COLLISION AWARENESS & AVOIDANCE
Paul Moore spoke to Dr Herman Hamersma, from the
University of Pretoria’s VDG, to get his direct input on
its testing program progress & the regulation latest
Q Where are we with Chapter 8 of the Mine Health and Safety Act in South
Africa? What happened after the June 2019 surface industry deadline? Did
most mining groups meet the deadline or has it been extended? And what
about underground, what are the key dates and timeline there?
A Both surface and underground timelines have been extended
unofficially in recent meetings to December 2020. However, the Mining
Regulations Advisory Committee (MRAC) of the Mine Health and Safety
Council (MHSC) will decide the actual dates in Q1 2020 and their mandate is
to advise the Minister of the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy
Q What distinction in the legislation has been made between PDS and
Collision Avoidance/CMS?
A No specific mention is ever made of PDS and CAS/CMS as you have also
published in this report. The clauses stating the machines must be
retarded and stopped are those that have not been implemented yet
Q Can you give any examples of mining companies or mining sites within
South Africa that have already achieved near complete introduction of
CMS on their fleets whether surface or underground?
A On surface – Kumba Resources’ Sishen mine has L9. At Glencore
Ferroalloys there is full L9 deployed underground at its chromite mining
complex in Rustenburg [see separate section for more detail on this]
Q What is the latest on your test programme at the VDG? Have your tests
resulted in any kind of standard or at least common approach in terms of
the CMS sensors/software/hardware being used?
A We have conducted about 35 tests with our test vehicles (the Land
Rovers) and six tests on actual TMMs on mining sites. I predict that we will
see more tests on site with real TMMs. There seems to be very little
standardisation of anything by PDS suppliers. The majority of them are at
a proof of concept level, some are starting to roll out and commissioning.
We have probably identified 8-10 potential PDS suppliers that may make it
all the way to L9 implementation and we have prevented some immature
systems from entering the market. Our testing has so far been focused on
single interactions, ie one truck to one truck, one truck to one pedestrian
etc. A lot of uncertainty exists about more complex scenarios with
multiple interactors (such as a queue at a crusher, with some trucks
queuing, others reversing, some tipping, others exiting the area, with
operate, Level 5 – fitness to operate, Level 6 –
operating compliance, Level 7 – operator
awareness (proximity awareness – alerts the
operator), Level 8 – advisory controls (proximity
detection – advises the operator) and Level 9 –
intervention controls (collision avoidance – takes
control from the operator). EMESRT has also
driven the mining industry development of a
standard communications protocol between the
proximity detection system (PDS) and OEM
machine for the practical implementation of Level
9 – intervention controls as part of the standard
ISO 21815.”
The importance of Level 7 – operator
awareness and Level 9 – intervention controls
was highlighted on February 25, 2015 when the
South Africa Minister of Mineral Resources
International Mining | JANUARY 2020
pedestrians in close proximity). We are
working with Mining3 in Australia in an
effort to develop a unified South Africa and
Australia CMS technical strategy, and one of
the aspects we are considering is testing
more complex scenarios such as these
Q Are there key suppliers of the technology
for CMS that you would single out for
offering the best solution in terms of results
but also value for miners?
A These systems are too complex to single
out a key supplier. It is heavily dependent on the risk assessment of each
site. Horses for courses, you know. That being said, I believe the testing
approach that we followed has allowed miners to compare apples with
apples when making their decisions
Q What has the response been from key mining equipment OEMs to
making CMS less of an option and more of a standard fitting both within
South Africa and outside?
A A lack of interaction with OEMs is one of my main concerns. The big
international OEMs are following their own timelines, more aligned with
what the ICMM is touting (2025). Interoperability (eg will a Komatsu
detect a Cat and be able to stop) is one of the obstacles which is receiving
a lot of attention from the ICMM ICSV working groups. Legacy equipment
in SA is also a big problem, technically challenging to solve with
significant capital expenditure attached to it
Q What is the current status outside of South Africa in terms of groups like
the ISO & ICMM achieving some kind of global alignment in CMS within
mining?
A The ISO21815 standard is making progress, but not quickly enough to
satisfy the South African need. Same for ICMM, with a timeline of 2025.
Our collaboration with Mining3 (via ACARP funding) is aimed at
developing a unified SA and Australia strategy, and I believe the plan is to
present that strategy to ICMM. We would also like to present that to the
ISO working groups. I really feel that we have learnt very valuable lessons
in SA and it would be remiss of bodies outside SA to ignore those lessons
and attempt to reinvent the wheel. I don’t think we have a fool proof
strategy yet, but it has matured significantly since the first time it saw the
light of day and has contributed to the increasing maturity of the CMS
offerings on the market
signed the Amendment of Chapter 8 of the Mine
Health and Safety Act. This legislation makes it
necessary to implement a system which provides
proximity awareness (Level 7) and collision
avoidance (Level 9), which will automatically
apply the brakes to trackless mobile machinery
(TMM) without any human intervention at any
mine where there is a significant risk of such
collisions.
This functionality essentially requires the
traditional Level 7 PDS to mature to provide full
machine interventions of a Level 9 collision
avoidance system.
“The legislation requires that each mining
operation conduct a comprehensive risk
assessment to determine the risk exposure
introduced by TMM. Based on the risk
assessment, the mining operation is then able to
define a collision management system user
requirements specification with regards to CAS
required on the TMM fleet. The need for such
measures was underlined when it emerged that
fatalities attributable to TMM-related accidents
increased nearly 50% from eight in 2016 to 14 in
2017.”
Wabtec Digital Mine says it has been the
global provider of a best of breed high integrity
level 7 PDS system for the past 14 years “and,
therefore, was perfectly positioned to take on the
journey to progress towards a fully compliant
Level 9 CAS system. At this level, the PDS
automatically applies full intervention controls to
the vehicle and takes control from the operator
when a dangerous vehicle interaction situation is