Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000
Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000
ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Procedia Computer Science 231 (2024) 660–665

The International Symposium on Intelligent Systems and Future Networks

The International Symposium on 2023)
(ISFN Intelligent Systems and Future Networks
(ISFN 2023)
November 7-9, 2023, Almaty, Kazakhstan
November 7-9, 2023, Almaty, Kazakhstan
A
A Mixed
Mixed Integer
Integer Programming
Programming optimization
optimization model
model for
for mining
mining truck
truck
dispatch
dispatch policies using traffic constraints: Case of a copper mine in
policies using traffic constraints: Case of a copper mine in
northern Chile
northern Chile
Gabriel País Cernaa,*, Thalía Obredor-Baldovinob
Gabriel País Cernaa,*, Thalía Obredor-Baldovinob
a
Faculty of Engineering - Universidad Andrés Bello, Antonio Varas 880 Providencia, Santiago 7500000, Chile
b a
Facultymanagement,
Department of industrial of Engineering - Universidad
agroindustrial Andrés
and Bello,Universidad
operations, Antonio Varas
de 880 Providencia,
la Costa, Calle 58Santiago
# 55–66,7500000, Chile
080002 Barranquilla, Colombia
b
Department of industrial management, agroindustrial and operations, Universidad de la Costa, Calle 58 # 55–66, 080002 Barranquilla, Colombia

Abstract
Abstract
Productivity in open pit operations in the mining industry is conditioned by the manual assignment of trucks by the
Productivity
dispatcher, who in open
does pit
notoperations in the to
have the ability mining industry
find the optimalis policy
conditioned by thehaving
by himself, manualmany
assignment of that
variables trucks by the
consider.
dispatcher,
To this end,who doesoptimization
an MIP not have the model
ability istoproposed
find the optimal policy by
that considers thehimself, having
scheduling of a many variables
discretized that consider.
operating shift in
To this end,
smaller stagesanthat
MIPconsider
optimization model
positions andiscapacities
proposedofthat considers
available the scheduling
trucks, of a discretized
and congestion operating shift
based on a differential speedin
smaller stages that consider positions and capacities of available trucks, and congestion based on a differential
based on the number of trucks in different sections of the transport route. The model seeks to prioritize the transfer of speed
based ontothe
material numberand
crushers of trucks in different
meet material goalssections of the
during the transport
planning route.Preliminary
horizon. The model seeks
resultstoindicate
prioritize
thatthe transfer
it is of
possible
material to crushers and meet material goals during the planning horizon. Preliminary results indicate that
to reduce the violation of the production plan by destination by 12% and increase productivity by 46% with respect to it is possible
to reduce
the thethe
state of violation of the solutions.
art of similar production plan by destination by 12% and increase productivity by 46% with respect to
the state of the art of similar solutions.
© 2024
© 2023 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
B.V.
© 2023
This is The
an Authors.
open access Published
article by the
under Elsevier
CC B.V.
BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is
This is an
an open
open access
access article
article under
under the
the CC
CC BY-NC-ND
BY-NC-ND license
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review
Peer-review under
under responsibility
responsibility of
of the
the Conference
Conference Program
Program Chairs.
Chairs
Peer-review under responsibility of the Conference Program Chairs.
Keywords: Dispatch Policies; Operation Research; Optimization; Queueing; Mine Planning.
Keywords: Dispatch Policies; Operation Research; Optimization; Queueing; Mine Planning.
1. Introduction
1. Introduction
One of the great challenges of the mining industry is productivity, since mineral reserves are found at greater depths,
One
in of the
rocks great
that are challenges
increasinglyofharder
the mining
and ofindustry is productivity,
lower grade. since mineral
This is particularly truereserves
in open are found at greater
pit operations, wheredepths,
if the
mines are deeper and of lower grades than before, extracting the same economic value necessarily meanswhere
in rocks that are increasingly harder and of lower grade. This is particularly true in open pit operations, if the
increasing
mines are deeper and of lower grades than before, extracting the same economic value necessarily means increasing
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +573015193516;
*
Corresponding
E-mail address:author. Tel.: +573015193516;
gabriel.pais@unab.cl
E-mail address: gabriel.pais@unab.cl

1877-0509 © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open
1877-0509 access
© 2023 Thearticle under
Authors. the CC BY-NC-ND
Published license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review
This under
is an open responsibility
access of the CC
article under Conference
BY-NC-NDProgram Chairs.
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the Conference Program Chairs.

