12th U.S.

/North American Mine Ventilation Symposium 2008 – Wallace (ed)

ISBN 978-0-615-20009-5

Analyzing ventilation requirements and the utilization efficiency

of the Kidd Creek mine ventilation system
S. Hardcastle, C. Kocsis & G. Li
Natural Resources Canada, CANMET-MMSL, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

K. Hortin
Hatch Associates, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
(Formerly with Xstrata Copper, Timmins, Ontario, Canada)

ABSTRACT: Kidd Creek mine has recently completed upgrades of its primary ventilation systems enabling it to
maintain a delivery of 1200 m3/s to continue mining ore zones extending to over 3000 m below surface.
Following these upgrades the mine initiated a multi-stage review of their ventilation usage. The focus of these
reviews, ranged from a brainstorming session of invited experts, through an evaluation of production plans to a
detailed analysis of production data to determine if the ventilation system could be run more efficiently, thereby
reducing the mine’s power consumption and associated operating costs. The initial review identified 1500 kW of
installed fan power that could be eliminated from the primary ventilation system. The benefits of the subsequent
analyses, so far, are not as measurable. The second and third analyses, respectively using long range production
plan data and historic production data to determine ventilation requirements based upon diesel equipment, did not
agree. Both were shown to have limitations, the future based analysis underestimating, and the historical analysis
overestimating the requirements. Regardless of the failings of each method, important outcomes were achieved
from the detailed analyses, namely, the ability for a mine to meet a forward analysis prediction of airflow depends
on its ability to adjust the ventilation to meet the dynamic nature of the mining process. Also, to minimize total
ventilation requirements, a mine must regularly redistribute its airflow; this not only reduces the total volume
requirement but also increases the variability of the delivered flows which can provide further operational savings.
Since the detailed analyses, the Kidd Creek mine has implemented a more frequent ventilation review and
redistribution procedure; consequently, it now operates with an average delivery of 930 m3/s, which is 23% lower
than in 2005 at the start of the review process.

1 Introduction depth, the mine has commissioned a 7.5 MWR bulk

cooling plant on surface to supplement the natural cooling
The Kidd Creek mine is primarily a copper/zinc operation capacity of a “cold stope”, afforded by Canada’s winter
located near Timmins, Ontario, Canada. The mine started climate which provides approximately an extra 8.5 MWR.
in 1966 with an open pit before going underground. It has As a consequence of the ventilation system upgrades,
extended through Mines #1, #2, #3 and now Mine D the mine’s total potential installed motor power in its
towards 3000 m progressively mining steeply dipping primary and booster fans has reached 13,600 kW; this, if
massive, banded and bedded sulphide deposits. Currently, ran at full capacity, would require considerable energy and
lowest production location is Level 88 but the ramp incur significant cost.
development extends to Level 91. The mine currently
produces >7000 tpd through a blasthole stoping method
combined with a pastefill system while employing a fleet 2 Ventilation Reviews
of 200 production and support diesel powered equipment
In 2005, the mine initiated a three stage review of the
with a total rated power of >25,000 kW (34,000 Hp).
efficiency of its ventilation system. This was considered
To facilitate the movement of the mining region to
necessary in an attempt to reduce the mine’s current and
greater depths, the mine has undergone various upgrades of
future power consumption and the associated operating
its ventilation system. These include a change over from a
costs especially in consideration of their incremental
Push-Pull system to exhaust only with the installation of
growth as the mining depth increases. The initial review
two 2600 kW surface fans (Hortin and Sedlacek, 2002),
was predominantly a brainstorming exercise with invited
and more recently the addition of two 3000 kW booster
expertise which focused on how the system could be
fans 1800 m below the surface. The combined effect of all
improved. The general consensus was that the mine could
these upgrades was to increase the mine’s ventilation
greatly increase the efficiency of its ventilation system
capacity for the current mining region to 1220 m³/s.
through better air management and potentially, some level
Furthermore, due to the added thermal load of mining at

