<00 SOCIETY FOR

UIi'G,(ANQ\~
PREPRINT
NUMBER
MINING, METALLURGY,
AND EXPLORATION, INC.
96-29
P.O. BOX 625002· LITTLETON, COLORADO· 80162-5002

AN EXPANDED CLASSIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF ROADHEADERS

L. Adler
S. D. Thompson
)
West Virginia University
Morgantown, West Virginia

For presentation at the SME Annual Meeting

Phoenix, Arizona - March 11-14, 1996

Permission is hereby given to publish with appropriate acknowledgments, excerpts or

summaries not to exceed one-fourth of the entire text of the paper. Permission to print in more
I extended form subsequent to publication by the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration
I
(SME), Inc. must be obtained from the Executive Director of the Society.
If and when this paper is published by the SME, it may embody certain changes made by
agreement between the Technical Publications Committee and the author so that the form in
which it appears is not necessarily that in which it may be published later.
Current year preprints are available for sale from the SME, Preprints, P.O. Box 625002,
Littleton, CO 80162-5002 (303-973-9550). Prior year preprints may be obtained from the
Engineering Societies Library, 345 East 47th Street, New York, NY 10017 (212-705-7611).

PREPRINT AVAILABILITY LIST IS PUBLISHED PERIODICALLY IN

MINING ENG~NEERING
 1
Abstract. To properly analyze and apply mining The most significant feature of the Roadheader is the
equipment, a systematic, current, inclusive, and simple unique and basic cutterhead which provides an excellent rod
classification scheme is required. This paper provides such cutting capability, and consequently, has had a phenomena
a classification for Roadheaders. This Roadheader development. The Roadheader is used in mining for minera
classification is based on factors, such as the rock extraction and development, and in construction for tunnels
cutterhead, the boom type, and the chassis configuration. It While its primary application is underground excavation, it i,
first assigns Roadheaders as an equipment type within the also capable of performing surface work (see DeLilla.
larger group of Integrated Excavators. The Roadheader type 1994).
is then delineated into the following SUbtypes: the standard,
the extended boom, the tunnelers, and the miscellaneous. The main advantage of using Roadheaders is that drillinf
Next, these SUbtypes are devolved into kinds, and fmally and blasting can be eliminated. The major disadvantage is it,
variants and attachments are considered. To resolve limitation to rocks of medium strength or less. Additiona
inconsistencies in characterizing the Roadheader, cross- information on the Roadheader's advantages, disadvantages
referencing is employed within the classification scheme. and applications can be found in the recent literature 01
mechanical mining (see Bullock, 1994; Chadwick, 1995
Dahmen and Willoughy, 1995; DeLilla, 1994; Gertsch, 199:
GENERAL and 1994; Ozdemir, Rostarni, and Neil, 1995; Rostarni
Ozdemir, and Neil, 1994).
It is universally accepted that classifying is the "first and
indispensable condition of systematic thought". A good
equipment classification system can provide: (1) a broad BACKGROUND
assessment and greater understanding of the equipment, and
(2) a basis for selecting and evaluating the equipment. Evolution

Within the classification system for construction and The Roadheader evolved from the already high1~
mining equipment, this paper focuses on providing a developed Continuous Miner (CM). The cutting drum of thl
systematic, current, inclusive, and simple classification for continuous miner was replaced by a smaller ball typl
Roadheaders. The new classification is needed as cutterhead, sometimes cone or disc shaped, with the pick
Roadheaders now come in a wide variety of configurations being retained (see Figure 2). This resulting reduction il
and are often considered to be the epitome of mechanical surface contact significantly increases the force concentratel
machine mining. on the face. Consequently, the ability for tool penetration i·
increased and a significantly harder rock can be cut.
Within the classification for mining and construction
equipment, each equipment group contains several types, a
well-recognized nomenclature. Types are followed by, Attendant Results
SUbtypes, kinds, and the smallest distinctive category, the
variant. This classification system is outlined in Figure 1. In order to achieve a full face cut, a boom swing 01
slewing capability must be added to the CM's existinf
elevating capability. This boom swing capability justifies tht
Previously, Roadheaders were classified as an equipment "Roadheader" designation since it produces a cross-sectior
kind within the Integrated Excavator Group (see Adler, with a horseshoe shape rather than a rectangular (or flat
1991). Since this classification was constructed, the shape (see Figure 3). The horseshoe cross-section i,
Roadheader has continued to evolve and its range of mining especially appropriate for tunneling since it increase,
and construction applications has expanded. As a result, a opening stability and improves tunnel ventilation. A ball
more up-to-date Roadheader classification is now required. shaped cutterhead is much smaller than a drum, therefore
The classification system, presented in this paper, addresses tramming ability is also improved.
this issue and upgrades the Roadheader to a type within the
Integrated Excavator group. Note that the type category is
just one level lower than the more encompassing group
category. Exceptions to this classification scheme will be
noted and discussed.

