MINE HAUL ROAD DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT: A CURRENT

PRACTICE REVIEW
RJ Thompson

Professor of Mining Engineering, Western Australian School of Mines, Curtin

University, Kalgoorlie WA, Australia

Abstract

Well designed and maintained haul roads are the key to minimizing truck haulage on-road

hazards and costs, as well as increasing productivity. In practice however, designing and managing a

haul road for optimal performance is often difficult to achieve, especially when resources assigned

to design and construction are constrained. By understanding how a road design is developed from

geometric, structural, functional and maintenance considerations, and critically, the interplay

between these components in design and operation, optimal performance can be achieved.

This paper briefly summarizes the evolution of mine haul road design, from the seminal USBM

work of Kaufman and Ault in 1977, through to current geometric, structural, functional and

maintenance management design components. These augmented design and management

guidelines have been developed over the past decade, both in response to the requirements of mine

operators for safer and more efficient haulage systems, the truck manufacturers’ requirements for a

more predictable and controlled operating environment and the recognition of human factors as a

significant contributor to haulage accidents. Whilst the human factor is the most problematic to

address in a road design, the paper shows the more that is known about human error, the better a

road can be designed to accommodate those actions or non-standard practices that would, on a

poorly designed road, invariably escalate an error into an accident.

 Introduction

The haul road design and subsequent road management and maintenance forms a principal

component of a transport operation in surface mines. Most mine operators will agree that a strong

relationship exists between well constructed and maintained roads and safe, efficient mining

operations. Large modern surface mining operations generally incorporate high standards of road

design work into the overall mine plan. The result is usually a well constructed roadway that is safe

to operate and easy to maintain. This situation can be quite different for smaller surface mining

operations where either only a few vehicles are used in the transport of material or traffic volumes

are comparatively low. Larger operations usually exhibit a stronger and more well-defined

management philosophy in which engineering methodologies are used for haul road design,

management and maintenance, whereas smaller operations, by virtue of their size, generally

operate without such extensive design and management input (Fourie et al; 1998, Randolph and

Bolt; 1996). Where design and management input is lacking, an empirical design approach based on

local experience may eventually result in safe, economically optimal roads but the learning curve is

shallow and slow. This approach does not lend itself to an understanding of the deficiencies in the

road design process and more importantly, when haul road safety is sub-standard, the empirical

approach does not easily allow the unsafe condition nor the road design deficiency implicated in an

accident to be identified.

One of the first, and arguably most important initiatives to formalize the approach to design and

management of mine haul roads was the USBM (1977) Information Circular 8758 - Design of Surface

Mine Haulage Roads - A Manual, by Walter Kaufman and James Ault. The aim of this publication was

to provide a complete manual of recommended practices that promote safer, more efficient

haulage. The authors recognized that the development of surface mine haulage equipment had

outstripped available (mine) road design technology, resulting in numerous accidents caused by road

conditions that were beyond the vehicle's and driver’s ability to negotiate safely.
 The content of the USBM design guidelines was developed primarily in response to haulage

accidents, but also included current practice information from mining companies and equipment

manufacturers. Content covered such aspects as road alignment (both vertical and horizontal), road

cross-section, construction materials, surfacing materials, road width, cross-slope and berm design,

together with traffic control and drainage provisions, as well as suggested criteria for road and

vehicle maintenance and for runaway vehicle safety provisions.

Adopting and categorising this content according to a set of integrated road design components

(following Thompson and Visser; 1999) that should be addressed in a haul road design, gives four

broad design components to consider;

• The geometric design - commonly the starting point for any haul road design and refers to the

layout and alignment of the road, in both the horizontal and vertical plane, stopping distances,

sight distances, junction layout, berm walls, provision of shoulders and road width variation,

within the limits imposed by the mining method. The ultimate aim is to produce an optimally

efficient and safe geometric design. Suffice it to say that an optimally safe and efficient design

can only be achieved when sound geometric design principles are applied in conjunction with the

optimal structural, functional and maintenance designs.

• The structural design provides haul road ‘strength’ to carry the imposed loads over the design

life of the road without the need for excessive maintenance, caused by deformation of one or

more layers in the road – most often soft, weak or wet in-situ materials below the road surface.

• The functional design centres on the selection of wearing course (or surfacing) materials where

the most suitable choice and application is required which minimizes the rate of defect

formation in the road surface, which would otherwise compromise road safety and performance.

The functional design is not a significant contributor to haul road structural strength.

• The maintenance design which identifies the optimal frequency of maintenance (routine grading)

for each section of haul road in a network, thus maintenance can be planned, scheduled and
 prioritized for optimal road performance and minimum total (vehicle operating and road

maintenance) costs across the network. This is especially important where road maintenance

assets are scarce and need to be used to best effect.