27
of ventilation automation; however, any major change
would require detailed analysis. One outcome of this
review was the confirmation that the current routing of air
within the mine needed to be addressed. For example, why
was the mine using a fan assisted delivery of air through its
#2 Shaft, a high resistance route, as opposed to alternate
fan-less lower resistance intake routes? The function of the
mine’s South Ventilation raise (SVR) and its fan,
exhausting 290 m3/s of air purely from Southern extent of
the upper mine prior to serving any production activity,
such as diluting diesel exhaust, was also questioned. These
simple suggestions were subsequently addressed and the
mine removed 1500 kW, over 10%, of the installed fan
motor power from its primary delivery system. However,
greater improvements would require more in-depth studies
to determine more precisely the actual needs of the mine.
The second and third reviews, started to study the
spatial ventilation requirements, and their frequency for the
current and future production areas. These were then
compared against the mine’s standard practice, namely
ventilating potentially all of its thirty-six possibly active
levels in #3 Mine and Mine D.
3 Ventilation Design Criteria
Providing adequate ventilation to meet all production and
support demands is a constant challenge for any ventilation
department. Front-line workers often believe their mine has
insufficient air to meet requirements, in some instances this
can be true due to conservative design; however, in most
instances it is more likely to be a consequence of the
airflow’s distribution failing to keep up with ever changing
and variable demands of production.
3.1 “Rule-of-Thumb” Design
Where explosive gasses, radiation and heat are not an
issue, there are various “rules-of-thumb” to determine the
amount of ventilation required in a mine. These can be
based individually or in combination upon such parameters
as the number of workers, the tonnage, the size of the
diesel fleet and the volume of diesel fuel consumed.
In general these can give a good first order estimation
of the ventilation requirements, such as at the conceptual
stage, or can be used as a comparative measure of the
efficiency of similar operations. However, when it comes
to the final design stage, these estimates may fall short of
what is actually required due to the “operational”
characteristics of the mine.
In Canada, the design of most mechanized metal mine
ventilation systems using diesel power production
equipment, such as Kidd Creek, are based upon a volume
requirement per rated engine power. In Ontario, the
statutory requirement is 0.06 m3/s per kW diesel engine
power (100 cfm/bhp) (Ontario Ministry of Labour, 1994).
Here, potential design underestimations can include:
• Ignoring the leakage especially in long auxiliary
duct systems to the point of application.
28
• Insufficient airflow allowances to prevent
recirculation within auxiliary systems.
• Assuming near zero flow through inactive
unsealed areas.
• Failing to provide sufficient air to temporarily
non-productive areas sufficient for support
activities.
3.2 Designing for Maximum Production Flexibility
Ideally, mines do not want their production flexibility to be
limited by the amount of ventilation available. Regardless
of the type of mine, production at any location will only be
for a certain period of time. Consequently, a mine always
has potential production locations ready to start and mines
should have some reserve capacity, or redundancy, in their
ventilation supply to accommodate the change-over.
However, the frequency with which the production
locations change, the changing ventilation demands of the
different production activities, and how often the
ventilation is redistributed all have a very significant
impact on the reserve capacity required by a mine.
Providing air continuously to every possibly active
location and at the maximum potential requirement for
each location would be unrealistic, but determining the
optimum volume remains problematic.
In a multi-level metal mine, such as Kidd Creek, a
ventilation system may supply an air volume in excess of
what is actually required for the activity taking place.
However, as will be shown, whether the volume is
conservative or excessive depends upon the available
“production” data to determine ventilation requirements
and how that data is interpreted.
3.3 Detailed Ventilation Requirement Analyses
Most mines should have two sources of data that can be
used for more detailed determination of ventilation
requirements. These are:
• Long-term production plans such as an 18-month,
month by month schedule of activity; and
• historical data of daily equipment activity
recorded by mines personnel.
4 Predictive Future Based Analysis – Iteration #1
Planning data can give a good indication of what the
ventilation requirements could be under “ideal” production
and ventilation distribution conditions, however, it may not
show whether it is feasible or achievable.
4.1 Iteration #1 – First Order Future Determination
This analysis for Levels 46.1 through to 88 of the Kidd
Creek mine was performed in 2005 by Genivar using the
18-month plan from Jan-06 to Jun-07. It was then
extrapolated through to the year 2018 using an “airflow to
tonnage” ratio, plus general leakage and additions for the
ramp haulage of ore at the final stages of the mine’s life.
Throughout it was assumed that the mine would eliminate
the truck haulage of backfill.
In this analysis, three basic minimum ventilation
conditions, generically termed in this paper as Production,
