img

Wechat

Adv. Search

Gold Science and Technology ›› 2019, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (6): 920-930.doi: 10.11872/j.issn.1005-2518.2019.06.920

• Mining Technology and Mine Management • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Construction and Evaluation of Generalized Safety Management Model for Underground Metal Mines

Zhuan DAI(),Zhouquan LUO(),Yaguang QIN,Lei WEN,Chunsheng DING,Zhezhe DONG   

  1. School of Resources and Safety Engineering,Central South University,Changsha 410083,Hunan,China
  • Received:2019-06-05 Revised:2019-08-30 Online:2019-12-31 Published:2019-12-24
  • Contact: Zhouquan LUO E-mail:daizhuanxl@163.com;Lzq505@csu.edu.cn

Abstract:

With the development of safety science,the scope of safety science research is not limited to accident prevention and risk control.The goal of safety management has gradually changed to the pursuit of coordinated operation of the whole system and the protection of people’s physical and mental well-being.And there are still frequent mine accidents and serious safety situation in China.In order to make the safety management of underground metal mines not only limited to accident prevention and hidden danger control,but also to make safety management better protect workers’ health and coordinate the operation of production system,combining with the generalized safety model,a safety management model of an underground metal mine was constructed,and the meanings and correlations of all levels of systems and elements in the model were described.In order to realize the information communication of all levels of systems in the generalized safety model,a method considering the fuzziness and uncertainty of evaluation data was proposed by using cloud model,AHP method and CRITIC method.It can also adjust the weight of each part by itself.Using cloud model to unify expert opinions and consider the fuzziness and uncertainty of evaluation data,AHP method to consider the subjective weight,CRITIC method to measure the objective weight and modify the subjective weight.The production system of an underground metal mine was divided into 12 microsystems,such as man-lifting system,etc.The weight of each microsystem was obtained after modification,and the safety assessment grade clouds of the mine and the microsystems were made.The results of evaluation examples show that the mine is in a safe state and the safety situation is stable,but it is necessary to make decision and deal with these problems,such as the low mean value of safety evaluation score of M2,M7 and M8 microsystems,the great fluctuation of safety score of M9 microsystems,and the low mean value and great fluctuation of safety score of M10 and M11 microsystems.Moreover,the weights of M2,M9,M10 and M12 microsystems after modification are relatively high,so we should pay attention to their safety management.The generalized safety model is no longer confined to accident prevention and risk control,aiming at ensuring the coordinated and efficient operation of the crowd and the machine group.It can better monitor the safety situation of the mine,protect the health of the workers and make the whole production system of the mine operate safely and efficiently.The evaluation method proposed in this paper is helpful to obtain the safety information of each system in the generalized safety model,and to obtain the evaluation results reflecting the fluctuation of mine safety situation considering the subjective and objective weights.

Key words: safety management, generalized safety model, underground metal mine, safety evaluation, production system, weight adjustment, safety monitoring

CLC Number: 

  • X921

Fig.1

Generalized safety model"

Fig.2

A generalized safety management model for an underground metal mine"

Fig.3

Atomized feature of cloud model"

Table 1

Parameters of each grade clouds"

评价等级分数范围评价等级分数范围
危险0~20较安全60~80
较危险30~40安全80~100
一般40~60

Fig.4

Evaluation grade clouds"

Fig.5

Evaluation steps"

Fig.6

Hierarchical structure of evaluation"

Table 2

Evaluation hierarchy and weight"

