Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cuttoff Osanloo
Cuttoff Osanloo
Cuttoff Osanloo
Abstract
One of the most important aspects of mine design is to determine the optimum cut-off grades. Material grading above and below
the cut-off is directed to different destinations. Optimization of cut-off grade is now an accepted principle for open pit planning
studies. The most commonly criteria used in cut-off grade optimization is to maximize net present value. Lane formulated the
concept of cut-off grade optimization for single metal deposit but this method cannot be use in multiple metal deposits. Because in
single metal deposits six points are possible candidates for the optimum cut-off grade, in multiple metal deposits an infinite number
of points are possible candidates for the optimum cut-off grades. The objective function evaluation of these infinite points is im-
possible. In this paper, the equivalent grade factor is used to find optimum cut-off grade of multiple metal deposits. First, the
objective function is defined for multiple metal deposits and then objective function is converted to one variable function by using
equivalent factors. The optimum equivalent cut-off grade of main metal can be found by the optimization techniques such as the
Lane algorithm or elimination methods. At final step, the optimum cut-off grades will be determined by interpolation of grade-
tonnage distribution of deposit.
2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
that to express the grade of one metal in term of another Qr1 ¼ g1 y1 Qc ð4Þ
(Zhang, 1998; Liimatainen, 1998). Other methods for
ore/waste discrimination in multiple metal deposits are Qr2 ¼ g2 y2 Qc ð5Þ
critical level method, single grade cut-off approach, where g1 : average grade of metal 1 sent for concentra-
dollar value cut-off approach (Annels, 1991; Barid and tion, g2 : average grade of metal 2 sent for concentration,
Satchwell, 2001). y1 : recovery of metal 1 from the ore, y2 : recovery of
All of these methods are associated with some flaws: metal 2 from the ore.
none of these methods consider the grade distribution of Substituting Eqs. (4) and (5) into Eq. (3) yields
the deposits and do not take into account time value of m ¼ ½ðs1 r1 Þ
g1 y1 þ ðs2 r2 Þ
g2 y2 cQc
money. Furthermore, they completely ignore the ca-
pacities of the mining system, so the cut-off grades cal- mQm ðf þ VdÞT ð6Þ
culated by these methods are not optimum. One would now like to schedule the mining operation
This paper describes the use of equivalent grade fac- in such a way that the depreciation in the present value
tors to optimum the cut-off grades of multiple metal takes place sooner rather than later. This is because later
deposits. profits are discounted more than those captured earlier.
In examining Eq. (6), this means that m has to be max-
imized. m is a function of two variables: grade of metal 1
2. Objective function and grade of metal 2.
In Eq. (6), the grade of metal 2 is converting to grade
In large open pit mines, there are typically three of metal 1 by using equivalent factor. Therefore m will be
stages of operations: (i) the mining stage, where units of function of grade of metal 1 and Eq. (6) yields
various grade are mined up to some capacity, (ii) the
ðs2 r2 Þy2
treatment stage, where ore is milled and concentrated, m ¼ ðs1 r1 Þy1 g1 þ g2 c Qc
ðs1 r1 Þy1
again up to some capacity constraint and (ii) the refining
stage, where the concentrate is smelted and refined to a mQm ðf þ VdÞT ð7Þ
final product which is shipped and sold; the latest stage Equivalent factor is equal to
is also subject to capacity constraints. Each stage has its
own associated costs and a limiting capacity. ðs2 r2 Þy2
Feq ¼ ð8Þ
By considering costs and revenues in this operation, ðs1 r1 Þy1
the profit is determined by using the following equation: Substituting Eq. (8) into Eq. (7) yields
P ¼ ðs1 r1 ÞQr1 þ ðs2 r2 ÞQr2 mQm cQc fT ð1Þ m ¼ ½ðs1 r1 Þy1 ð
g1 þ Feq g2 Þ cQc mQm ðf þ VdÞT
where P : profit ($), m: mining cost ($/ton of material ð9Þ
moved), c: concentrating cost ($/ton of material con-
centrated), r1 : refinery cost ($/unit of product 1), r2 : re- To calculate the average equivalent grade of ore based
finery cost ($/unit of product 2), f : fixed cost ($), s1 : upon equivalent factor and average grade of each metal,
selling price ($/unit of product 1), s2 : selling price ($/unit the following equation can be used:
of product 2), T : the length of the production period, geq ¼ g1 þ Feq g2 ð10Þ
Qm : quantity of material to be mined, Qc : quantity of ore
Substituting Eq. (10) into Eq. (9) yields
sent to the concentrator, Qr1 : the amount of product 1
actually produced over this production period, Qr2 : the m ¼ ½ðs1 r1 Þy1 geq cQc mQm ðf þ VdÞT ð11Þ
amount of product 2 actually produced over this pro- Eq. (11) is the fundamental formula for calculation of
duction period. optimum cut-off grades of ore. The time taken T is re-
If d is discount rate, the difference m between the lated to the constrain capacity. Three cases arise de-
present values of the remaining reserves at times t ¼ 0 pending upon which of the three capacities is actually
and t ¼ T is (Hustrulid and Kuchta, 1995) limiting factor.