Drilling and Miscellaneous, were derived based upon
potential diesel powered equipment activity as follows:
1. Production - 25.2 m3/s, sufficient for the
combined operation of the mine’s standard
production scooptram and a shotcrete hauler, were
allocated to a level for development, production,
backfilling (when considered) or rehabilitation
activities.
2. Drilling - 11.1 m3/s, enough for a Cubex drill and
small service tractor, were allocated to a drilling
level.
3. Miscellaneous - 14.5 m3/s, adequate for the mine’s
standard scooptram to enter, were allocated to a
level with minimum planned activity.
No individual allocation was given to an inactive level;
however, an additional global allowance of 20% was used
to account for leakage into these temporarily inactive areas
and old parts of the mine.
Based upon these allocations, and without diesel based
haulage of backfill material, the minimum required volume
was predicted for each month of the 18-month plan giving
an average minimum of 612 m3/s, and a highest minimum
of 641 m3/s. Based upon these values and extrapolating
through to the year 2018 using an airflow to tonnage ratio,
the highest ventilation demand was predicted to be a
minimum of 916 m3/s for the years 2013 & 2014.
These predictions would tend to indicate that the mine
should have more than sufficient ventilation delivery
capacity and that it should be able to operate more
efficiently at a lower volume than currently supplied.
4.2 Iteration #2 – Future Determination Revised by
Operational Logistics
Due to the disparity between the preceding predictive
analysis and actual practice, the ventilation design
assumptions and minimum requirements were re-evaluated
in regard to their operational applicability. Here, one major
consideration was the need to avoid uncontrolled
recirculation within the auxiliary ventilation systems when
only one large diesel unit was operating on a level. To
avoid recirculation, an oversupply would be required at the
auxiliary fan. Here, it was assumed that a minimum
velocity of 0.25 m/s should be maintained flowing past the
fan. Based on typical airway dimensions an oversupply of
6.2 m3/s would be required with the following results:
1. Increasing the production allocation,
accommodating two scooptrams, to 29.0 m3/s. In
the previous analysis, very few levels required
more than the Production minimum of 25.2 m3/s
allocated for one scooptram plus a shotcrete
hauler; however, experience and historical data
showed otherwise. More than one scooptram on a
level was a regular occurrence.
29
2. Raising the drilling allocation to 14.0 m3/s. In the
original allocation the service vehicle requirement
was insufficient to avoid recirculation within an
auxiliary ventilation system.
3. Increasing the miscellaneous minimum to 20.7
m3/s, this provides an oversupply at the auxiliary
fan and again prevents recirculation.
Furthermore, considering that the mining levels are
continually switching from active to non-active states, the
need for access and the potential differential pressures to
induce leakage in the ventilation system, “zero” flow is
unrealistic. A more practical non-active allowance would
be a minimum flow of 3.5 m3/s, as sufficient for most of
the mine’s small service vehicles.
Table 1 provides a sample of the airflow allocation
from these two iterations plus a summary for Levels 46.1
through 88 for the Kidd Creek Mine. For 2006, the net
result of the new minimum requirements for active levels
and new leakage allocations on non-active levels was to
raise the predicted average and maximum demands
respectively to 722 and 765 m3/s, an increase of 21-23.5%,
Upon considering the changes in mine’s annual production
tonnage, the highest minimum required in 2013/2014 now
becomes 1093 m3/s, 19% higher.
These new predictions still tend to indicate that the
mine should have more than sufficient ventilation delivery
capacity and that it should be able to operate at a lower
volume than currently supplied.
5 Retrospective Activity Based Analyses
One of the major failings of the “future” based analyses is
that they use idealistic production data generalized for a
specific time-span. In this instance, it was initially month
by month for 18-months of 2006/07, and then extrapolated
year by year through to 2018. This would be sufficient for
airflow determination if the ventilation was continually
adjusted to match production activity. In reality, the
scheduling of production and redistribution of supporting
ventilation is rarely this simple or timely.
At Kidd Creek, at the end of every shift, the activity
that has taken place is entered into an electronic database
referred to as SIMS. This data details what production/
primary diesel equipment was operating, its location(s) and
for how long. This data, exportable to standard spreadsheet
software, can be summarized through pivot table analyses.
Consequently, it can generate retrospective air volume
requirements based upon engine size and the number of
vehicles reporting to each level.
Similar to the preceding analysis, these demands can be
qualified to prevent recirculation within the auxiliary
ventilation systems depending upon the number and type
of diesel vehicles reported. These airflow requirements can
then be averaged for various time-spans, which could
represent the frequency with which the ventilation is
redistributed. The following sections consider the airflow
requirements assuming the ventilation is redistributed
Table 1. An example of the airflow allocations per level in the lower mine based on an 18-month production plan before and
after allowances for leakage and to avoid recirculation

