A Study On Industrial Iot For The Mining Industry: Synthesized Architecture and Open Research Directions
A Study On Industrial Iot For The Mining Industry: Synthesized Architecture and Open Research Directions
A Study On Industrial Iot For The Mining Industry: Synthesized Architecture and Open Research Directions
Review
A Study on Industrial IoT for the Mining Industry:
Synthesized Architecture and Open
Research Directions
Abdullah Aziz *, Olov Schelén and Ulf Bodin
Department of Computer Science, Electrical and Space Engineering, Luleå University of Technology,
971 87 Luleå, Sweden; Olov.Schelen@ltu.se (O.S.); Ulf.Bodin@ltu.se (U.B.)
* Correspondence: abdullah.aziz@ltu.se
Received: 6 November 2020; Accepted: 8 December 2020; Published: 10 December 2020
Abstract: The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) has the potential to improve the production and
business processes by enabling the extraction of valuable information from industrial processes.
The mining industry, however, is rather traditional and somewhat slow to change due to
infrastructural limitations in communication, data management, storage, and exchange of information.
Most research efforts so far on applying IIoT in the mining industry focus on specific concerns such as
ventilation monitoring, accident analysis, fleet and personnel management, tailing dam monitoring,
and pre-alarm system while an overall IIoT architecture suitable for the general conditions in the
mining industry is still missing. This article analyzes the current state of Information Technology in
the mining sector and identifies a major challenge of vertical fragmentation due to the technological
variety of various systems and devices offered by different vendors, preventing interoperability,
data distribution, and the exchange of information securely between devices and systems. Based on
guidelines and practices from the major IIoT standards, a high-level IIoT architecture suitable for the
mining industry is then synthesized and presented, addressing the identified challenges and enabling
smart mines by automation, interoperable systems, data distribution, and real-time visibility of the
mining status. Remote controlling, data processing, and interoperability techniques of the architecture
evolve all stages of mining from prospecting to reclamation. The adoption of such IIoT architecture in
the mining industry offers safer mine site for workers, predictable mining operations, interoperable
environment for both traditional and modern systems and devices, automation to reduce human
intervention, and enables underground surveillance by converging operational technology (OT) and
information technology (IT). Significant open research challenges and directions are also studied and
identified in this paper, such as mobility management, scalability, virtualization at the IIoT edge,
and digital twins.
Keywords: IIoT; mining industry; industrial standards; industry 4.0; industrial edge computing;
edge virtualization
1. Introduction
The Internet of Things (IoT) is a technological paradigm imagined as a global network where
devices or machines can interact [1]. IoT is acting as a technological revolution influencing all
application domains including smart home, smart cities, agriculture, automobiles, health-care,
industrial production, and transport [2,3]. It is estimated that there will be 50 to 100 billion smart things
and objects connected to the Internet by 2020 [4–6]. In this context, industries are being challenged to
rethink their production processes with the potential to spark innovations in production systems on an
unprecedented scale [7].
The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), which is an application of IoT in industry, is part of
the Industry 4.0 concept, which emphasizes the idea of consistent digitization and the connectivity
of all productive units [8], combining the strengths of the traditional industry with internet
technologies [9,10]. The Industrial Internet may also be considered as a convergence of Information
Technology (IT) and Operational Technology (OT) as shown in Figure 1. IIoT is the network of
physical objects, or things, embedded with electronics, sensors, and connectivity to enable that
network to achieve greater value and service by exchanging data with the manufacturer, operator,
and/or other connected devices [11]. Currently, many IoT technologies are integrated into consumer
applications, such as smart homes, connected cars, and smart wearables. The industrial applications
of IoT, or Industrial IoT (IIoT), however, are anticipated to have the capability to transform many
industries, including manufacturing, oil and gas, agriculture, and mining [12].
Figure 1. Operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT) = Industrial Internet of
Things (IIoT).
The scope of this research is the adoption of IIoT in the mining industry, specifically in the case of
underground mining. The complexity and specific challenges in this industry include: heterogeneity
where each mine has a different layout depending on the natural conditions, heavy transportation
in combination with very confined spaces, wireless communication across shafts and stopes not
possible, repeated blasting where devices would be destroyed unless moved every time, face drilling
that changes the layout continuously, the need for fail-over and autonomous operations to ensure
production and safety through catastrophic failures, etc. These challenges are further accentuated by
the need for continuous production of large volumes of extracted ore to reached targeted goals set to
ensure profitability in production. Other types of industries may be able to catch up after a stop in
production, while in mining lost production can typically not be recovered by an increased phase of
operations. The unique combination of these conditions is a motivation for the study. In particular,
it is motivated by the complexity in terms of the need for flexible and adaptable IIoT systems to cope
with the continuous change in topology and use of equipment and machines combined with the need
to ensure production and safety although connectivity may occasionally fail.
In this paper, we study the current practices of information technology (IT) in the mining
industry and find a major challenge of interoperability between various systems and devices.
Interoperability [13] is a characteristic in an architecture where different systems or devices can
communicate with other systems and devices to exchange, understand, and make use of the
information. The article also presents the study of the architectural models and features of some generic
IIoT frameworks, synthesizes them in the perspective of requirements from the mining industry,
and identifies the futuristic challenges and open issues. With the advancements in information
technology, the mining industry is increasing its adoption of digital and technology solutions.
IoT 2020, 1 531
The primary purpose of this adoption is to achieve cost and productivity based optimal solutions,
increase safety measures, and developing their intelligent systems. Mostly mining companies are
gathering data by the use of sensors and mobile telemetry to facilitate operational managers to
improve operational efficiency. These adoptions are mainly carrying by individual mining companies
to fulfill their specific needs and not well standardized for global adoption in the mining industry.
The operations and workflow of the mining industry are different than other industries such as
manufacturing, agriculture, and transportation industries, etc.
