402 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
Outside of the cost components stated in the pie-chart,
other sorter related cost centres will include materials han-
dling and disposal of rejects, dust suppression and potential
for parallel plant, if sorting response is inconsistent.
Based on the experience of the authors in metalliferous
ore, total operating costs from feed preparation through
to disposal of rejects, adjusted to 2024 values and in an
Australian context, are likely to be in the region of AU$1.70
to AU$3.58, depending on complexity.
INCORPORATION OF SORTING INTO A
STUDY
The second area examined relates to the evaluation of sort-
ing within the context of a mine studies timeline and impli-
cations for other areas in the studies, i.e., infrastructure, site
layout, waste stockpiling, transport logistics, mine design
and production scheduling. In a traditional studies envi-
ronment, there are a series of well defined, specified and in
most cases, company mandated steps, which are required to
deliver a final bankable feasibility study. Within the same
schedule and timelines, various decisions have to be made
in relation to the ability to economically deploy sorting or
preconcentration. Bearman et al. (2019) outlined some of
the key steps for decision support as it relates to sorting and
preconcentration, see Figure 2.
It is in the juncture between the standard studies envi-
ronment and the decision process for sorting that presents
challenges that can make a balanced and informed decision
on sorting difficult to achieve within the usual timeframes.
If sorting is simply considered to be another unit process,
then why should there be any issues in effectively integrat-
ing evaluation into a traditional studies structure? What
complicates the mine planning process is the attributes
applied to sorting (especially bulk sorting) are as likely to be
physical as chemical. Mine planning on a range of chemi-
cal and physical attributes is not unusual, but does create
a further dimension of complexity for the mine planners.
The heart of the discussion lies in key features of the
sorting evaluation and what is required, the assessment, the
level of detail and the timing of the overall study. For a
typical open pit orebody, a critical consideration in study, is
the definition of economic pit shells, comprising of ore and
waste removal. The pit shells being designed to allow give
Source: Wraith et al., 2021
Figure 1. Percentage break-down of ore sorting operating costs
Outside of the cost components stated in the pie-chart,
other sorter related cost centres will include materials han-
dling and disposal of rejects, dust suppression and potential
for parallel plant, if sorting response is inconsistent.
Based on the experience of the authors in metalliferous
ore, total operating costs from feed preparation through
to disposal of rejects, adjusted to 2024 values and in an
Australian context, are likely to be in the region of AU$1.70
to AU$3.58, depending on complexity.
INCORPORATION OF SORTING INTO A
STUDY
The second area examined relates to the evaluation of sort-
ing within the context of a mine studies timeline and impli-
cations for other areas in the studies, i.e., infrastructure, site
layout, waste stockpiling, transport logistics, mine design
and production scheduling. In a traditional studies envi-
ronment, there are a series of well defined, specified and in
most cases, company mandated steps, which are required to
deliver a final bankable feasibility study. Within the same
schedule and timelines, various decisions have to be made
in relation to the ability to economically deploy sorting or
preconcentration. Bearman et al. (2019) outlined some of
the key steps for decision support as it relates to sorting and
preconcentration, see Figure 2.
It is in the juncture between the standard studies envi-
ronment and the decision process for sorting that presents
challenges that can make a balanced and informed decision
on sorting difficult to achieve within the usual timeframes.
If sorting is simply considered to be another unit process,
then why should there be any issues in effectively integrat-
ing evaluation into a traditional studies structure? What
complicates the mine planning process is the attributes
applied to sorting (especially bulk sorting) are as likely to be
physical as chemical. Mine planning on a range of chemi-
cal and physical attributes is not unusual, but does create
a further dimension of complexity for the mine planners.
The heart of the discussion lies in key features of the
sorting evaluation and what is required, the assessment, the
level of detail and the timing of the overall study. For a
typical open pit orebody, a critical consideration in study, is
the definition of economic pit shells, comprising of ore and
waste removal. The pit shells being designed to allow give
Source: Wraith et al., 2021
Figure 1. Percentage break-down of ore sorting operating costs