Investigation on Conveyance Motion Using CFD

and Structural Analysis

Quan Situ, Thomas Li, Julius Butty

G.L. Tiley Associates Ltd, Flamborough, ON, Canada

ABSTRACT
As any underground mine expands vertically or laterally, one essential demand is the increase
of ventilation air. Most existing mine shafts used for hoisting ore from underground are also
being used for ventilation air intake or exhaust. Increasing ventilation air may lead to expen-
sive capital investment for a new ventilation shaft if the existing one is already reaching its
capacity by the conventional design guidelines.
This paper examines whether the air velocity can be increased beyond the empirical lim-
its given in conventional design guidelines. This is especially important for rope guided con-
veyances as the airflow could influence its motion when the two skips pass in the middle of
shaft or as skip passes a level. Field measurements were utilized to correlate the models in
the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) studies and in structural analysis of motion study.
Extrapolations were carried out to the proposed new flow volume. The minimum desirable
clearances would be examined to avoid risky motion and the corresponding flow volume
would be considered as the design limit. This approach enhances guidelines to determine shaft
layout and arrangements of rub ropes and has been successfully applied in the studied shaft to
predict the conveyance motion as a result of guide rope changes (production with asymmetric
guide rope configuration).

INTRODUCTION
In the consideration of mine shaft ventilation, the limit flow volume, or, the limit air veloc-
ity, is often a subject of study, such as the McPherson’s maximum relative velocity proposal
(McPherson 1993; de la Vergne 2003). This issue has mainly been related to the evaluation of
the fan capacity and the energy consumption, whereas few reports are about the influence of
increased flow volume beyond the “conventional design guideline” on conveyance motion or
hoisting operation. For a ventilation network that utilizes a vertical production shaft as the
intake or exhaust, it is necessary to investigate the conveyance motion under the increased flow
volume to ensure the conveyance will not run under unstable conditions.
As computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been commonly employed in the investiga-
tion of mine ventilation, the main features of the ventilation, such as flow pattern, air velocity
and pressure variation can be obtained through simulations. Although conveyance motion can
be measured experimentally with up-to-date techniques, little attention has been paid to the
simulation of the motion of conveyances, especially the comparison of influences from various

375
376 SHAFT GUIDING SYSTEMS

A. Production shaft B. Service shaft

Figure 1.  Layout of shaft showing conveyances, rub ropes, and guide ropes

factors. Therefore, efforts to integrate the flow study from CFD and the motion study from
finite element analysis (FEA) were carried out in the authors’ work.
The main methodology of the studies by the authors was to incorporate the experimen-
tally obtained data with the model simulation to represent the existing condition and further
extrapolate to the proposed conditions. In detail, field measurements on the current mine shaft
ventilation and conveyance motion were carried out, such as the directional displacements
of conveyance, air velocity and various pressures of current flow, from the travels of moving
conveyance in the shaft. The field test data was utilized to calibrate the models in CFD ven-
tilation study and in FEA motion study. The model results of air pressure from CFD would
be exported and superimposed to the conveyance surfaces. With various other factors, such
as rope tension and Coriolis effect, the conveyance displacement under a given flow volume
could be predicted. When the model results were in good agreement with the field test data,
the model would be regarded as “correlated” and could be utilized to predict the conveyance
motion under the proposed new flow volume. The minimum desirable clearance for position-
ing the conveyance in the shaft determines the corresponding limit flow velocity. By increasing
the clearances the flow velocity can also be increased.
In the case studies presented in this work, a typical conveyance rope guide system in
a vertical shaft arrangement was studied (Figure 1). In a rope guide system, the horizontal
motion of the conveyance is critical as it may cause collision between conveyances or with the
shaft wall. Various factors have been evaluated for the influences on the horizontal motion of
conveyance in a rope guide system, including the air pressure, stiffness of rope guide, Coriolis
effect, rope vibration, etc.
In the available investigations on a potash mine ventilation system (De Souza 2006), the
features of airflow were analyzed and the barriers of the ventilation network were identified.
The work by Tiley authors was to detail the conveyance motion with the criterion to avoid col-
lision between conveyances or between conveyance and shaft. Based on the running clearance
 INVESTIGATION ON CONVEYANCE MOTION 377

Figure 2.  Results of skip displacement in east-west direction from motion sensor

in-between the conveyances obtained from the motion study, the ventilation limit could be
determined for conveyances running under instability condition without a collision.