微系统主观权重修正后权重人群机群主观权重修正后权重评价要素主观权重修正后权重
人—提升系统(M10.09260.06790.39390.5241人误操作次数0.36260.5147
安全标志设置0.28570.1429
安全管理0.35160.3425
0.60610.4759设备检修情况0.36000.3393
应急设备0.39000.1950
设备异常次数0.25000.4657
人—通风系统(M20.10580.10420.40630.3812通风安全管理0.60780.5539
通风知识教育0.39220.4461
0.59380.6188粉尘浓度0.25000.3086
通风机工作情况0.27700.2293
应急设备0.23650.1783
巷道工作面风速0.23650.2838
人—运输系统(M30.08730.08470.42860.2143安全标志情况0.43550.4677
井下交通教育0.56450.5323
0.57140.7857照明情况0.23930.2636
路面、铁道情况0.26500.2463
应急准备0.25640.1969
事故起数0.23930.2932
人—管道铺设装备系统(M40.06880.06320.50850.4677误操作次数0.53130.7656
安全教育与疏导0.46880.2344
0.49150.5323设备异常次数0.32290.2956
劳保用品与应急0.35420.2779
作业环境0.32290.4265
人—钻机系统(M50.07940.07080.56450.5636误操作次数0.49280.7464
安全教育与疏导0.50720.2536
0.43550.4364设备异常次数0.35640.4476
劳保用品与应急0.35640.2291
作业环境0.28710.3232
人—铁道铺设装备系统(M60.07140.07800.51720.4103误操作次数0.49150.7458
安全教育与疏导0.50850.2542
0.48280.5897设备异常次数0.29790.2617
劳保用品与应急0.37230.3159
作业环境0.32980.4223
人—铲运机系统(M70.06880.06190.59650.5542误操作次数0.50770.6130
安全教育与疏导0.49230.3870
0.40350.4458设备异常次数0.33330.2604
劳保用品与应急0.37500.3741
作业环境0.29170.3655
人—液压凿岩台车系统(M80.07940.07760.50850.5734误操作次数0.50790.7540
安全教育与疏导0.49210.2460
0.49150.4266设备异常次数0.33330.4376
劳保用品与应急0.34380.2529
作业环境0.32290.3095
人—爆破系统(M90.10050.11660.50720.5635误操作次数0.53330.7667
安全教育与疏导0.46670.2333
0.49280.4365设备异常次数0.31680.5105
劳保用品与应急0.35640.1782
作业环境0.32670.3113
人—支护系统(M100.09260.09340.44780.5568安全教育0.49280.3872
安全管理情况0.50720.6128
0.55220.4432应急措施0.24030.2383
支护情况0.26620.2377
地压监测情况0.24680.2440
冲击地压征兆0.24680.2800
人—松石装备系统(M110.06610.08640.60000.6294误操作次数0.50000.7500
安全教育与疏导0.50000.2500
0.40000.3706设备异常次数0.32000.4923
劳保用品与应急0.36000.2687
作业环境0.32000.2390
人—装药台车系统(M120.08730.09510.49320.6389误操作次数0.53730.7687
安全教育与疏导0.46270.2313
0.50620.3608设备异常次数0.25000.2976
劳保用品与应急0.25710.2515
作业环境0.22140.1876
炸药的管理0.27140.2633

Fig.7

Mine safety assessment grade clouds"

Fig.8

Microsystem Safety Assessment Grade Clouds"