Boliden AB [14] is a Swedish mining and smelting company focusing on the production of
copper, zinc, lead, gold, and silver. They are among the leaders in the digitalization [15] of mining
operations and are therefore representative as a base for state-of-the-art. The overall strategy of
Boliden is to create profitable growth adapting to recent trends in the market and investments in
competitiveness and organic growth; and by evaluating opportunities for acquisitions. For data
derived processes the insights and decisions are getting increasingly important. Many mining sites
have in pockets highly mature proprietary systems, but when it comes to interoperability with different
systems or information sharing among departments or stakeholders, analytics capabilities, modern
IIoT practices, and architecture, there is need for improvements. A strategy has been set and several
projects are ongoing such as reporting and visualization of processes data, setting up a production
data platform for mines, ideas on a common data platform for smelters as well as activities coordinate
by the automation’s programs. Historically, Boliden is operating in a decentralized model, and in the
reporting and analytics field, the business areas and sites have started loosely coordinated activities.
In addition, to obtain extendable and scalable systems, there is a need to analyze the industrial
standards and practices and put them into a mining industry perspective.
The industrial IoT standards and initiatives are evolving and many industries are getting benefits
(e.g., increase efficiency, reduce errors, predictive maintenance, improve safety, and reduce cost) [16]
from the industrial IoT standards and guidelines such as the manufacturing industry [17,18], healthcare,
smart cities [19], and transportation [20]. The focus of this article is to investigate the possibility to
apply IIoT in the mining industry whether these standards and initiatives give guidelines that can
benefit the mining industry. Moreover, this study shows how these standard guidelines can help to
address the current challenges in the mining industry such as the interoperability problem due to
vertical fragmentation, data distribution, and the exchange of information securely.
The remaining sections of the paper can be grouped as background study (Sections 3 and 4),
related work of IoT in the mining industry in Section 5, and our contributions (Sections 6–9). This article
targets the readers from the two different domains of information technology and mining engineering
therefore covers the background study for both. A reader from mining engineering who knows the
mining life cycle can skip through Section 3. Similarly, a reader from the information technology
domain who already knows the listed IIoT standards and related initiatives can skip through Section 4.
Whereas the main contributions are as follows:
• We describe the current IT practices in the mining industry and identify the challenges (Section 6).
• We use the guidelines and key considerations from the industrial IoT standards and initiatives to
synthesize a high-level IIoT architecture for the mining industry (Section 7), and the reflections of
the architecture (Section 8).
• Finally, we analyze and identify some futuristic IIoT challenges and some possible future work
directions (Section 9), and conclude the manuscript (Section 10).
2. Research Methodology
Our research aims to improve the adoption of IIoT in the mining industry by synthesizing
a high-level architecture, using the guidelines of the industrial standards, and meeting the
specific challenges in the mining industry. Thus, qualitative synthesis was used as the research
methodology [21,22].
IoT 2020, 1 532
Boliden is a leading Swedish mining and smelting company and known to be in the forefront
of digitization and automation of mining [15]. Therefore, to study the present use of IIoT in mining,
we chose to work with them. The IT team of Boliden demonstrated their current IT practices (Section 6)
where standalone commercial solutions and systems operate in isolation without interworking with
other systems. Therefore, manual information exchange between those systems by human intervention
is a common practice.
To address these challenges we performed a literature study (Section 5) and found out that there
are various IoT solutions in the mining industry that are specific to one problem, forming vertical
silos in the mining industry. Further investigation to this problem revealed that the existing IoT
solutions are not following the standard guidelines, and to make them interoperable there is a need for
a standard-based IIoT architecture for the mining industry.
Our research selected a set of industrial standards (Section 4) providing industrial automation,
interoperability between different legacy and modern systems, real-time analytics at the edge for
continuous and safe mining operations, business analytics, distributed data management across various
mine sites, information exchange between departments and stakeholders, and security. A synthesized
high-level architecture is then presented (Section 7) which addresses the identified challenges of the
mining industry.
Exploitation
Large-scale production of ore
3.1. Prospecting
Prospecting, the first stage in the utilization of a mineral deposit is the search for ores or other
valuable minerals (coal or nonmetallic). Because mineral deposits may be located either at or below
the surface of the earth, both direct and indirect prospecting techniques are employed.
IoT 2020, 1 533
3.2. Exploration
The second stage in the life of a mine, exploration, determines as accurately as possible the
size and value of a mineral deposit, utilizing techniques similar to but more refined than those used
in prospecting.
3.3. Development
In the third stage, development, the work of opening a mineral deposit for exploration is
performed. With it begins the actual mining of the deposit, now called the ore.
3.4. Exploitation
Exploitation, the fourth stage of mining, is associated with the actual recovery of minerals from
the earth in quantity. Although development may continue the emphasis in the production stage is on
production. Usually, only enough development is done before exploitation to ensure that production,
once started, can continue uninterrupted throughout the life of the mine.
3.5. Reclamation
The final stage in the operation of most mines is reclamation, the process of closing a mine and
re-contouring, re-vegetating, and restoring the water and land values. The best time to begin the
reclamation process of a mine is before the first excavations are initiated. In other words, mine planning
engineers should plan the mine so that the reclamation process is considered and the overall cost of
mining plus reclamation is minimized, not just the cost of mining itself.
4.1. IIRA
Industrial Internet Reference Architecture (IIRA) [24] started in 2014 and gives guidelines to
construct industrial internet systems. It describes a standard open architecture framework that helps to
design industrial internet systems with modern capabilities. It characterizes conventional architectural
concerns and organizes them into the four viewpoints: business, usage, functional, and implementation.
IIRA states that the functional domain is the most important part to consider for an IIoT system which
describes five-layers as follows:
• Business layer: this layer provides the functions to allow end-to-end industrial operations such as
work planning, scheduling, enterprise resource planning(ERP), and life cycle management.
• Application layer: it provides the functions to allow the execution of some task or goal by
implementing the actual application logic such as application programming interface, and user
interface, etc.
• Information layer: this layer offers functionalities to collect and store data and semantics,
transforming and analyzing data, data provisioning, and deployment.
• Operations layer: this layer provides functions for assets to operate properly during the life-cycle.
