Mine Haul Road Upgrade Project OZ Minerals Prominent Hill South Australia

Haul Road Upgrade Project

ENTREPRENEURSHIP, COMMERCIALISATION & INNOVATION CENTRE

TECHCOMM5012

APPLIED PROJECT MANAGEMENT

HAUL ROAD UPGRADE PROJECT

Stephen James McKnight

26, May 2012

1|Page


ENTREPRENEURSHIP, COMMERCIALISATION & INNOVATION CENTRE

TECHCOMM5012


CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………………10

INTEGRATION………………………………………………………………………………………...11

SCOPE………………………………………………………………………………………………...12

TIME…………………………………………………………………………………………………..16

COST…………………………………………………………………………………………………..18

QUALITY………………………………………………………………………………………………20

RISK……………………………………………………………………………………………………22

HUMAN RESOURCES…………………………………………………………………………………24

COMMUNICATIONS………………………………………………………………………………….26

PROCUREMENT……………………………………………………………………………………….28

APPENDIX

Appendix.1 THE MINE MANGEMENT PLAN…………………………………………………………50

• AFE Authorisation For Expenditure Request, OZ Minerals Business Case Submission
• Thiess Contract Quote & Rates for requested equipment & resources
• Wet Weather delays business case & supporting evidence presentation
• LEAN SIX SIGMA DMAIC Business case presentation
• Business Improvement Posters & Monthly data progress presentations
• Thiess Road Design & Standards Criteria Document

REFERENCES

References………………………………………….………………………….……………………..103

2|Page


The University of Adelaide - TECHCOMM5021

Course Lecturer: John Sing

Major Project:


Executive Summary

• Up to 10 words description of what the project is.
• Upgrade mine roads to an all-weather haul road system
• Where is the Project Located?
• OZ Minerals, Prominent Hill, South Australia
• Who is the Owner and Sponsor
• The owner is Dave Way (Deputy Operations Manager, OZ Minerals)
• The sponsor is Robert Boyd (Open Pit Manager, OZ Minerals )
• The Key Stakeholders are OZ Minerals & Thiess
• The name of the Project Manager
• Stephen McKnight & also the Expert Road Consultant
• Your picture, vision or dream of the projects outcome
• A total of 20% of all excavators’ downtime is attributed to wet weather rainfall events and
subsequent delays. The “vision or dream” is to minimise this figure by some 25%-50%.
• To put this loss into perspective on average each excavator loses some 370 operating hours per
year per digger to wet weather events and subsequent delays, which is equivalent to 480,000
BCM’s per excavator per year in lost productivity at $43.00 per BCM, which is some
$20,000,000.00 multiplied by 5 excavators giving $100,000,000.00 in total potential saving costs
on notional EBIDTA values (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes and Amortization).
• This project will potentially save $25,000,000.00 up to $50,000,000.00 depending on the
successful implementation of the key deliverables outlined in the Project Management Plan.
• Historically, over the last 4 years the Mine has had on average 4 times the predicted annual
rainfall, which has produced a loss of 920 hours of production per year per digger. These rainfall
events typically occur during the months of November to April. Therefore, it is critical to complete
the project before November 2012
• The ultimate target is to achieve a minim of 6000 hours production per year per digger. The Haul
Road Upgrade Project will go some way to achieving this target (20%) in conjunction with other
site based initiatives including: a LOM dewatering strategy, blasting increases in pattern size/drill

3|Page


bit size and a 10% increase in powder factors and “hot seat” changes in all production equipment,
with staggered fly-in-out days for maximum coverage and finally vertical advance heights of
flitch/bench versus digger movement along wider and deeper benches
• The Phase of the project
• Due to the fluid and nonlinear nature of such a project we have been pushing every phase possible
at once because of the tight deadline involved, i.e. this project needs to be completed by the next
significant rain events predicted from November 2012 until April 2013.
• Therefore, the phase progressions are as follows;
a. Define, identify a problem or opportunity, which has been completed
b. Measure the baseline of the process has been implemented and started January 2012
c. Analyse, identify and validate root causes. A “fishbone” analysis has been completed,
problem analysis “brainstorming” completed, root cause prioritisation implemented, 5W
root cause analysis completed, root cause validation established by RTS Friction test
carried out on site to find “baseline”, a Traffic Light Friction Risk model has been
implemented and various other Project Management Tools have also been implemented,
which will be outlined in the body of this presentation.
d. Improve, find and evaluate best improvements. The best solution was to adopt the use
of a traffic light system for remediation of mine haul roads with some 25 interrelated
criteria across the 3 lights. However, the primary criteria is outlined below;
i. Red light = high priority site requiring immediate remediation with associated
plan and methodology
ii. Amber Light = less intense remediation but significant nonetheless and finally
iii. Green Light = a 200mm wearing course needs to be established to make the road
compliant with the all-weather upgrade specifications
iv. Red Light requires sub-base of up to 1000mm
v. Amber Light requires base of 600mm
vi. Green Light Running surface 200mm
vii. Crossfall of 2% on in pit and mine haul roads
viii. Centre camber with 2% crossfall on dump ramps and roads
ix. Establish significant drainage and run-off sumps
e. Control, execute and maintain improvement.
i. Cost
ii. Schedule
iii. Process Control
iv. SOPS
v. Training
vi. Communications
• The project is now in the execution phase
a. All equipment for the project will be on-site by the end of April 2012
b. The T8 supervisors from Thiess have been executing the plan with limited equipment,
resources and material
c. The project is 38% complete to this date regardless the above constraints
• Who is the client Representative?
4|Page


• Leidy Alvarado, OZ Minerals Mine Improvement Project Engineer
• Who are the Stakeholders?
• OZ Minerals Senior Management Team
• OZ Minerals Open Cut Management Team
• MIT OZ Minerals Project Team
• Thiess earth moving contractors
• Independent Road Expert Consultant
• Purpose of the Project:
• Site Description
 OZ Minerals operates both an open cut and underground copper/gold mine and
processing plant at the Prominent Hill Mine site. Prominent Hill is a remote site
with a FIFO and limited DIDO out workforce supporting the mining, production
and exploration activities. A permanent accommodation village located 3 km’s
from the mining operations supports some 1500 workers. Processing of ore
commenced in February 2009. Ore averaging 1.5% Cu and 0.5g/t Au is processed
at a nominal rate of 8Mt per annum to produce copper concentrate via both
Darwin and Port Adelaide by both rail and road
• Site Location and Access
 The mine site is located 650km north-west of Adelaide, South Australia, some
100km south –east of Coober Pedy and 150km north-west of Roxby Downs. The
site is accessible via an unsealed road off the Stuart Highway 100km south of
Copper Pedy. Daily charter flights from Adelaide, Melbourne and Port Augusta
service the FIFO workers
• Site Observations
 The access ramps are generally in poor condition at higher elevations
recommended by geological element profiles. The majority of access ramps do
not indicate any crossfall. No drainage or facility for run-off from the haul roads
seems to be in place, except for water running along the full length of access
ramps from higher levels to lower levels. This is one of the major causes of
uncontrolled water runoff during major rainfall events. The majority of access
ramps are graded and compacted. The use of inappropriate material selection on
some ramps. There are many cases of wheel rutting on ramp corners due to poor
material selection. Gradients on most active in-pit ramps are between 8%-10%.
Waste dump ramps vary from 5%, 8% and 10% depending on dumping criteria and
poor design. Steely Haematite, Andesite and Dolomite are the best material to
source for the remediation project. Large oversized material has been deposited
on windrows
 The existing access ramps make up 3.5km of the total 10km mine haul road
system. The width of ramps are currently 23m being used for 48 haul road trucks,
CAT 793D. Other equipment on-site is made up of some 5 graders CAT 24H,
another 6 Dozers D10T and 4 Liebher 996 excavators with numerous other
ancillary equipment
 Some recommendations based on the observations are;
5|Page


