SME Annual Meeting

Feb. 28-Mar. 03, 2010, Phoenix, AZ

Preprint 10-046

MINE ESCAPE VEHICLE (MEV) CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

S. Cotten, Raytheon UTD, Springfield, VA

A. Dennison-Johnson, formerly Raytheon UTD, Springfield, VA
L. Giraldo, Raytheon UTD, Springfield, VA
A. Renner, Raytheon UTD, Springfield, VA
K. Rouleau, formerly Raytheon UTD, Springfield, VA

SUMMARY will need the capability to function within and counteract these
conditions. An additional, less tangible operational consideration for
The concept for a Mine Escape Vehicle (MEV) is motivated by the MEV design is the post-incident mentality of the miners, including
desire to enable personnel to evacuate a mine rapidly as the first and panic and disorientation, which will limit their ability to interact with
most desirable response to any underground emergency. Under a complex equipment.
NIOSH contract, Raytheon UTD developed a conceptual design for a
vehicle that coal miners could use to facilitate their rapid exit from an
underground coal mine in the case of emergency, including fire or 100%
explosion. The vehicle requirements include the capacity to provide Explosion, 87.15%
life support functions for a number of miners, operate in an oxygen 90%
deficient, low or no visibility atmosphere, and travel at speeds faster
than miners can walk out of the mine. 80%
To develop the MEV concept, three primary tasks were identified
and executed. The first task focused on developing a realistic concept 70%
of operations (CONOPS) and associated high level vehicle
requirements. The second task identified and evaluated currently 60%
available equipment and technologies that could be applied to address
the CONOPS. The final task developed a design concept that 50%
integrated the identified components for the five (5) MEV sub-systems
to provide the foundation for future detailed engineering design and 40%
prototype construction.
30%
The resulting MEV design concept is centered upon retrofitting
existing mine personnel carrier chasses with available, mine-worthy 20% Fire, 5.73% Innundation, Roof Fall / Bump,
Collapse of
equipment capable of addressing the MEV requirements. This Coal Pile, 0.64% 3.94% 2.54%
approach offers a practical and economic avenue to prototype 10%
development and delivery with minimum lead-time and risk.
Furthermore, by integrating familiar and available equipment into the 0%
design and CONOPS, the resulting Mine Escape Vehicles Figure 1. Percentage by Category of U.S. Underground Coal Mine
Disaster Deaths Since 1950 (Total Number of Deaths: 786) (Source:
should also be more readily accepted by the mining industry. MSHA).
BACKGROUND SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES
Over the last century, the number of coal mining-related deaths The overall objective of the “Mine Escape Vehicle” (MEV) project
has decreased as more attention has been given to delivering safer was to investigate the technical issues related to development of a
mining conditions and procedures. Although the concentration on suitable vehicle to facilitate rapid exit of mine personnel. Vehicle
safety continues to drive a downward trend in the number of coal miner requirements include the capacity to provide life support functions for a
deaths per year, recent years have shown a significant spike in deaths number of miners, operate in an oxygen deficient atmosphere with low
attributed directly to the Sago and Darby disasters. Although the or no visibility, provide capabilities to enable navigation, obstacle
cause of both accidents was “Ignition/Explosion of Gas/Dust,” the detection, and communications with the surface, and travel at speeds
principal causes of the deaths were polluted atmospheres and the faster than miners can walk.
inability of the miners to escape dangerous areas of the mine. To help
combat the inability to rapidly escape, NIOSH sponsored an Five major subsystems were identified as necessary for any MEV
investigation into a “Mine Escape Vehicle”, or MEV. to attain the functional objectives noted above: (1) Vehicle Platform
(Chassis), (2) Life Support, (3) Communications, (4) Vision or
The overall goal of an MEV is to assist the evacuation of miners in Guidance, and (5) Navigation. During this investigation, which was
the event of a mine-wide emergency. Over the past four decades, divided into three “tasks”, existing technologies (and gaps in
mine-wide emergencies have largely been either explosion or fire technology) suitable for MEV use in underground mine environments
related (Figure 1). Any incident in which five or more fatalities occur is were identified and a high-level MEV system design concept was
designated as a mine disaster by NIOSH. Historically, post-incident developed.
conditions include high CO, CO2 and methane concentrations, low O2
concentrations, low or no visibility due to smoke or dust particles, entry Task 1 of the investigation, concentrated on developing, in
obstructions such as downed over-casts and stopping materials, lack consultation with NIOSH, MSHA, mine operators, the UMWA, and
of communications caused by the explosion or fire, and atmospheres state mine safety regulators, a realistic concept of operations
which can potentially foster secondary explosions. An effective MEV