It is also responsible for asset deployment, configuration, diagnosis, and update.
• Control Layer: functions of this layer provides the control of industrial assets such as sensors,
actuators, and communication.
industrial assets from the shop floor to the office floor with SOA-based services and applications in the
manufacturing industry. It does not provide a detailed methodology of technical implementation but
identifies the manufacturing industry standards that are analyzed in [25]. The core specifications of
RAMI 4.0 was published in [26] and applied to the field of linked data in [27]. Both RAMI 4.0 and IIC’s
IIRA provide reference architectures for industrial systems and the comparison of both architectures is
published in the joint whitepaper [28].
4.3. oneM2M
oneM2M [29,30] was formed in 2012 and it is an initiative of eight leading ICT standards
organization: European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) from Europe; Association
of Radio Industries and Businesses (ARIB) and Telecommunication Technology Committee
(TTC) from Japan; China Communications Standards Association (CCSA) from China; Alliance
for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS); Telecommunications Standards Development
Society (TSDSI) from India and Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) from the USA;
and Telecommunications Technology Association (TTA) from Korea. The goal of oneM2M is to
define a horizontal service layer [31] to provide a way to connect and communicate with different IoT
systems. Different vendors offer IoT systems unable to inter-work with other IoT systems and forms
vertical pipes causing fragmentation in the market. The oneM2M horizontal layered architecture [32]
addressing this problem by reducing the vertical fragmentation in the market [33]. A joint paper [34]
was written by IIC and oneM2M which maps the IIRA and oneM2M in detail and provides the future
directions for both organizations.
5. Related Work
There are only a few academic efforts and studies available to apply IoT and modern technology
in the mining industry. In [42], researchers investigated IIoT applications to identify the challenges
of the mining industry and determined whether an underground mine is capable of supporting IIoT
systems or not. A review of digital transformation in mining [43] presented the foundational parts as
ubiquitous data, connectivity, and decision making. An IIoT and Advanced Analytics framework is
proposed in [44], it provides a layered architecture for analytics to be used as a guide and facilitator for
the adoption of IIoT in the mining industry.
Various research efforts tried to solve specific problems in the mining industry by introducing
IoT such as gas monitoring system [45] and employee positioning system [46] in the coal mine.
Other pieces of work tailors dam monitoring and pre-alarm system in mines [47], tracking of
equipment for maintenance [48], improving machine safety [49], accident analysis system [50], oxygen
concentration system [51], fleet and personnel management system [52], ventilation monitoring
system [53], and underground mine air quality pollutant prediction system [54].
IoT 2020, 1 535
The IoT architecture and technology is presented in [55] to enable the creation of a digital
mining platform highlighting the exploration of rock–fluid–environment, new opportunities for
IoT implementations are offered in discovering new mineral infrastructure, better tailings disposal,
tracking and prevention of mining pollution. Explored also are the cutting edge innovations which
could be leveraged to build the state-of-the-art sustainable IoT mining model.
Many commercial solutions are available in the market for the mining industry and most of which
are discussed and evaluated in [56]. Moreover, Ref. [57] also described the application of industry 4.0
in the mining industry by the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) perspective and introduces the
semi-smart mine, while only focusing on industrial integration paradigms. An IP-based multimodel
sensing platform for realizing the vision of IoT in underground coal mines is developed and described
in [58]. It is a Zigbee-based wireless sensor network (WSN) initially established and extended to IoT
with IP enabled gateway.
The academic literature clearly shows that the pace of implementation of industrial internet
in the mining industry is slower. In addition, the solutions to solve specific problems shown in the
literature do create a challenge of interoperability between various solutions. There is a need for an IIoT
architecture for the mining industry that allows the smooth interoperability to exchange information
from the mine sites towards the operational units and office floor. Moreover, the architecture should
follow the guidelines of the industrial standards designed by standard bodies and adopted by a large
number of vendors. To address this research gap, this study synthesizes an IIoT architecture by using
the guidelines of the industrial standards for the mining industry.
The analytics and machine learning components are also needed for better operations and benefits
for the mining industry. For analytics Microsoft Azure is in use which gets data from the data lake,
OSIsoft, ABB by importing excel sheets.
As shown in Figure 3, all these systems, and applications are not able to interoperate.
These commercial systems have their individual technology stack and data formats, hence one system
can interoperate with another system of the same provider but unable to interoperate with a different
provider. This causes a big hurdle for applying industrial internet paradigms in the mining industry
and slows production.
Clouds
Interface
Assets
There are various challenges to achieve interoperability and communication between different
systems in the mining industry. As shown in Figure 3 the current state of the systems in the
mining industry is as vertical pipes. The mining industry is facing various key challenges which are
summarized as follows:
• Technological Variety: the development of IIoT based system is based on five main technologies:
wireless sensor network (WSN), radio frequency identification (RFID), cloud computing,
middleware/gateways, and IIoT application software [1]. Moreover, there are various already
deployed systems that are based on a different set of technologies.
• Possession of data: the matter of data possession or the ownership of data is an important
challenge not only in the mining industry but across many other industries. Industries usually
tend to keep the data as well as the information to interpret the data. The owner is typically the
one who generates the data, but the system provider collects the data from various customers
and can identify the trends by analyzing it.
• Data distribution between legacy systems: in the mining industry, data is distributed across
different legacy platforms and systems that causing problems to gather the information for
analytics and further operations.
• Security: IIoT enables various systems and applications to communicate with each other and open
up various security threats. The communication channels should be secure, IIoT devices become
more vulnerable to various attacks such as DDoS. Moreover, the rules for data governance and
specific security planning is needed.
• Data Management: In the IIoT environment, devices and assets produce data which then store
into the central data layer which later use by analytics applications. There are various data sources
in the mining industry such as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, PIMS, Manufacturing
Execution Systems (MES), and many legacies IT systems. In this scenario, data management is
a challenging task that requires the use of data lakes, migration, master data, and replication.
This challenge becomes worst when there are different cloud providers involved, which is the
typical case in the mining industry.
