Evaluation of Conventional Drill and Blast and Using a

Mechanical Roadheader to Excavate the Impumelelo Decline

Shaft

Kgomotso Mokoena (0614089 G)

Presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

degree
B.Sc. Eng. (Mining Engineering)

In the School of Mining Engineering

Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment
University of the Witwatersrand

July 2010
Declaration:
I declare that this report is my own, unaided work. I have read the University Policy on
Plagiarism and hereby confirm that no plagiarism exists in this report. I also confirm that
there is no copying and that there is no copyrighting infringement. I willingly submit to any
investigation in this regard by the School of Mining Engineering and I undertake to abide by
the decision of any such investigation.

____________________ __July 2010__

Signature Date

2
 PROJECT REPORT SUMMARY
Evaluation of Conventional Drill and Blast and Using a
Mechanical Roadheader to Excavate the Impumelelo Decline
Shaft

Kgomotso Mokoena (0614089 G)

Supervisor(s): Johan Steyn

School: Mining Engineering

University: University of the Witwatersrand

Degree: B.Sc. Eng. (Mining Engineering)

The project study at hand aimed at evaluating the conventional drill and blast method and
the use of a mechanical roadheader to excavate a decline shaft for a replacement mine,
Impumelelo mine. The evaluation focused on the safety provided through applying either
method, the cost implications and time frame which the decline shaft can be excavated. The
reason for the project study is to enable Sasol Mining to achieve its objective of supplying
coal to its counterparts and customers. Production from the replacement mine is expected in
2014 and thus essential to excavate the decline shaft in a short time frame, importantly
without compromising safety.

The evaluation was done by looking into the design of the decline shaft thus understanding
the required final profile of the decline shaft. The design evaluation of the decline shaft
provided for the support framework which both methods must guarantee. Furthermore, the
implementation of conventional drill and blast and the mechanical roadheader provided the
operational limitations and abilities of the two thus allowed for evaluation of the costs and
time frame of the project study.

The results obtained show the inability of the roadheader to cut rock strengths above 120
MPa. As for the conventional drilling and blasting, advance rate in the decline shaft is limited
to 3.6m/day. Such limitations forced the combination of the two methods to be used in the
decline shaft. Therefore 30% of the decline shaft applies conventional drilling and blasting
through the dolerite sills. As a result of combining the two methods the costs (operating
3
costs, labour costs and capital) of the project is high but then a safer operation is achieved
and with the operation expected to take under 5 months.

4
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Expressions of gratitude are extended to the following people who great influences in this
project report:

1. Johan Steyn:

Vacation work supervisor and Project Manager for Impumelelo who assisted in providing the
required information and recommending the right people to contact with regard to the project
report.

2. Matome Mohale:

In assisting with the Thubelisha decline shaft visits.

3. Andre Cloete:

Of Read, Swatman & Voigt (Pty) Ltd (RSV) in assisting with the understanding of the project
and provision of information which help conclude the project study.

4. Lelana Prinsloo and Martin Steenkamp:

Rock Engineers at Brandspruit Main Shaft

5. Willie Smit:

Stone work section shiftboss

6. Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd.

5
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 12

1.1. Mine Background and General Information 12

1.2. Project Background 13

1.3. Problem Statement 14

1.4. Objectives of the Project Study 14

1.5. Scope of the Project Study 14

1.6. Methodology 15

2. RESULTS FROM LITERATURE STUDY 16

2.1. Geology and Geotechnical Information 16

2.2. Safety Measures 16

2.2.1. Safety Project Plan 16

2.3. Drilling and Blasting in Tunnels 17

2.4. Selection of a Roadheader 19

3. OBSERVATION, MEASUREMENTS, DATA COLLECTION 22

3.1. Geology and Geotechnical Information of Impumelelo 22

3.2. Design Evaluation 24

3.2.1. Sinking Process 24

3.3. Method Evaluation 28

3.3.1. Implementing the Roadheader 28

3.3.2. Implementing Conventional Drill and Blast 30

3.4. Financial Survey 30

3.4.1. Operating Costs 31

3.4.2. Labour Costs 31

3.4.3. Capital Requirement 32

3.5. Time Schedule 32

6
4. ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF RESEARCH / INVESTIGATION OF RESULTS 34

4.1. Distinctions of the Roadheader and Drill and Blast method 34

4.2. Combination of Roadheader and Conventional Drill and Blast 35

4.2.1. Implementation 35

4.2.2. Financial Survey 35

4.2.3. Time Schedule 36

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 37

REFERENCES 38

APPENDICES 40

7
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Estimated UCS for expected rock types for Impumelelo 21

Table 3.1 Q index and RMR 22

Table 3.2 Personnel required for each method applied 32

Table 4.1 Advantage of combining the two methods 34

Table 4.2 Personnel required after combining the two methods 36

8
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Brandspruit mine replaced to the 250Mt Block 2 North 12

Figure 2.2 ICR (Instant Cutting Rate) vs. UCS for sedimentary rocks and transverse
roadheaders 21

