Search Documents

By Dean H. Ambrose

A computer model was created that generates contact data by means of simulation while altering several variables associated with the machine and its operator. These variables include work environment, the operator's anthropometry, work posture, choice of risky work behavior, and the machine's appendage velocity. In the model, a contact means two or more objects intersecting or touching each other, e.g., the appendage colliding with the operator's hand, arm, head, or leg. This report documents the code development of special features of the computer model, random virtual human motions and behaviors, which made it possible for researchers to study hazardous interactions, such as contacts between the operator and machine. The original idea for random virtual human motions began with the need for a model that, when simulated, would experimentally mimic machine and human actions that could cause actual injuries or fatalities in the workplace. Injury incident investigation reports do not usually contain enough information to aid in studying this problem, and lab experiments with human subjects are also not feasible because of safety issues and ethical issues. Early investigation that evaluated the feasibility of random motions resulted in a primary programming structure and building blocks for code expansion. Basic motions and standard derivation data provided random parameters for the operator's movement in the random motion code. Experimenting with basic motions in preliminary models helped researchers devise a random motion technique that worked with xyz motion parameter values from basic motion parameters. Both values were the building blocks used in motion commands that comprised the core of the random motion code. When the code is executed in a three-dimensional computer model, it generates realistic starting positions for the operator's (virtual human) body and body parts and realistic motions mimicking a work sequence with a valid range of variation in movements. Researchers developed several rules for the random motion technique that, when applied, will maintain directional integrity of a virtual human's basic motions. From previous research, researchers formulated the algorithm that determines the behavior during machine operation. The decision algorithm was needed by the random motion code to randomly select what behavior to use for a simulation execution for a realistic representation of the operator's motions and risky behaviors during work tasks. The operator's chance of avoiding the moving appendage was also a concern to ensure that data reflecting a near-miss would not be considered a contact. Therefore, to filter a database obtained from simulations for actual contacts, it was necessary to track the operator's field of view and determine from this information when the appendage is in and out of the operator's view. NIOSH researchers successfully applied random motions and risky behaviors to examine the speed range of a roof bolter machine appendage for different workplace scenarios and compare statistically which is most likely to cause contacts (and possible injuries) to miners. Researchers in this study believe that the use of such simulations, treated with advanced statistical procedures, are extremely useful tools to evaluate the hazards of tasks where it is not possible to perform experiments with human subjects.

Jan 3, 2004

By Lauren Roberts, Lewis Martin, John Goris

The Spokane Research Laboratory (SRL) of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and Thiessen Team USA, Spokane, WA, have developed a pull claw that can be attached to any accessible friction bolt ring to test the performance (i.e., load-carrying capacity) of bolts without the use of a pull collar. This would allow true random testing of friction bolts, which need to be evaluated to determine if they are still providing an adequate level of support months or years after installation. Such support is critical to maintaining safe working conditions for underground miners.

Jan 1, 2004

By Maria I. De Rosa

This report analyzes mine fires for all U.S. underground and surface coal mining categories by state and2-year time periods during 1990–1999. Risk rate values are derived, and ignition source, methods of fire detection and suppression, and other variables are examined. The data were derived from Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) mine fire accident publications and verbal communications with mine personnel. The analysis will provide the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, MSHA, and the mining industry with a better understanding of the causes and hazards associated with mine fires and will form a basis for future fire research programs.

Jan 9, 2004

By Maria I. De Rosa

This report analyzes mine fires for all U.S. underground and surface coal mining categories by state and 2-year time periods during 1990-1999. Risk rate values are derived, and ignition source, methods of fire detection and suppression, and other variables are examined. The data were derived from Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) mine fire accident publications and verbal communications with mine personnel. The analysis will provide the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, MSHA, and the mining industry with a better understanding of the causes and hazards associated with mine fires and will form a basis for future fire research programs.

