Effect of Oil Sand Mining Operations

on Haul Truck Dump Body Design

Author:
David Whalen, M.Eng.
Maintenance Engineer, Mine Engineering
Syncrude Canada Ltd.
P.O. Bag 4009, MD 0039
Fort McMurray, AB T9H-3L1 Canada
(780) 790-7303
whalen.david@syncrude.com

Co-Author:
Khaled Obaia, Ph.D.
Research Associate, Research
Syncrude Canada Ltd.

Presented at:
Operational Challenges in the Canadian Oilsands - Montreal 2003
May 04, 2003 - May 07, 2003
Abstract
Mobile equipment in oil sand mining operations experience more maintenance problems than similar equipment
in other surface mines, due to soft underfoot conditions. Oil sand properties are known to vary with
temperature, bitumen content and previous loading cycles. One of the challenges is the widely variable
underfoot pressure which supports shovels and trucks. In the case of a heavy hauler driving on in-pit roads,
each tire is supported by a different ground stiffness resulting in an apparent uneven surface. Driving over
uneven ground causes twist in the truck frame, which is transmitted to the dump body. Through a finite element
analysis of a haul truck dump body, it was shown that slight frame twists produce localized stresses in the
intersections of the floor stiffeners. These stresses are at times greater than those resulting from the maximum
ore weight and are primarily responsible for cracking in these intersections. Syncrude maintains high quality
haul roads, which are constructed of gravel, and makes every effort to keep the shovel pit roads as smooth as
possible. This problem cannot be avoided through operational practices only and must also be accounted for in
the design of haul truck bodies.

1.0 Introduction

Oil sand properties, in terms of their effect on mining equipment, vary dramatically with temperature, bitumen
content, and loading history. As a fully loaded haul truck travels over the shovel pit floor, each tire sinks into
the ground material differently according to the stiffness of the underfoot material. This has the same effect as
driving over a rutted, pot-holed or uneven rigid surface. This problem is compounded by the fact that the
stiffness of oil sand is reduced through repeated loading. These ground effects cause twist in the truck frame,
which is transmitted to the dump body causing chronic cracking.

Figure 1: Soft Underfoot Conditions

-2-
2.0 Frame Twist as Structural Loading

To describe the deformation in a haul truck as it travels over an uneven surface, a numerical simulation was
developed using the Finite Element Method (FEM). A full finite element model was constructed of a heavily
modified Komatsu 930E truck body. Significant modifications to the original structure have been implemented
by Syncrude Mine Maintenance to achieve acceptable performance in oil sand mining applications. The weight
of the ore load was applied to the inside surfaces of the dump body through a rather elaborate algorithm which
took into consideration the rounded profile shape of a typical payload of oil sand, and its specific soil mechanics
properties. It was noticed, however, that the results of the analyses were not sensitive to the manner in which
ore loads were applied. Rather, frame deflection seems to be the most sensitive factor.

2.1 Frame Deflection

Boundary conditions applied directly to the bottom of the dump body FEA model would sufficiently represent
the weight distribution for a static situation when the truck is parked on a level, rigid surface. In reality,
however, the frame deforms slightly under the weight of the ore as the truck travels over uneven ground.
Accurately modeling the weight distribution from the dump body onto this deflecting frame could only be
achieved by including the frame in the analysis. To accomplish this, the mo del included a simplified
representation of the frame and suspension. For the purpose of this analysis, frame stresses are not of interest;
rather, capturing the true deflection shape is the intent. The hydro-pneumatic suspension struts are represented
as spring elements (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Dump Body and Frame FEA Model

Strut pressure data was collected from a fully loaded haul truck, parked at a shovel, just prior to commencing a
haul run. The underfoot conditions at this location are characterized by soft uneven ground. When each wheel
of a haul truck is supported by a different stiffness, the uneven weight distribution sets up an uneven set of strut
forces. By multiplying the collected pressures by the active area of each strut, the supporting force in each was

-3-
obtained. These forces were then applied as boundary conditions in the FEA model above, serving as a
physically collected input to the analysis presented.