_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Process of Equlpmenl
Sol.cdo"

Continuer, as Illustrated by
the Type I Branch above.

Fig. 1 - Classification of contruction and mining equipment.

 2

. .. ..
".. .. .. .. . ... .. .. ....
..

Conical Shaped
C . . . ,--,...--
.. " ..
. .. . ..
" " '" .. .. .. . .
of ..
Drum Shaped Continuous
Roadheader Cutterhead Miner Cutterhead

Fig. 2 - Roadheader cutterhead versus continuous miner cutterhead (modified from AEC Inc.
1978). ' ,

Horseshoe cross-section typically Rectangular cross-section typically

cut by a roadheader. cut by a continuous miner.

Fig. 3 - Roadway cross-sections cut by roadheaders and continuous miners.

Because of its greatly improved rock cutting ability, the Articulated Boom kinds for the New Austrian Tunneling
basic cutterhead and boom have been used on a wide variety Method (NATM). The first kind has a single center-line
of assemblies beyond the original CM chassis. The use of transfer conveyor as well as a telescoping cutter boom and
its cutterhead and boom in this fashion has led to the need apron (see Figure 7). The other kind has two tandem
for an expanded classification, with the details developed transfer conveyors and uses a unique scraper conveyor
below. mounted on the underside of the cutter boom (see Figure 8).
Both of these kinds are true Integrated Excavators with
strong mutual similarities, and therefore, are bracketed
CLASSIFICATION together. The fmal kind is the Boom Cutter Loader (see
Figure 9), which does not have an articulated cutter boom or
Precedent a separate gathering head. Rock fragments are cascaded
directly from the cutter onto the flight conveyor on top of the
Roadheaders had been previously classified as a kind cutterboom. This boom is actually a conveyor boOm similar
within the sUbtype: Continuous Miners. This subtype was to that of a Bucketwheel Excavator (BWE).
listed under the type, Continuous Excavators (CEs), and the
CEs were listed within the group: Integrated Excavators The third subtype consists of machines similar to those
(lEs). The Roadheader is now upgraded to a type within the used in tunneling; therefore, this subtype is tenned:
lEs, and its has its own subtypes, kinds, and variants. Conventional Tunnelers. One kind is mounted on a Gantry
Table 1 displays this new classification system. (see Figure 10), jumbo or platform, such as employed for
tunnel face drilling These machines are not integrated and
The most obvious sUbtype is the Standard Roadheader require the use of an FEL. Another kind is. mounted. on
which has evolved directly from the CM (see Figure 4). The Tunnel Shields and resembles the Tunnel Bonng Machines
kinds within this category are generally accepted and clearly (TBMs) used in unstable ground (see Figure 11). ~ese
differentiated. The variants (see Figure 5) are numerous and machines advance by jacking. An interesting Tunnel Shield
the reasons for inclusion appear below. kind is the Concept Miner (see Figure 12). The fmal kinds
are debatable. They are used for soft ground and replace the
rock cutter with a Rake Loader or Backhoe. Since the
The second subtype is the Extended Boom Roadheader manufacturing literature on Roadheaders includes them, the)
(boom ~ 7.6 m~, including the kind: Hydraulic or Backhoe are included here for consideration.
M.o~ted (see FIgure 6a and 6b). A problem arises in that
this IS no longer an Integrated Excavator, but it is more like a
Rotating Excavator. However, since this excavator has a The fourth and fmal subtype is termed Miscellaneous. It
~oc~ c~tter and is usually presented along with Roadheaders, exists as a receptacle for several highly individualized kinds.
It IS mcluded here and cross-referenced to Hydraulic Among these is the Cutter Loader (see Figure 13), which
Excavators. During its operation, a separate Front-End should not to be confused with the Boom Cutter Loader
Loader (PEL) or Backhoe is needed. There are also two (Figure 7). This machine is essentially an FEL with a Rock
 3