Jan 1, 2004

By Launa G. Mallett, Charles Vaught, Michael J. Brnich

Beginning in 1991, scientists at the Pittsburgh Research Laboratory recorded interviews with individuals who are recognized as experts in mine emergency response. These 30 veterans related stories and observations from events experienced during as many as 47 years of response activities. Overall, the response veterans averaged 29 years of mine emergency response experience and 35 years of mining experience. Interviewees included representatives from mining companies, the United Mine Workers of America, and State and Federal agencies. Most of their comments dealt not so much with technical aspects of particular mine emergency responses, but rather the human side of more general topics, including preparedness, experience, people on-site, mine rescue teams, and decision-making. An analysis of their interviews provides an overview of lessons learned on-site at some of the largest mine disasters since the mid-1940s. This knowledge was gathered so that it could be provided to today's miners and to tomorrow's emergency response personnel. It is expected that the collective wisdom obtained can be used to help train new responders and guide those decisions that will have to be made on the scenes of future events.

Jan 4, 2004

By Edward A. Barrett, Roberta A. Calhoun

Introduction This Instructor’s Copy contains most of the information needed to use the Wearing Hearing Protection Properly 3-D training reel. It offers practical suggestions on how to use the reel as a training aid, performance objectives for deciding if the training is appropriate for your needs, and discussion notes that provide additional information to the user. The 3-D reel was designed as a self-teaching aid that drillers and others who work at a drill site can use wherever the opportunity for such training presents itself. The latter could be a company preshift requirement or a tailgate session where workers would have an opportunity to view and discuss the reel. It could also be an individual looking at the reel in a pickup truck prior to beginning work at a drill site. The 3-D training reel is versatile in that it can be used for a small group of persons or for a single worker. For any of these situations, information is transferred to the individual by viewing each of the seven colorful, in-depth 3-D scenes and relating the words that appear in each scene to what is depicted in the visual. Acknowledgment The authors thank Linda J. McWilliams, Statistician, NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, for her assistance in analyzing the experimental data in this document.

Jan 11, 2004

By Edward A. Barrett, Roberta A. Calhoun

Introduction This Instructor’s Copy contains most of the materials trainers will need in order to use Drill Rig Incident (DRI). It includes suggestions for using the exercise, performance objectives for the training, master answer sheets, a scoring key, and a set of discussion notes that provides additional subject information. Four appendices are also included. Appendix A is the complete exercise problem booklet. It may be reproduced so that every person in the training class has one. Appendix B contains answer sheet blanks. The blanks are furnished if you choose to have the invisible ink answers that appear in appendix C printed on them at your location.3 Answer sheets are consumable. One is needed for each group of three to five persons who work the exercise together. An alternative is for each individual trainee to have his/her own answer sheet. Appendix D contains the 24-question pretest / posttest that was used in the field evaluation of the DRI exercise. Acknowledgment The authors thank Linda J. McWilliams, Statistician, NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, for her assistance in analyzing the experimental data in this document.

Jan 2, 2005

By Fred C. Turin, William J. Wiehagen

This study examined musculoskeletal injury risk at four mining sites: underground coal, underground limestone, surface copper, and surface phosphate. Each site offered opportunities to investigate musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) injury risks and how those risks might be identified and categorized. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) worked with these sites to (1) identify work activities that showed evidence of MSD injury risk, (2) examine physical risk factors that can lead to MSDs for a handful of work tasks at each site, and (3) develop a set of ideas for problem-solving to help reduce risk factors for examined work tasks. For each site, NIOSH implemented a plan that was refined over the time period of this study. The plan consisted of four steps. The first step was to use mine injury records, a musculoskeletal discomfort questionnaire, front-line supervisor interviews, and a list of management concerns to identify work groups and work activities that have significant evidence of MSD risk factors. The second step was to select work tasks for evaluation. The third step was to interview those who do the work and make observations to characterize the MSD risk factors and musculoskeletal symptoms that exist for target tasks. The final step was to conduct brainstorming sessions with workers who perform the work or have a stake in the production task. The brainstorming sessions served to identify general strategies (ideas) for reducing MSD risk factor exposures. A final report of findings was presented to mine management and workforce representatives at each site. The risk factors and ideas for improvement identified for each site were specific to the target tasks examined. These target tasks were diverse, but there were some key similarities. For instance, jobs were found at each site that required a significant amount of manual work involving the upper extremities and low back. Handling heavy and awkward objects, forceful arm and shoulder exertions, and working in awkward postures were common for a variety of jobs across the four sites.

