基于组合权重和物元分析的矿山安全生产状况研究

doi:10.11872/j.issn.1005-2518.2020.06.108

Abstract

Abstract:

Mine safety is the foundation and premise of the sustainable development of mining industry.To do well in mine safety work is very important to ensure the development of regional economy and the safety of citizens’ personal and property.With the increase of mining scale and mining depth of mineral resources，the situation of mine safety production is becoming more and more complex，and various kinds of safety accidents happen frequently，which brings inestimable consequences to the country and the people.Therefore，in order to evaluate the situation of mine safety production accurately，reduce the accidents of mine safety production and ensure the sustainable development of the mine，the evaluation model of mine safety production status （MSPS） based on combination weight and matter element analysis was established.Firstly，according to the influencing factors of mine safety production，an evaluation index system of MSPS was constructed，which takes safety management，safety technology，safety production education and training and safety environment as the standard level，containing 12 evaluation indexes such as safety production management organization and safety management system as the index level.Industry experts scored each evaluation index，and we summarized and normalized the scoring results.Then the matter-element transformation was used to determine the classical domain，nodal domain and the matter-element of evaluated mine matter-element.The correlation degrees between the evaluation indexes and the established safety levels were calculated step by step，and the concept of distance function was introduced into the combination of analytic hierarchy process and entropy weight method for weighting to accurately determine the combination weight of mine safety production evaluation index.Finally，the grade of MSPS can be obtained from the comprehensive correlation degree between evaluation indexes and established safety levels.After calculation，the safety grades of five mines under a mining group are respectively grade Ⅱ，grade Ⅲ，grade Ⅱ，grade Ⅰ and grade Ⅱ.The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method was used to verity the results，and the two evaluation results are consistent.The research results show that the weight of evaluation indexes calculated by combination weighting method are more scientific and reasonable because it can avoid absolute subjectivity and objectivity.In addition，the evaluation model of mine safety production based on the combination weight and matter-element analysis provides an effective technical way for the study of mine safety production，which is helpful for the formulation and completion of the best mine safety production management plan.It is of great guiding significance to improve the safety production guarantee system of mines.

Key words: mine safety, evaluation system, matter element analysis method, distance function, combination wei-ghting, correlation degree, security level

CLC Number:

TD79

Yuxian KE,Cheng WANG,Lifa FANG,Baoquan LIAO. Mine Safety Production Status Evaluation Based on Combination Weight and Matter Element Analysis[J].Gold Science and Technology, 2020, 28(6): 910-919.