IoT 2020, 1 537
• Analytics: the analytics in the mining industry have added importance compared to the
other industries because of the heavy machinery, human force, mill functions, and stockpiles.
The operation managers need better insights into the processes and machines, so they can detect
issues and act accordingly. There is also a need for edge analytics at the mine sites which targets
mostly the operations, but analytics also needs on the office floor for business trends and needs.
Moreover, all of the industrial standards and reference architectures described in Section 4 are
trying to address the challenges in industries in general. These standards are providing the guidelines
and best practices to design and develop a solution for a specific use-case. Certainly, we cannot directly
apply these standards and reference architecture to fulfill the requirements in the mining industry,
although these standards can guide us to design an architecture for the mining industry.
Key Considerations
IIRA’s viewpoints to investigate into mining industry.
IIRA IIRA’s functional domains to categories the domains in the mining industry.
IIRA’s crosscutting functions necessary for the mining industry.
Six-layers of RAMI 4.0 guidelines to investigate into mining industry layered architecture approach.
RAMI 4.0 The crosscutting functions necessary for the mining industry.
The administration shell of RAMI 4.0 to categorize control and operation domain.
oneM2M’s common service entity as information domain.
Data management & Repository for information domain.
oneM2M Group management for information domain in the mining industry for different departments & stakeholders.
Subscription and Notification for information domain.
Security consideration for information domain.
The concept of local clouds for the edge of mining sites.
Arrowhead
Security consideration for the automation at the control and operation domain.
Framework
The orchestration mechanism at the control and operation domain.
The layered architecture is shown in Figure 4 and divided into five domains. Each mine site
consists of two domains such as the edge control domain and the edge operational domain. Information
and analytics domains can also deploy on-site in a single mine site at the edge or off-site at the cloud.
The off-site information domain at the cloud is connected to all mine sites and domains above that.
Furthermore, the analytics domain, business and application domain reside on top of the information
domain. The flow of information, commands/requests, and decisions are also shown in Figure 4 with
different arrows. The detailed descriptions of each domain are as follows.
IoT 2020, 1 538
Crosscutting Functions
Business &
Application
Analytics Presentation APIs
Domain
CRM, ERP, HRM, Billing & Payments
Management
Information
Repository Notifications
Domain
Group
Data Management
Semantics
& Repository
Edge Gateway
Provisioning &
Prognostics Optimization
Deployment
OT Software IT Software
Provisioning and Deployment comprise a collection of functions required for the configuration,
onboarding, registration, and monitoring of assets and the deployment and retirement of assets.
Asset management consists of a set of functions allowing assets management centers or systems to
send commands to the control systems, then from the control systems to the assets. These commands
are bi-directional so the assets can respond to these commands back to the asset management centers.
Monitoring and diagnostics are responsible for the detection and prediction of problem
occurrences. This is responsible for real-time analysis of asset core performance metrics, intelligence-
based gathering, and processing of asset safety data so that it can detect the true source of a problem,
and then warn about suspicious conditions and anomalies.
In mining operations, prognostics are really important and comprise the collection of tasks that
the IIoT systems provide as a predictive analytics driver. It relies on historical evidence about asset
activity and efficiency, asset property in engineering and physics, and knowledge about modeling.
Optimization consists of a series of functions that enhance the efficiency and performance of
assets, minimize energy usage, and maximize the quality and production in accordance with how the
assets are used. By recognizing output gaps and inefficiencies it helps maintain assets operate at their
peak performance.
Furthermore, at the mine site, there is an edge gateway that is responsible for real-time edge
analytics and the data formatter. The edge gateway is also responsible for the connectivity and
interoperability between various vertical solutions, which we will discuss later in this paper. The key
thing to mention here is that the data formatter will convert all the data from the operation and control
domain in a form understandable for the information domain.
common grammar so the participating systems can decide upon an ontology model to communicate
with each other.
(a) (b)
• Broker Based: the broker method as shown in Figure 5b, analogous to utilizing a translator
between two separate language speakers. The broker approach works fairly well with a limited
number of communicating parties. Perhaps it is the best way to allow communication between
parties, where they were previously designed with separate requirements and now feel the need to
IoT 2020, 1 541
interact. Moreover, a broker-based approach is also feasible for sharing the data where one system
only wants some specific information from another system. In this scenario, a PubSub based
broker can act as a middle-ware between these systems, and whenever the event or data occurs in
a system the broker notifies the other system who is interested in that data and already subscribed.
• Common Meta-Model: the common meta-model approach as shown in Figure 5a, needs foresight
for architecture interoperability as the communicating parties must be produced using the
standard meta-model and interfaces decided upon. There are several directions to achieve
common meta-models and agreed-upon interfaces. The predominant strategies include common
specification, common modules, standard-based open-source built, open-source frameworks,
and closed ecosystem framework.
In the context of the mining industry, Boliden is also facing the same problem of vertical silos.
To overcome the hurdle of data sharing between different verticals Boliden designs a solution based on
a broker-based interoperability model. An MQTT-based broker is designed and placed in between the
already deployed systems by various vendors. The reason for choosing the MQTT as the middle-ware
is that it is open source and has a rich inventory of libraries to work with different technologies.
There are specific topics registered in the broker and the source systems publish data to the topic in the
broker. On the other hand, all the listeners subscribe to the specific topic, and whenever a new event
comes broker broadcast the data to all the listeners. Moreover, the broker also implemented a data
formatter that translates the data according to the source and destination platforms.
communications, such as encryption and authentication. The overall security of an IIoT system of
the mining industry is based on how these systems have implemented the security and how securely
they are integrated. As a whole, the secure and trustworthy system depends on a collection of certain
features such as.
• Safety: safety is the state of the system functioning without creating an inappropriate possibility
of human injury to people working in the mines. Traditional OT safety-assessment approaches
concentrate on physical objects and procedures and then integrate the chances of calculated
element failure into overall system risk. Risk analysis to detect risks aims at avoiding erroneous
procedures and enhancing system tolerance to unpredictable incidents. Whereas a software
component behaves exactly as programmed, but adversaries can exploit security-related
systematic vulnerabilities. A remote attacker is able to exploit weaknesses in the connected
systems of mines to drive a device into an insecure state e.g., an autonomous vehicle, so it is
important to use safety regulations and practices.
