A New Approach to Flexible Open Pit Optimisation

and Scheduling
M Armstrong1 and A Galli2

ABSTRACT
Traditionally pit optimisation and scheduling is carried out assuming that the resources, the
commodity prices and production costs are all known. Once the pit contour and the mining schedule
have been determined, geostatistical simulations can be used to assess the impact of the uncertainty
in the resources on the pit design and the schedule, and likewise stochastic simulations can be used
to test its robustness to fluctuations in costs and prices. But it would be more interesting to have a
dynamic procedure for optimising the pit as the resources become better known and as economic
factors such as commodity prices and costs evolve over time. This paper presents a novel approach
for doing this.
Rather than working with millions of small selective mining units, it was decided to work with large
blocks, called macro-blocks. Mining sequences are defined as the quantities to be extracted from
each macro-block in each time period. Feasible mining sequences are mining sequences that respect
the accessibility constraints, and also the geometric constraints on the amounts that can be extracted
from any one block over time, or from all the active blocks at a given time. Having defined feasible
mining sequences, their mathematical properties were studied. It was found that natural breakpoints
occur in the sequences when one set of blocks have been completely mined out, thereby opening
up access to others. It was discovered that families of sequences exist, and that they are convex
and closed under certain types of row permutation operations. Convexity is an advantage when
optimising. The closure property opens up the possibility of mixing and matching subsequences of
rows in the sequences. Another interesting property is that the sequences form branching families,
rather like the binomial and trinomial trees used to model prices in finance and in real options.
It is easy to generate large numbers of feasible mining sequences randomly. A two-step procedure
is used to find the best one (or the best few) using three economic criteria:
1. expected NPV,
2. the probability of a negative NPV, and
3. the percentage of years when the cash flow is negative.
The procedure was tested on a synthetic gold mine based on the characteristics of the Essakane
mine in Burkina Faso. The results were encouraging.

INTRODUCTION
Traditionally pit optimisation and scheduling is carried out assuming that the resources, the
commodity prices and production costs are all known. Once the pit contour and the mining schedule
have been determined, geostatistical simulations can be used to assess the impact of the uncertainty
in the resources on the pit design and the schedule, and likewise stochastic simulations can be used
to test its robustness to fluctuations in costs and prices. But it would be more interesting to have a
dynamic procedure for optimising the pit as the resources become better known and as economic
factors such as commodity prices and costs evolve over time. This paper presents a novel approach
for doing this.
In the standard approach the deposit is divided into millions of small blocks. The Lerchs-Grossman
algorithm is used to construct a nested set of pit shells; the one which optimises the net present value
(NPV) is selected and the scheduling is carried out on this pit, usually by mixed-integer programming.

1. Professor, Cerna, Mines-Paristech, 60 Boulevard Saint-Michel, Paris 75272, France. Email: margaret.armstrong@mines-paristech.fr
2. Professor, Cerna, Mines-Paristech, 60 Boulevard Saint-Michel, Paris 75272, France. Email: alain.galli@mines-paristech.fr