Comparing the content of the USBM work to the more recent ‘integrated mine road design’

methodology of Thompson and Visser (1999), it is evident that the USBM work addressed each of

the design components and the associated engineering methodolgy, although not specifically

relating each design guideline to its associated design component. Designing a safe and efficient

haul road is best achieved through an integrated design approach. If one design component is

deficient, the other components will not work to their maximum potential and road performance

and safety is often compromised. This will often manifest as inherently unsafe, maintenance

intensive and high rolling resistance roads. This combination of circumstances translates into

hazardous, high-operating cost, low-productivity haul roads. The cure, however, is not simply to

increase routine (blading/scraping) road maintenance frequency, nor through improved driving

training, etc. Without recourse to road re-design and rehabilitation (complete overhaul), no amount

of routine maintenance will fix a poorly-designed road. Preferably, components of the road

infrastructure design process must be correctly addressed and integrated with each other at the

design stage, as illustrated in Fig. 1.

Safety Critical Defects In Mine Road Design

Just as when developing the original USBM guidelines in 1977, amending existing or developing

new mine road design methodologies requires reference to current surface (powered) haulage

accident and incident records to identify the major contributory factors that led to these accidents.

Several studies have been undertaken, both in the United States (Randolph and Boldt; 1996, USBM;

1981, Aldinger et al; 1995), and South Africa (Fourie et al; 1998). From an analysis of the principal

sub-standard surface mine road design factors which were most frequently encountered in the
accident reports, these studies lead to the identification of several key problem areas which should

guide development of appropriate design recommendations.

Based on the MSHA data compiled from Jan. through Dec. 2008, the ‘Powered Haulage –

Haulage Trucks’ class of accidents accounted for 8.2% of accidents both at surface coal (80) and

metal (56) mines, 4.1% (6) at non-metal surface mines, 3.4% (36) at surface stone operations and

3.2% (27) at sand and gravel operations . Whilst this data puts the paper into context, without

referring to each incident report to examine the details of the accident, it is difficult to determine

how the role of road design impacts on safety. A more detailed textual analysis was reported by

Randolph and Boldt (1996), based on the analysis of Aldinger et al (1995), using accident reports

over the period 1989-1991, which is shown in Fig.2.

In their study of surface coal mining, equipment operation was the most common category of

accident for haulage trucks (46% or 1251 accidents). Within the equipment operation sub-set,

jarring (38%) and loss of control (27%) accidents predominate. Of the jarring sub-set, rough ground

(45%), loading (34%), and dumping (15%) were the main root-cause factors. Loss of control sub-set

included too close to edge (36%) and runaway (28%). Whilst there is no specific reference to the

design component that was implicated in these accidents, it has been shown that haul road

structural design defects contribute significantly to jarring-rough ground incidents (Miller et al;

2004), whilst functional and geometric design were likely contributory factors in the loss of control

accidents.

The MHSA safety bulletin (Fesak, Breland and Spadaro; 1996) reported the results of 4397

accidents from 1990-1996 from which some 1300 lost time accidents associated with water trucks,

front end-loaders, tractor/scrapers, ore carrier/large trucks, ore haulage trucks, or other utility

trucks were isolated and evaluated. They reported that 49% (640) lost-time accidents (of which 96

were fatal) were associated with roads and (traffic) control issues. However, the specific road or
(traffic) control design component that was deficient or implicated as an accident root-cause was

not evaluated.

Internationally, a study conducted in South Africa by Fourie et al (1998) found that in the

majority of accident reports analyzed, scant attention or recognition was given to basic road design

components, even where the deficient condition which led directly to the accident was clearly

stated. Figure 3 shows how the engineering methodology of design relates to attributable accident

rate (accidents that involved vehicles on mine haul- or road-ways). As the formality of the design

methodology increases, the attributable accident rate decreases. In this context, formality of design

is defined as;

• Formal design methods; Site-and location-specific geometric, structural, functional and

maintenance designs tailored to operating conditions and subject to engineering review and

revision.

• Informal design methods; Company-wide generic design guidelines not tailored to individual

mine operating conditions nor subject to regular revision.

• No design methods; Informal un-documented approach to provision of mine roads, no standard

working methods, materials or equipment.

Using the South African attributable accident database, a further analysis was conducted to

determine the sub-standard act or condition which either led to, or was implicated in each

attributable accident. The principal deficient road design factors thus determined were;

• Geometric Design

o Junction layout:

Poor junction layout or incorrect or inappropriate signage. Poor visibility of or from

junction. Non uniformity of traffic controls.

 o Safety berms:

No safety berms where road runs on an embankment (fill area) or berms too small. No

berm maintenance. Vehicles which lost control on these sections ran off the road.

o Road shoulders:

Collisions with vehicles (breakdown, etc.) parked on roadside, no shoulder or road too

narrow. Poor demarcation of parked equipment. Poor or temporarily obstructed sight

lines.

o Run-aways- brakes:

Accidents due to brake failures whilst hauling laden down-grade or vehicle run-aways down-

grade. Steep gradients and operator inability to handle those grades (speed/retarder

management).