1 Copyright © 2010 by SME


(CONOPS) and initial list of high level MEV performance and
operational requirements.
Task 2 focused on identification and evaluation of viable, currently
available equipment or technologies from among the variety of
potential candidates and refinement of requirements for each of the
five MEV subsystems. Of special interest was mine-proven equipment
with which mine personnel are already familiar and that exhibits a high
level of reliability over long service life. Equipment from other
applications (fire fighting, military) was also investigated.
During Task 3 of the investigation, system engineering principles
and processes were utilized to evaluate the compatibility of the
identified technologies and to generate an integrated system concept.
This evaluation identified both the ability of the selected technologies
to address the basic MEV requirements and combinations that could
form the basis of an acceptable integrated MEV design. In addition, an
MEV prototype development plan was outlined and a “technology
development roadmap” identifying current technology gaps and
possible future approaches to bridging those gaps was created for
each subsystem.
Task 1: MEV Concept of Operations (CONOPS) Development
A CONOPS definition is necessary to guide future development
and ultimate successful use of the MEV. To be successful, the MEV
must be accepted by both mine operators and miners. Acceptance by
both groups is predicated upon the MEV being both useful and easy to
use. It is highly desirable and may be a valuable attribute for the MEV
to contribute to regular mining operations on a daily basis. Daily use
provides the confidence-building benefits of demonstrating equipment
reliability and availability and providing familiarly of vehicle operation in
times of emergency. Daily use also incurs the drawbacks of increasing
equipment wear and related maintenance costs. Therefore, a
philosophy has to be developed associated with the introduction of this
new equipment capability into the mine. An early project objective was
determining if the MEV platform could be based upon existing mine
equipment.
Identification, organization, and prioritization of performance and
operational requirements included a review of historical statistics on
emergency mine evacuation events. High-level MEV performance
objectives included passenger capacity, mission duration (affecting
minimum hours of life support and vehicle power), top vehicle speed,
required operational range, obstacle negotiation capability, and the
potential need for passengers to dismount/remount the MEV. MEV
requirements also include the need for components to be MSHA
approved and certified as either intrinsically safe (IS) or explosion proof
(XP) and for them to demonstrate very high reliability in this
application.
In defining the concept of operation (CONOPS) for the MEV,
consideration also needs to be made for the type of mine and
emergency event. The parameters that need to be taken into account
include the mine type (longwall or room and pillar), mining height (high,
defined as greater than 5 ft., or low, defined as less than 5 ft.), and
mine size (large, defined as those with escape routes longer than 2
miles, or small, defined as escape routes shorter than 2 miles).
There are many mine-wide emergency scenarios upon which the
MEV CONOPS could be based; as stated above, fires and explosions
account for a large proportion of catastrophic deaths in underground
mines. For simplicity, the operative MEV CONOPS description was
based on the scenario of an explosion and fire localized to one section
in a high room and pillar coal mine, with an escape route longer than 2
miles. The considerations above provide the background for
development of the following event response scenario:
After the initial event, it will take time to gather all miners, attend
to any injured, and determine an initial exit strategy and escape route.
The MEV must remain operable for a minimum of four hours, plausibly
in low-oxygen conditions. It also must provide a means of life support
to sustain all miners onboard for the duration of the escape. The MEV
chassis should have the capacity to assist the typical number of miners
on a working section including a seriously injured miner (or miners)
along with uninjured miners. It also should have the maneuverability to
