Seismic Elastic Behaviour of Mine Headframes

"The structural design of mine headframes is challenging due to the significant differences in the geometry, rigidity, and behaviour of these structures compared to conventional buildings. The differences are related to the main purpose of these structures, which is not human occupancy, but rather the support of hoisting equipment. The main objective of this paper is to present the seismic elastic behaviour of headframe structures in comparison with conventional buildings, which is the base case for the definition of seismic loads. This paper highlights the impact of backlegs on the dynamic behaviour of mine headframes, more specifically the resulting torsional sensitivity. INTRODUCTION The design of industrial structures is often governed by industrial processes rather than by architectural constraints. In ground-mounted hoisting plants, the structural configuration of headframes must allow clearances around conveyances and ropes while resisting the lateral loads associated with the hoisting equipment. Typically, these structures use backlegs to withstand the lateral loads, which leads to highly irregular structures with unconventional dynamic behaviour. The codes and standards applicable to the structural design of mine headframes in Canada are often incomplete or not adapted to the reality of practising engineers. This situation creates confusion, and engineers must look at various guidelines and international standards to support the engineering calculations required for the design of these structures. The loads resulting from the support of hoisting equipment, such as ropes and conveyances, are usually simple to calculate and are determined based on the information from manufacturer and industry related guidelines. Moreover, the loads associated with snow accumulation and wind are calculated applying the same methodology used for conventional buildings, without any major issues. On the other hand, the seismic loads are often difficult to calculate based on the methodology from the National Building Code of Canada due to the significant differences in the dynamic behaviour of the structures. The resulting structures may be either over-designed or worse, under-designed. Hence, there is a lack of uniformity in engineers’ designs. The latest edition of CSA S16-14 “Design of steel structures” includes Annex M (Informative) “Seismic design of industrial steel structures” to help designers close the gap between the requirements of traditional regulations and actual engineering practice."