Case Study: What Every EOR Wants in an Instrumentation Monitoring Platform

At a tailings storage facility (TSF), an instrumentation platform needs to serve more than an IT or data-management function. The Engineer of Record (EOR) defines monitoring requirements and relies on the resulting data to assess facility performance, while the operator is responsible for ensuring the monitoring program and supporting systems are in place.

At one Canadian TSF, a change in how instrumentation data was managed exposed an important gap between those requirements.

When centralization creates new engineering constraints

In this case, BGC Engineering originally managed the instrumentation program for this TSF where they served as the EOR. The mine operator later moved its instrumentation data into a third-party platform to meet broader IT requirements and standardization across their sites.

The change created several challenges for the EOR team. First, access to the platform was limited to a small number of users, so BGC largely depended on key staff with access and training to export data to assess facility performance.

As a result, when data was missing or questionable, BGC could not always investigate the issue directly. Troubleshooting required coordination between the EOR, mine operator, and technology provider before BGC could determine whether the data could be relied upon.

Reliable data was only part of the problem. Once exported, BGC still needed other tools to analyze and interpret it. The instrumentation data could not readily be viewed geospatially or alongside other information relevant to facility performance, such as imagery, construction activity, field observations, and site conditions.

The result was a fragmented process: retrieve the data, move it into another system, validate it, and only then begin the engineering interpretation. Those challenges prompted the mine operator and BGC to reconsider what they needed from an instrumentation monitoring platform.

Re-evaluating the monitoring platform

The mine operator empowered BGC to select the best monitoring solution providing it met their IT requirements. With that directive, BGC focused on three questions to guide their evaluation:

1. Can I trust the readings and alarms?
   ‍Are missing or anomalous readings easy to identify? Are processed values reliable? Are triggered alarms trusted enough that the first response is to assess facility performance rather than question the monitoring system?
2. Do I have enough agency over the data?
   ‍How quick and easy is it to investigate anomalies, modify plots, organize instruments around engineering criteria, and resolve common issues without unnecessary third-party intervention?
3. Can I interpret the readings in context?
   Can I readily relate instrument behaviour to location, geology, construction progress, design information, field observations, remote sensing, and historical site information?

With these requirements in mind, BGC selected Cambio™ as the project’s instrumentation monitoring platform to better support both the EOR and mine operator.

What changed with Cambio?

Greater confidence in the data

The project team now spends less time determining whether a reading or alarm is valid and more time interpreting what it means for dam performance. The near-real-time instrumentation readings, standardized plots and dashboards, and automated notifications tied to Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP) thresholds, give the project team a consistent basis for reviewing instrument behaviour and responding to changing conditions.

More agency for the EOR

BGC can now work directly with the monitoring data rather than relying on a third party to investigate routine issues or create the views needed for engineering analysis. The project team can quickly organize and visualize the data (for example, by geological unit or proximity to a dam reference line) and investigate anomalous or missing readings directly.

Instrumentation in context

The project team can now analyze and interpret the instrumentation readings within the same platform as other relevant project information. They can view a time-series plot alongside geologic models, construction progress, design information, field observations, imagery, and other spatial data.

Example: During construction, CQA personnel reviewed piezometer response alongside nearby rockfill placement, and annotated these plots with construction activities and observations for future reference and design. This allowed the team to assess construction-induced porewater pressure changes and determine appropriate hold points while excess pressures dissipated.

Wider access to monitoring information

Both BGC and the operator now have direct access to the same shared workspace. Plan views, dashboards, and instrument plots are available to the broader project team, while engineers can still investigate individual trends in detail.

‍