Search Documents

By S H. Begg

There is strong evidence that many major oil and gas (O&G) projects are plagued by large cost and schedule overruns, or significant underperformance in productivity. Similar evidence exists for large mining projects. This paper claims that uncertainty is the underlying reason why projects fail to deliver the metrics used to justify their investment, or to deliver the economic value possible if alternative decisions had been made.Most technical and economic analyses are performed to reduce uncertainty to help make decisions. Decision-making is about ranking alternatives and choosing the best; rarely are precise predictions required, if this is even possible. Better uncertainty assessment is one of the keys to better decisions, thus better business outcomes. To get better decisions it is suggested that the focus or reward/penalty incentives be shifted away from the quality of outcomes to the quality of decisions. High-quality decisions are those that are generated from the skilled use of the tools, methodologies and processes from the discipline of decision analysis.Uncertainty is quantified by probability, which is a degree of belief in the truth/falsity of some proposition about a quantity relevant to a decision, such as volume of in-place resource, future price or action of a competitor. The probability a person ascribes to a proposition depends upon their information set; hence probability is subjective – it is not an inherent attribute of the quantity of interest or the physical system.The above simple observations have profound implications for modelling approaches, how they deal with uncertainty, the use of data to help assess uncertainty and the reliability of information provided by subject-matter experts. The limited circumstances under which frequency data (from spatial or temporal variables) can be used to assign probabilities is also reviewed.People, in general, are subject to a range of biases and cognitive errors. Research with O&G subject-matter experts shows that their expertise offers little or no protection from making errors in probability assessments and other judgements.CITATION:Begg, S H, 2016. Decisions, decisions – uncertainty, variability, modelling and psychology, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 9–18 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By J Fisher, M Castro, A Hariyadi

The train haulage system being designed for PT Freeport Indonesia’s Grasberg Block Cave (GBC) will be located within the mine at an elevation of almost 3000 m above sea level on the west side of the island of Papua, Indonesia. The developing block cave is beneath the active Grasberg Open Pit and will transport 160 000 t of ore per day from multiple chute galleries to the underground crushing plants. The design entails 28 km of rail and 119 ore chutes, which will be brought online over the course of ten years.The train haulage system will be driverless and fully automated. Sequentially, the system includes remote controlled rock breakers at the top of the chute grizzlies, followed by remote controlled chute loading of the trains, then autonomous train haulage and autonomous unloading. An overhead catenary system (OCS) will power the locomotives, which are equipped with on-board batteries to drive through the loading and unloading sections. Service locomotives with drivers move material-laden freight cars in and out of the service shaft, destined for workshops, the magazine and batch plants. Service locomotives are also used for haulage level maintenance. Highly reliable and redundant control and communications systems are required to manage 12 trains in simultaneous operation.This paper provides an overview of the train haulage system’s technical complexities and the associated support systems interactions. The paper also highlights the project management issues and successes of this globally sourced project.CITATION:Hariyadi, A, Castro, M and Fisher, J, 2016. Automated train ore transport, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 563–570 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By R Long

The founder of social psychology is sometimes identified as Kurt Lewin. In a 1947 article, Kurt Lewin coined the term ‘group dynamics’. He described this notion as the way that groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Lewin theorised that when a group is established it becomes a unified system with unique dynamics that cannot be understood by evaluating members individually. The discipline of social psychology really emerged out of World War II and tackled questions associated with human judgement and decision-making by the Nazis. For a comprehensive look at the development of social psychology look at Abelson, Frey and Gregg (2004).Social psychology is concerned with the way social arrangements affect human judgement and decision-making. What the author has done is apply the knowledge of this new discipline to an understanding of risk, safety and leadership. This paper will explain some of the developments in social psychology, such as the discovery of the bystander effect, Groupthink, bounded rationality, heuristics, risk homeostasis and the Milgram effect.The social psychology of risk tackles the way decisions are made about risk in their social context. Unless organisations understand that decision-making is socially conditioned, they are unlikely to be able to tackle the complexities of culture change or the development of risk maturity.The paper will offer a new understanding of why people do what they do, how risk makes sense and why a ‘dumb down’ approach to safety is dangerous. A model will also be presented that shows the pathway to risk maturity.CITATION:Long, R, 2016. The social psychology of risk, safety and leadership maturity, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 31–42 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By A J. Weston