1877-0509 © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer-review under responsibility of the Conference Program Chairs
10.1016/j.procs.2023.12.167
 Gabriel País Cerna et al. / Procedia Computer Science 231 (2024) 660–665 661
2 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

productivity. In this context, the correct management of all the unitary operations of the mine is essential: drilling,
blasting, loading and transportation. Only the latter represents about 50% of mine costs in the case of Open Pit, so its
correct management is the key: a deeper mine than before increases transport distances, and to match productivity,
equipment must be increased, transport more material and/or carry out the cycle in less time than before.

Finally, the person ultimately responsible for this management during the operation is the dispatcher, who, based on
his expert judgment and supported by different software, assigns the different teams based on a daily shift goal.
However, to the extent that both equipment and destinations are increasingly numerous and of different types, expert
judgment and traditional software are not enough to make the best operational decisions, because the problem is no
longer intuitive for the number of variables involved and the occurrence of congestion. By having many variables to
consider, the dispatcher does not have the ability to find the optimal policy on its own, which generates a higher
transportation cost per ton; this being, the highest cost in the entire operation.

In this way, in the second section, we present an optimization model for the allocation of transportation equipment,
which incorporates congestion through multi-fleet, multi-period and multi-destination, and seeks to prioritize the
transfer of material to crushers and meet the goals of material during the planning horizon. Subsequently, the
considerations of the proposed model are shown. Results obtained are detailed in the section 4. Finally, in the section
fifth, the discussion and recommendations are detailed.

2. Literature review

Operation Research has been used massively in the last 50 years to solve different mining problems [1-9], being mostly
those that correspond to the time scheduling of tonnages and grades that maximize the value of the company in time
horizons, ranging in general from monthly to five-yearly. Secondarily in volume, there are applications related to
resource management for mine development and dispatch models [10].

For truck dispatch there are different types of approach: the first consists of incorporating truck congestion directly
into the objective function as done by Soumis, Ethier & Elbrond [11] through non-linear functions, which generates
that the solution has a long resolution time. The second approach consists of assigning a probability that the shovel
and the destination are unoccupied, this probability being a function of a queuing theory model as performed by Ta,
Ingolfsson, & Doucette [12], converting the non-linear problem into a linear one using different approximations of
the queuing function with the risk of loss of generality. The third approach consists of the construction of hybrid
models such as those carried out by White & Olson [13] who propose a truck assignment system through the use of
network models, linear programming and dynamic programming, dividing the problem into three parts: first the
shortest path between all the locations of the mine is chosen; second, the material flow in each of these paths is
determined by linear programming; third, the trucks are assigned to these routes using dynamic programming.

The last approach consists of defining operational constraints that are closer to reality and solving the dispatch problem
through a mixed integer programming (MIP) approach, as proposed by Smith, Linderoth & Luedtke [14], who solves
the problem. They perform models at regular intervals long enough to be able to predict the situation of the system in
the future, and short enough so that the solution can be obtained quickly, focusing the problem on the minimization
of the deviations with a focus on the processing rate over the deviation in ore extraction and quality.

