Chapter 4

Result and Analysis

4.1 Overview
This chapter presents a detailed analysis of the empirical findings derived from experiments
conducted to support the theoretical framework outlined in Chapter 3. The research focuses on
examining various aspects of coal mining operations, including the geological structure, equipment
details, and efficiency enhancement strategies.

The chapter begins by providing an overview of the project profile of the mines,
emphasizing the critical role of Heavy Earth Moving Machinery (HEMM) in efficient ore
extraction. Specific attention is given to the shovel and dumper units due to their significant
operational responsibilities and associated expenditures.

Mines Detail: Detailed information about the Sathupally coal mine, including its location,
ownership, and operational details, is provided. The geological structure of the mine, including
open-pit and underground sections, is discussed along with the proposed expansion project.

HEMM Details: The chapter presents a comprehensive overview of the Heavy Earth Moving
Machinery used in the Sathupally mine, including shovels, dumpers, drills, dozers, motor graders,
water sprinklers, and loaders. Details such as capacity, make, model, and quantity are provided for
each equipment type.

Coal Seam Analysis: An analysis of coal seam characteristics, including thickness, moisture
content, ash content, and average grade, is presented. This information is crucial for understanding
the quality of coal deposits and optimizing mining operations.

Flow Chart for Carry out the Study: A flowchart outlining the stages involved in conducting the
study is provided. These stages include problem identification, data gathering, analysis,
improvement, and control, highlighting the systematic approach employed in the research.

Selection of Shovel: Factors considered during the selection of shovels for mining operations are
discussed. These factors include cost, mobility, electric distribution system planning, operator
fatigue, construction, production rates, and operating conditions.
Enhancing Equipment Efficiency using OEE: The chapter discusses strategies for enhancing
equipment efficiency in the mining sector using Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE). The OEE
equation is modified for mining applications, considering factors such as availability, performance,
and utilization. Practical implications and challenges associated with implementing OEE in mining
operations are explored.

Overall, this chapter provides a comprehensive analysis of the empirical findings from the
conducted experiments, offering insights into various aspects of coal mining operations and
efficiency enhancement strategies.

4.2 Result and discussion

This section delineates the findings obtained from the execution of the proposed methodologies in
the mining operations, both within standalone and cloud environments. A comprehensive
comparison is drawn to elucidate the performance metrics observed during the migration from the
standalone setup to the cloud-based infrastructure. The discussion delves into the implications of
these results on the operational efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of the mining
processes, highlighting the benefits and hurdles encountered in each environment. The evaluation
of mining equipment in standalone environments focuses on various factors such as maintenance,
breakdown hours, and operational constraints. The effectiveness of Overall Equipment
Effectiveness (OEE) as a metric is highlighted, with modifications for mining applications to
substitute the quality factor with utilization due to difficulties in measuring processed and defect
amounts in mining operations.

4.2.1 Assigning of weights for co-efficient in OEE

The determination of coefficients in the Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) equation plays a
critical role in assessing the performance of mining equipment. In this section, the methodology
for assigning weights to these coefficients is elucidated. The OEE equation, which encompasses
availability (A), performance (P), and utilization (U), is analyzed to understand how each factor
contributes to the overall efficiency of mining operations. The process of assigning weights to
these coefficients is outlined, emphasizing the significance of each parameter in evaluating
equipment performance accurately. Additionally, analytical methods such as the Analytic
Hierarchy Process (AHP) are discussed as a means to facilitate decision-making in coefficient
OEE = A^a * P^b * U^c

Where:

 a, b, c are coefficients

 A = availability

o A = ((TH - MT - BH) / TH) * 100

 P = performance

o P = (worked hours / ideal hours) * 100

 U = utilization

o U = ((TH - DT - IT) / TH) * 100

o DT = MT + BH

 TH = Total Hours

 MT = Maintenance Time

 BH = Breakdown Hours

 DT = Downtime

 IT = Idle Time

4.2.2 Explanation for Assumption of Coefficient Concept for Weight Assignment

Weight assignment within the context of the modified Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE)
equation for mining applications constitutes a pivotal aspect of operational decision-making and
performance evaluation. This section elucidates the underlying rationale and methodological
considerations behind the coefficient concept for weight assignment, emphasizing its significance
in enhancing equipment efficiency and productivity within the mining sector.

