Innovation and best practices in Mining: Operations and Processing

Hoist & Haul: Fleet optimization/Fleet Hauling and Quality Assurance in Hoisting, Shaft Modeling, and Headframe Design

HEADFRAME DESIGN SELECTION IN A SALT MINE ENVIRONMENT: CARBON STEEL VS. STAINLESS STEEL HEADFRAME

Simon weixiao Sun G.L Tiley and Associates Ltd.

Abstract

Conventionally, carbon steel has been the primary material for salt mine headframe construction, protected by specialty paint layers to prevent corrosion. These layers require meticulous QA/QC during fabrication and erection, and the top UV protection layer typically loses effectiveness after an average of 10 years, necessitating ongoing maintenance. As headframes age, significant structural repairs are often required. Alternatively, stainless steel can eliminate corrosion concerns, though its high initial cost has limited its use in headframe design. However, when factoring in long-term maintenance costs, a 'maintenance-free' stainless steel headframe can be an attractive option for stakeholders. This paper compares the structural performance and economic considerations of painted carbon steel and stainless steel headframes, including initial capital and long-term maintenance costs. Additionally, it explores a hybrid approach, strategically using carbon steel in low-contamination areas to reduce initial costs and significantly minimize future maintenance efforts.

Attachments only available with access

Please log in to check whether your account has access to this article.

Published in CIM CONNECT 2025 Montréal

Publisher X-CD Journal

Date of Conference May 3–7, 2025