Search Documents

By Georgene Renner, Chee Theng, William Gleason

"More than 6,300 people attended SME’s 2016 Annual Conference & Expo in Phoenix, AZ and many of them made the trip to the conference to take part in the excellent technical sessions that are presented on a yearly basis by the Society.Holding true to form, this year’s conference was full of options. In fact, this year there were 121 technical sessions and 751 presentations to chose from. The following is a sample of some of the technical sessions as seen through the eyes of the editors of Mining Engineering and SME technical papers.SME Sections Sharing Success: Changing thePublic Perception of MiningThis session was a workshop on how several local sections were effective in getting the message out to their communities and schools about the value of the extractive minerals industry. Several sections shared their outreach successes, including the Mining in Society merit badge activities by the Minnesota Section by Julie Lucas and SME’s participation in the World Scout Jamboree in Japan by Frank McAllister.Dan Alexander highlighted activities by the Pittsburgh Section, such as preparing minerals kits and pamphlets for elementary school classes and regional science fairs. The West Virginia University Student Chapter used the kits as handouts at their local gem and mineral show. School speakers in full mining gear were especially interesting to the young children.Other speakers were Michael Linn, Paradise Valley Unified School District — Business and School Partnerships; and Greg Kruse, Central Wyoming Section of SME — What makes a successful section?Engineering Competency ModelAmerican Association of Engineering Societies and the U.S. Department of Labor, with a grant from the United Engineering Foundation, developed a guide to the set of skills necessary for success in the engineering community -- Knowledge – Skills – Abilities — needed for all disciplines.Various engineering societies are now writing the Tier 5 occupation-specific requirements. The Competency Committee is charged to write concise and discipline-specific mining engineering, mineral processing engineering, geological engineering, and geophysical engineering by Sept. 30, 2017."

May 1, 2016

By N. A. Karl, D. R. Wilburn

"This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2015 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature, SNL Metals & Mining (SNL) (Charlottesville, VA) database and specialists in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Minerals Information Center. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry, and presents analyses of exploration activities performed by the mineral industry.Three types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration: budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. dollars provided by SNL; regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2015 as compiled by the USGS; and regional events that affected exploration activities including economic, social and political conditions, which were derived from published sources and discussions with USGS and industry specialists. Commodity and regional compilations are presented in this summary. Because multiple sources were used to develop commodity and regional compilations, statistics may vary depending on the source and type of data that are being reported.The SNL data summarize planned company budgets for worldwide exploration activities in 2015 for 24 nonfuel mineral commodities and metal alloys and are based on company surveys. Surveys focused on precious metals (gold, platinum-group metals and silver), base metals, (cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, tin and zinc), bulk commodities (bauxite, chromite, iron ore, manganese, phosphate and potash), and other commodities (diamond, graphite, heavy-mineral sands, lithium, niobium, rareearth elements (REE), tantalum, tungsten and uranium).USGS data compilations and analyses are based on information provided by USGS mineral commodity and country specialists, as well as industry contacts and published trade journals. The USGS data summarize exploration site data collected for more than 80 minerals and materials, with a focus on base metals, diamond and precious metals. The USGS analyzed available information to assess the level of exploration activity in 2015 and to report trends in mineral exploration activity for the period 2005 through 2015. These analyses identify where mineral exploration is occurring by commodity and region and the intensity of activity that is taking place in each region for selected mineral commodities, and determines those factors that most affect changes in exploration activity."

May 1, 2016

By Todd Schrauf, James Scott, Mark Smith

"Cyanide heap leaching of gold ores in areas with extremely low winter temperatures requires special considerations to prevent freezing of the leach solution. Factors that impact the solution temperature include ore temperature at the time of stacking and during operation, burial of drip irrigation lines, use of geomembrane covers and heating of the leach solution. Thermodynamic modeling was performed to simulate expected ore and solution temperatures under different operating strategies for Kaminak Gold’s Coffee gold project in the Yukon Territory. Mean monthly temperatures at the site ranged from a low of -22.5 °C (-8.5 °F) to a high of 13.6 °C (56.4 °F), while in situ ore temperatures ranged from -0.5° to about -1.5 °C (31 ° to 29 °F). The modeling results were used to optimize the operational parameters and indicated that a combination of drip line burial and heating of the leach solution during the winter months was required to maintain solution temperatures above freezing during the initial years of stacking, although as the size of the heap increased, heating was no longer necessary.Modeling objectivesThe successful operation of a cyanide heap leach under extremely cold winter temperatures requires the implementation of operational strategies to prevent freezing of the leach solution and the ore within the heap. Thermodynamic modeling of the heap provides the means to quantify the effectiveness of these different operational parameters on maintaining the required operating temperatures to avoid freezing within the heap. The operational parameters that were evaluated with the model included:"