The most pronounced shape of frame displacement observed was torsion about the longitudinal centreline. That
is, the frame twists like a corkscrew in response to the moment created by the difference in the two front strut
forces. From the exaggerated deformation plot shown in Figure 3, one can easily see the twist in the frame
resulting from one front wheel sinking lower into the soil than the other. Torsional frame deflection, as shown,
is commonly known as “racking”.

Figure 3: Frame Displacement Exaggerated by a Factor of 75.

2.2 Racking vs. Frame Life

Heavy hauler manufacturers are aware that frame torsion is the limiting factor governing the expected life of the
frame structure in most, if not all, mining applications. As such, most manufacturers are able to correlate the
frequency and severity of frame twisting events with frame cracking by simply monitoring the vehicle strut
pressures. Racking is commonly defined as follows: (RF+LR) - (LF+RR) where RF, LR, LF and RR are the
pressures in the right front, left rear, left front and right rear struts, respectively. By not properly considering
the moments of each strut about the longitudinal centreline of the truck, racking as defined is not an accurate
measure of structural loading. Nonetheless, it is useful in monitoring frame life. To combat the chronic
problem of frame cracking under torsional loading, manufacturers have carefully designed the frame of each
haul truck with castings at all critical stress transition regions. Although this same form of loading is
transmitted to the dump bodies and is causing similar cracking problems there, the vendors have not applied
similar efforts to solve it.

-4-
3.0 Dump Body Cracking

3.1 Bolster – Stiffener Intersections

Standard dump bodies for most mining trucks are welded, steel plate structures consisting of flat floor, sidewall
and canopy components with an intricate pattern of box-style stiffeners on the outer sides of each. An array of
floor stiffeners (called bolsters) run from side to side, while two main rails (called stringers) run lengthwise.
Where the two intersect, the main rails are cut to fit over the bolsters and the intersection seam is continuously
welded. All heavy haulers at Syncrude mine sites develop some degree of cracking in the dump body under
normal service conditions, and require weld repair on a regular basis. This perpetual cracking occurs in the
welds forming the intersections between the widthwise and lengthwise floor stiffeners (Figure 4). These
regions of interest will hereafter be referred to as bolster-stringer intersections. Cracking seems to develop first
on the inside of the stringers, near the hinge pivots, even after very short periods of regular service. If left un-
repaired, the cracks will propagate until all of the bolster-stringer intersection welds have completely cracked.

Figure 4: Location of Floor Stiffener Cracking

3.2 State of Stress

Under static conditions, fully loaded and parked on soft uneven ground, there is sufficient frame torsion to
cause localized bending induced high tensile stresses in some bolster-stringer intersections which occurs most
extensively near the hinge pivots. This observation supports Syncrude’s experience that the bolster-stringer
intersections in this region develop cracks first, regardless of the make or model of the haul truck.

Bolster stiffeners in this region have a constant cross-section from the outer edge of one stringer to the outer
edge of the other. Outward from the stringers, these bolster stiffeners have a tapered cross-section. As

-5-
suggested in Figure 5, the exaggerated results of the shell element model indicate the presence of localized
bending stresses in this bolster-stringer intersection. At the outer edge of this intersection, the bolster bottom
plate is deformed upward, producing tension in the material near the weld toe.

Figure 5: Localized Deformation Near the Hinge Pin

Shell elements were used to represent the state of stress in this bolster-stringer intersection. The element
formulation chosen includes the assumption of a linear variation of in-plane stress through the shell element
thickness. From separate trial analyses, it was noted that the stress results at the corner intersection of a shell
element model were not significantly different than those near the weld toe of a solid element model of the
same region. It was therefore concluded that this shell element model does adequately represent the geometry
of this region.

The stress distribution along the thickness in this area is shown in Figure 6. The top and bottom stresses on the
inward side of the intersection are –70 MPa and –170 MPa respectively. The interpretation of this is that
superimposed onto 120 MPa of uniform, compressive membrane stress in this area is 50 MPa of a pure bending
stress.

