Gap851 Final Report Main Body

Dr. Wlodzimierz Rymon-Lipinski

Year of birth: 1943

Current position: Acting Director: Mine Safety, Department of Minerals and Energy

Qualifications:

M Eng 1968, University of and Metallurgy, Krakow, Poland

PhD 1973, Institute of Rock Engineering, University of and Metallurgy, Krakow, Poland

Experience:

Senior Lecturer / Adjunct Professor, University of and Metallurgy, Krakow, Poland

1981-1982 Post-doctoral fellow, University of Idaho / US Bureau of Mines

1985-1986 Professor, School of Mines, University of Zambia

1986-1989 Researcher, COMRO, South Africa

1989-1991 Anglo American Corp, Rock Mechanics Practitioner, President Steyn Mine, Free State, South Africa

1991-present Department of Minerals and Energy, South Africa

R-L has been involved with SIMRAC since its inception in 1991, representing the DME on the rock engineering advisory committees (GAPREAG and RETAC).

Date of interview: 18 February 2005

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?

R-L has read most of the SIMRAC projects relevant to rock engineering.

R-L has paid particular attention to the research work related to mining-induced seismicity, support, assessment of rock-related hazard and risk, and remedial action.

1.2 How many workshops and conferences have you attended?

R-L has attended many workshops and conferences. The Rockburst and Seismicity in Mines series has been particularly valuable.

1.3 Have you supplied researchers with information and derived benefit?

R-L has supplied many researchers with information. He has been the “gatekeeper” for the South African Mining-related Accidents Statistical System (SAMRASS), which many researchers have consulted.

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

N/A

1.5 Have you worked as a consultant on a mine that has hosted research projects?

N/A

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

The rock engineering advisory committee had appointed R-L as the champion of several projects related to mining-induced seismicity and support, for example, the rockburst task force (GAP 201). R-L said that the GAPREAG / RETAC had a policy of appointing committee members as champions, but this has not been very effectively implemented.

1.7 Have you implemented research knowledge and technology?

R-L said that he had used SIMRAC outputs as the basis for recommendations to mines following accident inquiries.

R-L said that he seeks to alert DME inspectors to relevant research work.

R-L commented that the awareness and knowledge of SIMRAC research was very low, both in the DME and the mining industry in general.

R-L described a road show that SIMRAC had conducted in 2004. The managers of the various programmes (rock engineering, health and engineering) had each reported on the research activities. Presentations were made in most regions (Gauteng, Free State, Klerksdorp, Limpopo, etc.). Several hundred senior employees of mining companies and the DME had attended.

1.8 Have you personally performed research work?

Yes. R-L had conducted research for his M Eng and PhD degrees, and while a member of academic staff in Poland, USA and Zambia.

R-L is the author of a book “Mining methods in rockburst conditions” (in Polish), published by the University of and Metallurgy, Krakow in 1984. The topics covered in the book included preconditioning by blasting, the injection of water into coal seams to create fractures and reduce the risk of face bursting, and seismo-acoustic monitoring.

1.9 Have you proposed research projects to SIMRAC?

R-L said that he has been intimately involved with SIMRAC processes since its inception in 1991.

1.10 Have you evaluated research proposals?

R-L has evaluated all the rock engineering research proposals.

1.11 Have you evaluated research progress and outputs?

R-L has evaluated virtually progress and outputs for virtually all the rock engineering research projects.

1.12 How could the SIMRAC research program be improved?

R-L commented that he missed the regular progress report meetings that were held by Miningtek in the past, but had been discontinued.

R-L said that the Auditor General had just completed a review of SIMRAC. The report had identified numerous shortcomings in SIMRAC process and made many recommendations. R-L said that he endorsed the recommendations wholeheartedly. R-L said, “the report is excellent, everything I would like to say is in it”. The Auditor General’s report will be tabled at the SIMRAC meeting on 24 February 2004, after which it will be made public.

R-L said that a SIMRAC Research Procurement Policy had been drafted and tabled twice at SIMRAC meetings. This policy provided criteria regarding the criteria to be used in adjudicating proposals e.g. it stipulated that 50 per cent of SIMRAC work should be carried out by public entities such as universities and CSIR Miningtek.

2. IMPACT OF ROCK-RELATED RESEARCH WORK

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

R-L said that SIMRAC work had enabled him to make recommendations to mines following accident inquiries.

2.2 / 2.3 Has research work produced knowledge and technology that have improved safety in the SA mining industry? / on your mines?

R-L said that there had been huge advance in regulation in the past two decades since with promulgation of the Mine Health & Safety Act in 1991, e.g. the introduction of Codes of Practice.

R-L said that he believes that research work has improved safety in South African mines. Coal and base metal mines approach international standards. The improvement has not been as marked in the gold sector, though there has been a reduction in the number of accidents causing multiple (4) fatalities.

However, research is just one link in the chain. R-L said that better training of inspectors is essential, and that he hoped the reorganization of the DME would make it possible to recruit more competent persons. R-L said that some of the SIMRAC publications had been very useful, particularly A Booklet on Practices for Anomalous Geotechnical Areas in Platinum and Gold Mines Stopes.

R-L said that SIMRAC outputs would be very useful in compiling Mining Qualifications Authority (MQA) unit standards.

