New simulated gas detector offers realistic training for mine 

rescue teams 

S.B. Bealko, D. Alexander, & L.L. Chasko 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, (NIOSH), Office of Mine Safety and Health 

Research, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA 

J. Holtan 

LightsOn Safety Solutions, Spring, Texas, USA 

ABSTRACT: The United States is trending away from traditional mine rescue contest training toward hands-on 

skills training that focuses on being better prepared for an actual mine emergency response. New technologies and 

engaging training exercises are providing more realistic experiences to mine rescue teams. The National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), in partnership with LightsOn Safety Solutions (LightsOn SS), has 

just completed the first phase of a research investigation of a multi-gas simulated gas monitor system (GMS). 

This endeavor is designed to add a higher level of realism during mine rescue contests and training exercises. The 

GMS is a wireless simulation tool utilizing a personal computer, wireless local area network, and simulated gas 

detectors. It is designed to assist mine rescue team members to learn about gas detection, understand the 

significance of gas concentrations, and encourage subsequent decision-making actions by team members. 

Moreover, it eliminates the static practice of using printed gas readings on a cardboard placard (placed on the 

ground during training or contests) and replaces it with a more realistic method of receiving gas concentration 

readings using a simulated hand-held gas detector. In 2009, NIOSH tested the LightsOn SS GMS technology with 

twenty-three mine rescue teams during two separate field trials. The first was during mine rescue training in the 

presence of dense theatrical fog that simulated smoke. The second integrated the GMS into a mine rescue contest 

held in a simulated mine. The research objective was to determine if the GMS technology could be used by mine 

rescue teams instead of placards, whether the teams would accept the new device, and if its functionality was 

suitable, reliable, and practical. This paper provides a brief history of the development and testing of the GMS, a 

description of the GMS functions for this initial phase, and the plans for the next phase of research. 

1 Introduction 

The mining industry goal has always been to reduce the 

number of emergency crisis situations to zero. Until this 

goal is accomplished, mine rescue teams will continue to 

be relied upon to save the lives of fellow miners. Situations 

requiring rescue teams are low-probability, highconsequence events in which mine rescue team members 

accept some personal risk. Therefore, it is most appropriate 

that mine rescue teams are fully equipped with state-ofthe-art technology and receive the best training possible. 

Appeals for mine rescue training improvements have 

been expressed over the past few years. Several sources 

identified that training would be more effective and 

engaging if it was more realistic and would better prepare 

all teams if this training was available to all teams 

(Alexander et al., 2010; Bealko et al., 2009; MST&TC, 

2006). The most recent National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health (NIOSH) Information Circular 

“Research Report on Strategies for Escape and Rescue 

from Underground Coal Mines” (Alexander et al., 2010) 

recommends that mine rescue contests and national rules 

be revised to emphasize realistic conditions expected 

during an emergency event and that mine rescue contests 

be held in simulated or underground coal mines instead of 

grassy fields and gymnasiums. The report also calls for the 

creation of U.S. regional mine rescue training facilities, 

utilizing simulated or real underground mines, so that 

hands-on emergency response training can be offered to all 

teams. Finally, NIOSH researchers recommend that in 

addition to using engaging and realistic training methods, 

the trainers’ and miners' proficiency be assessed and 

mentoring be offered to meet minimum standards. 

International mine rescue organizations fully support 

realistic training for emergency response preparedness. 

South Africa, Australia, China, India, United Kingdom, 

Germany and Eastern Europe (Russia, Poland, and the 

Ukraine) utilize numerous centralized and highlyspecialized training centers that provide all mine rescue 

teams with physical, and sometimes rigorous, hands-on 

training in mines or simulated real-life environments 

(Bealko et al., 2009). More evidence supporting increased 

realism is found in the 2008 Mine Rescue Teams Final 

Rule (CFR 49.11) where annual smoke training has been 

made mandatory (MSHA, 2008). 
 

 

The 2006 Mine Safety Technology and Training 

Commission (MST&TC, 2006) report states the following 

regarding mine rescue training quality: “We also find that 

training often is not realistic enough. Since events are rare, 

replicating the conditions and stress of a real event in a 

training environment is essential.” This report proceeds to 

identify the need for federal and state partnerships for 

teams to have more realistic training experiences. It also 

recommends improved auditing of how well miners retain 

their training knowledge, skills and abilities. The most 

successful training is performance-oriented and 

competency-based. Gas detection, testing, and

interpretation training needs to be strengthened. The 

MST&TC report states, “Many teams we spoke with 

emphasized the need for more rigorous and comprehensive 

training with respect to mine gases and the instruments 

used to detect them (MST&TC, 2006).” This paper 

discusses mine rescue contest and training results using a 

new device that has been demonstrated to simulate the 

operation of commercial gas detectors without using 

hazardous or toxic gases. NIOSH, in partnership with 

LightsOn Safety Solutions1

1 Mention of any company or product does not constitute 

endorsement by the National Institute for Occupational Safety 

and Health (NIOSH). In addition, citations to Web sites external 

to NIOSH do not constitute NIOSH endorsement of the 

sponsoring organizations or their programs or products. 