INITIAL FIELD MEASUREMENT

Field measurements of clearance between the east-west skips and the pressure over the sur-
faces of the east skip during the travels were carried out for a production shaft of a potash mine
in August 2010. The acceleration, velocity and displacement of the east skip were captured
with a three-dimensional motion sensor. The measured displacements of the skips at current
3300 fpm (16.76 m/s) velocity were the resultant movements under the combined influences
of airflow, Coriolis effect and guide rope vibration.
In reference to the rest position having around 22.5" clearance, the minimum clearance
between the two skips when the loaded east skip moves upward was about 17.3" (or 5.2" total
movement of the two skips), of which the maximum displacement of the east skip was around
3.3" westward. When the emptied east skip moves downward, the minimum clearance in-be-
tween the two skip was 27.8" (or 5.3" total movement of the two skips), of which the maximum
displacement of the east skip was about 2.4" eastward (Figure 2). The measurements confirmed
the Coriolis effect in that as the loaded east skip moves upward, it tends to move westward
and the clearance in-between the two skips reduces, whereas when the empty east skip moves
downward, it tends to move eastward and the clearance in-between the two skips increases.
The readings of the pressure gauge at the collar (ground, unloading zone), mid-shaft and
tunnel (bottom, loading zone) were –1.53 w.g., –0.66 w.g. and 0.21 w.g., respectively, after sub-
tracting the environmental pressure. The absolute reading on the surface level was measured as
13.8 psi, whereas the statistical record is 13.83 psi (sea level +1663 ft). The pressure difference
between the skip-skip interface and the skip-wall interface was negligible. Also, the pressure
378 SHAFT GUIDING SYSTEMS

Table 1.  Major hoist parameters of the potash mine

Production Shaft Service Shaft

Guide rope diameter 1.75" 1.63"
Guide rope quantity 4 4
Headrope diameter 2.01" 1.13"
Headrope quantity 6 4
Tailrope diameter 2.09" 1.44"
Tailrope quantity 6 3
Cheese weight 22 kip (average) —
48 kip (existing)
Conveyance weight 10 kip
91 kip (proposed)
66 kip (existing)
Conveyance payload 26 kip
110 kip (proposed)
48' (existing)
Conveyance length 40'
65' (existing)
Conveyance section area 7.5'x5' 9'x8'
3300 fpm (existing)
Conveyance Speed 2500 fpm (existing)
4000 fpm (proposed)

change from loading zone to unloading zone showed a smooth and gradual progress. No rapid
jump in the reading was obtained all along the travel or at the mid-shaft.
The experimental data shows that the major contribution to the skip clearance was from
the Coriolis effect, which is determined by the skip velocity and travel direction in the shaft.
The influences from the rope vibration appeared to be minor in comparison with the Coriolis
effect and air pressure, although the measured data was combined results.

CFD MODEL SETTINGS AND RESULTS

The CFD studies were carried out with software of SolidWorks CosmosFlow, whereas the
conveyance motion studies were carried out with ANSYS WorkBench. The major parameters
employed in the models are summarized in Table 1.
The potash mine in this study utilizes a downcast flow in the service shaft where sup-
ply fans are used, and an upcast flow in the production shaft where exhaust fans are used
(Figure 3). Per the McPherson’s maximum relative velocity, the limit air velocity may occur
at the flow volume of 515 k·cfm (conveyance velocity at 4000 fpm, or, 20.32 m/s). At current
location of rub ropes (14" centre distance), under the proposed velocity the east skip was pre-
dicted to be in constant contact with the rub rope on the east side in the process of east-up and
west-down, whereas the west skip still has clearance to the rub rope on the west side. It was
recommended to monitor the east rub rope set and, if wear has been found to be excessive,
move it at least 1 inch to the west (13" centre distance).
Major geometries, such as fan room passage, stations, simplified underground, total length
of tubbing region, etc, have been largely modelled in the simulations. The cage in the service shaft
 INVESTIGATION ON CONVEYANCE MOTION 379