Finally, traditional dispatch software vendors solve the dispatch problem with an approach similar to that of White &
Olson [13], dividing the problem into three parts: first, Dijkstra's algorithm is used to find the shortest path between
each of the points of the mine; second, they use a linear program with different operational constraints with a focus
on maximizing the productivity of the mine, delivering a set of optimal rates between the shovels and the points of
the mine; third, an algorithm is used that considers the current information of the trucks to assign in such a way that
the rates obtained are met in the linear problem of the second part.
662 Gabriel País Cerna et al. / Procedia Computer Science 231 (2024) 660–665
Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 3

3. Proposed model

The solution to have an enforceable dispatch recommendation takes as its starting point the Smith, Linderoth &
Luedtke MIP model [14]. From this, the scope of the model is extended with the incorporation of new destinations
(dumps and stockpiles) with their own restrictions and number of limit equipment in the queue at the origin and
destination. This incorporation is very important because the extraction of these volumes in quantity and location over
time is essential to align the operation of the shift with the short, medium, and long-term mining planning to avoid,
for example, the delay in the entry of new operation phases. On the other hand, the model is also extended in the
incorporation of congestion by route with an approach like that used by Ta, Ingolfsson & Doucette [12], but through
a step function that varies the travel time of trucks on a route in according to the amount of equipment that presents
that route. In real operation, this function is empirical based on the data of the mine, since it depends not only on the
amount of equipment, but also on variables of the operation such as safety distances, slopes, rolling resistance and
speed of the different types of trucks present on the route.

The incorporation of congestion directly in the model allows a result that is closer to operational reality and more
intuitive for the dispatcher. For example, under the traditional approach without considering congestion, if a goal of
some destination is very high, the traditional model will assign (without a consequence in time) many trucks on a
route in the same period. In the practice a considerable increase in travel times for said trucks that the model is not
able to integrate, making the dispatcher dismiss that recommendation. This does not happen in our proposal because
the speed of the truck is a function of the amount of equipment on the route in the model formulation. The proposed
model is based on the MIP model [14], which is based on restrictions, variables, and parameters. Regarding the
variables and restrictions, the main decision variable continues to be how many trucks of each type to send to each
point in each period; however, a dimension associated with the level of congestion with which it travels is added to
this variable. In this way, the model is expanded by adding: incorporation of the violation of dump and stock goals in
the different origins – destinations, variables for recording the volume of material in the dump and stockpile, variables
to count the number of trucks queuing in dumps and stocks, restrictions that define the number of trucks available at
the different origins – destinations, incorporation of congestion by section, and modification of the objective function.

The first four points consist of an extension of the model where the formulation of the new variables and restrictions
do not vary much in their form from what was proposed by Smith, Linderoth, & Luedtke [14] for the plant destination.
On the other hand, in the case of congestion, restrictions are added that calculate the number of trucks sent in the
direction "AB" and "BA" in the last 5 minutes, in each of the existing routes, restricting that the trucks that are
dispatched in each period travel with the corresponding level of congestion. In summary:

∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖1 + ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗1 ≤ 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶1 − ∑𝑡𝑡−1 𝑡𝑡−1

𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10 ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 ∑𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 − ∑𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10 ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 ∑𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗 + 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 ∗ (1 − 𝑧𝑧4𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ) , ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇
𝐻𝐻
(1)

∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖1 + ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗1 ≤ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 ∗ 𝑧𝑧2𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 , ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 (2)

∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖1 + ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗1 + ∑𝑡𝑡−1 𝑡𝑡−1

𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10 ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 ∑𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 + ∑𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10 ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 ∑𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗 ≥ 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶1 ∗ 𝑧𝑧4𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 , ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇
𝐻𝐻
(3)

∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖2 + ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗2 ≤ (𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 − 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶1 ) ∗ 𝑧𝑧4𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 , ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 (4)

∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖2 + ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗2 ≤ 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 − ∑𝑡𝑡−1 𝑡𝑡−1

𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10 ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 ∑𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 − ∑𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10 ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 ∑𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗 + 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 ∗ (1 − 𝑧𝑧5𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ), ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇
𝐻𝐻
(5)

∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖2 + ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗2 ≤ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 ∗ 𝑧𝑧5𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 , ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 (6)

