DOCSLIB.ORG

Overview of Underground Mining Business

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

IR-DAY2018 1 Komatsu IR－DAY 2018 Overview of Underground mining business September 14th, 2018 Masayuki Moriyama Senior Executive Officer President, Mining Business Division Chairman, Komatsu Mining Corp. IR-DAY2018 Various Mineral Resources 2 • Mineral resources are generated through several geologic effects. • Coal is usually categorized as Soft Rock, while other minerals such as Ferrous and Non-Ferrous are called as Hard Rock. # Generation of deposits Major Mineral Resources Platinum, Chromium, Magmatic deposit Titanium, Magnetite Generated Hard Igneous ① from Rock rock Magma Gold, Copper, Silver, Lead, Zinc, Hydrothermal Tin, Tungsten, deposit Molybdenum, Uranium Sedimentation/Weathering/ Erosion Sedime Hematite, Nickel, ② ntary Boxite, Lithium, etc rock Geothermal effect/Crustal rising Soft Rock *1 ③ Coal - ※1 Coal is not defined as “rock” in geological respect. Generation process of IR-DAY2018 Mineral Resources (1/2) 3 • Minerals derived from magma were generated in the depths of underground. 1) In case deposits exist beneath and relatively near from ground level, Open Pit Mining/Strip Mining methods are adopted. 2) In case deposits exist in the depths below geological formations, Underground Mining methods are adopted. 3) Open pit mines might shift to underground methods as they get deeper. 1.Magmatic deposit 2.Hydrothermal deposit 1) Typical minerals: 1) Typical minerals: Platinum, Chromium, Titanium, Gold, Copper, Silver, Lead, Zinc, Tin, Magnetite, etc. Tungsten, Molybdenum, Uranium, etc. 2) Generation process 2) Generation process ・In case Magma is slowly cooled, ・Hydrothermal mineral solution melted metal sulfide (containing Platinum, (containing metal elements) had been Chromium, Titanium or others) had been pushed up by high vapor pressure, separated and concentrated by specific precipitated and filled chasms in and gravity and generated deposit. generated deposits. Underground Isolated waterway magma Magma Magma Generation process of IR-DAY2018 Mineral Resources (2/2) 4 • Sedimentary rocks exist widely on the earth, where Open pit / Strip Mining methods are mainly adopted. • Coal is generated from sediment of plant fossil, which is explored both by Strip Mining and Underground Mining. 1. Sedimentation/Weathering/Erosion 2. Geothermal effect/Crustal rising 1) Typical minerals: 1) Typical minerals: Coal Hematite/Nickel/Boxite/Lithium/ Phosphate/others 2) Generation of coal ・Fossil of plants sedimented and generated 2) Generation of Hematite peat. Physical pressure & heat processed ・Cyanobacteria had oxidized iron in the sea dehydration & decarboxylation in the long and made iron rust, which had sedimented period, and evolved: peatlignite sub- in the bottom of the ocean, made deposit bituminous coalbituminous coal of hematite, and then rose up to appear anthracite, having increased calorie in the above the ground level. above order. Heat 4 bil years ago 2 bil years ago 1.5 bil years ago Heat Iron mine Iron oxide Pressure iron Rising Step1 Step2 Step3 Iron of ground Iron oxide was The deposit uplifted was solved into generated and from seafloor and Sub bituminous Bituminous Wood Peat Lignite Anthracite the sea. sedimented on became iron ore coal coal the seafloor. mine. Dehydration Decarboxylation Demethane IR-DAY2018 Mining methods 5 • Komatsu became a full line equipment supplier in IN-PIT operation through the acquisition of KMC in 2017. • Today, we will explain UG business. For Surface mining For Underground mining Hydra Mecha Elec. Contin Roof Road Bulldo Motor Dump ulic nical Rope Drag Shee Notes: Wheel Drill uous Truck Suppo head LHD zer grader truck Excava Wheel Shovel line rer Loader Miner rt er tor Loader KMC ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ( ) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ IR-DAY2018 Methods of UG Soft Rock - Room & Pillar 6 • UG Soft Rock methods are consisted of “Longwall” and “Room & Pillar”. • Room & Pillar is the oldest method. Rooms are dug progressively in a grid and mineral is extracted. For safety purpose, a part of the mineral layer is left to serve as pillars, which supports the roof as the extraction proceeds. It is highly cost efficient (initial investment and maintenance costs). However, the part of the mineral retained in the pillars cannot be mined and will become lost opportunity. 