Development of an Underground Haulage System Evaluation Tool for Feasibility Studies

  • M. Dammers
  • L. Barnewold
  • A. Merchiers
  • P. Jeschke
  • M. Pütz
Review Article


The mining industry faces many difficult challenges, for example, lower ore grades, smaller and deeper deposits, and longer transportation distances. In the past, there have been remarkable innovations in both equipment and the types of mining methods for which it is used, which have resulted in economies of scale. This has led to an increased use of bulk mining methods, like sublevel and block caving, which has increased productivity and reduced costs. Haulage alone plays a major role. Current haulage techniques are a significant cost driver, which account for between 15 and 30% of the overall capital investment (capex) in a mine and are an increasingly part of the operating costs (opex). The paper introduces a simulation tool of main haulage system in underground mining. Therefore, performances and the costs of the three most common underground main haulage systems, rail, truck, and conveyor, are calculated using a developed modeling tool. The tool was applied and validated in a case study carried out with the LKAB Kiruna Mine in northern Sweden.


Project evaluation Underground rail haulage systems Deterministic simulation 



The study was completed by the Institute of Mineral Resources Engineering (MRE) of RWTH Aachen University in cooperation with Schalker Eisenhütte GmbH and LKAB. Their approval to publish this work is gratefully acknowledged.

Conflict of Interest Statement

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    AMC Consultants Pty Ltd (2015) Underground Haulage Benchmark: Study on underground haulage systems for Schalker Eisenhuette Maschinenfabrik GmbH. AMC Consultants Pty Ltd, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bailey M, Olsson B, Glassock C (2005) “Underground Ore Handling Systems,” Hoist and haul 2005, Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, ed., PerthGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergstroem R, Sterner T, Nordstroem T (2011) “Heavy haul 1365 meter underground,” IHHA 2011, International Heavy Haul Association, ed.,, CalgaryGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bloss M (2013) Increasing throughput at Olympic Dam by effective management of the mine bottleneck. Min Technol 118(1):33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bloss M, Harvey P, Grant D, Routley C (2011) “Underground ore movement,” SME Mining Engineering Handbook, P. Darling, ed., Englewood, SME, pp. 1271–1294Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goldratt EM, Cox J (2004) The goal: a process of ongoing improvement. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    InfoMine Inc. (2012) Mine and mill equipment costs: an estimator’s guide. In: Spokane Valley. CostMine, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moore P (2012) Mine locomotion. IM 8(3):88–96Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pratt AGL (2008) “Mine haulage - options and the process of choice,” Proceedings of the 10th Underground Operators Conference, Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, ed., MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pratt AGL, Ellen PJ (2005) “Selection of an Ore Haulage System for Telfer Deeps,” Hoist and haul 2005, Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, ed., PerthGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schalke Eisenhütte Maschinenfabrik GmbH (2017) “Internal rail equipment data: production and cost figures,”Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smith GP, Taylor J, Anderson DC, Marsh AML (2007) Project valuation, capital investment and strategic alignment - tools and techniques at Anglo Platinum. J South Afr Inst Min Metall 107(1):67–74Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Dammers
    • 1
  • L. Barnewold
    • 2
  • A. Merchiers
    • 3
  • P. Jeschke
    • 4
  • M. Pütz
    • 5
  1. 1.AachenGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Mineral Resources EngineeringRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  3. 3.Sustainable Production and Investment PlanningBochum University of Applied ScienceBochumGermany
  4. 4.Wayss & Freytag Ingenieurbau AGFrankfurtGermany
  5. 5.Schalker Eisenhütte Maschinenfabrik GmbHGelsenkirchenGermany

Personalised recommendations