• Security: the security of the system is a continuous behavior and not a Boolean state. No IIoT
system can continue to act securely in any scenario so it is necessary to clearly indicate the
specific circumstances considered important along with the secure behavior that is expected by
the stakeholders. Confidentiality, integrity, and availability acronym as CIA, are the characteristics
that need to be maintained to provide security. However, availability added the most value in
operational technologies, followed by integrity, with confidentiality being usually the last concern,
eventually leads to the acronym AIC (also recognized as the security triad).
• Reliability: reliability is the capacity of a device or system to execute its necessary tasks for a
given period of time, under certain requirements. The reliability of the system can be enhanced
by analyzing which reliability facets an attacker might influence and implement the system and
its security to overcome those attacks.
• Privacy: privacy is an individual or group’s right to control what information relating to it may be
retrieved, analyzed, and processed and by whom and to whom it may be revealed. Privacy relies
on whether the stakeholders intend the information to be secure or restricted from other purposes,
which are legally necessary. It is important to remain up to date with laws and guidelines, such as
the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
• Resilience: resilience is the evolving ability of a system that acts in a way that prevents, absorbs,
and handles dynamic adversarial situations while executing the allocated tasks, and reconstitutes
the operational functionalities after causality. When a single function fails, it does not force other
functions to fail, so alternative forms to execute the failed task in the system should be available
which can be executed instantly, quickly, and consistently.
which cause vertical fragmentation, hence the data transfer and communication between various
systems and devices within a mine or among several mines become challenging.
This work studies the mining industry and related IIoT standards to synthesized a high-level
IIoT architecture shown in Figure 4 which can benefit the mining industry. The layered architecture
addresses the current challenges in the mining industry by offering a remotely controlled, automated,
and interoperable environment to improve communication, data access, and data management.
The architecture considers each mine site as an IIoT edge, which addresses all serious and complex
issues by local edge gateway, name a few as asset management, monitoring and diagnosis, provisioning
and deployment, and interoperability between different systems and devices. The information domain
facilitates to improve data access by different systems, departments, and stakeholders. On top of the
information domain, analytics performs fast and efficient data analysis to help determine business
decisions to improve productivity as well as operational decisions at the edge to be aware of various
risks. The predictability of mining operations and potential risks in the mining industry can also be
achieved by analytics. Both information and analytics domains can be on-site within the mine or
off-site in the cloud accessible by all departments and stakeholders securely. This IIoT architecture can
also make mining companies smarter and more productive while enhancing the logistics processes
and better customer relations by business application.
Moreover, the crosscutting functions describe in the architecture address many other challenges in
the mining industry such as security, data distribution among different departments and stakeholders,
possession of data, safety, privacy, and resiliency which are missing in the literature and other related
work. The adoption of such IIoT architecture in the mining industry offers safer mine site for workers,
predictable mining operations, advanced automation and operations of machines, interoperable
environment for both traditional and modern systems and devices, automation to reduce human
intervention, improving efficiency, ensuring worker and equipment safety and visibility, decreasing
operational costs, reducing energy expenditure, and enables underground surveillance by converging
operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT).
The resulted synthesized high-level IIoT architecture addresses the identified challenges in the
mining industry. When starting new mine site operations, this architecture should be possible to adopt.
However, there are impediments for adoption in ongoing mining operations since they are continuous
and pauses cannot be afforded. It is also difficult to seamlessly change the operational and information
technologies that are currently in action. Furthermore, introducing IIoT in the mining industry brings
many new challenges as described in the next Section 9.
needed for the connectivity of these “N” nodes is N ( N − 1)/2. Moreover, integration is also a key
challenge in the mining industry where it is really hard to achieve horizontal integration between
departments of the mining industry such as exploration, operations, and management departments.
The end-to-end integration between various stakeholders is also required. The mines are complex
in nature where it is really difficult to deploy brokers and establish strong communication channels.
There is ongoing research to solve the interoperability challenges in other industries [60], which can
also facilitate to address the same problem in the mining industry.
9.2. Scalability
IIoT is supposed to pose several problems due to the possible unbounded amount of
communicating actors. The worst case is that millions of possible event failures come with a wide scale
of devices. Industrial systems must equip themselves with scalable infrastructures that are ready for
expansion. In the future, many devices will be installed which will be mobile and constraint, so the IIoT
solution needs to be adaptive and scalable to accommodate many devices. The mine sites are really big
in the area and have many IoT devices deployed for various purposes. These devices and applications
are mainly connected and controlled by some edge nodes. The modern mines are equipped with
many robotic systems, autonomous vehicles, and drones for various operations. The edge of the mines
should be able to scale up and down the number of devices and applications according to the needs
e.g., there is a lot of material to take out for some reason from the mine so the edge node can scale the
number of autonomous vehicles and robots to speed this process. The convergence of blockchain and
edge computing can provide ways to address scalability challenges in IIoT [61].
9.3. Flexibility
As there are several IIoT applications, service provisioning to the various IIoT applications
has been quite difficult according to their demands. IIoT consumers typically require on-the-move
applications that are continuously optimized, personalized, value-added, and autonomous. The best
way to design an IIoT solution effectively that expands and helps the organization to integrate different
applications is to utilize a flexible architecture that will evolve into the future. In the context of the
mining industry, the mine sites are dynamic in nature with various risks. For example, there is an
alert for some accidents in the mine so the IoT devices and systems should be flexible to adapt the
changes according to the needs. The manufacturers or the designers of IoT devices and applications
need to develop flexibility into their products as the firmware updates not only facilitate customization
upon initial deployment at a mine site but also allow new functions to be installed or update remotely
without bringing them into in lab. A container-based flexible solution for industrial operations can
address this issue such as described in [62] for industrial control applications.
