828 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
performance through comparatively low investment in talent
and within shorter timeframes than can be achieved by seek-
ing to alter the physical attributes of an asset: for example, a
gifted metallurgist, … can have significant impact on … value
relatively quickly.”
Part of the discussion has taken place at the level of tech-
nical knowledge transfer. For example, McCaffrey, Giblett,
and Dunne (2014), Seitz (2014), Cilliers, Drinkwater and
Seitz (2023) identified many aspects for a skilled metallur-
gist including mineralogy, comminution, flotation, physi-
cal separation, sampling and problem solving.
Drinkwater (2016) and Munro (2017) noted that,
“Chemical engineers are the largest and most reliable source
of supply of new metallurgists. Chemical engineering educators
and practitioners point out that dealing with solids is more
difficult than gases and liquids …. In the minerals business the
solid (i.e., ore) tends to be both heterogeneous and changing
over time. Metallurgists spend more time than chemical engi-
neers in their tertiary studies dealing with solids. The indus-
try successfully converted chemical engineers into metallurgists
through a combination of on-site training and formal courses.”
Abenov et al (2023) discussed the importance of life-
long professional development and the need for explicit
expectation setting, “development only happens widely if the
expectation is set across the business that it is a requirement of
employment. … make efforts to understand which capabili-
ties drive value for their business, understand which matter to
their employees, offer the right development opportunities …
and make time for people to learn (for instance, through men-
toring, shadowing, and dedicated development time).”
Identification of a shortfall does not explain why pro-
cess engineers are necessary in processing plants or clarify the
competencies required to adequately perform the role. This
lack hinders the development of solutions. Understanding
the role is a necessary starting point for solution develop-
ment. It is also a starting point to shifting industry focus
toward supporting lifelong development.
Industry struggles with defining “capability” require-
ment, with functional fixedness leading to specification
based on individual personal history or traditional educa-
tion practice. This overlooks factors which remain in place
and have resulted in the existing condition. In discussions
with many senior leaders, a common view was expressed
that new graduates had all the technical knowledge neces-
sary upon graduation. This is clearly at odds with a norm in
much of the world that many new graduates taking on MP/
EM roles have university degrees from programs providing
limited or no course work about these subjects.
PROCESSING IN THE MINING VALUE
CHAIN
The goal of a mine is to produce a valuable product that
can be sold to downstream users, to maximize value cre-
ation and to meet EHS expectations. The product may be a
mineral concentrate, intermediate metal product, or higher
purity metal or oxide. The value may be purely financial
or may be a combination of financial and social factors.
Cilliers, Drinkwater and Seitz (2023) described the critical
role played by processing plants and process engineers. For
many reasons the unifying focus which should follow from
value maximization as a goal is all too often lost. A major
source for this lies in a mistaken belief that everyone shares
a common perspective regarding value pursuit and hence
discussion and reflection is not necessary.
From a purely financial perspective, value creation may
be modeled as:
Value Flowh fxn ,
grade,
per operating hour,O
hours recovery,
quality,
operating expense
=
Jhead
L
K
Kthroughput
K
Koperating
K Kconcentrate
K
^Cash
N
P
O
O
O
O
O
O
In order to meet value creation targets, the mine must meet
specific targets for each of the input factors: that is, Head
grade, Tons/operating hour, Operating hours, Recovery,
Concentrate quality, and OPEX. The reality will often be
different, with underperformance versus targets. A number
of control mechanisms exist to address underperformance.
For example,
• Process Management: Ensure meeting targets by
supporting 24 X 7 operation through problem
avoidance using standard operating practices (SOPs),
standard responses to deviations from performance
targets (control-response (C-R) plans for manual and
automatic process control).
• Problem Solving: Including plant capability improve-
ment projects and the identification and prioritiza-
tion of problem-solving projects.