1.Machines 2.Methods (Detailed) 1) Continuous Miner 2) Mobile Bolter 2) • 1) Continuous Miner will 1) excavate room. • Room will be Pillar reinforced by 2) Mobile Bolter. • Excavate room • Reinforce aisle and pillar • Coal will be hauled 3) Shuttle Car 4) Feeder Breaker 3) by 3) Shuttle Car 4) 5) to 4) Feeder Breaker and 3) 3) grinded. • Convey excavated • Grind 5) • Excavated coal will be coal excavated coal hauled by 5) Flexible 5) Flexible Conveyor Train to outside. Conveyor • Haul the coal to Train outside. IR-DAY2018 Methods of UG Soft Rock - Long Wall 7 • Longwall is one of the development approach for the underground mining and this is basically suitable for soft rock (coal). This approach will prevent rock fall by supporting the ceiling, and to carve the coal line by line, carrying out carved rocks by Conveyor • Initial cost is higher than Room and Pillar, but it can continuous excavation and it has High productivity. 1. Advance preparation 2. Coal excavation • At first, Entry drivers ・Shearer will will excavate entry excavate coal tunnel. layer. ・After that, Armored Face Conveyor will haul excavated coal. • After developing aisle, the equipment is set ・After excavated up to excavate and move forward one row, the convey coal equipment move • The equipment is forward. composed of 3 parts Roof • ”Roof Support” the Shearer Support machine supporting Coal layer the ceiling, ”Shearer” ・Collapsed at the the one carving the Colla back. coal layer, and psed Conveyor which is also Armored called “Armored Face Face Conveyor” is the one Conveyor shipping the rock IR-DAY2018 UG Soft Rock Outlook 8 • Coal demand for electricity generation is forecasted still stable. • Komatsu continues to provide for coal customers much higher quality products and services and fulfill social responsibility. ① Primary energy forecast ②Coal production forecast (by country) in the world (by minerals) Other Indonesia (Unit: British thermal unit) India USA History Projection China 250 8,000 petroleum and other liquids 229 (Unit: Million ton) 200 182 coal 6,000 161 150 129 natural 4,000 100 gas renewables 50 38 2,000 nuclear 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2011 2012 2013 2016 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2030 2035 2040 Source:EIA International Energy Outlook 2018 (IEO2018) Source: Komatsu estimation IR-DAY2018 Methods of UG Hard Rock - Block Caving 9 • UG Hard Rock methods are roughly divided into Supported methods and Unsupported methods. • Block Caving method is for large deposit. After establishing a room under a mineral vein, its roof is dug in an inverted conical shape, and the ore falls into the room under the pressure of its weight. The mineral ore that has fallen through is brought to the surface through the room. Minerals will be hauled through mine tunnels. Supported methods Unsupported methods Shrinkage Cut and fill Sublevel Sublevel Block Room&Pillar Stoping Stoping Caving Stoping Caving 工法 UG HRock Production ratio: 20% 30% 30% 20% UG HRock No of mine ratio: 15% 50% 30% <5% Transport Ventilation Block Caving method (Image) Water Product Refinery Electricity Ore Grinding Concentrate Flotation Mineral LHD Conveyor/Locomotive Lift Crusher IR-DAY2018 UG Hard Rock Outlook 10 • Market size of mining business is increasing. • In underground mining, hard rock segment will increase relatively. • As Open-pit mines are becoming deeper, it is difficult to mine high grade ores, haulage cost of overburden will increase. • So, some portion of Hard rock mining will shift from Surface to Underground operation. ① Market size(2017) ② Market size(2040) Market size total Market size total 40.2 Billion USD 54.3 Billion USD UG, 23.4 UG, 14.9 Surface, 37% 43% Surface, 63% 25.3 57% 30.9 Soft rock UG, Soft rock UG, Hard rock, Soft rock -Other 14.9 Hard rock, Soft rock -Other 23.4 5.4 -coal, 6.8 minerals, Billion 10.8 -coal, 7.7 minerals, Billion 2.7 USD 4.9 USD 36% 46% 18% 46% 33% 21% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Source: Komatsu estimation IR-DAY2018 UG Hard Rock Product Strategy 11 • We aim to develop products which are not existing, but delivering more value to customers “Dantotsu Product” for expanding our market share. • No Blasting (Safety), No Diesel (Environment), No Batch (Productivity) ⇒ Underground mining automation factory ① Conventional excavation method ② “Dantotsu” UGHR products instead of D&B (Drilling and Blasting : D&B) •DynaMiner: excavated by Dynamic Disc Cutting based on undercutting technology No Blasting =>Safety, Reduce support , Flexible tunnel shape, Working environment improvement ① Drill ②Charge •Mining TBM(Tunnel Boring Machine): No Batch excavated by many disc cutters => Safety, Rock support reduction, ⑧Survey Working environment improvement ③ Blast Rapid excavation ④Vent = early production start No Diesel ⑦Bolt •Hybrid LHD: =>Reduce emissions & ⑥Scale ⑤ Muck & Haul temperature raise in tunnel :Improve health & working environment, Reduce ventilation cost • Complementation between Key words at “Dantotsu” UGHR products TBM, DynaMiner, D&B • To improve productivity by No Blasting No Batch No Diesel innovating Drill jumbo .
Recommended publications
  • Underground Hard-Rock Mining: Subsidence and Hydrologic Environmental Impacts