• Structural Design

o Jarring:

Poor ride quality due to permanent deformation in base or in-situ materials and reflected

damage in surfacing (wearing course).

o Directional stability:

Large areas of potholing and slip cracks. Evasive action of vehicle in leaving demarcated

lane.

• Functional Design

(May also be in part attributable to maintenance design issues where poorly selected

wearing course material is not remediated by increased routine road maintenance activity).

o Dustiness:

Wearing course material selection inappropriate.

o Poor visibility:
 Excessive dustiness generated from vehicle wind shear or due to windy conditions,

especially at night.

o Skid resistance:

Wet wearing course material, either after rain or watering to allay dust. In several

instances, dry skid resistance also problematic. Inappropriate material for geographic

location of road and/or inappropriate speed.

o Large stones:

Haul trucks and utility vehicles running over large stones protruding from the wearing

course. Spillage from trucks is also a common causative factor. Evasive action of vehicle in

leaving demarcated lane.

The percentages of agency factors implicated in South African attributable accidents are

presented in Fig.4. Of the total transport accidents analyzed and categorized, 47% could be directly

attributed to road design and operation. 60% of these were related to non-standard acts (practices

and other) and human error. Of the 40% associated with sub-standard road design factors,

geometric and functional components predominate as the agencies implicated, with maintenance

and structural design exhibiting less influence.

Solutions to mine haul road safety problems predominantly relate to the road design

components of geometry and function, and to a lesser extent, structure and maintenance. However,

this work has shown that human factors (including non-standard practices), vehicle (mechanical)

factors and other deficiencies are all implicated in attributable accidents. Figure 5 illustrates the

relative percentage contributions of each of these factors to attributable accidents.

Whilst improved mine haul road design activities may well reduce design-related accidents, it

would appear that little recognition is given to the human factors which are a significant contributor
to haulage accidents. Fig. 5 illustrates that 25 percent of accidents in which human error was

implicated, were also associated with deficiencies in the road design itself. In other words, the road

design did not contribute to potential recovery from human error but instead escalated an error into

an accident.

The human factor is the most problematic to address in road design. Ideally, a road should be

designed to be more forgiving of human error, preventing an accident or reducing the severity of its

consequences. In this way a haul road can be designed to compensate for human error; the more

that is known about human error, the better the road can be designed to accommodate those

actions or non-standard practices. This premise forms the basis of road safety design audits used on

public roads (AUSTROADS; 1994).

Mine Road Design Guideline Development

Just as the authors of the original USBM guidelines recognized that the development of surface

mine haulage equipment had outstripped mine road design technology, the continuing increase in

truck size to-date, together with more recent powered haulage accident and incident analyses, has

warranted further development of mine road design guidelines. Using the USBM (1977) manual as a

starting point, these key developments are summarized below, as applied to the geometric,

structural and functional design components defined earlier.

Geometric Design

The geometric layout of a mine haul road is dictated to a great extent by the mining method

used and the geometry of both the mining area and the orebody. Mine planning software enables

various haul road geometric options to be considered and the optimal layout selected, both from a

road design and economic (lowest cost of provision) perspective. Whilst these techniques often

have default design values embedded in the software, it is nevertheless necessary to review the

basic concepts of geometric design if any modifications are to be considered in the design of mine

roads, either on the basis of economics or, more critically, from a safety perspective.
 The road layout – or alignment, both horizontally and vertically is generally the starting point of

the geometric design. Practically, it is often necessary to compromise between an ideal layout and

what mining geometry and economics will accommodate. The final design should always minimise

compromises as any departure from the ideal specifications will result in reductions of both road

and transport equipment performance.

The USBM data of Kaufman and Ault still forms a sound basis for this design component – albeit

with updates to truck types and dimensions. Broadly speaking, safety and good engineering practice

require haul road alignment to be designed to suit all vehicle types using the road, operating within

the safe performance envelope of the vehicle, or, where this is not possible, at the speed limit

applied. Ideally, geometric layout should allow the vehicles to operate at their maximum safe

speed, but since the same road is used for laden and unladen haulage, there is often the need to

minimize laden travel times, through appropriate geometric alignment, whilst accepting compromise

(generally in the form of speed limits) on the unladen return haul. Some of the more common

geometric design problems are listed below;

• Avoid sharp horizontal curves at or near the top of a grade section of road. If a horizontal curve

is necessary, start it well in advance of the vertical curve.

• Avoid switchbacks where possible - but if mine plan dictates their use, make radius as large as

possible and avoid placing on grade.

• Avoid sharp horizontal curves requiring a (further) speed reduction following a long sustained

downgrade where haul trucks are normally at their highest speed.