Jan 8, 2004

By Maria I. De Rosa

This report analyzes mine fires for all U.S. underground and surface metal/nonmetal mining categories during 1990–2001 by state and six successive 2-year time periods. Injury risk rates are derived, and ignition source, methods of detection and suppression, and other variables are examined. Fires involving contractors are also included in the analysis. The data were derived from Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)mine fire accident publications and verbal communications with mine personnel. The analysis will provide the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, MSHA, and the mining industry with a better understanding of the causes and hazards associated with mine fires and an increased awareness aimed at preventing and reducing fire hazards. It will also form a basis for future fire research programs.

Jan 11, 2004

By Raymond F. Helinski, Linda J. McWilliams, Sean Gallagher, Thomas R. Battenhouse, August J. Kwitowski, John R. Bartels, Dean H. Ambrose

This report examines the boom arm vertical speed for roof bolting machines to study a moving boom arm appendage at different speeds during different work scenarios. The goal of this study is to determine the impact of the appendage speed on the likelihood of the operator's hand, arm, head, or leg making contact, such as touching the moving appendage. The overall research goal is to reduce workers' risks to injury from exposure to underground mining machinery. Accident investigation reports from the Mine Safety and Health Administration do not usually contain enough information to aid in studying this problem, and lab experiments with human subjects are not feasible because of safety issues. As an alternative, researchers used a unique computer simulation model that uses a virtual human, vision tracking, and generates random virtual human motions and risky work behaviors. By using specialized software to simulate the computer model, researchers accurately identified potential hazards of tasks where it is not possible to perform experiments with human subjects. Results of a frequency distribution analytic approach show that, regardless of other variables, contact incidents were always greater when the boom was moving up, always greater on the hand, and always greater or the boom arm part of the machine. The reason why the subject experiences more contacts when the boom arm is moving up rather than down is that more risky behaviors occur during drilling and bolting when the boom is ascending. Results of a cross-tabulation analytic approach show that the 25th-percentile operators experienced more contacts than other operator sizes and had most of their contacts during a boom speed of 13 in/sec. The hand-on-boom behavior during drilling and bolting tasks experienced more contacts than other work behaviors, and both tasks had most of their contacts during speed 13 in/sec. The 60-in seam experienced more contacts than other seam heights and had most of the contacts during speed 16 in/sec. For univariate logistic regression models, seam height is the most important predictor of the probability of a contact. However, a multivariate logistic regression model predicted contacts are more likely with the both-knee work posture in the 60-in seam, a 25th-percentile operator compared to a 55th-percentile operator, and speeds 16 and 22 in/sec compared to 7 in/sec. Results of a survival analytic approach suggest that controlling the boom speed is the most important factor in determining the risk of an operator making contact. Based on the data collected, boom speeds greater than13 in/sec result in a substantial increase in risk to the roof bolter operator making contact. Speeds less than or equal to 13 in/sec are associated with a more modest relative risk of making contact, which represents a decrease in potential hazard. Virtual operator's response time has little effect on the number of contacts experienced. The mining industry can use the information in this study to reduce the likelihood that roof bolter operators will experience injury due to contact with a moving roof bolting machine's boom arm.

