Today
Each instrument read in its own system
- Each instrument type is read against its own threshold.
- InSAR is often used for investigations rather than routine review.
- Audit and GISTM evidence is assembled on request from multiple sources.
The instruments are installed.The data is in six systems.
Most tailings facilities already carry more geotechnical instrumentation than anyone analyses jointly. INSUS time-aligns piezometer, inclinometer, radar, survey and InSAR streams, flags joint anomalies a single-instrument threshold would miss, and keeps the monitoring record usable for GISTM review. Decision support for the Engineer of Record, never a substitute.
01
Streams are often read per instrument and per vendor system.
02
Slow cross-instrument trends can sit unseen.
03
GISTM accountability stays with named people.
The problem
More monitoringthan anyone reads together.
Tailings monitoring has grown instrument by instrument and vendor by vendor: piezometers, inclinometers, prisms, ground-based radar, satellite InSAR and inspection records. Coverage is extensive; joint analysis is fragmented. Instruments alone are not early warning. Some failure mechanisms can develop without clear precursors. Meanwhile the Engineer of Record still reassembles evidence for review and audit, and a trend spanning several instruments is easy to miss when nobody looks across them routinely.
01Ground instruments read against their own thresholds
02Radar and survey data held in separate systems
03InSAR series used episodically, not routinely
- 01Ground instruments read against their own thresholds
- 02Radar and survey data held in separate systems
- 03InSAR series used episodically, not routinely
The shift
From instrument-by-instrument thresholdsto a joint record.
Nothing here replaces geotechnical judgement or the Engineer of Record. What changes is whether streams are reviewed together, with joint anomalies and evidence attached.
With INSUS
One time-aligned record for geotechnical review
- Instrument streams are time-aligned and queryable together.
- Joint anomalies are flagged with contributing series shown.
- Monitoring and review evidence is kept as a by-product of routine work.
How it works
From separate data sourcesto one reviewable picture.
Inputs are data the facility already generates or licenses. Integration is read-only. Every flag goes to a qualified geotechnical professional. The system does not predict dam failure or trigger operational action on its own.
Connect
Bring monitoring streams into one place
Read-only links to piezometer, inclinometer and settlement readings; survey and prism data; ground-based radar; licensed InSAR series; pond level, freeboard and water balance; rainfall; deposition records; and inspection and Engineer of Record documentation.
Understand
Time-align streams and learn normal behaviour
Align streams to a common time base with gaps made explicit. Establish per-instrument baselines and seasonal behaviour, model how streams normally relate to rainfall and deposition, and flag dead, drifting or stalled instruments.
Detect
Project short-horizon trends, not failure
Project short-horizon trends in monitored variables such as pore pressure trajectory and deformation rate, and use change-point detection to flag departures from expected behaviour. This does not predict tailings dam failure.
Advise
Raise joint anomalies with evidence attached
Flag behaviour that is unusual across instruments together, not only against single thresholds. Each flag carries contributing series and is routed to geotechnical review. Nothing is sent to operations as an automatic alarm.
Verify
Disposition every flag and keep the evidence trail
A qualified geotechnical professional dispositions every flag. Dispositions and false-positive rates are recorded against monitoring and review requirements so the evidence trail stays current for GISTM work.
Getting started
Start with one facilityand the streams you already hold.
For sites that already run geotechnical monitoring platforms and hold inspection and Engineer of Record records. Multivariate signal integration is engineered as a tailored solution around the facility's data. ExpertFlow AI supports the document layer for inspection, EoR and conformance evidence. Expert Services can help with discovery and data-quality assessment. Advisory only. No new sensors from INSUS.
- What we need. Instrument histories across types; survey, prism and radar data; InSAR if licensed; water balance and deposition records; rainfall; and inspection and Engineer of Record reports. Whether instrumentation is adequate remains the Engineer of Record's call.
- What you see first. A retrospective integration of one facility's historical data, a baseline behaviour model, and a clear report on how complete and usable the instrument record actually is. Read-only throughout.
- How it grows. The pilot runs in shadow beside the existing monitoring regime. Scale-up can add further facilities by consequence classification. GISTM accountability stays with the named people already assigned.
Related for mining
Other miningstarting points
Tailings signal integration sits beside permitting compliance and near-miss learning on the same mine site.
- 01EU Mining Permitting & ComplianceTurn permits, conditions and regulatory correspondence into a searchable obligation layer with answers traceable to source.
- 02Near-Miss & Incident IntelligenceGroup near-miss reports by the conditions they describe and return relevant past events to crews facing similar work.
- 03Mining industryThe wider picture for mine sites: tailings monitoring, permitting and compliance, and incident learning.
Questions tailings and geotechnical teams ask us
Geotechnical streams sit in separate vendor systems and are usually read against single-instrument thresholds. This use case time-aligns those streams, flags joint anomalies and keeps monitoring evidence usable for review and GISTM work.
No. It projects short-horizon trends in monitored variables and flags departures from expected behaviour. Some failure mechanisms can develop without precursor signals.
Instrument histories, survey and radar data, licensed InSAR where available, water balance and deposition records, rainfall, and inspection and Engineer of Record reports. No new sensors from INSUS.
No. Accountability under GISTM stays with named people. Flags route to geotechnical review. The system triggers no operational action on its own.
No. It works alongside them read-only. It does not replace geotechnical monitoring platforms, GIS or document repositories.
As a tailored monitoring-integration solution engineered around the facility's data, with ExpertFlow AI for the document and evidence layer. Expert Services can support discovery, data-quality assessment and validation with the geotechnical team.
Some failure mechanisms give no precursors. Legacy instrument records are often incomplete. A flag is a prompt to look, never a conclusion, and false-positive rates must be tracked openly.
Tailings monitoring
Find out what your instruments show when they are read together.
Start with a retrospective on one facility: what your instrument record actually contains, and whether reading it together shows your engineers anything reading it apart did not.