Modified Ohara Model
Modified Ohara Model
net/publication/291060389
An updated and modified O’Hara cost estimating model based on World and
Iran economic conditions
CITATIONS
2 authors, including:
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Updating O'Hara cost estimating system for using in Iran (the modified version) and in the world (the general version) View project
Determination of optimum cut off grades in Iron ore mines with regard to sustainable developement View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Afshin Akbari Dehkharghani on 01 June 2016.
A.D. Akbari
Department of Mining Engineering, Azad University, Tehran, Iran
M. Osanloo
Department of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran
ABSTRACT: The original O’Hara cost estimator was published in 1980. It was developed based on the data
gathered in Canada, USA, Mexico, Australia, Peru, Bolivia, Ireland, France, Morocco and Iran. It was updated in
1988 by its author and published by SME in Handbook of Mining Engineering in 1992. In this study based on infor-
mation gathered from Iranian mines and world cost condition, O’Hara cost estimating equations were modified
and updated. These equations were picked out of the original model (1978) and the updated one (1988) in a manner
that the advantages of both models can be used. Beside modification and updating, two equations were presented
as crude guides for estimating the cost of reclamation. This was done by curve fitting to the actual reclamation cost
data as O’Hara had prepared his equations before. The obtained equations in such a way could be enclosures to
both updated and modified cost estimating models. These two models -side by side- could be used for preliminary
feasibility study of mining projects in general while facilitating comparability with the projects in Iran.
3
equations which were developed and updated by for updating O’Hara’s equations in a parallel manner
O’Hara and Hustrulid. The aforesaid escalated factor with the above mentioned modification in order to
of 2.54 comes from combining the PPI, GPD, CPI, and obtain two equations in each part of the cost estimator.
ECI proportionately. This escalated factor will be used One of them is localized for Iran condition in 2003 and
the other one is escalated for general condition (mostly
for North America) in 2003. They facilitate compara-
bility of the mining/milling capital and operating costs
in two different parts of the world. Then the result is a
modified as well as an updated one. Finally this study
suggests two new equations for both models in capital
cost section in order to estimate the reclamation cost
as a dependent variable to the area of reclamation.
2 EQUATION SELECTION
Table 1. O’Hara combined equipment selection and cost estimation model (fiscal equations are in USD for third quarter
of 1978).
4
Table 1. (Continued)
5
Table 1. (Continued)
55 For high grade gold ores with base metal sulfides; cyanide leaching, secondary updated
flotation, carbon adsorption by CIP or CIL, filtering, thickening,
drying, and refining
Processing and Related Capital Costs = $60705.8824T 0.5
56 For simple low grade base metal ores of copper with minor content of gold which updated
can be recovered as smelter credits. Flotation, thickening, filtering, and drying
Processing and Related Capital Costs = $8058.8235T 0.6
57 For pyretic gold/silver where precious metals are locked in the pyretic minerals. updated
Differential flotation, selective roasting, recovery of deleterious materials,
cyanidation, thickening, precipitation filtering, and refining
Processing and Related Capital Costs = $105882.3529T 0.5
58 For high grade Cu/Pb ores, Cu/Zn ores, Pb/Zn ores, Cu/Ni ores. Recovery by updated
differential flotation, thickening, filtering, & drying separate concentrates.
Processing and Related Capital Costs = $12117.6471T 0.6
59 For complex base metal ores containing at least three valuable metals updated
with recoverable minor amounts of precious metals; Cu/Zn/Pb, Pb/Zn/Ag, Cu/Pb/Ag,
and Cu/Zn/Auores. Differential flotation, separate thickening, and filtering
Processing and Related Capital Costs = $17705.8824T 0.6
60 For non sulfide ores containing metals such as Niobium, Tantalum, Tungsten, updated
and Tin in minerals that do not respond to flotation. Separating by specialized
gravity concentration methods.
Processing and Related Capital Costs = $(2941.18to7647.06)T 0.7
61 For Uranume ores: acid leaching, counter current decantation, clarification, updated
solvent extraction and yellowcake.