𝑡𝑡−1 𝑡𝑡−1
∑ 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖1 + ∑ 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗1 + ∑ 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖2 + ∑ 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗2 + ∑ ∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 + ∑ ∑ ∑ 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗 ≥ 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 ∗ 𝑧𝑧6𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 , ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 (7)
𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10 𝑠𝑠=𝑡𝑡−10
𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶 𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑐𝑐∈𝐶𝐶

∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖3 + ∑𝑘𝑘∈𝐾𝐾 𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗3 ≤ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 ∗ 𝑧𝑧6𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 , ∀𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑗𝑗 ∈ 𝑁𝑁, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 (8)

Constraints 1 and 2 regulate the maximum number of trucks to be sent with a congestion level 1, and their non-
shipment, in banks and crushers, in sterile banks and dumps, in ore banks and dump or stockpile, and in banks sterile
and stockpiles. Constraints 3 and 4 limit the assignment of trucks with congestion level 2 to the difference between
 Gabriel País Cerna et al. / Procedia Computer Science 231 (2024) 660–665 663
4 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

this congestion and congestion 1, in banks and crushers, in sterile banks and dumps, in ore banks and dump or
stockpile, and for banks sterile and stockpiles. Constraints 5 and 6 regulate the maximum number of trucks to be sent
with a congestion level 2, and their non-shipment, in banks and crushers, in sterile banks and dumps, in ore banks and
dump or stockpile, and in banks sterile and stockpiles. Finally, Constraints 7 and 8 allow the assignment of trucks
with congestion level 3 to the total number of trucks, in banks and crushers, in sterile banks and dumps, in ore banks
and dump or stockpile, and for sterile banks and stockpiles. In turn, trucks with medium congestion can only be
dispatched if the low congestion limit is exceeded and likewise to dispatch trucks with high congestion.

This modified model seeks to minimize the global violation of the problem, but now it must consider that not only the
processing centers have a goal, but also the dumps and stockpiles. Another point to consider is that in the modified
model, trucks were encouraged to be sent until the last period of the planning horizon. For this, the violations of the
three points of the mine are counted throughout the entire extended horizon, although trucks can only be dispatched
during the planning horizon. The problem with this is that the model could privilege fulfill with the material goals in
the horizon extension periods, which would not be correct. Therefore, the objective function must motivate the model
to prefer to meet the required volume of material during the planning horizon. Along with this, it will be assumed that
it is more important to meet the production goals than the goals of the dumps and stockpiles, which will have the same
importance. That said, we have the following objective function:
𝑃𝑃 𝐷𝐷 𝑆𝑆 𝑃𝑃 𝐷𝐷 𝑆𝑆
min 1.1 ∗ ∑𝑖𝑖∈𝑃𝑃 ∑𝑡𝑡∈𝑇𝑇 𝛾𝛾𝑖𝑖,𝑡𝑡 + ∑𝑖𝑖∈𝐷𝐷 ∑𝑡𝑡∈𝑇𝑇 𝛾𝛾𝑖𝑖,𝑡𝑡 + ∑𝑖𝑖∈𝑆𝑆 ∑𝑡𝑡∈𝑇𝑇 𝛾𝛾𝑖𝑖,𝑡𝑡 + 0.1 ∗ (1.1 ∗ ∑𝑖𝑖∈𝑃𝑃 ∑𝑡𝑡∈𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 \𝑇𝑇 𝛾𝛾𝑖𝑖,𝑡𝑡 + ∑𝑖𝑖∈𝐷𝐷 ∑𝑡𝑡∈𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 \𝑇𝑇 𝛾𝛾𝑖𝑖,𝑡𝑡 ∑𝑖𝑖∈𝑆𝑆 ∑𝑡𝑡∈𝑇𝑇 𝐻𝐻 \𝑇𝑇 𝛾𝛾𝑖𝑖,𝑡𝑡 ) (9)
𝛾𝛾 𝑃𝑃,𝛾𝛾 𝐷𝐷 ,𝛾𝛾 𝑆𝑆

In (9), the violations of the production goals of the crushers are worth 10% more (multiplied by 1.1) than the violations
of the material goals of dumps and stockpiles. On the other hand, violations committed during the extended horizon
periods are worth barely 10% (multiplied by 0.1) of the goals during the planning horizon. With this, we seek the
previously stated objectives: prioritize the transfer of material to crushers and meet the material goals during the
planning horizon.

