Gap851 Final Report Main Body

Messrs Michael Dunn and Johan Laas

Interviewee: Mr Michael Dunn (MD)

b. 1967

Current position: Rock Engineering Manager (Technical), AngloGold Ashanti

Qualifications:

BSc Honours (Engineering Geology), registered for MSc.

Experience:

MD has spent his entire career with AngloGold Ashanti (11 years), working mostly on the deep mines of the Vaal River Operations near Klerksdorp.

Interviewee: Mr Johan Laas (JL)

b. 1955

Current position: Manager Rock Engineering, AngloGold Ashanti

Qualifications:

National Diploma (Geology), MSc (Mining Engineering)

Experience:

JL first worked for the Department for Sea Fisheries (1 year), after which he joined the SA Geological Survey (3 years) and then a geotechnical engineering firm, George Orr and Associates (1 year). Johan has spent the bulk of his career with AngloGold Ashanti (23 years), working mostly on the deep mines of the Vaal River Operations near Klerksdorp.

Date of interview: 2 September 2004

STATUS REPORT

1. FAMILIARITY WITH ROCK-RELATED RESEARCH WORK

1.1 How many reports have you read? Which have had the greatest impact on your work?

JL and MD have both scanned many research reports, but only read a few thoroughly.

JL commented that he believed that COMRO had done much good work (pre-1993) that is not drawn on today. MD said that he believed that very few SIMRAC reports were actually read by industry practitioners.

MD’s reading had focuses on investigations dealing with support systems, mine design and seismology.

JL said that he had focused on work relating to the area where people are most vulnerable, viz. the face area.

The Support Design Analysis work by Mike Roberts had been most valuable, though aspects are contentious.

Seismological research was a popular research topic, but the results had caused huge confusion. For example, recommendations have been made that large dense networks should be installed, but he does not believe that the value has been scientifically demonstrated. Management and rock engineering practitioners have been disillusioned when expectations to use data pro-actively had not been fulfilled.

Numerical modeling to simulate the interaction between the rock mass and support components (e.g. by Daehnke and Hildyard) had been thought provoking, but there is still a long way to go as the system is complicated. JL warned that the application of Occam’s razor might result in real phenomena being ignored e.g. high bedding parallel stresses.

JL said that it was difficult to demonstrate how research work had shaped mining projects. He said that the expectation that research should impact the bottom line was perhaps unfair. Practitioners should not expect researchers to change things for them. JL also noted that even though research sometimes reaches a dead end, negative results are still information and not necessarily bad news.

1.2 How many workshops and conferences have you attended?

JL and MD have both attended most feedback sessions.

1.3 Have you supplied researchers with information?

JL said that he had done so continuously for many years, e.g. seismic data.

MD said that he had personally provided information and also facilitated the supply of data by other AngloGold staff e.g. bracket pillar and backfill projects.

1.4 Have you hosted projects on your mine(s)?

JL and MD have both provided sites for research work.

1.5 N/A

1.6 Have you been a mine/industry champion for a project?

JL was actively participated in a tunnel project led by Andy Haile. JL had investigated the influence of tendon length on support performance, and using the work for his MSc dissertation. He believes that this was valuable. MD has not filled this role before.

1.7 Have you implemented research knowledge and technology?

JL said that many research outputs had been implemented e.g. elongates, packs.

The introduction of backfill had contributed to safety on the West Wits gold mines such as Tau Tona and Savuka, though it had not had much benefit for mines in the Klerksdorp region because of the logistics of the scattered mining environment.

JL said that AngloGold had tried to implement the Support Design Analysis (SDA) tool, but found that it didn’t work for them.

JL said that it took a while for preconditioning to be applied even though the research work had shown that it did work. It took a bad run of rockbursts at Mponeng to get full commitment to implementation from mine management. At one specific time JL gave input to Dick Fisher, executive responsible for Safety at AngloGold head office, who was a mover in instigating implementation. However, real movement came from the present management team under Johan Viljoen and Rob McGill. MD said that the rock engineers were very involved in the training.

MD said that he had tried to implement the work on bracket pillar design, but found that the charts were too general to be of use. They were derived from idealized theoretical modeling and difficult to apply in practice on mines such as Vaal Reefs #5 shaft where the extraction ratio is 40% owing to numerous geological features.

MD said that he had tried to apply some of the ISSI seismological research products.

JL said that the research work that seeks to integrate numerical modeling and seismics had not delivered practical results yet, and said that work of this nature should not be sold as an “off the shelf” tool.

1.8 Have you personally performed research work?

MD is currently busy with his MSc. He is investigating stable spans between pillars at Tao Lekoa. He has also written and presented papers at conferences on topics such as rock passes and RMR systems. JL conducted research for his MSc dissertation (influence of tendon length on tunnel stability) and has written and presented papers on rock engineering management systems.