 Create a dedicated road maintenance project team
• 1 x Project Manager
• 1 x Project Engineer
• 4 x Various Independent Consultants required during execution phase
and peer review (Expert Road Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Friction
Loss Engineer, Surveyor and Peer Review Engineer)
• 2 x Supervisors (T8)
• 10 x Operators
 Source appropriate equipment
• 1 x Wheel Loader CAT 992D
• 2 x Komatsu 785 dump trucks
• 1 x Grader CAT24H
• 1 x Komatsu 300 Digger (Contract digger to supplement fleet)
• 1 x CAT 777 Water Truck
• 1 x CAT D10 Dozer
• And other ancillary equipment as required; Compactors or Impactors
 Source appropriate material
• Steely Haematite
• Haematite
• Andesite
• Dolomite
• Greywacke
• Granitites
 Engage a dedicated survey team to control and monitor the daily works
supervised by the T8 Thiess operator in charge of implementing the traffic light
system management plan
 Purchase the friction testing unit to verify when roads are safe to be driven on
after all rain events
 Follow the rain event flow diagram to minimise downtime
• The Objectives:
• Scope
 To address the issue of unsealed roads and the downtime associated with them
during and after rainfall events. This includes, road surfaces, remediation
configurations, floodway’s, cuts, fills, drainage and mine haul road design, the
identification of unsealed roads and suitable material selection for remediation
including in-pit material and engineered commercially produced material. This
remediation program will include the determination of sub base, base and
wearing course thickness, drainage and erosion protection, environmental
considerations, performance expectations, including surface condition
assessment.
• Time

6|Page


 The estimated scheduler for this project is 12 months starting January 2012 until
January 2013
 The schedule is broken up into phases which will be elaborated on at a future
date and location in this document
• Cost
 The estimated cost will be divided between OP EX and CAP EX the expenditure is
in the vicinity of $1.3M CAP EX and $4M OP EX, giving a total of some $5.3M spend
 OP EX will pay for the machine, operator utilisation and some occasional “day
work” nominated activities
 CAP EX will pay for material, Consultants and other yet to be identified costs
• Requirements to be satisfied:
• With the new contract model the Company has accepted the responsibility to upgrade
the haul roads in the open pit to a standard to assist in decreasing the operational delays
and risk involved in friction loss, with respect to the deterioration of the haul roads,
evident during wet weather.

Situation: The mine operates 24/7 365 days per annum. Excavator productivity is now seriously limited
by the fact that the pit is closed off when it starts raining, and then it takes a long time to
reopen the pit after the rain. This is because mine operations wait for roads to be dry again,
to avoid possibility of track slides. Overall wet weather causes circa 370 hours of downtime
per excavator per annum. The mining contract currently states that the contractor is
accountable to maintain ‘all-weather roads’.

Complication: The mining contractor is not confident that an ‘all-weather pit’ is possible at Prominent Hill,
claiming that the quality of the material available on site for road-sheeting. The is no clarity
also on the type of materials to be used, size of materials, current quality of design, use of
reagents, maintenance practices, etc. The road maintenance practices for managing haul
roads before, during and after wet weather events are also not clear and codified (e.g.
scarifying, sheeting, grading, etc.)

Resolution: OZ Minerals is willing to engage an experienced contractor on road design and maintenance
to perform a review of the current haul roads. This will include: design, road sampling, wet
weather performance, dust suppression, material quality & sizes, maintenance practices. The
scope of the report though should primarily be focused on providing OZ Minerals with a
recommendation on how to keep the mining operations running as long as possible during
and after wet weather events. To achieve this scope we would engage a contractor that has
previous experience in such projects and issues, especially in ‘all weather mines’ or in mines
in tropical areas.

The Roles & Responsibilities

• The roles Identified for the project are
 Project Manager (Stephen McKnight)
 Project Engineer ( Leidy Alvarado)

7|Page


 Road Maintenance Supervisors ( David Kurtzer & Chris Carroll)
 2 x 992 Loader Operator
 2 x 24H Grader Operators
 4 x 785 Truck Operators
 2 x 773 Water Cart Operators
 1 x Ancillary Operator from independent contractor
• The Benefits
• What are we trying to achieve
 To reduce the wet weather delays associated with Excavator utilisation by at
least 25% representing 370 hours per year for each excavator
• Why we should implement the project
 This 25% reduction in lost excavator hours represents a potential minimum
$25,000,000.00 EBITA saving to the company annually
• The value proposition for the sponsor
• At least a 25% EBITA saving per annum representing some $25,000,000.00 saving from a
capital outlay of $5,3000,000.00
• Constraints and assumptions
• Equipment availability
 It has been identified that there is a lack of suitable and available equipment to
implement the project
• Material availability
 It has been identified that there is not enough suitable or available appropriate
material crushed or screened or stockpiled for the project
• Resource availability
 Ramping up to the 16 people required for the continuous implementation of the
six month execution phase
• Scope, Time & Cost
 Even though the project was identified some 1.5 years ago there was no
“political” will to implement the project due to a lack of consistent direction,
scope, funds and a dedicated champion to drive the project forward.
• The implementation strategy including Critical Success Factors (Targets, KPI’s and Tolerances)
• The project requires completion before the next expected rainfall events, which are
usually expected in November 2012 until April 2013.
• Implementation occurred on the 5/12/2011 when the road expert was engaged in
anticipation for the contract change reflecting the haul road upgrade project as a key
strategy for increased productivity of a potential 20% of total Excavator increased
utilisation.
• From implementation key actions were identified and progressively introduce; ancillary
equipment, appropriate material, scientific measurement of friction loss and finally
execution of appropriate design criteria for successful completion of the projects targets
mentioned in previous sections of the executive summary.
• Risk and treatment

8|Page


• The issue of wet weather delays is very complex and there are no one size fits all solutions
in play. Regardless the fact that there are civil engineering solutions that can and will be
applied; this site has specific requirements for the appropriate solution and outcomes
desired
• Lack of basement material or crushed/screened or stockpiled material available when
required
• Equipment availability from Thiess
• HV & LV, HV & HV interactions during construction/execution phase of project
• Resource availability from Thiess for HV requirements
• Impact of road maintenance team during construction on production team
• Natural disasters
• Wet weather rainfall events
• How phases can facilitate delivery of future phases (particular design or constructability)
• Once the construction/execution phase of the project is completed there will be an
emphasis on maintaining the newly constructed roads on a regular basis so that the
current situation is not revisited during the remaining 6 years of the mines life
• The implementation of a road maintenance team will facilitate the continuous upgrade
and improvement of the haul road system without the re-introduction of a sustained
initial haul road upgrade campaign, which is in progress at this time
• From the RA all necessary steps have been implemented to negate and mitigate this
phase occurring again in the LOM strategy, this phase is a once off action of the project
leading to a continuous improvement phase
• Work Breakdown Structure
• Suffice to say that the 5 key areas of the WBS have been defined
 Define the situation
 Implement/Establish the action plan
 Acquire the;
• Resources
• Material
• Equipment
 Execute the action plan
 Close out the project
• The impact of the project on stakeholders
• OZ Minerals will have a significant increase in productivity
 This will provide increases in share value for stakeholders
 The increased productivity will impact the company’s bottom line
 This will provide extra capital for future project development
• Thiess will have multiple benefits
 Increased productivity
 Reduced wear & tear on equipment
 Reduced soft tissue issues for operators
 Maintain compliance with the LOM Contract introduced in January 2012