Apr 1, 2016

By L A. Martinez Tipe, J McKibben, S Barry

"Metal prices are central to a mineral investment decision and have a profound impact on the financial performance of companies in the mining industry. At its most basic level, metal prices are influenced by the disequilibrium between international metal volume supply and demand. That is, the commodity price is a regulator that equates international metal supply and demand where inventories act as a buffer between the emergence of this disequilibrium and its dissolution through a price change.From this viewpoint, mining companies are required to forecast metal and bulk commodity prices when evaluating minerals projects through discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. While supply-demand models are instructive, many companies use historical prices, spot prices, futures/forward pricing and consensus opinion (or a combination of all of these) to develop price forecasts.This paper discusses the definition, fundamentals and differences between futures/forward and consensus pricing and the appropriateness of each in a DCF model for mine project economic evaluation.Our results demonstrate that great care is required when using either futures/forward or consensus pricing and that the decision to use one rather than the other requires consideration of other important elements in the DCF model (ie the risk-adjusted discount rate).CITATION:Martinez Tipe, L A, McKibben, J and Barry, S, 2016. Metal prices and the differences between forward and consensus pricing – which one is better for use in a discounted cash flow model?, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 149–158 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By R Knight

"In project evaluation there are two matters of keen interest to non-executive directors: the process by which an investment recommendation is reached, as well as the investment itself, as presented. It is sometimes mistakenly believed that Boards of directors are interested only in the result. That is not so. The process by which project evaluations are derived and socialised with the Board is as important as the result, sometimes more so.Setting aside the gloomy predictions of the doomsayers and looking through short-term volatility in supply and demand, the overall availability of mineral resources more often than not exceeds demand. There are in reality more development projects in prospect at any one time than are needed to meet the market. Only the fittest will prosper, although some others may survive.Optimism springs eternal in the mining industry and every project promoter, executive or entrepreneur has a convincing project development case. Some will create value for shareholders, but the historical evidence suggests that many will fail to meet the expectations set in their evaluation.Boards of directors make the final decision to invest, or not, in a new mine. Knowledge is power, and on that basis the balance of power favours management. Management has the facts (or in some cases, what passes for fact) and the passion to invest. The non-executives have the power of approval – yes or no – but before making a decision directors must demonstrate due diligence, the essential precursor to project approval.Management has a vital part to play in facilitating that due diligence process and in encouraging the independent thought processes of the Board. A closed approach by management fosters a negative, risk-averse attitude on the part of the Board. One that encourages an understanding of the rigour of the project evaluation process and the robustness of the result will allow directors to understand better the implications of their decision.CITATION:Knight, R, 2016. Project evaluation – a non-executive director’s perspective, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 11–19 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By L I. Rozman

"There have always been development projects that fall short of expectations. In the last decade, we have seen more than the usual number of mining and oil/gas development projects taking significantly longer to develop and costing materially more than expected. The recent resource-equity market slump proves that investors are now far more cautious about investing new capital in the mineral and petroleum resources sector.What have we learned since 2005? Why have projects missed their targets? Why do investors often feel misled?Valuation of a project and the estimation of value is a more complex process than the evaluation of the merits of project development. The merit of project development can be clear from a prefeasibility evaluation, but this is no reason to skip the rigour of a feasibility study. The valuation of any project that is developed with any added risk should be discounted for this added risk.The development of a project impacts on other stakeholders, and the indirect cost of these impacts can have material implications for the cost structure, time and ultimate valuation of the project for its financial backers. The development of new projects (and thereby supply) can also have an impact on commodity prices, and therefore an impact on returns for financial backers.This paper will provide commentary on the author’s experiences and observations as a project developer and operator for 25 years, before becoming a project financier a decade ago.CITATION:Rozman, L I, 2016. Project evaluation and valuation – an investor’s golden rule, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 31–36 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By E C. Holloway