2 Copyright © 2010 by SME
SME Annual Meeting
Feb. 28-Mar. 03, 2010, Phoenix, AZ
move, drive over, or navigate around large obstacles that may be
blocking entries, have traction with suitable ground clearance
applicable to the conditions found within the mine, and the ability to
navigate and turn with relative ease in restricted space.
To speed the process of assembling all personnel and assessing
the nature and location of the event, the MEV should have a
communications system that integrates with the mine’s
communications system and is compatible with the life support system
provided on the MEV. Potentially, the driver of the MEV will use this
system to communicate with miners aboard the MEV, any miners
separated from others in the mining section due to injury or other
reasons, and with the surface. The driver can use the communication
system to learn the conditions outby to plan a route out of the mine,
and to let personnel on the surface know the nature of the emergency
and the location of the MEV.
Using a vision enhancement or guidance system would then allow
the driver of the MEV to better sense and recognize his surroundings
under atmospheric conditions with poor visibility. System components
would assist the driver in determining how far the vehicle is from the
ribs or other obstacles, increasing exit speed and decreasing the
chances of damaging and disabling the vehicle.
Once onboard, the miners will use the SCSRs on the MEV, if
necessary. The driver and navigator would have additional life support
capability to maintain their vision and facilitate clear communications.
As the MEV driver begins the evacuation, a navigation system shows
the vehicle’s orientation, and possibly its location within the mine,
improving the driver’s ability to determine an effective escape route. If
an obstacle cannot be avoided, the MEV chassis may possess the
traction, ground clearance, and power to either drive over or move the
obstacle. If the MEV cannot get past the obstacles, miners may have
to dismount and walk the rest of the way out of the mine. To the extent
possible, certain capabilities on the MEV will be designed to be man-
portable to facilitate successful escape on foot.
Based upon the selected CONOPS and this general event
response scenario, the list of high-level MEV subsystem requirements
presented in Table 1 was developed.
Task 2: Technology Assessment and Sub-system Requirement
Refinement
The second task was to investigate and identify both existing and
developing technologies that might address the high-level
requirements for each subsystem. In the search for currently available
technologies for the proposed MEV systems, the MEV team met with
state and federal government agencies, attended industry trade
events, conducted extensive Internet searches, and contacted product
developers. Visits to three working coal mines provided an initial frame
of reference for technology requirements. Interviews with experienced
personnel at the mines provided understanding of the capabilities and
limitations of technology currently used.
Some subsystems proposed for the MEV were assigned greater
priority by mine operators, government, and industry association
personnel. In conversations with these contacts, life support is
considered the most important subsystem, while communications and
vision/guidance systems share equal priority, with navigation assigned
the lowest priority. These comments relating to subsystem priority
should be considered as trades among the subsystems which may be
required during actual MEV design.
Chassis: The backbone of the MEV will be a chassis on which
the other four subsystem technologies will reside. The definition of the
chassis was developed through a discussion of its functionality: would
this be a vehicle that transports miners, or would this be a type of
cargo-assist in which the miners themselves walk while life support,
vision, and other accessories are carried by a separate device? From
the feedback obtained from mine personnel, it was determined that the
MEV should be a transport device on which miners can ride.
After examining numerous vehicle options, the decision was
made that the MEV chassis will be based on a mantrip, or personnel
carrier. A typical mantrip is used by all of the crew on a day-to-day

