EMESRT. a Safety by Design initiative operated by the global mining industry. Vehicle Interaction

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "EMESRT. a Safety by Design initiative operated by the global mining industry. Vehicle Interaction"

Dinah Russell
5 years ago
Views:

1 EMESRT a Safety by Design initiative operated by the global mining industry Vehicle Interaction

2 EMESRT Purpose Accelerate development and adoption of leading practice designs to minimise the risk to Health and Safety through a process of Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM), contractors and end user engagement.

4 EMESRT approach 2006 to now The design gap between OEMs and users required a change to past methods of improving designs

5 EMESRT approach 2006 to now The design gap between OEMs and users required a change to past methods of improving designs Only the OEM can shrink the design gap but many others, such as 3 rd party suppliers, will try to fill it

6 EMESRT approach 2006 to now The design gap between OEMs and users required a change to past methods of improving designs Only the OEM can shrink the design gap but many others, such as 3 rd party suppliers, will try to fill it Marketing controls the R&D spend therefore traditional path of working through engineers has failed to achieve optimal change in OEM designs

7 EMESRT approach 2006 to now The design gap between OEMs and users required a change to past methods of improving designs Only the OEM can shrink the design gap but many others, such as 3 rd party suppliers, will try to fill it Marketing controls the R&D spend therefore traditional path of working through engineers has failed to achieve optimal change in OEM designs Common industry voice approach to defining Problems not Solutions provide a business case for the marketing

8 EMESRT approach 2006 to now The design gap between OEMs and users required a change to past methods of improving designs Only the OEM can shrink the design gap but many others, such as 3 rd party suppliers, will try to fill it Marketing controls the R&D spend therefore traditional path of working through engineers has failed to achieve optimal change in OEM designs Common industry voice approach to defining Problems not Solutions provide a business case for the marketing Open genuine engagement is key

9 Key Messages from EMESRT Designing beyond standards Balancing engineering & behaviour Recognising the value of task based design review Appreciating that the OEM does its best with the end user involved Working together toward common goals (one industry voice!)

10 Current Status of EMESRT EMESRT is the mining industry with experts from many global companies EMESRT is a brand, recognised in major global OEMs. EMESRT has a unique process to initiate and influence change through engagement with OEMs. EMESRT has a global network that share the common goal; striving to champion improvements as a cohesive industry, one voice team.

11 2006 initial focus 2014/15/16 focus

12 EMESRT Vehicle Interactions What is driving EMESRT (Industry) to focus on Vehicle Interaction (VI) Company safety goals Fatal Hazards & Critical Controls Methodology Regulatory activity. Sth Africa, USA, Australia, Sth America OEM need for an integrated systems approach to VI technology integration Proximity Detection System (PDS) vendors need to establish a common interoperability framework with OEM s

13 Vehicle Interaction Progress Summary VI problem definition Who has been involved Definition of the Problem and Scenarios Solutions available to the industry Where are we today Anticipated development timelines The role of interoperability Where to from here? 13

14 Vehicle Interactions Chronology XCAP Project Glencore Anglo American RP 35 Q Vehicle Interaction Burning Platform Mar 2014 Brisbane Workshop defining the problem Sep nd Workshop at North Parkes, NSW Agreement on need for: User Requirements Development Tool New Design Philosophy for VI

15 Vehicle Interactions Chronology 2 Apr 2015 Decision develop performance requirements to supplement DP 5 Jun 2015 OEM one on one briefings to introduce DP 5 & PR 5A Jul 2015 PDS supplier one on one briefings to introduce DP 5 & PR 5A Sep 2015 One on one feedback sessions and joint OEM PDS workshop to initiate development of protocol for interoperability Dec nd OEM PDS interface workshop Mar rd OEM PDS interface workshop

16 Generic Bowtie Model

17 Incident Preventative Control Levels 1. Site Requirements 2. Segregation Controls 3. Operating Procedures 4. Authority to Operate 5. Fitness to Operate 6. Operating Compliance 7. Operator Awareness 8. Advisory Controls 9. Intervention Controls Equipment specifications, standards, mine design/plans Berms, access control, traffic segregation, time schedule SOP s, maintenance, road rules, quality control, lockout Training, licences, induction, access control Fatigue state, drug & alcohol, medicals Pre start, safety tests, machine health, event recordings Cameras, live maps, mirrors, lights, visible delineators Alerts: Proximity, Fatigue, Over speed, Vehicle stability Interlocks: Prevent Start, Slow Stop, Rollback, Retarder years months weeks days shift hours minutes seconds ms