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 253

M ARMSTRONG AND A GALLI

An alternative to the Lerchs-Grossman algorithm was proposed by Matheron (1975a, 1975b and
1975c) and implemented by Dagdalen and Francois-Bongaron (1982), Franois-Bongaron and
Guibal (1982 and 1984) and Coleou (1987). Matheron tackled the problem from a different point
of view. He considered that the economic parameters should be kept separate from the grades.
The family of nested pits generated by his method corresponds to different (but fixed) values of the
commodity price and the costs.
In practice neither the grades nor the economic variables are known. Two broad approaches have
been proposed for using geostatistical simulations to take account of the uncertainty on the resources.
Dowd (1994), Rossi and van Brunt (1997) and Thwaites (1998) generated several conditional
simulations of the orebody and optimised the pit for each one. When it became possible to generate
far more simulations, Dimitrakopoulos, Farelly and Godoy (2002) proposed generating the pit
contour using the kriged orebody model, then running the economic analysis for each simulation.
See also Kent, Peattie and Chamberlain (2007). The next step was to include the uncertainty on the
economic variables by stochastic simulations of prices and costs (Nicolas et al, 2007; Armstrong,
Galli and Ndiaye, 2009; Abdel Sabour and Dimitrakopoulos, 2009).
Recently two approaches for strategic pit optimisation have been developed based on large blocks/
panels rather than millions of small blocks. Whittle and Whittle (2007) explained that while small
pit optimisation problems can be solved by mixed-integer programming, large ones defy solution by
that means. The Whittles new procedure consists of randomly generating feasible mining sequences
and then using a search algorithm to find one that optimises the NPV. Whittle (2009) explained
that in their new methodology, a sequence consists of panels to be mined in a specified order. Each
panel consists of parcels which have a mine material type, a tonnage, a cost of mining per tonne
and one or more grade attributes, but no specific location. In a similar vein, Menabde et al (2007)
divided the deposit into large clumps of relatively homogeneous material. Then they optimised
the mine schedule (and the cut-off grade). Geostatistical simulations were used to take account of
the uncertainty on the grades but the economic parameters were considered as being known. They
concluded that an interesting generalisation would be to incorporate stochastic models for prices.
This paper presents a new approach for optimising and scheduling open pit mines which builds on
previous work, but which is radically different from it. Following Menabde and the Whittles, it was
decided to work with large blocks called macro-blocks. A random search procedure is used to find
feasible mining sequences that achieve a close-to-optimal NPV as the Whittles do, but in contrast to
them, grade attributes are not included in the information associated with each macro-block.
The first step in this approach is to set up a population of feasible sequences by a random
construction procedure. In the second stage, uncertainty is introduced: stochastic processes are used
to simulate market variables and geostatistical simulations are used to generate possible realisations
of the orebody. At that point the destination of different macro-blocks (treatment plant/stockpile/
waste dump) can be determined as a function of the simulated grade attributes and the simulated
prices and a value criterion can be associated with each sequence. This could be NPV, or the measure
of upside potential/downside risk proposed by Dimitrakopoulos, Martinez and Ramazan (2007). A
two-stage procedure is then used to select firstly a subpopulation of more promising sequences using
simplified economic criteria and then the best sequence is selected from that subpopulation using
a more detailed criteria. As the second stage in the selection procedure is more computer-intensive
than the first, the two-stage procedure saves time.
The mathematical properties of these feasible mining sequences turn out to be very interesting.
Firstly, they can be characterised in a very succinct way by identifying the break points in the sequences,
that is, the times when the various geometric accessibility constraints are first met thereby allowing
mining to start on other macro-blocks. Sequences with the same breakpoints can be improved by
operations similar to cross-over and mutation in genetic algorithms. Secondly it is shown that these
sequences form branching families. This opens up the possibility of using optimisation techniques
such as multi-stage programming with recourse to give decision makers a dynamic procedure for
optimising the pit as the resources become better known and as economic factors such as commodity
prices and costs evolve over time. An example of how multi-stage programming with recourse can be
applied in mining is given by Armstrong, Galli and Razanatsimba (2011).

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 254

 A NEW APPROACH TO FLEXIBLE OPEN PIT OPTIMISATION AND SCHEDULING

This paper is structured as follows. In the next section feasible mining sequences are defined and
their properties are presented. The following section describes the iterative procedure developed for
generating them and the two-step procedure for selecting the best one. The next section presents
tests that were carried out on a synthetic gold mine. The discussion and conclusions follow in the last
section. In the appendix a simple example with only six macro-blocks is presented to illustrate the
key concepts in the new method.

MINING SEQUENCES
The long-term objective is to use multi-stage programming with recourse to optimise the mine
contour and the mine plan, and later the choice of the cutoff grade, and the size of the stockpile.
In multi-stage programming care is taken to separate the variables into state variables such as
commodity prices and grades over which the decision-makers have no control, and the others which
are under their control. This distinction is maintained when defining mining sequences. These give
the quantity of material that the mine planner decides to extract from each large block in each time
period. In contrast to the Whittles no assumptions are made about the grades.
It is assumed that the deposit has been divided into NB large blocks called macro-blocks. These
could represent push-backs, for example. The material in each macro-block can be divided into two
categories (possibly more): pure waste which is sent to the waste dump, and potential ore which
becomes ore if its grade is above the cut-off grade at the time of mining. Let Tot(j) be the total tonnage
of material in the jth block. Macro-blocks are composed of a finite number of selective mining units.
Definition of a mining sequence Q
Let Q be a matrix of size NT NB where NT is the number of time periods. The quantity Q(k,j) is the
amount to be mined from the jth block in the kth time period. Following Whittle and Whittle (2007),
it is assumed that if part of a block is extracted in a time period, pure waste and potential ore are
extracted pro rata. Let the cumulative quantity extracted from block j up to and including time k be
SQ(k,j):
k
SQ ^k, j h = /Q^l, j h
l =1
As the most important constraints on both open-pit and underground mining are accessibility
(precedence) constraints, the next step is to define the accessibility matrix A. This is a square NB
NB matrix which specifies the order in which macro-blocks may be mined:

