Clear communication the key to avoiding site shutdowns and accidents

‘The affected area of the wall requires a 15m standoff and a 2m high bund to delineate personnel from the hazard.’

This is the kind of directions geotechnical engineers issue all the time, and while it appears reasonably straightforward, this single sentence could easily be misunderstood with disastrous consequences.

Working as an engineering geologist across various mine sites, I’ve come to appreciate the importance of clear communication in geotechnical reports. The nature of my work is to focus on risk management and accounting for the unknowns. We can identify areas that are more hazardous on a mine site, but we also need to err on the side of caution to factor in hidden dangers. A large part of my work is making observations, writing reports, and putting in place controls for mining operations.

The people reading my reports range from the Mine General Manager to the operators enacting the instructions on the ground. There is huge diversity of experience and backgrounds among the report’s audience, which means very different conclusions can be drawn from the same written recommendation.

Returning to our initial statement, it seems simple until you start looking at this direction in detail. Is the 15m standoff measured from the crest of the wall, or from the toe? Is the ‘affected area’ clearly illustrated or defined? Is the mid-point or the inside edge of the bund supposed to be at 15m from the wall toe? Does ‘delineate personnel’ also encompass prohibiting equipment (i.e. an excavator bucket) from entering the standoff?

How this direction is interpreted could result in a serious injury if it is implemented incorrectly, or unnecessary delays while the on the ground team seek clarification of the aforementioned ambiguities.

Another communication challenge that can exacerbate confusion is the fact certain technical words can be interpreted differently, or a called different things from site to site. A ‘bund’ on one mine site will be referred to as a ‘rill’ on another. What some places call a ‘berm’ may be referred to as a ‘catch bench’ elsewhere.

One issue I saw pop up repeatedly last year was confusion about the meaning of a stand-off and an exclusion zone. These terms are often used interchangeably but in fact have very different meanings. While a stand-off typically means the area can be accessed under JSA, an exclusion zone means access is prohibited under all circumstances. Quite obviously, there could be serious consequences for assuming these terms mean the same thing.

With no standard language across the board, it is important that you communicate in the lexicon of the site, but also ensure that everyone – no matter their experience or education level, can understand your directions. For consultant geotechnical engineers and engineering geologists, whom are transient across multiple sites and companies, this is critical.

One of the simplest solutions to this problem is to include diagrams and pictures in your reports to illustrate the controls that need to be put in place. Engineering designs, annotated photos, and even simple sketches that clearly shows the geotechnical controls can stop any confusion that may arise from a text only instruction.  

Another solution is the practice of digitising maps. We can upload a line to the operator’s machine guidance systems. Then, instead of relying on people to eyeball the distance, their machines have a clear delineation of the areas they need to avoid. 

Instead of the original statement, we should consider stating something like this:

‘The affected area, as highlighted in Figure A and on the digital plan, requires a 2m high bund to be installed. The mid-point of the bund should be at a 15m standoff from the highwall toe. The excavator can reach in and mine within the bunded area, as long as the operator cab remains outside.’

I believe it is very valuable to sit down with the end users and ask for feedback on your reports. You should check that the reports make sense to all stakeholders, and that the information and guidance you are providing is actually useful and meets their needs. You may find that your 10 page incredibly detailed report can actually satisfy its purpose with one or two pages.

This may seem like a simple concept, but all it takes is for a confused end user to shut down a dig circuit, or worse someone to get hurt by following incorrect guidance, for this to have a devastating impact. Not only does this practice of checking in help to indemnify you from any miscommunications, if you take the feedback on board, it also helps you become a better communicator and geotechnical engineer in the long term.