Rationale for Weight Assignment:

In the dynamic and resource-intensive environment of mining operations, the effective allocation
of resources and prioritization of operational objectives are paramount. The coefficients (a, b, c)
in the modified OEE equation serve as a quantitative representation of the relative importance of
availability, performance, and utilization factors in achieving these objectives.
  Operational Prioritization: Weight assignment enables operational managers to prioritize
improvement efforts and resource allocation based on the perceived significance of each
factor. For instance, in contexts where downtime due to equipment breakdowns is
particularly detrimental, a higher weight may be assigned to availability to underscore its
criticality in minimizing production disruptions.

 Resource Allocation: By quantifying the relative importance of availability, performance,

and utilization, weight assignment facilitates the judicious allocation of resources such as
maintenance personnel, spare parts inventory, and capital investments. This ensures that
limited resources are directed towards areas that yield the greatest improvement in
equipment efficiency and overall productivity.

 Performance Benchmarking: Weight-assigned coefficients allow for benchmarking of

equipment performance against industry standards and best practices. Organizations can
compare their OEE scores with those of peer operations and identify areas for
improvement, thereby fostering a culture of continuous enhancement and operational
excellence.

Methodological Approach:

The methodological approach to weight assignment typically involves the application of structured
decision-making techniques such as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). This entails a
systematic evaluation of criteria through pairwise comparisons and hierarchical structuring to
derive priority weights.

 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): AHP provides a rigorous framework for eliciting
stakeholder preferences and synthesizing diverse viewpoints into a coherent set of priority
weights. Stakeholders, including equipment operators, maintenance personnel, and
management, participate in the decision-making process to ensure alignment with
organizational goals and operational realities.

 Data-Driven Analysis: Weight assignment is informed by empirical data, historical

performance metrics, and operational constraints. By analyzing past performance trends
and industry benchmarks, organizations can identify patterns and correlations that inform
the relative importance of availability, performance, and utilization factors.
Considerations in Weight Assignment:

Several key considerations underpin the process of weight assignment and ensure its relevance and
applicability within the mining context:

 Operational Constraints: Weight assignment accounts for operational constraints such as

equipment limitations, production targets, and resource availability. Factors that
significantly impact equipment efficiency and overall productivity are accorded higher
priority in the weight assignment process.

 Dynamic Evaluation: Weight assignments are subject to continuous evaluation and

refinement in response to evolving operational dynamics and changing performance
objectives. Organizations must adapt their weight assignments to reflect emerging industry
trends, technological advancements, and operational best practices.

Implications for Performance Evaluation:

The assumption of coefficient concept for weight assignment has far-reaching implications for
performance evaluation and operational decision-making within the mining sector:

 Decision Support: Weight-assigned coefficients serve as a quantitative basis for decision-

making, guiding resource allocation, and improvement initiatives. Operational managers
can leverage these coefficients to identify opportunities for efficiency gains and prioritize
interventions that yield the greatest return on investment.

 Performance Monitoring: The modified OEE equation, incorporating weighted factors,

facilitates ongoing performance monitoring and trend analysis. By tracking changes in
availability, performance, and utilization over time, organizations can proactively identify
operational inefficiencies and implement corrective measures to optimize equipment
performance.

The assumption of coefficient concept for weight assignment in the modified OEE equation
represents a methodologically robust approach to evaluating equipment efficiency and
productivity in mining applications. By integrating stakeholder input, data-driven analysis, and
operational constraints, weight assignment enhances the accuracy and relevance of the OEE
framework, thereby empowering organizations to make informed decisions and drive continuous
improvement in their mining operations.
4.2.3 Composite Annual Table of Shovel & Dumps

Table 4.1 depict the composite annual table for shovels and dumps is an essential dataset that
provides a comprehensive overview of the heavy equipment used in the mining and excavation
operations. The equipment included in the table consists of various shovels, dumpers, drills,
dozers, motor graders, water sprinklers, and loaders, along with their respective capacities, makes,
models, and quantities. This information is crucial for resource allocation and operational
planning.

Table 4.1 Annual Sum of worked Hours of shovel and dumps

Years Sum of Worked Sum of B/D Sum of Maint Sum of Idle

Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs.