    Underground Hard-Rock Mining: Subsidence and Hydrologic Environmental Impacts

    Technical Report on Underground Hard-Rock Mining: Subsidence and Hydrologic Environmental Impacts By Steve Blodgett, M.S. and James R. Kuipers, P.E. Center for Science in Public Participation Bozeman, MT February 2002 Abstract: Subsidence and hydrology impacts occur at every underground mining operation bringing about changes to surface landforms, ground water and surface water. Although the same impacts to mining operations, man-made surface structures and other features are relatively well known and studied, the environmental impacts related to subsidence and hydrology at underground mines are not well known and have not been extensively described. This report examines the occurrence and environmental impacts of subsidence and effects on hydrology at underground hard-rock metal mines in the U.S. and abroad. Technical and scientific literature is cited on the cause and effect of underground mining on surface landforms and water resources. Existing laws and recommended regulatory provisions to address these impacts are discussed. Conclusions about subsidence and hydrologic impacts at underground hard-rock metal mines are provided along with recommendations for addressing those impacts. Case studies are provided from copper, molybdenum, silver and other hard-rock mines where significant subsidence and hydrology-related environmental impacts have occurred. The Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2) is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing professional technical assistance to public interest groups; state, tribal and federal governments; and industry. This report has been published with financial support from various foundations and individuals, and from the Mineral Policy Center and Amigos Bravos. The opinions contained in this study are those of the authors and are based solely upon their own scientific and technical knowledge and expertise.
  • Mining's Toxic Legacy

    Mining's Toxic Legacy

    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Acknowledgements _____________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Sierra Fund would like to thank Dr. Carrie Monohan, contributing author of this report, and Kyle Leach, lead technical advisor. Thanks as well to Dr. William M. Murphy, Dr. Dave Brown, and Professor Becky Damazo, RN, of California State University, Chico for their research into the human and environmental impacts of mining toxins, and to the graduate students who assisted them: Lowren C. McAmis and Melinda Montano, Gina Grayson, James Guichard, and Yvette Irons. Thanks to Malaika Bishop and Roberto Garcia for their hard work to engage community partners in this effort, and Terry Lowe and Anna Reynolds Trabucco for their editorial expertise. For production of this report we recognize Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin of The Sierra Fund for conceiving of and coordinating the overall Initiative and writing substantial portions of the document, Kerry Morse for editing, and Emily Rivenes for design and formatting. Many others were vital to the development of the report, especially the members of our Gold Ribbon Panel and our Government Science and Policy Advisors. We also thank the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment and The Abandoned Mine Alliance who provided funding to pay for a portion of the expenses in printing this report. Special thanks to Rebecca Solnit, whose article “Winged Mercury and
  • CORONAQUARRY Surface Mining Permit & Revised Reclamation Plan

