Geometallurgy Austmine - SRK - Standard

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 11

Introduction to Geology and

Geometallurgy
Improving Resource Knowledge to Optimise
Minerals Processing: Part 1
Mark Noppe | mnoppe@srk.com.au
24 May 2018

1
Why Geology?
Improving resource knowledge
• Rocks and minerals are the basis of all mineral
extraction activities
• An understanding of geology underpins all projects
– without good geological information, we are just
wasting money
• Linking of geology and metallurgy has long been done
empirically and has a long history of collaboration
– in todays environment it includes all disciplines
across the mining cycle
2
Geometallurgy Definition
“Geometallurgy” means different things to different people

‘Geometallurgy is the integration of geological,


mining, metallurgical, environmental and
economic information to maximize the Net
Present Value (NPV) of an orebody while
minimizing technical and operational risk’

Detailed
Discovery Exploration Assessment Development Production Closure
Design

3 SGS.com
Geometallurgy Definition
Geometallurgy has reached a maturity
beyond its early simplistic ‘geology +
metallurgy’ conception

Its application can both maximise value


and predict the risks associated with
resource development

Geometallurgy complements existing


approaches to design and optimisation
of mining and processing operations

Geometallurgy – Beyond Conception,


4
S.C. Dominy and L. O’Connor, 2016
Geometallurgy Definition
Key drivers for a Geometallurgical approach
• Deposits are becoming lower grade, and geologically and/ or
metallurgically more complex
• Orebodies are variable both in terms of grade and metallurgical
response
– this variability is a source of uncertainly that affects plant
design, mine design and capital investment decisions
• Throughputs are increasing and profit margins decreasing, thus
financial risk is also increasing
• Mining project risk needs to be carefully managed for projects to
attract funding
Geometallurgy – Beyond Conception,
5 S.C. Dominy and L. O’Connor, 2016
Geometallurgy Data
• Lithology information for ore zones and waste zones/host rocks -
mineralogy, alteration, and veining, etc
• Structural information - faults, foliation, schistocity
• Geotechnical information
• Geophysical data - density, magnetics, chargeability
• Metallurgical data - gravity recovery, flotation recovery, magnetic
recovery, crushing work indices, hardness, UCS, grindability indices
• Interpretations of integrated hyperspectral, digital photos, PIMA
and observed geology data
• Integrated 3-D models created for use for planning and forecasting

6
Case studies

7
Ni-Sulphide mine, WA
• The Resource Model was not a good predictor of the actual grade,
density and grindability of the ore
– Poor Resource to Mill reconciliation
– Mine operations could not rely on the model for short-term
production planning

• Grade control activities identified clear zones of magnesite


alteration, not recognised or modelled in the Resource Model
– When correctly mapped and modelled, the alteration domaining
helped improve reconciliation due to
• Hardness and grindability
• Bulk density
• ‘Grade per tonne’ versus ‘grade per
8
cubic metre’
Hill End – Trial Mining
Objectives
• Improve resource knowledge
– Improved understanding of grade distribution & geological controls
• Improve processing knowledge
– 90.4% recovery from nominal 1 mm grind; Staged grind and Knelson
concentration to capture coarse gold; Finish concentration on tables

Issues
• Generally poor reconciliation between face and
batch mined grades (drive and stope)
• Deposit difficult to scale up (mining tonnage
constrained, no electricity UG)
• Trial plant (5 tph) did not easily allow for scale-
up testing
Hill End – Ore Sorting
Test Work – Ore Sorting
• Initial evaluation of ore samples - multiple sensing systems tested
• Gold is in quartz veins hosted by shale – i.e. pre-concentration of
gold in geologically identifiable host
• Colour recognition in natural light (quartz ore & shale waste) most
effective
• Test work achieved 75% rejection of unmineralised slate*
• 95% of gold in quartz retained*

Issues
• Fines would not be sorted – proportion
unknown
• Hill End HG (8 - 12 g/t Au) and LG (1.5 -
3.5 g/t Au) in separate deposits, with
different economics
* HEG QR 31 January 2011
Thank you
Mark Noppe | mnoppe@srk.com.au

11

You might also like