7258.6 1786.82 397.98 8108.6

<4/1/2023 3629.3 893.41 198.99 4054.3

2023 2688.6 531.25 171.08 3201.07

2024 940.7 362.16 27.91 853.23

60-1 3629.3 893.41 198.99 4054.3

2023 2688.6 531.25 171.08 3201.07

2024 940.7 362.16 27.91 853.23

Grand Total 10887.9 2680.23 596.97 12162.9

The diversity in equipment types and capacities reflects the complexity and scale of the mining
operations. For instance, the presence of both 3.0 Cu.M and 5.0 Cu.M shovels indicates the need
for handling different volumes of materials, while the variety of dumper capacities (60 T)
demonstrates flexibility in transporting materials. The inclusion of different makes and models
suggests an optimization strategy aimed at leveraging the strengths of various equipment
manufacturers. The data underscores the importance of having a diverse and well-maintained fleet
to ensure operational efficiency and minimize downtime.

Figure 4.1 depict the annual report of dumper as shown below. While the document does not
explicitly provide a composite annual table for shovels and dumps, it mentions the importance of
monitoring and optimizing the performance of shovels and dumpers through metrics like
availability, performance rate, and utilization.

Annual Dumper

2024
III

2023

2024
60-1

II

2023 Sum of Idle Hrs

Sum of Maint Hrs
2024
Sum of B/D Hrs
I

2023
Sum of Worked Hrs
2024

2023

<4/1/2023

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

Figure 4.1 Annual Dumper data comprising the sum of idle, Maintenance, B/D and worked
Hours

Table 4.2 presents a detailed analysis of the shift-wise production data for various pieces of
equipment. The data includes the count of shifts, the total production (TTL PROD), total dispatch
to the Coal Handling Plant (TTL DISP to CHP), the total amount of coal handled from mines
(MINE Handled COAL), and the quantity transferred from quarry to yard (QRY->CY).
 Table 4.2 Shift Wise production data with Mines handled and sum of TTL production

Equipment Count Sum of TTL Sum of TTL Sum of MINE Sum of

’s of PROD(1+2+4+ DISP to Hndld QRY-
SHIFT 5) CHP(1+3+4) COAL(1+2+3+4+5 >CY(2)
)

4 244204 1710 244204 242494

KL-1 3 0 0 0 0

S-13 3 0 0 0 0

S-2 3 0 0 0 0

S-3 3 44685 0 44685 44685

S-5 3 8382 0 8382 8382

S6 3 53735 765 53735 52970

S-7 3 15300 90 15300 15210

Grand 25 366306 2565 366306 363741

Total

Difficult conditions, such as hard rock or adverse weather, typically result in lower availability,
utilization, and performance due to increased wear and tear and operational challenges. Moderate
and easy conditions, on the other hand, often see higher OEE values, reflecting smoother
operations and less strain on the equipment. This categorization aids in strategic planning by
identifying which equipment performs best under specific conditions, enabling better matching of
machinery to operational environments. For instance, if TATA HITACHI EX1200V performs well
in difficult conditions, it may be prioritized for challenging tasks, ensuring efficient resource
utilization and minimizing downtime.
Figure 4.2, titled "Production Data Shift Wise," illustrates a detailed analysis of the production
metrics across different shifts for various mining equipment. This chart provides a comprehensive
visual summary of the operational performance of each equipment unit in terms of several key
production indicators, including the total production, dispatches to Coal Handling Plant (CHP),
and transfers from quarry to yard. The equipment units analyzed in this figure include KL-1, S-13,
S-2, S-3, S-5, S-6, and S-7. By comparing these metrics across shifts, Figure 4.2 aims to highlight
the productivity and efficiency of each equipment type, identify operational bottlenecks, and
suggest areas for potential optimization within the mining operations. This visualization is crucial
for stakeholders to understand the performance trends and make data-driven decisions to enhance
the overall efficiency and output of the mining operations.

Production data shift wise

S-7

S6
Sum of QRY->CHP(1)
S-5
Sum of QRY->CY(2)
S-3
Sum of MINE Hndld COAL(1+2+3+4+5)
S-2 Sum of TTL DISP to CHP(1+3+4)
S-13 Sum of TTL PROD(1+2+4+5)
KL-1 Count of SHIFT

0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000

Figure 4.2 Shift wise production data

4.2.4. Annual OEE Estimation for Shovel

 The annual OEE for shovels can be calculated using the equation: A = availability

o A = ((TH - MT - BH) / TH) * 100

 P = performance

o P = (worked hours / ideal hours) * 100

 U = utilization
 o U = ((TH - DT - IT) / TH) * 100

o DT = MT + BH

Weights can be assigned to each factor using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which can
vary monthly.