• Avoid short tangents and varying grades, especially on multi-lane roads. Grades should be

smooth and of consistent grade percentages.

• Avoid intersections near the crest of vertical curves or sharp horizontal curves. Intersections

should be as flat as possible with sight distances being considered in all four quadrants. Where

an intersection lies at the top of a ramp, consider 100-200m of level road before the intersection.
 • Avoid stopping and starting a laden haul truck on grade.

• Avoid intersections with poor drainage. Drainage design at intersections should stop any

ponding of water against intersection super-elevated curves.

• Avoid sections of road with no camber or cross-fall. Often encountered at curve super-elevation

run-in or -out, these flat sections should preferably be at a 1-2% vertical grade to assist drainage.

• Preference should be given to 3-way over 4-way intersections. Avoid staggered or other multiple

road junctions. Always provide splitter or median islands to prevent vehicles cutting corners

through a junction.

• Avoid signage, vegetation, roadside furnishings or excessively high splitter islands that would

otherwise eventually limit sight distances in any of the four quadrants required.

• Avoid having the inside (and lower) side of a super-elevated bench-to-ramp access road at a

steeper gradient than the ramp road itself; the inside grade of the curve should not exceed that

of the ramp road.

With regards to safety berms, crest (outslope) or road-edge (windrow) berms will not effectively

stop trucks (especially high speed laden or unladen trucks) from leaving the road. At best, they will

provide limited deflection and warning to the driver that the truck path needs correcting. The

material comprising the berm and it’s natural angle of repose significantly influence how the berm

performs. The slope of the sides of the safety berm should be preferably as steep as possible –

1.5H:1V - this ensures better re-direction of the truck and less tendency to climb and topple. But in

doing this, stability and maintenance of height must be assured, since a flat or low berm can also

cause truck roll-over. For large haul trucks, the berm height should be at least 66% of the truck

wheel diameter.

Truck GVW and approach angle has a significant deformation effect on the berm, which is

typically constructed from unconsolidated material. The ability of a berm to re-direct reduces as
angle of approach increases. Furthermore, large tire sizes and non-centering steering mechanisms

reduce the tendency of the truck to redirect itself when encountering a berm. With 4x6 and 6x6

wheel drive articulated dump trucks, berm dimensions in excess of 66% wheel diameter are

recommended, due to the truck's ability to climb smaller berms. Other factors such as inertial

characteristics, sprung mass ratio and suspension characteristics indicate significantly different

response patterns for haul vehicles when encountering berms.

Structural Design Guidelines

The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) cover-curve design method (USBM; 1977) has been widely

applied to the design of mine haul roads in which untreated materials are used and is based on the

CBR penetration test. The CBR of a material is expressed as a percentage of the penetration

resistance of that material compared to that of a standard value for crushed stone. The value is

normally derived from laboratory tests, although field impact and penetration testing also delivers

indirect CBR values. In all but arid and semi-arid environments, the CBR value adopted in the design

should be based on a soaked CBR test. In this design procedure, pavement cover thickness above a

material with a particular CBR is determined as a function of applied wheel load and the CBR of the

material. The same technique can be used for successive layers – the only requirement being that

successive layers must be of higher CBR than the preceding layer.

Although the CBR cover-curve approach has generally been superseded by the mechanistic

approach described later, there are some design cases where it would still be appropriate. In Fig. 6,

an updated version of the USBM CBR design charts are presented (after Thompson, 2010),

appropriate for the wheel loads generated by typical 6-wheeled rear-dump trucks, together with the

approximate bearing capacities of various soils types defined by the Unified Soil Classification (USCS,

following Test Designation D-2487 of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM); 1998)
and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO; 1982)

systems.

Eq. (1), following Thompson (2010a), can alternatively be used to estimate the thickness of cover

(ZCBR (m)) required above a material of California Bearing Ratio (CBR %);

 CBR   − (0.415 + Px10 −4

)
9.81t w  −5  P    CBR 
Z CBR = [
0.104 + 0.331e (−0.0287t w ) ]
2x10  
  P  
P     
(1)

Where tw is the truck wheel load (metric tons), P is tire pressure (kPa) and CBR is the California

Bearing ration of the material (%). To replicate the increased stresses generated by a rear dual-

wheel axle which occur deeper in a road layer, the concept of Equivalent Single Wheel Load (ESWL)

can be used to estimate the cover ZESWL (m) required using Eq. 2 (following Thompson; 2010a) as;

−1
  17.76CBR 
Z ESWL = Z CBR + 0.184 +  0.086CBR + 
  t w  (2)

However, when multi-layered roads are considered in conjunction with a base layer of selected

blasted waste rock, a mechanistic approach is more appropriate. When a selected waste rock layer

is located under the wearing course, road performance is significantly improved, primarily due to the

load carrying capacity of the waste rock layer which reduces the susceptibility of the soft sub-grade

to the effects of high axle loads. It also has the added advantage of reduced construction costs (by

virtue of reduced volumetric and compaction requirements), compared with the CBR cover-curve

design approach.