Figure 6: Shell Element Results and Interpretation

-6-
On the outer edge, where cracking commonly occurs, the situation is different. This time, the top and bottom
results indicate –168 MPa and +100 MPa respectively. Again, a secondary bending stress is superimposed onto
a compressive membrane stress; however, this time the bending stress of 134 MPa is great enough to overcome
the 34 MPa of compression, producing tension near the weld toe (Figure 6). To demonstrate this stress
distribution, Figure 7 plots the in-plane stress through the shell elements along Section A-A, which is shown in
Figure 6. In this view, the tensile stress concentration in the rounded corner can be easily seen.

Figure 7: In-Plane Stress through Section A-A

The above analysis indicated that the frame of a mining truck does deflect under normal operating conditions,
resulting in a displacement of the dump body supports, which is a form of structural loading. In response to this
support displacement, localized bending stresses in some bolster-stringer intersections near the hinge pivots are
present with sufficient magnitude to produce tensile stresses. However, this analysis is a static simulation only.
In reality, haul trucks drive over uneven ground twisting the frame back and forth, causing the stress at the weld
toe to alternate between tension and compression. Under dynamic conditions, an inertial effect of the truck and
ore becomes an added force. One could expect the peak tension to be as much as three times greater than the
100 MPa (14.5 ksi) seen here under static conditions. It is the presence of these high alternating tensile stresses,
at the toe of a weld with inherent poor fatigue resistance, that is causing the extensive cracking problems
observed in this area.

3.3 Cost of Dump Body Cracking

Heavy hauler floor stiffener cracking is such a problem in oil sand mining operations that trucks are routinely
inspected with Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) to track the growth of cracks. To minimize the downtime
impact on production required to continually repair floor stiffener cracking, a spare body is used. For a fleet of

-7-
eight trucks, the ninth (spare) body is continuously out-of-service getting weld repairs. Although production
losses are minimized with this spare body, the additional capital expense to procure this body and the
continuous cost of structural rebuilds adds to our “total cost of ownership”. In short, floor stiffener cracking is
an ongoing and very expensive problem associated with running a fleet of heavy haulers. Syncrude is currently
investigating several options to eliminate or minimize these costs.

3.4 Alternative designs

Some suggestions to reduce the floor stiffener cracking problems include improvements in the weld details in
these structural intersections. Although the stresses predicted are quite high, perhaps better fatigue and fracture
performance can be achieved through the specification of better quality welds. Improved electrode selection,
post weld heat treatment (PWHT) and blend grinding are just a few examples of how better performance may
be achieved. Most likely, the additional costs associated with this would render it unattractive.

An effective way of eliminating floor stiffener cracking would be to redesign the geometry of the floor
stiffening arrangement. By designing an improved transition from the width-wise stiffeners to the main rails, a
smoother stress flow can be achieved reducing the localized deformation and stress concentration. Alternatives
to the conventional flat plate, box-style stiffened dump bodies are available. One such body is currently being
adapted for oil sand mining applications with promising results.

Another option is to replace the problem ridden bolster-stringer intersection with a cast component of similar
geometry (Figure 8). The localized deformations and stresses will remain, however, the problematic weld
details will be moved a short distance away and replaced by smooth radii and cast material. A short distance
away from this intersection, localized deformations and associated stresses dissipate. Under membrane stress
only, the fatigue performance of these new welds ought to be satisfactory.

Figure 8: Floor Stiffener Intersection Casting

-8-
4.0 Conclusions

Soft underfoot conditions in oil sand mines induce considerable twisting in the frames of haul trucks despite
grooming efforts in the shovel pit and construction of quality haul roads. These frame twists, although very
small, are an important form of structural loading that ought to be considered in haul truck dump body design.
Cracking in bolster-stringer intersections has been linked to these frame deflections, and forms a significant
contribution to the end-users “total cost of ownership”. Since soft underfoot conditions are a fundamental
characteristic of oil sand mining in Northern Alberta, current floor stiffener cracking problems ought to be
addressed in future bodies destined for oil sand mining service.

-9-