“Hi Michele. I’m working on an ore model and is it ever complex! Anyway, I’m thinking about producing a new table for Cu-equivalent grades. I was thinking about creating a field in the assay table with a formula to calculate the equivalents based on fluctuating metal prices. Got any ideas?”
That’s from my friend, Queen of Excel. What’s she’s talking about is inserting a formula into Excel so that the Cu-values are automatically changed corresponding to the daily market value she enters into the spreadsheet. Got me to thinking about GIS and the mining industry. We really don’t utilize our GIS software very much for the abilities that it offers — dynamic changes corresponding to non-static data for example, like a changing market value.
GIS software “looks at” other data and makes a visual map. That’s mostly what we use it for in mining. One of the most dynamic abilities of using GIS is to point or look at data that changes. Example is a spreadsheet of drill holes, including proposed holes. Proposed holes probably have (at the least) an easting, northing, a unique ID, and maybe that’s it. A GIS map will show the proposed holes locations as, say, little black crosses. Then, when the pad is built a technician enters some code into the spreadsheet that shows that task has been completed and the little black cross would change to a little blue cross. Then, when a rig gets on the pad and starts drilling, another person enters that code for that status and the symbol changes from whatever a blue cross to a green drill hole symbol. Then, as the hole is completed another code is entered into the same spreadsheet and so on including status of when the surveyor arrives, etc. etc. following the data as the samples get sent to lab and results come back – the color or symbol changes automatically. This is how GIS is usually used in mining.
Point being: no one actually edits or changes a GIS map – once the defaults have been created the GIS software makes the visual changes to correspond to changes in the status of the hole. So, a boss doesn’t need to track down a geo to ask him what the status is – he can look at the map on his computer as it changes instantaneously.
I wonder if the same thing could happen if the assay values in a spreadsheet were pointed to the daily market value? You could get a dynamic map (sections, ideally) that would change as the market went up or down. Would you want that? Every time you went to digitize a section – the values would change slightly. BUT – if the mining modeling software automatically made a wireframe to correspond to intercepts down hole (cut-off grades for example), then you could let a computer do the work. You would see your ore body swell (and shrink) as prices fluctuated.
Reply from a geostatistician I know (”geostatics” George calls them) about this idea of using a dynamic link to non-static data using GIS:
“I don’t think it’s a good idea at the database level when there is no volume or tonnage assigned anyway. Maybe it would be useful in ore control if you’re feeding a mill. Usually, we (geostatics) use long term averages so the daily changes in market value are useless. I think it would cause a lot of headaches to have a changing wireframe or ore body that fluctuates. “
Just a thought (I’m not gonna do it) but, what if? That’s what I like about my pal. She has these creative thoughts all the time like, what if you didn’t have to drill? What if you could just laser a beam to intercept programmed values, like petroleum tools do downhole for resistivity, porosity, density and you could at least pick tops or find water without any surface disturbance until you defined an area of interest. What if that was possible? And so on.
{ 2 } Comments
What I would like to see are real-time changes to the NSR values on drillhole intersections on plans and sections, although perhaps on a monthly or as-needed basis, as drastic changes can play havoc with short-term and long-term planning and scheduling. Maybe something akin to the “incremental ore” idea to take advantage of mineralization on the ore / non-ore boundary.
You are right, Isobel.
The incremental ore theory would be useful to engineers who have to make a cut off for an estimated resource of an undeveloped property but can you imagine if this was used for an operating mine? The Ore Control Staff would not only have to go out and flag the shot muck based on the daily NSR but I am pretty sure they’d also have to defend what they did over and over again to critics up the ladder on a daily basis.
Let’s say we allow real-time technology into the exploration and development side of mining and keep a more static model (based on short term and long term planning) in an operating facility.
Outside of the one geostatistician, I haven’t heard too much input as to this idea but I also realize it may be too technical at this point in time for a more general audience. You are the person I was trying to communicate with when I wrote this blog. Thanks for your contribution.
Post a Comment