According to the recent survey [75], the digital twin has 12 main properties in the context
of IoT such as representativeness and contextualization, reflection, replication, entanglement,
persistency, memorization, composability, accountability/manageability, augmentation, ownership,
servitization, and predictability. Whereas, some typical scenarios of digital twin usage are design
and consolidation of products, prediction and simulation of the behavior, servitization of a physical
product, and its augmentation.
In mining, the concept of digital twin provides a replica of a physical mine in a virtual environment
to simulate and execute plans in the virtual model and helps to make value-driven decisions. It can help
to conduct “what if” analysis to test various process methods such as blasting, crushing, and conveying
to better understand the outcomes. Moreover, the simulation gives better insights to make it possible
to predict and prevent failures of the assets in the mine sites.
10. Conclusions
The IIoT is a source and enabler of industrial automation, and opens possibilities for important
insights applicable in several business areas. Together with Boliden we explore the mining life-cycle
and analyze the current IT practices in the mining industry to identify various challenges which
can address by applying a suitable IIoT architecture in the mining industry. We use the guidelines
given by global IIoT standards and related initiatives to synthesize an IIoT architecture for the mining
industry to address the existing challenges. The synthesized IIoT architecture can apply to bridge
the technical gaps of interoperability and exchange of data that exist in the mining environment.
The implementation of such high-level architecture can be made possible by considering various
technologies such as OT/IT applications, IoT devices, cloud computing, edge computing, middlewares,
big data, and business applications.
The article also listed significant open research issues and future directions for researchers.
The open research challenges clearly depict that edge and fog computing is the most challenging layer
for the mining industry and the same is true for various industrial sectors. The above-mentioned
challenges for the edge can be addressed with the advancements in the virtualization techniques
for edge computing. The virtualization-based solution in the edge computing for deployment,
orchestration, updates, and upgrades are highly needed. Not only the mining industry but almost
all the industries are quite complex at the edge with the advancement of IoT based micro-services,
and systems. There are a great number of solutions available for cloud computing orchestration
and deployment of services, but a standard or concrete solution targeting the same problem for the
edge/fog does not exist.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.A.; methodology, A.A; writing—original draft preparation, A.A.;
writing—review and editing, O.S. and U.B.; visualization, A.B.; supervision, O.S. and U.B. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research work has been funded by the Arrowhead Tools research project with Grant Agreement
No. 826452.
Acknowledgments: We would like to thank Markus Frank, Daniel Lövgren, and Oskar Nilsson at Boliden AB
and Sohail Manzoor at LTU for their valuable input and support in understanding the mining process and
requirements on mining IT infrastructure.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Lee, I.; Lee, K. The Internet of Things (IoT): Applications, investments, and challenges for enterprises.
Bus. Horizons 2015, 58, 431–440. [CrossRef]
2. Atzori, L.; Iera, A.; Morabito, G. The internet of things: A survey. Comput. Netw. 2010, 54, 2787–2805.
[CrossRef]
IoT 2020, 1 547
3. Al-Fuqaha, A.; Guizani, M.; Mohammadi, M.; Aledhari, M.; Ayyash, M. Internet of things: A survey
on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2015, 17, 2347–2376.
[CrossRef]
4. Evans, D. The internet of things: How the next evolution of the internet is changing everything.
CISCO White Pap. 2011, 1, 1–11.
5. Ericsson, L. More than 50 billion connected devices. White Pap. 2011, 14, 124.
6. Ziegler, S.; Crettaz, C.; Ladid, L.; Krco, S.; Pokric, B.; Skarmeta, A.F.; Jara, A.; Kastner, W.; Jung, M.
Iot6–moving to an ipv6-based future iot. In The Future Internet Assembly; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2013;
pp. 161–172.
7. Rymaszewska, A.; Helo, P.; Gunasekaran, A. IoT powered servitization of manufacturing–an exploratory
case study. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 192, 92–105. [CrossRef]
8. Blanchet, M.; Rinn, T.; Von Thaden, G.; De Thieulloy, G. Industry 4.0: The New Industrial Revolution-How
Europe Will Succeed. Hg. v. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants GmbH. München. Abgerufen am 11.05.
2014. Available online: http://www.rolandberger.com/media/pdf/Roland_Berger_TAB_Industry_4_0_
20140403.pdf (accessed on 5 December 2020).
9. Li, Q.; Tang, Q.; Chan, I.; Wei, H.; Pu, Y.; Jiang, H.; Li, J.; Zhou, J. Smart manufacturing standardization:
Architectures, reference models and standards framework. Comput. Ind. 2018, 101, 91–106. [CrossRef]
10. Schmidt, R.; Möhring, M.; Härting, R.C.; Reichstein, C.; Neumaier, P.; Jozinović, P. Industry 4.0-potentials
for creating smart products: Empirical research results. In International Conference on Business Information
Systems; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2015; pp. 16–27.
11. Boyes, H.; Hallaq, B.; Cunningham, J.; Watson, T. The industrial internet of things (IIoT): An analysis
framework. Comput. Ind. 2018, 101, 1–12. [CrossRef]
12. Jaidka, H.; Sharma, N.; Singh, R. Evolution of IoT to IIoT: Applications & Challenges. 2020. Available online:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3603739 (accessed on 5 December 2020).
13. Wegner, P. Interoperability. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 1996, 28, 285–287. [CrossRef]
14. Boliden. Available online: https://www.boliden.com/ (accessed on 18 November 2020).
15. Boliden’s Digitalization. Available online: https://www.boliden.com/news/tomorrows-mines-are-digital
(accessed on 18 November 2020).
16. Kiel, D.; Müller, J.M.; Arnold, C.; Voigt, K.I. Sustainable industrial value creation: Benefits and challenges of
industry 4.0. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2017, 21, 1740015. [CrossRef]
17. Moghaddam, M.; Cadavid, M.N.; Kenley, C.R.; Deshmukh, A.V. Reference architectures for smart
manufacturing: A critical review. J. Manuf. Syst. 2018, 49, 215–225. [CrossRef]
18. Margherita, E.G.; Braccini, A.M. Industry 4.0 Technologies in Flexible Manufacturing for Sustainable
Organizational Value: Reflections from a Multiple Case Study of Italian Manufacturers. Inf. Syst. Front.