Furthermore, NIOSH is not responsible for the content of these 

Web sites. All Web addresses referenced in this document were 

accessible as of the publication date. 

(LightsOn SS

http://www.lightsonss.com/) has just completed the first 

phase of an investigation of a simulated gas monitoring 

system (GMS) which has the capability of receiving 

multiple gas readings. It is a training aid that can serve the 

entire mining industry and be integrated into educational 

programs at any of the U.S. mine rescue training facilities 

that utilize simulated mines or contest fields. The GMS is a 

substitute for the convenient but archaic practice of writing 

gas readings on a cardboard placard and placing them on 

the ground during training and mine rescue contests 

(Figure 1a). Gas placards are limited to providing two predetermined readings (one on each side of the placard) and 

their locations remain static during contests and training 

exercises. These placards are difficult to recognize in 

simulated smoke exercises and some mine rescue teams 

miss them altogether in very dense smoke. Most of all, gas 

placards don’t look, sound, or feel like real-life hand-held 

gas detectors and encourage developing unsound practices 

in training that may carry over into real emergencies. The 

one advantage of using placards is that they eliminate the 

potential for human error in relaying gas readings as long 

as the placards can be seen and are properly positioned 

throughout the exercise. 

The GMS offers teams a new device that provides the 

same information as a placard, but takes on more of the 

shape, sound, and function of a real portable gas detector 

(Figure 1b). 

Figure 1 Placard-style gas reading (a) versus GMS-style gas reading (b). 

GMS gas readings can be used in a more 

dynamic fashion allowing any combination of gas readings 

to be sent at any time during a training exercise. Current 

manufacturers of portable gas detectors do not offer 

simulation functionality on their gas detection devices. 
Thus, the GMS would provide mine rescue team members 

the chance to experience detector-initiated alarms as 

hazardous concentrations of gases are displayed while 

training in a safe atmosphere. Teams can also realistically 

experience a continuously-changing gaseous environment 

and better learn how to make sound split-second decisions 

in response to the gas readings. This system can also be 

used during smoke training where there is a near zerovisibility environment. 

In addition to providing a dynamic electronic placard, 

the GMS can relay instant messages to teams as an in-thefield teaching supplement. This unique GMS function can 

be used to question understanding, require feedback, or 

reinforce a teams’ knowledge about mine gas 

concentrations, mine rescue regulations and standards, 

and/or gas detection techniques as part of a field exercise. 

The LightsOn SS GMS patent-pending technology was 

developed with NIOSH assistance and collaboration. This 

paper describes how the GMS concept for emergency 

responder training evolved and how the technology was 

integrated into mine rescue training. It describes the 

outcomes of two field trials using the GMS technology and 

offers insight into the opportunities to improve the delivery 

of quality gas detector training and contest content. 

2 Gas Monitoring System (GMS) 

The GMS is based on a computer simulation for gas 

detection. The instructor kit includes the following 

components: 

•	 a heavy-duty instructor laptop including a control 

panel and gas concentration database, 

•	 the GMS software, 

•	 a wireless network and router(s), 

•	 multiple gas detector devices, and 

•	 a hard-bodied case that holds all the components of 

the GMS. 

The original GMS prototype was run on a Microsoft 

Windows operating system and the simulated gas detector 

was based on a consumer Personal Data Assistant (PDA) 

device in a protective case. The current GMS, used in the 

second field trial, uses a combination of Microsoft and 

Apple operating systems and hardware. Each gas detector 

operates on a fully-functional iPod Touch® while the 

control panel uses the Microsoft platform. 

The GMS gas detectors can display up to six different 

gases. However, only three gases methane (CH4), carbon 

monoxide (CO), and oxygen (O2) were selected for the 

mine rescue training exercises. The graphic displays on the 

detector can be designed to look similar to the display on 

any industrial or mining gas meter with the manufacturer’s 

permission. The hand-held detector has audio and visual 

alarms which emulates a real portable gas monitor device 

and gives the trainee a sense of how a portable gas monitor 

operates in the field under emergency situations. A 

vibration alarm feature could be an option if desired. 