Block or panel caving technology is far removed from that of the top slicing and block caving of the late nineteenth or early twentieth centuries. The rapid mechanisation and expansion of these methods in the late twentieth century was as much a result of the change of the technology of the unit operations of development, ground support, drilling and blasting and transport as it was of the advances in geotechnical understanding and practice. The small footprint gravity and scraper block caving mines with boundary weakening, rail transport and shaft hoisting of the early to mid-twentieth century have been replaced by massive high lift panel caves using preconditioning of the ore, large load-haul-dump units, adjacent crushers and conveyors to surface. The technology changes in the unit operations are described and the drivers for these changes examined.CITATION:Weston, A J, 2016. The evolution of block caving technology, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 265–274 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By M Mohammad Khani

An economic block cave is dependent to the characteristics of the rock mass at stages of caving. These are cave initiation, propagation and ore flow. In this research, the rock engineering system (RES), first established by Hudson (1992) to solve complex rock engineering problems, is introduced and verified against the well-established caving parameters established by Laubscher. There are two types of factors influencing caving and these are natural (cannot be controlled) and induced (operator controlled). A RES based interaction matrix is developed by determining the rating parameters required to reproduce the caving database using Laubscher’s caving parameters. This provides the relative importance of the parameters in the interaction matrix. After discussing the rock mass caving process and identifying all the effective parameters, an interaction matrix is introduced to study the cave initiation of rock masses. The expert-semi-quantitative (ESQ) coding method is utilised to assign the numerical value to each parameter’s interaction. Thereafter, the interaction intensity and dominance of each factor in the system is determined to classify these factors. Finally, all the parameters affecting caving operation and their weights on the RES system are identified. This new application of RES in block caving is very efficient and useful for any stage of caving studies and helps experts to make decisions more accurately.CITATION:Mohammad Khani, M, 2016. The application of rock engineering systems to block caving to identify the effective parameters, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 853–860 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By G Pizarro, O Miranda, D Rosales

In panel/block caving mines, large amounts of information are collected at the operations. This information includes grades and extracted tonnage, fragmentation, lithology, design of stopes and main infrastructure, geotechnical information, overbreak progress, seismicity, numerical modelling and many other mine variables. To improve the reliability of the production plan it is required to integrate the mine data into one platform. In this paper, the logic of a new technological platform is presented for analysis, modelling and design in panel/block caving mines. The platform includes an acquisition system for mine data and geotechnical information, a back-analysis module for calibrating statistical models and a module of visualisation of the results. The application and benefits of the platform is illustrated for mining induced seismic risk for panel/block caving mining operation. The platform can be used in the mine design and planning processes and is useful for reducing uncertainty in the mining business of panel/block caving operations.CITATION:Miranda, O, Rosales, D, Pizarro, G and Vallejos, J, 2016. Development of an integrated platform for the analysis, modelling and design in panel caving mines, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 237–240 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By P Paredes, T Leaño, D Gajardo, C Tramón, S Peñaloza

The definition of an ore handling system and its consequent layout design is of crucial importance in cave mining projects. It not only represents the main driver in the production capacity and reliability of the mining system, it is also a fundamental variable in the footprint’s development time and cost.In recent decades, load-haul-dump (LHD) tramming distance optimisation through the allocation of several orepasses inside the footprint has been the most common practice in ore handling system layout definition at Codelco’s operations. Today, the improvement of existing technology, such as higher-capacity LHDs and jaw-gyratory crushers, and intensive preconditioning techniques to improve fragmentation allow the conceptualisation of simple and highly productive ore handling system layouts for wide caving areas that avoid the complexity and high cost of developing numerous orepasses inside the footprint.The initial macroblocks of the Chuquicamata underground mine project (PMCHS) consider an ore handling system layout in which LHDs dump into orepasses located inside the footprint area. The ore is then transferred into crusher chambers located below the production level, where it is crushed by jaw crushers and then conveyed to surface. In an effort to reduce development time and costs, a new ore handling system layout for the PMCHS experimental macroblocks was engineered using improved technologies and techniques in a simpler mining system. This paper compares the new ore handling system layout for the project’s experimental macroblocks with the traditional LHD-orepass layout in terms of production capacity, reliability, development time and cost.CITATION:Paredes, P, Gajardo, D, Leaño, T, Peñaloza, S and Tramón, C, 2016. Simplifying the ore handling system through the use of current technology at Chuquicamata underground mine project, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 571–584 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By C Vejrazka