    CORONAQUARRY Surface Mining Permit & Revised Reclamation Plan

    CORONAQUARRY Surface Mining Permit & Revised Reclamation Plan City of Corona Permit No. 93-01 State of California Mine ID No. 91-33-0027 Prepared for: 500 North Brand Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 Prepared by: RGP Planning & Development Services 8921 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Submi ed to: City of Corona Community Development Department 400 South Vicen a Avenue Corona, CA 92882 March 2013 CORONA QUARRY Surface Mining Permit & Revised Reclamation Plan City of Corona Permit 93-01 State of California Mine ID No. 91-33-0027 Prepared For: Vulcan Materials Company, West Region 500 North Brand Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 (818) 553-8800 Prepared By: RGP Planning & Development Services 8921 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 450-0171 Submitted To: City of Corona Community Development Department 400 S. Vicentia Ave. Corona, CA 92882 (951) 736-2262 March 2013 Table of Contents 1.0 General Project Information ......................................................................................... 6 1.1 Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................ 6 1.2 Entitlement History ............................................................................................................ 6 1.3 Objectives of Amended Project ......................................................................................... 10 1.4 PCC-Quality Aggregate Regional Needs Assessment ............................................................ 11 1.5 Comparison of 1989
  • Backfilling of Open-Pit Metallic Mines1

    Backfilling of Open-Pit Metallic Mines1

    BACKFILLING OF OPEN-PIT METALLIC MINES1 Stephen M. Testa,2 and James S. Pompy Abstract: Thirty years ago, the Congress of the United States required that coal mines be backfilled as a routine element of reclamation when it passed the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. Until recently, that concept has not been generally applied to non-coal surface mines. In 2003, California’s State Mining and Geology Board (Board) evaluated reclamation of open pit metallic mines in the state and determined that they were not being reclaimed, despite California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA). As a result, the Board issued regulations for the backfilling of open-pit metallic mines. The need for such regulation reflected several issues. Open-pit metallic mineral mines often create very large excavations. In addition, metallic mineral mines that employ the cyanide heap leach method for mineral segregation and collection frequently generate very large leach piles which create long term soil and groundwater contamination conditions. It is the intent of SMARA that completed mine sites present no additional dangers to the public health and safety, and that the mined lands are returned to an alternate, useful condition. To date, no large, open pit metallic mines in California have been returned to the conditions contemplated by SMARA, and these sites continue to pose significant environmental problems. The goal of the Board’s regulations was to require mining companies to address the problems identified above and to take responsibility for cleaning up their mine sites after the completion of surface mining operations, and return them to a condition that allows alternative uses and avoids environmental harms, thereby meeting the purpose and intent of SMARA.
  • A Long Hole Stoping System for Mining Narrow Platinum Reefs

    A Long Hole Stoping System for Mining Narrow Platinum Reefs

    A long hole stoping system for mining narrow platinum reefs by P. van Dorssen*, P. Valicek*, M. Farren*, G. Harrison*, W. Joubert*, R.G.B. Pickering†, and H.J. van Rensburg‡ Introduction ➤ Services requirement ➤ Ore removal and cleaning requirement In South African metalliferous mines, stoping operations are ➤ Training requirement largely confined to narrow, tabular orebodies making mechanization extremely difficult. Limited flexibility in terms of stope width has necessitated drilling by means of hand Safety targets held, pneumatic rock drills at most of our operations. As the All persons involved with the project had to adhere to the largest producer of platinum in the world, we drill in excess mine’s safety programmes including the zero-tolerance of forty million stope blast holes per annum. Cleaning of the campaign, and were required to report all hazards observed broken ore is also done by conventional means—utilizing immediately. Mine personnel and Tamrock carried out a full scrapers and scraper winches. Conventional methods such as risk assessment on the drill rig before transporting these carry high costs in terms of risk exposure as well as underground. A further risk assessment was carried out labour intensity. when the machine was in position underground. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of a long hole stoping system suitable for the narrow platinum reefs. The new system had to be substantially safer Mining layout and more cost effective than conventional mining. We selected a site that was conducive to mechanized mining and See Figure 1 and Figure 2 for a detailed description. set out the parameters that we considered would meet our requirements.
  • Surface Mining Methods and Equipment - J