18 EMESRT Design Philosophy focus area for VI PUE1 PUE2 PUE3 PUE4 Equipment to Person Equipment to Equipment Equipment to Environment Loss of Control Design Operate React EMESRT Design Philosophy 5 & Performance Requirement 5A 18

19 VI Technology Design Objectives Level 7 Operator Awareness (PAT MDG 2007 aligned ) Technologies that provide information to enhance the operator ability to observe and understand potential hazards in the vicinity of the machine 19

20 VI Technology Design Objectives Level 7 Operator Awareness (PAT MDG 2007 aligned ) Technologies that provide information to enhance the operator ability to observe and understand potential hazards in the vicinity of the machine Level 8 Advisory Controls (PDT MDG 2007 aligned ) Technologies that provide alarms and/or instruction to enhance the operator ability to predict a potential unsafe interaction and the corrective action required 20

21 VI Technology Design Objectives Level 7 Operator Awareness (PATMDG 2007 aligned) Technologies that provide information to enhance the operator ability to observe and understand potential hazards in the vicinity of the machine Level 8 Advisory Controls (PDTMDG 2007 aligned) Technologies that provide alarms and/or instruction to enhance the operator ability to predict a potential unsafe interaction and the corrective action required Level 9 Intervention Controls (CATMDG 2007 aligned) Technologies that automatically intervene and take some form of machine control to prevent or mitigate an unsafe interaction 21

Model of Situational Awareness Mica Endsley 1998 Human Factors - Decision Making Environment Perception Comprehension Projection Decision State of the operator, machine and surrounding environment

22 Model of Situational Awareness Mica Endsley 1998 Human Factors - Decision Making Environment Perception Comprehension Projection Decision State of the operator, machine and surrounding environment Senses observe the environment An understanding of the current situation is developed A prediction on the future state of the environment is made A decision is made on what action to perform Action An action is implemented

Model of Situational Awareness Mica Endsley 1998 Human Factors - Limitations Environment Perception Comprehension Projection Decision Action

23 Model of Situational Awareness Mica Endsley 1998 Human Factors - Limitations Environment Perception Comprehension Projection Decision Action Reduced vigilance Information overload Fatigue / impaired fitness for work Memory lapse Stress / anxiety Risk homeostasis Delayed reaction time

Awareness LEVEL 8 Advisory Controls LEVEL 9

Determine hazard location/status Predict

24 Model of Situational Awareness Mica Endsley 1998 Human Factors Control Interaction Environment Perception Comprehension Projection Decision Action LEVEL 7 Operator Awareness LEVEL 8 Advisory Controls LEVEL 9 Intervention Controls Measure the environment Determine hazard location/status Predict interaction with hazards Alarm hazard or Alert instruction Control machine

Alignment with Australian (MDG2007) and Sth African Legislated Requirements Model of Situational Awareness Mica Endsley 1998 Environment EMESRT Control Technology Definitions Intent Statement

25 Alignment with Australian (MDG2007) and Sth African Legislated Requirements Model of Situational Awareness Mica Endsley 1998 Environment EMESRT Control Technology Definitions Intent Statement Perception Comprehension Projection Decision Level 7 Awareness Level 8 Advisory P A T P D T C A T Provide additional information on the proximity of equipment, infrastructure and personnel in the surrounding area Alerting people to interactions that might be unsafe to allow them to take corrective action Action Level 9 Intervention Intervening and taking some form of control to prevent an unsafe event This now becomes a safety system

26 Mobile Equipment Incident Area Focus Surface Underground Coal Underground Hard Rock Diesel Diesel Diesel Electric Electric Electric Focus Areas 26

27 = or or or VI Scenarios Surface PUE1 Equipment to Person PUE2 Equipment to Equipment PUE3 Equipment to Environment PUE4 Loss of Control Unwanted Event 27

28 = or VI Scenarios Underground Diesel/Electric PUE1 Equipment to Person PUE2 Equipment to Equipment PUE3 Equipment to Environment PUE4 Loss of Control Unwanted Event 28