"The financial valuation of mining assets has a number of fundamental differences to the valuation of many other asset groupings. One such difference is that typically, the greater proportion of both the cost and revenue sides of the cash flow are inherently governed by systemic market forces.As a result, the range of outcomes for the valuation of each mining asset is more unpredictable, with higher levels of risk and uncertainty. In contrast, the management function of many other non-mining businesses or industry groups can control at least a portion of the cash flow by maintaining the margin or controlling the sales price. The management teams of mining businesses and operations typically have limited options, and are thus price-takers for both costs and revenues. As mining is an inherently cyclical industry, large, long-life operations can exist through several price cycles, making valuation both subjective and challenging.The outcomes of both static- and stochastic-based valuations, as well as the internal probabilities of the associated cash flow statements, are significantly impacted when the correlations between the appropriate parameters are quantified, modelled and incorporated into the valuation framework. The appropriate parameters for correlation modelling primarily include those that are governed by systemic market forces. Applying this process results in a different risk profile for the asset by allowing the risks resulting from systemic market movements to be more accurately quantified and then objectively minimised. This process also reduces the level of residual uncertainty in the valuation outcome.This paper presents a valuation methodology to pragmatically incorporate this level of valuation sophistication and statistically quantify the associated increase in the level of confidence of the valuation outcomes reported.CITATION:Holloway, E C, 2016. Correlated valuation methodology, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 181–200 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By S G. Gemell

"The financial model is an integral component of any project evaluation based on mineral resources, ore reserves and (at least internally) exploration targets. Given the unity of purpose for preparing financial models for project evaluation purposes, the diversity of both format and content of the finalised models is surprising. Many models are prepared by staff or consultants who are comfortable with a particular format that may be used for other purposes, such as budget preparation or financial reporting. It is natural in these situations that the practitioner will take these models and adapt them to the purpose. The end result may or may not succeed in providing a clear, accurate and sufficiently detailed view of the project’s economic viability.When preparing a model, the practitioner should be cognisant of the interpretation and review, or audit, process. The auditor may be a consultant or employee of a bank, potential equity provider or of the project sponsor itself. Depending upon the scale of the project and the level of participation of the entity that the auditor represents, the financial model will be interrogated more or less rigorously. In any event, the end user will require the model to permit easy change of inputs and will wish to confirm that such change is appropriately and thoroughly transmitted throughout.Accordingly, there are some ‘dos and don’ts’ that can be readily applied in the creation of the financial model that will greatly assist the end user, not just in the change of inputs, but also in reviewing the model’s integrity. The less time and effort required by an auditor in this regard is reflected directly in the cost of the review process.CITATION:Gemell, S G, 2016. Financial modelling with the auditor in mind, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 172–180 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By R Jacobs

"The Jaguar project is relatively unique in that it was evaluated, financed, built and operated to completion within the last ten years, providing the opportunity to holistically review and reconcile expectations against the actual outcomes. It is a case study that allows wider conclusions to be drawn with respect to the risks and opportunities involved with project evaluation and execution.Jaguar is located in the Leonora Mining District of Western Australia and was commissioned in mid-2007 as an underground accessed, single high-grade volcanic-hosted massive sulfide (VHMS) deposit with an on-site concentrator, producing copper and zinc concentrates exported via the Port of Geraldton to South-East Asian markets.The feasibility study (FS) had several iterations (JML, 2005a); the last dated July 2005 was specifically targeted to secure project funding, and summarised the reserves-only portion of the resource and its planned exploitation. The commissioning of the mine was the transition for the owner Jabiru Metals NL from junior explorer to producer and the project was the dominant asset of the company.Jaguar operated through several significant deviations from the linear project plan set out in the FS, including the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), a corporate takeover and disruption to the mine plan from the onset of material geotechnical issues. Whilst the GFC or mining disruption were not specifically predicted in the FS or peer reviews, the generic effects of the events were assessed in the project risk assessment and they influenced subsequent management decisions. In parallel to the internal project-specific risks, the short planned life of Jaguar was a risk to the continuation of the corporate entity which was being addressed by significant investment into brownfields exploration to extend or replicate the project, and ultimately added value such that attracted a corporate takeover.Holistically, the project delivered the returns predicted in the FS, but in a much different guise than was expected. This paper will describe the reality of operations compared with the study predictions and expectations through the perspective of the project and corporate risk assessment.CITATION:Jacobs, R, 2016. Jaguar base metals project case study – has reality reflected the study?, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 86–97 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By J A. Wells, K G. Thomas, R F. Dewhirst