m ¼ P VTd ð2Þ
• If the mining capacity (M) is the limiting factor then
where V is the present values at time t ¼ 0. Substituting
the time T is given by
Eq. (1) into Eq. (2) yields
Qm
m ¼ ðs1 r1 ÞQr1 þ ðs2 r2 ÞQr2 mQm T ¼ ð12Þ
M
cQc ðf þ VdÞT ð3Þ • If the concentrating capacity (C) is the limiting factor
then the time T is controlled by the concentrator
The quantities of refined metals Qr1 and Qr2 are re-
lated to that send from the mine to concentrator (Qc ), Qc
T ¼ ð13Þ
therefore C
M. Osanloo, M. Ataei / Minerals Engineering 16 (2003) 771–776 773
Qr1 g1 y1 Qc
T ¼ ¼ ð14Þ
Rm Rm
4. Example
Table 1
Grade–tonnage distribution of copper and molybdenum
Copper (%) Molybdenum (%)
0–0.025 0.025–0.05 0.05–0.075 0.075–0.1 >0.1
0–0.1 1,320,000 900,000 285,000 315,000 510,000
0.1–0.2 360,000 300,000 240,000 135,000 60,000
0.2–0.3 735,000 525,000 300,000 210,000 30,000
0.3–0.4 1,110,000 570,000 375,000 135,000 30,000
0.4–0.5 525,000 255,000 75,000 60,000 90,000
0.5–0.6 510,000 300,000 210,000 105,000 30,000
0.6–0.7 375,000 270,000 210,000 90,000 90,000
>0.7 645,000 690,000 570,000 495,000 360,000
Table 2
Average grade of copper of different copper and molybdenum intervals
Copper (%) Molybdenum (%)
0–0.025 0.025–0.05 0.05–0.075 0.075–0.1 >0.1
0–0.1 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.05
0.1–0.2 0.12 0.17 0.16 0.19 0.14
0.2–0.3 0.25 0.27 0.25 0.22 0.26
0.3–0.4 0.33 0.32 0.35 0.34 0.37
0.4–0.5 0.44 0.47 0.45 0.48 0.46
0.5–0.6 0.53 0.55 0.57 0.54 0.55
0.6–0.7 0.67 0.63 0.65 0.64 0.66
>0.7 0.98 1.04 1.02 1.09 1.01
M. Osanloo, M. Ataei / Minerals Engineering 16 (2003) 771–776 775
Table 3
Average grade of molybdenum of different copper and molybdenum intervals
Copper (%) Molybdenum (%)
0–0.025 0.025–0.05 0.05–0.075 0.075–0.1 >0.1
0–0.1 0.002 0.026 0.052 0.076 0.113
0.1–0.2 0.017 0.031 0.06 0.085 0.114
0.2–0.3 0.011 0.028 0.066 0.091 0.137
0.3–0.4 0.031 0.042 0.058 0.094 0.138
0.4–0.5 0.006 0.035 0.054 0.091 0.119
0.5–0.6 0.012 0.039 0.07 0.082 0.152
0.6–0.7 0.014 0.029 0.062 0.085 0.12
>0.7 0.009 0.038 0.063 0.086 0.128
Table 5
Equivalent copper grade of different copper grade
Copper grade (%) Average grade Equivalent Tonnage
Copper (%) Molybdenum (%) copper grade (%)
Table 6
The optimum cut-off grades of different years of mine life
Year Copper cut-off grade (%) Qm (Ton) Qc (Ton) Qr1 (Ton) Profit ($) NPV ($)
1 0.4617 2,010,300 750,000 4976.9 4,425,600 16,355,000
2 0.3725 1,345,100 750,000 4546.2 4,013,100 15,201,000
3 0.3645 1,601,700 750,000 4487.3 3,961,200 14,228,000
4 0.3555 1,555,600 750,000 4421 3,899,900 13,112,000
5 0.3455 1,507,300 750,000 4347.4 3,828,700 11,834,000
6 0.3355 1,462,000 750,000 4273.8 3,754,300 10,373,000
7 0.3255 1,419,200 750,000 4200.2 3,677,200 8,693,000
8 0.2634 1,222,500 750,000 3850.5 3,286,600 6,754,000
9 0.2464 1,181,500 750,000 3774.9 3,196,200 4,818,000
10 0.2293 794,700 521,330 2571.4 3,103,000 2,586,000
¼ 4492019:035
References
Yearly cash flow and NPV of mining operation under
break-even equivalent cut-off grade found to be Annels, A.E., 1991. Mineral Deposit Evaluation––A Partial Approach.