Jan 5, 2005

By W. R. Reed

Dust dispersion modeling is a subject that has had a large amount of research activity. Much of the research has focused on large-scale global or regional dispersion models. Other models have been created for industry-specific purposes. Furthermore, some of the past research has focused on dust dispersion modeling in the mining industry. This report presents the various dust dispersion models that have been developed specifically for the mining industry. The report first gives a brief background of the regulatory environment that helped to promote development of such models. It then presents an overview of the mathematical concepts used in this dispersion modeling. Finally, each of the various models developed for the mining industry are described, along with their associated mathematical algorithms and any field validation conducted on the different models.

Jan 9, 2005

By Launa G. Mallett, Kathleen Kowalski-Trakofler, Robert H. Peters, Charles PH. D. Vaught, Peter Keating, William J. Wiehagen

On-the-job training is a common means of training or retraining workers and the practice may seem simple and straightforward. Doing it effectively however requires more thought and preparation than simply having someone follow an experienced worker around and watch what they're doing. Over the years, various techniques and practices have evolved that pass on the skills and knowledge of a trainer or coach in a manner that leads an inexperienced trainee to really absorb the information being taught. On-the-job training thus becomes less a haphazard show-and-tell and more a real transfer of information. The goal of this document is to describe how to develop or manage an on-the-job training program so that information is passed on from trainer/coach to trainee efficiently and effectively. By efficient is meant the best use of time and resources of all those involved in the training process, and by effective is meant that the trainee truly learns the skills and internalizes the knowledge needed to perform the job well. The first part of the document discusses topics to think about when developing a formal on- the-job training program. A structure based on coaching is suggested. Then a workshop designed to prepare trainers as coaches is described. Workshop materials include an instructor’s guide and trainee workbook. These materials can be used to train coaches and to assist trainees as they go through the learning process. Content related to specific jobs can be added to these materials to create targeted on-the job-training manuals. Structuring a formal on-the-job training program It is likely that some form of on-the-job training (OJT) is being conducted at your workplace. The formality of that training can range from a structured program to an informal “follow Joe around” method. If your program is completely unstructured, it may not be meeting current training needs. Worse, it may perpetuate bad habits and create “trained” employees who are not given the same information or evaluated to the same standards. Wiehagen et al. comment that, “Success in using unplanned OJT is usually dependent on the luck of the draw, that is, whether the informal trainer is competent at the task he or she is teaching, is motivated to teach, can organize the job into logical components, and knows something about good practices in teaching and evaluating” (2002, p. 27). It is only through planning a structured OJT program that consistency can be created and maintained. At the least, all trainees who have successfully completed such a program can be expected to perform at an established level—they will know what they must do to be successful.