Table 1 - Classifying the Roadheader (Type)

o CuHemead· single (a few with two and additional boom), milling

(transverse) or ripping (longitudinal) motions, and water jets.
Single Cente~ine CuHer Boom - fixed or telescoping (long, do not need to tram to
Transfer Conveyor: sump, and for soMer rock).
o Discharge Boom - shcrt to long, and slewing or fixed.
o Small (" 25 T) Transfer Ramp Conveyor - belt or flight.
o Med. (25 T . 80 T) Gathering Assistance (on apron) - arms, flat spiral discs, stars,
o Large (i< 80 T) and paddle conveyor.
• Narrow

Attachments: On CuHer Boom· work platlorms, tunnal sets, drill and impactor
mountings.

Two External Comments: Single oscillating notched disc assistance, fixed flight transfer
Transfer Conveyors conveyor boom, stabilizers, and ripping only.

Variants: o Articulated boom (one or two pivots).

I
I Single Cente~ine AHachment: Stabilizers.
I Transfer Conveyor
Comments: Telescoping cuner boom and apron (one pivot also).
15'8
~.::: I
;; I
I;
e.5 I
------ Variants. Size range.
HI
~~ I Two External
Crawlers or rails.
La rge has two assisting backhoes.
- ..... Transfer Conveyors Attachments: Stabilizers.
~E I Comments' Scraper conveyor on underside of cutter boom for gathering. single
~~ I oscillating notched diSC assistance.

Variants: Size range.

Boom Cutter Loader Attachments: Stabilizers.
(Fixed Boom - NATM) Comments. Cuner boom holds conveyor (see BWE), single discharge boom.

Gantry, Jumbo, or Vanants: 1 or 2 standard booms and cuttemeads.

Crawlers or wheels
Platform Mounted 1
Attachments· Impactor, drill.

I Conventional Variants: Single or multiple cuHemeads.

Scroll, arms, or backhoe assistance.
Fixed or telescoping cutter boom.
1_ _ _ _ _ -

: Concept Comments: Advanced concept (multiple rotating and sWiveling cuner booms and
heads.

t~~~~-=-
COmmemS: NotarOCk cutt8r.'" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I Backhoe and Comments: Not a rock cutter (surface or trench location).

I Shield

Variants: Cunerhead mounted In bucket 01 FEl.

o No bucket, venically swiveling cunerhead (shaft Sinking).

Variants: o CuHemead (slews), non-elevating. or elevating (up dip)

Mobile Miner Comments: No assistance on apron (8 crowd plate). disc cutters mounted on a
vertical wheel that slews (refer to rock saw or wheel dllcher which do
not slew).

1 Not integrated, needs separate loader, FEL, or backhoe.

2 Cross-referenced with Rotating Excavators (or FEL).
 4

Fig. 4 - Standard Roadheader on a chassis similar to a continuous miner (plan view)

(modified from Voest-Alpine. n.d.).

Fig. 5 - Roadheader variants (Atlas Copco-Eickhoff. 1987).

(a) Roadheader on a hydraulic excavator chassis.

(b) Roadheader on a truck.

Fig. 6 - Extended boom roadheaders (Voest-Alpine. n.d.)

 5

""'
-, ~­
"
'""
.
~~;;"
?~~~::.-:.:::____ ~--------. "0.::-
. ,
" ,"',"'If-:""
--- r-- ,"---

Fig. 7 - Articulated Boom Roadheader with centerline transfer and telescoping boom and gathering
head for New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM) (modified from Wiest-Alpine, n.d.).

Scraper
Conveyor Tandem Transfer

~C"""y""

Fig. 8 - Articulated Boom Roadheader for New Austrian Tunneling Method with tandem transfer
system (modified from Westfalia LUnen, n.d.).

Fig. 9 - Boom Cutter Loader ( modified from Westfalia LUnen. n.d.).

(a) Roadheader on a gantry. (b) Gantry with drill and separate FEL working underneath.

Fig. 10 - Gantry mounted roadheaders (AEC, Inc., n.d.).

