Fatigue Management in Mining: A Critical Safety Challenge

One of the most significant yet underrecognized risks in mining operations is worker fatigue, which threatens not only individual safety but also that of entire crews working in these hazardous environments.

Despite industry-wide safety initiatives, fatigue remains particularly dangerous because of its “invisible” nature, according to Dr. Tim Bauerle, a behavioral scientist at the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health’s Spokane Mining Research Division. Unlike physical hazards that can be easily identified and mitigated, fatigue often goes undetected until it’s too late.

“Our inability to accurately judge how our own fatigue negatively affects our performance” is just one factor contributing to the problem, Dr. Bauerle explains. Other issues include production pressures, team dynamics that discourage acknowledging fatigue, inadequate measurement tools, and persistent myths that miners should simply “work through” their exhaustion.

The consequences are far from theoretical. Research by Caterpillar Global Mining found that fatigue may be responsible for a staggering 65% of accidents involving haul trucks, highlighting the urgent need for better management strategies.

Josh Savit, principal advisor for safety at Hexagon, notes that “noise, distraction, poor visibility and fatigue are daily hazards for mining equipment operators,” compounded by “long hours, repetitive tasks and heavy machinery that operate amid significant blind spots.” He emphasizes that addressing these hazards is essential not just for safety but also productivity, stating that “a safe mine, after all, is a profitable mine.”

Surface vs. Underground: Different Environments, Different Risks

While both surface and underground mining present significant fatigue-related risks, subsurface operations are generally considered more hazardous due to their unique environmental challenges. However, Dr. Bauerle points out that there is “very little quantitative scientific evidence” directly comparing fatigue risks between the two settings using standardized measures.

Surface mining typically exposes workers to cognitive fatigue through monotonous haul truck routes, continuous whole-body vibration, and sometimes extreme weather conditions. Underground miners, meanwhile, face physically demanding work in unusual postures, darker conditions that disrupt circadian rhythms, ventilation issues creating hot and humid environments, and communication isolation that impacts social support.

Savit believes that “given the complexities of mining underground, it is certainly plausible that the risks posed by fatigue and distraction are even greater.” He highlights recent advances in networking and communications technology, particularly 5G, as critical innovations for addressing these challenges.

5G: Transforming Underground Communication

Shao Qi, general manager of the Open-pit Mine of Oil, Gas and Mining Business Unit at Huawei, explains how 5G technology is overcoming traditional connectivity challenges in underground mines. “With 5G base stations, underground mines can access comprehensive, highly-reliable connectivity that supports real-time HD video and sensor data transmission,” extending signals to previously unreachable areas.

While 5G’s impact on fatigue management may be indirect, it’s nonetheless significant. The technology enables remote equipment operation, even from above ground, drastically reducing the time workers need to spend in hazardous underground environments. “This allows for remote fault diagnosis, reducing the time workers need to spend underground,” Shao explains, noting that real-time monitoring has helped reduce inspection time by 75%.

Importantly, Savit points out that the “myth” that certain technologies are only suitable for surface operations has been dispelled. “The same systems can be used in both surface and underground,” allowing mining companies to develop “a more unified community of practice on fatigue, distraction and safety overall.”

Technological Advances in Fatigue Management

Beyond improved connectivity, the industry is embracing numerous fatigue detection technologies (FDTs). These include in-cab cameras, computerized impairment detection tests, biomathematical models predicting fatigue based on sleep patterns and work schedules, fleet management systems analyzing driving performance, vehicle automation, and wearable devices monitoring physiological signals.

Dr. Bauerle highlights emerging analytics trends complementing these technologies, including cloud-based systems integrating multiple data streams, edge computing for instant alerts without requiring internet connectivity, and AI solutions that analyze complex patterns to make sophisticated fatigue risk predictions that improve over time.

Biomathematical model algorithms predict how fatigue and alertness might change based on sleep/wake history, work hours, and time of day. More advanced models incorporate factors like rest breaks, sleep inertia, and workload intensity. Meanwhile, fleet management technologies employ AI to analyze driving metrics such as brake pressure, drifting, steering patterns, and reaction times to determine fatigue levels.

These technologies form part of comprehensive Fatigue Risk Management Systems that Dr. Bauerle describes as the “gold standard” for continuous monitoring and proactive intervention. Such systems not only help avert incidents but also enable “non-punitive decision-making” and “compassionate and meaningful” discussions with workers about fatigue management.

Automation: Solution or New Challenge?

Automation represents another promising approach to reducing fatigue-related risks. “Technological advancements have focused on reducing operator fatigue by minimizing direct exposure to high-risk or exhausting environments,” Savit explains, noting that “autonomous haul trucks are helping to eliminate the need for human drivers in repetitive, fatigue-prone tasks.”

Remote monitoring centers allow operators to work in safer, more comfortable environments, reducing risks associated with on-site work in remote or extreme conditions. However, Dr. Bauerle warns of what some call “the irony of automation”: as systems become more accurate and autonomous, the humans monitoring them may experience “degraded situational awareness, increasing fatigue through mental underload and disengagement.”

To address this concern, Bauerle suggests designing systems that promote “dynamic, active monitoring rather than passive observation,” supported by continuous training and fatigue assessment practices that help workers maintain awareness and readiness to intervene when necessary.

As mining operations continue to evolve, so too will the nature of fatigue-related risks. While technology offers promising solutions, the industry must remain vigilant against emerging challenges. As Dr. Bauerle notes, “Worker fatigue is a substantial risk in both surface and underground mining because it can impair mental abilities that are essential for safe operations.” Addressing this persistent threat will require ongoing innovation in technology, processes, and worker support systems—an effort that promises benefits for both safety and productivity.