"One of the contributing factors to the extreme cost escalation in the first decade of the 21st century was the increase in the amount and cost of engineering work that went into studies and projects. Various reasons for this were identified, including unsatisfactory productivity due to a shortage of experienced/qualified engineers, the increased complexity and infrastructure requirements of many projects due to location, metallurgy that is more challenging and increasing environmental and social requirements. These conditions often led to unsatisfactory project results in terms of cost and schedule blowouts and created a loss of confidence – both internally and externally – in the industry’s ability to complete projects on time and on budget.Technical fundamentals aside, the experience and effectiveness of project teams has had, and continues to have, a major impact on project cost, schedule and ramp-up to nameplate capacity and operating parameters. There are unfortunately too many examples of where project teams have not been as effective as they could or should have been, all to the ultimate detriment of the project.Using the authors’ extensive experience on both owner’s and engineer’s teams, this paper discusses some of the main reasons for suboptimal team, and hence project, performance and offers thoughts on how best to build and maintain project teams. The analysis and conclusions drawn are built around the Tuckman model of group development known as ‘forming-storming-norming-performing’, which was first proposed some 50 years ago. Given the importance of good teamwork to project success, understanding how project teams grow and become efficient and productive is an essential part of good project management that should receive more attention.CITATION:Dewhirst, R F, Thomas, K G and Wells, J A, 2016. Building and maintaining effective project teams, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 38–48 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By P B. Card

"The website www.economicevaluation.com.au, which had its origins at the Project Evaluation Conference 2009, provides a free way for industry professionals to teach themselves economic evaluation. At its core is a set of fast-moving modules and three worked examples.The website recognises that economic evaluation is a discipline with a hierarchy of three levels:decision-makingevaluating the project/businesshands-on modelling.There are a set of modules for each level that describe the concepts and activities in detail. These emphasise that the most important and rewarding work is the evaluation of Level 2. The economic model created in Level 3 is merely a working tool and should not become a sophisticated ‘trophy’ in Excel that only one or two people can comfortably use.Hands-on modelling contains three sets of practices designed to make any model rigorous and intuitive so that it can be easily understood and used by others in the project team. Even if the model develops into a long, detailed and complex workbook, it should remain easy to follow and be intuitive. The website advocates freedom to devise any architecture that best suits the project under study, but promotes rigour through the following practices:four cash streams and graphsthree architectures – concept, prefeasibility and feasibilitysix principles.The modules in the Level 2 evaluation use conversational language to describe in detail the broad range of activities needed to properly understand and characterise a project/business. It stresses that net present value is nothing more than the mathematical treatment of a whole set of opinions, is not an absolute truth and is only a fraction of the evaluation process. The modules describe in detail the range of economic metrics that should be computed and the full spectrum of equally important characterisations required to make the decision in Level 3.CITATION:Card, P B, 2016. Teach yourself economic evaluation, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 160–171 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By R Jacobs, J Yeates

"The Stockman base metals project is situated in State Forest in the alpine area of East Gippsland, Victoria, adjacent to a National Park and within the headwaters of a major Ramsar-listed wetland catchment and the Murray-Darling River system. Site topography is steep, and elevated (650 m – 1200 m above sea level), and subject to circa 1 m annual rainfall, with occasional winter snowfall. The project consists of two volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS) deposits to be mined by underground methods and treated in a 1.0 Mt/a central concentrator to produce copper and zinc concentrates for export over a ten year operational life. New resource projects are rare in Victoria. Recognising the sensitive setting, planning for the Stockman Project, which is now in the advanced permitting stage, has focused on balancing economic, environmental and social outcomes to ensure social licence to operate is secured and can be maintained. This has involved close attention to triple bottom line (TBL) risks and outcomes. Stockman has successfully gained State and Federal approvals via the Environmental Effects Statement process. The process of obtaining these approvals has required close attention to effective stakeholder involvement, and management of a lengthy and difficult approvals process, which is still to be finally concluded. This paper is a case study of the process of that permitting and the issues encountered to date. Key learnings from the experience have included: successful approvals require close attention to much more than just the project and its technical aspects and physical setting – effective stakeholder involvement and endorsement is critical the differing consultation requirements for local, regional and government stakeholders, to design and plan implementation of a project to meet TBL objectives, and to gain social licence to operate within the Victorian approvals process, the need for an effective lead government agency with policy authority dealing with material policy change requiring post-closure financial sureties estimating realistic permitting time and cost during the project evaluation phase. CITATION: Jacobs, R and Yeates, J, 2016. Stockman base metals project – sustainability, social licence to operate and permitting lessons learnt, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 98–110 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By Ma Yuxin, Niu Fusheng, Yuan Zhitao, Bai Limei, Han Yuexin

