Journal of Mining Science

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 73–82 | Cite as

A maximum upside / minimum downside approach to the traditional optimization of open pit mine design

  • R. Dimitrakopoulos
  • L. Martinez
  • S. Ramazan
Article

Abstract

The management of cash flows and risk during production is a critical part of a surface mining venture as well as an integral part of a strategy in developing new and existing operating mines. Orebody uncertainty is a critical factor in strategic mine planning, the optimization of mine designs and long-term sequencing. Traditional optimization approaches do not account for in situ grade variability or deal with geological risk. This paper presents a new approach to mine design based on risk quantification and alternative strategic decision-making criteria.

Keywords

Open pit optimization stochastic simulation economic evaluation upside downside 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    H. Lerchs and L. Grossman, “Optimum design of open-pit mines”, Transactions of CIM, LXVII (1965).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Whittle, “Beyond optimization in open pit design,” in: Canadian Conference on Computer Applications in the Mineral Industries, Balkema, Rotterdam (1988).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Whittle, “A decade of open pit mine planning and optimization — the craft of turning algorithms into packages,” in: Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on the Application of Computers and Operations Research in the Mineral Industries, Colorado School of Mines, Golden (1999).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. C. Godoy and R. Dimitrakopoulos, “Managing risk and waste mining in long-term production scheduling,” SME Transactions, 316 (2004).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Dimitrakopoulos and S. Ramazan, “Uncertainty based production scheduling in open pit mining,” SME Transactions, 316 (2004).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. J. Ravenscroft, “Risk analysis for mine scheduling by stochastic simulation,” Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy, Section A: Mining Technology, 101 (1992).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. A. Dowd, “Risk in minerals projects: analysis, perception and management,” Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy, Section A: Mining Technology, 106 (1997).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. K. Baker and S. M. Giacomo, “Resource and reserves: their uses and abuses by the equity markets,” in: Ore Reserves and Finance: A Joint Seminar between Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and ASX, Sydney (1998).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Vallee, “Mineral resource + engineering, economic and legal feasibility = ore reserve,” CIM Bulletin, 93 (2000).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Dimitrakopoulos, C. T. Farrelly, and M. C. Godoy, “Moving forward from traditional optimization: grade uncertainty and risk effects in open-pit design,” Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy, Section A: Mining Technology, 111 (2002).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Dimitrakopoulos, “Risk assessment in orebody modelling and mine planning: decision-making with uncertainty,” Course Notes, 2004 SME Annual Meeting & Exhibit, Denver, Co. (2004).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Dimitrakopoulos and X. Luo, “Generalized sequential Gaussian simulation on group size ν and screen-effect approximations for large field simulations,” Mathematical Geology, 36 (2004).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. A. Vargas-Guzman and R. Dimitrakopoulos, “Successive stochastic simulation of random fields by residuals,” Mathematical Geology, 34 (2002).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. T. Farrelly, “Risk quantification in ore reserve estimation and open pit mine planning,” MSc Thesis, University of Queensland, Australia (2002).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Ramazan and R. Dimitrakopoulos, “Recent applications of operations research in open pit mining,” SME Transactions, 316 (2004).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Ramazan and R. Dimitrakopoulos, “Traditional and new MIP models for production scheduling with insitu grade variability,” Int. J. Surface Mining, Reclamation and the Environment, 18 (2004).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Dimitrakopoulos
    • 1
  • L. Martinez
    • 2
  • S. Ramazan
    • 3
  1. 1.COSMO Laboratory, Department of Mining, Metals and Materials EngineeringMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.School of Economics and Finance, Faculty of BusinessQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Rio TintoPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations