ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
Australian Roadway Development
Improvement Project
OPERATORS’ WORKSHOPS
September 2006
OBJECTIVE AND FORMAT
Provide a forum for roadway development
operators to:
 Learn of emerging best practice and roadway
development initiatives
 Learn of developments in equipment and
technology
 Network with peers, and share their experience
and learnings (and not just their successes)
 Identify areas for targeted research
ACARP Project C15005
2
FORMAT

Four workshop subjects presented by best practice operators

Each workshop comprises a 20-25 presentation and a 20-25 minute
open forum for discussion and sharing of experiences and learnings

Poster board presentations by OEMs and researchers

Plenary session to:
 Capture key findings
 Identify opportunities to improve the workshop process
 Identify other issues for future workshops
 Identify areas for targeted research

Workshop report with copies of presentations to be provided to all
participants
ACARP Project C15005
3
INTRODUCTION
Prerequisites for attendance:
 A passion for roadway development, and
 A willingness to participate in discussions and share
experiences
ACARP Project C15005
4
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT
TASK GROUP
Guy Mitchell, BMA
Glen Lewis, Xstrata Coal
Bob Miller, Centennial Coal
2005 DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGE – Why?
 Marked increase in demand for export coal.
 Significant increase in capital and production costs.
 Substantial improvements in longwall production and
productivity are continuing to be achieved.
 Improvements in roadway development are generally failing to
keep abreast of longwall improvements.
 Higher capacity, new generation mines are being planned.
 Older mines are still struggling to survive as it becomes more
difficult to find solutions and successfully apply them.
 Unlikely that both will be realised if current roadway
development activities and trends are remain unchanged.
ACARP Project C15005
6
2005 DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGE

RDTG formed design a roadmap or strategy for targeted R&D to
improve roadway development.

Previous attempts as ‘one off ‘ Company initiatives have failed:

Industry wide problem where common sense suggest joint problem
solving approach where we share successes and failures!

Initial members were Anglo, BHPB, BMA, Centennial, Rio Tinto,
Thiess, and Xstrata.

References to July 2005 ACARP report identifying what incremental
and step changes can and must be made in roadway technology and
systems:
 Poor problem scope, planning & organisation
 Lack of Mine involvement and commitment
 Poor execution and patience
 Absence of information sharing (competitive edge)
 Development of new generation longwall mines
 Older mines to remain competitive
ACARP Project C15005
7
2005 DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGE
• Report Recommendations
– What operators/mine managers should do
– What mine owners should do to address key constraints
– What incremental/step change initiatives should be pursued by ACARP
• Focus on Key Elements
–
–
–
–
Coal cutting and loading
Roadway support
Coal clearance
Logistics (services & supplies)
• Operators Workshop
– Industry practitioners with broad range of conditions
– Detailing sub elements of the development process
– Providing insight into where their gains have been made”
•
•
•
•
Process control/continuous improvement
Roof/rib support practices and equipment
Best practice maintenance
Panel advances
• Opportunity for questions and discussions
ACARP Project C15005
8
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
REVIEW OF AUSTRALIAN ROADWAY
DEVELOPMENT – CURRENT STATUS
Gary Gibson, ACARP
2005 REVIEW
 Identify where past wins have been achieved and the
lessons learnt.
 Identify incremental and step changes in roadway
development technology and systems necessary to:
• Enable new generation, high capacity longwall mines to be
developed;
• Provide productivity gains to enable existing mines to compete
with the new generation mines.
 Identify specific R&D opportunities for new technologies,
equipment and associated systems.
 Build support and commitment for a targeted 7 year R&D
program.
ACARP Project C15005
10
INDUSTRY REVIEW PROCESS

Reviews conducted with representatives from:
• All longwall mines
• Bolting hardware suppliers – Hilti, Jenmar, and One Steel
• Corporate offices - Anglo, BHP Billiton, BMA, Centennial, and Xstrata
• Geotechnical consultants - SCT, Seedsman, and Strata Engineering
• Mining contractors - HWE, Roche, Thiess, UGM, and Walters
• Mining equipment OEMs - DBT, Joy, and Sandvik
• Other OEMs – Alminco, Continental, Hydramatic, and PJ Berriman
• R&D organisations – CET, Eikon CoalStream, GSS, and QCAT
• Regulators and service providers– DNRM, DPINR, and Coal Services
• TBM OEM/developers – IHI and Pacific Tunnelling

In all, some 160 persons participated.

Structured review process at mine sites, 1 on 1 interviews elsewhere.
ACARP Project C15005
11
BEST PRACTICE MINES
 A wide range of performance levels were reported across
a wide variety of mining conditions and equipment.
 Factors other than mining conditions, and equipment
must be at play – significant differences with similar
equipment and similar mining conditions!
ACARP Project C15005
12
BEST PRACTICE MINES
 Key factors differentiating best practice mines and
others:
• “Driven” culture, desire to succeed, focus on getting things right,
accountability.
• Understanding of roadway development as a process, and the
application of short interval process control.
• Degree of involvement of employees.
• Focus on utilisation of personnel through provision of adequate
“fit for purpose” equipment.
• High levels of reliability and availability engineered into
equipment, with focus on maintaining equipment fit for purpose.
• Awareness of and aggressive application of new technology,
equipment and systems to improve safety, productivity and costs
.
ACARP Project C15005
13
HIGH PERFORMANCE MINES
 High performers in poor conditions were typically
achieving similar or better development rates than poor
performers in good conditions.
 Factors typically evident at high performing mines:
• Major focus on and prioritisation of roadway development.
• Incentive schemes strongly linked to development performance.
• Likely utilisation of 12CM/12/30/32 continuous miners in a
balanced, sequential cutting and bolting process.
• Ability to complete panel advances in 12 – 15 hours.
• Effective mine planning.
ACARP Project C15005
14
MAIN FINDINGS

Later generation mines with good conditions are likely to establish
15Mtpa mines without major developments in mining equipment and
systems.
EFFECT OF FACE WIDTH AND BLOCK LENGTH ON WEEKLY DEVELOPMENT RATES - 3.5m MINING HEIGHT
15Mtpa
1,200
DEVELOPMENT METRES PER WEEK
1,000
Block
Length
2,500
3,000
800
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
600
5,500
6,000
400
200
150
ACARP Project C15005
200
250
300
FACE WIDTH
350
400
450
15
MAIN FINDINGS
 Infrastructure limitations likely to constrain older
mines from making major improvements in mine
capacity.
 Adverse conditions associated with depth (eg;
stress and gas) will pose additional productivity
challenges to older mines, and to later
generation mines as they mature.
ACARP Project C15005
16
MAIN FINDINGS
 Technology developments are currently
underway which will address some key process
constraints in the short to medium term,
providing potential to improve system capability
across all mines.
ACARP Project C15005
17
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY

Five self drilling bolting (SDB) systems are currently in various stages of
development, with a variety of civil sector SDB also available (but
expensive).

Sandvik releasing an upgraded ABM25(S) designed for difficult mining
conditions and 4.8m wide roadways. Likely to incorporate Aro semiautomated bolting system.
Joy mooted to be developing a new generation continuous miner for global
roadway development market.


DBT established a global roadway development group.

Both IHI and Pacific Tunnelling have developed concepts and detailed
engineering designs for TBMs, and project that they could be on site in 18 –
24 months.
ACARP Project C15005
18
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY

Joy had 2 floor mounted 4FCT systems in operation in US mines,
with 2 other systems then under manufacture for US mines.

Sandvik were due to shortly release a roof mounted continuous
haulage system.

Continental anticipated releasing a roof mounted monorail based
extensible and retractable development/longwall conveyor.

Cutting Edge Technologies had reportedly completed designs for an
extensible conveyor system.

Eikon had completed design for a 250m3/hour coal slurry
transportation system.

Finalisation of the ACBM was reportedly stalled by a failure to
complete contracted development of an automated bolting system.
ACARP Project C15005
19
ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS








Roof and rib bolting, and installation of roof and rib mesh
Cyclic nature of coal haulers, particularly beyond 70m from boot end
Advancement of conveyor and panel services, particularly with dual
CM units
Routine installation of ventilation ducting
The logistics of supply, transport, distribution and handling particularly at older mines.
Installation of long tendons as primary support becoming more
widespread - installation equipment still fairly rudimentary
The physical demands of the work environment, the extent of
manual handling, an ageing workforce
Coal cutting was not seen as a constraint at any mine, however the
ability of machines to cut breakaways for cut throughs was
considered to be a major failure of all machine configurations.
ACARP Project C15005
20
NEW MINING SYSTEM
 The key attributes of a new roadway development mining
system were identified as:
• Integrated, continuous cutting, bolting and coal clearance system
– continuous mining.
• Automated bolting, with self drilling bolts.
• Integrated materials supply and logistics with components stored
in magazines or cassettes allowing minimal manual intervention.
• Extensible (monorail mounted) face services (eg; ventilation,
power, water, compressed air, pump out).
• Extensible, self advancing panel conveyor.
• High capacity, automated installation of long tendon secondary
supports.
ACARP Project C15005
21
INDUSTRY CONSTRAINTS

Real or perceived constraints to successful RD&D of new technology
and mining systems:
• Industry’s ability and willingness to fund and sustain the RD&D of new
mining systems, particularly through tight economic conditions.
• Few mines have sufficient development float to allow critical resources
and mine real estate to be deployed to developing new technology.
• Scarcity of managers, engineers, supervisors, operators and trades.
• Limited size of Australian market, and OEMs propensity to develop new
technology as global products, and for development to be done” inhouse”.
• Lead time from concept to successful demonstration is too long;
•
loss of project champions (eg; promotion or turnover) and;
•
diminution of corporate energy and critical mass.
• Overly restrictive legislation limiting the development and application of
new technologies and the use of light weight materials.
• Over zealous pursuit of absolute safety first by Inspectorate, with
prosecutions in the event of less than absolute safety.
ACARP Project C15005
22
RECOMMENDATIONS
 What mine operators and mine managers should do
to improve development performance.
 What mine owners should do to address key
constraints.
 What incremental change initiatives should be
pursued by ACARP.
 What step change initiatives should be pursued by
ACARP.
ACARP Project C15005
23
MINE OPERATORS AND MINE MANGERS


Pursue industry best practice roadway development.
Fully embrace concepts of process control, continuous improvement, and
involvement of all personnel in those pursuits.

Commit to conduct of a routine roadway development benchmarking
process across the industry.
Commit and contribute to a regular “best practice” roadway development
forum and enable development practitioners to share successes and
failures, and learn of new practices, developments in R&D, and emerging
issues.
Through publication of Proceedings from the forums, support the
development of a “body of knowledge” of best practice roadway
development.
Give due recognition to development in the mine’s operation




Adequately resource development to enable it to be properly accountable
for its performance.
ACARP Project C15005
24
MINE OWNERS




Develop and commit to a long term investment strategy to support and
sustain the research, development and demonstration of new mining
systems and technology.
Develop and commit to a long term strategy to develop the industry’s skills
base and overcome the scarcity of experienced mining professionals,
engineers, supervisors, operators and trades personnel.
Challenge the restrictive legislative framework being imposed on the industry,
and the regulators resort to prosecution in the event of less than absolute
safety.
Fund, support and sustain:
•
•
•

routine roadway development benchmarking studies
conduct of regular “best practice” roadway development forums, and
development of a best practice “body of knowledge”.
Challenge mine operators and mine managers if they fail to pursue industry
best practice roadway development practices.
ACARP Project C15005
25
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT
IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES
Guy Mitchell, BMA
Glen Lewis, Xstrata Coal
Bob Miller, Centennial Coal
BRAINSTORM TIME
• A quick exercise
– Your thoughts & ideas
– Your opinions
ACARP Project C15005
•
What’s good?
•
What’s bad?
27
WORKSHOP RESPONSES - MACKAY
•
GOOD
– Clean separation of development from longwall – equal focus individual
business units
– Involvement of operators and others in all facets of the development process
and activities
– Companies using data to identify opportunities
– Ownership of process and involvement is high at high-performing mines
– Focus on workforce and community
– Parallel-pathing of activities
ACARP Project C15005
28
WORKSHOP RESPONSES - MACKAY
•
BAD
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Lack of commitment by all stakeholders
Right people lack control
Industry becoming ‘closed’ to new inexperienced people
Operators don’t have enough input into standardising processes
Non-standardisation of processes
Coal haulage – continued use of shuttle cars
Old technology used too long
Failure of develop continuous haulage systems
Unrealistic budgets
Lack of investment in process
People not able to be accountable
People – lack of work ethic
Unrealistic expectations of machinery and people’s performance
Fear of failure – development behind budgets - reluctance to try new things
Fear of prosecution
Rosters affect effective communication
Lack of knowledge and management focus
Shift duration - operators become unproductive later in shift
ACARP Project C15005
29
WORKSHOP RESPONSES - POKOLBIN
• SUCCESSES OF LAST 5 YEARS
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Hydraulic bolters in lieu of hand held bolters
Focus on process, and integration of systems
Set standards, with all shifts doing the same thing
Achievements in primary and secondary support systems and products (installation
systems require further R&D)
Machine monitoring improvements, almost to longwall standards
Use of fit for purpose materials and equipment handling attachments - $ spent on
ancillary equipment to improve materials handling and logistics systems
Attitude of personnel – harnessing power of people – pride in their job maintenance
of standards
Senior management credibility – doing what they said they would do
Involvement of people in process
Change in leadership model and supervisors’ role – leader rather than lamp holder
Age of workforce – focus on ergonomics
Increased focus on safety and development of safety systems approach
Services handling systems – monorails
Increased KW installed in development equipment
Radio control of machines – success? – reliability? – exposure of people to pinch
points?
ACARP Project C15005
30
WORKSHOP RESPONSES - PENRITH
• R&D SUCCESSES OF LAST 5 YEARS
–
–
–
–
–
Geological and geotechnical developments for roof support determination
Application of monorail systems
Development of roof and rib support hardware by OEMs and suppliers
Technology developments from ACBM project
How do we wrap emerging technologies together as an integrated, cost effective
system?
• R&D ISSUES FROM THE PAST 5 YEARS
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
R&D on the run (roof and rib support) – lack of industry support
Reactive application of geotechnical design to support systems
Failure to adopt “other industry” supply systems
Lack of predictability of geotechnical conditions
Pioneering development of equipment
Further improvements in monorail systems required
ACBM – getting OEMs and operators to take it forward
ACARP Project C15005
31
ACARP - INCREMENTAL CHANGE
•
Demonstrate a high capacity, integrated mining system that
incorporates then available, best practice technology.
 Pursue and expedite commercialisation of alternative self
drilling bolt technologies and automated bolting systems,
including potential retrofitting of automated bolting systems to
existing CMs.
 Facilitate and expedite completion of the ACBM and associated
technologies.
 Develop alternate skin reinforcement and confinement
measures to eliminate use and handling of steel mesh.
 Facilitate development of an extensible, self advancing panel
conveyor.
 Develop a high capacity, automated long tendon installation
system for both primary and secondary support applications.
ACARP Project C15005
32
ACARP - INCREMENTAL CHANGE
 Develop a mine economics modelling system that enables
mines to properly evaluate the full cost of alternate
development systems.
 Pursue other complementary technology developments
including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
automation and robotics
machine guidance systems
light weight materials
face pumping systems
roadway construction and consolidation
gas drainage
 Improve level of awareness and understanding of technologies
being applied in other industry sectors:
• Metalliferous and tunnelling
• Coal industry assessment by a “technologist”
ACARP Project C15005
33
ACARP - INCREMENTAL CHANGE
 Improve level of awareness and understanding of roadway
development technologies and systems being utilised in mines
overseas.
• Desk top review
• Technology mission if warranted.
 Develop software that will facilitate and enhance the adoption
of the systems approach/ process control.
ACARP Project C15005
34
ACARP - STEP CHANGE
(We recognise the problem but can’t conceptualise the solution)
 Develop a vision to demonstrate a high capacity, integrated
mining system by end 2008.
 Specification – capable of sustained, continuous production at a level of
+10MPOH, >20 hours day (10/20).
 Develop a strategy for development and demonstration of the
high capacity, integrated mining system.
 Develop a specification for the high capacity, integrated mining
system
 Commission the design of a number of alternative systems:
 TBM concept could provide an integrated, continuous cutting, bolting and
coal clearance system at a number of mines.
 TBM provide good immediate ground support in difficult ground
conditions.
 Construction industry approach – simultaneous and parallel pathing of
work activities
ACARP Project C15005
35
ACARP - STEP CHANGE
 Evaluate and select a design that best meets the industry
specification and requirements, and
 Commission an OEM (or OEMs) to develop the technology and
manufacture the integrated system.
 Establish a collaborative agreement to conduct demonstrations
at appropriate mine site (eg; highwall), either:
 by a project team internally funded by the mine owner, or
 by an externally funded mining contractor (ACARP).
 Project manage the technology and equipment development
process through to the conclusion of the field trials and
demonstrations through to end 2008.
ACARP Project C15005
36
WHAT HAS BEEN DONE TO DATE
 Report accepted by ACARP and key recommendations
supported including:
 Benchmarking studies on 6 monthly basis
 Regional Operators’ Workshops on 6 monthly basis,
culminating in Operators’ Conference early 2008
 Review of civil and tunnelling sectors
 Alternate skin reinforcement and web-based operators’
network/MIS invited to make second round submissions
 Support for field trials of SDB project
 High capacity mining systems workshop scheduled November
2006 (coupled with L15 project?)
 Commitment to pursue opportunities identified in workshop
processes
ACARP Project C15005
37
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
KEY FINDINGS – JULY 2006
BENCHMARKING STUDY
Gary Gibson, ACARP
JULY 2006 BENCHMAKING STUDY

Contributions received from:













Mandalong
Metropolitan
Broadmeadow (BMA)
Tahmoor
Angus Place
Beltana
Austar
North Goonyella
Broadmeadow (HWE)
Springvale
Appin
Glennies Creek and Kestrel reportedly well advanced
Findings now to be separately reported to respondents and
workshop participants, with close-off of responses 8 September
2006.
ACARP Project C15005
39
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
PROCESS CONTROL AND
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
David Gibson and Matt Bonnard, Beltana
PROCESS CONTROL WORKSHOP - MACKAY

How do you involve people in the selection the equipment?
–

How much time per week you as Development Coordinator spending doing work for your
process and not the rest of the mine?
–

–
–
–
Firstly, development operates as a business unit, and recruits its own personnel, with personnel be
selected for what they are good at (majority of personnel were recruited from South Bulga and were each
well known for their various strengths and capabilities)
We feed them with information and shift briefings are attended daily by each crew at the start of shift
We listen to suggestions and act where appropriate, and involve them in the selection of their equipment
We adopt sustainable manning levels
Can you outline the incentive scheme?
–
–
–

Approx 70% attributable to the process
How do you get people to own the process?
–

Form task groups to involve people from conception to completion. Benchmark other sites and consider
all OEM’s. Beltana to supply guidelines for equipment performance and expectations. People that will be
using the equipment pick the best of what is available and engineer in changes to suit our requirements
Two major components, 50% each for development metres and longwall tonnes
We conduct fortnightly audits of panel standards including roadway alignment and horizon control, safety
equipment, etc
Safety performance is also factored into incentive scheme
What are the top 5 delays, and do you have any magic wands?
–
No magic wands – top 5 delays section advance, travelling to section, flitting, stone dusting, supplying the
miner
ACARP Project C15005
41
PROCESS CONTROL WORKSHOP - MACKAY

What material handling issues have been identified with the new CM?
–

Are you going to transfer the learnings to the new Blakefield mine?
–

–
Seven day, four panel roster, 8 week rotation
Rotate shifts each 2 weeks, that is, 2 weeks on night shift, 2 weeks on afternoon shift, 2 weeks on
dayshift, two weekends, 1 week off
Undermanagers work same roster but the development process management team works normal 5 days
Do you intend to utilise dual CM unit at Blakefield?
–

Reduce development rate by 0.5MPOH (from 5MPOH)
Shift roster?
–
–

Approx 3.2 – 3.5 days including 8 hour maintenance shift and 18-20 hours for section advance
Impact of say 30% increase in support density?
–

Yes, the process will be ‘picked’ up and taken to Blakefield South although there will be a need for a
much larger work force
Face cycle?
–

Bolts handled by QDS pod system. Biggest issues are handling 1.7m mesh module and vent tubes. Mesh
is stowed in the rib behind the miner and fetched as required, vent tubes are brought in when bolting and
handled/installed from the miner platforms.
Yes. The model has us running two twin miner panels at Blakefield
Back bye maintenance?
–
We are responsible for everything inbye of our portal. Done when we are cutting at the start of our cut
sequence when there are no parallel tasks to do and also during our weekend maintenance windows.
ACARP Project C15005
42
PROCESS CONTROL WORKSHOP - POKOLBIN

You mentioned panel auditing, what auditing do you do?
–
–

Have you sought or do you have an exemption for stonedusting?
–

Budget 17.446km roadway development for single unit
11.18km completed YTD, and we are 186m ahead of budget YTD
What are the major impediments to further improvement?
–
–
–

Whoever holes the cut through, no other fast rules, rotating shifts are employed
Now considering cutting B heading again while belt road is being cleaned up
What is the budget this year and how are you going against it?
–
–

Have found 70 degrees to be optimum as it doesn’t add too much additional development over life of panel
Used to drive belt road and cut out a wedge for break away, now cut a 5.5m cut out in the cut through as the
belt road is advanced. That enables CM to get a full head of coal when it commences cut through
Who starts the panel advance?
–
–

Yes, application currently being evaluated by Department
What have you found to be the optimum break away angle?
–
–

Fortnightly audits of panel standards are conducted as part of the mine’s incentive scheme
Typically audit alignment and width of roadways and compliance with other panel standards
Continued use of shuttle cars, need to utilise continuous haulage systems (going overseas next week to
benchmark their performance)
Panel advances are biggest delay, typically 20 hours to complete and over life of panel that is significant given
that we are currently completing two panel advances per week
Face services an issue, but not convinced regarding monorail systems at this stage
What fundamental changes do you expect as you go into deeper areas of mine?
–
–
Blakefield Seam is lower height and will require 7 entry mains
Expect to utilise two super units and will require additional personnel to manage development business unit
ACARP Project C15005
43
PROCESS CONTROL WORKSHOP - PENRITH

To get good scores you need equipment reliability. How do you achieve it?
–
–
–

How do you develop crew ownership of the development process?
–
–
–
–

Crew supervisors report on a prepared shift report and are required to log performance in 15 minute rests
Development Maintenance Coordinator uses the mine’s PULSE system to record data
Performance is tracked on a daily basis on a whiteboard in the crew muster area, weekly performance is
tracked, reported and trended by the planner. Graphs displayed in muster area updated weekly.
Are crew supervisors deputies, and how do you achieve sustainability if in fact they are deputies?
–
–

Firstly, development operates as a business unit, and recruits its own personnel, with personnel be selected
for what they are good at (majority of personnel were recruited from South Bulga and were each well known
for their various strengths and capabilities)
We feed them with information and shift briefings are attended daily by all crews at start of their shift
We listen to suggestions and act where appropriate, and involve them in the selection of their equipment
We adopt sustainable manning levels
Who tracks the development cycle process time?
–
–
–

Firstly, you need good equipment supported by a good maintenance program, with 100% compliance with
that program
We use a 4-5 day window between panel change outs to give equipment a major work over
Utilise two maintenance windows, 2 x 12 hour shifts of a weekend and one 8 hour dayshift mid week. Major
maintenance jobs done on weekends
Yes, crew supervisors are deputies and we typically have at least two deputies in a crew, sometimes 3. They
step-up from operator to Crew Supervisor as required
The step-up deputies/crew supervisors are paid at a rate higher than operators but slightly less than the
nominated Crew Supervisor
You noted that at 170m depth rib support density increases. Do you experience a change in
development rates with increased rib bolting?
–
Yes, we see a de-rating of development rates of some 15% with the increase in rib support and seam water
make
– The 170m depth of cover is nominal and the change in rib support is driven by conditions. We commenced
increased rib support at 130m depth of cover in the current gateroad
ACARP Project C15005
44
PROCESS CONTROL WORKSHOP - PENRITH

What do the 12 man development crews comprise?
–

You noted that development crews comprised 12 personnel including the crew maintenance
supervisor, how many people are used when cutting and loading?
–
–

–
–
Don’t do it down to the minute, but crew supervisors report in 15 minute increments on report forms which are
customised for each shift in accordance with work scheduled for shift
Debrief crew supervisors and crews at end of each shift
Do you maintain during belt moves?
–

Two major components, 50% each for development metres and longwall tonnes
We conduct fortnightly audits of panel standards including roadway alignment and horizon control, safety
equipment, etc
Safety performance is also factored into incentive scheme
Do you have a system for controlling the development process?
–

1 crew supervisor, 1 operator, 2 fitters and 1 electrician, plus supplementary contractor if required
What sort of incentive scheme do you have?
–
–

We typically cut out for 10-12m at a time and then bolt the 10-12m increments in one campaign
We require that 5 people be on the CM when bolting up, and this will include whoever is available including
SC drivers and trades personnel
What does the weekend maintenance crew consist of?
–

Each crew comprises a crew supervisor plus an 11 man crew, with the crew comprising a maintenance
supervisor, 2 fitters, 2 electricians and 6 operators one of which is a step up crew supervisor (deputy)
No, not with the single CM unit. Maintenance is completed during the three scheduled maintenance windows
What rosters do you work?
–
–
–
Seven day, four panel roster, 8 week rotation
Rotate shifts each 2 weeks, that is, 2 weeks on night shift, 2 weeks on afternoon shift, 2 weeks on dayshift,
two weekends, 1 week off
Undermanagers work same roster but the development process management team works normal 5 days
ACARP Project C15005
45
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
ROOF AND RIB SUPPORT PRACTICES
AND EQUIPMENT
John Vincze, Springvale
ROOF & RIB SUPPORT WORKSHOP - MACKAY

With self drilling bolts is it important to pre-tension the bolt?
–

How does galvanising the long tendons (spin-bolts) affect the metallurgy of the tendon/bolt?
–


Don’t know, that’s a question for a metallurgist. Again we haven’t used them yet however we are
considering them for use in the Mains where we have a high water content from adjacent old workings.
What benefit do you get out of the galvanised mesh as compared to the standard mesh?
–

Yes, we believe it is important to tension the bolts as we go. At this stage we haven’t trialled any SDB but
we will as soon as they are ready.
Marked difference, they last a fair bit longer. It is more expensive and we only use it for reconstruction
work in a light duty rib support role, and it is very easy to handle. Must note that we put a fair bit of support
into it, with bolt spacing at 1 metre in accordance with the mines standard support rules. Also the large
pizza plates give it a fair bit of support and provide good coverage over the mesh.
With all the primary and secondary roof support materials, belt structure and other materials
being used has there been any increase in manual handling injuries?
–
Yes, but we try to minimise it. The PET delivers the pods to the panel and they are put onto the miner with
a pod handler, and the operator only has to touch the 7’ bolts when he goes to install them, and he drags
the 8m bolts off the monorail.
–
Trusses installed by contractors and they are delivered underground and unrolled on the job.
–
Main injuries at the mine are strains, to the back, shoulder and arms, and we do notice that as the
workforce ages they are more susceptible to these injuries.
I noticed on one of the photographs that the miner appeared to have a slide arrangement to put
the mesh onto the CM. Can you give us some more details of that?
–
Yes, we have a slide arrangement for when we put the mesh onto the CM, it minimises the incidence of
the mesh catching on the CM.
ACARP Project C15005
47
ROOF & RIB SUPPORT WORKSHOP - MACKAY

You mentioned light weight tensioners, can you give us more detail?
–

Do you post grout the 8m spin bolts?
–

Yes, they are post-grouted with a thixotropic mixture which is the consistency of toothpaste. Also post
grout the tendons and trusses but we use a strata binder grout for that, with the strata binder penetrating
the strata as well.
What else is suspended off the monorail system?
–

They are lighter than previous ones used, but I am not certain how heavy they actually are. It certainly is
an issue working at 3m height when lifting the tensioner overhead. We do get injuries, and we don’t have a
solution yet. We would certainly like to hear of one if there are any solutions.
8m bolts, plastic (grout) tubing, maximum fifteen 20 litre drums of oil, maximum 20 bags of stonedust
(20kg each), fitter’s and electrician’s tool boxes, first aid equipment
What is the make up of the production crews and what are they responsible for?
–
Similar to what was at Beltana with dual continuous miners in gateroads and 6 miners on each CM, with 1
fitter, 1 electrician and 1 deputy in the panel.
–
Deputy manages the crew’s annual leave roster, with one tradesmen and 3 miners allowed off at any one
time. Sick leave does impact upon numbers although we have good support from outbye crew.
–
The three production crews cut coal, do belt extension and pipe extensions, with the dayshift outbye crew
doing roadworks right up to the crib room, and doing the transformer moves, and transporting belt
structure and supplies.
–
110m belt move is budgeted for 3 shifts, averages 17 hours with a best result of 11 hours. The belt move
includes the belt and 6” air and water pipes, with a 4” fire main between the travel road and belt road every
second pillar
ACARP Project C15005
48
ROOF & RIB SUPPORT WORKSHOP - POKOLBIN

What is the standard panel manning and what are the crews responsible for?
–
–
–
–
–
–
–

A deputy, 12 operators, 1 fitter and 1 electrician
Dual CM unit in gateroads
Headings at 48m centres, cut throughs at 140m centres
Crew responsible for supplying panel, roadworks, pipework, belt structure
Best panel advance 11 hours, budget 3 shifts but typically achieve 18 hours
1200mm longwall conveyor installed in development
Transformer move every fourth pillar
You mentioned you hade problems with Megabolts and they were no longer used, can you
expand upon that?
–
–
–
Had problems tensioning Megabolts off the CM, very heavy tensioning equipment
We found that Megabolts were not flexible enough in our operating environment
Also found them to be difficult to install and post-grout
ACARP Project C15005
49
ROOF & RIB SUPPORT WORKSHOP - PENRITH

Water was reported to be a major issue at Springvale, can you outline what you use to manage
the mine’s water make?
–
–
–
–

It was noted that you are awaiting the development of SDB. Hilti now have a self drilling bolt
available now, why not utilise it ?
–
–

Have a number of Air 2000 pumps, 3.7KW and 37KW mono pumps
Typically have fish tanks every 3-4 pillars along the longwall gateroads
Water is pumped out to surface via a series of boreholes and in some instances we utilise a FBT (frigging
big tanks) to transport water from the mine
We have also drilled a 1.2km long borehole in advance of the longwall bleeder roadways to pre-drain the
installation face area of future longwalls
The Hilti SDB system does allow the bolt to be pre-tensioned
While Hilti have a SDB roof bolt, we have a greater need for a SDB rib bolt
What type of rib mesh do you use along the longwall block side of gateroads?
–
Steel rib mesh is now used although we were previously using Tensar mesh
ACARP Project C15005
50
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
DEVELOPMENT AND OPTIMISATION
OF CONTINUOUS MINERS
(Best Practice Maintenance and
Engineering)
Alan Bruce, Crinum
CONTINUOUS MINER WORKSHOP - MACKAY

How much roof and rib support is installed at Crinum?
–

Platforms on the ABM25(S), why do they raise and lower?
–
–
–

The Sumps Shearer is no longer being considered for development by Joy, but I definitely believe it had
potential.
What sort of improvement do you expect from the new ABM25(S)?
–

The roof bolts will be installed at 2.6m from the face.
The Joy Sumps Shearer addressed many of the ergonomic issues raised in your presentation, is
there any benefit in revisiting that machine as a work platform?
–

There is another valve bank situated beside the rib bolter controls to operate the platforms and the mesh
handler.
How far back from the face are the roof bolts installed?
–

Our ergonomist recommended that operators only move their head through a 15 degree arc in order to
minimise pinching of discs in the neck, and also required operators to be at a suitable height relative to the
drills rigs
The preferred operating height was above the preferred maintenance height, and to lift the machine
components up 200mm to be above the work platform would have increased the overall machine height
Then decided to install a moveable platform which was raised for operation and lowered for maintenance,
thereby putting the operators at the correct height and avoiding increasing the machine height
Where are the control for raising and lowering the platforms?
–

In good roof conditions there are 6 x 2100mm roof bolts installed per metre, with 2 x 1200mm steel rib
bolts on the chain pillar side and 3 x cutables on the block side. When roof conditions deteriorate there
are 8 x 2100mm bolts installed per metre.
The ABM25(S) is expected to give a 12% increase in development productivity
What other improvement initiatives are being considered with introduction of the ABM25(S)?
–
There are three different projects currently being undertaken. One is the ventilation-monorail system and
its interface with the miner, the second is the supply cassette system, and the handling, carting and
loading of supplies onto the miner, the third is the electrical requirements to run the machine, ie; cable
sizing and handling.
ACARP Project C15005
52
CONTINUOUS MINER WORKSHOP - POKOLBIN

You stated that the work platform raised and lowered some 200mm for maintenance, can you
explain that some more?
–
–
–

What level of productivity improvement is expected with the ABM25(s) at Crinum?
–

Don’t know, we have always had the on-board system
Are any other changes to the roadway development system at Crinum being considered?
–
–

I know what OEMs are like, they don’t like making changes
You have highlighted a number of changes to the on-board ventilation system. Do you consider
that the on-board systems are worthwhile as compared to a conventional ducting system?
–

I understand that VA spent some $6-7M to complete the development
It cost BMA $0.5M more than an “off the shelf” machine
Did it surprise you that you had to be so proactive with OEMs?
–

The ABM25(S) is expected to give a 12% increase in development productivity
What was the increase in cost for the ABM25(S) relative to a new CM?
–
–

Our ergonomist recommended that operators only move their head through a 15 degree arc in order to
minimise pinching of discs in the neck, and also required operators to be at a suitable height relative to the
drills rigs
The preferred operating height was above the preferred maintenance height, and to lift the machine
components up 200mm to be above the work platform would have increased the overall machine height
Then decided to install a moveable platform which was raised for operation and lowered for maintenance,
thereby putting the operators at the correct height and avoiding increasing the machine height
Yes, always working to improve the system
Looking at how to make the supply system work better, including QDS attachments, etc
A participant noted that Crinum had developed and fitted a simple device to the MBE that allowed
belt structure stands to be inserted with minimal manual effort
ACARP Project C15005
53
CONTINUOUS MINER WORKSHOP - PENRITH

How well does the ABM25(S) break away and complete cut throughs?
–

With the electronic roof bolting controls is there any ability to monitor bolt torque and tension?
–
–

Dry now, although it was very wet initially
Have you done any comparison of the availability of the electronically controlled roof bolting rigs?
–

No analysis of why OEMs didn’t submit tenders was completed
Is Crinum a wet or dry pit?
–

To create room on the machine, that is two motors that are not required
Development and fitment of self drilling bolting systems are likely to require on board chemical injection
storage and pumps and the space created by fitting the hydraulic traction units will allow retrofitting of SDB
systems
What factors were identified by OEMs when they did not submit tenders for development of the
new “Crinum” CM?
–

Yes, there is an ability to monitor all CM functions and to record data on the surface
In regard to the “specific drilling energy” function we monitor and record data for the two outside roof bolts
Why have you fitted hydraulic traction drives on the CM?
–
–

Same as the 12CM32, hasn’t been identified as an issue at this stage
Still working on the comparison although it should be noted that we didn’t have to send a fitter into the
panel for the first 6 weeks that the bolters were being used (Note: Crinum standard panel manning does
not include trades personnel)
You seem to have had a fair budget available to undertake all the necessary modifications?
–
Small changes were taken at a time, with continual improvements being made over time
ACARP Project C15005
54
CONTINUOUS MINER WORKSHOP - PENRITH

You reported that you have just had your best year of development at Crinum, what performance
rates were achieved, MPOH and metres overall?
–
–

Now that you have both upgraded 12CM32s and an ABM25(s) available, do you have any
preference on how they will be deployed to mains and gateroad drivage?
–

No, nothing different
What did it cost for development of the ABM25(S)?
–
–

No preference however should note that we are moving to a highwall operation at Crinum East and there
will be no mains development
You noted that you changed from gear pumps to Rexroth pumps, were there any other changes
necessary to accommodate that change?
–

Typically achieving 3.5 – 3.75MPOH
Don’t have an exact overall figure but it was the most metres achieved in any one year and we only
operated the 3 CMs on a part time basis, rather than on a full time basis as in previous years
BMA committed $300,000 up front to commence the development process and I understand that VA spent
some $6-7M to complete the development
The machine as delivered will cost $4.8M
What level of productivity improvement is expected with the ABM25(s) and what other
improvements are contemplated in roadway development at Crinum?
–
–
The ABM25(S) is expected to give a 12% increase in development productivity
Other improvements include introduction of monorail mounted ventilation systems and improvements to
handling and installation of roof mesh and support materials
ACARP Project C15005
55
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
PANEL ADVANCES
Jim Richardson, United
PANEL ADVANCES WORKSHOP - MACKAY

What improvements to the development services time?
–
–

Is there a specific development maintenance window, and does maintenance get done during
development time?
–
–

Maintenance for the belt road equipment is linked to a full shift (usually Thursday ) each week when “Stop
Belt” maintenance is carried out.
The travel road equipment is carried out when services are being advanced after the travel road miner has
mined to 130m chainage.
Why does the mine work a five day roster, why not seven day roster?
–
–
–
–

Panel advance could be sped up by utilisation of Development monorail system.
Potential to get time down to 4.5 hours.
5 days are enough to maintain longwall continuity.
Rosters are simple.
Management are not burnt out.
We are not paying penalty rates.
Do you utilise detailed procedures to ensure that the belt extension process is consistently
repeated?
–
–
We have procedures detailed within the panel folder however we tend to achieve repeatability by utilising
the same people to do the same job each time, so there is not a need to constantly refer to these
procedures.
With the introduction of the contractor based weekend production crews we have progressively involved
them in the process to the point that this weekend they will complete their first solo panel advance.
ACARP Project C15005
57
PANEL ADVANCES WORKSHOP - POKOLBIN

Can you go through the road clean up and cut through holing process?
–
–
–
–
–

Does the conduct of the panel advance on day shift and “out of cycle” require specialisation of
day shift crew?
–

Yes, that is one of the keys to our success, with the day shift crew developing their specialisation and
repeating it each 4 days, with the same people doing the same thing each time
What type of LTU drives are installed?
–

The travel road CM is advanced to 132m to complete overdrive before being pulled back to clean up
travel road from outbye cut through to face
Following clean up of travel road vent ducting is recovered and the extension of services is commenced
Belt road CM completes 20m overdrive in belt road before commencing cut through
When belt road CM holes it takes about 2 hours to complete bolt up, during which time a loader is used to
doze up belt road into overdrive
Belt road CM then trammed into belt road and an LHD cleans up the cut through into belt road overdrive,
before CM trammed to face and loads out stowage at face into shuttle car
Eddy current winches which tension the belt to 7KN
What is the name of the day shift supervisor?
ACARP Project C15005
58
PANEL ADVANCES WORKSHOP - PENRITH

When do surveyors install the grade line and do the belt bolt mark-up?
–

When are belt hanging bolts installed?
–

One fell down hit operator, and there have also been reports of then falling down and catching equipment
Doesn’t add too much time
We use fully encapsulated 2100mm belt hanging bolts which are part of our roadway support system
Participant reported that they pre-hung the chains and marked the grade line on the chains to expedite
levelling of the conveyor structure
How long are the longwall blocks, and do you have any problems pulling the belt out of the LTU
over that distance?
–
–

On the “stop belt” shift (typically Thursdays) although may have to do it during the panel advance if there is
no “belt stop” shift between panel advances
Why not pre-hang the belt hanging chains rather than hang them at the start of the belt move?
–
–
–
–

On the “stop belt” shift (typically Thursdays) although may have to do it during the panel advance if there is
no “belt stop” shift between panel advances
3.2km long
Problems are experienced at times due to soft floor conditions in inbye section of panel, however the
utilise a second LHD to assist
Do you have any issues involving contractors in panel advances given the strong union culture at
the mine?
–
–
–
Union role at mine not an issue, they have a position of Board and employees are kept fully informed on
costs and profitability
Employees recognise that contractors are there to assist them and to make the mine viable
Contractors used on panel advances are drawn from other contract works being undertaken at the mine at
the time (eg; secondary support, ventilation) and are not specifically employed for panel advances
ACARP Project C15005
59
PANEL ADVANCES WORKSHOP - PENRITH

When do you put the belt into the LTU?
–

How do you doze up the belt road?
–

–
–
–
Previously we used weekends to catch up on the belt hanging bolts, stone dusting and major component
changes on the equipment, and maintenance of the travel road unit
Now are working a 7 day week with mine employees on a 4X9.5 hour roster 4 days per week, with
Walters working other 3 days to catch up on a development shortfall created by extended equipment
overhauls, geology and EA negotiations
Contractors trained to do belt advances and they are completed as they fall
being utilised on 3X12
What is the pillar cycle time?
–

We crowd the boot end back into the bucket and that separates the top and bottom belt and allows the
idlers to be inserted between the belt
Do you use the weekends when there is no production scheduled to complete preparation works
for panel advance?
–

Use an LHD bucket to push up the floor material rather than use it as a conventional loader bucket. Then
load it out with CM and shuttle cars
How do you install the belt structure when pulling the boot end back with the LHD?
–

On the “stop belt” shift, approximately 2 hours to install
Typically 4 days in middle 20 pillars of gateroad development, extending out to 5 days at start and finish of
panel due to mining conditions
Do you use a second DCB?
–
Yes, use a second DCB to leapfrog belt road DCB each pillar, with travel road CM powered directly off
transformer which is moved every 2 pillars as part of panel advance
ACARP Project C15005
60
PANEL ADVANCES WORKSHOP - PENRITH

Do you have any views regarding roof and floor mounted structure?
–
–

What improvements could be made to panel advances at United?
–
–

No, we load directly onto a grizzly style boot end
The overall system is currently in balance and do not require a breaker feeder for surge capacity
Do you mine any rock at all?
–
–

Considering use of monorail services management system in both headings to take the extension and
relocation of panel services off the critical path
Expect panel advances could then be completed in 4.5 hours
Do you use a breaker feeder?
–
–

1200mm belt operates at 5.2m/s and needs to be high standard, and we utilise roof mounted structure to
provide a high standard “longwall ready” conveyor
Minimal works are undertaken on completion of gateroad development to get conveyor “longwall ready”
Yes, seam thins at inbye end of longwall blocks and we take up to 400mm of roof stone
Not a problem for conveyor system
Which miner completes the cut through?
–
–
Belt road CM completes the cut through
The travel road CM pulls up at 132m after completing overdrive and is then pulled back to clean up travel
road from outbye cut through to face (while belt road CM completes hole through), before recovering vent
ducting and commencing extension of services
ACARP Project C15005
61
ACARP
Australian Coal Association Research Program
PLENARY SESSION
TARGETED RESEARCH
 The 2005 Review identified a number of areas for
targeted research, are they relevant?
 What other research initiatives should be pursued by
ACARP to improve roadway development?
 What are the roadway development research priorities?
ACARP Project C15005
63
TARGETED RESEARCH - MACKAY

R&D Priorities for Future
– Development and application of forcing ventilation systems
– Development of monorail mounted services management systems
– Development of system components matched to individual mines
rather than development of a “one size fits all integrated roadway
development system
ACARP Project C15005
64
TARGETED RESEARCH - POKOLBIN

R&D Successes and Failures
– 5 continuous miner systems
–
Sumps Shearer
–
Maintel Development Machine (Jack Wallace)
–
Kemcoal Beaver
–
In Seam Miner
–
ACBM
– FCT and Chain Haulage Systems

R&D Priorities for Future
– Integrated continuous mining system, from surface to face
– Design of continuous miners to required roadway dimensions
– Belt moves
– Road construction and maintenance (roadway construction engineering
standards)
– Water management
ACARP Project C15005
65
TARGETED RESEARCH - PENRITH

R&D Priorities for Future
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Self drilling roof and rib bolts *
Ergonomics – due to ageing workforce *
Automation of bolting including associated materials handling systems *
Continuous coal clearance *
Diesel particulate (ventilation) *
Light weight materials
Logistics of materials handling
Bolting at the immediate face
Gas management and drainage
Water management
Skills development and training
Mobile boot ends, potentially incorporating auxiliary fans
Roadwork
Dust control
High capacity ventilation systems
Continuous miner cable spooling
Smaller diesels, improved visibility and control, good stability
* Priority R&D issues
ACARP Project C15005
66
WORKSHOP CRITIQUE
 What improvements could we make to the structure
and format of the Workshop:
 No of key workshop presentations?
 Presentation/open forum structure?
 Focus on operators rather than OEMs and researchers?