Jan 7, 2005

By John J. Sammarco

This report (System Safety Guidance 5.1) is the sixth in a nine-part series of recommendations and guidance addressing the functional safety of processor-controlled mining equipment. It is part of a risk-based system safety process encompassing hardware, software, humans, and the operating environment for the equipment’s life cycle. Figure 1 shows a safety framework containing these recommendations. The reports in this series address the various lifecycle stages of inception, design, approval and certification, commissioning, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. These recommendations were developed as a joint project between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Mine Safety and Health Administration. They are intended for use by mining companies, original equipment manufacturers, and aftermarket suppliers to these mining companies. Users of these reports are expected to consider the set in total during the design cycle. • 1.0 Safety Introduction (Part 1).—This is an introductory report for the general mining industry. It provides basic system/software safety concepts, discusses the need for mining to address the functional safety of programmable electronics (PE), and includes the benefits of implementing system/software safety program. • 2.1 System Safety (Part 2) and 2.2 Software Safety (Part 3).—These reports draw heavily from International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard IEC 61508 [IEC 1998a,b,c,d,e,f,g]and other standards. The scope is “surface and underground safety-related mining systems employing embedded, networked, and nonnetworked programmable electronics.” System safety seeks to design safety into all phases of the entire system. Software is a subsystem; thus, software safety is a part of the system’s safety. • 3.0 Safety File (Part 4).—This report contains the documentation that demonstrates the level of safety built into the system and identifies limitations for the system’s use and operation. In essence, it is a “proof of safety” that the system and its operation meet the appropriate level of safety for the intended application. It starts from the beginning of the design, is maintained during the full life cycle of the system, and provides administrative support for the safety program of the full system. • 4.0 Safety Assessment (Part 5).—The independent assessment of the safety file is addressed. It establishes consistent methods to determine the completeness and suitability of safety evidence and justifications. This assessment could be conducted by an independent third party. • Safety Framework Guidance.—It is intended to supplement the safety framework reports with guidance providing users with additional information. The purpose is to assist users in applying the concepts presented. In other words, the safety framework is what needs to be done and the guidance is how it can be done. The guidance information reinforces the concepts, describes various methodologies that can be used, and gives examples and references. It also gives information on the benefits and drawbacks of various methodologies. The guidance reports are not intended to promote a single methodology or to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject material. They provide information and references so that the user can more intelligently choose and implement the appropriate methodologies given the user’s application and capabilities. The guidance reports comprise parts 6 through 9 of the series and are listed below: [< 5.1 System Safety Guidance (Part 6).—This guidance supplements 2.1 System Safety. < 5.2 Software Safety Guidance (Part 7).—This guidance supplements 2.2 Software Safety. < 6.0 Safety File Guidance (Part 8).—This guidance supplements 3.0 Safety File. < 7.0 Independent Functional Safety Assessment Guidance (Part 9).—This guidance supplements 4.0 Independent Functional Safety Assessment.] [ ]

Jan 8, 2005

By Edward J. Chuhta, Joseph E. Chilton, Robert J. Timko

in underground mines to measure worker exposure to various gases such as methane, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Even in relatively small concentrations, NO2 can produce harmful side effects in underground workers. Mines using equipment powered by diesel engines, carrying out explosive blasting operations, and performing extensive arc welding and/or cutting work will have measurable quantities of NO2 released by these processes. Workers in these areas often use gas monitors to warn of excessive gas concentrations and to help them determine when to increase ventilation air that will dilute these gases, thus minimizing exposures to this gas. Portable gas monitors, used to measure NO2 levels, must be calibrated before each use. Calibration is typically performed using a small portable pressurized cylinder containing a certified gas mixture. The certified NO2 standard mixture, usually 10 ppm NO2 concentration, is diluted with either air or nitrogen gas. To determine the stability of commercially available portable gas standards, two different cylinders containing NO2 in nominal 10-ppm concentrations were examined. One cylinder was diluted in air, the other, in nitrogen. Baseline NO2 mixtures were generated using a standard liquid NO2 permeation tube operated at a constant temperature. Final dilutions of the test gas mixtures were made with air or with nitrogen using a mass flow-controlled gas dilution system. This study showed that, when a permeation-type NO2 generator is used, the electrochemical sensors in portable NO2 monitors provide identical results for gas mixtures whether they are diluted with air or with nitrogen. Two different gas monitors, one with a two-electrode sensor and one with a three-electrode sensor, were used to measure gas concentrations in the two commercially available cylinders. One month after the cylinders were delivered, the NO2-in-nitrogen cylinder, stated to contain 10 ppm NO2, measured 8.13 ppm. The NO2-in-air cylinder, also stated to hold 10 ppm NO2, measured 6.88 ppm. Therefore, before using NO2 gas cylinders to calibrate monitors, it is recommended that their concentrations be verified either by manufacturer recertification or by comparing the stated cylinder gas concentrations to a laboratory-based permeation tube-generated standard.