A. Isometric view B. Top view

Figure 3.  Typical result of simplified ventilation system (flow volume 500 k·cfm)

was modelled as a wall in motion at velocity of 2500 fpm (12.7 m/s), upward. The skips in the
production shaft was modelled as a wall in motion at velocity of 4000 fpm (20.32 m/s), the east
skip moving upward and the west skip moving downward. The inlet supply fan at the ground
level was simulated with flow volumes of 500, 550 and 600 k·cfm, respectively (current flow
volume 450 k·cfm). The outlet exhaust fan operates with air pressure of –370 Pa (–0.0537 psi).
The typical results showed that severe turbulence was found in the entry from the fan
room passage into the shaft and exit to the underground tunnel. This was mainly due to the
construction and equipment layout. The shaft wall roughness had minor influence in the flow
pattern. The tubbing region (with narrowed diameter) did not produce significant turbulence.
Per the guideline of McPherson for the maximum relative velocity of 6000 fpm (30.48 m/s),
with the cage running at 2500 fpm (12.7 m/s) in the service shaft, the limit air velocity in the
tubbing region should not exceed 3500 fpm (17.78 m/s). Under flow volume of 550 k·cfm, the
air velocity in the tubbing region can be greater, indicating that the limit velocity may occur
when the flow volume is between 500 ~ 550 k·cfm. However, since the cage travels through the
tubbing region in about 5 ~ 6 seconds, and as the cage passes the tubbing, more air can flow
in. The cage itself did not introduce severe turbulence, and its position was irrelevant to the
flow volume.
Similarly, when the skips are running at 4000 fpm (20.32 m/s) in the production shaft,
the maximum air velocity in the mid-shaft should not exceed 2000 fpm. Under 550 k·cfm
flow volume, the average air velocity in the mid-shaft region was already higher. The limit air
velocity would occur between 500 ~ 550 k·cfm flow volume. As the two skips approach, meet
and pass each other, the pressure increased to the maximum when the two skips were side by
side at the mid-shaft. This instance is a restriction to the flow inside the shaft, although it lasts
for only about 0.5 seconds.
380 SHAFT GUIDING SYSTEMS

Figure 4.  Pressure difference on east-west direction over surfaces of two skips (flow volume
500 k·cfm)

Interpolation shows that under 515 k·cfm flow volume, the air velocity in the mid-shaft
of the production shaft reaches the limit velocity of 2000 fpm (10.16 m/s), per McPherson’s
guideline. As the time the two skips travels with the possibility of collision at the mid-shaft
lasts only 0.5 seconds, whereas the rest of time the skips are running under limit velocity, the
flow volume of 515 k·cfm is an achievable flow volume and practical for operation.

MOTION STUDY MODELLING AND RESULTS

Motion study was focusing on the skips in the production shaft only. No motion study was
carried out for the cage in the service shaft, as the cage moves at a lower speed.
As the clearance between the skips is the minimum at the mid-shaft, the relative move-
ment of the two skips at different stages, such as approaching, meeting and passing each
other, were modelled. In each scenario, the pressure over the surfaces of the conveyances was
obtained from CFD modelling for further motion study (Figures 4 and 5).
The model of motion study for the skips (65 ft, 4000 fpm) was extrapolated from the exist-
ing setting (48 ft, 3300 fpm) that has been correlated with the field tests. The field measurement
results of skip movement (clearance), Coriolis effect, guide rope with tension from cheese
weight, and air pressure during the skip travels were incorporated in the model. Minimum
clearance between the skips during the travels was predicted. No skip collision was predicted
to occur under the tested conditions.
Based on the geographic location of the potash mine, the Coriolis acceleration was deter-
mined as:

77 When skip moves upward, vu = +3300 fpm, ac = 0.0591 in/s2 (westward).

77 When skip moves downward, vu = –3300 fpm, ac = 0.0591 in/s2 (eastward).
 INVESTIGATION ON CONVEYANCE MOTION 381

Figure 5.  Force on east-west surfaces of skips due to air pressure

Referencing the up and down movement of skips in the shaft, the Coriolis effect at the
studied location tends to push the up-moving object westward and the down-moving object
eastward. Two typical motions may occur during the skip travel in the shaft. When the east
skip is loaded and moving upward, while the west skip is empty and moving downward, the
Coriolis effect pushes the two skips closer. This scenario must be considered to ensure a col-
lision does not occur between the two skips. On the other hand, when the east skip is empty
and moving downward, while the west skip is loaded and moving upward, the Coriolis effect
pushes the skips apart. This scenario must be considered to ensure a collision does not occur
between a skip and the shaft wall. In this study, the subject of interest was to investigate the
condition when the loaded skip in east and empty skip in west move towards each other as
they approach.
The CFD model produced the air pressure over the skip surfaces under various flow vol-
umes. The response of skip to air pressure can be obtained in the motion investigation. Typical
results showed that along the skip body vertically higher pressure was found in top section.
In the tested condition with the east skip moving up and west skip moving down under 500
k·cfm flow volume, the forces tended to push the two skips moving towards each other. Due
to the opposite relative velocity, the west skip was subjected to higher pushing force than the
east skip from the air. This reduced the clearance between the skips. The forces due to the air
pressure under various flow volumes were obtained and applied to the skip surfaces to further
investigate the response of skips.
The process when the two skips approach, meet and pass each other at the mid-shaft was
modelled at progressive positions. Skip displacements due to Coriolis effect, air pressure, guide
rope vibration and combined influence are presented in Figure 6. In summary for the motion
study, based on the predictions for the proposed skip length and velocity, no collision would
382 SHAFT GUIDING SYSTEMS