Figure 3.1 RMR and Q index against unsupported span 23

Figure 3.2 RMR and Q index against FOS 23

Figure 3.3 Bench box-cut excavated to stable rock 25

Figure 3.4 High wall box-cut excavated to stable rock at Mooiplaat mine 26

Figure 3.5 Master Arch 27

Figure 3.6 Section of the decline shaft from Master Arch 27

9
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

SCS Sasol Coal Supply

RQD Rock Quality Designation

RMR Rock Mass Rating

ICR Instantaneous Cutting Rate

MHSA Mine Health and Safety Act

kg/m 3 Density of explosives

MPa Unit Rock Strength

UCS Uniaxial Compressive Strength

Q index Rock Quality Index

FOS Factor of Safety

m3 Volume of rock excavated

m3/hr Volume of rock excavated or moved per hour

m/hr Linear decline shaft advance per hour

m/s Pick cutting rate

FCT Flexible Conveyor Train

10
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Rock strata near surface 40

Appendix B Geology through the decline shaft 41

Appendix C Post sinking excavation required 42

Appendix D Roadheader specifications 43

Appendix E Wedge blast design 44

11
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Mine Background and General Information
Impumelelo mine is located south west of the Secunda area in Mpumalanga and is
established as a replacement mine for Brandspruit mine. The mine is a green-field
programme, initiated by Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd, currently comprising of feasibility projects of
sinking three shafts, namely, the service shaft, ventilation shaft and the decline shaft to a
depth of about 220m.

The establishment of the replacement mine is for Sasol Mining to be able to achieve its
mandate to supply coal to its counterparts, Sasol Synfuels, Sasol Infrachem factory and
Sasol Coal Supply (SCS) and keep exporting coal 1. Means of sustainable supply of coal will
be achieved through Impumelelo as the Brandspruit mine reserves get depleted. Figure 1.1
shows the replacement of Brandspruit mine to Impumelelo mine reserves.

Figure 1.1 Brandspruit mine replaced to the 250Mt Block 2 North

12
Impumelelo mine is one of the Sasol Mining mines which will also utilize the board and pillar
and NeVid pillar extraction methods to extract the coal. According to Impumelelo mine’s
project manager Johan Steyn, two coal seams which are separated by 30 metres of Karoo
rocks will be mined simultaneously with the top seam being 2 years ahead in production of
the bottom seam. Impumelelo mine will be expected to be in operations up until about the
year 2050 2. The production target set for the mine is 10 million tonnages per year with the
initial production stage commencing in 2014 while full production is expected within four
years from then 1.

1.2. Project Background

Sasol Mining as a whole produces about 40 million tons per year 1. In order to maintain such
levels of production a replacement mine is developed prior to the depletion of pre-existing
mine. Construction stage for Impumelelo will commence in the year 2011, one of the initial
steps is to establish a decline shaft to host the coal conveyance system 2.

The use of decline shafts in South African underground mines is common. All of the Sasol
mines use such shaft infrastructure to transport the coal from underground to surface coal
handling points 2.

Excavations of decline shafts at Sasol Mining are usually done using the conventional Drill
and Blast method and this is done through the employment of a contractor 2. The current
replacement mine, Thubelisha mine, is using the Drill and Blast Method for its decline shaft
and about 2m/day of linear advance is achieved in the decline shaft 3. The new idea is to
move away from drill and blast and use a mechanical roadheader instead and their use in
South Africa is not a common trend 3.

The idea is to find safer and quicker ways of excavating decline shafts so as to establish
mine transport network easily at Sasol Mining. Therefore looking at the implementation of a
mechanical roadheader against the conventional method in decline shaft is essential.

The selected dimensions of the decline shaft are a result of the need to use two conveyor
belt systems. According to Johan Steyn, this allows for continued transportation if one
conveyor breaks down 2.

13
1.3. Problem Statement
The project study at hand was to investigate and evaluate which method is the most
effective for sinking a decline shaft between a conventional Drill and Blast method, the use
of a mechanical roadheader or a combination of the two for Sasol’s replacement mine
Impumelelo, considering the main factors; safety, cost and duration of the project.

1.4. Objectives of the Project Study

The objective of this study is to determine the most effective method of sinking the decline
shaft, drill and blast or using a mechanical roadheader, through comparing the two methods
according to safety, time frame and costs. Another aspect is to investigate and consider the
possibility of combining the two methods in order to meet the project’s objectives. Issues that
should assist with the comparison of the methods would be:

 Background studies relating to the project study.

 Evaluation of the design and specifications of the decline shaft.

 Evaluation of the implementation of each method.

 Financial implications

 Time frame in implementing each method.

Safety measures in the design and implementation will be assessed. The implementation of
each method should look at aspects such as cutting or blasting cycle, advance, limitations,
delays, ventilation, etc. Conclusions made will be from the analysis made from comparing
the methods outline in the problem statement.

1.5. Scope of the Project Study

The project study is limited to:

 The evaluating the methods according to the excavating of the decline shaft.
Methods evaluated are Drill and Blast method, the use of a roadheader and possible
combination of the methods.

 Comparing the methods according to safety, cost and duration.

14
  The excavation of the decline shaft at 17o as given by the project manager Johan
Steyn. The decline shaft can be excavated at different angles other than 17 o, which
can prove beneficial for either method used but the project study focuses on the set
parameters.

1.6. Methodology
The investigative work done on the project study, with regard to background, decline shaft
designs, technical operations and implementation, in order to fulfil the set objectives is done
through:

 Interviews

Interviews were carried out with Sasol personnel and contractors who are knowledgeable in
the subjects concerning the project at hand.

 Literature study

Published works relating to the project are used to gain background on the processes
involved.

Analysis of report work done on roadheaders is also assessed.

 Site visits

A thorough understanding and ability for progress is achieved through observations made
during site visits.

The visits to the current Thubelisha replacement mine.

Visits to the old Brandspruit decline shafts.