JL and MD both said that they would be keen to have staff members participating in projects as researchers, as this would let them improve their qualifications. However, the day-to-day demands are such that it is virtually impossible to grant people extended periods of relief from their duties to concentrate on study and conduct research.

JL explained that the “high flyers” amongst their rock engineering practitioners tend to move quite a lot (say every 2-3 years) from mine to mine to gain broad experience. The leadership group is drawn from this group. The remaining 80% of their staff tend to stay on one mine for far longer periods. AngloGold runs an in-house outcomes-based training programme that culminates in a Rock Mechanics Certificate, which typically takes 3-4 years to complete. Some SIMRAC reports (e.g. Support Design) are included in the curriculum. There is no research work in the programme.

JL expressed interest in an exchange scheme between AngloGold and Miningtek, where mine staff could gain research experience and vice versa. However, it would be necessary for Miningtek staff to hold a Rock Mechanics Certificate.

1.9 Have you proposed research projects to SIMRAC?

MD has proposed a variety of projects. Some of these have been funded by SIMRAC, including five of the projects currently underway. JL said that there is much “behind the scenes” lobbying. He is generally satisfied that his needs are met.

JL said that there was a period when AngloGold’s participation in SIMRAC had been rather erratic following the resignation of Drs Sam Spearing and Terry Hagan. At one time SIMRAC was seen as a producer of piles of unread paper. Even now, there are senior managers (such as David Diering) that indicate the notion that “everything has been researched”. He does not share this opinion, but believes that it is now time to stand back and assess what has been done. JL envisages a map showing the path that research has taken, complete with nodes and dead ends and where it should be going to.

MD said that he believed that the research needs and views of consultants not directly represented on the SIMRAC panel (e.g. Open House, Kevin Brentley and Associates) are effectively communicated by the mining company representatives.

MD remarked that participation by the other two parties in the tripartite mechanism is very weak. Government has a single representative, while the labour representative is rarely present. JL said that he feels that is a good thing that labour has the opportunity to be represented. If labour is unhappy with the process, they should make the effort to participate.

1.10 What do you think of the process used to vet research proposals?

MD said that there were many meetings and discussions. JL and MD agreed that the process is essentially sound.

MD remarked that there is now a core of Steering Committee members that attend meetings regularly and are committed to making the process work effectively (in addition to himself and JL, they are Les Gardner, Alan Day, Johan Klokow and Johan van Wijk).

1.11 What do you think of the process used to evaluate research progress and outputs?

MD said that he believed that there was insufficient monitoring of the research work while it is in progress. The onus to improve this rests with both researchers and the steering committee. JL agreed that there should be more consultation, but not through formal meetings. He said that he believed that the researchers should work a lot more closely with practitioners, and that he would be keen to nominate some members of his staff to take special interest in projects. This would also provide his staff members with learning opportunities. It was important that researchers nurture the relationships. They cannot expect people simply to read reports posted on the Internet.

MD has only recently started to review reports. He will carefully read those that he has been asked to “sign off”, and refer them to AngloGold practitioners (e.g. Gary Dukes, Shawn Murphy) that have been involved in the work or have a special interest in the topic.

MD suggested an independent expert review be sought for work of an advanced technical nature (e.g. numerical modeling, seismics). It is probably not fruitful to get competitors (e.g. Miningtek, ISSI) to review each others work. MD said that encouraging researchers to submit papers to international refereed journals could be an additional way of verifying the scientific integrity of concepts and results.

JL said that the rock engineering practitioners had an issue with the way in which seismology related intellectual property is handled (workshop users group 25/06/04). Seismology service suppliers sell services and products to monitor seismicity and indicate the relative stability of the rock mass. However, the success rates are low (by seismologists agreement – H&S Council workshop, 12/08/04). Because of the loss in faith due to over-selling and under-achievement practitioners do not support further research funding. The problem is that the methodologies are not scientifically tested and seismologists do not advocate independent specialists to verify their practices, nor encourage external audit of their services. Best practice algorithms for assessing rock mass stability are not common amongst seismologists – THUS MUCH room for research!!!

MD remarked that the independent expert reviewer also should have an understanding of mining, so that he/she can judge the value of the work accordingly.

1.12 How could the SIMRAC research program be improved?

JL said that each SIMRAC report should state clearly the context of each study. By this he meant that it should include a concise description of the conditions under which the findings are valid e.g. mining depth, geotechnical area. This would give an indication of where else work had to be done to generalize or customize the findings.

JL commented that proposals for technical projects submitted to the Rock Engineering Steering Committee are often are whittled down to strata control investigations that look at human factor issues. He suggested that this might be due to some Committee members lacking advanced rock engineering expertise.