May-06

Aug-06

Nov-06
Mar-06

Dec-06
Apr-06
Feb-06

Sep-06

Oct-06
Jun-06
Jan-06

Jul-06
Level
18-month plan based predcition - Iteration #1
46.1 Closed 11.1 11.1 11.1
Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed Closed
46 25.2 11.1 25.2 15 15 15 15 Closed 11.1 11.1 Closed 15
47 Closed Closed 25.2 11.1 15 15 11.1 11.1 15 25.2 25.2 25.2
48 25.2 25.2 25.2 15 15 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 15 11.1
87 Closed Closed Closed 25.225.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 15 25.2 25.2
88 15 15 15 25.225.2 35 35 25.2 15 25.2 40 35
Total Volume 466.5 462.0 583.7 591.7
612.4 623.0 632.5 598.9 598.7 629.8 610.8 608.0
# Active Levels 21 23 28 28 27 29 30 27 27 29 25 28
2006 Summary Average 584.8 Maximum 632.5 Minimum 462.0
18-month plan based predcition - Iteration #2
(shaded areas denote substitutions to account for leakage and avoid recirculation with auxiliary systems)
46.1 3.5 14 14 14 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
46 29 14 29 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.7 3.5 14 14 3.5 20.7
47 3.5 3.5 29 20.7 14 20.7 14 14 20.7 29 29 29
48 29 29 29 20.7 20.7 29 29 29 29 29 20.7 14
87 3.5 3.5 3.5 29 29 29 29 29 29 20.7 29 29
88 20.7 20.7 20.7 29 29 35 35 29 20.7 29 40 35
Total Volume 599.9 602.7 724.7 734.2 752.4 765.2 762.7 735.8 737.5 764.5 738.4 748
Increase 80.9 95.2 109.5 107.5 108.5 114.2 105.7 101.9 103.8 106.7 85.6 108.5
2006 Summary Average 722.2 % Change 23.5% Maximum 765.2 % Change 21.0% Minimum 599.9 % Change 29.8%

Table 2. Sample of the lower mine airflow requirements per level by month derived from historical production/equipment
deployment data with and without diesel place backfill (shaded areas denote substitutions for minimum flow or to prevent
recirculation within auxiliary ventilation systems)

Requirement/ Backfill Haulage with Diesel Powered Equipment Grand

Month 2005-06 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 56 57 83 84 86 87 88 Total
January 21.4 25.7 3.5 38.5 53.0 18.6 58.6 3.5 35.3 20.7 71.8 84.5 21.1 3.5 3.5 1314.8
February 6.9 3.5 18.6 61.4 50.9 14.0 59.9 48.4 36.0 20.7 86.9 79.1 74.1 20.7 3.5 1477.5
March 27.9 22.4 18.6 61.0 50.9 31.6 27.5 18.6 20.7 3.5 69.5 44.1 87.4 20.7 3.5 1559.3
Activity Count 13 12 13 15 12 11 11 10 12 8 15 14 15 14 8 max 15
Average 16.4 15.0 19.6 34.2 27.1 14.5 22.5 18.3 20.7 12.1 40.0 36.8 48.0 44.6 50.1 1260.6
Maximum 32.1 25.7 37.9 61.4 53.0 31.6 59.9 48.4 36.0 23.1 86.9 84.5 101.7 85.2 122.6 1559.3
Minumum 3.5 3.5 3.5 16.1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 7.4 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5 968.2
Requirement/ Non-diesel based Backfill Grand
Month 2005-06 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 56 57 83 84 86 87 88 Total
January 21.4 25.7 3.5 3.5 23.6 18.6 46.2 3.5 35.3 14.7 40.6 70.0 21.1 3.5 3.5 1005.3
February 6.9 3.5 18.6 35.9 20.7 14.0 21.4 22.9 26.9 4.0 46.3 64.6 59.6 3.5 3.5 1088.4
March 27.9 18.6 18.6 23.6 20.7 31.6 14.7 18.6 20.7 24.8 55.0 29.6 72.9 3.5 3.5 1125.2
Activity Count 13 12 12 13 11 8 11 9 12 8 14 13 15 11 8 max 15
Average 16.4 14.8 18.1 18.9 13.8 11.3 15.8 13.7 18.9 11.0 28.7 30.2 40.2 31.0 37.0 983.4
Maximum 32.1 25.7 37.9 35.9 26.9 31.6 46.2 26.9 35.3 24.8 55.0 70.0 72.9 70.7 85.3 1163.6
Minumum 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5 807.6

monthly, weekly or daily based upon the day-shift SIMS
records of January 2005 through March 2006.
5.1 Pivot table Analyses
Table 2 is a sample of the monthly maximum required
airflow per level and their summation under two
operational conditions, with and without diesel vehicle
placed backfill. Generally, this table shows that on a
monthly basis few levels are devoid of any activity,
consequently most would require a significant volume.
This table also shows that unless the ventilation is adjusted
regularly it will result is high total volume requirements.
With diesel placed backfill, the mine’s practice at the time
of the analysis, the monthly total varied between 968 m3/s
and 1559 m3/s, this later volume is well in excess of the
mine’s capacity and hence the belief that the ventilation
system maybe inadequate.
Table 3 provides samples of the weekly and daily
maximum required airflow per level and their summation.
Of note within these tables is the increasing frequency in
the number of days each level requires the minimum

30
Table 3. Sample of the lower mine airflow requirements per level by week and day derived from historical production/
equipment deployment data (shaded areas denote substitutions)