9|Page


• Milestone and an activity schedule
• 5/12/2011 Independent Road Expert engaged to implement project
• 5/1/2012 Project needs identified and implemented
• 5/2/2012 Execution phase begun with limited; resources, equipment and material
• 5/3/2012 Scientific validation of friction loss assessed and measured
• 5/4/2012 Resources, Equipment and Material in place and beginning execution phase
• 5/5/2012 Execution in full swing, all elements on-site and in play
• 5/6/2012 to 5/11/2012 Haul Road Maintenance Plan following PMBOK project cycles until
conclusion of project in November 2012
• Budget
• $5.3M have been committed to the Haul Road Upgrade Project
• The $5.3M will be divided into CAPEX $1.3M, which includes payment of expert engineers
and surveyors, material all in 75mm for wearing course, friction testing module, uplift of
equipment and any other costs outside the committed OPEX money
• OPEX is committed at $4M this pays for equipment hire for the six months of the
execution phase of the project
• There is a further contingency fund available, but to this point a final figure has not been
negotiated with the OZ Minerals BI and financial Departments, suffice to say a top end
figure of $1M extra funds could be available if required. However, the current budget is on
track with no need for a contingency to be anticipated
• The CAPEX is well within budget with only some $350,000.00 committed thus far,
however the cost of the material (75mm all in) will eat into this fund significantly, some
$1M over the 6 months
• The OPEX has an anticipated “burn rate” of $550,000.00 per month for 6 months coming
in at $3.3M, leaving a $700,000.00 contingency fund if required
• Are there Enterprise Environmental Factors or Organisational Process Assets which can be used?
• Refer to the body of this document with emphasis on the PMBOK processes
• The Management structure of both OZ Minerals Thiess have been utilised in the initial
stages of the projects development, until the project produced its own organisational
chart and resources
• All material has been sourced from the PIT
• All resources and equipment have been sourced from Thiess
• Road design criteria has been sourced from Thiess and previous champions of the project
• Further development of the road design criteria have been introduced from the Expert
Road Consultant working in concert with both site based knowledge groups and the
adoption of industry “best practise” applications to the specific and unique site
requirements

10 | P a g e


PMBOK MANAGEMENT PLAN

Plans for managing (planning, monitoring & controlling- If Areas not already covered)

• Integration
• Scope
• Time
• Cost
• Quality
• Risk
• Human Resources
• Communications
• Procurement

11 | P a g e


INTEGRATION

• Up to 10 words description of what the project is.
• Upgrade mine roads to an all-weather haul road system
• Where is the Project Located?
• OZ Minerals, Prominent Hill, South Australia
• Who is the Owner and Sponsor
• The owner is Dave Way (Deputy Operations Manager, OZ Minerals)
• The sponsor is Robert Boyd (Open Pit Manager, OZ Minerals )
• The Key Stakeholders are OZ Minerals & Thiess
• The name of the Project Manager
• Stephen McKnight & also the Expert Road Consultant
• Your picture, vision or dream of the projects outcome
• A total of 20% of all excavators’ downtime is attributed to wet weather rainfall events and
subsequent delays. The “vision or dream” is to minimise this figure by some 25%-50%.
• To put this loss into perspective on average each excavator loses some 370 operating hours per
year per digger to wet weather events and subsequent delays, which is equivalent to 480,000
BCM’s per excavator per year in lost productivity at $43.00 per BCM, which is some
$20,000,000.00 multiplied by 5 excavators giving $100,000,000.00 in total potential saving costs
on notional EBIDTA values (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes and Amortization).
• This project will potentially save $25,000,000.00 up to $50,000,000.00 depending on the
successful implementation of the key deliverables outlined in the Project Management Plan.

12 | P a g e


• Historically, over the last 4 years the Mine has had on average 4 times the predicted annual
rainfall, which has produced a loss of 920 hours of production per year per digger. These rainfall
events typically occur during the months of November to April. Therefore, it is critical to complete
the project before November 2012
• The ultimate target is to achieve a minim of 6000 hours production per year per digger. The Haul
Road Upgrade Project will go some way to achieving this target (20%) in conjunction with other
site based initiatives including: a LOM dewatering strategy, blasting increases in pattern size/drill
bit size and a 10% increase in powder factors and “hot seat” changes in all production equipment,
with staggered fly-in-out days for maximum coverage and finally vertical advance heights of
flitch/bench versus digger movement along wider and deeper benches
• Site Description
 OZ Minerals operates both an open cut and underground copper/gold mine and
processing plant at the Prominent Hill Mine site. Prominent Hill is a remote site
with a FIFO and limited DIDO out workforce supporting the mining, production
and exploration activities. A permanent accommodation village located 3 km’s
from the mining operations supports some 1500 workers. Processing of ore
commenced in February 2009. Ore averaging 1.5% Cu and 0.5g/t Au is processed
at a nominal rate of 8Mt per annum to produce copper concentrate via both
Darwin and Port Adelaide by both rail and road
• Site Location and Access
 The mine site is located 650km north-west of Adelaide, South Australia, some
100km south –east of Coober Pedy and 150km north-west of Roxby Downs. The
site is accessible via an unsealed road off the Stuart Highway 100km south of
Copper Pedy. Daily charter flights from Adelaide, Melbourne and Port Augusta
service the FIFO workers
• Site Observations
 The access ramps are generally in poor condition at higher elevations
recommended by geological element profiles. The majority of access ramps do
not indicate any crossfall. No drainage or facility for run-off from the haul roads
seems to be in place, except for water running along the full length of access
ramps from higher levels to lower levels. This is one of the major causes of
uncontrolled water runoff during major rainfall events. The majority of access
ramps are graded and compacted. The use of inappropriate material selection on
some ramps. There are many cases of wheel rutting on ramp corners due to poor
material selection. Gradients on most active in-pit ramps are between 8%-10%.
Waste dump ramps vary from 5%, 8% and 10% depending on dumping criteria and
poor design. Steely Haematite, Andesite and Dolomite are the best material to
source for the remediation project. Large oversized material has been deposited
on windrows
 The existing access ramps make up 3.5km of the total 10km mine haul road
system. The width of ramps are currently 23m being used for 48 haul road trucks,
CAT 793D. Other equipment on-site is made up of some 5 graders CAT 24H,

13 | P a g e


another 6 Dozers D10T and 4 Liebher 996 excavators with numerous other
ancillary equipment
 Some recommendations based on the observations are;
 Create a dedicated road maintenance project team
• 1 x Project Manager
• 1 x Project Engineer
• 4 x Various Independent Consultants required during execution phase
and peer review (Expert Road Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Friction
Loss Engineer, Surveyor and Peer Review Engineer)
• 2 x Supervisors (T8)
• 10 x Operators
 Source appropriate equipment
• 1 x Wheel Loader CAT 992D
• 2 x Komatsu 785 dump trucks
• 1 x Grader CAT24H
• 1 x Komatsu 300 Digger (Contract digger to supplement fleet)
• 1 x CAT 777 Water Truck
• 1 x CAT D10 Dozer
• And other ancillary equipment as required; Compactors or Impactors
 Source appropriate material
• Steely Haematite
• Haematite
• Andesite
• Dolomite
• Greywacke
• Granitites
 Engage a dedicated survey team to control and monitor the daily works
supervised by the T8 Thiess operator in charge of implementing the traffic light
system management plan
 Purchase the friction testing unit to verify when roads are safe to be driven on
after all rain events
 Follow the rain event flow diagram to minimise downtime

14 | P a g e


SCOPE

To sheet existing haul roads utilising the traffic light system for remediation. This concept has been
previously and briefly explained in both the Executive Summary and Project Management Plan. This form
of remediation identifies 3 different remediation criteria once they are satisfied and competent material is
placed in-situ to design this will facilitate quicker resumption of heavy vehicle activity after wet weather
stoppages. Site based crushing/screened material will be utilised to provide the 3 necessary types of
engineered rock identified in the remediation process. This material will be sourced from in pit basement
material with properties consistent within optimum design tolerances. This material has been successfully
utilised on other in pit ramps (SO8, Beach Ramp, parts of the Western Ring Road, Upper Rom and
Southern Dump access) The new road design has performed better on these areas than on areas yet to
receive the remediation such as ( NO7 ramp, Northern Dump ramp, NO3 running track and Eastern Ring
Road.