MD said that some research outputs are based on idealized theoretical results (e.g. bracket pillar design charts) that do not take the realities of mining into account sufficiently. Proposed new methods should be thoroughly field-tested.

2. IMPACT OF ROCK-RELATED RESEARCH WORK

2.1 Has research work enable you to do your work better?

JL and MD both said that research work had stimulated their thinking and supplied them with ideas (see 1.1 above)

2.2/3 Has research work improved safety in the SA mining industry? / on your mines?

MD and JL listed technologies that had emerged during the last decade or two that they believed had improved safety: support design, backfill, elongates, stabilizing pillars, new mine layouts, preconditioning, seismic monitoring, rockburst hazard assessment. JL remarked that while it is easy to criticize these products and tools, without research work there would be no scientific basis to the rock engineering discipline.

The interviewer then asked: “why does research work seems to get little credit for these advances?’ JL suggested that many practitioners and production personnel are so immersed in mining that they take things for granted and do not stop to think about the origins. MD said that it might also reflect on recruitment and training issues. Many rock mechanics officers are “retreaded shift bosses” and do not appreciate the science behind the discipline.

2.4 How would you describe the research work carried out by SIMRAC?

JL said that SIMRAC projects were initially very academic. Later they became too practically orientated. What is need is balance! Perhaps an equal split between fundamental research, applied research and technology transfer.

Is the research work world-class? JL and MD were rather non-committal here. MD said that it is difficult to know, as we are all in the same frame of reference. JL said that he believed that generally good work is done and good presentations are made, “There may be some very bright people too, but they don’t all communicate very well!” MD then said that the fact South Africans have won four Rocha Medals must count for something. JL indicated that the more focused approach of Canadian research e.g. on tendon support in stopes and tunnels to solve specific mining problems was likely more valuable than much of our more generic deep tunnel & support research.

2.5 Are research products effectively transferred to practitioners?

JL suggested that there should be a project that ask mines why they have not implemented research findings. MD said that this should be the role of inspectors rather than researchers. It was agreed that knowledge transfer must improve, that practitioners should be “put on the hook” and not be able to plead ignorance. The concept of a series of “SIMRAC Schools” to transfer knowledge was discussed. It was agreed that this could work, provided each school was not longer than one day, and that they focused on practical, field-tested implementation of the findings.

MD said that the training provided to use SIMRAC software products (SDA, MINSIM2000) has been quite weak. JL said that training has been disjointed. JL said that he would like to see continuous availability of training on SIMRAC outputs, perhaps through the Mine Qualifications Authority.

This question provoked a lengthy discussion on training and staff competence. JL commented that he sees reluctance on the part of rock engineering students to solve problems, and strongly advocated the need to develop this ability. He also remarked that many practitioners do not seem to take personal responsibility for their professionally development. MD endorsed these comments, saying that many practitioners expect the researchers to solve all their problems, and do not seem to want or be able to think for themselves. JL remarked that some practitioners seem always to “be tired” and unable to think creatively.

JL said that there is also no expectation for senior levels that people study in their own time; rather it is expected that the rock engineering managers do the teaching. However, he feels that this does not develop independent thinking. JL emphasized the need for practitioners to be people who are always alert, as many people on mines will “take chances”. MD said that many practitioners prefer just to do the routine work, and do not look at “the bigger picture”. JL said that rock engineering is not a routine job as the ground changes continually. Consequently one cannot simply apply a recipe.

2.7 Have SIMRAC funds been well spent?

MD said that he believes that there has been some improvement in knowledge and implementation. He said that it should be borne in mind that mining is getting more difficult as depth increases, more remnants are mined, and the work force is getting weaker by the day. JL commented that we like to relate danger to depth. However, it might be better to relate it to stress.

MD said that perhaps we have fallen short with regard to technology transfer, and perhaps have become stuck on certain concepts.

JL said that the introduction of new technology has been gradual and perhaps not noticed by gold mining. But deep platinum mining will have a huge body of knowledge to draw on that would not have existed if there had not been research. MD then showed a graph produced by Rob McGill (Mponeng mine) showing a reduction in lost time injuries that correlated with the introduction of various technologies.

FORESIGHT REPORT

3/4 What changes do you predict will affect the SA mining industry during the next decade?

MD said that he did not believe that efficiencies would increase greatly. He remarked that the remaining life of most of AngloGold Ashanti’s deep gold mines is only about 10 years. JL said that a reduction in pay limit could turn low-grade resources into huge reserves. MD replied that he thought that this would only come about by an increase in the gold price rather than through a reduction in costs.

JL said that the demands on practitioners will increase and that they will battle. MD agreed, saying that rock mechanics practitioners were increasingly being made responsible for implementation. They were also being made to carry increasing legal responsibilities. However, production personnel were paid a premium to “make things happen”, while technical people were not.

