Meeting Minutes from Automation and Emerging Technologies Health and Safety Partnership, Sept. 20-21, 2023

Keywords: Automation

Minutes from the September 20-21, 2023 meeting of the Mine Automation and Emerging Technologies Health and Safety Partnership.

Day 1 - September 20

Welcome and Introductions, George Luxbacher, Deputy Associate Director for Mining, NIOSH

History of mine automation research at the US Bureau of Mines
Importance of partnerships between NIOSH and industry.
Jessica Kogel’s critical role in forming this partnership and the automation research agenda.
Overview of mining fatalities and injuries – numbers have plateaued.
Overview of automation health and safety contracts and the Broad Agency Announcement funding mechanism.

Summary of the Meeting Agenda, Joel Haight, University of Pittsburgh

NIOSH Project Updates:

Machine Situational Awareness, Bob Bissonette, NIOSH

Q: Are we considering input from contractors that are on a mine site?

A: Yes, working with anyone that is interested in providing input.

Coexistence of Wireless Systems in Mining, Ron Jacksha, NIOSH

Q: Have you looked at IEEE 1902?

A: Yes.

Q: Will V2V/V2X standards influence deployment at mines?

A: Not yet, but we acknowledge this will be a hot topic and should be considered.

NIOSH Robotics Research in Other Industries, Jacob Carr, NIOSH

Q: Are the organizations listed as partners with NIOSH also open to partnering with mining research organizations?

A: Yes, lessons learned in other industries will be valuable to mining.

Battery Safety Research, David Yantek, NIOSH

Q: Are partnerships being sought with industry? What opportunities are available?

A: Yes, NIOSH is seeking partners in this research effort. Please contact the presenter if interested.

Autonomous Vehicles – Surface and Underground Mining, Gary Hebel, MSHA

Provided examples of technology being tested in surface and underground mines in the western US.
Showed various technologies to isolate autonomous machine from people or human-operated equipment.

Q: What is your role with MSHA?

A: Western district manager.

Q: What was your role at these technology demos?

A: Just observation. We were invited to mines that are rolling these systems out.

Q: What comms system is used for teleoperation data/video in underground mines.

A: Only aware of the leaky feeder system.

Q: Are these examples from pilot studies and are they all in the US?

A: Yes and yes. Also aware of autonomous drilling that is further along.

Case Studies:

Hecla Greens Creek, Jo Thompson, Hecla Mining Co.

Four levels of automation on loaders:
- Line-of-sight remote control
- Teleoperation
- Driver-assisted with auto-steering (operator has brake control and overrides)
- Full automation (not used yet)
Challenges:
- Blending manual and automated operations
- Significant costs in setup
- Change in culture
- Keeping up with the technology
- Mine design to accommodate automation
Five automated loaders, fully autonomous operation not being pursued in near future
Four semi-automated haul trucks with one operator supervising multiple machines. This project is currently on hold after preliminary tests.
Automated underground drills, still in training phase for auto drill patterns. Operators still manually drill the perimeter holes to avoid drill arm damage.

Epiroc Autonomous Surface Drilling, Zach Ellis, Epiroc

Study was at the KGHM Robinson Mine in Nevada.
Drill operator shortage was a driver.
Keys to success:
- Adequate wireless network and infrastructure
- On site support
- Project champion
- Expertise
No safety incidents introduced with auto drills.
First 100% autonomous drill site in US.

Global Perspectives on Mine Automation, Joel Haight, Univ. of Pittsburgh

NIOSH Mining BAA project update
3-Year project to determine the path of development of the automation transition in countries more advanced in the transition than we are here in the United States.
Project involved:
- Observing the operations of 11 s mines in several countries
- Interviewing workers, engineers and management representatives using semi-structured interview process
- Researching production, operational and safety performance data
Findings so far:
- No one has involuntarily lost their job due to automation.
- Jobs have changed
- People have to learn new skills and use higher order thinking to accomplish higher order tasks
- “We used to be just miners, but now we are so much more!” (Quote – underground miner – May 2022)
- However, not everyone is willing to change. Transition may be able to rely on attrition…..it is natural and will occur
Worker impact
- Reported that for every manual position lost, within the automated system, two or three are needed.
- Fear that there will not be enough people available for new roles
- Necessary changes:
  - Controllers and other operational positions
  - Maintenance
  - Programmers
  - Communication systems
  - Cyber security
- Issues to address
  - Complaceny and loss of Situational Awareness
  - Distributed Situational Awareness
  - Human-Machine Interface

Day 2 - September 21

Eliminating Barriers for the Implementation of Automation in the Mining Industry, Kray Luxbacher, Univ. of Arizona

Goal: Identify regulations that could be a barrier to implementing automation in the US.
Scope expanded to include health and safety, and technical issues.
1 year into project.