In some cases heavy vehicle operations will be able to continue in low level rain events; if the following
factors have been considered and completed; new material in-situ, correct design parameters installed,
such as 2% crossfall, sufficient wearing course, drains and drainage construction all under survey control.
This design veracity will potentially provide in excess of a 25% improvement in digger availability and
utilisation rates during wet weather events. The EDITA data has been outlined in both the Executive
Summary and Project Management Plan. This data will also be available in the cost section of this
document in the PMBOK knowledge area.

In addition, the road maintenance crew lead by the Thiess T8 Supervisor will focus on the design
management with an embedded dedicated survey contractor employed expressly for the project. Their
remit, together is to focus on performance managing the wet weather aspect of the project and its
mitigation. The focus will change after the initial six month construction period to one of daily maintenance
as opposed to daily remediation tasks.

The inclusion of a friction monitoring devise mounted in the T8’s vehicle will add some scientific veracity to
the experience based assessment currently being utilised by site personnel. This issue was highlighted in
the flow diagram exercise for determining the wet weather delay process assessment matrix. This
monitoring devise helps to mitigate risk between the differing risk tolerances based on personnel levels of
experience when determining return to work practises after rain events

In Scope: Priority and critical causes of wet weather delays: Poor surface material, insufficient road
maintenance and no crossfall, no drainage.

Project would be considered successful if 25% of delays have been decreased and Extra BCMs have been
produced due to this improvement.

Out of Scope: Other benefits will be achieved simultaneously such as productivity increase, tyres
conservation, HV and machinery maintenance reduction, decrease of uncontrolled vehicles movements,
safer work conditions environment and driver comfort.

15 | P a g e


SCR ANALYSIS

SITUATION:

Some 20% of total excavator downtime is due to wet weather events. On average each excavator
loses 370 operating hours per year due to wet weather, which is equivalent to 480,000 BCM per
excavator.

COMPLICATION:

To sheet existing haul roads with competent material to enable quicker resumption of heavy
vehicle activity after wet weather stoppages. In addition to sheeting crossfall and drainage also
needs to be included in the remediation process to rain water from the newly constructed roads.
To make this happen there are 3 necessary elements required; Equipment, Material & Resources

RESOLUTION:

Equipment has been ordered to create a dedicated ancillary road maintenance team. Appropriate
material is being stockpiled and crushed and screened as required. The necessary road
maintenance team has been formed to implement the already established Project Management
Plan

STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS

Stephen McKnight: Project Manager & Expert Road Design Engineer

After some considerable background analysis of current designs, requisite rock types, equipment
requirements, resource levels, civil engineered drawings, available material types and rock sizing required;
the project is now at the stage of committing funds and progressing to execution phase. Engineered
drawings have been commissioned. Quotes have been sourced for equipment and material. Human
resourcing levels have been identified and committed to the daily execution of the project. Budgets are
being evaluated and implemented as required. A comprehensive Project Management Plan has been
established and communicated to all the key stakeholders. The plan looks at people, culture, training,
equipment, material and competency based evaluation for driving on remediated haul roads. A traffic light
remediation system that incorporates the necessary design criteria for the identification of the 3 road
mediation types is now in place. A friction analysis of the haul roads has been completed by RTS.

Leidy Alvarado: Project Engineer BI Team

The new approach to tackle Wet Weather Delays is realistic and achievable. The expected improvement
will be guaranteed by completing the 3 proposed project generations. (Road remediation, Road
Maintenance Plan and Rain Management). The project has been re-scoped in order to meet costs, time
and quality requirements of the project deliverables and the stakeholders. In addition, the new contract
has facilitated the communication within both parties and has also enhanced the interest and enthusiasm
of Thiess and Oz projects team by their mutual cooperation. e.g. Quick fixes implemented so far such as
S08 ramp correlates with new roads design and performance tolerances when rain event occur.

16 | P a g e


The Project implementation stage will be managed by Contract Consultant Engineer (Stephen McKnight)
until completion and it is estimated to be completed within 6 months. It is suggested also to have Road
Maintenance Supervisors (T8s) in order to work in conjunction with Oz Project Engineer. The Road
remediation and Maintenance Plan will be incorporated into 36hrs and Weekly Plan to make sure the
project progress is communicated to all required mine personnel and followed successfully on a daily basis
incorporated into the production planning cycle.

Mitigation steps of Risks identified (see tab 2.1 Risk Mgmt.) within the proposed approach such as Lack of
Equipment and Crushed material have been incorporated into the Implementation Plan.

17 | P a g e


TIME

WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE

 Define the situation
 Implement/Establish the action plan
 Acquire the;
• Resources
• Material
• Equipment
 Execute the action plan
 Close out the project

PROJECT MILESTONES

• 5/12/2011 Independent Road Expert engaged to implement project
• 5/1/2012 Project needs identified and implemented
• 5/2/2012 Execution phase begun with limited; resources, equipment and material
• 5/3/2012 Scientific validation of friction loss assessed and measured
• 5/4/2012 Resources, Equipment and Material in place and beginning execution phase
• 5/5/2012 Execution in full swing, all elements on-site and in play
• 5/6/2012 to 5/11/2012 Haul Road Maintenance Plan following PMBOK project cycles until
conclusion of project in November 2012

PROJECT SCHEDULE

THE 75mm ALL IN SCHEDULE

OZ MINERALS
ALL WEATHER HAUL ROAD UPGRADE PROJECT
MATERIAL CRUSHING/SCREENING SCHEDULE

MATERIAL SIZE TOTAL TONNAGE TOTAL VOLUME MONTHLY MATERIAL WEEKLY MATERIAL DAILY MATERIAL DESIRED MATERIAL TYPES TRAFFIC LIGHT SYSTEM DEPTHS
mm t m3 t t t Rock type Colour mm & m
75mm 146,000 67,000 24333 6083 869 Haematite, Andesite, Skarn, Greywacke or Granitoid GREEN 200mm + 2% CROSSFALL
150mm 240,000 109,000 40000 10000 1428 Andesite, Skarn, Greywacke,Sediments or Granitoid AMBER & RED up to 1.5m
300mm 395,000 181,000 65833 16458 2351 Andesite, Skarn, Greywacke, sediments or Granitoid RED up to 2.0m
TOTALS 781,000 357,000 130166 32541 4648

These figures are based on a 6 month crushing/screening schedule
We are assuming a start date of early March 2012 completing August 2012; giving a 2 month buffer before our next "wet weather" window begins from November 2012 to March 2013