The instructor controls the training session via a PC 

laptop control panel that wirelessly communicates to the 

gas detector device. As seen in Figure 2, the instructor 

enters gas concentrations for a specific location into the 

laptop (Step 1), sends the readings to the GMS device by 

means of a wireless local area network (LAN) (Step 2), 

and then the trainee (student) receives and reads the gas 

reading from the detector (Step 3). This process mimics 

actual gas detectors with continuous monitoring 

functionality; no buttons are pushed on the GMS to 

generate a gas reading. The simulated gas readings appear 

on the screen after being initiated by the GMS operator. 

The current instructor’s kit (one total system) can 

support up to eight simulated gas detectors communicating 

with one laptop. However, the wireless network can handle 

many systems. Thus, the exercise can be expanded to 

handle eight, sixteen, twenty-four or more trainees as 

needed by adding more laptops and gas detector devices. 

The instructor can change the air quality levels on each 

trainee’s device individually or all at the same time. 

The instructor also has the ability to send instant text 

messages for display on the trainee’s gas detector as a 

teaching instrument. These messages are expected to be 

shared among team members to learn and make informed 

decisions. For example, if a reading of 55 ppm CO is sent 

to the gas detector, followed by an instant message that 

reads “Mine rescue national rules require that an 

atmosphere containing more than 50 ppm of CO be treated 

as irrespirable,” the trainee would then be expected to 

know that above 50 ppm CO, he must don his breathing 

apparatus or justify alternative action. 

3 Field Trial One – April 2009 

3.1 Description of Exercise for Field Trial One 

The original GMS prototype developed for Field Trial One 

included an instructor’s PC control panel, a wireless router 

system, and several handheld devices. The instructor’s 

control panel was run on a durable laptop with a long 

battery life. The router acted as a base station for the GMS 

and additional wireless repeaters could be used to increase 

signal strength, if needed. The gas detector was a PDA 

running customized software and inserted inside a 

customized case to protect the PDAs from damage. 

Field Trial One was conducted at the Academy for 

Mine Training and Energy Technologies at Southern West 

Virginia Community and Technical College (SWVCTC) in 

Logan, WV. The exercise was held in the basement of a 

warehouse that was converted into a simulated coal mine. 

This area is divided by plywood interior walls for coal 

pillars. The mine layout is 3 entries wide by 4 crosscuts 

deep and had an average height of 1.52 m (60"). It is 

equipped with stoppings, mandoors, a hoist/elevator, mine 

fan, cribs, belt lines, and a working refuge chamber to 

create a nearly realistic mining environment. The entire 

building had both wireless and hard-wired communication 

systems. During the training exercise, the mine was filled 

with dense, non-toxic theatrical fog to simulate smoke 
 

making it very difficult to see anything more than 0.3 m 

(12") away. The mine rescue exercises were not timed 

events and lasted between three to four hours. In all, nine 

days were required to train seventeen different teams. The 

research objective was to determine if the GMS 

technology could be used by mine rescue teams instead of 

placards, whether the teams would accept the new device, 

and if its functionality was suitable, reliable, and practical. 

The purpose of the GMS was to provide gas 

concentration readings by utilizing the simulated gas 

detectors and not the typical printed cardboard gas 

placards. The gas man from each team was asked to attach 

the simulated gas meter to his/her person at chest level by 

means of a clip and retractor device. The retractor system 

allowed the gas man to take simulated gas readings near 

the roof, at chest level, and near the floor without losing 

the device in the fog if it was dropped. The emergency 

drill was designed so that as many as eight different, predetermined gas readings would be supplied to the gas man 

in lieu of the placards as he reached specific locations. The 

gas man was expected to share these readings with the 

team, at which time the captain, team, and/or command 

center would make decisions based on that information. 

Instant messages were to be utilized in conjunction with 

the gas readings during the exercises. 

Figure 2 GMS process with instructor, wireless LAN, and student. 

Preparation started by installing the GMS in the 

basement and testing the device operating characteristics. 

The most practical way to operate the GMS was to utilize 

two persons. One person with the laptop (representative 

from LightsOn SS) was located in a central room in the 

basement and the second person (a NIOSH researcher) 

followed the teams to identify their location and relay that 

information back to the laptop operator. Because visibility 

was limited, a thermal imaging camera was utilized by the 

second person. When a team arrived at pre-determined 

locations, the person with the team contacted the operator 

of the laptop via radio to initiate transmission of a new gas 

reading. This routine continued until the completion of the 

exercise. 

