Case Study: Actual vs Mine Plan Performance Analysis - Iron OreIron Ore Miner- Pilbara, Australia
At A Glance
- Industry: Iron ore mining
- Location: Pilbara, WA
- Scope: Haul trucks only
- Inputs: Mine plan + actual performance + production & delay data
- Outputs: Plan‑to‑actual gap drivers + prioritised improvement opportunities
Executive Summary
An iron ore mining operation in the Pilbara engaged EnterpriseIS to perform an Actual vs Mine Plan analysis using production and delay data for haul trucks only, alongside mine plan and actual performance data sourced from the client’s information systems.
The work compared plan assumptions with actual performance (including fleet assumptions, availability/utilisation, haul distance productivity, cycle delays, and payload performance) to identify where the largest gaps existed.
The analysis found a significant plan‑to‑actual performance gap driven by factors such as plan assumption inconsistency, availability targets above fleet capability, increasing haul distances with static fleet size, “Scheduled No Work” time, payload distribution issues, and higher than planned loading/queuing times, and it identified and prioritised improvement projects to address the gap.
Client Challenge
An Iron Ore miner engaged EnterpriseIS in Western Australia to undertake a detailed review of the production and delay data across their Mining operation (Haul Trucks only). To understand the key performance issues impacting the operation in achieving their business objectives and correlating the outcomes with the current projects, to understand their priority.
Our Solution
EnterpriseIS sourced the mine plan and actual performance data from the clients’ information management systems.
The analysis steps included:
- Reviewing the historical mining plan
- Comparing the mining plan against actual performance for spatial compliance and mining process capability
- Comparing mine plan assumptions against actual truck performance to validate assumptions of fleet size, availability, utilisation, and effectiveness
- Analysing mine productivity against haulage distances
- Analysing truck cycles for delays and performance losses
- Analysing truck payloads to determine underloading and overloading capability.
EnterpriseIS analysed all plan assumptions to determine where the greatest gaps with actual performance existed.
The Results
There was found to be a significant gap between the mining plan and actual performance.
The discrepancies were due to:
- Inconsistency between Mine Plan assumptions and actual performance (analysis indicated >75% likelihood the plan would not be met under current assumptions)
- Equipment ‘Availability’ targets considerably higher than fleet capability (both planned & unplanned)
- Growing distances travelled to meet the mine plan with static fleet size
- Large volumes of “Scheduled No Work” time for high capital, production critical equipment
- Broad distribution in payload performance (significant overloading and underloading to plan)
- Higher than planned loading & queuing times
The improvement projects to close the gap between the mining plan and actual performance were identified and prioritised for resourcing.