Northparkes is located 27 km north of the township of Parkes in central New South Wales, Australia. The operations consist of underground block cave mines and an ore processing plant that produces high-grade copper and gold concentrate. Production is currently sourced from the E48 Lift 1 block cave mine and open cut stockpiles. Mining commenced at Northparkes in 1994 as an open cut operation. Underground block cave mining began in 1997. Northparkes was the first mine in Australia to use the highly efficient block cave mining method, which relies on gravity and natural rock stresses to fragment the ore.The occurrence of air blasts is one of the principal mining hazards in block caving operations between the time of first undercutting and breakthrough of the cave to surface. As such, it needs to be managed continuously, and risk assessments need to be reviewed on a regular basis for applicability to changing conditions. Unfortunately, there is little literature on how to practically approach air blast risk assessments in a way that can be incorporated in the day-to-day operation of a mine. Previous methods of assessing air blast risk were tedious and results were often unrepeatable.With the extension of the E48 Lift 1 extraction level, it was necessary to assess the air blast risk for the extension drives and develop operational guidelines for production from the extension. A review of the methodology for assessing air blast risks revealed substantial improvement opportunities.This paper outlines the principles used for air blast risk assessments at Northparkes Mines and the methodology employed to achieve efficient, repeatable and auditable results.CITATION:Vejrazka, C, 2016. Northparkes Mines’ current air blast risk assessment practices for block caving operations, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 257–264 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By A D. Campbell, G R. Power

The increasing availability of marker data in sublevel caving operations is changing the way draw can be managed to achieve positive recovery outcomes in these mines. This paper describes how marker data has been incorporated into flow simulations to help calibrate full mine ore recovery simulations for the forecasting and optimisation of recovery.Some flow modelling techniques do not use marker data, relying instead on the outcomes of physical and numerical experiments to guide assumptions about an idealised recovery flow shape. Other mines have access to marker trial data, but find it difficult to specifically link this marker trial information to their recovery models. This can make it difficult to create a link between the marker trial information and recovery forecasting and limits the potential value of the marker trials at the mine.In the simulations shown here, the marker rings are fully incorporated into the flow model, and can be tracked in the model. The model is compared against the real underground marker recovery information to give the user an indication of how accurately the flow settings in the model are reflecting the conditions in the experimental marker rings. An example of use of this system at an operational mine is included.CITATION:Power, G R and Campbell, A D, 2016. Modelling of real-time marker data to improve operational recovery in sublevel caving mines, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 105–110 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By E Widzyk-Capehart, C Hölck Teuber, S Steffen, V Rivero, O Fredes, E Sanchez, I Pedemonte, N Gonzalez

This paper summarises the research, development and initial application of a sensing platform that has the potential to monitor subsurface deformations, pore pressure and other variables simultaneously to gain a better understanding of rock mass behaviour. The platform is based on Networked Smart Markers (NSMs) devices, which, with their ability for wireless communication between individual sensors and the possibility of real-time data acquisition and processing, will assist in the development of predictive tools to better assess rock mass behaviour.A good opportunity to implement this technology is in the specific application of transitioning from an open pit mine to an underground caving operation. One of the key elements to maintaining the mining business during such a transition is having a good understanding of the unique geotechnical conditions of mutual influence created during the open pit to underground interaction. The knowledge acquisition will require the implementation of a robust platform for geotechnical monitoring, which could be enhanced by incorporating the NSMs. The integration of sensors within the NSMs would enable the collection of additional data about rock mass behaviour (ie caving propagation and crown pillar fracturing), which could be used to improve the management of mining operations and, specifically, allow the development of reliable predictive tools based on the data collected.CITATION:Widzyk-Capehart, E, Hölck Teuber, C, Fredes, O, Rivero, V, Sanchez, E, Pedemonte, I, Gonzalez, N and Steffen, S, 2016. Understanding rock mass behaviour through the development of an integrated sensing platform, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 275–284 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By P Duplancic and C R Lilley, R Hudson, D Beck