A^ j1, j2h = )
1 if block j2 can only be mined after block j
0 otherwise
Level 0 blocks are those which can be mined immediately, that is, for which:
NB
/ A^ j1, j2h 0
j1 1
The remaining blocks can only be mined after the geometric accessibility constraints have been
met. If there are NL0 Level 0 blocks then there are (NB NL0) higher level blocks.
The array AC takes the value zero only if the jth block is accessible at time k:
Z NB
]
] /A (l, j) of k = 1
] l = 1
AC^k, j h = [
] NB
]
]l 1
/
Tot (l) - SQ (k - 1, l)A(l,j) k > 1

Feasible mining sequences \ =

In order to be a feasible mining sequence, a sequence Q must satisfy four constraints. The first ensures
that only accessible blocks are mined. The second limits the total amount that can be extracted from
a given block while the third limits the amount that can be extracted in a given time period. The
fourth constraint limits the amount that can be extracted from one block in a single time period.

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 255

M ARMSTRONG AND A GALLI

NB
/ AC^k, j h Q ^k, j h = 0 6k
j=1

NT
/ Q^k, jh # Tot^ jh
k=1

NB
0# / Q^k, j h # QM 6k k = 1, fNT
j =1

0 # Q^k, j h # Qmax^ j h 6j j = 1, fNB & 6k k = 1, fNT

where Qmax(j) be the maximum that could be mined from the jth block per time period and QM is
the maximum that can be extracted per time period. These two parameters could vary over time. To
illustrate the new concepts developed here, a simple example with only six macro-blocks is presented
in the appendix.
Break points
The key times in a sequence are when one or more new blocks can start to be mined because the
accessibility constraints are met for the first time. These times are called break points (because mining
in one set of blocks breaks off, allowing access to others or ending the extraction). As there are (NB
NL0) higher level blocks, there are NBP (NB NL0) break points. Let BP be the column vector
containing the NBP break points. Let SQS be an array of size NBP NB containing the cumulative
quantities mined from each block at the break points. This is called the sequence summary.
Properties of feasible mining sequences
Let (BP,SQS) be the set of feasible sequences having the break points BP and the sequence summary
SQS. It is easy to prove that (BP,SQS) is convex. Secondly if Qmax(j) and QM are constant over
time, (BP,SQS) is closed under certain types of row permutations. Let be a permutation that
affects only the rows in Q up to and including the first break point, or only the rows between two
break points. Let the Q be the array consisting of the permuted rows and the rest of the array. Q
is also a feasible mining sequence and so (BP,SQS) is closed under this type of row permutations.
Subsequence of rows after one break point and up to and including the next one can be handled
independently of previous subsequences provided that the sequence summary SQS remains the
same. This means that subsequences can be mixed and matched. It is planned to use this in future
work to improve feasible mining sequences.
Generating feasible mining sequences
An iterative procedure is used to generate a large number of feasible mining sequences. Starting with
the first time period, the accessible blocks are identified. These are put into a random order. Taking
each block j in turn in the randomised order, the maximum amount that can be extracted from that
block at that time k is computed:

Max extractable = min *Qmax (j) u - S ^k - 1, uj h, QM -

u , Tot (j)
Q / Q^k, jj h4
jj <uj
The first term is the maximum that can be extracted from that block at any time, the second is the
amount left in the block and the third is the maximum that can still be extracted at that time given
what has been allocated to be extracted from other blocks at that time. A random number u is drawn
between 0 and 1. Set

Q^k,uj h = max^u # Tot^ j h, Max extractable1h

and proceed to the next block in the randomised order. When all accessible blocks have been
considered or when the maximum possible QM has been extracted from that row, move on to the
next one. If only a small amount is left in a block (say 20 per cent of the total), all of it is extracted.