4. Results

The results are evaluated in a copper mine in the north of Chile with 2 crushers, an ore bank, a waste bank, a dump
and a stockpile (CF. Fig. 1). This mine has a total of 73 trucks that are divided into trucks with capacities of 300 and
400 tons. On the other hand, the crushers will have a goal of 200 tons of ore per period each and the dump with the
stockpile will have a goal of 100 tons of material. Additionally, it was defined that each crusher will have a 200-ton
ore rehandling pile at the beginning of the model, while the dump and stockpile start without material. The maximum
tonnage restriction that the piles can have will be 500 tons.

Regarding restrictions associated with congestion, it is considered that the model starts at the beginning of the shift,
so there are no trucks on intermediate routes. Finally, the 3 levels of route congestion are defined based on historical
data: average speed when there are less than 3 trucks, when there are 3 or 4 trucks, and when there are more than 6
trucks. Finally, the model is defined to deliver a dispatch policy for the next 20 minutes, with each model period
lasting 30 seconds.

Fig. 1. Mine operation diagram: S (stockpile), BE (Waste Bench), C1 and C2 (crushers), and B (dumps).

Regarding the results of the model, Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 present the fulfillment of the production goals of the Smith
Linderoth & Luedtke model [14], and the proposed model. In the case that the violation is 0, the plan is fulfilled. In
664 Gabriel País Cerna et al. / Procedia Computer Science 231 (2024) 660–665
Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000 5

the case of figure 4, the total tonnage and violation by destination are presented, where it is observed that the proposed
model is better for taking care of congestion and the existence of other relevant destinations, and finally figure 5
presents the number of trucks dispatched for each of the periods of 20 minutes each.
a b

Fig. 2. (a) Violation of crusher production goals #1; (b) chancador #2, Smith, Linderoth & Luedtke model (blue) and
Proposed Model (orange).
a b

Fig. 3. (a) Violation of production goals of the stockpile; (b) Violation of production goals of the dump, Smith,
Linderoth & Luedtke model (blue) and Proposed Model (orange).

Fig. 4. (a) Total Violation by destination; (b) and Violation Total Tonnage by destination, Smith, Linderoth & Luedtke
model (left column) and Proposed Model (right column); crusher #1 (blue), crusher #2 (orange), dump (grey) and
stock (yellow).

5. Discussion and recommendations

The general summary of the results is that the proposed model reduces the global operational violation by 12%, also
increasing the transported material by 46%, which is mainly explained by a greater number of cycles dispatched as
result of an intelligent assignment that generates less congestion. These results are explained by the fact that in the
Smith, Linderoth & Luedtke model [14] there is no incentive to send material to dumps and stockpiles, since there are
no material targets at these points, contrary to the proposed model. Additionally, congestion plays a fundamental role,
since if it does not exist, trucks take longer and therefore some do not arrive on time within the planning horizon.
Finally, congestion is incorporated in a simple and intuitive way, showing that better results are obtained than without
incorporating it and with results that are more in line with operational reality. The future challenge is to delve into
 Gabriel País Cerna et al. / Procedia Computer Science 231 (2024) 660–665 665
6 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2023) 000–000

better adjustment and clustering models to generate better models of speed per section and number of teams using
online information from truck sensors. Likewise, we intend to use algorithms from artificial intelligence and data
mining such as [15], [16] and [17], as well as secure architectures [18] and [19] to implement an autonomous and
intelligent design.

Acknowledgement

The author thanks the mining companies Codelco Chile, BHP, Minera Tres Valles and Compañía Minera del Pacífico
(CMP), for the information facilities and understanding of the mining dispatch problem.