Requirement/ Non-diesel based Backfill Grand

Week 2005-06 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 56 57 83 84 86 87 88 Total
Week 1 21.4 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.7 17.4 37.2 3.5 3.5 14.7 36.8 70.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 693.6
Week 2 3.5 11.8 3.5 3.5 20.7 18.6 24.8 3.5 7.4 14.7 40.6 59.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 674.6
Week 3 17.4 18.6 3.5 3.5 20.7 3.5 27.3 3.5 35.3 3.5 32.1 52.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 709.8
Week 4 14.7 25.7 3.5 3.5 23.6 17.4 46.2 3.5 3.7 3.5 36.8 66.5 21.1 3.5 3.5 742.9
Activity Count 30 33 32 46 26 21 24 35 41 19 50 37 59 45 35 max 65
Average 9.1 9.0 9.7 13.1 8.2 7.5 9.1 11.0 12.8 7.0 19.7 18.4 27.1 23.6 31.8 681.4
Maximum 32.1 25.7 37.9 35.9 26.9 31.6 46.2 26.9 35.3 23.1 55.0 70.0 72.9 70.7 85.3 867.3
Minumum 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 438.8
Requirement/ Non-diesel based Backfill
Day 2005-06 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 56 57 83 84 86 87 88
08-Jan-05 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.5 37.2 3.5 3.5 14.7 26.1 46.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 419.3
09-Jan-05 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.5 24.8 3.5 3.5 14.7 40.6 18.7 3.5 3.5 3.5 409.9
10-Jan-05 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.5 24.8 3.5 3.5 3.5 19.2 52.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 373.3
11-Jan-05 3.5 11.8 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 23.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 34.4 24.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 388.3
12-Jan-05 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.5 16.1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 59.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 378.4
13-Jan-05 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 20.7 3.5 18.6 3.5 3.7 6.9 6.9 15.2 3.5 3.5 3.5 395.1
14-Jan-05 3.5 14.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 19.6 3.5 7.4 3.5 35.6 26.1 3.5 3.5 3.5 425.4
Activity Count 67 106 110 209 96 58 97 135 143 51 297 165 352 301 235 max 455
Average 5.0 5.7 5.6 8.5 6.0 4.8 6.3 7.2 7.1 4.6 10.9 9.8 14.7 15.1 21.7 399.7
Maximum 32.1 25.7 37.9 35.9 26.9 31.6 46.2 26.9 35.3 23.1 55.0 70.0 72.9 70.7 85.3 574.6
Minumum 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 126.0

1600
3 Production plan based
Monthly requirement with diesel placed backfill, average 1260.6 m /s
Maximum Predicted Airflow Requirement, m /s

monthly requirement with

1400
3

diesel placed backfill,

3
average 642.4 m /s
1200

3
Monthly requirement without diesel placed backfill, average 983.4 m /s
1000

800

3
600
Weekly requirement without diesel placed backfill, average 681.4 m /s

400

3
Daily requirement without diesel placed backfill, average 399.7 m /s
200

0
02-May

28-Feb
31-Aug

30-Dec
02-Mar

01-Apr

30-Mar
30-Oct

29-Nov
30-Sep
01-Jan

31-Jan

01-Jun

29-Jan
01-Jul

31-Jul

Figure 1 Comparison of the lower mine’s ventilation requirements derived from historic production data, analyzed daily,
weekly and monthly, and from future monthly production plans.

31
 36
Maximum potentially active number of levels = 36

30
Monthly active with/without diesel placed backfill, averages 32.3 & 31.2 levels
Number of Active Levels

24
Weekly active without diesel placed backfill, average 25.0 levels

18

Daily active without diesel placed backfill, average 17.5 levels

12

Production plan based monthly requirement with

diesel placed backfill, average 24 levels
6
02-May

28-Feb
31-Aug

30-Dec
02-Mar

01-Apr

30-Mar
30-Sep

29-Nov
30-Oct
01-Jul

31-Jul
01-Jan

31-Jan

01-Jun

29-Jan
Figure 2. Comparison of the number of active levels within the lower mine derived from historic production data, analyzed
daily, weekly and monthly, and from future monthly production plans.

Table 4. Summary of the ventilation requirements predicted for the lower mine based upon historical vehicle deployment data
and the relative improvements with increasing adjustment frequency.
Mining
Diesel Placed Backfill Non-diesel placed Backfill
Method
Adjustment
Monthly Monthly Weekly Daily
Frequency
Total Flow Flow/Level Total Flow Flow/Level Total Flow Reduction Flow/Level Total Flow Reduction Reduction Flow/Level
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s vs Monthly m3/s m3/s vs Monthly vs Weekly m3/s
Average 1260.6 35.0 983.4 27.3 681.4 30.7% 18.9 399.7 59.4% 41.3% 11.1
Maximum 1559.3 153.4 1163.6 114.0 867.3 25.5% 114.0 574.6 50.6% 33.7% 114.0
Minimum 968.2 3.5 807.6 3.5 438.8 45.7% 3.5 228.8 71.7% 47.9% 3.5
Standard. 168.1 103.9 84.4 54.8
Dev. 13.3% 10.6% 12.4% 13.7%
# Active # Active # Active Reduction # Active Reduction Reduction
Levels Levels Levels vs Monthly Levels vs Monthly vs Weekly
Average 32.3 31.2 25.0 19.9% 17.5 43.9% 29.9%
Maximum 35 34 28 17.6% 23 32.4% 17.9%
Minimum 30 29 21 27.6% 7 75.9% 66.7%
Average Average Average Average
Active Active Active Reduction Active Reduction Reduction
Days/Year Days/Year Days/Year vs Monthly Days/Year vs Monthly vs Weekly
327 316 252 20.3% 174 44.9% 30.9%