 6

Fig. 11 - Roadheader mounted on tunnel shields (Anderson Stratchclyde PLC, 1982).

Fig. 12 - The concept miner (Westfalia LUnen, n.d.).

Fig. 13 - Cutter loader (Atlas Copco-Eickhoff, 1987).

 7
Cutter in the bucket; again, it is really not an integrated DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
excavator. Note that is also exists without a bucket for shaft
sinking. Another kind in this category is the Mobile Miner,
which is similar to a rock saw with disc cutters (see Figure Viewpoint
14). In addition, there is a separate small Tunnel Expansion
Kind for converting circular cross-sections into horseshoes The basis of the classification brings to light trends thaI
(see Figure 15). Another kind is the Road Cutter, which were previously unnoticed. The diverse applications of the
resembles a shortwall excavator, with the cutter performing Roadheader's cutterhead closely parallels that of the Hammer
complex kinematics (see Figure 16). The Hybrid Kind (see Impactor, which is also mounted on various chassis such as
Figure 17) has both cutting and boring heads. Other kinds mobile loaders and rotating decks. Table 2 compares these
can exist and would be located in this sUbtype. two applications with the transfer conveyor on the

Fig. 14 - The mobile miner (Gertsch, 1992).

Fig. 15 - Tunnel expansion kind (Atlas Copco-Eickhoff, 1987).

Fig. 16 - Roadheader resembling a shortwall excavator (Atlas Copco-Eickhoff. 1987).

Fig. 17 - AEC 'Orebiter' (Chadwick, 1995).

 8

Table 2 - Comparing Components of Rock Cutters and Impactors With Comparable Types

,.". Cutterhead '. I:'l<. Other Comparable

Component .~.
Rock' Cu;;e~~J;
.•
Impactors
1;)
o·~,,,, · ..;' .... Types/Kinds
.• r

Basic Mobile Tractor Cutter Loader Dintner FEL (Bucket)

(esp. crawlers) Also without a Bulldozer (Blade)
bucket
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rotating Super· Yes Also fixed at Hydraulic Excavators
~tru..:!ur:JH~ra~c) _ ...ariz!!.ey _ BWE
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Jumbo Gantry Mounted Drilling Jumbos
'"
'cr.
~
f------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
f-
..r;: Shield (Tunneling) Yes No Boring Machines (Esp. TBM)
U
f------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
,; Ramp Conveyor Yes (most) Yes (Attachment) Continuous Miner
. : I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Handheld No Pick, Spade
I: I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Complex Road Cutter No Longwall Shearer or
Plow, Shom~·all. (Road-
headers?)

-c -0 Transfer Conveyor Boom Cutter No BWE, BCE, and Dredge

"
..r;:
.,c
on top of Cutter Loader (belt, flight. bucket
Boom conveyors)

I Job end other than cutterhead (e.g .. boom. transfer. etc.).

cutterboom to display similarities. This table also considers often for special conditions, and various combinations 01
the Bucket (Blade) and Boring applications: the former as in them can be used. Attachments upgrade performance. the)
the dintner (see Figure 18). Specifically, these associations do not dominate it. In spite of these distinctions. some
provide a different classifying viewpoint based on the classification overlap occurs. For example. health and safet)
chassis. devices (for surface versus underground use) can be
considered as variants or attachments.

Fig. 18 - The dintner (impacting bucket) (AEC, Inc., 1978),

Variants vs. Attachments Other Viewpoints

At the most detailed level of classification, some guidance An alternative classification viewpoint could focus on the
is required to distinguish between variants and attachments. chassis rather than the job-end. Cross-references within the
The chassis is often selected first (from several possibilities), proposed classification consider this alternate viewpoint.
because it is critical to equipment operation. Variants However. it must be understood that a classification is not a
describe a more integral and permanent form of the strait-jacket, but should be of practical use. In addition, to
equipment, usually involving a major component Uob-end, consider new and changing equipment. the classification
power, or running gear). Attachments on the other hand must be periodically upgraded.
tend to be more ancillary or peripheral. They are add-ons,
 9
Although "Rock Cutter" is the new term often used for Bullock, R. L., 1994, "Underground hard rock mechanica'
"Roadheaders", the latter word is retained due to its wide- mining," Mining Engineering, Vol. 46, No. 11, Nov.
spread use and the basic horseshoe or circular cross-section pp. 1254-1258.
it produces. Other competing terms are "Mechanical Mining
or Machine Mining", which also apply to TBMs and others. Chadwick, J., 1995, "Mechanised drivage," Minin~
Magazine, Vol. 172, No.2, April, pp. 227-235.