Dec 1, 2005

By Dana C. Reinke

Water well drillers are exposed to high levels of noise while working. NIOSH researchers have found that water well drillers are exposed to levels above 85dB (A) while performing certain tasks during a typical drilling job. Noise levels consistently over 85dB (A) during an 8–hour work shift are hazardous and can lead to hearing loss in workers. Finding ways to reduce noise exposure is difficult because of many factors. The work environment is constantly changing due to the location of jobs and environmental factors. The types of drill rigs required for drilling are expensive. Equipment can range from new to used (10 to 30+ years old). Drillers and owners can work together to prevent noise–induced hearing loss, and measures can be taken to reduce exposure to hazardous noise.[ ] Preventing hearing loss occurs through three stages. The first stage is removing noise from the source (i.e., drill rig). Various parts of a drill rig create noise besides the drilling rod. NIOSH researchers have examined noise levels of drill rigs. Some of the loudest parts of the drill rig include the compressor, engine, and cooling fan (Fig. 1). While removing the noise source from a worksite is ideal, the process would be expensive and difficult.[ ]

Jan 9, 2005

By Dana C. Reinke

A job analysis is a written list of the tasks associated with doing a particular job. In drilling, describing the steps associated with adding rod to the drill steel would be an example of a task associated with the job. How to hammer casing or fish a lost drill bit out of a hole would also be job tasks. Develop a written list of job tasks. Ask drillers in your company if the tasks listed are correct and accurately reflect how to perform the job. While each driller may do the job a little differently, some tried?and?true methods are required to perform certain tasks safely and correctly. You may find a separate analysis is needed for different drilling jobs (e.g., a residential well or a monitoring well). Also remember to include the tasks of both the helper and the driller.

Jan 1, 2005

By Dana C. Reinke

Jan 1, 2005

By Elaine Cullen, Launa Mallett, Mike Jenkins, C. M. K. Boldt, Thomas Camm

The material in this Information Circular was presented at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health’s (NIOSH) open-industry briefing held during the 2004 Northwest Mining Association conference in Spokane, WA. The open-industry briefing discussed results of recently completed and on-going mine safety- and health-related research conducted at NIOSH’s Spokane and Pittsburgh Research Laboratories on the human side of mining—the miner. The first paper sets the stage for what mining has achieved and what we mean by “getting to zero.” The second paper, “Help Experienced Miners Become Great On-the-Job Trainers,” distinguishes between experienced miners and trainers. This paper provides some key concepts for turning great miners into great trainers. “The Power of Story-Telling in Getting Through to Miners” explains the history and importance of stories in the culture and training of miners. Finally, “Understanding Self in Stressful Working Environments,” describes the personal and social aspects of the working environment, much of which parallels familial theories. The downward trend of deaths in U.S. mining has been remarkable. The number of miners killed or injured each year has decreased steadily over the past 100 years. Some charts show these trends overlain with important events such as World War II and the Mine Safety and Health Act. However, this downward trend in mining fatalities has flattened out. How can you get to zero accidents? Do you concentrate on technological advances and equipment maintenance to avoid malfunctions? Do you concentrate on developing work processes and organizational structures that minimize risk? Do you combine them and take a systems approach that links one to the other with an evaluative loop? Safety efforts in mining have used all of these approaches. What more can we do to get to zero? Getting to zero will require two objectives: A clear and unshakeable belief that it can be done and attention to the human side of mining. Getting to zero is not a new idea; it has been used by mine companies and safety professionals for years as the safety goal. But getting to zero is not so much a physical goal as it is a belief that there are no insurmountable barriers to achieving the goal.