2020, 1–22. [CrossRef]
19. González-Zamar, M.D.; Abad-Segura, E.; Vázquez-Cano, E.; López-Meneses, E. IoT technology
applications-based smart cities: Research analysis. Electronics 2020, 9, 1246. [CrossRef]
20. Pretorius, B.; van Niekerk, B. Industrial Internet of Things Security for the Transportation Infrastructure.
J. Inf. Warf. 2020, 19, 50–67.
21. Zimmer, L. Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts. J. Adv. Nurs. 2006, 53, 311–318.
[CrossRef]
22. Thorne, S.; Jensen, L.; Kearney, M.H.; Noblit, G.; Sandelowski, M. Qualitative metasynthesis: Reflections on
methodological orientation and ideological agenda. Qual. Health Res. 2004, 14, 1342–1365. [CrossRef]
23. Introductory Mining Engineering, 2nd ed.; Wiley India Pvt. Limited: New Delhi, India, 2002.
24. Lin, S.W.; Miller, B.; Dur, J.; Joshi, R.; Didier, P.; Chigani, A.; King, A. Industrial Internet Reference
Architecture. Technical Article. 2015. Available online: http://www.iiconsortium.org/IIRA.htm (accessed on
29 August 2018).
25. Grangel-González, I.; Baptista, P.; Halilaj, L.; Lohmann, S.; Vidal, M.E.; Mader, C.; Auer, S. The industry
4.0 standards landscape from a semantic integration perspective. In Proceedings of the 2017 22nd IEEE
International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Limassol, Cyprus,
12–15 September 2017; pp. 1–8.
IoT 2020, 1 548
26. Adolphs, P.; Bedenbender, H.; Dirzus, D.; Ehlich, M.; Epple, U.; Hankel, M.; Heidel, R.; Hoffmeister, M.;
Huhle, H.; Kärcher, B.; et al. Reference architecture model industrie 4.0 (rami4. 0). In ZVEI and VDI,
Status Report; Interenational Society of Automation: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2015.
27. Bader, S.R.; Maleshkova, M. The Semantic Asset Administration Shell. In International Conference on Semantic
Systems; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2019; pp. 159–174.
28. Lin, S.W.; Murphy, B.; Clauer, E.; Loewen, U.; Neubert, R.; Bachmann, G.; Pai, M.; Hankel, M. Architecture
Alignment and Interoperability: An Industrial Internet Consortium and Plattform Industrie 4.0 Joint Whitepaper;
White Paper; Industrial Internet Consortium: Needham, MA, USA, 2017.
29. oneM2M. Available online: https://www.onem2m.org/ (accessed on 18 November 2020).
30. Husain, S.; Prasad, A.; Kunz, A.; Papageorgiou, A.; Song, J. Recent trends in standards related to the internet
of things and machine-to-machine communications. J. Inf. Commun. Converg. Eng. 2014, 12, 228–236.
[CrossRef]
31. Swetina, J.; Lu, G.; Jacobs, P.; Ennesser, F.; Song, J. Toward a standardized common M2M service layer
platform: Introduction to oneM2M. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2014, 21, 20–26. [CrossRef]
32. TS-0001: Functional Architecture. 2016. Available online: https://www.onem2m.org/images/files/
deliverables/Release2/TS-0001-20Functional_Architecture-V2_10_0.pdf (accessed on 5 December 2020).
33. Husain, S.; Kunz, A.; Song, J.; Koshimizu, T. Interworking architecture between oneM2M service layer and
underlying networks. In Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps); IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 636–642.
34. Deol, A.; Figueredo, K.; Lin, S.W.; Murphy, B.; Seed, D.; Yin, J. Advancing the Industrial
Internet of Things: An Industrial Internet Consortium and oneM2M Joint Whitepaper. 2019.
Available online: https://www.iiconsortium.org/pdf/IIC_oneM2M_Whitepaper_final_2019_12_12.pdf
(accessed on 5 December 2020).
35. Arrowhead Project. Available online: https://arrowhead.eu/ (accessed on 18 November 2020).
36. Delsing, J. Iot Automation: Arrowhead Framework; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017.
37. Delsing, J. Local cloud internet of things automation: Technology and business model features of distributed
internet of things automation solutions. IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag. 2017, 11, 8–21. [CrossRef]
38. Productive 4.0. Available online: https://productive40.eu/ (accessed on 18 November 2020).
39. Arrowhead Tools. Available online: https://arrowhead.eu/arrowheadtools (accessed on
18 November 2020).
40. Arrowhead Framework. Available online: https://www.arrowhead.eu/arrowheadframework (accessed on
18 November 2020).
41. Eclipse Arrowhead Project. Available online: https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/iot.arrowhead
(accessed on 18 November 2020).
42. Zhou, C.; Damiano, N.; Whisner, B.; Reyes, M. Industrial Internet of Things:(IIoT) applications in
underground coal mines. Min. Eng. 2017, 69, 50.
43. Young, A.; Rogers, P. A Review of Digital Transformation in Mining. Min. Metall. Explor. 2019, 36, 683–699.
[CrossRef]
44. De Moura, R.L.; de Landa Farias Ceotto, L.; Gonzalez, A. Industrial IoT and Advanced Analytics Framework:
An approach for the Mining Industry. In Proceedings of the IEEE2017 International Conference on
Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 14–16 December 2017;
pp. 1308–1314.
45. Qin, X.; Fu, M.; Shen, B. Coal mine gas wireless monitoring system based on WSNs. In Proceedings of the
IEEE 2011 Second International Conference on Digital Manufacturing & Automation, Zhangjiajie, China,
5–7 August 2011; pp. 309–312.
46. Liu, Z.; Li, C.; Ding, Q.; Wu, D. A coal mine personnel global positioning system based on wireless
sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2010 8th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation,
Jinan, China, 7–9 July 2010; pp. 7026–7031.