For deep block and panel caving mines, undercut or extraction level instability can have as much impact on overall recovery as underbreak or the premature ingress of waste. If the area of the mine affected by excessive convergence is small, recovery is usually possible. However, there are several examples of entire blocks that were abandoned prematurely due to footprint collapse. Clearly, such global instability has a major impact on recovery and must be avoided – this is one of the essential tasks for the design team.The design problem is complex. The planning engineer must ensure that the footprint has sufficient capacity to withstand the maturing loads in the cave, accounting for the effects of stress path, geological structures and the rock mass conditions. These are often uncertain and only sometimes quantified.The demand on the footprint will also be influenced by decisions and actions taken during production, especially related to draw, which can worsen a developing problem. Perhaps most importantly, the design decisions that favour stability and lead to lower deformation also negatively impact on idealised cave flow. Many engineers aim to minimise the size of extraction level pillars, to improve theoretical future resource recovery but in fact this can reduce recovery if widespread deformation ensues due to the undersized pillars.In 2014, PT Freeport Indonesia undertook detailed numerical analysis to quantify the effects of variability in rock mass conditions and geological structure on overall footprint performance. The analysis accounted for a range of stress paths and maturing cave loading scenarios sourced from a calibrated whole-of-cave deformation-flow model. The intent was to replicate some of the diversity and distribution of pillar deformation outcomes that may be seen in practice at Freeport.The discontinuum finite element analysis was able to replicate damage localisation around persistent structures, a realistic distribution of drive deformation and show how small areas of instability can evolve into major problems if poorly managed. The limits of pillar size and ground support as solutions to a number of different instability problems was also investigated, showing that pillar size alone was not a sufficient remedy for all adverse circumstances.In this paper, we describe the workflow for numerical analysis of footprint deformation. We discuss the compromises and considerations for balancing the sometimes competing needs for efficient extraction levels pillars, ground support and prudent draw strategy.CITATION:Beck, D, Hudson, R, Wilson, A D, Duplancic, P and Lilley, C R, 2016. An investigation of factors affecting the long-term reliability of extraction level pillars in deep block and panel caves, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 295–304 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By S Rogers, D Stead, E Eberhardt

The last decade has seen a major increase in use of the discrete fracture network (DFN) approach applied to cave mining problems, often integrated within more complex geomechanical simulations. Because the value of the DFN model directly depends on the quality and quantity of available field data, there is the need to apply dedicated mapping procedures to collect sufficient structural data at the required engineering scale. This paper attempts to address several key questions about DFN modelling; for example: are current methods for fracture mapping suitable for DFN modelling? What are the critical parameters that we need to measure and what do we need to change in the current practice? Particularly at the earlier stages of a cave project, engineers may have to account for the lack of appropriate data, which manifests itself in the form of increased uncertainty and the difficulty to characterise variability in an objective manner using a limited set of data. DFN models could in principle be generated using limited data by assuming statistical distributions for the sampled parameters; however, engineers would need to be aware of the implications that such limited knowledge (and increased uncertainty) would have on stability analysis, fragmentation analysis and mine design. When used correctly, a DFN approach offers practitioners the opportunity to:maximise the use of fracture data collected from mapping of rock exposuresgenerate more realistic synthetic rock mass modelsprovide estimates of natural fragmentation that also account for rock mass variability.CITATION:Elmo, D, Eberhardt, E, Stead, D and Rogers, S, 2016. Discrete fracture network modelling – importance of accounting for data uncertainty and variability, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 845–852 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By G Chitombo, A Perryman, A D. Campbell, J White, B Hollis