18 | P a g e


COST

19 | P a g e


QUALITY

Attached are the majority of QAQC documents associated with the project. There are a wide variety of
documents included in this section; ranging from the traffic light design criteria, the actual map of the sites
requiring the traffic light system remediation, correspondence with the world leader in haul road design RJ
Thompson on negative superelevation design, a working haul road assessment document, a flow diagram
on how to mitigate delays in returning to work after wet weather rain events, etc. This section does not go
into the true depth of detail associated with the issues of maintaining quality, but gives a representation of
the thought and knowledge being implied to make the haul road design as robust and relevant to the site.
During the course of this project a number of specific haul road design documents, white papers and books
have been consulted, which can be found in the reference section of this presentation. Suffice to say
quality on this project was identified as one of the most contingent aspects of the projects potential for
success, hence the amount of effort applied to achieve the quality required

THE ALL-WEATHER HAUL ROAD UPGRADE PROJECT (AWHRUP)

TRAFFIC LIGHT SYSTEM
OZ MINERALS PROMINENT HILL JANUARY
2012
DESIGN CRITERIA GREEN AMBER RED
1. Road Design Types Design #1 Design #2 Design #3
200mm wearing 200mm wearing 200mm wearing
course course course
passing @ 75mm passing 75mm passing 75mm
400mm Base 600mm Base
passing 150mm passing 150mm
500m Sub Base 1000mm Sub Base
passing 300mm passing 300mm
2. Rock Type Steely Haematite Granitoids Mudstone
Greywacke Andesite Silcrete
Skarn Bulldog Shales
Sedimentary Hornfels Fresh
Weathered
3.MPa (UCS) >81 >47 <20
4. CBR% >80 >60 <15
5. Road Life Span 1 year + 6 months + less than 6 months
6. Rolling Resistance 1% 2% + 3% +
7. Friction >80% >50% <50%
8. Defect Score <64 65 to 139 >140
9. % of Project 50% 20% 30%

20 | P a g e


10. Definition Green Amber RED
Road Condition Road Condition Road Condition
VERY GOOD FAIR BAD
DAILY INSPECTION WORK REQUIRED IMMEDIATE WORK
DAILY INSPECTION REQUIRED
DAILY INSPECTION
11. Crossfall 2% 3% 4%
12. Crown 2% 3% 4%
13. Drainage .5m .3m >.3m
14. Berms 1.8m 1.5m <1.5m
15. Equipment 2x 992 Digger Anything less Nothing different
3 x 785 Trucks than the wish list than what is on-site
1x 24 Grader Now
1 x 16 Grader
1 x 777 Water Truck
1 x D9 Dozer
1 x 966 FEL
1 x WA900 FEL
HPGPS
LPGPS
1 x 25t Compactor
16. Road Category Permanent Semi-Permanent Semi-Permanent
High Volume Traffic Medium to High Medium to Low
Operating Life 15
years Volume Traffic Volume Traffic
Operating Life 10 Operating Life <2
Low Maintenance years years
Maintenance
over design life Regular Maintenance intensive
Over design life Traffic volume
exceeded
17. Grade Breaks <10% 10% >10%
18. Road widths >30m 30m <30m
19. Tyre Pressure 800kPa >800Kpa >700Kpa
20. Water Truck
Spray 50m on 50m off <50m on 50m off >50m on 50m off
21. Dust Block
Agents Tar/Bitumen Petrol/Polymer Wetting Agents
22. Road Managed
Maintenance Maintenance Scheduled Blading Ad-hoc Blading

21 | P a g e


23. Design Approach Integrated Design Empirical Design Just build a Road
24. Gradients 10% <12.5% >12.5%

22 | P a g e


23 | P a g e


24 | P a g e


25 | P a g e


26 | P a g e


27 | P a g e


28 | P a g e


29 | P a g e


30 | P a g e


31 | P a g e


Correspondence with Roger J Thompson regarding the issue of introducing negative superelevation to the
road design and QC of the project in relation to crossfall of the in pit haul road design. This situation came
about due to the road design standards Thiess have in their coal operations and as such is in their working
haul road design document, which needed to be addressed so the appropriate run off design could be
implemented in this site specific circumstance.

Excellent Steve, an educational read too. Thank you Rob

From: Stephen McKnight
Sent: Wednesday, 4 January 2012 3:41 PM
To: Robert Boyd; Jarrad Dodson; Richard Turnbull; Leidy Alvarado
Cc: David Way
Subject: FW: HAUL ROAD DESIGN

FYI Gents

Steve McKnight
Contract Mining Engineer – Mine Improvement Team

OZ Prominent Hill | Respect Integrity Action Results
Ground Floor, 170 Greenhill Road
Parkside, South Australia, 5063, Australia

T 61 8 8672 8148 F 61 8 86728101 M 04 350 29 169
Stephen.McKnight@ozminerals.com

 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

From: Roger Thompson [mailto:R.Thompson@curtin.edu.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 4 January 2012 3:02 PM
To: Stephen McKnight
Subject: RE: HAUL ROAD DESIGN

Steve

Sounds like a good approach – some changes or modifications to designs can have far reaching
effects on operation and maintenance – best to explore these before implementation.

32 | P a g e


Have worked with iron-ore discard roads wearing course material before at a few sites (overseas)
and it tends to make an excellent wearing course if it does not slake (and obviously has no fibrous
material content). Only issue is sometimes too little fine fractions or binder. Bituminous emulsion
treatment also generally an excellent option with this material type, mixed-in if well compacted road
with low void ratio, or spray on IF depth of penetration can be assured (last thing you want is a thin
‘crust’ of treatment – bit like a sheet of glass on top of a sponge).

Friction/skid resistance testing always good info – (Dave Tulloch – RTS? excellent for this evaluation
work) but I’d also suggest sampling and evaluating the wearing course material at the locations you
do these tests too – otherwise you don’t have such a good idea of what influence the wearing course
material (as opposed to moisture/rainfall) has on friction supply. Ditto any treatment you
apply. Shave off top 10-20mm max of wearing course where you do the tests and evaluate following
AS1289.

Would be happy to act as your third party peer review and quarterly inspection consultant (haulroad
design aspects – safety audits best handled by Damir Vagaja of ARRB). I can run this work through
WASM Consulting who provide liability cover, Admin and invoicing etc. as part of their service. As
and when the work transpires, I can provide a Scope of Works Quote and take it from there.

Regards

Roger

From: Stephen McKnight [mailto:Stephen.McKnight@ozminerals.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 3 January 2012 12:00 PM
To: Roger Thompson

Hi Roger,

First off really appreciate your prompt reply and considered response

Over the last month I have been reading everything you have published to get up to speed with this
project

I am glad you agree with the negative crossfall of 2% with qualifications, of course

We are working with Thiess our Open Pit Hauling Contractor

They have a high turn-over of staff so there are a significant number of “newbies” on-site at any one
time, hence our difficulties with the fleet working in wet weather, among other reasons

33 | P a g e


I take on board your central corridor berm idea and will pass it on to the team for discussion

And yes we need to consider drainage in such cases

We are looking at introducing HPGPS & LPGPS systems on both graders and dozers

We are also looking at applying Dust Bloc as well to the wearing course; this is a bitumen type
palliative

The wearing course will be made of steely haematite, MPa >150 passing through up to 75mm @
200mm depth close to or above 80% CBA

With regards friction analysis we are bring in a team to do the whole mine on the 24-26 January, to
establish a “baseline”

I fully appreciate the “negative” superelevation on the downward journey into the pit. This will be
and has been discussed with the Thiess team, but will be further enforced

We are constructing a simulation ramp at 10% to begin training the operators

A constructed ramp with a crossfall of 2% appropriate wearing course and drainage

With another ramp with no controls in place

Yes, I totally agree with the civil/geotech analysis and intend to follow your specifications to the
letter

Roger would you consider being our third party peer review and quarterly inspection consultant?