basis, and could be operated by any of the miners. In any of its forms,
from high coal, SUV-type vehicles to low coal versions, non-rail
mantrips are generally based on a driving system that is similar to that
of a typical automobile. This familiarity provides a benefit in an
emergency when time and efficiency are critical to successfully
escaping the mine. An additional benefit to mantrips is that they
generally provide the greatest maneuverability throughout the mine.
Table 1. Summary of High-Level Sub-system Requirements for the
MEV.
High-Level MEV Sub-system Requirements
Power plant: Electric / diesel
Personnel Capacity: 8 to 10
Size: Design for high coal (>60 inches)
Chassis Range: 2 to 3 miles
Speed: Sustained 3 mph or greater
Maneuverability: Max. ground clearance,
min. wheel base, max. traction
Interface: Ability to interact with mine-wide
communication sub-system
Communications Integrate: With life support sub-system
Intra-vehicle communication: Ability for MEV
occupants to communicate with each other
Duration: 8 to 12 people for up to 4 hours
Life Support Man portable
Integrate: With communications sub-system
Performance: See through smoke, dust,
and total darkness
Resolution: Identify people and objects 3 to
100 ft. (min.)
Vision and Guidance
Man-portable
Interface: With life support and chassis sub-
systems
Display: Visible in smoke and dust
User display: Screen visible in smoke and
dust
Operation: Ability to determine location and
Navigation orientation relative to exit
Interface: With latest mine survey and maps
Accuracy: Duplicate that of mine-wide
tracking system (if available)
Multiple mantrip chassis options were investigated throughout this
project. Ultimately, it was decided that if the vehicle is battery
powered, it can continue to work through low or no oxygen
environments. Also, permissible, battery-powered mantrips are
currently available and employed within working mines.
Life Support: Life support refers to a means to provide a
breathable atmosphere in a hostile environment. MEV requirements
fall in one of two categories: a group life support system integrated into
the MEV, or independent life support devices for each passenger
stored on the MEV. Current regulations require that miners carry
emergency respirators at all times. Additionally, mines are required to
have caches with fresh respirators at prescribed intervals to support
evacuation. The MEV concept takes into account existing life support
capabilities in the mines and, if possible, incorporates other
technologies and capabilities already in use.
A review of existing and developing technologies for life support
was conducted to determine their characteristics and evaluate their
potential for incorporation into the MEV. The two main groups of life
support systems currently in use are Self Rescuers and Self-Contained
Breathing Apparatus (SCBA). Individual products for the various
technology classifications were reviewed and compared to determine
their relative advantages over other products in the same category.
New products that are under development or in the MSHA certification
process include novel features that may provide some advantages
over existing products.
3 Copyright © 2010 by SME
SME Annual Meeting
Feb. 28-Mar. 03, 2010, Phoenix, AZ
A design objective is to provide the driver and navigator of the
MEV with life support units that permit clear voice communication, and
all other miners aboard the vehicle with the self-rescuer units already
employed in each mine. The option of creating an integrated life
support system on the vehicle is also becoming possible for some
mines introducing new SCSR concepts.
Communication: The MINER Act of 2006 mandated certain
capabilities for underground communications systems, and multiple
manufacturers have developed mine-wide communication systems
intended to meet the Act’s requirements. More than 30 mine-wide
communications systems have appeared on the market over the past 2
years. As the overall MEV concept needs to be effective in different
mines employing different communications systems, a major design
requirement would be interchangeability of the communications
system: the MEV design would have to accommodate any mine-
specific system in a “plug-and-play” method.
Communications options for the MEV are constrained by the
ability to integrate with the life support system. It is possible that only
the driver and navigator of the MEV will need the capability to talk to
the surface or other personnel underground, which can reduce system
complexity and cost. Currently, only two life support options integrate
voice communications with rescuer units. Potential disadvantages to
these units include the high cost per unit and additional training and
maintenance requirements for this “non-standard” equipment. The
least demanding requirement is intra-vehicular communication. Some
communication systems have the ability for “nodes” to talk to each
other, using handheld radios for voice communications. Therefore, in
some mines, each miner may already carry a radio. An alternative to
radios is use of either a bullhorn or loudspeaker, simple technologies
that can be easily implemented with any MEV chassis selection.
Vision and Guidance Systems: Following an explosion, thick
smoke or dust in the air can cause a zero-visibility environment. A
review of both existing and developing technologies for vision and
guidance systems to address this situation was conducted to
determine their actual functional characteristics and evaluate their
potential for the MEV application. Commercial products used both
within and outside the mining industry were investigated and
compared.
Several technologies were identified as potential solutions to the
vision problem. Thermal infrared (IR) is capable of creating an image
smoky or dusty environments, but there are no MSHA approved IS
handheld units on the market at this time. There are at least two IS
mounted thermal IR cameras available, but these are not MSHA
approved and they cannot be carried with the miners if abandonment
of the vehicle is required. There are less expensive technologies that
may offer a solution in a less traditional sense of the word “vision.”
These include proximity sensors which can assist the operator in
steering the MEV away from ribs and warn of obstacles in the vehicle’s
path. Some of the proximity sensors are capable of overlaying the
data output onto a video image. While these sensors have a limited
detection range, there should be sufficient time for the proximity
sensors to update to prevent collision if the MEV is moving at a slow
speed. Proximity sensors employing radar technology appear to offer
the best performance for this application.
Navigation: A navigation system can assist those exiting the
mine to assess their actual location, progress, and escape route
options to reduce the time it takes to get out of the mine. A full
navigation system is the least developed and least supported of the
five defined MEV subsystems. No navigation system is currently
available that can fulfill the high-level requirements. Navigation
software programs that link into and employ information from
underground tracking and communications systems may become
available in the not-so-distant future.
However, simpler, low cost approaches to a navigation system
also exist. An analog magnetic compass is the simplest way to
determine the correct direction toward a mine exit. Installing an
odometer on the MEV would require little modification to the chassis
and would not rely on any mine-wide infrastructure to perform.
 SME Annual Meeting
Feb. 28-Mar. 03, 2010, Phoenix, AZ

