Greg Mascioli – Mobile Maintenance Wednesday, April 19, 2023

Equipment Visibility Presentation

2

The Issue

One of the main issues when operating heavy equipment is the inability of the operator to always see pedestrians and other equipment nearby.

This has led to many near misses, high potential incidents, equipment damage, injuries and fatalities in the industry.

3

The Issue

Case study showing the line of site accidents & injuries between 1986 & 2002.

Note the totals!

How many near misses were there?

4

The Issue

Closer to home in the last few years;

• One mine had a fatality – electrician run over by a loader – Visibility was an issue

• Another mine had a fatality – miner run over by a loader – Visibility was an issue

• At another site near miss when a geologist was picked up in a bucket of ore – Visibility was an issue

5

The Issue

At Kidd, we weren’t immune to the problem:

Injury involving 2 mechanics – one was pinned between two vehicles – Visibility was one of the issues

6

The Issue

• In another incident a loader collided with a parked fuel truck which was refueling another loader in the drift.

• The approaching loader (bucket was full) could see the parked loader down the drift, but not the smaller fuel truck.

• Visibility issue.

7

The Issue

Another incident involved a loader driving bucket first making a right hand turn.

• The unit collided with a parked scissorlift causing damage – Visibility was an issue

In another occurrence a loader operator was travelling down ramp with a full bucket, bucket first.

• The unit collided with a pickup truck and pushed it down ramp a distance before the operator heard the screeching metal – Visibility was an issue.

8

The Issue

Needless to say,

The Mining Industry has An Issue With Visibility when Operating Heavy Equipment!

9

The Solution

• Flashing LED’s were given to all employees to be worn on the rear of their hats to improve visibility while walking away from equipment.

Because of the concern, a number of projects were started at Kidd;

10

The Solution

areas notification flashing blue lights• Underground service groups were given flashing blue LED’s.

• These were to be hung from the wall or back to act as a warning beacon for approaching equipment.

Hooked LED style whips are also being considered by the maintenance group

11

The Solution

Flags equipped with reflective tape were installed on all smaller equipment.

We also are currently looking at enhancing the flag pole with LED Whips.

New types of LED strobe lights are to replace our old ones which better address light pollution.

12

The Solution

Taking a cue from our contractors; “High Visibility” coveralls are being purchased for all employees.

13

The Solution

On top of the visibility issues, a new Horn Standard was developed at Kidd so that large equipment operators could hear oncoming small vehicles.

- The result has been overwhelmingly accepted by all heavy equipment operators.

- New horns have been installed on 2/3 of the fleet to date.

- This will be the subject of another presentation in the future.

Last Reviewed: 2009 02 23

To All Site Personnel

Last Reviewed: 2010 02 26Review Date: 2011 02 26

KMN-15-HS-FRM-20143

Horns are going to be LOUDER!

In December 2010, we experienced a High Potential Risk Incident associated with a Risk Register High Hazard Activity. Interaction between mobile equipment and workers resulted in an HPRI incident where two workers could have been pinned between a Toyota service truck and a Mclean boom truck.

One of the gaps identified during the incident investigation process revealed the need to establish an audible alarm standard for mobile equipment.

A new site Mobile Equipment Standard - Horn and Back-Up Alarm has been written and is available on the site intranet.

Sustainable Development 17 Standards/Standard 8/Standards/Horn and Back-Up Alarm

The new standard requires that :-Horn frequency be within the range of 300 – 475 Hz.-Horn loudness be 105 dBA measured @ 3 meters from the front and rear of the unit.-Horns will not be louder than 115 dBA.

In order to meet compliance to this standard, all underground mobile equipment will be measured to the standard, during regularly scheduled maintenance inspections.

Any mobile equipment that fail to meet the standard, will be retrofitted with a new horn.

Note:• Always be aware of the equipment around you and changing conditions.• Always place yourself or your equipment out of harms way.• Operators, know who is in your area or path of travel before moving your

equipment.• Always communicate your intent using audible alarms.• Pedestrians, be aware of mobile equipment activities going on around you.• Never take for granted the Operator sees you! Be safe be seen!

May 4, 2011

14

The Solution

A Collision Avoidance System is being considered;

• We are currently awaiting delivery of a test system which will warn the operator of pedestrians and equipment in close proximity to large equipment.

• The system will be able to monitor pedestrians /equipment within a 5 meters, 30 meters and 100 meters of the unit.

• Reliability has to be the key for this to work.

15

The Solution

We then considered the visibility the operator had and saw fit to address this in several steps.

First of all – We informed the workforce about an area called the

“NO ZONE”Operator visibility is often restricted

when a pedestrian enters this area.