I’m not sure if you would be available, but your experience and technical background are second to
none in this field

It would be a privilege and a pleasure if you were interested in assisting our team over the course of
this project

Cheers,

Steve McKnight


34 | P a g e


T 61 8 8672 8148 F 61 8 86728101 M 04 350 29 169


From: Roger Thompson [mailto:R.Thompson@curtin.edu.au]
Sent: Tuesday, 3 January 2012 2:03 PM
To: Stephen McKnight

Steve

In principal, a construction width of 35m for a 30m running surface (4x6.64m body width of 793C)
appears fine. The cross-fall of 2% also typical – but would depend on the type of wearing course
(surfacing) material you have too. The only recurrent problem with a constant crossfall is the
potential of trucks to wander across lanes into the direction of on-coming traffic. If you have
operating experience and safety/accident data, it may be worth looking at the type of
accidents/near-misses at the site to see if truck misalignment/skidding, etc. is an issue for whatever
reason. Centre berms have been used in some operations to split traffic lanes, but with a constant
crossfall, this complicates drainage (and road and berm maintenance).

Blading a road with a constant crossfall is also more difficult than a crowned road, with the added
problem of debris, spillage, etc. being pushed to the drain-side where it could cause tyre damage,
etc. Good grading practice should remedy this.

Further, where the road is required to change direction against the cross-fall, care will be needed to
specify speed limits (especially down-grade unladen) since on these curves, the super-elevation will
be in the wrong ‘sense’ and road surface friction supply needs to be maximised here to prevent
skidding. An incorrect super-elevation may lead to truck instability at speed, and the misalignment
problems outlined above.

This also raises the issue of the wearing course material itself. A good quality material is required,
with a CBR ideally >80%, to help reduce the likelihood of cross-erosion or run-off channels being

35 | P a g e


eroded from the wearing course on the down-slope edge of the road. The majority of even the best
specified wearing course materials are sensitive to rain, and the road will go down eventually. You
may want to look at adding a stabiliser or other similar treatment to the wearing course to enhance
it’s ability to shed water as opposed to absorb it. In doing this, you’ll need to ensure the road
structure is well built and can support a long-lasting surface treatment – otherwise you’ll end up
blading it off the road as you blade the surface – due to poor support problems in the structure
itself.

Good starting point would be to sample actual/proposed wearing course materials and get a civil
eng lab to run a road indicator test on them according to AS1289 (grading to 0.075, Atterburg limits,
MDD, OMC and CBR at say 97% Mod AS1289) to see what you’ve got and what options you have if
you need to fix it up (reduce clay by adding aggregates, increase fine fraction to improve binding,
etc.). Treatment suppliers would also look at this info to determine how and at what rate of
application their product may work.

Let me know if you need more info – happy to assist.

Roger

From: Stephen McKnight [mailto:Stephen.McKnight@ozminerals.com]
Sent: Monday, 2 January 2012 4:59 AM
To: Roger Thompson
Subject: HAUL ROAD DESIGN

Hi RJ,

I am currently working on an all-weather haul road upgrade project here in South Australia

I have been applying many of your thoughts, concepts and principles to this project

The project consists of approximately 10kms of road work; in pit haul roads, outer ring roads and
waste dump/ROM pad roads

The projects focus is to reduce the downtime we experience from rainfall events

It has been determined that with rain events between 1mm – 5mm we lose up to 80% productivity
due to truck downtime

Some 470 hrs per year per digger, we have 5 Diggers; 996 Liebher

Our aim is to achieve 6000 hrs per digger per year and the all-weather haul road upgrade project has
been put in place to achieve a high percentage of this target

36 | P a g e


Currently, there are no crossfalls, no road designs or competent material utilised in the construction
of the roads.

I have developed a traffic light system that identifies these conditions and we are working our way
through the work required

However, I require your thoughts on the following situation

We are developing a design for a negative superelevation for the in pit curved roads, which will
spiral down to some 480m at the end of the pits life

We are considering the following ideas;

• Up 2% crossfall from the in-pit side of the road out to the highwall side
• We will install the drainage on the highwall side of the pit and pump it out from sumps
• The width of the total road is 35m
• The working surface is up to 30m
• We are using 973 Cat Dump Trucks (payload 220t)

My question is related to the negative superelevation

Therefore, what we are proposing, is it safe and feasible or do you have better: thoughts, comments,
ideas or suggestions

We need to make sure the rain water runs off the wearing course into the drains so we do not lose
truck availability

Cheers,

Steve McKnight


T 61 8 8672 8148 F 61 8 86728101 M 04 350 29 169

37 | P a g e



RISK

• There were 5 major risk areas identified during the All Weather Upgrade Risk Assessment,
which have been categorised in the below chart The issue of wet weather delays is very
complex and there are no one size fits all solutions in play. Regardless the fact that there
are civil engineering solutions that can and will be applied; this site has specific
requirements for the appropriate solution and outcomes desired
• Lack of basement material or crushed/screened or stockpiled material available when
required
• Equipment availability from Thiess
• HV & LV, HV & HV interactions during construction/execution phase of project
• Resource availability from Thiess for HV requirements
• Impact of road maintenance team during construction on production team
• Natural disasters
• Wet weather rainfall events

Risks identified Risk Rating Mitigation Action Risk Rating
Likelihood Conseq. Rating Likelihood Conseq. Rating
1 Lack of road basesment or crushed material Possible Major Extreme Ongoing stockpiling of Road basement Unlikely Moderate Moderate
w hen required material and Hire Screening plant
2 Equipment Availabilty Possible Major Extreme Hire Road Maintenance Equipment through Rare Moderate Moderate
Thiess
3 HV contact w ith LV during road w orks Unlikely Major High Road w orks completed on shift change Rare Major Moderate
days, alternate routes to be used
4 Thiess manning level drop below minimum Possible Moderate High Monitor crew levels, move personnel Unlikely Moderate Moderate
requirements betw een crew s, park up digger that do not
5 Impact on production during road construction, Unlikely Moderate Moderate ff t th j t
Schedule to be managed by mine planner Unlikely Insignifica Low
by the contruction w ork group (both 36hr plan and w eekly plan)and Thiess nt

38 | P a g e


These 5 categories have been further calculated in the below risk register matrix

39 | P a g e


HUMAN RESOURCES

Project
Manager

T8 Road
Project
Maintenance
Engineer
Supervisors

Expert
Road Crew A Road Crew B
Consultants

Project Manager: Steve McKnight

Mine Project Engineer: Leidy Alvarado

T8 Supervisors: David Kurtzer / Chris Carroll

Road Crew A & B

2 x CAT 992 Wheel Loader Operators

2 x CAT 16 H Grader Operators

2 x CAT D10 Dozer Operators

4 x KOMATSU 785 Truck Operators

Expert Consultants on an as required basis

(Friction Test Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Surveyors & Peer Review Principal Engineer)