leakage flow, and how this translates into significantly frequency. These graphs also include the “future” based
lower overall requirements predictions derived from the long range plans.
Figures 1 & 2 presenting the results of the pivot table Figure 1 highlights the benefit of increasing the
analyses in graphical terms demonstrate how the total frequency with which the ventilation is redistributed
required volume for the lower mine and the number of through the notable reductions in the maximum required
active levels varied as a function of airflow redistribution volume. For the 15-month period analyzed, with

32
redistribution monthly, the average maximum required
volume was 983 m3/s; with weekly and daily redistribution
this requirement fell to 681 m3/s and 400 m3/s,
respectively. Comparing the ventilation requirement
predictions over the common analysis period, January
through March 2006, the future based monthly plan
analysis gave 600 m3/s which is significantly lower than
the 852 m3/s from the historical month based analysis.
Figure 2 shows that by increasing the mine’s
ventilation redistribution frequency from monthly to
weekly and to daily, can significantly reduce the number of
active mining levels. The average number of active levels,
out of a potential maximum of 36, reduces from 31.2, to 25
and then to 17.5. Again comparing with the previous
methodology, the future analysis was showing on average
24 levels as active, whereas the historical event data
method indicated an average of 30.3 levels as active.
5.2 SIMS Data Limitations
One of the limitations of the available activity data is that it
does not provide a ‘time-stamp”. Consequently, when the
time reported is less than the full shift length, or when a
vehicle is reporting to more than one level, it would be
extremely difficult to establish when a vehicle was
working in a specific area. This would cause the pivot table
analysis to overestimate the airflow requirement because
the two or more vehicles reporting to the same level may
be there at different times.
For example, the pivot table analyses produced airflow
requirements >100 m3/s on several of the mine’s levels,
such demands were considered to be very high when
compared to the 30 m3/s currently being allocated. These
high values were typically generated on levels where
multiple vehicles, up to 5, were recorded as “active” on the
same level. Although the requirement was recognized as
probably overstated, it could not be totally discounted.
5.3 Variance Between Forward and Backward Analyses
The results from the various analyses as summarized in
Table 4, show significant differences between the airflow
requirements determined for the lower part of Kidd Creek
mine as derived from the historical SIMS activity data and
the 18-month production plan. The differences are a result
of the following:
• The first forward analysis using the 18-month
plan did not account for the additional
requirements of an auxiliary ventilation system to
avoid recirculation on a level where only one
vehicle was operating. This analysis also assumed
that temporarily inactive levels would not be
ventilated, whereas in reality they would still be
ventilated to some degree.
• The second forward analysis, although taking
account of the auxiliary fan requirements and a
minimum flow per non-active level was still
based upon the 18-month production plan. This is
an “ideal” plan more focused on ensuring tonnage
33
than the deployment of such resources as
ventilation.
• Both of these forward analyses were based upon
averaged production activity and do not include
any maximum concentrated activity demands.
• The SIMS backward analysis is based upon the
“observed” discontinuous production activity
details, which highlights maximum demands as
opposed to the idealized average activity.
Despite, the review and modification of the forward
monthly based analyses, they still appear to underestimate
the overall flow requirement when compared to the
historical analysis. The primary reason for this remains the
oversimplification of the future plans.
Conversely, the historical based analyses seem to
overstate the overall flow requirement on a monthly basis
due to the potential multiple accounting of diesel vehicles
that report to more than one location per shift. However,
regardless, of the actual flow predictions, the historical
based analyses will give a truer estimation of the number
of levels that could be active; this value is independent of
the number of vehicles reporting to each level.
Both analyses show that for the mine to operate
efficiently, it must regularly redistribute its ventilation.
However, to achieve a flow requirement comparable to the
production plan based requirement, as shown by the
historical analysis, the mine has to consider at least
redistributing its flow weekly.
6 Ventilation Redundancy/Inefficiency and
Demand Variability
Determining the current overall efficiency of the
ventilation system at Kidd Creek would be at best
subjective. The reductions between monthly, weekly and
daily, as shown in Figure 1, despite being considerable,
will not be the same when it comes to implementing