Jan 3, 2006

By Fred N. Kissell

This handbook describes effective methods for the control of methane gas in mines and tunnels. It assumes the reader is familiar with mining. The first chapter covers facts about methane important to mine safety, such as the explosibility of gas mixtures. The second chapter covers methane sampling, which is crucial because many methane explosions have been attributed to sampling deficiencies. Subsequent chapters describe methane control methods for different kinds of mines and mining equipment, primarily for U.S. coal mines. These coal mine chapters include continuous miners and longwalls, including bleeders. Coal seam degasification is covered extensively. Other coal mine chapters deal with methane emission forecasting and predicting the excess gas from troublesome geologic features like faults. Additional coal chapters contain methane controls for shaft sinking and shaft filling, for surface highwall mines, and for coal storage silos. Major coal mine explosion disasters have always involved the combustion of coal dust, originally triggered by methane. Thus, a chapter is included on making coal dust inert so it cannot explode. Methane is surprisingly common in metal and nonmetal mines around the world, as well as in many tunnels as they are excavated. Accordingly, a chapter is included on metal and nonmetal mines and another on tunnels. Proper ventilation plays the major role in keeping mines free of hazardous methane accumulations. The ventilation discussed in this handbook, except for the chapter on bleeder systems, deals only with so-called face ventilation, i.e., ventilation of the immediate working face area, not ventilation of the mine as a whole. The omission of whole-mine ventilation was necessary to keep this handbook to a reasonable size and because a huge amount of excellent information is available on the subject.2

Jan 1, 2006

By John J. Sammarco

This report (Safety File Guidance 6.0) is the eighth in a nine-part series of recommendations and guidance addressing the functional safety of processor-controlled mining equipment. It is part of a risk-based system safety process encompassing hardware, software, humans, and the operating environment for the equipment’s life cycle. Figure 1 shows a safety framework containing these recommendations. The reports in this series address the various life cycle stages of inception, design, approval and certification, commissioning, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. These recommendations were developed as a joint project between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Mine Safety and Health Administration. They are intended for use by mining companies, original equipment manufacturers, and aftermarket suppliers to these mining companies. Users of these reports are expected to consider the set in total during the design cycle. • 1.0 Safety Introduction (Part 1).—This is an introductory report for the general mining industry. It provides basic system/software safety concepts, discusses the need for mining to address the functional safety of programmable electronics (PE), and includes the benefits of implementing a system/software safety program. • 2.1 System Safety (Part 2) and 2.2 Software Safety (Part 3).—These reports draw heavily from International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard IEC 61508 [IEC 1998a,b,c,d,e,f,g]and other standards. The scope is “surface and underground safety-related mining systems employing embedded, networked, and nonnetworked programmable electronics.” System safety seeks to design safety into all phases of the entire system. Software is a subsystem; thus, software safety is a part of the system’s safety. • 3.0 Safety File (Part 4).—This report contains the documentation that demonstrates the level of safety built into the system and identifies limitations for the system’s use and operation. In essence, it is a “proof of safety” that the system and its operation meet the appropriate level of safety for the intended application. It starts from the beginning of the design, is maintained during the full life cycle of the system, and provides administrative support for the safety program of the full system. • 4.0 Safety Assessment (Part 5).—The independent assessment of the safety file is addressed. It establishes consistent methods to determine the completeness and suitability of safety evidence and justifications. This assessment could be conducted by an independent third party. • Safety Framework Guidance.—It is intended to supplement the safety framework reports with guidance providing users with additional information. The purpose is to assist users in applying the concepts presented. In other words, the safety framework is what needs to be done and the guidance is how it can be done. The guidance information reinforces the concepts, describes various methodologies that can be used, and gives examples and references. It also gives information on the benefits and drawbacks of various methodologies. The guidance reports are not intended to promote a single methodology or to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject material. They provide information and references so that the user can more intelligently choose and implement the appropriate methodologies given the user’s application and capabilities. The guidance reports comprise parts 6 through 9 of the series and are listed below: [5.1System Safety Guidance (Part 6).—This guidance supplements 2.1 System Safety. < 5.2 Software Safety Guidance (Part 7).—This guidance supplements 2.2 Software Safety. < 6.0 Safety File Guidance (Part 8).—This guidance supplements 3.0 Safety File. < 7.0 Independent Functional Safety Assessment Guidance (Part 9).—This guidance supplements 4.0 Independent Functional Safety Assessment.] [ ]

Jan 4, 2006