"Using batch flotation experiment, contact angle measurement, particle size analysis, and scanning electron microscope (SEM), the influence and difference of pH value on the flotation rate of talc and chalcopyrite were investigate without collector at the pH range of 3~11. The results showed that, the flotation rate of talc decrease with the increasing of flotation time, while that of chalcopyrite hardly affect by flotation time, besides, the flotation rate of chalcopyrite is much less than that of talc, so the laws of flotation rate of the two minerals are independent of pH value. The flotation test data of two minerals are simulated with first order and multi-rate flotation kinetic model respectively. The simulation results showed that flotation of talc only meet the first order kinetic model, while chalcopyrite’s meet the both. In addition, According to test results of talc and chalcopyrite by the particle size distribution, SEM photographs and the contact angle measurement, the reason why talc did not conform to the first order kinetic model is not because of particle size distribution, but of particle shape. That is to say, because of sheet structure of talc, the contact angle of layers and sections are 74°and 52°respectively. At the same time, the contact angle of layers and sections are different between the particles. So flotation rates between talc particles are difference.INTRODUCTIONPossessing superior self-induced, collector-induced and sulfur-induced floatability, chalcopyrite exhibits good floatability at a wide range of pH values and potentials. Serpentine are regarded as the most difficult selected type in various chalcopyrite ore, and the predominant reason is that it contains talc. Talc, as a nonpolar layered silicate mineral, is one kind of common associated mineral in sulfide ores (Lu, 2010). Concentrate quality and flotation process of chalcopyrite are influenced as a result from the presence of talc. It is because that talc has inherent floatability which makes it readily mixed with the floated mineral and talc is easy to slime causing the slime coating of the valuable mineral (Beattie et al., 2006). Thus in order to improve the flotation effect of chalcopyrite, methods can be introduced from two respects. One method is that fast-floating talc mineral is floated preferentially, and the other is that sulfide mineral is floated prior to talc by depressing the flotation of talc mineral (Beattie et al., 2006), nevertheless, no matter with which the flotation effect of fine-sized chalcopyrite is not positive. Therefore, in order to realize the flotation separation of talc and chalcopyrite, the difference between the inherent floatability of fine-sized chalcopyrite and talc is researched and analyzed in terms of flotation dynamics in the absence of collector and frother."

Jan 1, 2016

By A. J. Monhemius

"The paper reviews the history of modern iron control processes in hydrometallurgy. Particular attention is paid to the processes developed in the 1960s by the electrolytic zinc industry for the removal of iron from zinc sulphate leach liquors - namely the Jarosite, Goethite and Hematite processes. Problems faced by the industry in the safe disposal of the iron residues produced by these processes are discussed. The lessons learnt over the past half century by the zinc industry are projected on to the current efforts to develop hydrometallurgical processes for the treatment of copper sulphide concentrates. It is argued that any attempt to create a “hydrometallurgical copper smelter” is doomed to ultimate failure, unless and until methods are developed that can recover iron from solution in a form that can be directly utilised by the steel or pigment industries.INTRODUCTIONYou suddenly realise that age is catching up with you and that technology is moving on apace when you are asked to talk about the history of a process or a technology that you’ve grown up with. Such was my reaction when, out of the blue, I received an email last year from the chairman of the CIM’s Historical Metallurgy Committee, asking me if I would give a talk on the early developments of iron control in hydrometallurgy. Once I’d got over the initial shock of realising that I had now become living history, I was of course flattered that the invitation was to give a talk at the prestigious IMPC, a conference series that has been going for as long as I have been in the business. That this particular IMPC was to include the 4th Symposium on Iron Control in Hydrometallurgy, made the invitation even more appealing and appropriate, because I was the co-chairman of the First Symposium on Iron Control, together with my old friend, John Dutrizac (known by many as Dr Jarosite), which was held 30 years ago in Toronto.first became involved with iron at the very start of my career in hydrometallurgy – the research topic for my Masters degree thesis at UBC, back in the mid 1960s, was “Reductive leaching of Goethite with SO2”. My thesis supervisor was the late Professor Ian Warren, who himself was a protégé of Professor Frank Forward, one of the founding fathers of modern hydrometallurgy. Little did I realise at that time, now 50 years ago, that the problem of iron and how to deal with it in hydrometallurgical processes would be a theme that followed me throughout much of my 40-year career in academia."