16

The Solution

Pedestrian Pedestrian no longer visible

We reminded our employees about things that would obstruct the operators vision – “Do Not ASSUME You Are Seen!”

• Bucket, Boom, Light Brackets, Air Conditioner, Fire Extinguisher Placement, Cab Canopy design, etc.

17

The Solution

Presentations were given to all crews identifying the “Danger” or “No Zone” complete with examples.

• Here are a few

18Material Handler

Caution: No Zone pivots when the equipment pivots

Area of fullyobstructed view

Area of Limited visibility

Operator eye level 17 ft

above ground level

19

Operator eye level 6 ft - 3 in.

above ground level

Bulldozer

12’ 1”

18’ 7”

8’ 2”

12’ 5”

8’ 2”

16’ 0”

3’ 10”

20

Operator eye level 5 ft - 5 in.

Above ground level

6’ 1”

11’ 7”

6’ 3”

Bobcat

3’ 1”

4’ 10”

11’ 5”

21’ 8”

21

The Solution

We decided to apply the same logic to our larger equipment fleet identifying the “No Zone” or “Blind Spots”

• We contacted Dr. Tammy Eger and Dr. Alison Godwin from the “Center for Research in Occupational Safety & Health” at Laurentian University who have worked with WSN (Underground Equipment Committee)

• We asked them to evaluate a Toro 1400 loader for line of site blind spots – make recommendations showing where to install a camera system

• Since we knew it would be some time before a collision avoidance system could be tested – decided to try something lower tech – 4 camera system to enhance visibility.

22

The Solution

Field measures were completed using the adapted FERIC method, previously used by the Laurentian research team (Eger et al. 2004).

Several two-dimensional plots were

created to provide a visual representation of the restricted line of sight available to the operator.

23

The Solution

Tests were done with the1. Bucket down2. Bucket up3. Bucket filled

This result shows the bucket down and the operator in a fixed position.

• Dark indicates no visibility

• Opaque indicates restricted visibility

24

The Solution

This drawing shows the approximate locations of the 4 cameras, and 2 monitors installed on the loader

25

The Solution

This picture shows the results with a quad camera system mounted on the unit.

Results were the same with bucket up or down.

Quite spectacular.

26

The Solution

Comparison???

27

The Solution

This picture shows the results with a full bucket of ore.

The full bucket impedes forward visibility but the opposite camera mitigates this somewhat

28

The Solution

This picture shows the Line of Site with a full bucket and the operator standing.

29

The Solution

Conclusion;1.The proposed four-camera system eliminated all blind spots on the side of the machine opposite to where the operator sits.

2.It substantially improved line of sight to ground compared with a no camera system.

3.It provided line of sight to a standing pedestrian 1.7m tall around nearly the entire perimeter of the machine.

4.The exceptions are located behind the seated position of the operator, at the intersection between rear camera and back right camera and against the machine along the opposite-side to the operator.

30

The Solution

31

The Solution

Worker

Rear Cab Window View Rear & Side

Camera View

32

The Solution

WorkerRear Cab View

Rear & Side Camera View

Rear Cab Window View Worker

33

The Solution

WorkerRear Cab View

Rear & Side Camera View

Rear Cab Window View Worker

34

The Solution

WorkerRear Cab View Side Cab

Window View Rear & Side Camera View

Worker

35

The Solution

WorkerRear Cab View

Front & Side Camera View

Front & Side Cab Window View

Worker

36

The Solution

Worker

Front Cab Window View

Worker

Front & Side Camera View

37

The Solution

Worker

Worker Front Cab Window View Front & Side

Camera View

38

The Solution

Toro 1400 with 2 rear facing cameras.

39

The Solution

Toro 1400 with 2 front facing cameras

40

The Solution

Cab Monitor Layout

41

The Solution

Cab Monitor Layout looking Rearward

42

The Solution

Cab Monitor Layout looking Forward

43

The Solution

- To date;- 3 loaders have been equipped with a camera

system- 1 mobile rockbreaker has been equipped- 1 EJC 30 ton truck equipped- 5 loaders are scheduled to be equipped

within the next month- Capital dollars are being approved to equip

the fleet with an enhanced visibility system for all larger equipment types.

44

Acknowledgments

- The Winstead Group - Dave Windfield, cameras, monitors and installation

- Dr Tammy Eger, Dr Alison Godwin - “Center for Research in Occupational Safety &

Health” - Laurentian University

- Sandvik Mining – use of their facilities for test purposes.

- Xstrata Copper Mobile Maintenance Team - Bob Peeken, Wayne Aldred- With the cooperation of the OHS Team.

45

Questions