Suitability of location, venue and facilities?
Cost
Timing (eg; day of week, and actual times)
How to communicate to industry in future
What issues should be the subject of future
workshops?
 Any volunteer presenters?
ACARP Project C15005
67
WORKSHOP CRITIQUE - MACKAY

Timing (eg; day of week, and actual times)
– 9:00am to 3:30pm - better suit people on flights out of Mackay

No of key workshop presentations?
– 4-5 presentations enough

Focus on operators rather than OEMs and researchers?
– Maintain operator focus but complement with presentations from researchers
and OEMs where appropriate

What issues should be the subject of future workshops?
–
–
–
–
–
–
Developments in civil tunnelling and metalliferous sectors
Coal haulage systems
Benchmarking study
Overseas developments and report on mine visits
Introduction of process control software (Unimine)
People issues – availability/shortages, training and skills development
ACARP Project C15005
68
WORKSHOP CRITIQUE - POKOLBIN

Timing (eg; day of week, and actual times)
– 10:00am preferred, Tuesdays - Wednesdays most suitable days

Presentation/open forum structure
– Good mix of papers

Focus on operators rather than OEMs and researchers?
– Selected OEMs to report on specific initiatives and trials
– Potential to utilise 9:00-10:00am period as a technology update session with
say five 10 minute presentations from OEMs?

What issues should be the subject of future workshops?
–
–
–
–
Ground support systems
Process control systems
Monorails
Overseas technology developments and report on mine visits
– Developments in new technology
ACARP Project C15005
69
WORKSHOP CRITIQUE - PENRITH

Timing (eg; day of week, and actual times)
– 10:00am preferred, Tuesdays - Wednesdays most suitable days

Presentation/open forum structure
– Possibility of “break out” groups for workshopping key issues after
presentations
– Involvement of workforce in workshops (open to all sections of workforce from
miner driver to GM)
– Possible networking session on night before – help to break the ice
– Involvement of Inspectorate

What issues should be the subject of future workshops?
– Roadway development benchmarking report – mines should complete
surveys asap
– Maintenance best practice – is equipment becoming to over-engineered?

Other
– Roadway development newsletter featuring in developments equipment,
technology and systems, and reporting development performance (UoW
proposing web based networking system and information management
system for roadway development)
ACARP Project C15005
70
OBSERVATIONS ON MANAGEMENT OF ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT
The first of the presentations demonstrated the performance capability of a “current technology” roadway development
system. Clearly, good ground conditions are experienced at the mine and the mine has minimal outbye infrastructure
to constrain performance. In the context of the recent Roadway Development report and the key factors differentiating
best practice operations identified therein, it is evident that leadership and management of the roadway development
process is a significant factor underpinning the performance levels achieved at this mine.
In reflection, I suspect that because mines haven’t achieved the full potential of the continuous mining system as
applied to longwall gateroad development, most likely through failures to provide “fit for purpose” equipment and to
effectively manage the roadway development process, additional development units have been employed to achieve
longwall continuity. Management effectiveness is then further eroded as the number of development units increases,
and is not matched by a corresponding increase in the level of management resources applied. Is this the law of
diminishing returns?
From a financial perspective it is estimated that the mine applies some $0.5-0.6M per annum in direct management
costs to manage and optimize performance from a single development unit which has an annual labour cost of
approximately $7.8M. Compare this with other mines that are probably applying similar or lower levels of management
resources to manage MULTIPLE units, each with an annual labour cost of approximately $5.0-6.0M. It would appear
to be good business sense to increase management resources to optimize development performance and reduce the
number of units being applied.
Following the presentation on development and optimization of continuous miners a number of participants asked
what costs had been committed by the mine to make the identified improvements. Clearly, the perception was that
they themselves would not be able to commit such costs to improve the performance of their equipment. From a
leadership and business management perspective we need to improve the understanding of the economic relationship
between people, equipment and processes, and the dynamics of effective utilisation.
Mines typically undertake major overhauls of continuous miners on a four yearly basis consistent with Code D
schedules. We therefore commit labour costs of $20-24M (ie; 4 X $5-6M pa) over the ensuing four years to operate
continuous miners at potentially sub-optimum rates due to fundamental design, engineering and/or maintenance
related issues (a lack of fitness for purpose).
ACARP Project C15005
71
OBSERVATIONS ON MANAGEMENT OF ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT
How much should we spend to address these issues in order to make a 10 or 20% improvement in development
performance, and when should we expend that money? Should we leave the continuous miner in the mine until it has to
come out for a Code D rather than getting it out, rectifying the problems, and removing the performance barriers? Or
should we put up with it, man up another unit, and compound the problem even further!
Both the first (process control) and last presentations (panel advances) also gave insights into the application of visioning,
strategy development, and execution phases of the management process, with key learnings from the latter, panel
advance presentation including:
–
the involvement of employees to develop the panel advance process, and to identify and remove barriers to the
effective execution of the process;
–
the priority given to effectively resource the panel advance process;
–
utilizing the same people to do the same task each time to ensure repeatability, together with the clear definition
of specific responsibilities and accountabilities;
–
supervision and employees taking ownership of and responsibility for the process.
Management resources are leverage by the involvement of employees in the improvement process. This ultimately leads
to a freeing up of management resources to develop better operating strategies and to focus on other improvement
initiatives, thus developing a self-sustaining continuous improvement culture, rather than being dissipated in ongoing
command, control and rectification issues.
With capital cost for a development unit approaching $8-9M and annualized operating costs almost of a similar level,
there appears to be significant upside from improved development performance, either by reducing the level of
development assets employed in the event of stable longwall performance, or at least not increasing the level of
development assets employed in the event of improved longwall performance. Management’s challenge is to visualize
what improved development performance could mean in a specific environment, and to develop and execute change
strategies that will lead to achievement of the vision.
Gary Gibson
Project Leader and Workshop Convenor
ACARP Project C15005
72
END OF WORKSHOP
Thank you!
Look forward to seeing you
again first week of March 2007
ACARP Project C15005
73