Closure for this major classification change must Dahmen, N., and Willoughby, R., 1995, "Recent mobile
obviously be made within the entire IEs group. Also, miner developments," Preprint 95-155, SME Annua'
adjustments to the adjacent groups, Rapid Excavators, and Meeting Denver, Co., March 6-9, 8 pp.
Muckers and Loaders, should be examined. Changes in all
classification levels should require no more than a single slot DeLilla, E., 1994, "Continuous surface mining equipment:
of displacement, either up or down (e.g., kind to SUbtype or How to achieve success," Mining Engineering, Vol. 46
vice versa). No. 11, Nov., pp. 1259-1262.

Gertsch, R. E., 1992, "Mechanical mining and the future 0:

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS the industry," Mining Engineering, Vol. 44, NO.7, July
pp. 696-698.
The Roadheader is largely a direct descendant of the
continuous miner, but with a much superior rock cutting Gertsch, R. E., 1994, "Mechanical mining: Challenges an(
ability. This improvement has led to a drastically expanded directions," Mining Engineering, Vol. 46, No. 11, Nov.
application. To cope with this expansion, a revised pp. 1250-1253.
classification system has been presented in this paper. It
upgrades the Roadheader to a "Type" within the Integrated Ozdemir, L. Rostami, 1., and Neil, D. M., 1995
Excavators group. Subtypes are then described, followed "Roadheader development for hard rock mining," Preprin:
by lower level kinds and finally variants. Numerous new 95-246, SME Annual Meeting Denver, Co., March 6-9, ~
designations are invoked, ranging from the Standard pp.
Roadheader to the Concept Tunneler. These new
designations are necessary due to the Roadheader's excellent Rostami, 1., Ozdemir, L., and Neil, D. M.. 1994.
rock cutting ability, which makes it a leader in mechanical or "Performance prediction: A key issue in mechanical hare
machine mining. rock mining," Mining Engineering, Vol. 46, No. 11.
Nov., pp. 1263-1267.

REFERENCES Voest-Alpine, n.d., "Alpine Miner AM 75," Brochure Fr-

5132-HA-2000, Linz, Austria.
Adler, L., 1991, "Modifying the Classification for
Construction and Mining Equipment." Trans. SAE. VOest-Alpine, n.d., "Alpine Miner AM 50," Brochure P.
Journal of Commercial Vehicles. Vol. 99, Sect. 2, Sept., VF 23/93e - VII.77 - 1000, Linz, Austria.
pp. 549-560.
Voest-Alpine, n.d., "Alpine Tunnel Miner ATM 70,"
Brochure, Fr-52/20472-M90-1000e, Zeltweg. Austria.
AEC Inc., 1978, "Boom-Type Continuous Miner
Roadheader & Tunneling Machine," Brochure 8178- Westfalia LUnen, n.d., "Westfalia Mining and Heading
1026/2000, State College, P A. Machine BUffel, Type WAY 170," Brochure B1.35.
LUnen, Germany.
AEC Inc., n.d., "Buyer's Guide," Brochure 1063/2000e,
State College, P A. Westfalia LUnen, n.d. "Equipment for Tunnel and Gallen
Construction," Brochure Lfd. Nr. 44 Sa/e/l-UVVV-LTS-
Anderson Stratchclyde PLC, 1983, "Cutting booms for 245, LUnen, Germany.
tunnelling," Brochure 2500/6/83, Glasgow, Scotland.
Westfalia LUnen, n.d., "Selective Cutting Machines.
Synopsis," Brochure Ltd.-Nr. 104 So e/f/s-EVVV-ETu-
Atlas Copco-Eickhoff, 1987, "ET-300 ," Brochure,
245, LUnen, Germany.
Bochum, Germany.

Atlas Copco-Eickhoff, 1987, "There are Many Reasons why

Your Next Partner in Tunneling Driving and Roadheading
should be Atlas Copco-Eickhoff," Brochure 9851 1900
01, Bochum Germany.