Visit to the Coal Africa’s Mooiplat mine for AM75 Voest Alpine-Sandvik roadheader
applications.

15
2. RESULTS FROM LITERATURE STUDY
2.1. Geology and Geotechnical Information
Collection of geotechnical information can be through a number of methods such as
borehole drilling by percussion or rotary core, testpitting, large diameter hole augering 4. The
benefits in applying such methods is the “indication of soil profile, depth to bedrock, depth of
weathering, rock quality and water table depth”4.

As for box-cut or portals it is essential to know the top soil depth and properties and this is
best achieved by using testpit or auger hole (invasive techniques) 4. Core samples can
provide information on the rock strength, weathering and jointing, core recovery and Rock
Quality Designation (RQD) 4. Therefore the rock mass quality can be determined using
Barton’s Q or Bieniawski’s RMR (Rock Mass Rating) 4. This thus helps to determine “support
required in the box-cut sidewall, portal brow or tunnel hangingwall” 4.

A study carried out shows the relationship between geotechnical data and the mechanical
raodheader 5. From the measurements taken consistency in the roadheader operation is
hard to achieve as the RQD and water ingress can have an impact on the Instantaneous
Cutting Rate (ICR) 5. The water ingress from within the strata makes the rock softer thus
increase in ICR is expected as compare to dry sections of the rock strata 5. Therefore the
water in rock strata can insure high advance rate in strong rocks. Therefore, when using a
mechanical roadheader the advance rate can be great but not consistent.

An increase in rock compressive strength and specific energy reduces the ICR 5. But the
water ingress supports the ICR which may increase because of the weakening of rock
strength due to water5.

2.2. Safety Measures

2.2.1. Safety Project Plan

The Mine Health and Safety Act (MHSA) compels Sasol to have safety measures such as
health and safety policy and codes of practice in place in order to protect anyone who is
doing work for them 6. Sasol prefers to use contractors to develop their shafts. Their role is
to administer the project. In granting a contractor the project, the contractor is required to
produce a safety project plan which is according to the Sasol Project Guidelines to Safety
Management 7. Some of the criteria which the contractor must comply with in the safety
project plan are7:
16
  Risk Assessment

This entails the methodology in which risk assessment will be carried out. This is done under
three methods, that is, Base Line, Continuous and Issue Base Risk Assessment. This
means that when work is done on a certain system, risk which affects that system (base line)
or risk within the system (issue base) must be identified and recorded and continuously
monitor.

 Legal Appointments

Legal appointment documents from all people working on the project (managers,
supervisors, operators, et cetera) must be made available. This ensures all employees on
the site are qualified and capable.

 Site Establishment

Site establishment refers to standards regarding the handling of waste and site security
systems.

 Procedures and Task Observations

All activities involved in the project must have standard procedures and task assessments
and must be in print. Such activities are the investigation of accidents, site clearances and
task observation on employees.

 Equipment Inspections

All equipment used must be registered and approved by an appointed qualified employee.

 Administration Documents

Required documents for operation must be signed from the Health and Safety Policy to the
daily site diary.

The above is to assure Sasol that the employed contractor(s) will be able to execute the
project according to legal safety requirements. Background on the contractor’s work conduct
and safety standards, including their track record on accidents and fatalities during
execution, is vital to Sasol.

The project is expected to be conducted by the contractor up to the point of commissioning

and handing over. Sasol safety representative shall work on site along with the contractor
ensuring that safety measures and monitoring is continuous.

17
2.3. Drilling and Blasting in Tunnels
Tunnel excavation by drill and blast methods is a common practice. Face drilling can be
done with the use of jackhammers and drill jumbos. Jackhammers can “offer economy,
flexibility and ability to drill a wide range of rock strength”8. Mostly importantly, jackhammers
are useful when it come to large cross section tunnels and can achieve short drilling cycle
time 8.

Drill bits are tools that wear out and the operational drilling life of drill bits is after 120 to
300m of drilling 8. Therefore drill bits are a cost factor and depend on the type of rock drilled.
There are a number of blasthole designs such as drag round, burn round and wedge round
8
. When drilling large cross section tunnels the wedge round is mostly suitable for the work 8.
Cross sectional areas of about 25m 2 can be loaded with explosive amounts of about 4 to 5
kg/m 3 for high rock strength and this would require 60 to 70 drilled blast holes 8.

Blasting of tunnel ends or faces result in blast fumes being generated and therefore must be
removed. Smoke clearance is “the time to allow dilution to a level for men to work and
clearance of blasting fumes from the tunnel face and to allow adequate visibility of the
freshly exposed unsupported ground” 8. This is safety measure which is essential in blasting
operations. The procedure for blasting must be according to explosive regulations and
included in the Sasol Project Guidelines to Safety Management. Ventilation system in the
tunnel must be able to remove blast fumes, preferably exhaust ventilation to avoid contact of
blast fumes and tunnel workers, and usually smoke clearance can take 10 minutes 8.

2.4. Selection of a Roadheader

The reasons relevant to having a mechanized system (mechanical roadheader) with regards
to the excavation of the decline shaft is to have a “faster development; faster mining; safer
mining; mining with smaller underground crews; work under protectively supported roofs ;
development of more productive crews”9.

The selection of a roadheader involves approaching a manufacturer who will provide a

roadheader which can be utilized in sinking the Impumelelo decline shaft. The roadheader
parameters must be able to handle the conditions of the Impumelelo project, that is, to
excavate the decline shaft according to the design requirements.