When a mechanistic design approach is used to determine the response of the road to an

applied load, a multi-layered elastic model is developed representing the various haul road layers in

the design (Thompson and Visser, 1996). Software is available which can be used to solve multi-

layer problems in road design, including ELSYM5A (FHWA, 1985) and CIRCLY (MinCad, 2008).

Irrespective of the solution software used, the approach is similar. The effective elastic (reslilient)
modulus of (Eeff) and Poisson's ratio (μ, typically 0.35) define the layerworks material properties

required for computing the vertical strains (εv) in the road. In addition to the material properties, a

layer thickness (generally 200mm) is also specified for the wearing course. By varying the thickness

of the base-layer, a solution for maximum strain in any pavement layer that is below the limiting

strain criteria for that class of road is found. Generally, a three layer model is sufficient where the

road is built directly on sub-grade fill or in-situ. If the construction incorporates ripped and

compacted in-situ, this may also be added as an additional layer. For computational purposes, the

layers are assumed to extend infinitely in the horizontal direction.

The applied load is calculated according to the mass of the vehicle and the rear dual wheel axle

load distributions, from which the single wheel load is found. The load application is determined

from dual wheel geometry and together with tire pressure, the contact stress is calculated. Fig. 7

summarizes the layered elastic model and data requirements. The strains induced in a road are a

function of the effective elastic (resilient) modulus (Eeff) values assigned to each layer in the

structure. Fig. 6 gives recommended modulus value correlations to USCS and AASHTO classification

systems. To select suitable modulus values for in-situ materials, the associated range of CBR values

are also given. Other values are published by Thompson and Visser (1996) and AUSTROADS (2009)

from where Eq. (3) is taken, which, when used in conjunction with layer CBR values, determines the

modulus values (Eeff, MPa). In each case however, care should be taken to ensure that the general

correlations presented here are consistent with soil properties not directly assessed in the derivation

of the equation.

E eff = 17 .63CBR 0.64 (3)

The mechanistic design methodology is presented by Thompson and Visser (1996). In general

terms, applied load, sub-grade strength and the pavement structural thickness and layer resilient

modulus predominantly controls the structural performance of a haul road. An upper limit of 2000

microstrain is generally placed on layer vertical compressive strain values. Strain values exceeding
2500 microstrains are associated with unacceptable structural performance in all but the most

lightly traffic and short-term roads. When specifying an appropriate mechanistic structural design,

the thickness of the base layer is adjusted to maintain layer strain values below the recommended

maximum values. Data from Fig. 8 can be used to assist in selecting a limiting strain value, according

to the category of road to be built, based on operating life of the road, traffic volumes and

performance index. In addition, to prevent excessive damage to the wearing course, deformation at

the top of this layer must be limited to no more than 3mm.

Software is then used to generate a solution to base layer thickness requirements, to limit

vertical compressive strain at the top of the in-situ layer to a value prescribed by the category of

haul road. Fig. 9 illustrates one such solution, in this particular case for a 3-layer model in which

various in-situ layer modulus values are encountered, together with a base layer of 3000MPa

modulus (selected blasted waste rock) and 200mm thickness of 350MPa wearing course. The

solution is based on wheel loadings generated from a Caterpillar 797B haul truck, loaded to

manufacturers specified gross vehicle mass and operating with 800kPa tire pressure.

Functional Design Guidelines

The USBM guidelines provided the first insight into haul road functionality through consideration

of general road performance. The primary characteristics considered were road adhesion and rolling

resistance and the most practical construction materials recognized were asphaltic concrete,

crushed stone or gravel and stabilized earth. The concept of functionality was not specifically

introduced but rather alluded to in terms of some of the defects reported with these various

construction materials. In conclusion, they recommended crushed stone or good quality natural

gravel as wearing course materials, together with specifications for gradation and Atterberg limits.

The most common wearing course material for haul roads remains compacted gravel or gravel

and crushed stone mixtures. In addition to a low rolling resistance and high coefficient of adhesion,

their greatest advantage over other wearing course materials is that roadway surfaces can be
constructed rapidly and at relatively low cost. As with structural designs, if local mine material can

be used for construction, the costs are all the more favorable. This cost advantage is, however, not

apparent in the long term if the characteristics of the wearing course material result in an inherently

unsafe and maintenance intensive road.

By relating wearing course performance in terms of safety-critical defects (derived from an

analysis of those road design factors implicated in haulage accidents, following Thompson and

Visser; 2006), the defects most commonly associated with mine haul roads, in order of decreasing

impact on haulage safety and operational performance are typically;

• Skid resistance - wet, Skid resistance - dry, Dustiness, Loose material, Corrugations, Stoniness -

loose, Potholes, Rutting, Stoniness - fixed, Cracks - (slip, longitudinal and crocodile).

