FACTORS THAT JUSTIFY THE TRANSITION OF OPEN PIT TO

UNDERGROUND MINING AND A SHORT ANALYSIS OF THE

CHUQUICAMATA MINE
LUIS VARGAS DIAZ
Mining and Engineering Department – Clausthal University of Technology

ABSTRACT
Conventionally it has been known two mining extraction variants: surface and
underground methods; However, due to the demands of the market, the mining industry
is faced with the challenge of extracting as much as possible from a mineral deposit;
what it means to look for other alternatives. This is where the idea of combining both
methods mentioned above arises. In this work the main factors to determine the
transition from an open pit to an underground exploitation have been developed; such
as the type of deposit, mining costs, geotechnical factors, optimal depth of the transition,
among others. Additionally, Chuquicamata Underground Mine project was analyzed in
order to show the main design parameters taken and the benefits present in this type of
exploitation.
1. INTRODUCTION
Mining industry, a risky business due to the changing prices of commodities, has the
challenge of maximizing the cash flow of every projects, which is achieved by reducing
costs and optimizing the extraction of mineral resources. For this reason is essential
choose an efficient mining method for the operation, deciding between the development
of an open-pit or underground mine. However, in many cases the combination of both
options is more profitable.
This paper will analyze the considerations necessary for the choice of a combined mining
method, showing the main benefits of developing a project of this type and the optimal
point of transition of the methods.
Additionally, a brief analysis of a project underway in Chile called the Chuquicamata
Underground Mine Project will be carried out; in which the largest open pit mine in the
world is building the necessary infrastructure to carry out the exploitation of its copper
deposit through the Block Caving method; prolonging the life of the mine for four more
decades and achieving to extract 60% more reserves than what has already been
extracted so far during the last one hundred years of exploitation.

2. REASONS THAT JUSTIFY THE EXPLOITATION OF A MINERAL

DEPOSIT THROUGH OPEN-PIT AND UNDERGROUND METHODS
The main reason for using this combined method of exploitation is that the deposit is
close to the surface and is also elongated on the vertical axis. This means that in order
to optimally extract the mineral, it is not enough to use only the surface method, as will
be explained later, if the mine goes deeper the extraction costs will increase (Solar,
2010). But the resources that are deeper if they can extract with the implementation of
an underground method; generating numerous advantages in the design of the project.
Then next indicator is stripping ratio because a variation in this considerably affects the
operating costs of a particular mining method due to if the mine goes deeper the pit
diameter will increased and thus there is an increase in material to be moved. Whence
will be necesary more drilling, explosives, loading and hauling equipment; in general, the
work cycles are reduced.
On the environmental side, migrating from the surface to the underground method
generates less impact on the environment due to the reduction of particulate matter
emissions and also because the footprint left in the environment is much lower. This
generates a better environmental and social acceptance (Bakhtavar, K. Shahriar *, and
K. Oraee, 2009). However, other controversial issues are generated such as the
reduction of personnel due to hiring qualified personnel in underground exploitation and
workers will be exposed to risky conditions.
In the study case of the Chuquicamata project, the current pit has a depth of more than
one kilometer, reflecting, according to CODELCO (2009), the following challenges: "The
studies carried out to date by the Corporation show that the Open Pit of Chuquicamata
depletes its reserves in the environment of 2018, product of the natural decrease of the
average copper grades of the mineral; the increase in transport distances; the large
amount of waste that must be removed to extract a ton of ore and the increasing
geotechnical risk, due to the increased depth of the pit".
Then it possible to state that the choice of a combined extraction method is mainly
optimizes the cost per ton removed and consequently generate an efficient cutoff grade
to become much of the resources generated (which one method of operation they were
not economically exploitable) tin reserves, increasing the NPV of the project.
This is clearly shown in the case of Chuquicamata where below the final pit there are still
reserves estimated at 60% of what is already extracted in the last hundred years of
operation, this is 4.2 billion mineral of which 1700 million are held as reserves with a
grade of 0.71% copper. The exploitation of this faction of the deposit would generate an
increase of life in the mine in forty more years (CODELCO, 2009).

3. HOW TO CARRY OUT THE TRANSITION

The predominant challenge of using this combined method is to determine the optimal
depth for the transition from open pit to underground. In order to understand the ideal
depth for change, Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee (2009) present a hypothetical model
case for an economic block model for both open pit and underground mining (Figure 1
and figure 2).

Fig. 1. Open-pit economical block model Fig. 2. Underground economical block model
Source (Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee.2009) Source (Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee.2009)

Subsequently, the author makes the optimization for the surface extraction by using the
Korsakov algorithm, obtaining the final pit with a depth up to level 7 of the block model
(Figure 3) and for the case of the underground extraction they got the optimum
underground layout (Figure 4).