Only Sandvik mining and construction has been approached with regard to providing a
roadheader for the project. Sandvik produces roadheaders and in selecting and modifying

18
the roadheader, Sandvik imust be provided with geo-technical information for Impumelelo in
order to assist in the selection of the roadheader 1.

According to the paper, “Analytical hierarchy process for selection of roadheaders”, the first
factor which must be assessed is the rock’s cuttability/excavability and this depends on: the
10
rock physical, mechanical and mass properties . Selection of a roadheader is according to
the mechanical operations of the Roadheader. A selection criterion is chosen according to
the machine’s parameter which cannot be modified afterwards 10. That is, once the machine
is built such parameters cannot be change. Thus in general the technical criteria for the
roadheader will involve looking at 10:

a. Applicable max torque

The preferred Roadheader machine should have more torque to cut harder rocks. The more
power is provide the torque increase and the rock can be cut. The power should then be
increased to the point of rock excavability.

b. Applicable max boom force

The boom forces consist of the vertical, horizontal and axial forces and the higher these
forces are the better. The boom forces enhance the cutting made by the Roadheader. In
cases of longitudinal cutting head type of roadheaders the axial force must be at its
maximum since the other forces are equal.

c. Cutting capacity (cutting rate)

This describes the amount of rock cut in a given time or period. Cutting capacity provides for
how effective the Roadheader is. The higher the cutting rate the lower the excavation costs.

d. Stability states

Stability is achieved with the use of horizontal and vertical hydraulic cylinders and is
affected by the width of the tunnel excavated and if the roadheader works under wet and
soft ground.

e. Maximum cutting width and height

The size of the tunnel section is greater than minimum cutting range of the roadheader. This
allows for the roadheader to cut the require profile from the same position thus reducing the
time spent moving the roadheader. An increase in cutting rate can be achieved.

19
f. Travelling speed

The preferred roadheader should have high travelling speeds. This is to reduce time taken to
move the roadheader around.

g. Grounding pressure

This is pressure due to the weight over the base area of the roadheader. For wet and soft
rock conditions the grounding pressure must be kept low to prevent sinking of the
roadheader.

h. Maximum working gradient

The selected roadheader must be able to work in the required decline shaft gradients.

In addition other considerable parameters can be:

i. Support work system

The roadheader must be complete with an onboard roofbolter. This allows for an increase in
the sinking rate as it cuts off the delay of bringing in another machine to support the area.

j. Roadheader dimensions

The excavated dimensions of the tunnel must be greater than that of the roadheader. The
roadheader must be able to fit and manoeuvre in the selected tunnel width and height.

Also noted on the paper is that basic problems resulting from not selecting the right
roadheader are difficulties in cutting, loading, stability of machine, face and ground
conditions and design of the decline 10.

The major aspect is that the selected roadheader must be able to cut the different rock types
which will be encountered. Looking at a past geo-technical information report done by Sasol,
the estimated Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS) for Impumelelo are shown on table 2.1.

20
 11
Table 2.1 Estimated UCS for expected rock types for Impumelelo .

Expected Rock Types Estimated UCS – (MPa)

Siltstone 80

Carbonaceous Shale 70

Sandstone 100

Coal 60

Dolerite sill 250

The cutting rate of a roadheaders depends on the type of rock it cuts. A brief consultation
with Sandvik points out that roadheader can cut rock strength up to 120 MPa economically.
Figure 2.2 shows a representation of sedimentary rock with the roadheader, this is
necessary as the Secunda area is of the Karoo basin. The graph shows the decline of the
cutting rate with increase in UCS and that the Roadheader is limited to about 120 MPa.
Therefore the dolerite intrusion, shown in the geo-technical information on the table above, is
a major limitation in implementing the roadheader.

12
Figure 2.2 ICR (Instant Cutting Rate) vs. UCS for sedimentary rocks and transverse roadheaders

21
3. OBSERVATIONS, MEASUREMENTS, DATA COLLECTION
RESULTS FROM PROJECT STUDY

3.1. Geology and Geotechnical Information of Impumelelo

The geology of Impumelelo consists of stratification such as top soil, dolerite sills which are
spheroidally, weathered and hard, sandstone, carbonaceous siltstone, coal and tillite and
Appendix A shows the rock strata near surface. A major fault cuts through the decline shaft
causing a vertical displacement effect on the rock strata this results in extensive excavation
through the lower dolerite sill (Appendix B).

The two dolerite sills are near surface and separated by the Karoo rocks and the decline
shaft must cut through the two. As a result of the major fault the decline shaft length of the
two dolerite sills which must be excavated is about 30% of the whole decline shaft. The
Karoo rock and the coal needed to be excavated is 70% of the decline shaft.

The Q index rating of the rock strata is shown in Table 3.1. The Rock Mass Rating (RMR) is
given by equation: RMR = 9lnQ + 44. The width of the shaft or span is 7m thus using the Q
index and RMR the stability of the decline shaft can be determined.

Table 3.1 Q index and RMR

Rock strata Q index RMR

Interbedded sandstone and siltstone 6 - 17 60 - 69
Sandstone 11 - 22 66 - 72
Carbanaceous siltstone 3-9 54 - 64
Weathered dolerite 1-4 44 - 56
Hard dolerite 4 - 10 56 - 65
Coal 1-3 54 - 44

The RMR of the rock strata in the Impumelelo area ranges from 44 to 72. An RMR of 44
shows a stability period of days if the span is unsupported with a Factor of Safety (FOS) of
about 0.9 as shown in Figure 3.1 and 3.2. Also the RMR of 72 has a stability period of years
if unsupported with a FOS of about 1.25.