Table 4.3 provides a detailed analysis of the coal overburden operations, showing data for different
types of equipment. The table includes the count of equipment, average lead, sum of cumulative
kilometers (Cu.M Kms), and the total cubic meters (Cu.M) handled. This information is essential
for assessing the workload distribution and the effectiveness of different equipment types in
overburden removal, which is a critical aspect of mining operations.

Table 4.3 Lead coal overburden with leads and sum of distance

Equipment’s Count of AVGLEAD Sum of Cu.M Kms Sum of Cu.M

11249755.4 6150624

KL-1 2 540340.7 645149

S-13 2 644696.2 532487

S-2 1 309883.5 339795

S-3 2 1570908 400353

S-5 2 464163 130188

S6 2 1233889.3 520169

S-7 2 860997 507171

Grand Total 13 16874633.1 9225936

In surface mining operations, the term "lead coal overburden" refers to the layers of soil, rock, and
other materials that overlay the primary coal seam targeted for extraction, requiring systematic
removal to ensure efficient resource recovery, minimize environmental impact, and optimize
economic feasibility.

Figure 4.3 visually represents the various types of equipment used in overburden (OB) operations.
It shows the diversity and quantity of machinery employed, such as shovels, dumpers, drills,
dozers, motor graders, water sprinklers, and loaders. This figure helps to understand the scale of
operations and the range of equipment necessary to manage the overburden efficiently

Lead Coal overburden

S-7

S6

S-5

S-3 Sum of Cu.M

Sum of Cu.M Kms
S-2
Count of AVGLEAD
S-13

KL-1

0 2000000 4000000 6000000 8000000 10000000 12000000

Figure 4.3 Equipment’s OB in operations.

The annual estimation of Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) for shovels involves calculating
the availability, performance, and utilization of each shovel type over the course of the year. The
OEE is a key performance indicator that combines these three metrics to provide a holistic view
of equipment efficiency.

So, Analyzing the OEE for different shovel types reveals significant insights into their
operational efficiency. High availability percentages indicate effective maintenance and minimal
downtime, while strong performance metrics suggest optimal operational speed and efficiency.
Utilization rates provide an understanding of how well the equipment is being used relative to its
capacity. For example, a high OEE in TATA HITACHI EX1200V shovels could indicate superior
reliability and efficiency, making them crucial assets for the operations. Conversely, lower OEE
values may highlight areas for improvement in maintenance practices or operational procedures.
This comprehensive analysis is vital for strategic decision-making regarding equipment upgrades,
replacements, or process optimizations.

Equipment Overview

The shovels included in this report encompass various models with differing capacities and makes,
each selected based on specific operational requirements. The key shovels analyzed are:

 KOMATSU PC45 LC-7 (3.0 Cu.M)

 TATA HITACHI EX1200V (5.0 Cu.M)

 BEML BE1000-1 (5.0 Cu.M)

 TATA HITACHI EX-200LC (1.0 Cu.M)

Table 4.4 summarizes the total quantity of equipment used in BTRTL (Basic Track Relay Transit
Line) and GCV (Gross Calorific Value) operations. It includes the equipment quantity, count of
BTRTL, and count of GCV. This table is critical for evaluating the resource allocation and
ensuring that the right equipment is used for specific operational tasks, which impacts the overall
productivity and efficiency of mining operations.

Table 4.4 Sum of Equipment’s used in BTRTL and GCV

Equipment’s Sum of Count of BTRTL Count of GCV

QUANTITY

6098922 10 10

KL-1 644792 21 21

S-13 531395 18 18

S-2 339795 21 21

S-3 387585 12 12

S-5 120612 14 14
 S6 519161 26 26

S-7 506121 25 25

Grand Total 9148383 147 147

The documents suggest that monthly weights can be assigned to availability, utilization, and
performance rates. These weights help in assessing the month-wise OEE, which involves
evaluating parameters like payload capacity and cycle time for dumpers and shovels.

Figure 4.4 compares the performance of equipment in BTRTL and GCV operations, presented in
hours of operation for the years 2023 and 2024. This figure highlights trends and differences in
equipment performance over time, helping to identify which equipment performs best under
specific conditions and where improvements can be made.