This paper describes the development and implementation of an optimisation tool developed as part of the Mass Mining Technology (MMT) Project. The tool, known as the SLC Schedule Optimiser, is capable of optimising the schedule of development and production activity for a sublevel cave, given a fixed draw strategy, for the life of the mine.This paper starts by describing the development and production scheduling problem for a sublevel cave, the geotechnical constraint that a schedule of activities must adhere to, and outlines the pre-existing manual planning procedures used to produce schedules.Following this, the paper then outlines the optimisation tool developed, describes the changes to the planning process it has enabled and finally quantifies the improvement to operations this tool has brought using Glencore’s Ernest Henry Mining Operations as a case study.CITATION:White, J, Perryman, A, Campbell, A D, Hollis, B and Chitombo, G, 2016. Life-of-mine development and production scheduling optimisation for sublevel cave operations, in Proceedings Seventh International Conference and Exhibition on Mass Mining (MassMin 2016), pp 133–138 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 9, 2016

By Georgene Renner, Chee Theng, William Gleason

"More than 6,300 people attended SME’s 2016 Annual Conference & Expo in Phoenix, AZ and many of them made the trip to the conference to take part in the excellent technical sessions that are presented on a yearly basis by the Society.Holding true to form, this year’s conference was full of options. In fact, this year there were 121 technical sessions and 751 presentations to chose from. The following is a sample of some of the technical sessions as seen through the eyes of the editors of Mining Engineering and SME technical papers.SME Sections Sharing Success: Changing thePublic Perception of MiningThis session was a workshop on how several local sections were effective in getting the message out to their communities and schools about the value of the extractive minerals industry. Several sections shared their outreach successes, including the Mining in Society merit badge activities by the Minnesota Section by Julie Lucas and SME’s participation in the World Scout Jamboree in Japan by Frank McAllister.Dan Alexander highlighted activities by the Pittsburgh Section, such as preparing minerals kits and pamphlets for elementary school classes and regional science fairs. The West Virginia University Student Chapter used the kits as handouts at their local gem and mineral show. School speakers in full mining gear were especially interesting to the young children.Other speakers were Michael Linn, Paradise Valley Unified School District — Business and School Partnerships; and Greg Kruse, Central Wyoming Section of SME — What makes a successful section?Engineering Competency ModelAmerican Association of Engineering Societies and the U.S. Department of Labor, with a grant from the United Engineering Foundation, developed a guide to the set of skills necessary for success in the engineering community -- Knowledge – Skills – Abilities — needed for all disciplines.Various engineering societies are now writing the Tier 5 occupation-specific requirements. The Competency Committee is charged to write concise and discipline-specific mining engineering, mineral processing engineering, geological engineering, and geophysical engineering by Sept. 30, 2017."

May 1, 2016

By A. Moergeli, Philip Sander, John J. Reilly

"Estimating and managing the costs of complex infrastructure projects – in the planning/design and construction phases, for both owners and contractors – has been a challenge for decades. The more complex and technologically advanced the project, the greater the uncertainty, including potential risks that are important to owners and contractors, such as:• Cost risks to owners – meeting budget and schedule, maintaining public credibility.• Cost risks to contractors – profit, consequences of loss, impacts to reputation/future work.This concern has been addressed in various ways by the underground construction industry for some time (Reilly, 2001). In particular, while significant advances have been made in cost estimating for the planning and design phases (Reilly et al., 2004), that are important to agencies and political decision-makers, it is not apparent that these advances have been widely adopted for construction cost estimates. The reasons for this may relate to lowbid considerations – any method that tends to increase the contractor’s cost estimate, by including risk or likely costs, could lead to an erosion of the contractor’s competitive position – if others are not similarly required to include such costs.Different cost estimating methods produce different levels of information. Specifically, there is a large difference in the character and depth of information if a deterministic (quantities times price plus a contingency) and risk-based cost methods are used. It is this difference in character and depth of information that is the reason that risk-based cost estimating has potential value for owners and contractors. Figure 1 presents hypothetical cost results from deterministic and risk-based methods and illustrates some of these differences.In Fig. 1, the results for deterministic and risk-based cost estimates are given related to the potential profit or loss for a typical project. As is evident in this example, there is significant potential for costs to be realized that are higher than the proposal/bid value estimated using a deterministic approach, with a 15 percent probability of a loss. There is a 30 percent probability that the project will have a reduced profit. There is a 55 percent probability that the project will return a good profit. Using a risk-based approach, it is possible to better recognize this potential outcome in the bid phase and, as a consequence, develop a strategy to:"