22
 13
Figure 3.1 RMR and Q index against unsupported span

13
Figure 3.2 RMR and Q index against FOS

23
3.2. Design Evaluation
Evaluating the design of the decline shaft provides for the expected amount of excavation
which is required from the chosen methods. The decline shaft sinking undergoes a number
of steps which are described in the sinking process. The final parameters of the decline shaft
can be achieved once the geo-technical investigation report for Impumelelo decline shaft is
made available. The dimensions of the decline shaft to be sunk are: a 7m x 3m face profile,
decline dip of 17o, vertical depth of 220m.

3.2.1. Sinking Process

The development of the decline shaft is done in a number of successive steps. These steps
are the key aspects of sinking a decline shaft, which are:

 The Box-cut/Portal

 Arch Support

 Collar Construction

 The Actual Sinking

 Post Sink Development

The support work and thus safety in each of the above steps differs and this is due to the
depth, rock type and the required excavated profile of the decline shaft. Each step of the
sinking outlines the nature of support work required.

a. Box-cut/Portal

The box-cut is the initial step of the execution of the project and is established on high level
ground of the mining boundary, this is to avoid flooding the decline shaft during heavy rain.
The box-cut aims to set up a platform for the constructing the arch. The depth of the box-cut
can be limited to the depth of stable or hard rock. The depth excavated depends on the geo-
technical investigation done prior to the start of the project and differs for every decline shaft.

The box-cut is done with the use of the trucks and loading equipment such as a back hoe
excavator. The rock mass removed must be allocated a dumping area near site. The box-cut
can be done in two ways which depends of the stability of the site chosen. That is by

24
benches or either establishing a high wall straight from surface as shown in Figure 3.3 and
3.4.

The construction of box-cut using benches requires the bench gradient to be at about 15 o.
This is a safety consideration since the angle depends on the angle of repose of the top rock
removed. The benches are covered with wire mesh in order to avoid any rock material falling
to the bottom of the box-cut. The bottom bench is lined with shotcrete for stability. A wall
made of timber stick and wooden board can be constructed at the bottom bench so as to
prevent the collapse of the upper benches from running into the bottom of the box-cut.
Fencing around the box-cut prevents any incident of any vehicle, machinery or persons
accidentally falling into the box-cut as shown in Figure 3.3.

14
Figure 3.3 Bench box-cut excavated to stable rock

When the box-cut is done using the high wall, the stable rock should be near surface. The
sidewalls are supported with wire mesh, shotcrete and support cables. Fence can be erected
to prevent any vehicle from driving into the portal.

25
Figure 3.4 High wall box-cut excavated to stable rock at Mooiplaat mine

The high wall box-cut is ideal for Impumelelo. The geotechnical data shows stable rock
(dolerite) which is near surface and the method requires less amount of rock excavation than
the bench box-cut which requires benches down to stable rock.

b. Master Arch

The master arch is a support structure made of system of rock bolts and concrete cast as
shown on Figure 3.5. This is to achieve a stable opening into the decline shaft.

26
 15
Figure 3.5 Master Arch

c. Actual Sinking

The decline shaft is excavated to a final profile of 7m x 3m which from the Master arch is an
excavation to a vertical depth of 220m at 17o that will be a decline length of about 760m.
Volume that needs to be excavated is about 15 969m 3. Therefore volume of the dolerite sill
which must be excavated is 4790.7m 3 (30% of the decline shaft). Support work includes wire
mesh with a meter spaced row of rock bolts and double straps where necessary.

15
Figure 3.6 Section of the decline shaft from Master Arch

27
d. Post Sinking

Post sinking is the required excavation which must be done after the actual decline sink.
This includes the Bunker, the connection or access tunnel of the bottom of the Bunker and
the No.2 seam and also the needed excavation into the No.2 seam to connect with the
ventilation shaft thus establishing the ventilation circuit. The post sinking excavation is
shown in annex B.

3.3. Method Evaluation

Evaluation of each method is essential in showing the application of the methods to the
decline shaft. Method evaluation provides for a comparison of the roadheader and
conventional drill and blast applications and thus allows for the best method to be
determined. With the implementation or cycle of each method the relevant services (water
and electricity supply) to each operation is reflected.

3.3.1. Implementing the Roadheader

3.3.1.1. Roadheader Selected

In selecting the roadheader geo-technical information and the parameters of the decline
shaft of Impumelelo is provided to Sandvik. The features of the roadheader determined by
Sandvik should relate to the general technical criteria for the roadheader discussed in
section 2.4.

Threfore roadheader assumed for the decline shaft by Sandvik is the Sandvik Roadheader
MR340. The roadheader has a cutting motor power of 200 kW with a power supply demand
of 630 kVA. The cutting height and width of the roadheader is 4.87m and 7.4m respectively.
Dimensions of the roadheader are 2.8m width and 10.3m length weighing at 52t. The
roadheader can operated at gradients of 20o which is suitable for the decline shaft project.
Full description is shown in annex C.

The roadheader cutting motor power is limited to 120 MPa of rock strength 3. The Karoo has
sandstone layers which can have rock strength up to 100 MPa and the performance of the
roadheader in the sandstone can be estimated through equation 12:

28
 ICR = 27.511 x e (0.0023xRPI) (m 3/hr)

Where RPI = P x W/UCS

W - The weight of the roadheader (tonnes)

P - Power of the cutter motor (kW)

Therefore the Instantaneous Cutting Rate (ICR) is:

ICR = 27.511 x e (0.0023x104)

= 35.3 m3/hr

Considering the dimensions of the decline shaft, a 21m 2 tunnel, therefore an advance rate of
1.7m/hr can be achieved. At rock strength lesser than the sandstone higher advances can
be achieved.