increased management and control of the ventilation at the
mine. This is because the current ventilation system is
incapable of meeting the maximum predicted airflow
requirements that would permit unencumbered production
when the ventilation is redistributed monthly, as was the
mine’s standard practice.
Any determination of the benefit of managing the flow
weekly or controlling it daily must be performed against
the current ventilation volumetric delivery. However, even
then it remains problematic as the analyses considered two
conditions, the original situation with backfill haulage by
diesel vehicles, and then by some other method, potentially
pastefill, which was ultimately implemented.
Currently, the mine appears to have sufficient air if it is
redistributed somewhere between weekly and monthly.
Therefore, the only major improvement minimizing
redundancy and thereby improving the system’s relative
efficiency would require the ventilation to be redistributed
more frequently than weekly. This in all likelihood would
necessitate some form of automation. In the historical
analyses, summarized in Table 5, it can be seen that more
Figure 3. Control and Automation Intranet display for primary ventilation processes at Kidd Mine.
frequent redistribution, from weekly to daily could reduce
the average demand by 40% and peak by 26%. Due to the
magnitude of the mine’s current electrical usage, this order
of reduction provides the justification to possibly consider
some level of automation as the mine continues to develop
its lower levels.
Possibly more beneficial, would be for the mine to set
its overall airflow at a specific flow rate for the
management period adopted. This becomes evident
through a comparison of the standard deviation of the
results at each adjustment frequency. With increasing
redistribution frequency, the standard deviation in relative
percentage terms increases, hence the greater benefit in
setting the mine’s overall flow appropriately.
7 Changes Implemented at Kidd Creek
Figure 3 provides a control system schematic overview of
the mine’s primary ventilation process. As mentioned
previously, the first wholesale change made following the
ventilation reviews was to discontinue the use of the SVR
fan. With the completion of #2 Mine and near completion
of #1 Mine, the remaining active levels in the upper mine
now exhaust exclusively to the North Vent Raise system.
Future ventilation reviews intend to investigate the
possibility of using the SVR raise as an intake. This would
decrease the fresh air delivery through #2 Shaft and reduce
the costs of running the #2 Shaft fans (#2 Fanhouse) and,
during the winter, its associated natural gas heating system.
This may also provide a further opportunity for either the
extension of the existing cold stope system or creation of a
new area to assist in offsetting the increased thermal loads
as the mine becomes deeper.
34
The major positive outcome of the ventilation reviews
discussed within this paper has been the implementation of
a more systematic procedure to manage the underground
ventilation system. This procedure, summarized below,
takes into account the various primary work activities
taking place and the existing ventilation available to plan
any adjustments.
Towards the end of each week the Kidd Mine
Production Engineering group determines the activities to
be undertaken in the mine for the following week. Using a
simple spreadsheet, the activities are entered and pre-
determined ventilation rates based upon the diesel
equipment required for each activity are assigned. The
spreadsheet automatically calculates the required volume
per level for comparison against the current ventilation
available for each level. An example of this spreadsheet’s
output for Phases I and II (P1 and P2) of #3 Mine is shown
in Table 5. The “Tag Board” value is the most recent
ventilation survey measurement for a level. (Note: “Tag
Boards” are the method by which underground airflows are
displayed and the equipment entry managed for each
level). The levels which have no activity assigned are
automatically shaded grey. The Ventilation Department
reviews this spreadsheet and uses the outcome to produce a
ventilation redistribution plan for the upcoming week
detailing which levels will need to be shut down, due to
“no activity”, or the airflow regulator adjustments required
to meet the activity specific ventilation demands of each
level. This ventilation redistribution plan is passed onto the
mine’s Operations group to be implemented prior to the
commencement of the next week’s work activities.
This system of regular ventilation adjustments not only
achieves a better distribution of the available air, but also
Table 5. An example of a weekly ventilation distribution plan for #3 Mine.
Level Tag Board Calc. Volume Dev Rehab CB-Drill CB-Install Rse Bore Prod Drill Blast Muck Paste CWF Dia Drill Transfer
4600 40 40 1 1 1
4700 30 0
4800 30 15 1
4900 26 0
5100 26 0
5200 30 15 1
P1 5300 26 15 1
5400 26 0
5600 15 0
5700 26 10 1
5800 26 10 1
6000 25 25 1 1 1
6100 25 0
6200 30 10 1
6300 30 10 1
6400 25 15 2
P2 6500 25 25 1 1
6600 25 25 1 1 1 1
6700 25 25 1 1 1
6800 25 10 1