By examining which wearing course material property parameters lead to these defects, a

specification was developed for wearing course materials selection (Thompson and Visser; 2006).

The specifications are based on an assessment of wearing course material shrinkage product (Sp)

and grading coefficient (Gc), defined in Eqs. (4) and (5) as;

Sp = LS x P425
(4)

(P265 - P2) x P475

Gc =
100 (5)

where;

LS = Bar linear shrinkage (%)

P425 = Percent wearing course sample passing 0.425mm sieve

P265 = Percent wearing course sample passing 26.5mm sieve

P2 = Percent wearing course sample passing 2mm sieve

P475 = Percent wearing course sample passing 4.75mm sieve

 The parameters comprising Eq. 4 and Eq. 5 are determined from road-building material indicator

tests, as prescribed by the relevant testing methodology, such as ASTM (1998).

To select a suitable wearing course material, the selection chart in Fig. 10 can be used in which

the two selection parameters that describe the material; the grading coefficient (Gc) and shrinkage

product (Sp), define a range of acceptable specifications. A wearing course material that satisfies

the specification is thus centered on an area bounded by a grading coefficient of 25-32 and a

shrinkage product of 95-130 in which the overall and individual defects are minimized (Area 1).

Extending this region to encompass poorer (but nevertheless operable) performance enables an

additional area (Area 2) to be defined. If the three most critical haul road defects are considered, it

appears that mine road-user preference is for much reduced wet skid resistance, dust and dry skid

resistance defects. This is also borne-out with reference to the most common causative factors in

haulage accidents, in which dust, visibility and stoniness figured significantly.

The selection should also be evaluated in the light of other material property limits identified as

important in functional performance but not directly assessed in Fig.10. Table 1 presents a summary

of these property limits, determined from road indicator tests of a wearing course material. Ideally,

a suitable wearing course material should not exceed the parameter limits established in Table 1.

Maintenance Design

The maintenance aspect of haul road design cannot be considered separate from the geometric,

structural and functional design aspects since they are mutually inclusive. Design and construction

costs for the majority of haul roads represent only a small proportion of the total operating and

maintenance costs incurred over the road’s life. It is possible to construct a mine haul road that

requires virtually no maintenance over its service life, but this would entail excessive expenditure on

initial construction costs, although on-going road maintenance and vehicle operating costs would be

low. Conversely, a maintenance intensive road, whilst much cheaper to build, would entail higher

on-going maintenance costs and, as a result of rapid traffic-induced deterioration (i.e. rolling
resistance increases) higher vehicle operating costs over the life of the road. An optimally safe and

efficient road design will include a certain amount and frequency of maintenance (watering, grading

etc.) and thus maintenance can be planned, scheduled and optimized within the limits of required

road performance and minimum vehicle operating and road maintenance costs.

Road maintenance itself is rarely implicated as a contributory factor in mine road accidents. This

is because maintenance is seen as a reactionary measure, a maintenance activity, (blading, grading,

watering, etc.) being initiated when road performance becomes unsatisfactory. However, if the

geometric, structural or functional design components are incorrectly formulated at the design

stage, a road will invariably become maintenance intensive as a result and frequent maintenance

interventions will be required. Routine maintenance per se will not correct the underlying road

design deficiency, only temporarily reduce it’s impact on safety and operational efficiency. Hence in

this discussion, maintenance management system design (Thompson and Visser; 1999, 2003) should

not be considered as a universal remedy for poor road design in the first instance and the root-cause

of road under-performance should be sought in the geometric, structural or functional design

components.

Conclusions

Well designed and maintained haul roads are the key to minimizing truck haulage on-road

hazards and costs, as well as increasing productivity. However, practically designing and managing a

haul road for optimal performance is often difficult to achieve. We can be guided on this endeavor

by our understanding of how a road design is developed, and, critically, the interplay between a

good design and safe, cost efficient haulage.

The seminal USBM work of Kaufman and Ault in 1977 was the starting point of a formalized

approach to mine road design. Just as the authors of the original USBM guidelines recognized that

the development of surface mine haulage equipment had outstripped mine road design technology,
the continuing increase in truck size to-date, together with more recent powered haulage accident

and incident analyses, has warranted further development of mine road design guidelines.

Augmented design and management guidelines have been developed over the past decade,

both in response to the requirements of mine operators for more safe and efficient haulage systems,

and the truck manufacturers’ requirements for a more predictable and controlled operating

environment. Amending existing or developing new mine road design methodologies requires an

analysis of surface (powered) haulage accident and incident records to identify the major

contributory factors that led to these accidents. Several studies are summarized from which it was

seen that the principal sub-standard surface mine road design factors were geometric and functional

design issues, with a lesser, but nevertheless significant contribution from inadequate structural

design.