Equipment performance in HOURS

TH-05
S-7
S-6
S-5
S-3 2023
S-2* 2024
S-2
S-13
LC-3

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

Figure 4.4 Equipment in BTRTL & GCV performance in hours for year 2023 & 2024

Moreover, the juxtaposition of equipment performance in BTRTL and GCV operations offers a
nuanced insight into the efficacy of utilization strategies across distinct operational contexts.
Through meticulous scrutiny of performance trajectories spanning the years 2023 and 2024,
stakeholders gain discerning perspectives on operational competencies and deficiencies. This
analytical approach enables data-driven deliberations concerning resource allocation,
maintenance regimen, and holistic operational refinement. Moreover, the comparative appraisal
furnishes a robust foundation for delineating performance benchmarks and gauging the efficacy
of enhancement endeavors across temporal horizons.

4.2.5. Month-wise Evaluation of Availability, Utilization, and Performance

Table 4.5 provides a detailed month-wise breakdown of equipment usage and performance for the
year 2023. It includes metrics such as hours worked, maintenance hours, breakdown hours, and
idle hours for various pieces of equipment. This table is crucial for understanding the reliability
and operational efficiency of each equipment type, allowing for better maintenance planning and
operational management.

Table 4.5 Breakdown data 2023 – Equipment and month wise

Equipm Jan Feb Mar Apr Ma Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
ents y

LC-3 297. 12.4 51.0 25.5 25.4 34.3 73.4 509. 6.44 612. 2.07 72.6
38 2 1 8 2 5 3 5 17 7

S-13 29.8 46.1 79.7 94.0 99.0 47.2 33.9 29.1 42.0 54.6 120. 42.4
8 5 8 7 5 7 7 9 5 82 2

S-2 426 73.5 37.0 199. 390. 310. 142. 23.8

1 9 13 54 09 22 5

S-2* 119. 208. 205. 40.4 125.

42 81 23 2 2

S-3 81.9 229. 50.7 43.8 56.5 119. 41 60.9 130. 65.7 46.5 86.7
1 92 1 4 1 93 21 3 2 1

S-5 49.7 61.7 496. 362. 72.9 127. 39.5 56.9 159. 29.9 58.6 176.
3 1 73 29 1 93 8 8 17 2 52
 S-6 70.3 76.4 55.3 53.9 253. 71.5 31.2 626. 19.7 44.6 74.6 63.6
5 3 7 9 77 4 6 15 3 4 2 4

S-7 70.0 25.4 30.8 31.0 107. 41.9 29.0 45.8 18.5 67.4 23.2 42.5
3 1 4 1 75 9 9 3 8 4 5 3

TH-05 11.0 75.5 14.5 8.42 112. 18.7 64.3 64.6 108. 43.4 12.5 11.0
3 08 5 3 4 54 8

Grand 729. 736. 984. 1045 801. 498. 511. 1783 794. 1060 402. 620.
Total 73 3 14 .21 02 83 79 .71 85 .15 67 77

LC-3 shows significant variations in performance, with higher production levels observed in
August and October compared to other months. Similarly, S-13 demonstrates consistent
production levels throughout the year, with notable spikes in April and November.

Moreover, equipment S-2 showcases substantial production figures in May and June, while S-5
demonstrates a peak in March production. This variation in performance underscores the
importance of closely monitoring and optimizing equipment usage to maximize overall
productivity.

The "Grand Total" row summarizes the cumulative production figures for each month,
highlighting the overall production output over the entire year. This collective data provides
valuable insights for mine management to make informed decisions regarding resource allocation
and production planning.

Figure 4.5 presents data that illustrates the monthly production values for the equipment S-6
throughout the year, with totals summarized at the end. It provides a breakdown of production
values for each month from January to December, showcasing the operational performance of
equipment S-6 over the specified period. Additionally, the grand total aggregates the production
values across all months, offering a comprehensive overview of the equipment's yearly
performance.
 S2 to S6, LC13 Break down with 2023 Data

Grand Total

TH-05

S-7

S-6

S-5

S-3

S-2*

S-2

S-13

LC-3

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Grand Total Dec Nov Oct Sep Aug Jul Jun May Apr Mar Feb Jan

Figure 4.5 Breakdown of monthly 2023 data of S2-S6 and LC13

The Table 4.6 presents comprehensive production data for shovel and dumper operations over a
series of dates. This data encompasses various key metrics essential for evaluating the efficiency
and performance of mining operations. Each row corresponds to a specific date, with
corresponding figures reflecting the operational activities carried out during that [Link] data
is instrumental in understanding the productivity levels, resource utilization, and operational
dynamics within the mining environment. By analyzing shifts, machine serial numbers (MSN) for
shovels and dumpers, trip counts, and other relevant parameters, stakeholders can gain valuable
insights into the daily operational efficiency and identify trends over time.