Processing and Related Capital Costs = $(88235.29 to 117647.6)T 0.5
62 For minimum estimation updated
Costs of Tailing Storage $11764.71T 0.5
63 Cost of Concentrate Storage and Loadout = $3505.88 × original
(overall recovery × T × average ore grade 0.8
concentrate grade
)
64 For graveled road with 9 m width in moderate condition original
Cost of Road for Subsequent Truck Haulage = $175294.12 Per Mile
Vast Civil 65 Cost of Bridge to Span Creeks = $114.12 (each bridge length)1.5 original
Costs 66 For key staff only (excisting town) Cost of Housing = $3505.88 × Number original
of whole employees
67 For mine camp Cost of Housing = $17529.41 × Number of whole employees original
68 For family town site Cost of Housing = $81950 × Number of whole employees original
Plant 69 Volume of fresh water required for mine and mill T tons ore per day in gpm = 12T0.6 original
Utilities 70 Volume of reclaim water required for mine and mill T tons ore per day original
Costs in gpm = 0.026T1.2
71 Pipe Diameter in inches = 0.15(gpm)0.6 original
72 Cost per mile of pipe = $306.76(gpm)0.6 original
73 Cost of F. Water Pump = $2015.88(gpm)0.6 original
74 Cost of R. Water Pump = $2629.41(gpm)0.6 original
75 PL for a mine mills T tons ore/day(kw) = 78T 0.6 updated
76 Power Consumption (kwh) = 1400T 0.6 updated
77 For power supplied by utility updated
Cost of Substation = $341.18(PL)0.8
78 For power supplied by utility original
Cost of Transmission Line = $52588.24 per mile
79 Cost of Diesel Elec. Plant = $3529.41(PL)0.8 updated
80 Cost of L. Vol. Distribution = $676.47(PL)0.8 updated
General 81 Ao = 35 (General Administrative Personnel)1.3 updated
Services 82 Cost of Office = $91.18A0.9 o updated
Costs 83 Am = 85 × NS updated
84 Cost of Maintenance Shop = $60(Am )0.9 updated
85 Af = 24 × Nm updated
86 Cost of Change houses, First aid station, and Mine rescue facilities = $73.53(Af )0.9 updated
87 Cost of Warehouse = $3382T 0.4 updated
88 Cost of miscellaneous facilities including general purpose vehicle, garages, updated
seurity stations, fencing, parking lots, and etc. = $5882.35T 0.5
6
Table 1. (Continued)
Indirect Costs 89 Cost of feasibility studies, environmental studies, design engineering, equipment updated
specification and procurement, and specialized consulting services = $2.3D0.8
90 Cost of construction camp, specialized construction equipment, and general updated
construction site costs = 0.31D0.9
91 Cost of project supervision, scheduling and budgeting, and construction updated
management = 1.8D0.8
92 Cost of local office administration by owner’s representative, accounting and payment updated
of general contractors, preproduction employment of key
operating staff, and legal costs = 1.5D0.8
Operating 93 Cost of provision of working capital = All operating costs and spares inventory updated
Costs for 10 weeks
94 Mining Labor Costs per ton = $51.33TP−0.5 + $3.15TP−0.3 original
95 Mining Supplies Costs per ton = $11.74Tp−0.5 + $1.09TP−0.3 + $0.79TP−0.2 original
96 For simple base metal ores original
Milling Labor Costs per ton = $78.88T −0.5
97 For simple base metal ores original
Milling Supplies Costs per ton = $16.48T −0.3
98 For complex base metal ores original
Milling Labor Costs per ton = $81.51T −0.5
99 For complex base metal ores original
Milling Supplies Costs per ton = $18.85T −0.3
100 For precious metal ores original
Milling Labor Costs per ton = $85.02T −0.5
101 For precious metal ores original
Milling Supplies Costs per ton = $13.35T −0.3
102 Electrical services wages costs per day = $59.6 (0.03 to 0.05 Nm ) + 35% original
Fringe Benefits
103 General plant service wages costs per day = $46.45 (0.04Nm ) + 35% Fringe Benefits original
104 General plant services supplies costs per day = $5.26T 0.5 original
105 General administration salaries costs per day = $74.55 (0.07 Nm ) + 35% original
Fringe Benefits
106 Cost of general administration expences including office and wearhouse supplies, original
telephone and travel expences, property t taxes, insurance and legal expenses,
auditing and consolting fees per day = $3.5Nm
107 Townsite employees costs per day = $43.82 (0.00 to 0.05 Nm ) + 35% Fringe Benefits original
108 For bunk house townsite original
Townsite operating costs per day = $11.39(Nm )
109 For family townsite original
Townsite operating costs per day = $4.38(Nm )
110 Cost of electric power per day = $85.29T 0.56 updated
equation must present the labor costs and the sup- or quantity and T represents the tonnage rate or other
ply costs separately in order to have the ability of physical conditions causing changes in costs or quan-
being modified. Also they must be in conformity with tities. Because of O’Hara’s comprehensive analysis x
selected pattern for personnel estimation. In Table 1, will be the fixed scale factor and only K which repre-
the fiscal equations are presented in US dollar for the sents project factor or in other word the general project
base year (third quarter of 1978). factor will be modified and updated. This is because
the conventional technology is still in use.