provides a cost improvement as the auxiliary ventilation
fans on the inactive levels are switched off and the two
3000 kW booster fans on Level 60 (6000L) are prevented
from being run at a higher than necessary operating point.
As shown by Figure 3, the Central Process Control
Room (CPCR) and Kidd’s Intranet service allows the real
time monitoring of the primary ventilation processes
within the mine. Furthermore, any person with the
appropriate access to the mine’s Intranet may also observe
the real time conditions of the mine ventilation system.
Throughout each shift, 24 hours a day and 7 days a week
CPCR Operators monitor all the main mining processes
including ventilation. This ensures any changes to the
ventilation are responded to as quickly as possible.
The next phase of ventilation changes currently being
evaluated by Kidd Mine is to have the majority of the
underground auxiliary ventilation fans placed under PLC
control. The CPCR could then activated or deactivated
these fans from surface, and be able to monitor their
performance again with the view of achieving further cost
improvements and more effective use of the available
ventilation.
8 Discussion
Minimizing ventilation costs in large mechanized mines is
not straightforward due to the dynamic and variable nature
of production process constantly redefining where
ventilation is required. There are various ways to
determine an “ideal” flow requirement for a mine but the
question is whether it is practical and operationally
achievable. This paper has shown two ways to determine
an appropriate volume, however, neither is perfect.
Using forward planning data can greatly underestimate
the required flow unless some consideration is given to
how that ventilation is delivered to the point of application.
In this analysis, the need to prevent uncontrolled
recirculation within auxiliary ventilated locations and
allocations to non-productive levels significantly increased
the volumetric predictions of the future analysis.
However, even with these considerations, the
predictions could still underestimate the ventilation
demand due to their oversimplification of where
production was taking place, and/or the assumption that the
ventilation would be adjusted accordingly.
The use of historical data can obviously capture the
ever changing and dynamic nature of mining better, but it
can still be inadequate. For example, at Kidd Creek, within
a month, the future analysis only showed on average 24
mining levels as being active, whereas the historical data
showed 31 levels requiring ventilation for production
related activities However, the historical data analyses
seemed to overestimate the actual volumes required. This
was due to the recorded diesel activity data not having any
time-stamp by which to correct for multiple vehicles
reporting to a mine level but at different times.
Despite this, the major benefit of the historical based
analyses is their ability to show:
• the significant benefits of increasing the
adjustment and redistribution frequency of the
ventilation system, and
• the importance of being able to set the mine’s
overall flow appropriately when one increases the
frequency of redistributing the airflow.
It is also important to note, that these are not the only
options available to the Kidd Creek operation to minimize
its ventilation costs. Other studies have shown that the cost
of running a large inventory of auxiliary fans can be as
significant as that of the primary system. In one detailed
study (Hardcastle, Kocsis and O’Connor, 2006) it was
shown that the average utilization of auxiliary ventilation
ranged from 10 through to 45% for various production
activities; in this situation some control of the auxiliary
fans would be warranted.
9 Conclusions
Various reviews have been performed of the Kidd Creek
mine’s primary ventilation system and its capacity to serve
the mine through to 2018 and a depth of 3000 m.
The initial review brought almost instant savings,
through the identification of unnecessary fans that have
since been eliminated.
The specific savings resulting from the second and
third more detailed reviews have yet to be quantified.
However, they did indicate the need to redistribute the

35
airflow more frequently in order to increase its utilization
efficiency. Consequently, these detailed reviews provided
the mine the basis to implement a more systematic method
to manage their ventilation, and then consider some level
of automation such as the PLC control of their auxiliary
fans.
Kidd Creek now sets and manually redistributes its
overall airflow weekly based upon the upcoming week’s
detailed schedule. Since moving to this protocol, the
number of ventilation complaints has decreased and the
mine now delivers, on average, 930 m3/s which is 23% less
than supplied at the start of the review process.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank of Xstrata Copper and the
Kidd Creek mine for their assistance in gathering the data
and permission to present this paper.
36
References
Hardcastle, S.G., Kocsis, C. and O’Connor, D., 2006,
Justifying ventilation-on-demand in a Canadian mine
and the need for process based simulations, in
Proceedings of the 11th U.S./North American Mine
Ventilation Symposium 2006, pp 15-27, (Taylor and
Francis Group Plc.), ISBN 0-415-40148-8.
Hortin, K.M. and Sedlacek, J., 2002, Change of the push-
pull ventilation system at Kidd Creek mine of
Falconbridge Ltd (challenges and logistics), in Mine
Ventilation - Proceedings of the 1st North American/9th
U.S. Mine Ventilation Symposium, pp. 69–75, (Taylor
and Francis Group Plc.), ISBN 90 5809 387 5.
Ontario Ministry of Labour, 1994, MINES AND MINING
PLANTS, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 854, Section 183.1 (3),
O. Reg. 779/94, s. 7.