Published: September 22, 2014 |

[Click image to enlarge]

The labor turbulence recently experienced in the Western Bushveld’s platinum mines has led to renewed calls for South Africa’s mining industry to implement mechanized mining methods in order to realize greater efficiencies, reduce reliance on labor and achieve long-term sustainability.

But do the skills exist in South Africa to achieve this goal? To find out, Modern Mining recently spoke to Rod Pickering, probably South Africa’s best-known advocate of mechanized mining, and Professor John Sheer, both associated with the Center for Mechanized Mining Systems (CMMS) at the University of the Witwatersrand.

Pickering is in no doubt that South Africa does indeed have the skills to implement mechanized mining and he points to the example of the local coal mining industry, which over a 40-year period has almost entirely mechanized its operations. “I don’t agree with the widely-held view that we’re not good at mechanization and that we lag countries like Australia,” he says.

“The reality is that we’re very good at mechanization as our coal mining sector has proved. One of the first continuous miners to be introduced locally — a Lee-Norse machine, as I recall — was deployed in the late 1970s by the Chamber of Mines and thereafter the take up of the technology was very rapid.

We still have drill-and blast sections in our underground coal mines but the use of continuous miners is now dominant and many of them have achieved world production records. “Of course, mechanization in narrow-reef hard-rock mines is a much more challenging task but even here South Africa has done well.

In 2000 South Africa’s hard rock mines, mainly those in the platinum/chrome sector, were producing about 2 Mt of ore annually using mechanized methods but that figure has since increased to over 30Mt and is predicted to more than double by 2020.

If you consider the fact that total narrow-reef production globally is about 110 Mt, then I think it’s fair to say that South Africa has done exceptionally well in mechanizing.” Pickering is well-qualified to talk on the subject of mechanization in the mining field, as he has devoted most of his long career to it.

Brought up in Yorkshire in the UK, he has a BSc in Mechanical Engineering. He has lived in South Africa since 1969, working first for Union Corporation and later — in 1977 — joining the then Chamber of Mines Research Organization (COMRO), where he stayed for 20 years. While at COMRO, he was appointed director of the Stoping Technology Laboratory, with the responsibility to develop ways of mechanizing the narrow-reef hard-rock gold mines.

In 1996, Pickering started his own consultancy and a couple of years later began a long — and still continuing — association with Sandvik Mining & Construction, his brief being to assist the company in developing and introducing mechanized mining processes and equipment for its customers, particularly those in South Africa.

This initiative led to Sandvik developing its low profile (LP) and xtra low profile (XLP) equipment, with the first LP drill rig being introduced at a South African chrome mine in 1999. Since then around 2,000 LP and XLP machines (mainly the former) from all OEMs have been supplied into the narrow-reef mining industry in Southern Africa.

Pickering believes the main barrier to a wider acceptance of mechanized mining techniques in Southern Africa does not lie with technology. “The technology is readily available and it works,” he observes. “What is not always present though is a willingness to change — and to counter this one needs to educate and empower people so that they can handle change.

We realized this at Sandvik over 15 years ago and started to look around for ways and means to address the problem, which we identified as having two components — one being the skills required to keep mechanized mining fleets running and the other being the higher level skills required to manage mechanized mining operations.

“Sandvik addressed the first problem — at least in terms of its own needs — by launching a very ambitious apprenticeship program which resulted at one stage in the company having around 200 apprentices on its books,” Pickering continues. “The second problem was more difficult and we soon realized that to generate the right management skills was going to take an industry-wide effort.

This led us to entering a relationship with Wits and in particular with the School of Mechanical, Industrial and Aeronautical Engineering, starting in 2004, which eventually resulted in the formal establishment of the Center for Mechanized Mining Systems or CMMS in early 2008.” Taking up the story, John Sheer – who was closely involved with these early negotiations and discussions and who currently supervises the Center’s MSc and PhD programs as visiting professor – says the CMMS has been a huge success, with the number of courses it holds and the number of students it attracts increasing year by year — to the point where it is now running around 10 post-graduate courses yearly and also has over 20 students pursuing MSc and PhD studies.

“Interestingly, we offer an MSc in Mechanized Mining and, to the best of our knowledge, this is unique in the world,” he says. Sheer — who, incidentally, is also a former senior director of COMRO — adds that the Center also undertakes consulting work for industry.

“The consulting work brings in part of our income and we also derive a revenue stream from our courses and students’ fees. Additionally, we have a number of companies who act as sponsors and donors and in fact Rod is the chairman of the CMMS’s Steering Committee, which is the mechanism which allows these companies to interact with the CMMS,” says Sheer.