6182964:363 4492019:035 ¼ 1690945:325 $ Chapman and Hall, London (pp. 114–117).
Barid, B.K., Satchwell, P.C., 2001. Application of economic para-
14:37
1690945:325½ð1 þ 0:2Þ 1 meters and cut-offs during and after pit optimization. Mining
NPV ¼ 14:37
¼ 7839174:188 Engineering, 33–40.
0:2 ð1 þ 0:2Þ Chong, E.K.P., Zak, S.H., 1996. An Introduction to Optimization. A
Therefore, NPV of mining operation under break- Wiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley and Sons Inc, New
York (p. 409).
even equivalent cut-off grade is $ 7839174.188 and NPV
Hustrulid, W., Kuchta, M., 1995. Open-pit Mine Planning and Design,
of mining operation under proposed method according vol. 1. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, Brookfiled (pp. 512–544).
to Table 6 is $ 16,355,000. Thus, if mining operation is Lane, K.F., 1964. Choosing the optimum cut-off grade. Quarterly of
operated under proposed method, NPV is more than the Colorado School of Mines 59 (4), 811–829.
twice of NPV of mining operation under break-even Lane, K.F., 1988. The Economic Definition of Ore-cut-off Grades in
Theory and Practice. Mining Journal Books Limited, London.
equivalent cut-off grade.
p. 145.
Liimatainen, J., 1998. Valuation model and equivalence factors for
base metal ores. In: Singhal, J. (Ed.), Proceeding of Mine Planning
6. Conclusion and Equipment Selection. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, Brookfiled,
pp. 317–322.
Rao, S.S., 1996. Engineering optimization (Theory and Practice), third
One of the important aspects of mining is deciding
ed. A Wiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley and Sons Inc,
what material in a deposit is worth mining and pro- New York (p. 903).
cessing, and on the contrary, what material is waste. Rardin, R.L., 1998. Optimization in Operations Research. Prentice-
This decision-making is summarized by the cut-off grade Hall International Inc. (p. 919).
policy. Cut-off grades of multiple metal deposits are Taylor, H.K., 1972. General background theory of cut-off grades.
Institution of Mining and Metallurgy Transactions, A160–179.
evaluated by several methods such as NSR method,
Taylor, H.K., 1985. Cut-off grades––some further reflections. Institu-
critical level method, single grade cut-off approach, tion of Mining and Metallurgy Transactions, A204–216.
dollar value cut-off approach. None of these methods is Whittle, J., Wharton, C., 1995a. Optimizing cut-off grades. Mining
optimum. In this paper, proposed that minable ore is Magazine, 287–289.
ranked based on metals contribution of the mine reve- Whittle, J., Wharton, C., 1995b. Optimizing cut-offs over time, 25th
international symposium application of computers and mathemat-
nue and equivalent grade of main metal is determined
ics in the mineral industries, 1995b, Australia, pp. 261–265.
using equivalent factors. Objective function is expressed Zhang, S., 1998. Multimetal recoverable reserve estimation and its
to one variable function. Then optimization techniques impact on the cove ultimate pit design. Mining Engineering, 73–
such as Lane algorithm or elimination methods must be 77.