3.3.1.2. Cutting Cycle

Cutting – Loading – Support

The cutting cycle involves cutting of the rock using the roadheader, loading of broken rock
and support on the roof and sidewall. Assume a normal shift time worked is 9 hours per shift
at two shifts a day.

The mechanical tools used by the roadheader to cut the different rock types are called picks.
The cutter head consists of such picks which cut at a rate of 2.3m/s. The metres advance
per shift depends on the cutting availability of roadheader, that is, cycle time available when
excluding the loading and support time. The roadheader can cut a width of 7.4m and height
of 4.87m, therefore the decline shaft profile can be cut with the roadheader in one position
thus reducing tramming delay times. The roadheader should require a trained operator to
effectively utilize the machine. Predicted cutting rate are discussed in the above sub section.

The broken rock is loaded onto the roadheader apron which is connected to an onboard
conveyor with a capacity of 400m 3/hr. From the roadheader the broken rock can be loaded
onto a Flexible Conveyor Train (FCT) which will load onto the feeder breaker and
transported out of the decline shaft by the main conveyor belt. The crushed rock should be
dump on an allocated dump site. The FCT is positioned between the main conveyor belt and
roadheader and it contributes to a continuous system.

29
The selected roadheader consists of an onboard roofbolt machine and this allows for support
work to be done at a faster rate. Therefore the cutting availability of the roadheader can be
increased. The roadheader consist of a dust suppression system and thus water needs to be
pumped out of the decline shaft during operation.

3.3.2. Implementing Conventional Drill and Blast

3.3.2.1. Blast Cycle

Drilling – Charging – Blasting – Lashing – Support

The blast cycle involves drilling of the face, charging of explosives and blasting of the drilled
rock, lashing of blasted rock and support of the roof and sidewall.

The drilling is done using jackhammers which allows for blastholes of 2m in length. The use
of jackhammers is common thus experience in the use of jackhammers can allow for more
efficient drilling. The drill pattern used for large face profile is the wedge blast design shown
in Annex D.

The wedge blast design requires about 68 charged blastholes with a single blasthole
uncharged. Charging must be according to procedure along with handling of explosives. The
blast can achieve a success rate of 90% therefore achieving an advance of approximately
4m per day. Smoke clearance period is required after every blast.

Lashing of the blasted rock is done using track-mounted loader which can tip sideways into
the feeder breaker and thus conveying the crush rock to surface. The track-mounted loader
can operate at dip angles of 17o.

Roof and sidewall support is done using a roofbolt machine. The support work is according
to the sinking process and up to the drilling range.

3.4. Financial Survey and Time Schedule

The financial survey reflects the cost implication of applying each method. The major
difference in cost between using the roadheader or the conventional drill and blast are the
operating costs, labour and capital. Design Evaluation phase above provides for the required
support installations within the decline shaft. Therefore cost implications with regard to
support are the same for both methods. Surface preparation costs are also the same for

30
both methods. In the following subsections costs are estimated according to previous Sasol
projects.

3.4.1. Operating Costs

Operating costs are divided as services and supplies, whereby services are power supply,
water supply and ventilation and supplies are roofbolts and resin, wire mesh, w-straps,
explosives, picks and drill bits.

Power is supplied to equipments and machines and common to both methods is the
conveyor belt and feeder breaker. The roadheader method requires a roadheader and an
FCT while the use of the drill and blast methods requires jackhammers, a track-mounted
loader (diesel powered at around R8/litre) and a roofbolt machine. The roadheader requires
630 kVA supplied through a transformer which is extremely higher than the equipment used
in drill and blast method.

Water supply needed in operating the roadheader is exceeds that of jackhammers due to the
amount of water required to suppress the dust generated by the roadheader during cutting.

Supplies regarding support are common for both methods. The conventional method uses
explosive to break the rock. The wedge blast design with 69 blastholes drilled, 2m advance
at 90% success rate, that is, over 422 blasts over the whole decline shaft. Blasting costs
include detonators and blasting wire. The operational drill life of a drill bit is an average of
210m of drilling depending on the rock type drilled 8. Meters drilled per blast are 138m
therefore about 2 drill bits per blast used. Another supply need is of cutting picks and their
wear rate depends on the rock cut, thus high rate wear expected when cutting dolerite.

3.4.2. Labour

Labour used for using the roadheader or conventional drill and blast comprises of
supervisors, team leaders, teams and safety personnel. For a three shift per day operation
with two blasting or cutting shifts and one maintenance shift, Table 3.2 shows the number of
employees needed in the decline shaft operations. Maintenance for the roadheader is
provided by the roadheader supplier and thus an expense.

31
Table 3.2 Personnel required for each method applied

Roadheader Drill and Blast

Supervisor(s) 2 2
Team leader(s) 3 3
Teams
Roofbolt operator 4
Track-mounted loader 2
Blasting 6
Drillers 4
Artisan 3 3
General worker 4 4
Roadheader operator 2
FCT operator 2
Safety personnel 3 3
Total 19 31

Labour costs for conventional drill and blast are high as compared to using the roadheader
due to the number of personnel required for the decline shaft excavation.