Table 4.6 Production data for period of 4 months

Dates Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of

Shift Shovel MSN Du MSN COUNT TRIP_NO Tripman
MSN
01.01.2024 1528 2792849 3950983 705 4384 2583416
 01.02.2024 1547 3811736 3939404 743 3759 2516446
01.03.2024 1399 3337521 3877865 713 3846 1872611
01.04.2024 1420 2959698 4159258 702 3018 3540715
02.01.2024 1552 3331021 4101795 745 4517 3952289
02.02.2024 1687 3528331 4721801 829 4955 3582237
02.03.2024 1311 3310999 3784732 674 3081 1713707
02.04.2024 1454 3540409 4006246 709 2990 4016223

The bar chart illustrates the monthly breakdown data for different equipment, including shovels
and dumpers, represented by their respective designations: LC-3, S-13, S-2, S-2*, S-3, S-5, S-6,
S-7, and TH-05. The breakdown hours are recorded month-wise, providing a detailed view of the
equipment's downtime across the year.

Figure 4.6 graphically represents the shovel data for different pieces of equipment. It shows the
variations in performance across different months, helping to identify periods of high and low
efficiency. This visualization is essential for pinpointing specific times of the year when equipment
performance may dip, potentially due to external factors such as weather or operational load.

Shovel breakdown data

TTL % Of PERF
TTL Act Trips
TTL Std Trips
% Of PERF
III Act Trips
III Std Trips
% Of PERF
II Act Trips
II Std Trips
% Of PERF
I Act Trips
I Std Trips
SH CAP

0.00 20,000.00 40,000.00 60,000.00 80,000.00 100,000.00 120,000.00

S6 LC-2 LC-3 S-2 S-5 S-7 S-3 S-13 TH-05

Figure 4.6 Shovel Report of different Equipment’s used in production.

The month-wise evaluation of equipment availability, utilization, and performance provides a
detailed temporal analysis of the operational efficiency. Each month's data is collected and
analyzed to identify trends, seasonal impacts, and potential operational [Link] monthly
breakdown of availability, utilization, and performance metrics allows for a nuanced
understanding of how equipment operates throughout the year. For instance, lower availability in
certain months might correlate with scheduled maintenance or unexpected breakdowns, while
variations in utilization and performance could be attributed to changing operational demands or
environmental conditions.

Identifying these patterns helps in proactive maintenance planning and resource

allocation, ensuring sustained operational efficiency. Additionally, this temporal analysis can
guide the implementation of targeted interventions during low-performance periods to mitigate
productivity losses.

The performance of shovels is affected by job conditions such as dust, snow, fog, and operator
inefficiency. These conditions can be categorized as:

 Difficult: High downtime frequent maintenance, and breakdowns.

 Moderate: Occasional downtime and maintenance with moderate environmental impacts.

 Easy: Minimal downtime and maintenance with favorable working conditions.

Understanding the impact of varying job conditions on shovel performance allows for targeted
interventions and proactive maintenance strategies to optimize equipment utilization and overall
productivity in mining operations. These categories help in assessing the modified OEE equation
which incorporates weights for availability, performance, and utilization based on the relative
difficulty of the digging conditions.