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

R-L said that some SIMRAC work was sophisticated (e.g. seismics), some was practice –orientated (e.g. Support Design Analysis tool), some was academic, and all was safety-focused.

The interviewer asked if SIMRAC should pay more attention to the productivity and cost benefits of research. R-L agreed that this should be done, as it would increase the motivation to implement. R-L said that he believed deeply that “SAFETY PAYS”. R-L noted that several people had attempted to calculate the cost of accidents to the industry (Duncan Adams of SIMPROSS and a Karl Marx).

2.5 Are research products effectively transferred to practitioners?

R-L said that he did not believe that the research findings and products were adequate transferred to practitioners. He said that the SIMRAC road show (see section 1.7) had been a real eye-opener regarding the level of ignorance that prevailed.

R-L said that greater engagement with mines during the research process could overcome this. He suggested tackling real problems in partnership with mines, with the mine sharing the cost of the research work. R-L said that inspectors and interns could be seconded to the research team, and that very beneficial interaction could take place with researchers and practitioners on the mines.

2.6 Are practitioners able to effectively implement the research?

R-L said that he believed that implementation was the weakest link in the chain.

R-L took the “walking support” project as an example. R-L said that 80 per cent of fall of ground accidents are due to the absence of support, not the failure of support units or systems. The possibility of people working under an unsupported hangingwall must be eliminated. R-L said that the introduction of walking support had virtually eliminated rockburst and fall of ground accidents in Poland, as it removed the onus for installing support from the workers. He believed that it could have a similar impact in South Africa. Prototype “walking support” units had been built. The next stage of testing demanded a serious increase in funding to equip a stope with units, and a relaxation of production targets in the stope to accommodate the inevitable teething problems. Equipment manufacturers and mining companies were very slow in offering funding or a test stope. R-L said that it might be necessary to work out a scheme where a mine providing a stope is compensated for any loss in production.

2.7 Have SIMRAC funds been well spent?

R-L agreed that there had been a serious decline in SIMRAC funding of rock-related research since 1995. He said that he believed increasing the proportion of funding to health-related research had been legitimate.

R-L said that the mining industry argues that that have no money for research, but noted that the R40 million SIMRAC annual levy was very small compared when the size of the industry is considered. More than R1 billion is spent annually on support alone! R-L suggested that matching funding from industry for mine-specific projects could increase the level of funding.

FORESIGHT REPORT

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

R-L said that the progress in mine safety research was only possible if stakeholders (mining companies, researchers, labour and government) combined forces.

4. What advances could significantly address the above-mentioned changes?

R-L commented that rock engineering practitioners generally seemed scared of the changes taking place in the industry, and resistant to them. For example, there was resistance to the introduction of the Mining Qualifications Authority. It appeared that many practitioners were afraid that they would fail to qualify.

R-L said that training is generally not a priority in the industry, with the exception of Anglogold Ashanti and perhaps Gold Fields. There was no effective coordination, and most of the training levy paid by employers (1 per cent of the payroll) was not been claimed. R-L said that a few consultancy companies had positioned themselves as training-providers, but many lacked the resources and long-term commitment necessary to ensure sustainability. R-L said that he hoped that a change in management at the MQA would improve the situation, and strongly advocated that CSIR Miningtek play a leading role in the provision of training to the industry. He expressed the view that

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

and

6. What factors could improve rock-related safety?

R-L said that he wanted to emphasize the need for better training, and focused all his comments on this topic. R-L said that he believed that the general level of rock engineering skills had declined significantly over the last two decades. One of the reasons for this was the closure of training centres run by the Chamber of Mines and major mining companies. R-L was particularly concerned about standards of training, supervision and enforcement on small mines.

R-L strongly urged that the system for training stope workers and technical specialists be reviewed. He described his own training at a technical high school in Poland, where from the age of 14 he had spent two days per week underground in a mine where a stope was run by the school. Students were rotated through the various departments on a mine, and after five years had a thorough understanding of each job on the mine.

R-L advocated a systematic centralized industry-wide training scheme. R-L said that funding for learnerships is available from the MQA, but very few companies are making use of this. R-L said that CSIR’s coal fire and explosion facility at Kloppersbos could be used. He suggested that the stope simulator at Savuka be used for a similar purpose.

7. NEED FOR ROCK-RELATED RESEARCH

7.1 Should research work continue in SA

Yes

7.2 Should research effort be increased significantly?

Yes. The percentage of GDP spent on research by South Africa is relatively small and must be increased is the country is to become competitive.

7.3 Do we have the research competency?

Yes, but it should be better coordinated. He felt that researchers were generally doing a good job, and in some areas were world leaders. R-L said that an organization such as Miningtek should be hosting at least 20 interns per annum.

7.4 Do we have the research capacity?

The comments in 7.3 apply to capacity as well.

7.5 Do we have the research facilities?

R-L said that testing equipment is becoming outdated and needs replacement. This should be funding by a government grant, especially if it is used for training.

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

Both are important.

7.7 Should research work be abandoned?

Definitely not.

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

Both are important. R-L suggested that any supervisors / practitioners found not to adhering to standards be compelled to undergo retraining. This could provide a powerful motivation to do things right the first time.