Fig. 3. Optimal final pit limit Fig. 4. Optimum underground layout

Source (Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee.2009) Source (Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee.2009)

Then it is possible to determine the economic result of the exploitation in each level for
both extraction methods (Table 1).
Table 1. Economical results of the example. Source (Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee.2009)

To complete the process, the author introduces the concept of maximization of the NPV,
considering additional factors such as the discount rate, in addition to using a support
pillar between both methods, with which a more realistic economic distribution of the
block model is obtained and also a graphic representation of the extraction limits for each
case (Table No. 2 and Figure No. 5). Proving that the maximum NPV of the project is
achieved with the combination of both mining methods that independently Bakhtavar, K.
Shahriar, and K. Oraee (2009).
Table 2. Economical results with the NPV of the example. Source (Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee.2009)
 Fig. 5. Optimal transition from open pit to underground
Source (Bakhtavar, Shahriar and Oraee.2009)

On the other hand, the choice of underground mining method is key to the development
of the operation, since it must meet a high quota of production at a low cost per tonne
extracted because the laws that are presented in this type of deposits are low. That is
why the main methods to be taken into account are those of massive mining such as
Caving. Taking the case of Chuquicamata as an example, the chosen method is block
caving, through the use of macro blocks. This method has cost advantages in terms of
production capacity and a good adaptation to geomechanical conditions; however, the
loss of selectivity must be accepted, as well as the high degree of investment in time and
money necessary, since Codelco plans to invest USD 4.2 billion and a construction time
of 9 years.

4. CHUQUICAMATA MINE DESIGN

In this stage a summary of the design of the project made by Codelco (2009) will be
presented
Chuquicamata Mine Project considers a production regime of 140,000 tons per day,
having the greatest challenges to develop and build the necessary infrastructure.
Because it should develop about 18,000 linear meters of horizontal works and 3,500
meters in vertical works per year in order to achieve the mentioned production quota.
As an outstanding infrastructure, there will be a ventilation shaft 11 m in diameter and
918 m deep, two 4.2 km air injection tunnels, two parallel tunnels as main accesses of a
length of 7.5 km with a grade of 8.75%. When the life of the project is concluded, it is
planned to build 1 020 km of tunnels.
Regarding the future of mining, technological innovations are necessary requirements to
optimize costs in processes. This is reflected in the case studied, according to
CODELCO (2016), in the operation of the future underground mine will also be
implemented semi-autonomous LHD technologies operated from surface in the
Integrated Operation and Management Center, remote controlled hammers and
ventilation on demand, which allows to inject the necessary amount of air in the work
fronts, allowing important savings in energy. In addition, it has been chosen to introduce
as semiautomatic jumbos, which allow greater efficiency in drilling, as well as in the use
of water via semi-wet drilling and operation by remote control of shotcrete.
As mentioned above, the exploitation method will be block caving, which provides greater
flexibility in the designs and planning of the mine, allowing to incorporate technological
changes in the future.
The design consists of four levels of extraction, which are divided into base units of
preparation and independent production, called macro blocks with average dimensions
of height 245 m and base of 30,000 m2, which will be separated by pillars of 20 m in
order to reduce the effect of rock efforts.
Each level of exploitation will have 20 macro blocks representing 60 hectares per level.
The exploitation will be done in a descending manner, preparing the next level 6 years
before the end of the first in order to maintain the production.

Fig. 6. Design of Chuquicamata Underground Mine. Source (CODELCO.2009)

5. CONCLUSIONS
The main reason for using the combined method of exploitation is to increase the NPV
of the project, extracting the optimal amount of reserves at a lower cost per ton instead
to use a single method individually.
The depth at which the method transition must be made is decided by an economic
analysis, evaluating both options separately and then combining them in order to obtain
the highest profits, and also taking into account the geological characteristics of the
deposit.
The depth of an open-pit mining operation plays an important role as it goes deeper,
there are greater geotechnical risks (slope instability), greater stripping, greater transport
cycles, etc. That is why it is decided to migrate to an underground method. However, the
design and construction of the project is another big challenge because the operation is
already in huge depths and above is the open pit.
The tendency of the mining industry is to opt for underground operations with massive
mining methods, since production costs are reduced due to the movement of enormous
amounts of material and it can even be compared with a superficial method by the index
of production and associated costs.
The goal of future operations is to automate processes in order to reduce costs, provide
better working conditions and be friendlier to the environment.
The analysis of Chuquicamata Underground Mine case served as an example to indicate
the benefits that the use of this method brings, such as the fact that 1,700 million
additional copper reserves can now be extracted and that it will extend the mine for four
more decades; additionally to analyze the necessary infrastructure for the project and
the main parameters of the design.
 6. REFERENCES
CODELCO (2009). CRITERIOS ESPECIFICOS DE DISEÑO
Available at:
https://www.codelco.com/prontus_codelco/site/artic/20110706/asocfile/2011070
6150616/criterios_espec__ficos_de_dise__o_rev_p.pdf
[Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
CODELCO (2009). PRINCIPALES DECISIONES.
Available at:
https://www.codelco.com/prontus_codelco/site/artic/20110706/asocfile/2011070
6150616/informe_principales_decisiones_rev_p_25_03_2009.pdf
[Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
SOLAR, J. (2010). MODELO DE PROGRAMACIÓN MATEMÁTICA PARA
SUSTENTAR LA TRANSICIÓN RAJO SUBTERRÁNEA. Santiago de Chile:
Universidad de Chile.
Available at:
http://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/102466
[Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
BAKHTAVAR, E., SHAHRIAR, K., AND ORAEE, K. (2009). TRANSITION FROM
OPEN-PIT TO UNDERGROUND AS A NEW OPTIMIZATION CHALLENGE IN
MINING ENGINEERING
Available at:
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10913-009-0060-
3.pdf
[Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Ordin, A. and Vasil’ev, I. (2009). OPTIMIZED DEPTH OF TRANSITION FROM OPEN
PIT TO UNDERGROUND COAL MINING
Available at:
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1134%2FS1062739114040103.pdf
[Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].