Automation is delivering a “step change” in terms of safety in the mining industry says Robin Burgess-Limerick, a professor at the University of Queensland in Brisbane who studies human factors in mining. But it doesn’t mean there isn’t room for improvement.
Professor Burgess-Limerick has analysed incidents involving autonomous equipment reported to regulators.
As he sees it, the interfaces used by staff both in the field and in control centres to gain information aren’t optimally designed. There have been situations where field staff have lost awareness of the situation, which better screen design may have prevented. “The designers of the technology should put a bit more effort into considering people,” he says.
And there is also a risk that controllers’ workloads can be overwhelming – it is a busy, high stakes job.
Over-trust, where people become so confident the autonomous equipment will stop that they start putting themselves at risk, can also be an issue, and he notes effort needs to be directed into improving the ability of trucks themselves to detect moisture. There have been incidents where wet roadways have caused them to lose traction.
There can be legitimate safety concerns with autonomous equipment, says Shane Roulstone, co-ordinator for the Western Mine Workers Alliance, which represents mining-related workers in the Pilbara.
He points to a serious incident this May where an autonomous train slammed into the back of a broken-down train, which workers at the front end were repairing (they evacuated before it hit but were left shaken).
But Mr Roulstone also praises Rio generally for having, over time, developed “some good strategies, procedures and policies” around how people interact with automated vehicles.
Mr Roulstone expects that at some point options for redeployment will lessen and there will job losses. “It is just the mathematics of it,” he says.
Credit: Source link