Figures/Tables 11

Fig.1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

Table 9

Table 10

References 22

1	Zhou J H，Wang L J.Comprehensive study on ecological restoration and land exploitation of mining subsidence in suburbs of Chinese mining cities［J］.International Journal of Coal Science & Technology，2014，1 （2）：248-252.
2	王成，孙宝生，张建，等.中国矿山安全现状与对策［J］. 矿业研究与开发，2006，26（2）：81-82，85.
	Wang Cheng，Sun Baosheng，Zhang Jian，et al.On the current situation and counter measures of mine safety in China ［J］.Mining Research and Development，2006，26（2）：81-82，85.
3	柯愈贤，王新民，张钦礼.全尾砂料浆磁化絮凝沉降特性［J］. 中国有色金属学报，2017，27（2）：392-398.
	Ke Yuxian，Wang Xinmin，Zhang Qinli. Flocculating sedimentation characteristic of pre-magnetized crude tailings slurry［J］.The Chinese Journal of Nonferrous Metals，2017，27（2）：392-398.
4	柯愈贤，王新民，张钦礼，等. 基于全尾砂充填体非线性本构模型的深井充填强度指标［J］. 东北大学学报（自然科学版），2017，38（2）：280-283.
	Ke Yuxian，Wang Xinmin，Zhang Qinli，et al.Strength determination of crude tailings backfill in deep mine based on non-linear constitutive model［J］.Journal of Northeastern University（Natural Science），2017，38（2）：280-283.
5	Cygankiewicz J，Knechtel J. Isotherm maps of virgin rock temperature in collieries of katowicki holding węglowy［J］. Journal of Sustainable Mining，2014，13（4）：1-4.
6	陈建宏，覃曹原，邓东升.基于AHP和物元TOPSIS法的层状岩体巷道冒顶风险评价［J］.黄金科学技术，2017，25（1）：55-60.
	Chen Jianhong，Qin Caoyuan，Deng Dongsheng. Risk assessment of bedded rock roadway roof fall based on AHP and Matter-Element TOPSIS method［J］.Gold Science and Technology，2017，25（1）：55-60.
7	王鸿鹏，徐桂芹，李娜，等. 基于熵权法TOPSIS模型对18省市安全生产状况评价研究［J］. 中国公共安全（学术版），2016（4）：35-38.
	Wang Hongpeng，Xu Guiqin，Li Na，et al.Evaluation on the safety production status of eighteen province and cities based on entropy weight TOPSIS model［J］.China Public Security （Academy Edition），2016（4）：35-38
8	吴凯，褚召祥. 基于B/S模式的矿山安全现状评价研究［J］. 中国安全生产科学术，2011，7（1）：102-106.
	Wu Kai，Chu Zhaoxiang. Research on present status assessment of mine safety based on B/S model ［J］. Journal of Safety Science and Technology，2011，7（1）：102-106.
9	唐琦. 基于PP模型的矿山企业安全生产状况研究［J］. 采矿技术，2019，19（2）：44-45，49.
	Tang Qi. Study on the safety production status of mining enterprises based on PP model［J］.Mining Technology，2019，19 （2）：44-45，49.
10	赵志国.基于突变理论的煤矿安全状态评价研究［J］.矿业安全与环保，2019，46（4）：113-117，122.
	Zhao Zhiguo.Study on safety state evaluation of coal mine based on catastrophe theory ［J］. Mining Safety & Environmental Protection，2019，46 （4）：113-117，122.
11	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.
12	王新民，柯愈贤，鄢德波，等.基于熵权法和物元分析的采空区危险性评价研究［J］.中国安全科学学报，2012，22（6）：71-78.
	Wang Xinmin，Ke Yuxian，Yan Debo，et al.Underground goaf risk evaluation based on entropy weight and matter element analysis［J］.China Safety Science Journal，2012，22（6）：71-78.
13	谢尊贤，李艳艳，吴晓茹，等. 基于物元多级可拓模型的档案馆火灾安全风险评价［J］. 安全与环境学报，2019，19（1）：21-28.
	Xie Zunxian，Li Yanyan，Wu Xiaoru，et al. Fire risk assessment of archives based on matter-element multi-level extension model ［J］. Journal of Safety and Environment，2019，19（1）：21-28.
14	陈道贵. 基于物元分析和组合权重的原地浸矿技术适用性评价模型［J］.稀土，2019，40（4）：32-39.
	Chen Daogui.Applicability evaluation model of in-situ leaching technology based on matter-element analysis and combined weight［J］.Chinese Rare Earths，2019，40（4）：32-39.
15	郭其林，史秀志，唐礼忠.基于组合权重的地下矿山岩体质量可拓评价方法［J］.矿冶工程，2013，33（3）：34-38.
	Guo Qilin，Shi Xiuzhi，Tang Lizhong. Extension evaluation method for rock mass quality in underground mine based on combination weighting ［J］. Mining and Metallurgical Engineering，2013，33（3）：34-38.
16	邓书显，张学凌，饶明贵. 基于Fuzzy逻辑和物元分析的矿井突水预测研究［J］. 江西理工大学学报，2009，30（4）：1-3.
	Deng Shuxian，Zhang Xueling，Rao Minggui.Research on the mine water inrush forecast based on fuzzy logic and matter element analysis ［J］. Journal of Jiangxi University of Science and Technology，2009，30（4）：1-3.
17	万孝衡，王新民，朱阳亚，等.基于组合赋权TOPSIS法的采场结构参数优选［J］.黄金科学技术，2014，22 （5）：69-73.
	Wan Xiaoheng，Wang Xinmin，Zhu Yangya，et al.Optimization of the stope structural parameters based on empowerment combination TOPSIS［J］. Gold Science and Technology，2014，22 （5）：69-73.
18	梁礼明，吴莉，谢荣浩. 基于层次分析法的工程评标应用研究［J］. 江西理工大学学报，2006，27（1）：61-63.
	Liang Liming，Wu Li，Xie Ronghao. Research on application of analytic hierarchy process in engineering project assessment［J］.Journal of Jiangxi University of Science and Technology，2006，27（1）：61-63.
19	虞未江，贾超，狄胜同，等. 基于综合权重和改进物元可拓评价模型的地下水水质评价［J］. 吉林大学学报（地球科学版），2019，49（2）：539-547.
	Yu Weijiang，Jia Chao，Di Shengtong，et al. Groundwater quality evaluation based on comprehensive weight and improved matter-element extension evaluation model［J］. Journal of Jilin University（Earth Science Edition），2019，49（2）：539-547.
20	范敏，刘亚玲，黄华勇，等. 一种配电自动化系统状态操作评价方法［J］. 重庆大学学报，2018，41（3）：21-31.
	Fan Min，Liu Yaling，Huang Huayong，et al. An evaluation method for state operation of distribution automation system［J］.Journal of Chongqing University，2018，41（3）：21-31.
21	李希建，华攸金，陈刘瑜. 基于熵权物元可拓模型的煤矿安全评价及其应用［J］. 矿业研究与开发，2019，39（9）：93-99.
	Li Xijian，Hua Youjin，Chen Liuyu. Coal mine safety evaluation based on entropy weight matter element extension model and its application［J］.Mining Research and Development，2019，39（9）：93-99.
22	迟国泰，李刚，程砚秋. 基于AHP-标准离差的人的全面发展评价模型及其实证研究［J］. 管理学报，2010，7（2）：301-310.
	Chi Guotai，Li Gang，Cheng Yanqiu. An evaluation model of human’s overall development based on AHP standard deviation and its empirical study ［J］. Chinese Journal of Management，2010，7（2）：301-310.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 10