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 256

 A NEW APPROACH TO FLEXIBLE OPEN PIT OPTIMISATION AND SCHEDULING

Selecting the best sequence

A two-step procedure is used to select the best sequence, that is, the one that maximises one or more
economic criteria (usually the NPV) subject to the uncertainty on both the resources and the prices
and costs. Typically 100 geostatistical simulations and 1000 stochastic simulations of the commodity
price are generated. Suppose that 5000 feasible mining sequences have been generated. In the first
step the best 500 sequences are selected using a flat commodity price and a representative subset of
the geostatistical simulations. The latter can be selected by applying the scenario reduction procedure
developed by Armstrong, Ndiaye and Galli (2010) and Armstrong et al (2011). In the second step, the
subset of the best 500 sequences are tested more thoroughly. Three criteria are used:
1. the expected NPV,
2. the probability that the NPV was negative, and
3. the percentage of years when the cash-flow was negative.
These are computed for all 100 geostatistical simulations and all 1000 stochastic simulations of
prices, ie 100 000 combinations.
One reason for using a flat commodity price in the first step was that most mining companies use
a constant price in feasibility studies, so this makes it possible to compare the value obtained there
with that in the feasibility study.
TESTING THE METHOD
A synthetic example was constructed to test the proposed method. The key characteristics of the
orebody and the economic parameters were set up to mimic those of the Essakane Gold Mine in
Burkina Faso, because the updated feasibility study (IAMGOLD, 2009) for the mine was available
on the internet. Over the 9.5 year mine life its owners plan to mine 330 000 oz of gold per year at
a cut-off of 0.5 g/t. The capital expenditure was planned to be about $450 million. After analysing
their figures, the fixed cost was set at $50 million per year, and the variable costs at $1.20 per tonne
of material extracted from the pit and $10 per tonne for mining and processing ore.
Orebody model
The mineralised zone is a rectangular block 1050 m 500 m 120 m deep. The grid consists of
110 drill holes on a 100 m 50 m grid as shown in Figure 1. Each of the vertical drill holes contains
12 sections 10 m long which have been analysed for gold content. The ore in the central part has
higher grades. The data have an overall log-normal type distribution with a few high values.
Figure 2 presents a birds eye view of the lowest level of the orebody (above) and a vertical cross-
section (below) showing the mineralised material and the additional waste that has to be extracted

FIG 1 - Drill hole layout.

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 257

M ARMSTRONG AND A GALLI

to maintain a 45 pit slope. The macro-blocks are 150 m 100 m 40 m and contain 600 selective
mining units (smus), each 10 m 10 m 10 m. The orebody contains a total of 197 macro-blocks,
99 in the top level, 63 in the middle level and 35 in the lowest level.

FIG 2 - Birds eye view of the lowest level of the pit (above), and a vertical section show the mineralised blocks plus
the waste that must be extracted to ensure a 45 slope on walls (below).

Stochastic model for the price of gold

For simplicitys sake a geometric Brown motion with an initial price of $600 and a volatility of
20 per cent was used. Figure 3 shows 25 simulations of the gold price.

FIG 3 - Twenty of the 100 simulations of the gold price over a ten year period on weekly basis. The model was a geometric
Brownian motion with an initial price of $600 (as in the Essakane feasibility study) and a volatility of 20 per cent.

Generating 5000 feasible mining sequences

The first step was to generate 5000 feasible mining sequences. As there are a total of 197 macro-blocks
to be mined over ten years, the matrices Q and S will be 10 197 in size. As the mining equipment is
designed to extract the equivalent of 12 000 smus per year, the value of QM is set to 12 000. Because
of the geometry of the pit the 197 macro-blocks are not all the same size. As blocks are 40 m high,
waste panels have to be 40 m wide in order to respect the 45 stability angle. Three waste block sizes

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 258

 A NEW APPROACH TO FLEXIBLE OPEN PIT OPTIMISATION AND SCHEDULING

need to be considered depending on whether they are oriented EW or NS, or whether they are corner
blocks. See Figure 2. The EW waste blocks are 150 m 40 m 40 m and have a volume equivalent
to 240 smus, while the NS ones are 100 m 40 m 40 m and are equivalent to 160 smus. Lastly
corner blocks are 40 m 40 m 40 m and contain 64 smus. These give us the values of Tot(j) for the
different macro-blocks. For simplicity Qmax(j) was set to be equal to Tot(j).
Selecting the best of the 5000 feasible mining sequences
A two-stage procedure was used to select the best feasible mining sequence. In the first step, the
expected NPV was computed using a simplified approach: a flat gold price of $600 per oz and a subset
of 12 of the 100 geostatistical simulations. Figure 4 shows the 5000 values of the NPV arranged in
descending order from left to right. The top 500 sequences were selected for more detailed study.