As the equations of O’Hara cost estimator have spe-
3 MODIFYING AND UPDATING cific formats which differ from cost estimating system
handbooks, in this section at first an analysis on each
In this section the fiscal equations of Table 1, will fiscal equation was preformed in order to determine
be modified and updated. Corresponding numbers are the percentages of the impressive factors on each equa-
underlined in Table 1. tion. Then in the subsections in which there are some
Most of O’Hara’s equations were presented in the impressive factors and the equation/equations are not
form Q = KTX where Q represents the required cost limited to a category of engineering activities, these
7
percentages will be stated for equation/equations being should be noted that the loading fleet mainly, includes
modified. After that based on these percentages the shovels, loaders, and dozers. The general project fac-
calculated modification coefficient of the subsections tors for these equations in both updated and modified
are expressed. models are the same. They are 29882.3530, 762000,
In some cases, the modification coefficient is the and 30480 respectively.
average inflation shown in a studied category of
engineering activities which fits the cost estimating
equation because of their similar nature. In other cases, 3.5 Modifying and updating equations 38 and 84
it is the result of mixing the average inflation in some
related categories, and Iran and world cost conditions. Equation 38 is the estimator of maintenance facili-
It is interesting to note that these modification coeffi- ties cost for open pit and equation 84 is the estimator
cients can be used just after multiplying by common of maintenance and repair facilities cost for movable
fraction 70.4713/8281 which is the ratio of the Rials equipment from processing and service department.
per USD exchange rate in the base year to the target
year. The utilized updating coefficient is 2.54 as men-
tioned in introduction. In some cases like the operating
costs, this coefficient may cause over estimation. But it
must be noted that the major role of the updated model
is facilitating the comparability of the modified model
estimated cost with estimated cost in general and the
minor role is estimating the cost in North America.
Figure 2. Soil stripping cost in the base year and the target
3.2 Modifying and updating the equation 23 year in Iran and in general.
The studied inflation in this subsection is 3280.13 per
cent. After multiplying by the ratio of the exchange
rates and also by the base year general project factor,
the general project factor in modified model for this
equation will be 0.5255. While in updated model, it is
4.7813 (Fig. 2).
8
The estimated costs of these equations are rates and also by the base year general project fac-
impressed by 78.28 per cent construction costs and tor, the general project factors in modified model for
24.72 per cent tools purchase payment. The studied these equations one after the other will be 6696.1922,
inflation in such construction cases is 5744.84 per cent 12053.1502, and 23436.681 respectively. While in
which after multiplying by the ratio of the exchange updated model, they are 44524.7060, 80144.4707, and
rates and 0.7828, it would be 38.27 per cent. On the 155836.4706.
other hand, there is another 62.79 per cent inflation
which comes from multiplying 254 per cent (tools
3.10 Modifying and updating the equation 48
purchase payment inflation rate in USD) by 0.2472.