3.4.3. Capital

The use of a roadheader or conventional drill and blast require the same machines such as
the conveyor belt and feeder breaker, trucks and loaders for surface preparation. Different
major machine used are in drill and blast method, that is, jackhammers, roofbolt machine
and Track-mounted loader. The capital for applying the roadheader must assist in acquiring
a roadheader and a FCT. The roadheader must be purchase and not rented and thus allows
for further use in other future replacement mine operations. The cost of a roadheader ranges
from R21 million to R26 million 3. Capital requirement for using the roadheader is higher than
using the conventional drill and blast method.

3.5. Time Schedule

Time schedule for the decline shaft relate to the other shafts which will be sunk (ventilation
and service shaft). The decline shaft is in the critical path of the three shafts and thus must
be completed at the earliest time possible. The early completion allows for the ventilation
circuit to be established. The time schedule for the decline shaft must be ahead of the
ventilation. The project is scheduled to start in 2011.

Drilling and blasting the decline shaft is limited to the length of the drill steel and the number
of blast which can be achieve a day. The drill steel is 2m and the charging and blasting is
32
done twice a day. Blast success rate is 90% thus the advance per day which is possible is
3.6m/day. Therefore the decline shaft should be excavated in 211 days, with the decline
shaft length of 760m.

The roadheader can achieve 1.7m/hr linear advance in Karoo rocks of the decline shaft.
70% of the decline shaft is Karoo rock therefore 532m of cutting. Assuming a machine
utilization of 50%; taking into account delays, tramming and roofbolting, the roadheader
should achieve 7.65m/shift in a 9hr shift. Therefore the Karoo rocks can be cut in 35 days.

The roadheader is limited to cutting soft rocks and when cutting through the dolerite the
advance rate drops and pick wear rate increases. This results in longer time frame of cutting
through the dolerite.

33
4. ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF RESEARCH /
INVESTIGATION RESULTS

4.1. Distinctions of the Roadheader and Drill and Blast method

The roadheader can achieve advance rate which are higher than conventional drill and blast
but is unable to effectively cut rocks above 120 MPa of rock strength 3. For Conventional drill
and blast the Karoo rocks and dolerite sill can be blasted or broken down but the advance
rate is limited to blasthole length achieve per blast.

Using only the roadheader in the excavation of the whole decline shaft will result in an
extremely high rate of pick wear in hard rock with extremely reduced rates of advance. The
Karoo rocks can be cut at high rates; therefore the time frame of the project can be
substantial or extensive since the major delay will result in the cutting of the dolerite sill. High
capital for the roadheader is required thus increasing the costs inclusive of operating, labour
and maintenance costs. With regards to safety, less number of workers is exposed to risk as
compared to conventional drill and blast thus using roadheader is advantageous.

The use of a conventional drill and blast method for the whole decline shaft results in an
extensive time frame for the project due to limited advance rate. The advance rate relies on
the experience of the jackhammer operators and workers charging the explosives. The cost
involved from using drill and blast can be lesser than or similar to using the roadheader for
the whole decline shaft. This is due to the more number of equipment (roofbolt machine and
track-mounted loader) being used in drill and blast and the increase in cost for using the
roadheader in harder rock.

The roadheader if used for the whole decline provides for a high cost, more safer and
extensive project and the conventional drill and blast provides for a low cost, less safe and
extensive project. The combination of the two methods can provide for a high cost but safer
and less extensive project as described in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Advantage of combining the two methods

Roadheader Drill and Blast Combination

Safety High low High

Costs High low High

Time Frame High High Low

34
Other distinctions, is that the roadheader is advantageous in the development needed to
make a ventilation circuit between the ventilation shaft and the decline. The roadheader can
provides for a better excavation profile than conventional drill and blast thus more stability in
the decline shaft is achieved.

4.2. Combination of Roadheader and Conventional Drill and Blast

The possibility of using the roadheader in combination with Conventional drill and blast
depends on the extent of both methods’ disadvantages and constraints mentioned above.
The combination of the two methods is a result of the limitation of the roadheader not been
able to cut 120 MPa of rock strength. Also the limitation in advancement as a result of drilled
blasthole length.

4.2.1. Implementation

The dolerite sill is near surface thus the conventional drill and blast method can be initially
used. The cutting cycle for each method would apply but the roadheader would be ideal for
excavating the Karoo rocks and the dolerite sills excavated using conventional drill and blast.
Once the excavation through the dolerite sills is done operations throughout the project can
completed using the roadheader.

The operation allows for high risk exposure of personnel to injuries in the beginning of the
project due to increase number of personnel and machinery in the decline shaft, but safety
an exposure to risk decreases as the project advances.

4.2.2. Financial Survey

Combination of the roadheader and conventional drill and blast mean that the costs for the
project will be high. The capital for the above mentioned machinery for both methods is
necessary in combining the two. Operating costs using drill and blast for the decline shaft will
be for 30% of the decline excavation. The operating costs for drill and blast become minimal
compare to using drill and blast for the whole decline shaft.

The number of people employed increase as shown in Table 4.2 and therefore the labour
cost increase. Once the dolerite sills are drilled and blasted the number of personnel drops

35
and only the crew needed for the roadheader continues into the Karoo rocks thus the labour
costs are moderate when implementing the two methods.