    Surface Mining Methods and Equipment - J

    CIVIL ENGINEERING – Vol. II - Surface Mining Methods and Equipment - J. Yamatomi and S. Okubo SURFACE MINING METHODS AND EQUIPMENT J. Yamatomi and S. Okubo University of Tokyo, Japan Keywords: Mining method, surface mining, open pit mining, open cast mining, placer mining, solution mining, leaching, stripping ratio, mining machinery, excavation, cutting, grading, loading, ditching Contents 1. Surface Mining Methods 1.1.Classification of Surface Mining Methods 1.2. Open Pit vs. Underground Mining Methods 1.3. Open Pit Mining 1.4. Open Cast Mining 1.5. Placer Mining 1.6 Solution Mining 2. Surface Mining Machinery Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketches Summary This chapter deals with surface mining. Section 1 presents an overview of surface mining methods and practices as commonly employed in modern surface mining operations. The description includes a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of surface and underground mining as well as brief explanations of open pit, open cast, placer, and solution mining operations. Section 2 describes surface mining equipment with particular focus on relatively large machines such as bucket wheel excavators, large shovels and draglines. 1. Surface Mining Methods UNESCO – EOLSS After a mineral deposit has been discovered, delineated, and evaluated, the most appropriate mining method is selected based on technical, economic, and environmentally accountable considerations. The first step in selecting the most appropriate miningSAMPLE method is to compare the CHAPTERS economic efficiency of extraction of the deposit by surface and underground mining methods. This section reviews surface mining methods and practices. 1.1. Classification of Surface Mining Methods Extraction of mineral or energy resources by operations exclusively involving personnel working on the surface without provision of manned underground operations is referred to as surface mining.
  • EPA's National Hardrock Mining Framework

    EPA's National Hardrock Mining Framework

    EPA’s National Hardrock Mining Framework U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (4203) 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 HARDROCK MINING FRAMEWORK September 1997 September 1997 HARDROCK MINING FRAMEWORK Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose and Organization of the Framework ...................................1 1.1 Purpose of the Hardrock Mining Framework ..............................1 1.2 Why Develop an EPA National Mining Framework Now? ....................1 1.2.1 Need For Program Integration ...................................1 1.2.2 The Environmental Impacts of Mining .............................1 1.3 Goals of EPA’s Mining Framework .....................................3 1.4 Guide to the Framework ..............................................3 2.0 Current Status ..........................................................3 2.1 Overview of Regulatory Framework for Mining ............................3 2.2 EPA Statutory Authority .............................................4 2.3 Partnerships .......................................................6 3.0 Improving How We Do Business ...........................................7 3.1 Key Considerations .................................................7 3.2 Recommendations ..................................................8 4.0 Implementation Actions .................................................10 4.1 Putting the Framework into Action .....................................10 4.2 Next Steps .......................................................11 5.0 Introduction to the Appendices
  • Mines of El Dorado County

    Mines of El Dorado County

    by Doug Noble © 2002 Definitions Of Mining Terms:.........................................3 Burt Valley Mine............................................................13 Adams Gulch Mine........................................................4 Butler Pit........................................................................13 Agara Mine ...................................................................4 Calaveras Mine.............................................................13 Alabaster Cave Mine ....................................................4 Caledonia Mine..............................................................13 Alderson Mine...............................................................4 California-Bangor Slate Company Mine ........................13 Alhambra Mine..............................................................4 California Consolidated (Ibid, Tapioca) Mine.................13 Allen Dredge.................................................................5 California Jack Mine......................................................13 Alveoro Mine.................................................................5 California Slate Quarry .................................................14 Amelia Mine...................................................................5 Camelback (Voss) Mine................................................14 Argonaut Mine ..............................................................5 Carrie Hale Mine............................................................14 Badger Hill Mine
  • SIMPLIFIED COST MODELS for UNDERGROUND MINE EVALUATION a Handbook for Quick Prefeasibility Cost Estimates