Whilst improved mine haul road design can reduce haulage accidents, recognition also needs to

be given to human factors which are a significant contributor to haulage accidents. The human

factor interactive effects include the geometric, structural and functional design components and to

prevent an accident or reduce the severity of its consequences, a road should be more

accommodating to human error. The more that is known about human error in the context of mine

haulage, the better a road can be designed to accommodate those actions or non-standard practices

that would, on a poorly designed road, invariably escalate an error into an accident.

References

AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 1982. AASHTO

Materials, Part 1, Specifications. Washington, DC., USA.

ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 1998. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Sec 4,

Vol 04.08, West Conshohocken, PA., USA: ASTM International.

Aldinger, J.A., Kenney, J.M. and Keran, C.M. 1995. Mobile Equipment Accidents in Surface Coal

Mines. USDOI Bureau of Mines IC 9428.

AUSTROADS. 1994. Road safety audit. National Association of Road Transport and Transport

Authorities of Australia, AUSTROADS Publication AP-30/94, Sydney, Australia.

AUSTROADS. 2009. Review of Relationship to Predict Subgrade Modulus From CBR. National

Association of Road Transport and Transport Authorities of Australia, AUSTROADS Publication

AP-T130/09, Sydney, NSW., Australia.

Fesak G.M., Breland, R.M. and Spadaro, J. 1996. Analysis of Surface Powered Haulage Accidents.

Mine Safety and Health Administration, USDOL HAS Bulletin.

http://www.msha.gov/PROGRAMS/HSAPUBS/SURPOWER.pdf. Accessed 1.11/2009.

FHWA. 1985. ELSYM5A: Interactive version 5A users guide. FHWA, US Dept of Transportation.

Fourie G.A.F., Smith, R.A.F., Thompson R.J. and Visser A.T. 1998 Benchmarking haul road design

standards to reduce transportation accidents. International Journal of Surface Mining and

Reclamation Engineering, vol 12, n4, December, pp157-162.

Miller R.E., Thompson R.J. and Lowe N.T. 2004. A GPS-based system for minimizing jolts to heavy

equipment operators. Society of Automotive Engineering, SAE Transactions, Journal of

Commercial Vehicles, SAE 2004-01-2726, ISBN 0-7680-1641-X, pp850-855.

MinCad. 2008. CIRCLY 5. Mincad Systems Pty Ltd, Richmond, Vic., Australia.

Randolph, R.F. and Boldt, C.M.K. 1996. Safety analysis of surface haulage accidents. Proc 27th

Annual Institute on Mining Health, Safety and Research. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic

Institute and State Univ. p:29-38

Thompson R.J. and Visser A.T. 1996. Towards a mechanistic structural design method for surface

mine haul roads. Jnl. South African Institute of Civil Engineering, 38:2, second quarter,

Johannesburg, South Africa.

Thompson, R.J and Visser, A.T. 1999. Management of unpaved road networks on opencast mines.

Transportation Research Record (TRR) 1652, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Thompson R.J. and Visser A.T. 2003. Mine haul road maintenance management systems. Jnl. of the

South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 103:5, May/June.

Thompson R.J. and Visser A.T. 2006. Selection and maintenance of mine haul road wearing course

materials. Trans(A) (Mining Technology) Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Materials (IMMM).

115:4, pp140-153

USBM. 1977. The Design of Surface Mine Haul Roads - A Manual. USDOI Bureau of Mines IC 8758.

USBM. 1981. A Study of Mine Haulage Roadway Surface Safety Hazards. USDOI, Mines, Minerals,

Health and Safety Technology Division, Bumines OFR 5-83.

Thompson, RJ. 2010. In SME Mining Engineering Handbook. Edited by P Darling. Ch.21 (12.3).

Design, Construction and Maintenance of Haul Roads. Littleton, CO., USA: SME. Forthcoming.

Thompson, RJ. 2010a. CBR and mechanistic structural design methodologies for mine haul roads.

Submitted to Trans(A) (Mining Technology) Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Materials

(IMMM). Forthcoming.
Figure 1. Typical integrated approach to road design.
 Figure 2. Surface coal haulage truck accident categories (after Aldinger et al; 1995).

4.5
Formal design
methods4
3.5
3
2.5
Informal design methods
2
1.5
1
0.5
No design methods
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Percentage attributable accidents / 1000 workers

Functional design methods Geometric design methods

Trend for Functional Designs Trend for Geometric Designs

Figure 3. Relationship between road design and attributable accident rates (South Africa).
 Geometric
21%
Functional
17% Maintenance &
structural
Road design Vehicle 2%
Not attributable related mechanical &
53% accidents other
47% 11%
Practices Human Error
19% 30%

Figure 4 Role of road design in attributable accidents (after Fourie et al; 1998)

Road geometric,
structural, functional Human error and non-
and maintenance standard practices 49%
design factors 40%

20%
12%
25%
4%
3% 2,5%

1.5% Vehicle mechanical and

'other' factor interaction with
human error and non-
Vehicle mechanical standard practices 6.5%
and 'other' factor
interaction with road
design 4.5%

Figure 5 Factor interactions contributing to truck haulage accidents.