The sponsors and donors are mining companies (Anglo American, Anglo Platinum, ARM and Implats), equipment suppliers (Sandvik, Joy Global and Atlas Copco) and consulting engineers/EPCM contractors (Hatch Goba and Worley Parsons). Explaining the function of the CMMS, Sheer says its basic purpose is self-evident. “We have a website and we produce literature which spells out in detail our aims and objectives but, in essence, our role — as our name suggests — is to promote mechanization in our mines, primarily by developing the skills and capabilities that managers need to successfully implement mechanized and automated mining systems,” he says. “I think it also needs to be stressed that we are not an undergraduate teaching organization.

Our students and those attending our courses generally already have careers in mining and in many cases are senior managers. They know conventional mining backwards but they lack a knowledge of mechanized mining — and that’s the gap we are filling.” Reinforcing Sheer’s point, Pickering points out that prior to the establishment of the CMMS South Africa’s mining engineers had little opportunity to gain an understanding of mechanized mining. “Typically, a student would graduate from Wits or one of the other universities with a BSc in Mining Engineering and would then find his first job underground in one of the narrow-reef hard-rock mines where he would spend two or three years in what was effectively an apprenticeship, learning skills such as how to drill with a hand-held rock drill, how to put in a pack and how to operate a scraper winch,” he explains.

“This was all very well but the net result was that mining engineers in South Africa would almost invariably reach management level knowing everything about traditional narrow-reef mining but almost nothing about mechanized mining systems, where the emphasis is not so much on managing people as machines. This situation is now starting to change, in part due to the efforts of the CMMS, but there is still a long way to go.”

While Pickering, as mentioned, believes that South Africa has done well in mechanizing its mines, he does acknowledge that there have been some failures — including one instance where a prominent platinum producer first embraced mechanization and has subsequently reverted to traditional practices. “My own belief is that there are two main reasons for failure,” he says.

“One has to do with personalities. Occasionally you’ll get a CEO who believes in mechanization and who drives the process but, once he departs, for whatever reason, there will often be a reversion to the old ways. The second and more common reason for failure is that the technology is thrown out because of inappropriate implementation rather than any fundamental problem with the concept of mechanization.

“I’ve already said that I don’t think we lag our overseas counterparts when it comes to mechanization but perhaps I need to qualify that statement. I did an analysis a couple of years back where I looked at the performance of equipment in our mines and compared it with the performance of equipment in Australian mines. My conclusion was that we ran our machines very efficiently. What was missing though was an appreciation of the systems that are needed to support the whole process, which is where the Australians are undeniably superior.

For example, you need a mining layout compatible with mechanization, an organizational culture that supports and reinforces the process, adequate infrastructure in the form of workshops and stores in place and management controls that allow one to measure compliance to production targets. If any of these elements are missing, then the entire mechanization process can be compromised.” While Pickering believes that the majority of underground mines can be successfully mechanized, he does concede that there are situations where a good case can be made for sticking with conventional methods.

“If a mine is very mature with a limited life left, it may be that the investment needed to convert to mechanized methods is not justified,” he says. “One can also accept that if traditional methods are working well and delivering the performance required, then there is no compelling reason to change. All I would say is this: whatever way you chose to mine, do it well — and, of course, safely. I can think of many conventional mines which have been and continue to be very successful.

Equally, and if we look at the platinum field, of the eight major underground mines in South Africa and Zimbabwe which are generally deemed to be profitable, five are mechanized operations.” When Modern Mining visited the CMMS at Wits recently, the Center was without a director but this is only a temporary situation. “Our very first director was Professor Alex du Plessis — also well-known as the founder of Turgis Consulting — and his tenure was from 2008 to 2011, when he was succeeded by Professor Jim Porter,” says Sheer. “Jim recently resigned from this position — although he still retains a close association with the CMMS — and we are currently in the process of selecting a successor.

We are confident that the person we appoint will build upon the fine work done by both Alex and Jim and that the Center’s reputation as one of the world’s leading ‘think tanks’ on mechanized mining will continue to grow.”

The Center for Mechanized Mining Systems (The CMMS) was established in 2004 at the request of the mining industry with three immediate objectives:

The Center initiative has developed an integrated systems engineering perspective that addresses the business challenges of the mining industry, both current and long term. CMMS is a collaborative initiative involving the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits), international tertiary research organizations, mining houses, mining equipment suppliers and other stakeholders. Its intent is to develop new capabilities for the mining industry and act as a catalyst for significant improvements in safety, profitability and sustainability.