29 Surface Mobile Equipment: Scenario Codes Examples Underground Mobile Equipment: Example: V4-14

30 Current Participating 8 OEM s & 9 PDS Vendors OEM / PDS Vendor Atlas Copco Booyco Caterpillar GE Mining Guardvant Hexagon Mining Hitachi Joy Global Komatsu Liebherr France Liebherr USA Matrix Minetec Modular Mining Sandvik Schauenburg Strata

31 EMESRT 2014 Vehicle Interaction Workshops: Brisbane Initial formulation of the problem North Parkes 50+ attendees Syndicated 9 step model Developed key Design Philosophy (DP) performance requirements for levels 7,8 & 9 Developed plan for delivering a design philosophy Agreed to developing a site resource for evaluating vehicle interaction systems Mining companies endorsed the 9 step preventative model: Implemented reviews of levels 1 6 controls

32 EMESRT 2015 June/July 2015 Workshops with OEM s/pds (50+ people) A draft Vehicle Interaction Design Philosophy (DP) OEMs A draft mine site tool to help define specifications for required Vehicle Interaction technology September 2015 Workshops with OEM s/pds (100+ People) Feedback on the draft DP and performance requirements Assessment on their current capability against the DP and performance requirement Provided a forecast of future capability by 2018 All Participated in interoperability workshop to define common protocals for compatibility between PDS and OEM products

33 Speed Range km/h VI Exposure* Mobile Equipment Exposure takes into account incident rate and an assessment of potential severity of all unwanted events for Vehicle Interactions (PUE1 PUE4) combined 0% UG Electric N=30 0% UG Diesel N=82 0% Surface N=77 36% 64% 52% 17% 31% 27% 26% 23% 24% *based on reportable incidents to DMR, South Africa over the period

34 Issues for PDS Development Levels 7 9 sequential development: Must achieve Level 7 before Level 8 Must achieve Level 8 before Level 9 Under appreciation of need for end user engagement in the design phase Eg: cut and paste approach to technology transfer from other industries can lead to a mismatch in performance criteria Misconception: Proof of Concept Proven Commercial Product 34

35 PDS Capability Development Phases Development Stage Proof of Concept (PoC) Early Stage Development (ESD) Late Stage Development (LSD) Proven for Commercial Release Description Basic operation demonstrated in a controlled environment; no sites currently using technology in live production Controlled testing of specific functionality in pilot implementation on multiple items of mobile equipment to prove viability of the solution and evaluate performance Deployment at one or more sites on a part of an operating fleet, not all PR 5A performance requirements met at intended capability level (7 9) including demonstration in a production environment Fit for purpose, established solution with scalability / capacity and meets reliability, dependability, performance, accuracy and repeatability objectives defined in PR 5A TRL* Typical Elapsed Time from Concept year years years 7 5+ years *Note: Equivalent Technology Readiness Level (TRL) e.g. see

36 OEM / PDS vendor responses on development levels PDS Capability Current* Underground Electric Level 7 Level 8 Level 9 N suppliers = 6 *participating PDS suppliers only; as of October 2015

37 OEM / PDS vendor responses on development levels PDS Capability Current* Underground Diesel Level 7 Level 8 Level 9 N suppliers = 6 *participating PDS suppliers only; as of October 2015

38 OEM / PDS vendor responses on development levels PDS Capability Current* Surface Level 7 Level 8 Level 9 N suppliers = 7 *participating PDS suppliers only; as of October 2015

39 Status of PDS Solutions Level 7 EMESRT assessment of OEM / PDS technology status: Level 7 systems unsatisfactory for reducing risk exposure due to the high rate of alerts / alarms when other vehicle, personnel, infrastructure is close by and reliance on operators making correct predictions & decisions

40 Status of PDS Solutions Level 8 EMESRT assessment of OEM / PDS technology status: Level 8 systems for UG Electric do not require significantly more rules / decision logic than Level 7, however, there is a much greater technology change required to transition from Level 7 to Level 8 for UG Diesel and Surface No Suppliers have successfully achieved level 8 beyond Late Stage Development

41 Status of PDS Solutions Level 9 EMESRT assessment of OEM / PDS technology status: UG Electric machines in South Africa some Level 9 scenario solutions in operation UG Diesel and Surface machines Level 9 implementation impeded by lack of interoperability for: PDS to Machine Interface development is unique to each machine Not achieving an integrated / interoperable solution From participating OEM / PDS vendors only: 9 PDS x 8 OEM = 72 PoC s required to demonstrate Level 9 Not sustainable industry requires a Plug and Play solution