 California Bearing Ratio CBR (%)
1 10 100
Cover Thickness (mm) 0.0
55 40 25 15
500.0

1000.0
Truck Truck wheel
GVM (t) load (t)
1500.0
90 15
2000.0
150 25
2500.0
240 40

320 55 3000.0

390 65
3500.0
450 75
510 85
570 95 4000.0
630 105
4500.0
CBR (%) . 1 2 3 4 6 8 . 10 , 20 40 60 80 100

Modulus (E eff)(MPa) . 10 14 21 28 35 41 55 69 104 138 207 276 345 414

. .
A-1-b A-1-a

A-2-7 A-2-6 A-2-5 A-2-4

A-3

AASHTO Soil Classification A-4

A-5

A-6

A-7-6 A-7-5

CH

MH

CL

ML

SW

SP

SW-SC

SW-SM

SP-SC

SP-SM
Unified Soil Classification
SC

SM

GW

GP

GW-GC

GW-GC

GP-GC

GP-GM

GC

GM

Subgrade soil category Poor Medium Good Excellent

Figure 6 CBR cover curves for 90-630 metric ton GVM haul trucks and approximate bearing

capacities of various soils types defined by the Unified Soil Classification (ASTM; 1998) and American

Association of State Highway Transportation Officials’(AASHTO; 1982) systems.

 Rear dual tyre centre to centre spacing

Rear dual tyre centre to

dual mid-point spacing

Total load Total load

per tyre per tyre
Load
radius r Tyre contact
pressure

Wearing Course

Blasted waste rock base

Compacted sub-grade / in-situ

In-situ
Evaluate vertical compressive strains at the
top of the compacted sub-grade / in-situ and/or
top of in-situ

Figure 7. Multi-layer model for mechanistic structural design evaluation

 Range of
maximum
permissible
vertical
Haul Road Category

compressive
strains
(µstrains) Limiting pavement layer vertical compressive strain
values for mine haul road structural design

Traffic volumes >

Traffic volumes <

10000

100kt/day

100kt/day

Limiting microstrains
Typical Description Category III Haul Road

Category II Haul Road

Category I Haul Road

1000

Permanent life-of-mine high 900 1500

CATEGORY I

traffic volume main hauling

roads and ramps in- and ex-
pit. Operating life >20 years
100
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320
Traffic volume (kt/day) x performance index
Semi-permanent medium- to 1500 2000
CATEGORY II

high traffic volume ramp

roads in- and ex-pit.
Operating life >10 years

Shorter-term medium- to 2000 2500 Maximum permissible vertical strains can also be
CATEGORY III

low-volume in-pit bench determined from (kt/day x performance index)

access, ex-pit dump, or ramp where performance index is defined as;
roads. Operating life; 1 Adequate but fairly maintenance intensive
• <5 years at >50kt/day) 2 Good with normal maintenance interventions
• <10 years at <50kt/day) 3 Outstanding with low maintenance
requirements

Figure 8 Haul road classification and associated mechanistic structural design limiting strain

criteria
 2000

1800

1600
Wearing course
Base Layer Thickness (mm)

1400 200mm layer

Eff = 350MPa
1200

1000 Base layer

Eff = 3000MPa
800

600

400
In-situ
200 Thickness
3000mm layer
0
10 100 1000
In-situ layer Eff Modulus (MPa)

Category I Category II Category III

Figure 9 Typical mechanistically determined multi-layered elastic solution to base layer

thickness for CAT 797B fully laden truck, for category I-III haul roads.
 400
Dustiness
Shrinkage product 350
Slippery w hen w et
300
250
200
150
Loose stones
100
and tyre Loose material
50 damage Corrugates
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Grading Coefficient

Recommended selection area 1 - ideal

Recommended selection area 2 - operable

Figure 10 Haul road wearing course material selection (after Thompson and Visser; 2006).

Table 1. Additional wearing course material selection parameters (after Thompson and Visser; 2006).

Material Parameter Range

Min Max

Shrinkage Product 85 200

Grading Coefficient 20 35
1
Dust Ratio 0,4 0,6
Liquid Limit (%) 17 24
Plastic Limit (%) 12 17
Plasticity Index 4 8
4-day soaked CBR at 98% compaction 80
Maximum Particle Size (mm) 40
1.
Dust ratio defined as;
P075
P 425

where
P425 = percentage of material passing the 0.425mm
sieve
P075 = percentage of material passing the 0.075mm
sieve