Apr 1, 2016

By Howard Lum, Sergio Valles, John Bednarski, Gordon Enas, Jay Arabshahi

"Water drawn from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta provides water supply to 66 percent of California’s population and supports the state’s agriculture industry. The existing through-Delta water system is outdated and unreliable with environmental risk to some fish and wildlife species. The Bay-Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) has been established to environmentally retrofit and modernize California’s water delivery system through the Delta by restoring habitats, constructing new diversion points in the north Delta and providing a means to transport water supplies under the Delta, rather than through sensitive natural channels.Under BDCP, the Delta Habitat Conservation and Conveyance Program (DHCCP) has developed several alternatives to convey water from the Sacramento River in the north to the existing pumping facilities in the south Delta through an isolated conveyance system. The new conveyance system would become an integral part of the State Water Project (SWP) and the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) by transporting water to the export pumping plants for each of these projects. The DHCCP is managed by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), while state and federal water contractors provide technical support to the program.The initial conceptual study efforts on the overall program commenced in 2007 and examined various options for the proposed conveyance system. Several conveyance alternatives were analyzed at that time. The Conceptual Engineering Report published on Oct. 1, 2013 identified the modified pipeline/tunnel option (MPTO) as the preferred alternative to be included in the BDCP environmental documents. MPTO includes three river intakes and pump stations along the Sacramento River, various sizes of pipelines and tunnels, junction structures and two forebays that are capable of delivering up to 4 million gpm (9,000 cfs) from the Sacramento River to the SWP and CVP. The river intakes are located near Hood in Sacramento County approximately 64 km (40 miles) from Clifton Court Forebay (CCF) in Contra Costa County. This route would cross portions of Sacramento, San Joaquin and Contra Costa counties. Figure 1 depicts the configuration of the MPTO alternative."

Apr 1, 2016

By P McCarthy

"This paper is based on 30 years of involvement in feasibility studies as a participant, study manager and the leader of a firm that provides study components and overall study management. The following topics are discussed:the purpose of feasibility studiesaligning the goals of the study team with those of the ownerthe difference between optimisation and designhow the types and levels of studies affect the organisation of the studythe relative merits of various management structures and contractual arrangementssetting scopes of work and tendering the work outthe selection of a study manager and the study management teamcommunications within the study team and externallythe project management trianglemanaging scope changes and maintaining flexibility to respond to study findingsprogress paymentsmanaging a study crisisinnovation, risk aversion and bankabilityreporting the resultsthe dangers and benefits of value engineering.CITATION:McCarthy, P, 2016. Making studies work – organisation, communication and management, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 20–30 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By A A. Roberts, R F. Dewhirst