A. Boundary condition B. Movement due to Coriolis effect

C. Movement due to air pressure D. Movement due to Coriolis

effect and air pressure

Figure 6.  Typical FE model of skip motion (east up and west down at 4000 fpm velocity under
500 k·cfm flow)

occur. Guide rope vibration exerts minor influence upon the skip motion. The main contribu-
tion to skip movement was from the Coriolis effect and airflow.
The typical results of modal analysis of skip vibration showed that the 1st and 2nd mode of
vibrations occurred in the loaded skip (east in model), the first in east-west direction, and the
second in south-north direction. Similarly in the emptied skip (west in model), vibrations also
 INVESTIGATION ON CONVEYANCE MOTION 383

Table 2.  Skip movements due to various factors (east up and west down at 4000 fpm velocity
under 500 k·cfm flow)
Movement in East-West Direction (in)

West Skip East Skip

Position Coriolis Air Total Coriolis Air Total Clearance

2.014 0.253 2.273 3.501 0.282 3.793 16.434

2.039 0.253 2.306 3.594 0.265 3.880 16.314

2.153 0.255 2.414 3.556 0.257 3.814 16.272

2.154 0.268 2.397 3.708 0.301 3.961 16.142

2.262 0.264 2.517 3.552 0.283 3.814 16.169

2.219 0.279 2.503 3.497 0.267 3.754 16.243

2.149 0.274 2.425 3.430 0.271 3.709 16.336

occurred in east-west direction and then in south-north direction respectively. The amplitude
of guide rope vibration on the skip movement (FEA results) was about 0.05 in. It should be
noted that for the natural frequency of rope, the longer length of rope, the lower frequency,
and the lower amplitude. Therefore, the simplification of guide rope was sufficient, as the con-
tribution of the guide rope vibration was minor compared to the factors of Coriolis effect and
air pressure (Table 2).
384 SHAFT GUIDING SYSTEMS

Figure 7.  Clearances between skips under various airflow volumes (east up and west down)

The skip movements under various flow volumes are re-plotted in Figure 7. The criterion
to evaluate the influence of the flow on conveyance motion was to check the clearance between
the two skips and the clearance between the skip and rub rope as well. Since the narrowest
clearance between skips and shaft wall is sufficient to avoid a collision, only the clearance
between the two skips is discussed.
As the flow volumes increased from 500 to 600 k·cfm, the displacement of the east skip
changed from 3.7" to 4.1", whereas the displacement of the west skip changed from 2.4" to
2.7". It should be noted for the east skip, even under 500 k·cfm flow volume, the predicted skip
movement was larger than 3.375", indicating that the east skip would be in contact with the
rub ropes. The predicted movements of the west skip show that there would still be clearance
between the west skip and rub ropes. The clearances between the two skips show that the
higher the flow volume, the smaller the clearance. Although the east skip was in contact with
the rub ropes, no collision between the two skips was found under the tested flow volumes.
Even at 600 k·cfm flow volume, there was still minimum 15.6" clearance in-between the two
skips. This indicates that although the skips may travel under the limit velocity, collision is not
predicted to be a concern. However, the rub ropes near the east skip may have to be moved
by 1" westward, or, the centre distance between the rub rope in the east-west direction would
change from 14" to 13". The clearance between the rub rope and the east skip would change
from 3.375" to 4.375" (Figure 8).

APPLICATION OF THIS STUDY

Utilizing the established methodology and results, the prediction of the limit velocity for the
conveyance in the production shaft with only three guide ropes was carried out. Conveyance
motions with 3 guide ropes were modelled under various velocities, such as the normal
3300  fpm (full production velocity) and empirical 1650 fpm (50% of full velocity). The
 INVESTIGATION ON CONVEYANCE MOTION 385

Figure 8.  Top view of skip and rub ropes (solid line: existing location; dashed line: suggested
location)

maximum velocity that the skip would stay clear of the rub ropes was determined to be at
2600 fpm (Figure 9). It should be noted that this number was predicted before a field mea-
surement of skip motion prior to a rope change schedule. Based on the field measurement,
the allowable skip velocity was set to 2400 fpm (nearly 70% of full production velocity), for
production to proceed with three guide ropes on one skip. Operating at 70% hoisting speed
reduction prevented substantial production loss for the period with preparation made for the
guide rope repair.