42 Vehicle Interaction Interoperability Layers On any mine there will never be only one brand/type of equipment and hence the interoperability of the multiple relationships between the levels of sensing and intelligence/rules and the different vehicles is essential to achieve an overall mine site solution for the industry. Sensing Rules / Intelligence PDS1 PDS2 3 rd Party PDS3 Protocol Protocol Vehicle Interface OEM1 OEM2 OEM3 EMESRT Focus for 2016

43 OEM-PDS Interface On-vehicle Protocol Refer to PR 5A and associated documentation for Proximity Technology Profile

interoperation PoC ESD LSD Proven * * * Underground

44 OEM Vehicle Interface Development Status* *Current interfaces are proprietary / unique, limits ability for interoperation PoC ESD LSD Proven * * * Underground Electric Underground Diesel Surface * Note :Available as of 2 Oct 2015

45 Schedule for VI Interface Development # Activity N D J F M A M J J A S O N D 0a OEM / PDS Vendors to nominate representative for WG (Nov Dec) 0b OEM / PDS Vendors to confirm development schedule for L7/L8/L9 1 Convene initial OEM & PDS working groups: 1a OEM Working Group What s required of interface to PDS? 1b PDS Working Group What s required of interface to OEM? 2 Report back from each WG and joint session on scope ( What ) 3 Convene OEM & PDS working groups: 3a OEM / PDS Working Group Architecture of OEM PDS interface (J1939 CAN Agreed) 4 Report back from each Supplier on existing protocols 5 Draft 1 of protocol X X 5a Nomination of Test Site(s), OEM, PDS, equipment X 5b Establish evaluation scope: concept / partial / complete X X 5c Assess practicality / gaps / timelines X 6a Conduct testing at site (Surface Diesel) X X X X X 6b Conduct testing at site (UG Diesel) X X X X X 7 Report back on from test site(s) and joint OEM PDS feedback session X X 8 Final Draft of protocol X X 9 Joint OEM PDS session to review and finalise protocol X 10 Closeout report X 45

46 Participating OEM s & PDS suppliers covers ~80% of market L7 solutions: Multiple PDS vendors, generally high rate of nuisance alerts / alarms L8 solutions: Easier transition from Level 7 in UG Electric, more difficult transition and not proven yet for UG Diesel/Surface L9 solutions: UG Electric: Late Stage Development testing UG Diesel: Proof of Concept tests underway, not proven Surface: Initial Proof of Concept, technology in infancy Summary Working Groups to define protocol for PDS OEM interface with coordination by EMESRT/CSIRO Embedding of outcomes through industry published protocol and eventually via industry recognised standards bodies (e.g. ISO) 46

47 Vehicle Interaction Project Deliverables Industry Aligned definition of what the VI problem is. Validated Design Philosophy 5 - Machine Operation & Controls (Circa 2009) VI Performance Requirement 5A Agreed Nomenclature Exposure Scenarios (UG & Surface) Users Site Resource User Guide Technical Specification Framework Designers PDS/OEM Interface Protocol

48 VI Interoperation Enabling Benefits Published outcomes of VI interface development for benefit of the greater industry (CSIRO via ACARP) Starting point for industry standard e.g. incorporate outcomes into ISO TC 82/127 Collision Awareness and Avoidance New Work Item Proposal in ballot phase Apr Jun 2016 Establish a platform for ongoing collaboration in VI design improvement between Users / OEMs / PDS Vendors / Regulators Contribute to a review of MDG

49 How can I participate? Stay informed via EMESRT website: Contact with EMESRT secretariat: enquiries@emesrt.org Discussion with EMESRT member companies Via ISO Working Group: Nomination of experts through your national standards organisation Feedback into standard development via EMESRT End of Presentation 49

Collision Avoidance. A Discussion. October 6 th, 2014 Andrew Scott Senior Director, Mining Information Technology Barrick Gold Corporation

Collision Avoidance. A Discussion. October 6 th, 2014 Andrew Scott Senior Director, Mining Information Technology Barrick Gold Corporation Collision Avoidance A Discussion October 6 th, 2014 Andrew Scott Senior Director, Mining Information Technology Barrick Gold Corporation Chair, Global Mining Standards and Guidelines Barrick Gold Corporation