"Extensive literature surveys, research in the project environment and personal experiences both within and consulting to project teams have revealed some consistent ‘people factors’ that contribute most to ultimate project success. Outside of purely technical and business case issues, there are a small number of leadership characteristics – probably only ten – that if correctly applied can positively leverage a team’s impact on project success.Of the top seven project success characteristics that were consistently highly rated in a recent study, five of them were around leadership. The authors have focused on this topic, noting that good leaders need to display the following traits:passionate commitment to deliveryconsistent modelling and reinforcement of correct values and behaviourfocus on managing relationships well and energising teams and individualscarefully clarifying project vision from front-end loading stages onwardseffective decision making.Not every project manager can and does practise these behaviours all of the time, but being aware of them and receiving training or facilitation in improving their application of these skills can equip project managers with the essential tools to markedly improve their own performance and that of their teams.This paper draws upon experiences in the field and provides lessons – both good and bad – to illustrate. As well as examining leadership traits, the way in which a leader can establish, organise, motivate his or her team and ultimately lead them to success is examined. The paper shares methodologies that have been successfully used to track status within a team and generate appropriate recovery plans where required.In particular, the paper will examine a case study based on an amalgamation of real project issues in some challenging situations using virtual teams (ie physically distant teams located in different centres) to illustrate the importance of strong and positive leadership in achieving success across geographies, time zones and languages.CITATION:Roberts, A A and Dewhirst, R F, 2016. Leadership in projects – a recipe for success, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 49–58 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By B E. Hall, D B. Kahler

"'Optimisation' has become a catchcry among many mining companies looking to tell the market how mining businesses will be improved and shareholder value increased. Consequently, the term 'optimisation' has been adopted by many service providers as they look to assist mining companies in achieving their objectives. But the explosion of services and products being offered with the label 'optimisation' has created some confusion. Mining companies ask for help in 'optimising' and service providers offer their assistance because they have a product that has the word 'optimisation' in its title. This is of course an over-simplification, but not by much! The authors' discussions in recent years with both mining companies and service providers have uncovered a number of very different definitions of optimisation.This paper provides a framework for identifying the scope and approach of different mining optimisation products and services, particularly the distinction between optimisation of components of the operation and the business as a whole. The different types of business optimisation are discussed, highlighting the failings of the mining industry's typical approach of strategy selection (as opposed to strategy optimisation). Mining business optimisation is discussed as a wicked problem, with the implication of this on how strategy optimisation models should be used and what the objectives of a business optimisation study should be.Case studies are also included to illustrate how fully flexible strategy optimisation models have been applied to assist decision-makers understand the impacts of changes in one part of the operation on the whole mining and treatment process, from geological models to the sale of product to customers.CITATION:Kahler, D B and Hall, B E, 2016. Strategic decision-making in mining – business optimisation using flexible evaluation models, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 215–225 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By P Mitchell, S Pushpan, G Ferres, K Bobbermien, L Hudson

"Falling commodity prices and a rising supply surplus have ushered in a period of restraint in capital project investment across the global mining and metals sector. Competition for capital project funding has seen fewer projects progress through investment gates and a stronger focus on projects that deliver gains in capital productivity and strategic outcomes.Over the course of the 2015 financial year, EY conducted a study of 108 projects in the global mining and metals sector (EY analysis; Larsson and Ericsson, 2014; SNL Financial, 2015). The projects studied were at various life cycle stages and related to the development of copper, iron ore, gold, coal, nickel and other commodities. Each individual project investment exceeded US$1 B, and the studied group represented a cumulative investment value of US$367 B.The research found that the majority of projects were delayed and/or over budget when measured against the initial estimates made during the early stages of the project life cycle. Of the surveyed projects, 69 per cent were identified as facing cost overruns with an average overrun of 62 per cent above the initial estimate and 50 per cent reported schedule delays, even after remedial acceleration initiatives.The analysis found that budget and schedule overruns could be attributed to five key causes:project management factorsstakeholder conflictsresource constraintsregulatory, and policy-related challengesunfavourable external environment.Improving project delivery performance starts with successful planning, followed by rigorous management during delivery. From global experience on large and complex capital programs, EY has observed a consistent theme of underinvestment and a lack of focus in three often-overlooked but critical areas:implementing effective governance and reporting frameworks with lead indicators that reliably flag emerging risks while they can still be mitigatedallocating adequate cost and time contingency to account for risks across the life cycleenhancing the value of contingency by aligning contingency plans with scenario plans.This paper explores the surprising findings of the study, proposes a root cause model and examines key considerations in applying these critical enabling techniques.CITATION:Hudson, L, Mitchell, P, Ferres, G, Bobbermien, K and Pushpan, S, 2016. Are your megaproject schedules and costs under – or out of – control?, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 75–85 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016