Jan 1, 2016

By M. Rudolph, T. Leißner, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, C. Mämpel, R. Möckel, M. Embrechts, T. Leistner

Tin-mining activities have taken place in the region of the German Erzgebirge (Ore Mountains) for over hundreds of years up until 1991. For long times, gravity separation processes used to be the dominating beneficiation approach in those mining districts to recover cassiterite, the main tin-bearing mineral. For fine (< 100 µm) and very fine (< 20 µm) particles these approaches might not represent effective techniques, significant valuable materials could not be recovered and reported to tailings, where it was subsequently disposed. Thus, there are substantial amounts of cassiterite still present in these tailings disposals, most of it as very fine particles with already high degrees of liberation. That fact brings these tailings disposals into focus for potential reprocessing using beneficiation approaches, which are more sensitive to fine and very fine particles. In this paper we present results concerning the laboratory-scale treatment of material from exemplary heaps of the former Altenberg and Ehrenfriedersdorf mining sites using various flotation methods (including conventional froth flotation and oil-assisted flotation). Different size ranges of the material were previously prepared in order to investigate their response to the different techniques. For the study, special emphasis is put on agglomeration flotation, an oil-assisted flotation method. Therefore, an aliphatic oil phase of alkane basis is used to either selectively aggregate or collect the cassiterite particles. Recovery and flotation performance results are presented with respect to different process parameters: various collectors (including sulphosuccinamates and phosphonic acids) and depressants (including sodium fluorosilicate and oxalic acid) regime, oil dosage, agitation time and pulp density during oil/pulp agitation. Furthermore, the oil/particle aggregation behavior is analyzed via particle image analysis and, additionally, collector adsorption characteristics are investigated by contact angle measurements and zeta potential analysis. The data obtained is correlated with the testwork results achieved in order to interpret the flotation response of very fine cassiterite particles.

Jan 1, 2016

By L. Su, S. Liu, K. Jiang, K. Xie

The reduction of iron dissolution and acid consumption is fairly important in the extraction of Ni and Co from laterite ores from both economic and efficiency perspectives. BGRIMM conducted detailed research to investigate the behavior of iron in a nickel laterite leaching process. The mineralogy of Ni and Co was studied. In limonite ore about 76% of nickel is present in goethite while in saprolite ore 79% of nickel is associated with magnesium and silicon minerals. Test work revealed that limonite can be decomposed completely with enough acid concentration during atmospheric leaching. More than 98% of Ni and Co were leached into solution while 85% of the iron was also dissolved with 130-140 g/L iron in solution. Iron precipitates as hematite in the temperature range 250-270?C without neutralization reagents. That’s why limonite is treated by high pressure acid leaching (HPAL) technology to achieve nickel extraction and iron precipitation in the same autoclave. BGRIMM’s test results indicated that the remaining acid in atmospheric leaching solution and acid released by iron precipitation at a lower temperature was enough to leach saprolite efficiently. The so-called inverse leaching technology leaches limonite at atmospheric condition and the leaching slurry combined with saprolite is pumped into an autoclave to leach saprolite at 150-170?C. In the autoclave iron precipitates as hematite without acid consumption. Total nickel and cobalt extractions in the test program were more than 90% with iron content in solution below 8 g/L. In this inverse process iron dissolves in the atmospheric leaching stage and precipitates as hematite in the low temperature leaching stage. Compared with HPAL the leaching temperature is reduced to 150-170 ºC from 250-270 ºC. Compared to atmospheric tank leaching acid consumption is reduced from 850-950 kg/t ore (atmospheric) to 550-650 kg/t ore (inverse).