    SIMPLIFIED COST MODELS for UNDERGROUND MINE EVALUATION a Handbook for Quick Prefeasibility Cost Estimates

    Montana Tech Library Digital Commons @ Montana Tech Mining Engineering Faculty Scholarship 2020 Simplified Cost Models orF Underground Mine Evaluation: A Handbook for Quick Prefeasibility Cost Estimates Thomas W. Camm Scott A. Stebbins Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.mtech.edu/mine_engr Part of the Mining Engineering Commons SIMPLIFIED COST MODELS FOR UNDERGROUND MINE EVALUATION A Handbook for Quick Prefeasibility Cost Estimates By Thomas W. Camm & Scott A. Stebbins 2020 Montana Technological University Mining Engineering Department MINING ENGINEERING CAMM & STEBBINS • SIMPLIFIED COST MODELS FOR UNDERGROUND MINE EVALUATION Simplified Cost Models For Underground Mine Evaluation A Handbook for Quick Prefeasibility Cost Estimates By Thomas W. Camm & Scott A. Stebbins Cover design by Lisa Sullivan Keywords: cost models, prefeasibility studies, underground mine design, mineral property evaluation, mine cost estimating Topic Area(s): Mineral property evaluation, underground mine design Copyright © 2020 by Thomas W. Camm & Scott A. Stebbins Mining Engineering Department Montana Technological University Butte, MT About us Montana Tech is ranked #1 among the best engineering schools in the nation by Best Value Schools (2020). You’ll have the opportunity to engage in hands-on learning with a 10:1 faculty to student ratio. Our ABET-accredited mining engineering degree program also boasts a 100% career outcome rate. Visit our website: https://www.mtech.edu/mining-engineering/index.html We hope you find this publication useful. We are strong believers in open-access teaching resources, and strive to keep the costs to our students as low as possible. For that reason, this publication is free, along with many other publications by myself and my colleagues in the Mining Engineering Department on our library Digital Commons page: https://digitalcommons.mtech.edu/mine_engr/ Suggested citation: Camm, T.
  • Evaluation of the Potential in Critical Metals in the Fine Tailings Dams of the Panasqueira Mine (Barroca Grande, Portugal)

    Evaluation of the Potential in Critical Metals in the Fine Tailings Dams of the Panasqueira Mine (Barroca Grande, Portugal)

    UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA FACULTY OF SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY Department of Earth Sciences EVALUATION OF THE POTENTIAL IN CRITICAL METALS IN THE FINE TAILINGS DAMS OF THE PANASQUEIRA MINE (BARROCA GRANDE, PORTUGAL) - TUNGSTEN AND OTHER CRMs CASES - Francisco Cunha Soares Veiga Simão MASTER IN GEOSCIENCES – Specialisation in Geological Resources September, 2017 UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA FACULTY OF SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY Department of Earth Sciences EVALUATION OF THE POTENTIAL IN CRITICAL METALS IN THE FINE TAILINGS DAMS OF THE PANASQUEIRA MINE (BARROCA GRANDE, PORTUGAL) - TUNGSTEN AND OTHER CRMs CASES - Francisco Cunha Soares Veiga Simão MASTER IN GEOSCIENCES Specialisation in Geological Resources Scientific Advisors: Doctor Alcides Pereira, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra Doctor Elsa Gomes, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra September, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I RESUMO III ABSTRACT V LIST OF FIGURES VII LIST OF CHARTS IX LIST OF TABLES XI LIST OF ACRONYMS XIII LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS, CHEMICAL SYMBOLS AND FORMULAS, AND UNITS XVII CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. RATIONALE 1 1.2. MAIN AND SPECIFIC GOALS 2 1.3. STATE OF THE ART 2 CHAPTER 2. EUROPEAN UNION AND PORTUGUESE POLICIES ON RAW MATERIALS 5 2.1. RAW MATERIALS INITIATIVE 6 2.2. INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMACY ON RAW MATERIALS 18 2.3. RAW MATERIALS INITIATIVE DEVELOPMENT 18 2.3.1. THE EUROPEAN INNOVATION PARTNERSHIP ON RAW MATERIALS 19 2.3.2. EUROPEAN INSTITUTE OF INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY 22 2.4. CIRCULAR ECONOMY 22 2.4.1. CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES 22 2.4.2. EUROPEAN UNION POLICIES ON CIRCULAR ECONOMY 24 2.4.3. CRITICAL RAW MATERIALS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION’S CIRCULAR ECONOMY 26 2.5.
  • Longhole Stoping at the Asikoy Underground Copper Mine in Turkey