ORGANIZATION OF PROCESSING PLANT
WORK
Processing plant work can be organized in many different
ways. However, the work can be grossly categorized as fall-
ing into two cycles (Figure 1):
performance through comparatively low investment in talent
and within shorter timeframes than can be achieved by seek-
ing to alter the physical attributes of an asset: for example, a
gifted metallurgist, … can have significant impact on … value
relatively quickly.”
Part of the discussion has taken place at the level of tech-
nical knowledge transfer. For example, McCaffrey, Giblett,
and Dunne (2014), Seitz (2014), Cilliers, Drinkwater and
Seitz (2023) identified many aspects for a skilled metallur-
gist including mineralogy, comminution, flotation, physi-
cal separation, sampling and problem solving.
Drinkwater (2016) and Munro (2017) noted that,
“Chemical engineers are the largest and most reliable source
of supply of new metallurgists. Chemical engineering educators
and practitioners point out that dealing with solids is more
difficult than gases and liquids …. In the minerals business the
solid (i.e., ore) tends to be both heterogeneous and changing
over time. Metallurgists spend more time than chemical engi-
neers in their tertiary studies dealing with solids. The indus-
try successfully converted chemical engineers into metallurgists
through a combination of on-site training and formal courses.”
Abenov et al (2023) discussed the importance of life-
long professional development and the need for explicit
expectation setting, “development only happens widely if the
expectation is set across the business that it is a requirement of
employment. … make efforts to understand which capabili-
ties drive value for their business, understand which matter to
their employees, offer the right development opportunities …
and make time for people to learn (for instance, through men-
toring, shadowing, and dedicated development time).”
Identification of a shortfall does not explain why pro-
cess engineers are necessary in processing plants or clarify the
competencies required to adequately perform the role. This
lack hinders the development of solutions. Understanding
the role is a necessary starting point for solution develop-
ment. It is also a starting point to shifting industry focus
toward supporting lifelong development.
Industry struggles with defining “capability” require-
ment, with functional fixedness leading to specification
based on individual personal history or traditional educa-
tion practice. This overlooks factors which remain in place
and have resulted in the existing condition. In discussions
with many senior leaders, a common view was expressed
that new graduates had all the technical knowledge neces-
sary upon graduation. This is clearly at odds with a norm in
much of the world that many new graduates taking on MP/
EM roles have university degrees from programs providing
limited or no course work about these subjects.
PROCESSING IN THE MINING VALUE
CHAIN
The goal of a mine is to produce a valuable product that
can be sold to downstream users, to maximize value cre-
ation and to meet EHS expectations. The product may be a
mineral concentrate, intermediate metal product, or higher
purity metal or oxide. The value may be purely financial
or may be a combination of financial and social factors.
Cilliers, Drinkwater and Seitz (2023) described the critical
role played by processing plants and process engineers. For
many reasons the unifying focus which should follow from
value maximization as a goal is all too often lost. A major
source for this lies in a mistaken belief that everyone shares
a common perspective regarding value pursuit and hence
discussion and reflection is not necessary.
From a purely financial perspective, value creation may
be modeled as:
Value Flowh fxn ,
grade,
per operating hour,O
hours recovery,
quality,
operating expense
=
Jhead
L
K
Kthroughput
K
Koperating
K Kconcentrate
K
^Cash
N
P
O
O
O
O
O
O
In order to meet value creation targets, the mine must meet
specific targets for each of the input factors: that is, Head
grade, Tons/operating hour, Operating hours, Recovery,
Concentrate quality, and OPEX. The reality will often be
different, with underperformance versus targets. A number
of control mechanisms exist to address underperformance.
For example,
• Process Management: Ensure meeting targets by
supporting 24 X 7 operation through problem
avoidance using standard operating practices (SOPs),
standard responses to deviations from performance
targets (control-response (C-R) plans for manual and
automatic process control).
• Problem Solving: Including plant capability improve-
ment projects and the identification and prioritiza-
tion of problem-solving projects.
ORGANIZATION OF PROCESSING PLANT
WORK
Processing plant work can be organized in many different
ways. However, the work can be grossly categorized as fall-
ing into two cycles (Figure 1):