The Table 4.7 infers comprehensive data for mines handled and shift counts operations over a
series of different quarries. This data encompasses various key metrics essential for evaluating the
efficiency and performance of mining operations. Each row corresponds to a specific mine, with
corresponding figures reflecting the operational activities carried out during that period.
 Table 4.7 Mines Handled and Shift counts

Equipmen Count Sum of TTL Sum of TTL Sum of MINE Sum of

ts of PROD(1+2+4+ DISP to Hndld QRY-
SHIFT 5) CHP(1+3+4) COAL(1+2+3+4+5 >CY(2)
)
4 244204 1710 244204 242494
KL-1 3 0 0 0 0
S-13 3 0 0 0 0
S-2 3 0 0 0 0
S-3 3 44685 0 44685 44685
S-5 3 8382 0 8382 8382
S6 3 53735 765 53735 52970
S-7 3 15300 90 15300 15210
Grand 25 366306 2565 366306 363741
Total

KL-1, S-13, S-2: These units show no production or handling activity during the recorded period.S-
3, S-5, S6, S-7: These units have contributed to production and handling activities, with varying
levels of output and dispatch to the CHP. The grand total summarizes the collective performance
of all equipment units, indicating the overall production, dispatch to CHP, and coal handling for
the observed shifts. This data is vital for assessing the operational efficiency of each unit and
identifying areas for improvement in production and handling processes.

Figure 4.7 provides a graphical analysis of the monthly OEE data, highlighting efficiency trends
over time. This figure helps in understanding how the efficiency of equipment changes throughout
the year, identifying long-term patterns, and determining the effectiveness of implemented
improvements or maintenance strategies
 Mines Handled and Shift counts

S-7

S6

S-5 Sum of QRY->CHP(1)

Sum of QRY->CY(2)
S-3
Sum of MINE Hndld COAL(1+2+3+4+5)
S-2 Sum of TTL DISP to CHP(1+3+4)
Sum of TTL PROD(1+2+4+5)
S-13
Count of SHIFT
KL-1

0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000

Figure 4.7 Count of shifts and sum of TTL, QRY data

4.2.6. Age-wise OEE of Different Types of Shovels, Including Availability, Utilization, and
Performance

Report

The age-wise analysis of OEE for different shovel types assesses how equipment age affects
operational efficiency. This includes examining the availability, utilization, and performance
metrics across shovels of varying ages.

Discussion

The correlation between equipment age and OEE provides critical insights into the lifecycle and
longevity of the shovels. Older shovels may exhibit decreased availability due to more frequent
maintenance needs and higher susceptibility to breakdowns. Similarly, performance and utilization
rates may decline with age as equipment efficiency wanes. For example, if the KOMATSU PC45
LC-7 shows a significant drop in OEE after a certain number of years, it indicates the need for
more rigorous maintenance schedules or potential replacements. Understanding these trends is
essential for optimizing maintenance strategies and making informed decisions about equipment
investments to maintain high operational standards.
Table 4.8 lists the factors involved in calculating the Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), such
as availability, performance, and utilization, along with their assigned weights. This table is critical
for understanding how each factor contributes to the overall efficiency of the equipment. By
assigning weights, the table helps in prioritizing factors that have the most significant impact on
performance, allowing for targeted improvements

Table 4.8 SSH, MAH Utilization, Availability and Age of worked Hours

Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of % Utln Sum of % Utln Sum of %

Wkd SSH Hrs. Available Hrs. on SSH on MAH Availability
Hrs.

11285.3 17256 15443.85 130.73 145.99 178.93

7815.42 14341.22 11237.4 214.85 224.96 259.5

4996.33 8600 7688.64 58.1 64.98 89.4

6358.15 16248 13448.94 77.54 92.87 165.4

2504.5 8080 7444.76 31 33.64 92.14

5620.9 8600 7924.75 65.36 70.93 92.15

38580.6 73125.22 63188.34 577.58 633.37 877.52

The table provides age-wise OEE data but implies only that factors such as equipment aging, sum
of worked hours and operator inefficiency impact the performance component of OEE. Older
equipment might have reduced speed and increased downtime, affecting availability and utilization
on MAH and SSH.

By using the OEE metric tailored for mining operations, mining companies can better manage
equipment efficiency and improve overall production performance.
Figure 4.8 presents a comparative analysis of OEE across different equipment types or operational
conditions. This figure is vital for benchmarking the performance of different equipment,
identifying best practices, and making strategic decisions on equipment upgrades, replacements,
or process optimizations. It helps in understanding which equipment is performing optimally and
which ones need more attention or replacement

Availability, Utilization and Years SSH Hrs

2020
Sum of % Availability
2019
Sum of % Utln on MAH
2018
Sum of % Utln on SSH
2017 Sum of Available Hrs

2015 Sum of SSH Hrs

Sum of Wkd Hrs
<4/11/2015

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000

Figure 4.8 Utilization on MAH, SSH and Sum of worked hours and availability