40 | P a g e


COMMUNICATIONS

41 | P a g e


PROCUREMENT

42 | P a g e


APPENDIX.1

THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

43 | P a g e


44 | P a g e


45 | P a g e


46 | P a g e


47 | P a g e


48 | P a g e


49 | P a g e


50 | P a g e


51 | P a g e


52 | P a g e


53 | P a g e


54 | P a g e


55 | P a g e


56 | P a g e


57 | P a g e


58 | P a g e


59 | P a g e


60 | P a g e


61 | P a g e


62 | P a g e


63 | P a g e


64 | P a g e


65 | P a g e


66 | P a g e


67 | P a g e


68 | P a g e


69 | P a g e


70 | P a g e


71 | P a g e


72 | P a g e


DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF
MINE ROADS
1.0 GENERAL .......................................................... 75
2.0 CONTROLS ........................................................ 75
2.1 Road Classification ................................................... 75
2.1.1 Permanent Haulroads ................................................. 75
2.1.2 Pit Haulroads (Short or Medium Term Haulroads) ........... 76
2.1.3 Light Vehicle Roads .................................................... 76
2.2 Mine Road Design & Construction Process ................... 76
2.3 Rolling Resistance.................................................... 78
2.4 Geometric Design Phase ........................................... 79
2.4.1 Stopping Distance ...................................................... 79
2.4.2 Sight Distance ........................................................... 79
2.4.3 Alignment ................................................................. 80
2.4.4 Roadway Width ......................................................... 81
2.4.5 Cross Fall ................................................................. 82
2.4.6 Gradient ................................................................... 83
2.4.7 Super-elevation ......................................................... 84
2.4.8 Road Side Drainage.................................................... 86
2.4.9 Road Shoulders ......................................................... 87
2.4.10 Bundwalls ................................................................. 87
2.4.11 Intersections ............................................................. 89
2.4.12 Intersection Traffic Control .......................................... 93
2.4.13 Runaway Vehicle Control............................................. 94
2.4.14 Heavy Equipment Go-lines .......................................... 96
2.5 Structural Design Phase ........................................... 99
2.5.1 General Road Construction .......................................... 99
2.5.2 In-situ Surface Preparation ....................................... 100
2.5.3 Sub-base Requirements ............................................ 100
2.5.3 Base Course Requirements ........................................ 101

73 | P a g e


2.6 Functional Design Phase ......................................... 101
2.6.1 Running Surface Requirements .................................. 102
2.7 Maintenance Design ............................................... 102
2.7.1 General Road Maintenance ........................................ 104
2.7.2 Road Furniture – Signs ............................................. 104
2.7.3 Road Furniture – Sign Positioning ............................... 105
2.7.4 Road Furniture – Delineators ..................................... 106
3.0 MONITORING & REVIEW ................................ 106
4.0 RESPONSIBILITIES ........................................ 107
4.1 Mineworkers ........................................................... 107
4.2 Supervisors ............................................................ 107
4.4 Superintendents / Project Manager ............................ 107
5.0 USEFUL REFERENCES & FORMS ...................... 108

74 | P a g e


PROCEDURE & INFORMATION

Procedure Information
1.0 General
PRINTING INFORMATION
Mine roads shall be designed and constructed to appropriate specifications Due to the graphics
to allow the safe and efficient movement of vehicles around the mine site. included within the
body of this document
it must be printed in
The specifications must have regard to the particular conditions at the mine,
high resolution
including the following:

• The characteristics of the mine vehicles;
• The types of materials available for road construction;
• The methods of working the mine;
• Relevant legislation.
Good design and construction of mine roads will enable:

• Safe movement of vehicles;
• Optimal haulage cycle times;
• Increased tyre life;
• Less stress to mechanical components of vehicles;
• Less structural damage to vehicle chassis;
• Reduced operator fatigue.

2.0 Controls
2.1 Road Classification

Mine roads should be designed and constructed to a standard in accordance
with the road classification which is dependent on:

• The expected life span of the road;
• The primary purpose of the road;
• The frequency of usage of the road.

2.1.1 Permanent Haulroads

Permanent haulroads are major arterial roads used by haul trucks and the
majority of mine traffic. The basic criteria for permanent haulroads are as
75 | P a g e


follows:

• Long term existence;
• Used by haul trucks and other mine vehicles;
• High frequency usage;
• Formed construction profile;
• Delineated.

2.1.2 Pit Haulroads (Short or Medium Term Haulroads)

Pit haulroads are roads that are used by haul trucks and other mine traffic
in and around pit areas including, in pit haulroads and ramps, bench roads,
dump roads and ramps, etc. The basic criteria for pit haulroads are as
follows:

• Short to long term existence depending on particular road function;
• Used by haul trucks and other mine vehicles;
• High frequency usage (may be periodic);
• Formed or non-formed construction profile;
• Delineated.

2.1.3 Light Vehicle Roads

Light vehicle roads are roads that are used by light and medium vehicles for
access around the perimeter of the pit, within pit areas and on the surface.
The basic criteria for light vehicle roads are as follows:

• Short to long term existence depending on particular road function;
• Used by light and medium vehicles only;
• Low to medium frequency usage;
• Basic construction profile only;
• Delineated on more permanent light vehicle roads.

2.2 Mine Road Design & Construction Process

76 | P a g e


Mine road design and construction can be thought of as 4 distinct steps or
phases:

• Alignment
• Super-elevation
• Gradient
• Sight Distance, Etc.

• General road construction
• In-situ surface preparation
• Sub-base requirements
• Base course requirements

• Running surface requirements Design &
Construct

• Haulroad maintenance
• Road furniture – signage
• Road furniture – delineators
• Inspections / audits

77 | P a g e


2.3 Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance is the resistance that occurs when a tyre rolls on a  Refer to AM-PH-HS-IF-
0832.8 Information
surface. Sheet – Rolling
Resistance Table
Rolling resistance can significantly impact on the efficiency of vehicles
travelling on a mine road and associated haulage costs.

It is caused by any combination of the following:

• Deformation of the road (may be at any depth in the road profile)
under the tyre;
• Penetration of the tyre into the road surface;
• Tyre deformation caused by the road surface resulting in energy
required to lift the vehicle as opposed to propel it forward.
Rolling resistance of a haulroad shall be considered throughout all 4 phases
of the design and construction process to maximise haulage efficiency and
safety.

• Poor geometric design resulting in significant
or sharp changes to vehicle direction and
speed may result in deformation of the road,
tyre deformation and/or tyre penetration into
the road surface;

• Poor structural design (as a result of poor in-
situ surface, insufficient structural layer
thickness, inappropriate structural material
and/or poorly constructed structural layers)
may result in deformation of the road profile;

• Poor functional design (as a result of
inappropriate running surface material and/or
poorly constructed running surface layer) may
result in tyre penetration;

• Poor maintenance design (as a result of poor
maintenance practices and/or insufficient
maintenance frequency) may result in an
inability to minimise all types of rolling
resistance.

In order to maximise haulage efficiency rolling resistance should be
minimised where possible.

78 | P a g e


2.4 Geometric Design Phase

The geometric parameters of the mine road shall be designed to ensure the
safe and efficient travel of mine vehicles at normal operating speeds.

2.4.1 Stopping Distance

Mine roads shall be designed to accommodate the stopping distance of the  Refer to AM-PH-HS-IF-
largest fully laden haul truck regularly using the road (using emergency 0832.10 Information
braking). Sheet – SAE Stopping
Distance Graphs
Theoretical stopping distances may be determined from a series of Stopping
Distance Characteristic Graphs developed by the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE).
OEM’s utilise these standards to design their vehicle brake systems.
Tests carried out by Dawson in 1975 indicate that to preclude brake fade or
failure, 61m braking distance should be considered the minimum allowable
(this is under test conditions). However, adopted stopping distance needs to
accommodate a number of variables (e.g. driver reaction time, road surface
conditions, traction loss, etc) as well as the vehicle braking capability. As a
result, a minimum stopping distance of 100m should be utilised.
2.4.2 Sight Distance

Sight distance is the extent of peripheral area visible to the vehicle
operator, and is dictated by:
• The design speed of the road;
• The driver eye height of the lowest vehicle using the road;
• The stopping distance of the largest vehicle using the mine road in
the worst case driving conditions.
The distance ahead of the driver to an unforeseen hazard shall always be
greater than the distance required to bring the vehicle to a stop.