References
[1] Bastos, G. (2013). Decision Making applied to Shift Change in Stochastic Open-pit Mining Truck Dispatching.
IFAC Proceedings, 46(16), 34-39.
[2] Afrapoli, A., Tabesh, M. & Askari-Nasab, H. (2019). A multiple objective transportation problem approach to
dynamic truck dispatching in surface mines. European Journal of Operational Research, 276(1), 331-342.
[3] Li, S. & Knights, P. (2009). Integration of real options into short-term mine planning and production scheduling.
Mining Science and Technology, 19(5), 674-678.
[4] Chaowasakoo, P., Seppälä, H., Koivo, H. & Zhou, Q. (2017). Improving fleet management in mines: The benefit
of heterogeneous match factor. European Journal of Operational Research, 261(3), 1052-1065.
[5] Soleymani, M. & Benndorf, J. (2019). Simulation-based optimization approach for material dispatching in
continuous mining systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 275(3), 1108-1125.
[6] Haviland, A. & Marshall, J. (2015). Fundamental behaviours of production traffic in underground mine haulage
ramps. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 25(1), 7-14.
[7] Gamache, M., Grimard, R. & Cohen, P. (2005). A shortest-path algorithm for solving the fleet management
problem in underground mines. European Journal of Operational Research,166(2), 497-506.
[8] Li, Z. (1990). A methodology for the optimum control of shovel and truck operations in open-pit mining. Mining
Science and Technology, 10(3), 337-340.
[9] Castillo, D. & Cochran, J. (1987). A microcomputer approach for simulating truck haulage systems in open pit
mining. Computers in Industry, 8(1), 37-47.
[10] Newman, A. M., Rubio, E., Caro, R., Weintraub, A., & Eurek, K. (2010). A review of operations research in
mine planning. Interfaces, 40(3), 222-245.
[11] Soumis, F., Ethier, J., & Elbrond , J. (1989). Truck dispatching in an open pit mine. International Journal of
Surface Mining Reclamation and Environment, 3(2), 115–119.
[12] Ta, C. H., Ingolfsson, A., & Doucette, J. (2013). A linear model for surface mining haul truck allocation
incorporating shovel idle probabilities. European journal of Operational research, 231(3), 770-778.
DOI:10.1016/j.ejor.2013.06.016
[13] White, J. & Olson, J. (1992). On improving truck/shovel productivity in open pit mines. Proceedings of the 23rd
International Symposium on Application of Computers and Operations Research in the Minerals Industries (APCOM
’92), pp. 739–746, SME, Littleton, CO, USA.
[14] Smith, A., Linderoth, J. & Luedtke, J. (2021). Optimization-based dispatching policies for open-pit mining.
Optimization and Engineering. 22. 1-41. 10.1007/s11081-021-09628-w.
[15] Azmi, M., Mansour, A., & Azmi, C. (Forthcoming in 2023). A Context-Aware Empowering Business with AI:
Case of Chatbots in Business Intelligence Systems. [Preprint available: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hWhJrWC-
GjUvyib9krCPpFhymP27vwZ_/view?usp=sharing]
[16] Ouallane, A. A., Bakali, A., Bahnasse, A., Broumi, S., & Talea, M. (2022). Fusion of engineering insights and
emerging trends: Intelligent urban traffic management system. Information Fusion.
[17] Azmi, M., & Berrado, A. (2021). CARs-RP: Lasso-based class association rules pruning. International Journal
of Business Intelligence and Data Mining, 18(2), 197-217.
[18] Eddermoug, N., Mansour, A., Sadik, M., Sabir, E., & Azmi, M. (2023). klm-PPSA v. 1.1: machine learning-
augmented profiling and preventing security attacks in cloud environments. Annals of Telecommunications, 1-27.
[19 Eddermoug, N., Mansour, A., Sadik, M., Sabir, E., & Azmi, M. (2021, June). KLM-based profiling and preventing
security attacks for cloud computing: A comparative study. In 2021 28th International Conference on
Telecommunications (ICT) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.