Q: What will NIOSH do with the results of this work?

A: This will inform our research priorities and our approach to reframe regulations.

Q: Did this effort reveal cultural differences as a barrier?

A: Yes, with zero-harm approach being a factor.

Q: Did pride in manual work come up?

A: In general, workforce issues are not the main driving force in the US.

Q: Regarding zero-harm vs. acceptable risk: Why does this come up since all companies have a goal of zero harm.

A: US culture and legal system are not conducive to acceptable risk approach.

Q: Did the pandemic influence automation?

A: Yes, we saw that issue come up.

Workforce Issues Panel Discussion, Ravitha Sukumaran, Denise Baker, Peta Chirgwin

Cognitive load increases with the complexity associated with automation.
Skill decay and insufficient training must be considered.
Need improved design of human-system interactions.
Detection failure and loss of situational awareness are factors.
Emphasis is on technology, but not as much on the workforce and transition.
Site-based remote control operations with one operator supervising multiple machines increases cognitive load and illness:
- Decreased bathroom and other breaks
- Increased stress of complicated supervision/control tasks
Improved training needed for automation skill sets.
No clearly defined career progression for control room operators.

Q: Can the machine take on some of the load of increased cognitive requirements for operators?

A: Yes, there is opportunity for this. Machine can make more decisions with humans just reviewing. Technology integration needs to be improved before we get there. OEMs take this approach. Gains can be negated if the interface is not designed correctly.

Q: Currently many transitions to automation rely on retrofitting existing equipment. What is needed as we move to equipment designed for no human operator?

A: Still need to consider what operating functions are needed when equipment fails. How will humans move it to the maintenance area, etc.

Automation in Small Mines Panel Discussion, Libby Pritchard, Zach Ellis, Douglas Duesing

Small family-owned mines with no automation, still use paper ticketing for example. They don’t see the need and there is no budget for it.
If automation is applied to the larger small operations, you see a efficiency focus. Conveyors, etc.
Some showing interest in remote control of equipment in hazardous areas. Will have some process control. Some have shown interest in automated truck pilot projects.
Economics is the main driver.
Resistant to change.

Q: Will small mines ever see automation?

A: Automation will come in small steps. 10-20 years behind the larger operations. Need to look at different purchase models for affordability.

Q: European countries moving toward decarbonization. Are US mines feeling this pressure?

A: Yes, with multinational companies leading the way.

Future of this Partnership Panel Discussion, Todd Ruff, Joel Haight, Jacob Carr, Bob Bissonette

This is our 4^th annual meeting. Good time to evaluate if we need to refocus our efforts.
Are we adequately meeting the needs as you see them in this effort? Are these meetings valuable?
How can we improve the impact or value of the information that is presented and the discussions we hold?
Remember, outside discussions can continue and contact information can be shared using our LinkedIn group: Automation and Emerging Technology in Mining

Feedback:

Go deeper into key issues:
- Design of machine-human interfaces, design of work/tasks for automation.
Establish more focused collaborations that meet outside of this annual meeting.
More sharing of lessons learned from mine operators and other industries that have implemented automation.
Increase number of meetings and hold them in person.
Form workgroups that meet more often to address high priority topics.

Breakout Session Reports:

Underground Mine Automation Technology Opportunities and Challenges, Bob Bissonette

Regulation is not major barrier in US.
Economics is main factor, just not there yet. Benefits are being identified but realized at a very slow pace.
Conducting research and developed at actual mine sites is a barrier to progress due to limited access and production priorities.
An approach involving more of the mining community is needed – more cooperation and partnerships.

Surface Mine Automation Technology Opportunities and Challenges, Jacob Carr

Miner health monitoring is an opportunity with new technology.
Interoperability is a major need. Opens up new suppliers, easier implementation, better designs including human-centered.
Retrofit technology for small operations will still be important.