248 (a) (b) Figure 6 - Fuel Ratio per Kilometer: (a) Trend comparison between alpha and bravo, (b) Charlie trend Figure 7 shows that FMS-enabled operations exhibit weaker correlations between productivity and fuel ratio than non-FMS operations, indicating more stable fuel efficiency. This suggests that FMS reduces fuel sensitivity to productivity variability, resulting in more consistent and efficient energy use. (a) (b) Figure 7 - Correlation diagram versus Fuel Ratio: (a) Truck productivity, (b) Digger productivity Figure 8 shows that FMS significantly improves production cost efficiency. Alpha achieved a 28% cost reduction compared to Bravo, while Charlie recorded a consistent 15% reduction after FMS adoption, confirming stronger cost benefits in large-scale mining operations. a) b) Figure 9 shows cost efficiency gains from FMS, which are closely tied to energy use; Table 2 confirms that, at constant production and haul distance, FMS reduces fuel consumption, energy intensity (GJ/ton), and CO₂e per ton, delivering both economic and ESG benefits.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2