FIG 4 - Expected NPV computed in the first step of the selection process using a flat gold price of $600 and a subset of
12 of the 100 geostatistical simulations. The 5000 values have been arranged in descending order from left to right.

In the second step three criteria were considered:

1. the expected NPV,
2. the probability that the NPV was negative, and
3. the number of years when the cash-flow was negative.
These were computed based on all 100 geostatistical simulations and all 1000 simulated price paths
for the gold price. Table 1 gives the values of these three criteria for the three best sequences. In this
case one sequence is better than the others according to all three criteria, especially the percentage
of years with negative cash flows which gives the management an idea of the risk involved.
TABLE 1
Values of the three criteria (expected NPV, probability of a negative cash flow and the proportion of years with a negative cash flow) for the three top ranking
feasible mining sequences.

Rank Expected NPV Probability of a negative NPV Proportion of years with neg cash flow
1 $322.57 M 28.3% 12.74%
2 $321.65 M 28.8% 15.68%
3 $321.52 M 28.5% 14.46%

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 259

M ARMSTRONG AND A GALLI

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The long-term objective is to use multi-stage programming with recourse in order to evaluate and
optimise mining projects subject to technical and financial uncertainty, that is, uncertainty on the
resources and the commodity prices and costs. One of the underlying principles in multi-stage
programming is to separate state variables such as prices and grades (which the decision maker
cannot change) from the control variables such as the amount to mine from each macro-block in
each time period, which are under the managements control. This is why mining sequences were
defined as being the quantities to be extracted without including grade attributes. Feasible mining
sequences are mining sequences that respect the accessibility constraints, and also the geometric
constraints on the amounts that can be extracted from any one block over time, or from all the active
blocks at a given time.
Having defined feasible mining sequences, their mathematical properties were defined. It was found
that natural breakpoints occur in the sequences when one set of blocks have been completely mined out,
thereby opening up access to others. It was discovered that families of sequences exist, and that they
are convex and closed under certain types of row permutation operations. Convexity is an advantage
when optimising. The closure property opens up the possibility of mixing and matching subsequences
of rows in the sequences. Another interesting property is that the sequences form branching families,
rather like the binomial and trinomial trees used to model prices in finance and in real options.
Further work is in progress to optimise the cut-off grade as well as the order in which the macro-
blocks are mined. Preliminary results indicate that mining should stop if the price drops too low for
too long. In that case the macro-blocks at the end of the sequence would simply not be mined. Put
in other words, the pit would be smaller. So these new feasible mining sequences provide a way of
optimising the mining sequence and the pit contour.
While this new method builds on existing work by others, it is radically different in several regards
and notably because it separates the state variables from the control variables. In our opinion this
will open up the way to optimising mining projects (underground as well as open pit) while taking
account of the inherent uncertainty on the resources and on the economic variables.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was carried out as part of a Consortium on the Application of Real Options in Mining.
We would like to thank the sponsors , Codelco (Chile) and two multinational mining groups, for their
support and encouragement during the consortium.