Odometer accuracy to hundreds of feet would be adequate to help the Table 2. Identified Mine Escape Vehicle Technology Gaps.
driver determine distance traveled and his approximate location in the Identified Mine Escape Vehicle Technology Gaps
mine. A diesel-powered vehicle that is MSHA-
Task 3: Systems Engineering Analysis and Concept Development approved for operation in hazardous
The final task employed system engineering principles to develop atmospheres
from the prior task investigations a concept for a mine escape vehicle More efficient, higher energy-density batteries
Chassis
that (1) met the established requirements and (2) offered a practical suitable for daily use underground
and economical basis for MEV development. In some instances, more Alternative power sources insensitive to
than one viable solution was identified. Presentation of options reflects ambient atmospheric conditions (potential
the need to address the wide variety of both operator needs and examples: fuel cells, hybrid powered engines)
currently available technology. A communications system integrated within a
full-face life support unit mask designed
Figure 2 represents the culmination of the final task in the Communications specifically for use in underground coal mines.
evolution of the MEV design concept, integration of the currently A vocal cord enhancement sensor designed
available sub-system technologies identified during the first two tasks specifically for underground coal mines.
into a feasible approach worthy of continued consideration.
An accurate multi-gas detector/analyzer with
response time significantly less than 10
seconds
Life Support
A proven oxygen generator system that
incorporates pre-filtering of dust and scrubbing
of noxious intake gases
An MSHA approved hand-held thermal
infrared IR camera
Vision and Guidance An MSHA approved material for XP
enclosures that is transparent to thermal
infrared (IR) radiation
A navigation software program that links into
and employs information from underground
Navigation tracking and communications systems
A commercial, fully capable underground
navigation system

Figure 2. MEV Concept Drawing.

Table 2 below summarizes the major MEV-related technology
gaps, the “technology development roadmap”, identified during the
course of this investigation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The MEV Concept design effort was funded under CDC Contract
Number 200-2008-24826 issued in response to NIOSH BAA 2007-
N09221. The MEV team also thanks the many representatives from
the mining industry and labor organizations for their generous
response of time and valuable insights in support of this effort.

4 Copyright © 2010 by SME