Then the modification coefficient in this subsection The estimated cost of this equation fits buildings in
is 1.0106 and the general project factors in modi- mild climate (degree-days = 4000 c◦ ) and in cold cli-
fied model for these equations, respectively, will be mate it should be modified by 10 per cent for each 1000
3566.8236 and 60.636. While in updated model they increase in degree-days. In hot climate it could be less
are 8964.7060 and 152.4. because of locating thickener and hydrometallurgical
equipment outside (Hustrulid & Kuchta 1995).
3.6 Modifying and updating the equation 39 The studied inflation in this subsection is 6021.15
per cent. After multiplying by the ratio of the exchange
The estimated cost of this equation includes 63.168 per rates and also by the base year general project factor,
cent electrical distribution costs with 8009.50 per cent the general project factor in modified model for this
studied inflation and 36.832 per cent communication equation will be 8138.1176. While in updated model,
costs with 7673.50 per cent studied inflation. Then it is 40341.1764 (Fig. 4).
the modification coefficient in this subsection after
multiplying by the ratio of the exchange rates is 0.6711
and the general project factors in modified model for 3.11 Modifying and updating the equation 49
this equation will be 98.6913. While in updated model The estimated cost of this equation is impressed by 80
it is 373.5299. per cent purchase payment, transport costs, and super-
vising cost in installation with 254 per cent assumed
3.7 Modifying and updating the equation 40 inflation rate in USD and 20 per cent labor and con-
The estimated cost of this equation is impressed by struction material costs for installation with 5752.06
11 per cent construction costs and 89 per cent devices per cent studied inflation in Rial which must be mul-
purchase payment. The studied inflation in such con- tiplied by the ratio of the exchange rates. Then the
struction cases is 5918.17 per cent which after mul- modification coefficient in this subsection is 2.1299
tiplying by the ratio of the exchange rates and 0.11, and the general project factor in modified model for
it would be 5.54 per cent. On the other hand, there this equation will be 84005.7618. While in updated
is another 33.56 per cent inflation which comes from model it is 100180.5883 (Fig. 5).
multiplying 4430.65 per cent (devices purchase pay-
ment inflation rate in Rial) by 0.89 and also by the ratio
of the exchange rates. Then the modification coef-
ficient in this subsection is 0.3910 and the general
project factors in modified model for this equation
will be 6.44. While in updated model it is 41.8353.
9
Figure 5. Crushing capital costs in the base year and the
Figure 6. Grinding capital costs, in the base year and the
target year in Iran and in general.
target year in Iran and in general.
10
Figure 8. Processing capital costs for leaching, CIP/CIL Figure 10. Processing capital costs for high grade gold ores
carbon adsorption and refining in the base year and the target with base metal sulfides and pyretic gold/silver ores in the
year in Iran and in general. base year and the target year in Iran and in general.
11
Figure 12. Road construction cost in the base year and the
Figure 11. Tailing storage cost in the base year and the target target year in Iran and in general.
year in Iran and in general.
it would be 39.7 per cent. On the other hand, there
to 16759.2941.While in updated model it is 7470.5883 is another 76.2 per cent inflation which comes from
to 19424.8735. multiplying 254 per cent (loader purchase payment
inflation rate in USD) by 0.3. Then the modification
3.18 Modifying and updating the equation 61 coefficient in this subsection is 1.159 and the general
project factors in modified model for this equation will
The estimated range of cost by this equation belongs
be 4063.3177. While in updated model it is 8904.9413.
to different condition of Uranium processing. In all
condition it is almost impressed by 50.4 per cent pur-
chase payment, transport costs, and supervising cost 3.21 Modifying and updating the equation 64
in installation with 254 per cent assumed inflation rate The estimated cost of this equation fits graveled road
in USD and 49.6 per cent labor and construction mate- of 9 m width in moderate topography, tree, and rock
rial costs for installation with 5421.86 per cent studied outcrop condition and it should be modified by ±30%
inflation in Rial which must be multiplied by the ratio for better or worse condition.
of the exchange rates. Then the modification coef- The studied inflation in this subsection is 4640.94
ficient in this subsection is 1.5091 and the general per cent. After multiplying by the ratio of the exchange
project factor in modified model for this equation will rates and also by the base year general project factor,
be 133155.8823 to 177541.1764. While in updated the general project factor in modified model for this
model it is 224117.647 to 298823.5294. equation will be 69231.3491. While in updated model,
it is 445247.0587 (Fig. 12).