Table 4.2 Personnel required after combining the two methods

Combination
Supervisor(s) 2
Team leader(s) 3
Teams
Roofbolt operator 4
Track-mounted loader 4
Blasting 6
Drillers 4
Artisan 3
General worker 4
Roadheader operator 2
FCT operator 2
Safety personnel 3
total 37

4.2.3. Time Schedule

The number of shifts utilized per day for drilling and blasting or cutting is 2 shift/day (9hr
shifts). The advancement of the roadheader through the Karoo rocks is determined in
section 3.5 as 35 days. The drilling and blasting through the dolerite sills is 30% of the
decline shaft at a constant 3.6m/day. Therefore the duration of excavating the decline shaft
should take 64 days. The total time frame of the decline shaft is 99 days. Assuming the there
is only 23 working days per month, the decline shaft should be completed on the 5 th month
of the start of the project excluding site preparation.

36
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions and recommendations with regard to the project study:

 The geotechnical information provided favours the use of a mechanical roadheader

in combination with conventional drill and blast for the Impumelelo decline shaft. This
is necessary to meet the objectives of safety and duration of the project.

 The initial phase of establishing a box-cut or portal can be easily achieve by using
the high wall box-cut which is drilled and blasted since the dolerite sill is near surface.

 The combined system can achieve the highest advance rate in the decline shaft with
the application of conventional drill and blast in hard rock (dolerite sills) and the
roadheader in the Karoo rocks (1.7m/hr). 30% of the decline shaft is through the
dolerite sill as a result of the vertical displacement caused by the major fault.

 The combination of the two methods will result in high cost but the critical path of the
programme can be achieved since full production is expected in 2014.

 The major decisive costs involved in the project are the operating costs, labour costs
and capital for the required machinery.

 The evaluation of the roadheader and the conventional drill and blast method in
sinking the decline shaft provides for a system whereby both methods are relied
upon. This is because of the combination of the two best reflects on the safety, cost
and time frame of the project.

37
REFERENCES
1. Creamer M (editor). (2009) Sasol to build three new replacement coal mines. Mining
weekly, vol. 15 no 41, pg 24, 28

2. Steyn, J. (2009/2010) Personal Communication.

3. Cloete, A. (2009/2010) Personal Communication.

4. Puchner, RA. (2009) GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF DECLINE SHAFT

PORTALS. http://www.saimm.co.za/Conferences/ShaftSinking2009/03a-Puchner.pdf.
The South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Shaft Sinker and Mining
Contractors Conference 2009. Accessed 11/12/09.

5. Bilgin, N, Dincer, T, Copur, H and Erdogan, M. (2004) Some geological and geotechnical
factors affecting the performance of a roadheader in an inclined tunnel.
http://www2.itu.edu.tr/~bilgin/paper03.pdf. Science Direct. Accessed 11/12/09.

6. President’s Office. NO. 29 OF 1996: MINE HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT, 1996. Chapter
2. http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=70869. Accessed on 16/07/09.

7. Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd. PROJECT GUIDELINES TO SAFETY MANAGEMENT (manual).

Prepared by Jan Ferreira.

8. Whittaker, BN and Frith, RC. TUNNELLING – DESIGN, STABILITY AND

CONSTRUCTION. The Institution of Mining and Metallurgy (IMM), pg.94-102

9. Ataei, M, Khalokakaei, R, and Hossieni, M. (2009) Determination of coal mine

mechanization using fuzzy logic.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B9861-4WD3284-3-
1&_cdi=59113&_user=1378557&_pii=S1674526409600284&_orig=search&_coverDate=
03%2F31%2F2009&_sk=999809997&view=c&wchp=dGLbVtb-
zSkzS&md5=6c2b3ea856f050d0e04c77226de2dde2&ie=/sdarticle.pdf. Mining Science
and Technology, vol. 19 Accessed 15/04/10

10. O. Acaroglu, H. Ergin and S. Eskikaya. (2006) Analytical hierarchy process for selection
of roadheaders. http://www.saimm.co.za/Journal/v106n08p569.pdf . Journal of South
African Institute of Mining Metallurgy, vol. 106. Accessed 11/12/09

11. Michael Pavlakis & Associates cc. (2008) REPORT TO GOBA CONSULTING
ENGINEERS ON A GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE FEASIBILITY STUDY
OF THE PROPOSED ROOIPOORT SHAFT DEVELOPMENT – REF 3012 – JULY,
2008, pdf file.
12. Copur, H, Ozdemir, L and Rostami, J. Roadheader applications in mining and tunneling
industries. http://mining.mines.edu/emi/papers/roadheader/roadheader6.pdf. Accessed
11/12/09

13. Stacey, TR. (2010) MINN4010 ROCK ENGINEERING. University of the Witwatersrand,
pg. 108

38
14. Strydon, A. (2009) Safety and innovation play key role for shaft sinking company.
http://images.google.co.za/imgres?imgurl=http://us-
cdn.creamermedia.co.za/assets/articles/images/resized/75967_resized_thubelishaboxcu
t.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.miningweekly.com/article/safety-and-innovation-plays-key-
role-for-shaft-sinking-company-2009-10-
23&usg=__Y2udi6vfx3UjX1wMhEtPnMJO4sw=&h=213&w=320&sz=22&hl=en&start=1&
um=1&tbnid=m6-nNM92g-
NxDM:&tbnh=79&tbnw=118&prev=/images%3Fq%3DProfile%2Bof%2Bdecline%2Bshaft
%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1. Mining Weekly.

15. Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd. DECLINE SHAFT THE ARCH SET SUPPORT DETAILS.

39
APPENDICES
Appendix A

40
Appendix B

41
Appendix C

42
Appendix D

43
Appendix E

44
45