1 中华人民共和国应急管理部.2017年全国非煤矿山生产安全事故统计分析报告[R].北京:中华人民共和国应急管理部,2018.
Ministry of Emergency Management of the People’s Republic of China.Statistical analysis report on production safety accidents in non-coal mines in 2017[R].Beijing:Ministry of Emergency Management of the People’s Republic of China,2018.
2 田水承,李红霞,王莉,等.从三类危险源理论看煤矿事故的频发[J].中国安全科学学报,2007,17(1):10.
Tian Shuicheng,Li Hongxia,Wang Li,et al.Probe into the frequency of coal mine accidents based on the theory of three types of hazards[J].China Safety Science Journal,2007,17(1):10.
3 傅贵,殷文韬,董继业,等.行为安全“2-4”模型及其在煤矿安全管理中的应用[J].煤炭学报,2013,38(7):1123-1129.
Fu Gui,Yin Wentao,Dong Jiye,et al.Behavior-based accident causation:The “2-4”model and its safety implications in coal mines[J].Journal of China Coal Society,2013,38(7):1123-1129.
4 Liu G Y,Luo C L.Analysis of the safety psychological factors in the coal mine safety management[J].Procedia Engineering,2012,45(2):253-258.
5 Mustafa O,Seyhan O,Erhan A.Applying hierarchical loglinear models to nonfatal underground coal mine accidents for safety management[J].International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics,2014,20(2):239-248.
6 Su T Y,Sun Z Q,Yang N.The analysis of coal mine safety management evaluation system based on the DEMATEL and ISM model[C]//2011 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.NewYork:IEEE,2011:12304233.
7 张舒,史秀志,古德生,等.基于ISM和AHP以及模糊评判的矿山安全管理能力分析与评价[J].中南大学学报(自然科学版),2011,42(8):2406-2416.
Zhang Shu,Shi Xiuzhi,Gu Desheng,et al.Analysis and evaluation of safety management capability in mine based on ISM and AHP and fuzzy evaluation method[J].Journal of Central South University (Natural Science Edition),2011,42(8):2406-2416.
8 王志,郭勇.基于BP神经网络的非煤地下矿山安全评价模型[J].中国安全科学学报,2009,19(2):124.
Wang Zhi,Guo Yong.Safety assessment model of underground non-coal mine based on BP neural network[J].China Safety Science Journal,2009,19(2):124.
9 Yin J,Wang Y J,Lü L,et al.Research of non-coal mine safety management system on the basis of GIS[J].Journal of Wuhan University of Technology,2010,32(13):110-113.
10 罗周全,程鹏毅.基于DEMATEL-ISM的地下金属矿山人机系统事故影响因素分析[J].中国安全生产科学技术,2017,13(12):145-151.
Luo Zhouquan,Cheng Pengyi.Analysis on factors affecting accidents of man-machine system in underground metal mine based on DEMATEL-ISM[J].Journal of Safety Science and Technology,2017,13(12):145-151.
11 Hu L R,Li G Q.Evaluation of personnel underground behavior safety for metal mines based on grey relevance analysis[J].Applied Mechanics and Materials,2015,737(2):461-466.
12 尹土兵,王品,张鸣鲁.基于AHP及模糊综合评判的地下金属矿山安全分析与评价[J].黄金科学技术,2015,23(3):60-66.
Yin Tubing,Wang Pin,Zhang Minglu.Analysis and evaluation of safety in underground metal mine based on AHP and fuzzy evaluation method[J].Gold Science and Technology,2015,23(3):60-66.
13 吴超,黄浪,贾楠,等.广义安全模型构建研究[J].科技管理研究,2018,38(1):250-255.
Wu Chao,Huang Lang,Jia Nan,et al.Study on the construction of generalized safety model[J].Science and Technology Management Research,2018,38(1):250-255.
14 刘辉,王海宁,吕志飞.模糊神经网络技术在矿山安全评价中的适应性研究[J].中国安全生产科学技术,2005,1(3):56-59.
Liu Hui,Wang Haining,Zhifei Lü.Study of adaptability on FNN in mine safety assessment[J].Journal of Safety Science and Technology,2005,1(3):56-59.
15 陆秋琴,潘长波,黄光球.基于未确知属性层次法的矿山资源环境安全评价模型[J].安全与环境学报,2013,13(1):234-240.
Lu Qiuqin,Pan Changbo,Huang Guangqiu.A mining resource environment evaluation model based on the fuzzy attribute hierarchical analysis[J].Journal of Safety and Environment,2013,13(1):234-240.
16 李德毅,杜鹅.不确定性人工智能[M].北京:国防工业出版社,2005.
Li Deyi,Du E.Uncertainty Artificial Intelligence[M].Beijing:National Defense Industry Press,2005.
17 叶琼,李绍稳,张友华,等.云模型及应用综述[J].计算机工程与设计,2011,32(12):4198-4201.
Ye Qiong,Li Shaowen,Zhang Youhua,et al.Cloud model and application overview[J].Computer Engineering and Design,2011,32(12):4198-4201.
18 李邵红,王少阳,朱建东,等.基于权重融合和云模型的岩爆倾向性预测研究[J].岩土工程学报,2018,40(6):112-120.
Li Shaohong,Wang Shaoyang,Zhu Jiandong,et al.Prediction of rock burst tendency based on weighted fusion and improved cloud model [J].Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,2018,40(6):112-120.
19 刘禹,李德毅.正态云模型雾化性质统计分析[J].北京航空航天大学学报,2010,36(11):1320-1324.
Liu Yu,Li Deyi.Statistics on atomized feature of normal cloud model[J].Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,2010,36(11):1320-1324.
20 彭洁.基于云模型的退役铀尾矿库渗水污染现状分析及水质综合评价[D].衡阳:南华大学,2016.
Peng Jie.Analysis on Current Situation of Pollution and Water Quality Comprehensive Assessment of Seepage of Decommissioning Uranium Tailings Impoundment Based on the Cloud Model[D].Hengyang:University of South China,2016.
21 Saaty T L.How to make a decision:The analytic hierarchy process[J].European Journal of Operational Research,1994,24(6):19-43.
22 Diakoulaki D,Mavrotas G,Papayannakis L.Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems:The critic method[J].Computers and Operations Research,1995,22(7):763-770.
[1] Xuan WANG,Yabian WANG,Lichen LIU,Xing CAO,Lifang ZHAO,Zhaohu ZHANG. Analysis on the Environmental Safety Status and Discussion on Reasonable Closure Measures for Tailings Reservoir in Longnan City [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2019, 27(1): 144-152.
[2] Jianhua HU,Chen GAO,Chun YANG. Simulation and Evaluation of Engineering Response Under the Mining of Overlapping-Orebody [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2018, 26(6): 736-743.
[3] Deming WU,Shan YANG,Ximei WANG. An Improved Evaluation Method for Safety Harmony Equation of Tailing Ponds [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2018, 26(5): 662-668.
[4] YANG Chao, SHI Xiuzhi. Mine Safety Standardization Grade Evaluation Based on Fisher Discriminant Model [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2018, 26(2): 187-194.
[5] YIN Tubing,WANG Pin,ZHANG Minglu. Analysis and Evaluation of Safety in Underground Metal Mine based on AHP and Fuzzy Evaluation Method [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2015, 23(3): 60-66.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!