3.19 Modifying and updating the equation 62
The studied inflation in this subsection is 4514.69 per 3.22 Modifying and updating the equation 65
cent. After multiplying by the ratio of the exchange
rates and also by the base year general project factor, For estimating the cost of necessary bridges by this
the general project factor in modified model for this equation, each bridge cost must be estimated and then
equation will be 4520. While in updated model, it is all estimated costs must be summed. It should be
29882.3530 (Fig. 11). noted that this equation is just presented for estimating
small bridges costs to span creeks and small rivers and
the large necessary bridges must be built by national
3.20 Modifying and updating the equation 63 investment.
The estimated cost of this equation is impressed by 70 The studied inflation in this subsection is 5875.35
per cent construction costs and conveying and feed- per cent. After multiplying by the ratio of the exchange
ing devices purchase payment and 30 per cent loader rates and also by the base year general project factor,
purchase payment. The studied inflation in the 70 per the general project factor in modified model for this
cent portion of the cost is 6664.43 per cent which after equation will be 57.0579. While in updated model, it
multiplying by the ratio of the exchange rates and 0.7, is 289.8587 (Fig. 13).
12
these equations will be 641.8859 and 837.2425 respec-
tively. While in updated model, they are 5120.341 and
6678.7060.
13
27.9 per cent portion of the cost is 5551.13 per cent multiplying 9709.83 (general purpose vehicle pur-
which after multiplying by the ratio of the exchange chase payment inflation rate in Rial) by the ratio of
rates and 0.297, it would be 13.18 per cent. On the the exchange rates and 0.445. Then the modifica-
other hand, there are other 70.10 per cent inflation tion coefficient in this subsection is 1.2005 and the
which comes from multiplying 254 per cent (instru- general project factors in modified model for this
ments and devices purchase payment inflation rate in equation will be 7061.7647. While in updated model
USD) by 0.276 and 36.77 per cent which comes from it is 14941.1764.
Table 2. Parts of mining supply cost with their impression percentages and inflation rates.
70.4713
Blasting materials 36.5 23651.5 ×
8281
70.4713
Trucks fuel and lubrication 13.15 9102.75 ×
8281
Drills spare parts 12.95 254
Drills bits and steel parts 8 254
Trucks tires 7.4 254
Trucks spare parts 6.8 254
Shovels spare parts 2.6 254
Dozers spare parts 2.35 254
70.4713
Dozers fuel and lubrication 2.35 9102.75 ×
8281
70.4713
Drills fuel and lubrication 2 9102.75 ×
8281
70.4713
Loaders and graders fuel and lubrication 2 9102.75 ×
8281
Loaders and graders spare parts 1.51 254
70.4713
Drilling and Blasting auxiliary equipment fuel and lubrication 1.12 9102.75 ×
8281
Loaders and graders tires 0.8 254
Drilling and Blasting auxiliary equipment spare parts 0.25 254
70.4713
Shovels fuel and lubrication 0.12 9102.75 ×
8281
70.4713
Drilling and Blasting auxiliary equipment tires 0.1 10316.9 ×
8281
14
3.34 Modifying and updating equations per cent labor work force costs which in turn includes
96, 98 and 100 51.69 per cent direct labor costs and 48.31 per cent
maintenance labor costs. And the estimated cost of
The estimated cost of equations 96 and 98 include
equation 100 includes 35.85 per cent administrative
36.42 per cent administrative work force and 63.58
work force and 64.15 per cent labor work force costs
which in turn includes 58.065 per cent direct labor
costs and 41.935 per cent maintenance labor costs.
Considering this conformation, the comparison of the
wages which O’Hara developed his equations based
on them, with nowadays wages will result the modifi-
cation coefficient of 0.1946 for equations 96 and 98
and 0.1954 for equation 100. While in updated model
they could be about 2.54 (Fig. 16).
Table 3. Parts of milling supply cost with their impression percentages and inflation rates for base metal ores.