REFERENCES
Abdel Sabour, S A and Dimitrakopoulos, R, 2009. Accounting for joint ore supply, metal price and exchange
rate uncertainties in mine design, in Proceedings Orebody Mining and Strategic Mine Planning, pp 21-26,
(The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Armstrong, M, Galli, A and Ndiaye, A A, 2009. A case study on the impact of hedging against foreign
exchange risk and energy price risk, in Proceedings Orebody Modelling and Strategic Mine Planning,
pp 95-99 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Armstrong, M, Galli, A and Razanatsimba, R, 2011. Multi-Stage stochastic optimisation for managing
major production incidents, in Proceedings 35th APCOM Symposium 2011, pp 491-500 (The Australasian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Armstrong, M, Ndiaye, A A and Galli, A, 2010. Scenario reduction in mining, presented at the IAMG Annual
Meeting held in Budapest, Hungary, August 2010.
Armstrong, M, Ndiaye, A A, Razanatsimba, R and Galli, A, 2011. Scenario reduction in mining, accepted for
publication in Mathematical Geosciences.
Coleou, T, 1987. The two dimensional dynamic programming algorithms as used in the technical
parametrisation of reserves, Internal Note CGMM, Ecole des Mines de Paris, 17 p.
Dagdalen, K and Franois-Bongaron, D, 1982. Towards the complete double parameterization of recovered
reserves in open pit mining, in Proceedings 17th International APCOM Symposium, pp 288-296.
Dimitrakopoulos, R, Farelly, C T and Godoy, M, 2002. Moving forward from traditional optimisation: Grade
uncertainty and risk effects in open pit design, Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy,
Mining Technology, 111:A82-A88.

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 260

 A NEW APPROACH TO FLEXIBLE OPEN PIT OPTIMISATION AND SCHEDULING

Dimitrakopoulos, R, Martinez, L and Ramazan, S, 2007. Optimising open pit design with simulated
orebodies and Whittle Four-X A maximum upside/minimum downside approach, in Orebody Modelling
and Strategic Mine Planning, second edition, pp 201-206 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Dowd, P A, 1994. Risk assessment in reserve estimation and open-pit planning, Transactions of the Institutions
of Mining and Metallurgy, Mining Technology, 103:A148-154.
IAMGOLD, 2009. Updated feasibility study on the Essakane Gold Deposit (Burkina Faso)[online], March
2009. Available from: <http://www.iamgold.com/Theme/IAmGold/files/operations/43-101 Technical
Report Essakane Project March 2009.pdf>.
Franois-Bongaron, D and Guibal, D L, 1982. Algorithms for parameterizing reserves under different
geometrical constraints, in Proceedings 17th International APCOM Symposium, pp 297-309.
Franois-Bongaron, D and Guibal, D, 1984. Parameterization of optimal designs of an open-pit Beginning
a new phase of research, Trans Soc Mining Engineers of AIME, 274:1801-1805.
Kent, M, Peattie, R and Chamberlain, V, 2007. Incorporating grade uncertainty in the decision to expand
the main pit at the Navachab Gold Mine, Namibia, through the use of stochastic simulation, in Orebody
Mining and Strategic Mine Planning, second edition, pp 207-216 (The Australasian Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Matheron, G, 1975a. Technical parametrisation of reserves, Int Note CGMM, Ecole des Mines de paris, 54 p
(in French).
Matheron, G, 1975b. Parametrisation of the optimal pit contours, Int Note CGMM, Ecole des Mines de paris,
54 p (in French).
Matheron, G, 1975c. Additional information on the parametrisation of optimal pit contours, Internal Note
CGMM, Ecole des Mines de paris, 19 p (in French).
Menabde, M, Froyland, G, Stone, P and Yeates, G, 2007. Mining schedule optimisation for conditionally
simulated orebodies, in Orebody Modelling and Strategic Mine Planning, second edition, pp 353-357 (The
Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Nicolas, G D, Coward, S J, Armstrong, M and Galli, A, 2007. Integrated mine evaluation Implications
for mine management, in Orebody Modelling and Strategic Mine Planning, second edition, pp 9-19 (The
Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Rossi, M E, and van Brunt, B H, 1997. Optimising conditionally simulated orebodies with Whittle 4D,
Proceedings Optimising with Whittle Conference, Perth, pp 119-128.
Thwaites, A M, 1998. Assessment of geological uncertainty for a mining project, APCOM 98, Proceedings of
27th International Symposium on Computer Applications in the Minerals Industry, London, pp 396-404.
Whittle, G, 2007. Global asset optimisation, in Orebody Modelling and Strategic Mine Planning, second
edition, pp 331-336 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Whittle, J, 2009. The global optimiser works What next? In Proceedings Orebody Modelling and Strategic
Mine Planning, pp 3-5 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Whittle, J and Whittle, G, 2007. Global long-term optimisation of very large mining complexes, in Proceedings
APCOM 2007 33rd International Symposium on Application of Computers and Operations Research in
the Mineral industry, Santiago, pp 253-260.