Jan 1, 2016

By K. Huang, L. Pan

"Darcy’s law has been used extensively to model cake filtration. It is a macroscopic model, in which particle size dominates the kinetics and cake moisture. In the present work, a capillary flow model has been developed from first principles to study the effects of microscopic parameters such as capillary radius, boundary layer slip, disjoining pressure, and surface tension that may be important for dewatering ultrafine particles. Laboratory-scale pressure filtration tests show that dewatering kinetics is strongly dependent on capillary radius, which in turn is influenced by surface hydrophobicity, surface charge, and length scales of particles. The model parameters determined from laboratory-scale filtration tests show that use of a hydrophobizing reagent can greatly improve fine particle filtration due to increased slip and decreased capillary pressure. The kinetics of dewatering kaolin clay is fastest at a pH where the layer-structured particles coagulate with a face-to-edge orientation. The capillary flow model developed in the present work may be useful for designing filters and optimizing operating conditions.INTRODUCTIONIn 2014, Canada produced 2.2 million barrels per day of crude oil from the oil sands resources in Alberta, which is expected to grow to 3.2–4.0 million barrels per day by 2030 (CAPP, 2013). One of the challenges to meeting these projections is the tailings management. At present, the industry uses ?77 km2 of the lands to construct tailings ponds. Significant amounts of the tailings disposed to the ponds are silts and clays that are slow to settle and consolidate, creating problems for reclamation. It is, therefore, the objective of the present work to develop a filtration model that may be useful for developing advanced dewatering technologies that can address the tailings management issues.Darcy’s equation is the governing law for filtration. It was derived as an empirical model by H. Darcy in 1856 while he was studying fluid flow in sand filters (Hall, 1956). Since then, many investigators derived it from first principles. It relates superficial fluid velocity to the pressure drop across a porous medium of known permeability. In filtration, the latter can be related empirically to particle size using the Kozney equation (Yoon, 2005)."

Jan 1, 2016

By A. Pytlik, W. Masny

"Underground mining is subject to various natural hazards such as seismic events, rockbursts, fire, and gas (methane). In general, an increase in the extraction depth causes an increase in the likelihood of these hazards, especially seismic activity and rockbursts. Dynamic phenomena such as rockbursts and tremors have been recorded on six continents: Europe (Poland, Russia, Czech Republic, Germany, and Slovenia), Asia (India, and China), North and South America (USA, Canada, and Chile), Africa (South Africa), and Australia. To select appropriate mine working supports for such dynamic phenomena, the performance characteristics of such support types must be determined under both static and dynamic load conditions.This article presents information regarding the application of rockbolts in Polish underground hard-coal mines. Dynamic phenomena occurring in the mines from 2004–2013 are also characterized. A methodology developed at the Central Mining Institute (GIG) for the laboratory testing of rockbolts is presented. In this methodology, the bolts are loaded by the direct impact of a free-moving mass (up to 20 000 kg) at speeds of up to 1.2 m/s. The facilities at GIG used to test the support under static and dynamic load conditions are characterized, and the results of laboratory tests on yielding bolts with a nominal capacity of 420 kN are presented. These types of bolts are commonly used for reinforcing steel arches and the surrounding rock mass in Polish coal mines. The results of the laboratory testing of yielding bolts are discussed.IntroductionSeismic events such as rock bumps and tremors occur with great frequency during underground mining. These phenomena have been reported in such countries as Poland, Czech Republic, Germany, France, Slovenia, Russia, India, China, the USA, Canada, Chile, South Africa, and Australia (Brauner, 1991; Potvin, Hudyma, and Jewell, 2000; Kidybin??ski, 2003; Driad-Lebeau et al., 2005; Li, Cai, and Cai, 2007; Whyatt and Loken, 2009; Durrheim and Riemer, 2012; Holub, Rušajova, and Holec?ko, 2011). Descriptions of the dynamic events and their effects in the form of damage to or destruction of supports have been presented in many publications, both for hardrock mines as well as for coal mines (Brauner, 1991; Dubin??ski and Konopko, 2000; Heal, 2010; Heal and Potvin, 2007; Simser, Joughin, and Ortlepp, 2002; Kaiser and Cai, 2012; Cai 2013; Nierobisz, 2013; Mark, 2014; Masny and Prusek, 2015). One of the main goals of the research has been to develop methods, criteria, and guidelines for the selection of an optimal and safe support for mine workings located in areas of rock bumps or tremors. Example of such studies include the Canadian Rockburst Support Handbook (Kaiser, McCreath, and Tannant, 1996), or the principles presented in the literature (Li, 2010; Cai, 2013)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Matteo Cortinovis, Giuseppe Gelmi