JL said that he thought established listed companies would become conservative with regard to taking rock-related risk. This would create space for new entrants who were prepared to mine under more risky conditions.

JL said that it was predicted that the physical strength of mine workers would decline and that standards of care and diligence might diminish. Costs may rise, as labour typically comprises about 60% of costs. MD noted that despite these predictions, productivity is currently far higher than it ever was. He suggested that this might be due to the change in stope support from packs to elongates.

JL predicted that scattered and sequential grid mining would generate a lot of new questions, particularly in the 3500 – 4000 m range.

MD said that the development of a reliable method of seismic prediction would greatly assist mining.

5. What advances could significantly reduce rock-related safety risks?

MD said that most accidents come down to people taking risks, right from the planning stage to the work place: “It generally comes down to human error. We must get people to be more responsible!” He said that the same issue had been identified in Australia in the late 1990’s.

JL said that layout rules were often not strictly adhered to, as people thought that the rules could be bent. Everything starts with the layout, as residual conditions are created. It is necessary to stick rigorously to rules. MD commented that there “are many gray areas”. MD said that there was a need for an effective inspectorate. JL said that: “we, as rock engineering people, don’t really want to know rules. We want the freedom to ‘exercise judgment’.” He repeated his call for more rigid rules, and for tests to verify them.

6. What factors could improve rock-related safety?

MD commented that all the factors listed in the questionnaire apply: “We need to look at everything.” He emphasized the need for management interventions:

Make sure Codes of Practice are applied.

Do more training (at all levels, from in-stope workers to supervisors) then we have ever done before. The same mistakes happen over and over again. The fundamental problem is that people are prepared to take a chance, and poor training is used as an excuse.

JL agreed that “everything is priority”, but then went on to rank the factors on the list as follows on the basis of “the first thought is maybe the best”.

1. 
   Implementation of existing knowledge
   
2. 
   Stricter enforcement of regulations and codes of practice
   
3. 
   Ability to predict reliably the occurrence of rockbursts in space and time.
   
4. 
   Techniques to detect hazardous structures ahead of mining
   
5. 
   Better training of in-stope workers
   
6. 
   Better supervision
   
7. 
   A quantum improvement in support systems
   
8. 
   Stress modeling techniques that accurately simulate rock degradation and failure
   
9. 
   Greater mechanization, thereby removing workers from hazardous areas.
   

JL said that he thought that site-specific problem solving could add value. MD cautioned that this could have the result that some important issues (e.g. tunnels) were neglected.

7 NEED FOR ROCK-RELATED RESEARCH

7.1 Should research work continue in SA?

JL and MD both said “definitely”.

7.2 Should research effort be increased significantly?

MD supported an increase in budget, noting that the research expenditure had decreased in real terms. He asked how SA’s budget compared with other countries e.g. Australia, USA.

JL disagreed, saying that it the research effort should stay at much the present level and that funds could be spent more wisely. He expressed the opinion that some projects had failed to deliver. JL said that he supported basic research that stimulated ideas and thinking. JL also commented that it might be timely to scale back generic research and look at solving mine-specific problems (hotspots).

7.3 Do we have the research competency?

JL said that he thought the competency was adequate, though it was dependent on a few leading figures.

MD noted with concern that many of the good researchers were approaching retirement, and that some younger researchers had recently joined consultancy companies. He said that some senior researchers were stuck in a rut and not listening to issues being articulated by industry e.g. insisting on using ERR and 3 m/s as a support design criteria

7.4 Do we have the research capacity?

JL and MD both expressed some concern about capacity (see 7.3 above).

7.4 Do we have the research facilities?

MD noted that some key equipment is aging e.g. Terratek.

JL said that he believed that there were reasonable facilities for research, and that the provision of facilities should be needs driven. For example, the rockburst problem compelled the gold mining industry to create facilities for dynamic research.

JL remarked that the Department of Minerals and Energy should provide financial support for facilities. MD said that research funds should not be used for training. It should be possible to tap into other funds for this purpose.

7.6 Should the focus be on implementation rather than on more research?

MD agreed partly, with the rider that” there will always be questions that need to be researched.”

JL said “50/50”, meaning that the focus should be on both new research and implementation of existing knowledge and technology – as before perhaps rather 33,3% each for fundamental, applied & transfer.

7.7 Should research work be abandoned?

JL and MD both disagreed strongly with the proposition.

7.8 Would stricter enforcement have a greater impact than more research work?

MD that said an effective inspectorate is needed, but expressed the view that there is a serious lack of knowledge and expertise in the Department of Minerals and Energy. In the past, a greater proportion of inspectors had practical on-mine experience. MD said that he thought some decisions (e.g. to temporarily close shafts) were made for political reasons rather than for sound technical reasons.

JL said that the mine inspectors were too friendly with management in the past, but this is no longer seems the case.