3.2 Discussion and Findings from Field Trial One 

Over the nine-day training period, a number of members 

from each mine rescue team were able to use the GMS to 

receive gas readings during the exercise and did not have 

to use gas placards. However, the system was not fully 

utilized as originally intended because of system and 

operational problems causing some delays and disruption 

to the mine rescue exercises. Challenges included the 

existence of competing wireless signals and frequent 

communication drop-outs with the laptop, the inability to 

automatically reconnect, highly-variable time periods 
between sending a reading from the laptop to receipt at the 

gas detector, the inability to send multiple gas readings 

simultaneously (only one gas concentration could be sent 

at a time), and unintentional GMS gas detector alarms. 

Therefore, the GMS gas detectors were not able to be 

attached to the gas man, but rather were handed to him by 

a NIOSH researcher when it was time to take a gas reading 

at a designated location. The detector was then returned to 

the researcher until it was time for the next gas reading and 

so forth throughout all of the exercises. In spite of the 

functional problems encountered, mine rescue team 

members endorsed the concept and accepted the GMS as a 

substitute for placards. 

NIOSH researchers identified thirteen enhancements, 

mostly software or system changes, that were necessary for 

the gas detector system to operate satisfactorily and 

minimize wireless communication problems. A research 

and development plan to incorporate these

recommendations was created and funding was provided 

by NIOSH for an improved GMS. 

4	 Field Trial Two – October 2009 

4.1	 Description of Exercise for Field Trial Two 

The operating system for Field Trial Two remained the 

same as the first except for a change in the electronic 

device for the GMS gas detector and the communication 

protocol. An iPod Touch device was used instead of a 

PDA. In addition, software enhancements were added to 

incorporate the thirteen NIOSH-recommended changes 

into the GMS. 

The second field trial was conducted in a simulated 

mine at the Mine Technology and Training Center 

(MTTC) located at Ruff Creek, PA. The mine area is 

constructed inside a 3,700 m2

 (40,000 ft

2

) metal building, 

with plywood interior walls supported on steel studs for 

coal pillars. The mine layout is slightly larger than used 

during field trial one; it utilizes 5 entries with 6 crosscuts 

with an average height of 2.13 m (84") and is designed to 

replicate an underground coal mining environment. The 

building has only hard-wired communication systems. 

Theatrical fog was not used. However, the mine rescue 

exercises were timed events as part of a mine rescue 

contest and had a maximum duration of three hours. 

As in Field Trial One, the gas man attached the 

simulated gas meter to his/her person at chest level by 

means of a clip and retractor device. The contest was 

designed so that thirteen, pre-determined gas readings 

were sent to the gas man at specific locations. The gas man 

was expected to share these readings with the team and 

then the captain, team, and/or command center would 

make decisions based on that information. The research 

objective again was to evaluate viability of the technology 

and determine if the GMS could be integrated into mine 

rescue contests without a long learning curve, disruptions, 

or distractions. Six teams competed over three days. 

On the eve of the MTTC training, the GMS system was 

installed and tested as in Field Trial One. At first, two 

people were needed to operate the GMS. More numerous 

and rapid gas readings had to be sent compared to the Field 

Trial One which required one researcher to identify the 

team location on the mine the map and provide the 

appropriate gas readings to the second person who then 

operated the laptop. The two operators kept in close 

proximity to the team. After operators became more 

proficient, only one person was needed to operate the 

GMS throughout the exercise. 

4.2	 Discussions and Finding from Field Trial Two 

The second GMS prototype as used in Field Trial Two was 

more user-friendly when compared to that used in Field 

Trial One. On each of the three days, twenty-six gas 

readings (13 per exercise) were sent using the GMS. The 

gas man received the gas readings and the system was 

fully utilized as intended. Multiple gas readings (CO, CH4, 

and O2) were sent simultaneously and the GMS signal 

transmission time from the laptop to gas detector was less 

than one second. There were no system errors over the 

three days. However, four erroneous readings were sent 

because of human error. Instant messages, used as a 

coaching method, were sent at opportune times and team 

members acknowledged the messages and shared the 

specifics with each other. 

Beyond implementing the GMS into the mine rescue 

exercise, NIOSH researchers evaluated the system to 

identify some features that could make the GMS more 

user-friendly. These recommendations will be incorporated 

into the next phase of research. However, the second GMS 

prototype functioned as a stand-alone system, the mine 

rescue team gas men learned to use it quickly and 

intuitively, the use of the device stimulated team 

discussions of the gas reading implications within the 

contest exercise, and the system performed reliably during 

the second field trial. One trainer group was sufficiently 

impressed with the realism that the GMS devices brought 

to the contest, that they initiated discussions to purchase a 

system for training in their facilities. 