FIELD VERIFICATION ON ROPE CHANGE

Field measurement on the motion of the east skip with three guide ropes (asymmetric config-
uration) was carried out in November 2011, under various skipping velocities, namely 2000,
2200, 2400 and 2600 fpm. Both planar and rotational movements were observed. Based on
the clearance between the skips for the condition of east-up and west-down travel (minimum
clearance), the practical limit velocity was determined at 2400 fpm.
With the absence of a guide rope in the north-west corner, three guide ropes were utilized
on the east skip during the production. The motion test system was employed to obtain the
clearance between the two skips. The test data of skip clearance for the different travels under
various velocities were obtained. Also, the displacements at the sensors reflected the deflec-
tions of the east skip. Assuming the axis in the centre, the rotation angles of the east skip under
various tested conditions were obtained.
The test results have demonstrated that the motion of the east skip contained both planar
and rotational conditions. In the process of east-up, the Coriolis effect tended to push the
skip westward, planar. Due to the absence of the guide rope in the north-west corner, free of
386 SHAFT GUIDING SYSTEMS

Figure 9.  Influence of skip velocity on skip deflection in east-west direction (with three
guide ropes)

restraint, the skip tended to rotate counter-clockwise, which reduced the clearance. As the
velocity increased, the clearance in between further reduced. In the process of east-down, the
Coriolis effect tended to push the skip east-ward, planar. The asymmetric restraints from the
guide ropes produced rotation clockwise, which resulted in an increased clearance.
As the velocity increased from 2400 to 2600 fpm, significant reduction in the clearance
was found in the east-up process. Although no collision occurred between the two skips, there
was contact between the rub rope and east skip in the north-west corner, which would result
in material wear-off from the rub rope and the cushion plate on the skip. Therefore, velocity
at 2400 fpm was considered as the limit velocity. This speed was maintained prior to the rope
change successfully without any collision.

CONCLUSIONS
The airflow in a potash mine was investigated in CFD modellings. When McPherson’s guide-
line was applied, a limiting air velocity was predicted to occur at a flow of 515 k·cfm. However,
based on the clearances obtained from the motion study of skips in the shaft, as there was no
collision predicted, the flow volume can therefore be increased to 600 k·cfm without causing
excessive movement of the conveyances.
The motion study of skips in the production shaft that investigated the influence of guide
ropes, air pressure and Coriolis effect was correlated with experimental data from the cur-
rent production hosting plant and then extrapolated to the proposed operating parameters.
The various causes of skip motion have been evaluated. The predictions showed that with
skip velocity increased to 4000 fpm, under various flow volumes, no collisions were predicted
between skips. It should be noted, however, that the east skip may abrade the rub ropes. The
rub rope set near the east skip may need to be moved about 1" westward. In this respect, it
 INVESTIGATION ON CONVEYANCE MOTION 387

would be advisable to check the rub rope wear area on the skips regularly to avoid constant
contact between the skip and rub ropes.
The established methodology has been employed to determine the hoisting operation
with 3 guide ropes only prior to the rope change period. A limiting velocity was predicted
and validated with field tests, which successfully helped to increase the productivity from the
empirical value of 50% to 70% of the full production velocity.
Further field verification during any mine upgrade is recommended to examine the pre-
dictions of conveyance motion under various ventilation flow volumes. The methodology pre-
sented in this work can then be validated to be practical support to run the conveyance beyond
the conventional design limit.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Authors would like to thank Greg Stevens and Erick Gow for the painstaking work in building
the test system and the field measurement.

REFERENCES
de la Vergne, J. N., Hard Rock Miner’s Handbook, Section 18.2, “Rules of Thumb,” Chapter
18, “Ventilation and Air Conditioning,” published by McIntosh Engineering (ISBN
0-9687006-1-6), pp. 158–159, 3rd Edition, 2003.
De Souza, E., An Assessment of Ventilation Conditions, internal report, 2006.
De Souza, E., An Analysis of Airflow Characteristics For The Ventilation Shafts, internal report,
2006.
McPherson, M.J., Subsurface Ventilation and Environmental Engineering, Chapman & Hall,
1993.