OFFICIAL systems are utilized at the Santa Luisa Mine, operated by Mitsui Mining & Smelting Co., Ltd., as well as at the Cerro Lindo Mine, operated by Nexa Resources, where mechanical ground‑support installation has become an integral part of routine development and production activities. In Chile, mesh handler units are installed at the El Teniente Mine as part of Codelco’s Andes Norte Project, with Züblin acting as the principal contractor. In this application, the systems support large‑scale, high‑productivity mining under demanding stress and ground‑control conditions. Further deployments include production‑support operations for Vale (Coleman and Garson mines) and Agnico Eagle (Odyssey and LaRonde mines) in Canada, where the systems are used to enhance safety and productivity in both development and production areas. In Brazilian underground mines, mechanised ground support is also standard practice, particularly in operations operated by Nexa Resources and Vale. In Turkey, a device is operating successfully at a mine owned by First Quantum Minerals, while additional applications include the Kiruna Mine in Sweden, one of the world’s deepest and most technically advanced underground iron‑ore operations. These applications clearly illustrate the adaptability of mechanised mesh installation systems to different mining methods, rock‑mass conditions, and regulatory environments. At an earlier stage of development, ground‑support projects were conducted in underground mines in Spain, South Africa, Mexico, Australia, and New Zealand. Although these operations are no longer active, they provided valuable validation of the technology and contributed significantly to its subsequent refinement and commercialization. Typical OEM carrier machines include Epiroc Boltec S and Boltec M units, Sandvik DS411 and DS412 bolters, and Resemin 100 machines. This integration allows mesh installation to be closely synchronized with the bolting cycle, reducing non‑productive time, improving overall ground‑support efficiency, and minimizing operator exposure to unsupported ground. These devices are subject to periodic replacement, typically within a range of approximately three to six months, depending on factors such as usage intensity, operational discipline, rock abrasiveness, and environmental conditions. Importantly, replacement is not governed by a rigid time‑based interval; instead, it is primarily based on condition monitoring and maintenance assessments. This condition‑based approach ensures that safety and performance are maintained while optimizing lifecycle cost and equipment availability for the mine operator. 9. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings of this study, no significant improvements in underground mining safety performance have been observed that can be interpreted in terms of fatalities. This means that, in practice, no further reductions in fatality rates have been recorded, as safety has stabilized at historical highs. According to the data consulted, fatalities are attributed to geotechnical failures, not to the volume of material produced. In regions of the world with lower fatality rates (conservative geotechnical design and execution of dynamic and static loads), robust governance is in place, and human exposure is eliminated through the successful use of state-of-the-art ground support techniques to control geotechnical risk. These systems utilize dynamic load and energy-absorption capabilities and are composed by layers of flexible, high-tensile strength mesh, which functions as a system based on geotechnical engineering findings for deep, high-stress conditions. When
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2