5	 Future Work In Simulated Gas Detector 

Research 

Research to date has demonstrated that a simulated gas 

detector system could replace printed gas placards in mine 

rescue contests and training drills, improve realism for the 

miners, stimulate discussions of the mine environment, and 

better evaluate a team’s understanding of this knowledge. 

Anecdotal data from field trial participants revealed a 

preponderance of positive feedback regarding the GMS 

and the desire for this technology to replace gas placards 

altogether. The responses also show a desire for more 

technologies and training tools that enhance learning and 

realism. 

A second phase is being planned to improve 

repeatability and automation of the coordinated gas 

readings that are currently manually controlled. The 

research objectives for this work would expand upon the 
GMS messaging functions to make it more interactive, 

offer training validation, have tracking ability, and be able 

to operate automatically during exercises without operator 

assistance. In-the-field testing will be offered to evaluate 

trainee’s knowledge of various gas detection subjects. The 

ability to record the trainee’s identity, training date, and 

starting/ending times will also be incorporated. Multiplechoice tests will be developed in which trainees respond by 

selecting an answer that is recorded into the GMS 

database. Subsequent field tests can be given to evaluate 

student comprehension changes. Printed reports of the 

training activities and test results can be used to assess and 

track the trainee’s level of knowledge and understanding. 

Future efforts would examine how tracking and 

locating devices could be incorporated into the GMS 

system. For example, RFID tags or pseudo GPS markers 

could be used to notify the GMS when teams are 

positioned in a specific location. This tracking feature 

could trigger the GMS to automatically send a gas reading 

when teams arrive at specified locations and record their 

locations on a map (which is pre-programmed into the 

GMS). In the application for mine rescue contests, this 

feature would ensure that every exercise is reproducible so 

that each team has the same experience without the 

potential for human error when timing and transmitting gas 

readings. It would also eliminate the issue of determining 

team locations in the poor visibility encountered during 

simulated smoke training exercises. 

6 Conclusions 

NIOSH evaluated two versions of the simulated gas 

detector during separate field trials with mine rescue teams 

during training and contest situations that showed a 

progression in technology and practicality. Results from 

the second field trial demonstrated improvements with the 

GMS over the original prototype technology used in the 

first field trial, especially in regards to wireless and 

connectivity issues. The GMS was successfully 

incorporated into the mine rescue exercises as planned 

with very few problems encountered. Over a three day 

period, there were seventy-four out of seventy-eight 

successful gas readings sent to the GMS gas detectors. The 

GMS instant messaging feature was used to offer 

additional learning opportunities to the teams. 

Right now, the GMS is an available training tool that 

provides more realism and engagement to mine rescue 

team members than the practice of using cardboard 

placards. In response to feedback from GMS users and 

mine rescue trainers, research that will offer advanced 

teaching tools and introduce tracking and automation 

features is being considered. 

Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this report 

have not been formally disseminated by the National 

Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and should 

not be construed to represent any agency determination or 

policy. 

Acknowledgement 

The first and second field trials would not have been 

possible without the cooperation of the staff and mine 

rescue team members from Academy for Mine Training 

and Energy Technologies at the Southern West Virginia 

Community and Technical College, Mine Technology and 

Training Center, Mine Safety and Health Administration, 

CONSOL Energy Inc., Pennsylvania State mine rescue, 

and mining companies that form the Pennsylvania state 

mine rescue teams. 

References 

Bealko, S.B., Alexander, D.W., Chasko, L.L. & Grayson, R.L. 

(2009). A global inventory of mine rescue training facilities: 

compendium of ideas to improve U.S. coal mine rescue 

training. In SME Annual Meeting and Exhibit Preprint 09-

101. Littleton, CO: Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and 

Exploration, Inc. 

Mine Safety Technology and Training Commission (MST & TC) 

(2006). Improving mine safety technology and training: 

establishing U.S. global leadership. National Mining 

Association. Available at: http://www.coalminingsafety. 

org/documents/ msttc_report.pdf. 

MSHA Mine Rescue Rules (2008), Federal Register (30 CFR, 

Part 49). Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health 

Administration, June 17, 2009, 74(115):28606-28609. 

Alexander, D.W., Bealko, S.B., Brnich, M.J., KowalskiTrakofler, K.M. & Peters, R.H. (2010). Research Report on 

Strategies for Escape and Rescue from Underground Coal 

Mines. Pittsburgh, PA: U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) (in print).