APPENDIX 1 SIMPLIFIED EXAMPLE

Consider a case where there are six macro-blocks. Blocks 1, 2, 3 and 4 are accessible immediately.
Block No 5 can only be exploited after Blocks 1 and 2 have been mined, while Block No 6 can only be
exploited after Blocks 3 and 4. The accessibility matrix A is:

0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 0 0 1
A 
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 261

M ARMSTRONG AND A GALLI

Table A1.1 gives the total amount Tot(j) in each macro-block together with the maximum amount
Qmax(j) that can be mined from the jth block per time period. The matrix Q below is a feasible
mining sequence for producing all the material in ten time periods. An equivalent way of expressing
the mining sequence is by computing the cumulative quantities extracted up to and including any
time period. The matrix S gives this.

TABLE A1.1
Values of the parameters in the simplified example.

Macro-block j 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tot(j) 8 8 9 9 10 9
Qmax(j) 3 3 3 3 3 2

Time Block N q Block N q

Period >1 2 3 4 5 6@ >1 2 3 4 5 6@
1 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0
2 1 2 1 2 0 0 3 4 2 2 0 0

3 3 2 0 1 0 0 6 4 2 3 0 0

4 2 2 1 1 0 0 8 8 3 4 0 0
5 0 0 2 2 1 0 8 8 5 6 1 0
Q S
6 0 0 2 1 2 0 8 8 7 7 3 0
7 0 0 2 2 1 0 8 8 9 9 4 0 

8 0 0 0 0 2 3 8 8 9 9 6 3
9 0 0 0 0 2 3 8 8 9 9 8 6

10 0 0 0 0 2 3 8 8 9 9 10 9

Suppose that QM = 6, that is, at most 6 units can be produced from the pit in any time period.
Computing the row sums shows that the sequence respects this constraint.
As all the material from blocks 1 and 2 has been extracted by time period 4, mining could start on
Block 5 in the following period, but as the extraction of Blocks 3 and 4 was only completed in the
7th time period, work on Block 6 could only start in time period 8. In this case the breakpoints are
4, 7 and 10 (when all the material has been removed). The vector of the break points, BP, together
with the sequence summary matrix SQS are given below:

4 8 8 3 4 0 0
BP 7 SQS 8 8 9 9 4 0 

10 8 8 9 9 10 9

Row permutations
Consider two more mining sequences, Q2 and Q3, obtained by permuting rows 2 and 3 and then rows
4 and 5, respectively. Q2 is a feasible mining sequence but Q3 is not because it attempts to mine block
5 before blocks 1 and 2 have been fully mined out. Q2 permutes rows within the same subsequence;
Q3 attempts to permute them across a break point.

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 262

 A NEW APPROACH TO FLEXIBLE OPEN PIT OPTIMISATION AND SCHEDULING

Time Block N q Block N q

Period >1 2 3 4 5 6@ >1 2 3 4 5 6@
1 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0
2 3 2 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 0

3 1 2 1 2 0 0 3 2 0 1 0 0

4 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 0
5 0 0 2 2 1 0 2 2 1 1 0 0
Q2 Q3
6 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 2 1 2 0
7 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 

8 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 3
9 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 3

10 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 3

Linear combinations
This time only the first four rows are considered (ie rows in a subsequence between breakpoints)
from two feasible mining sequences from the same family (BP,SQS). In both cases the cumulative
amount to be extracted up to and including the 4th time period is [8 8 3 4 0 0]. This would be the
first row in the sequence summary SQS in both cases:

2 2 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0
1 2 1 2 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0

3 2 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 0

2 2 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0

Next take a linear combination of these two sets of rows (ie weighted average with
weights and such that + = 1). The sequence summary corresponding to row 4 is still
[8 8 3 4 0 0]. So the linear combination belongs to the same family.

2 2 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0
1 2 1 2 0
0 2 2 1 1 0 0
D  E
3 2 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 0

2 2 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0


2D  2 E 2D  2 E D  E E 0 0
D  2E 2D  2 E D  E 2D  E 0 0

3D  2 E 2D  2 E 0 D E 0 0

2D  2 E 2D  2 E D  E D E 0 0

This illustrates some of the interesting properties of these families of feasible mining sequences.

35TH APCOM SYMPOSIUM / WOLLONGONG, NSW, 24 - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011 263