Hey, notice lots of threads around civil sized gear. Have we many techs who work on the big gear. Work on a mine with a dozen diggers made up of 996b and 9400 Liebherrs
There’s a couple lurking, I believe they’re associated with Cat and Hitachi. I spent 10 years working in and around a fleet of 12 or so 9200-996‘s. I was a big fan of the 9400 due to the longer stick. absolute beasts those Liebherrs, really move some dirt, In the right material 80 wmt a bucket which is unreal to think about. We had a few Cat 6050’s and Hitachi 3600’s but pound for pound they were not as Productive. The liebherrs however were notorious for lighting up the dash with all sorts of annoying alarms, they seemingly had sensors everywhere. The 996’s do a smart job of cooking a roller on a hot summers day too which no doubt you’d be all over. Feel free to share some more pics, we love pics on here.
IMHO Liebherrs are fine so long as you have a Frenchman swinging around on the counterweight looking after them.
Ok, I’ve got a question- why do Liebherrs have the boom cylinders mounted upside down from all other brands?
Ask the Frenchman on the counterweight.
Big hydraulic excavators were replaced by electric rope shovels and 994s in this region. I've worked around the big stuff quite a bit - mostly 793s.
Only where there is a power supply to run the cable shovels. A large proportion of open-pit mines in Australia are so remote that they do not have a power supply available of sufficient capacity to run electric mining shovels. For them the only option is to run diesel-powered hydraulic excavators as a prime loading tool. Most of the large mines I've been around the loaders of 994 size were classed as auxiliary equipment and used to run cleanup in the pit.
I've heard that explanation before and it makes a great deal of sense. Hydraulic machines also eliminate much of the in-pit electrical infrastructure - especially the trailing cable and pole bridges. That was the original intent with 994s here, but it shifted over time to them becoming production machines in the pit, with a secondary role reclaiming stockpiles. A few years ago there was talk of replacing rope shovels with 994s but fortunately that idea was shot down. Loading time is much slower and they just plain break down more often than shovels.
We really don’t have much in the way of dramas. New style dirty sensors in the pumps are really reliable and quick to inspect and clean. The mines as-ons such as service trap modules and boarding ladder upgrades are a bit finicky at times. Undercarriage cracks and rollers are the Achilles heel of these things. And grease faults! I’ve been told it’s to increase visibility as the rod is much thinner and keeps hosing up high too
Most big mining machine have the boom cylinders mounted that way. Another reason I have heard is that dirt/spillage cannot pile up on top of the barrel for the rod to run through if the cylinders are mounted upside down. Obviously the cylinders are an order of magnitude bigger than what you would find on, for example, a 20-ton machine. I think if you look at any machine in that size class the boom cylinders are going to be mounted with the rod at the bottom.
A better question would be why is the 996 cab on the RHS?