Construction of a Geometallurgical Model, How it should Interact with the Plant Model and the Importance of Final Reconciliation

"The concept of geometallurgy has been extensively mentioned and used in the mining industry in the past years. However, each mining firm has a different understanding of what geometallurgy means, and its actual value varies significantly from site to site. Even in the case of properly constructed geometallurgical models, it is fairly common to observe a sub-utilization of the model in the actual operation, because of its low production forecasting capability on the short term. This disconnect between the geometallurgical model and operations is typically caused by a lack of tuning between the original model and the actual plant operation. Also, the absence of procedures and other standards for reconciliation, affects the confidence and the predictive quality of the model. The geometallurgical model should consist of three different levels: (I) adequate capture of information, (II) data analysis and modelling, and (III) development of the block model. Once the geometallurgical in-situ model is finalized, a process model should be developed of the plant at industrial scale, in order to scale up the in-situ geometallurgical parameters from their base or standard condition, to the actual operating reality of the plant. Finally, the stage of reconciliation will close this process, assuring that any deviation between the geometallurgical model and the actual plant operation is not due to lack of tuning, but due to operational issues such as unattended maintenance requirements or poor process control in the operation. The methodology as described in this paper has been applied at several large mining sites in Chile. The paper presents the characteristics of the proposed methodology, and quantitatively describes its benefits with examples from actual operations.INTRODUCTIONIt probably is fair to say that geometallurgy became widely used in greenfield projects in the Andes region during the mining boom of the 90’s, when massive orebodies were studied and developed, and upfront metallurgical characterisation proved its use for accurate economic evaluation including estimates of plant throughput, energy consumption, final product quality and overall recovery. A few examples of such greenfield studies for concentrator plants in the 90’s are Minera Los Pelambres (Antofagasta Minerals, Chile), Minera Escondida, Laguna Seca (BHP Billiton, Chile), and Rio Blanco (then Montterrico Metals, Peru). Large size hydrometallurgical operations such as Cerro Colorado, Quebrada Blanca and Lomas Bayas (all in Chile), also recognised early on the importance and value of relating ore mineralogy, geological characterisation and metallurgical behaviour."