[1]	YAN Jie, QIN Ze-Li, XIE Wen-Bing, CA Bang-Yong. [J]. J4, 2010, 18(4): 22 -26 .
[2]	SONG He-Min, FENG Chi-Li, DING Xian-Hua. Geological-Geochemical Charicteristics and Prospecting Direction of Jiaojiekou Mining Area, North Part of Taihang Mountain[J]. J4, 2010, 18(3): 54 -58 .
[3]	HU Qin-Xia, LI Jian-Zhong, YU Guang-Meng, XIE Yan-Fang, ZHANG Ku-Xiao. Discussion on Gold Ore Point of Bailongjiang Metallogenic Belt[J]. J4, 2010, 18(3): 51 -53 .
[4]	CHEN Hua-Dun. [J]. J4, 2010, 18(4): 50 -53 .
[5]	CUI Ting-Jun, DAI Ke-Sai, PENG Yong, FU Xing. Discussion on the Geological Characteristics and Metallogenic Regularity of the Southern Edge of Qaidam Basin Gold Metallogenic Belt in Qinghai Province[J]. J4, 2010, 18(3): 63 -67 .
[6]	YANG Meng-Rong, MAO Chang-Xian. Uncertainty Evaluation of Arsenic and Antimony in Chemical Prospecting Sa-mple by Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry[J]. J4, 2010, 18(3): 68 -71 .
[7]	SU Jian-Hua, LIU Shu-Lin. Study of Gold Extraction from Tail Solution with High Acid Content and Low Concentration[J]. J4, 2010, 18(3): 72 -75 .
[8]	WANG Da-Beng, SONG Bing-Jian, HUI Ku-Meng. The Application of High Power IP Method for Searching Concealed Metallic Mine in Beishuiquan，Liaoning Province[J]. J4, 2010, 18(3): 76 -78 .
[9]	LIU Qing-Guang, GAO Hai-Feng, HUANG Suo-Yang. The Application of PDA in Geology Department of Jiaojia Gold Mine[J]. J4, 2010, 18(3): 79 -82 .
[10]	HUANG Jun, WU Jiafu, LU RuKuai , XIA Liyuan. [J]. J4, 2010, 18(4): 1 -5 .

评价指标	安全性高（Ⅰ级）	安全性良好（Ⅱ级）	安全性一般（Ⅲ级）	安全性差（Ⅳ级）
安全管理（x₁~x₃）	[35，40]	[25，35）	[15，25）	[0，15）
安全技术（x₄~x₆）	[30，40]	[20，30）	[10，20）	[0，10）
安全教育与培训（x₇~x₉）	[34，40]	[25，34）	[12，25）	[0，12）
安全环境（x₁₀~x₁₂）	[28，40]	[18，28）	[8，18）	[0，8）

评价指标	评分值
评价指标	矿山1	矿山2	矿山3	矿山4	矿山5
x₁	0.900	0.675	0.750	0.650	0.475
x₂	0.675	0.450	0.725	0.775	0.850
x₃	0.375	0.800	0.700	0.425	0.600
x₄	0.550	0.675	0.475	0.875	0.775
x₅	0.625	0.325	0.725	0.925	0.750
x₆	0.475	0.500	0.850	0.950	0.600
x₇	0.600	0.575	0.400	0.825	0.525
x₈	0.425	0.725	0.625	0.775	0.850
x₉	0.675	0.525	0.475	0.775	0.600
x₁₀	0.750	0.875	0.700	0.675	0.525
x₁₁	0.425	0.600	0.625	0.925	0.475
x₁₂	0.600	0.525	0.825	0.675	0.450