15
Table 4. Parts of milling supply cost with their impression percentages and inflation rates for precious metal ores.
16
Table 5. Predicted updating coefficient per year for modified model up to three years after 2003.
8281
1 20, 21, 22 1.15 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
2 23 1.1 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
3 24, 73, 74 1.11 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
4 30, 33, 36 1.056
8281
5 38, 84 0.92 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.26
8281
6 39, 80 1.11 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
7 40, 45, 46, 47, 62, 64 1.14 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
8 42, 43, 44 1.12 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
9 48, 82, 86, 96, 98, 100, 102, 103, 105, 107, 110 1.12 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
10 49 0.23 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.84
8281
11 50, 51, 52 0.23 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.85
8281
12 53 0.41 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.69
8281
13 54 0.45 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.64
8281
14 56, 58, 59 0.29 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.79
8281
15 55, 57 0.37 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.72
8281
16 60 0.2 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.88
8281
17 61 0.58 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.53
8281
18 63 0.84 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.32
8281
19 65, 78, 94 1.19 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
20 66, 67, 68, 87, 1.17 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
21 72 1.09 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
22 77, 79 1.23 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
23 88 0.91 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.29
8281
24 95 0.90 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.45
8281
25 97, 99 0.13 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.96
8281
26 101 0.12 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
+ 0.95
8281
27 104, 106 1.28 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
28 108, 109 1.3 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
8281
29 (1) 1.12 × Update Rials per Dollar Exchange Rate
base year and the target year, the costs of activities can simply be done for the updated model which could
were monitored during recent ten years. Also some be used for cost estimating in industrialized coun-
other forecasts of local and general inflation rates for tries (specially in North America). This is because
next three years were utilized in this prediction. The of the existing economic stability in those countries.
predicted coefficients are presented in Table 5. Whereas currently in Iran, in spite of good economic
Obviously, using a combined index which calcu- potency of the country, there is a gradual climb in Rials
lated from PPI, GPD, CPI, and ECI , the same updating exchange rate per USD to encourage the exportation.
17
Table 6. Examples of estimated costs by the modified model in comparison with the actual cases.
Preproduction soil stripping cost 0.042 0.044 Managing and planning 4.55 25
(USD/tonne) organization of Iran
Preproduction waste stripping cost 0.333 0.367 Managing and planning 9.26 25
(USD/tonne) organization of Iran
Drilling capital costs 1885449 2000000 International market 5.73 25
(per unit of drill with 10 inches
bit diameter)
Grinding capital costs 30033384 32858000 Sungun Copper Project 8.6 25
Processing capital costs 6882792 7704000 Sungun Copper Project 10.66 25
Power supplying capital costs 7372904 8212000 Sungun Copper Project 10.22 25
Ore production operating costs 1.426 1.56 Sungun Copper Project 8.6 25
(per tonne of ore, assuming
1:1.63 stripping ratio)
Concentrate production operating costs 2.376 2.56 Sungun Copper Project 7.19 25
(per tonne of ore)
Also on the other hand some specific financial poli- localized guides are applied considering the exist-
cies are being used for controlling the consequent ing background of accomplished similar projects, the
inflation on the engineering activities costs.These real- experienced cost estimator can even gain more accu-
ities demand the above-mentioned monitoring when rate estimation than what is needed in preliminary
being concern in updating the fiscal equations of the feasibility study.
modified model.
REFERENCES
6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
O’Hara, T.A. 1980. Quick guides to evaluation of orebodies.
The estimated costs by modified model are in con- CIM Bulletin (2) 73814: 78–99.
A., Suboleski, S.C. 1992. Cost and cost estimation. Hartman,
cordance with the actual cost data (some examples
H.L. (ed), Mining engineering handbook 2nd edition:
are presented in Table 6). Then it is recommended 405–424. Colorado: SME.
to localize the O’Hara cost estimator in different Hustrulid, W., Kuchta, M. 1995. Mining revenues and costs.
parts of the world in order to take benefit of these Open pit mine planning and design: 101–122. Rotterdam:
quick guides in preliminary feasibility studies. If these Balkema.
18