"INTRODUCTIONEdilmac dei F.lli Maccabelli (hereinafter referred to as Edilmac) has recently developed a special civil engineering application using the Raise Boring technology with the assistance of Inrock MGS (Magnetic Guidance System). Applying the Paratrack Magnetic Guidance System coupled with a directional mud motor to the drill string allows a better accuracy compared to standard drilling, as showed in our tests. This is the first time the Paratrack System has been applied to the Raise Boring technology. RAISE BORING METHOD STATEMENT The Raise Boring technology was born in North America during the Sixties. In 1962, Ingersoll and Robbins were the first companies to produce Raise Boring Machines (RBM). The technology was first used in the underground mine industry, in order to bore ventilation shafts and passes through different levels, thus reducing the cost of haulage. The Raise Boring method is only feasible in stable rock conditions. The Raise Boring method consists of drilling a small diameter pilot hole that reaches a tunnel located at the bottom of the drilled hole. Once the pilot hole reaches the tunnel, a reamer head is installed at the end of the drill string and pulled up, creating the hole with the designed diameter (Figures 1 and 2). The main equipment, which is required to perform Raise Boring activities, is the following: •,An RBM; •,A tricone bit; •,Drilling rods; •,A reaming head; The standard mucking of the pilot hole is done with water or bentonite mud. For the last 30 years, Edilmac has developed a mucking process, which uses compressed air with the addition of foam or a small amount of water for dust control.Pilot hole tricone. The drilling of the pilot hole is usually performed with a tricone bit having a diameter between 11” (27.61 cm) and 15” (38.10 cm) (Figure 3). High strength rods. They generally have a diameter ranging from 10” (25.40 cm) to 12 ?” (32.70 cm) (Figure 4), depending on the length and the final diameter of the shaft."

Jan 1, 2016

By Brian Gettinger, Jim Schlaman, Alston Noronha

"INTRODUCTION The public understanding of green solutions today is based on the definition of sustainability adopted by the Brundtland Commission (World Commission on Environment and Development) in 1987: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Over time this initial definition evolved to identify three distinct factors impacting sustainability that are often referred to as the “Triple Bottom Line”: Economic, Environmental and Social. The triple bottom line approach seeks to drive outcomes that create maximum value for all stakeholders. In the last ten years purveyors of water and wastewater tunnel solutions have found themselves on the wrong side of a politically polarizing issue in the crosshairs of politicians, environmental activists and community groups branding tunnels as expensive, “gray” and not-sustainable. Tunnels under design were stopped and large planned tunnel programs were delayed or canceled. Therefore being sustainable and “green” is not simply using natural vegetation, but creating an asset that meets current and future needs and will not become a future liability. As this paper will discuss, tunnel projects embody a sustainable triple bottom line project well, are equally sustainable as green infrastructure, and have begun to gain awareness for their sustainability. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE CHANGES TUNNELING LANDSCAPE The green movement quickly swept across the nation in the mid to late 2000’s and was a hot topic in the media and at all the local, regional and national industry conferences. Politicians espoused the benefit of green infrastructure including job creation, urban renewal, aesthetics, property values economics and sustainability. The political microscope was focused the closest on stormwater and wastewater management, particularly in communities responding to combined sewer overflow (CSO) consent decrees from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As communities with CSO problems evaluated their long term control program (LTCP), local government officials and planners began to balk at the huge price tag required for compliance and began looking for alternatives. “Green” infrastructure was proposed as lower cost solution that could be used to offset capital-intensive “gray” infrastructure like new sewers, storage tanks, tunnels, and treatment facilities. In addition, including green infrastructure in a previously negotiated LTCP required a reset on the entire planning process, additional studies and more planning which would push capital investment further off into the future, subsequently delaying unpopular user rate increases. As a result, tunnel projects as well as trenched conveyance and treatment plant projects that had not yet started construction were stopped, delayed or substantially changed."

Jan 1, 2016