    Longhole Stoping at the Asikoy Underground Copper Mine in Turkey

    4 Longhole Stoping at the Asikoy Underground Copper Mine in Turkey Alper Gönen Mining Engineering Department, Dokuz Eylul University, İzmir, Turkey 1. Introduction Asikoy underground copper mine is located in Küre county, some 60 km north of Kastamonu province and 25 km from Black Sea cost. Underground mining method is longhole stoping with post backfill. Ore production is 420.000 ton/year with an average of %2 copper grade[1]. 2. Geology of the region Küre copper deposits occur along the middle pontide zone. Although it exists in a region which has considerably different geological past from the southeast Anatolian ophiolite zone, Küre massif sulfide deposits comprise properties that could be classified within the Kieslager type, which is between Cyprus type and Kuroko type [2]. In the region, there exist the plagical sediments formed of subgrovacs and shales and also the toleitic basalt volcanites that are the products of the mid-ocean extension. It is seen that important tectonic movements occurred within the Küre formation. The units are intercepted with an N-S oriented fault. The mineralization takes place in the weak zone induced by this fault and also within the toleitic basalts and along the borders of the plagical sediments. The overall geologic map of the study area is demonstrated in Figure 1. The ore mass occurs within the altered basalt series that are a part of the Küre ophiolites and is overlain with black shale. The ore mass consists of coarse lenses broken with faults and thrusted. The ore, which is composed of pyrite and chalcopyrite, is in the form of massif lenses with high grades under the hanging wall black shale and in the form of stock work pyrite and chalcopyrite veins with low grades within the altered footwall formation.
  • Drill and Blast Tunneling Practices

    Drill and Blast Tunneling Practices

    Drill and Blast Tunneling Practices Gerhard Girmscheid1 and Cliff Schexnayder, F.ASCE2 Abstract: High-performance drill and blast methods for tunnel construction require that each of the individual working elements that constitute the construction process are optimized and considered as a system of sequential and parallel activities. The advantage of integrating the logistic backup systems facilitates an increase in performance. To achieve increased production, it is necessary to improve the drilling, explosive loading, temporary ground support installation—rock bolts, steel mesh, shotcrete, steel sets, lagging, mucking, and logistics. Better blast techniques, partial robotilization, and integration of all systems and processes is also necessary. DOI: 10.1061/͑ASCE͒1084-0680͑2002͒7:3͑125͒ CE Database keywords: Drilling; Blast; Tunnel Construction. Introduction due to the use of standard equipment. Compared with TBM tech- Tunneling, especially tunnel excavation by tunnel boring ma- nology, the performance ͑rate of advance͒ for drill and blast ex- chines ͑TBMs͒ has increased in the last three decades. Twenty- cavation is lower in most cases. The total labor cost for drill and five years ago, the question was, ‘‘Can the tunnel be excavated by blast tunneling is high, but the total investment cost is less as TBM?’’ Today the question has become, ‘‘Can you afford not to compared with use of a TBM. excavate with a TBM?’’ Therefore, when a project is being ana- This can be summarized as follows: Based on research at the lyzed the drill and blast-tunneling method is in intensive eco- Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, TBM technology shows an nomic competition with TBM tunneling. excellent cost efficiency in the case of tunnels longer than ap- In principle the TBM method ͑Table 1͒ is a highly mechanized proximately three kilometers.