On hill crests, the sight distance may be restricted by the vertical curve or
crest of the hill, in this instance the crest may need to be flattened.

At horizontal curves or intersections of the road the sight distance may be
restricted by batters, vegetation, signs or other obstructions. Where
possible horizontal curves and intersections should have all sight
restrictions removed or minimised.

79 | P a g e


2.4.3 Alignment

Road alignment refers to the road direction in both the horizontal and
vertical planes.

The following elements should be considered when designing the mine road
alignment:

• All curves (horizontal and vertical) should be designed with the
largest radius possible;
• The alignment should be smooth and consistent;
• Compound curves (curves where the radius changes) shall not be
used;

80 | P a g e


• Horizontal and vertical alignments should complement each other
and the following should be considered when combining horizontal
and vertical curves:
o Avoid sharp horizontal curves at the crest of vertical curves
as sight distance is generally restricted and it is difficult for
drivers to perceive the curves in such a situation;
o Avoid sharp horizontal curves at the base of ramps or long
sustained downhill grades as vehicles are typically at their
highest speed at these locations;
o If switchbacks are required they should be designed with the
largest radius possible and should be placed on flat sections,
avoid placing them on grade as the inside of the curve may
exceed the design gradient specification.

2.4.4 Roadway Width

Mine roads should be designed and constructed to suit the Operating Width The Roadway of a mine
road refers to the running
of the largest vehicle that will be using the road regularly.
surface of the road.

The following table summarises the roadway width for various road types: The Operating Width of a
vehicle is the maximum
Straight Single Lane Roadway 2 x Operating Width width of the vehicle during
normal operation. The
Straight Double Lane Roadway 3.5 x Operating Width measurement must be
taken from outer
Curved Single Lane Roadway 2 x Operating Width x 1.18 extremity (for example
mirrors, tray, rock
Curved Double Lane Roadway 3.5 x Operating Width x 1.18 deflectors, etc) on one
side to the outer extremity
(1.18 represents an overhang/vehicle tracking multiplier)
(for example mirrors, tray,
rock deflectors, etc) on the
Consideration should be given to separate roadways where possible other side.
particularly in high hazard areas (e.g. fog zones). In such circumstances the
roadways should be separated by a median (separation) bund or other  Refer to AM-PH-HS-
TP-0832.6 Template –
physical barrier. The height of the median bund or physical barrier must be Site Specification
appropriately selected to ensure that sight distance is not affected (typically Sheet (Site Version)
median bundwall height should be restricted to 1m unless otherwise
required for risk control).
 Refer to AM-PH-HS-FO-
In areas where roadway width criteria cannot be met, an assessment of risk 0501.6 Job Safety and
shall be undertaken and appropriate controls put in place. Environmental Analysis

Straight Double Lane Roadway Schematic

81 | P a g e


© Cat Graphics reproduced with permission from Caterpillar Inc.

Straight Separated Double Lane Roadway Schematic

Separated Roadways are
treated as two single lane
roadways when
determining roadway
width.

© Cat Graphics reproduced with permission from Caterpillar Inc.

2.4.5 Cross Fall
 Refer to AM-PH-HS-
Cross fall is the cross road gradient perpendicular to the road direction and TP-0832.6 Template –
Site Specification
Sheet (Site Version)

82 | P a g e


should be utilised in order to divert water away from the road surface.
 Refer to AM-PH-HS-IF-
0832.11 Information
The rate of cross fall should allow rapid water runoff without adversely
Sheet – Gradient
affecting the drivers steering control or increasing Position 1 tyre wear. Conversion
The degree of cross fall is dependent and directly related to:
• Road gradient;
• Expected rainfall (during normal weather conditions);
• Construction materials used on the running surface.
The following table details typical cross fall for various applications:

Min Cross fall Max Cross fall
Road Gradient Low Rainfall or Smooth High Rainfall or Rough
Surface Surface

0 to 4% 1 in 25 1.0% 3%

5 to 9% 1 in 11 1.0% 2.5%

10 to 12.5% 1 in 8 0.5% 2%

2.4.6 Gradient
The gradient on a ramp is the grade line profile along the road centre line, 0832.11 Information
in the vertical plane. Sheet – Gradient
Conversion
Vertical curves should be utilised to provide smooth transitions from one
 Refer to AM-PH-HS-
grade to another. The vertical curves utilised shall ensure that the sight TP-0832.6 Template –
distance is sufficient at the design speed for the vehicles using the road. Site Specification
Sheet (Site Version)

Gradient should be kept as constant as possible (avoid unnecessary grade
changes) to reduce the tendency of trucks to change through gears (hunt)
on the up-grade hauls. This affects:

• Haulage cycle times;
• Fuel consumption;
• Stress on the mechanical components of the vehicle e.g.
transmissions and torque converters;
• Excessive chassis flexing due to uneven surfaces (Racking);
• Damage to the road surface.
Gradient should be selected in accordance with manufacturer’s
specifications to suit the particular vehicle that is expected to utilise the
road.

Both the uphill (rimpull) and downhill (retarding/brake capability) of the
vehicle should be considered when determining the most appropriate grade.

83 | P a g e


Particular attention needs to be paid to loaded downhill haulage and/or long
sustained downhill grades (for both loaded and unloaded operations) to
ensure that the braking capability of the vehicle is not compromised.

Consideration must also be given to possible mine design impacts when
selecting gradients.

Typically grades up to 10% (1in10) should be utilised on haulage ramps.

An assessment of risk shall be undertaken for grades ranging from 10%
(1in10) to 12.5% (1in8).

Gradients exceeding 12.5% (1in8) shall not be utilised.

Median bundwalls should be utilised to separate traffic where there is a
horizontal curve on grade. Horizontal curves on ramps may increase the
potential for vehicles travelling down the ramp to lose control and slide into
vehicles travelling up the ramp (this is particularly the case when the down
grade curve is to the left).

2.4.7 Super-elevation
Super-elevation is the cross fall applied to switchbacks, corners and curves. 0832.11 Information
It allows the vehicle taking the corner to counteract the centrifugal forces Sheet – Gradient
Conversion
by directing the vehicle weight towards the centre of radius of the curve.

All horizontal curves shall be appropriately super-elevated and/or speed
restricted.

The amount of super-elevation on the corner is directly related to the radius
of the corner and the desired vehicle speed through the corner.

Under no circumstance shall negative super-elevation be used.

Typically super-elevation for a normal mine road application is between 3%
and 5%. Super-elevation rates above 5% are not recommended.

The following table details recommended super-elevation rates and proper
curve and speed relationship:

Recommended super-elevation rates in % for given vehicle speeds and curve radii

Curve
Vehicle Speed (km/hr)
Radius

20 30 40 50 60 70

50m 6% - - - - -

84 | P a g e

Mine Haul Road Upgrade Project OZ Minerals Prominent Hill South Australia

Mine Haul Road Upgrade Project OZ Minerals Prominent Hill South Australia

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Mine Haul Road Upgrade Project OZ Minerals Prominent Hill South Australia

Similaire à Mine Haul Road Upgrade Project OZ Minerals Prominent Hill South Australia (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Mine Haul Road Upgrade Project OZ Minerals Prominent Hill South Australia