47. Sun, E.; Zhang, X.; Li, Z. The internet of things (IOT) and cloud computing (CC) based tailings dam
monitoring and pre-alarm system in mines. Saf. Sci. 2012, 50, 811–815. [CrossRef]
48. Atkins, A.; Zhang, L.; Yu, H. Application of RFID and Mobile technology in Tracking of Equipment for
Maintenance in the Mining Industry. In The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy; University of
Wollongong: Wollongong, Australia, 2010; pp. 350–358.
IoT 2020, 1 549
49. McNinch, M.; Parks, D.; Jacksha, R.; Miller, A. Leveraging IIoT to Improve Machine Safety in the Mining
Industry. Mining, Metall. Explor. 2019, 36, 675–681. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
50. Xia, X.; Chen, Z.; Wei, W. Research on monitoring and prewarning system of accident in the coal mine based
on big data. Sci. Program. 2018, 2018, 9308742. [CrossRef]
51. Qian, Z.M.; Yuan, Y.B.; Zhang, S.S.; Ren, G.F. Design of Online Mine Safety Detection System Based on
Internet of Things. Int. J. Online Biomed. Eng. (IJOE) 2016, 12, 60–62. [CrossRef]
52. Dessureault, S. Rethinking fleet and personnel management in the era of IoT, big data, gamification,
and low-cost tablet technology. Mining, Metall. Explor. 2019, 36, 591–596. [CrossRef]
53. Gillies, A.S.; Wu, H.; Tuffs, N.; Sartor, T. Development of a real time airflow monitoring and control system.
In Proceedings of the Tenth US/Northern American Mine Ventilation Symposium, Anchorage, AK, USA,
16–19 May 2004; pp. 145–156.
54. Jo, B.; Khan, R.M.A. An internet of things system for underground mine air quality pollutant prediction
based on azure machine learning. Sensors 2018, 18, 930.
55. Salam, A. Internet of Things for Sustainable Mining. In Internet of Things for Sustainable Community
Development; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2020; pp. 243–271.
56. Gackowiec, P.; Podobińska-Staniec, M. IoT platforms for the Mining Industry: An Overview. Inż. Miner.
2019, 21. [CrossRef]
57. Sishi, M.; Telukdarie, A. Implementation of Industry 4.0 technologies in the mining industry-a case study.
Int. J. Min. Miner. Eng. 2020, 11, 1–22. [CrossRef]
58. Mishra, P.; Kumar, S.; Kumar, M.; Kumar, J. IoT based multimode sensing platform for underground coal
mines. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2019, 108, 1227–1242. [CrossRef]
59. Yalcinkaya, E.; Maffei, A.; Onori, M. Application of Attribute Based Access Control Model for Industrial
Control Systems. Int. J. Comput. Netw. Inf. Secur. 2017, 9, 12–21. [CrossRef]
60. Zeid, A.; Sundaram, S.; Moghaddam, M.; Kamarthi, S.; Marion, T. Interoperability in smart manufacturing:
Research challenges. Machines 2019, 7, 21. [CrossRef]
61. Wu, Y.; Dai, H.N.; Wang, H. Convergence of Blockchain and Edge Computing for Secure and Scalable IIoT
Critical Infrastructures in Industry 4.0. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020. [CrossRef]
62. Goldschmidt, T.; Hauck-Stattelmann, S.; Malakuti, S.; Grüner, S. Container-based architecture for flexible
industrial control applications. J. Syst. Archit. 2018, 84, 28–36. [CrossRef]
63. Skwarek, V. Blockchains as security-enabler for industrial IoT-applications. ASia Pac. J. Innov. Entrep. 2017.
[CrossRef]
64. Roy, C.; Misra, S.; Pal, S. Blockchain-Enabled Safety-as-a-Service for Industrial IoT Applications. IEEE Internet
Things Mag. 2020, 3, 19–23. [CrossRef]
65. Ghaleb, S.M.; Subramaniam, S.; Zukarnain, Z.A.; Muhammed, A. Mobility management for IoT: A survey.
EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2016, 2016, 165. [CrossRef]
66. Lesi, V.; Jakovljevic, Z.; Pajic, M. Reliable industrial IoT-based distributed automation. In Proceedings of
the International Conference on Internet of Things Design and Implementation, Montreal, QC, Canada,
15–18 April 2019; pp. 94–105.
67. Raptis, T.P.; Passarella, A.; Conti, M. Distributed Data Access in Industrial Edge Networks. IEEE J. Sel.
Areas Commun. 2020, 38, 915–927. [CrossRef]
68. Municio, E.; Balemans, N.; Latré, S.; Marquez-Barjal, J. Leveraging Distributed Protocols for full End-to-End
Softwarization in IoT Networks. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 17th Annual Consumer Communications
& Networking Conference (CCNC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 10–13 January 2020; pp. 1–6.
69. Tao, Z.; Xia, Q.; Hao, Z.; Li, C.; Ma, L.; Yi, S.; Li, Q. A survey of virtual machine management in edge
computing. Proc. IEEE 2019, 107, 1482–1499. [CrossRef]
70. OpenStack. Available online: https://www.openstack.org/use-cases/edge-computing/ (accessed on
18 November 2020).
71. KubeEdge. Available online: https://kubeedge.io/en/ (accessed on 18 November 2020).
72. Edge Virtualization Engine. Available online: https://www.lfedge.org/projects/eve/ (accessed on
18 November 2020).
73. OpenEdge. Available online: https://openedge.tech/en/ (accessed on 18 November 2020).
IoT 2020, 1 550
74. Haag, S.; Anderl, R. Digital twin–Proof of concept. Manuf. Lett. 2018, 15, 64–66. [CrossRef]
75. Minerva, R.; Lee, G.M.; Crespi, N. Digital Twin in the IoT Context: A Survey on Technical Features, Scenarios,
and Architectural Models. Proc. IEEE 2020, 108, 1785–1824. [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.
c 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).