical and near-optimal mine production schedule for block caving operations considering operational uncertainty. The problem is defined in the context of goal programming optimization to meet the operational objectives, including tonnage and grade as daily production targets. The considered operational constraints include drawpoints and ore pass design, draw rate, mine production, and transportation capacities in different operational levels, tonnage and grade constraints, and mine production targets in the presence of several mining sectors. The developed model is verified and validated using historical operational data obtained from an actual block caving operation. The practicality and flexibility of the framework are examined through three different operational scenarios and compared with the real block caving operation mine plans and historical production data.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous multi-sector block cave mine production scheduling considering operational uncertainties

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Production scheduling specifies the selection of stopes in an extraction sequence to maximize or minimize an objective while adhering to operational restrictions (Khodayari and Pourrahimian 2019;Martinez and newman 2011;nehring et al 2010;O'Sullivan and newman 2014;Terblanche and Bley 2015). In recent decades, Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) has been widely used in long-term production scheduling optimization to maximize nPV (Badiozamani et al 2016;Little et al 2008;Nehring et al 2007).…”

Section: Optimization Of Underground Mine Access Layout and Productio...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gospodarka Surowcami Mineralnymi - Mineral Resources Management

Hou¹,

Li²,

Hu³

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The existing material flow analysis in block caving can be divided into three categories: numerical models, pilot tests, and full-scale experiments (Khodayari & Pourrahimian 2019). Pilot tests and full-scale experiments can be very expensive to implement while not easy to calibrate based on the actual data for specific projects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Material flow simulation using marker mixing

Khodayari¹,

Diering²

2022

Caving 2022: Fifth International Conference on Block and Sublevel Caving

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Material mixing and its impact on the block cave operations is one of the main aspects for evaluating and operating any caving project. Initial modelling with limited geotechnical data and calibration using the actual data are the two main phases to build the flow model. Challenges on the way are inevitable; how to predict the flow in the first place, and how to calibrate even when such data is available. In order to achieve realistic results, the right tools are a necessity to be able to mimic the actual cave. Vertical Mixing (VM), Template Mixing (TM), and CA3D tools in GEOVIA PCBC have been extensively used for more than two decades by many users across the globe; very useful tools but slow and limited on graphics. To overcome these challenges, Marker Mixing (MM) was introduced in 2021; a powerful material flow simulator with unique graphical capabilities and much higher speed compared to other existing tools. The stand-alone feature in MMIX provides the option to run a mixing model without even running a productions schedule. Implementing cave back and other geotechnical and operational constraints are easier and visually assessable, increasing the transparency while making it possible to improve the caving model in a more efficient approach. Markers simulate the material movements from their original location to extraction (from drawpoints) within the cave. Simulation is done step by step with vertical and horizontal movements, toppling, riling, erosion and frozen concepts all captured and visualised in the new MMIX tool. The theory and experience behind MMIX can help define the initial flow model, then in the next step, actual production data can be used to calibrate the parameters. In addition, information gathered from Beacons (smart markers) installed in the cave zone can be visualised, interpreted, and implemented using the MMIX play back tool. This feature can significantly improve the calibration process for achieving more precise models by mimicking the actual flow in the cave. The residual block model can also be generated using MMIX much faster and with better visual checks compared to CA3D. This paper introduces Marker Mixing tool, its features, and capabilities, with comparisons to existing Vertical Mixing, Template Mixing, and CA3D tools in PCBC.

show abstract

Long-term production scheduling optimization and 3D material mixing analysis for block caving mines

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Simultaneous multi-sector block cave mine production scheduling considering operational uncertainties

Simultaneous multi-sector block cave mine production scheduling considering operational uncertainties

Gospodarka Surowcami Mineralnymi - Mineral Resources Management

Material flow simulation using marker mixing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About