评价指标	安全性高（Ⅰ级）	安全性良好（Ⅱ级）	安全性一般（Ⅲ级）	安全性差（Ⅳ级）
安全管理（x₁~x₃）	[0.875，1）	[0.625，0.875）	[0.375，0.625）	[0，0.375）
安全技术（x₄~x₆）	[0.75，1）	[0.5，0.75）	[0.25，0.5）	[0，0.25）
安全教育与培训（x₇~x₉）	[0.85，1）	[0.625，0.85）	[0.3，0.625）	[0，0.3）
安全环境（x₁₀~x₁₂）	[0.7，1）	[0.45，0.7）	[0.2，0.45）	[0，0.2）

评价指标	相关度
评价指标	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅲ级	Ⅳ级
x₁	-0.200	-0.200	-0.733	-0.861
x₂	-0.381	-0.200	-0.133	-0.480
x₃	-0.571	-0.400	0.000	0.000
x₄	-0.308	-0.200	0.200	-0.400
x₅	-0.250	-0.500	-0.250	-0.500
x₆	-0.367	-0.050	-0.100	-0.321
x₇	-0.385	-0.059	-0.077	-0.429
x₈	-0.500	-0.320	-0.385	-0.227
x₉	-0.350	-0.222	-0.133	-0.536
x₁₀	-0.167	-0.167	-0.545	-0.688
x₁₁	-0.393	-0.056	-0.100	-0.346
x₁₂	-0.200	-0.400	-0.273	-0.500

评价指标	矿山1	矿山2	矿山3	矿山4	矿山5
x₁	0.082	0.090	0.094	0.059	0.072
x₂	0.107	0.112	0.109	0.131	0.078
x₃	0.106	0.125	0.093	0.120	0.054
x₄	0.046	0.119	0.056	0.119	0.107
x₅	-0.011	0.116	0.090	0.046	0.107
x₆	0.070	-0.009	0.077	-0.023	0.081
x₇	0.060	-0.011	0.107	0.103	0.086
x₈	0.126	0.111	0.066	0.130	0.076
x₉	0.131	0.089	0.040	0.130	0.049
x₁₀	0.101	0.063	0.080	0.103	0.100
x₁₁	0.068	0.097	0.109	-0.021	0.105
x₁₂	0.115	0.098	0.080	0.105	0.086

Mine Safety Production Status Evaluation Based on Combination Weight and Matter Element Analysis

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 11

References 22

Related Articles 7

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

业内专家	安全管理			安全技术			安全生产教育与培训			安全环境
业内专家	Ⅰ级下限	Ⅱ级下限	Ⅲ级下限	Ⅰ级下限	Ⅱ级下限	Ⅲ级下限	Ⅰ级下限	Ⅱ级下限	Ⅲ级下限	Ⅰ级下限	Ⅱ级下限	Ⅲ级下限
专家1	34	25	12	28	18	8	34	25	12	28	17	8
专家2	35	25	15	27	18	9	34	25	12	31	20	10
专家3	33	23	15	32	20	10	32	23	10	27	17	7
专家4	37	27	17	28	20	8	35	26	12	26	18	7
专家5	33	23	14	29	19	9	33	24	11	29	20	8
专家6	36	25	15	30	20	10	34	25	13	30	19	10
专家7	37	25	17	33	22	11	35	26	13	28	17	8
专家8	33	25	14	28	19	10	36	27	14	28	18	8
专家9	35	24	15	32	22	12	33	24	12	27	17	7
专家10	37	28	16	33	22	13	34	25	11	26	17	7
得分汇总	350	250	150	300	200	100	340	250	120	280	180	80
平均值	35	25	15	30	20	10	34	25	12	28	18	8

评价指标	矿山2 （α=0.569，β =0.431）	矿山3 （α=0.559，β =0.441）	矿山4 （α=0.580，β =0.420）	矿山5 （α=0.557，β =0.443）
x₁	0.096	0.097	0.083	0.087
x₂	0.105	0.104	0.113	0.090
x₃	0.082	0.069	0.079	0.052
x₄	0.071	0.044	0.070	0.067
x₅	0.125	0.113	0.096	0.121
x₆	0.043	0.080	0.038	0.082
x₇	0.022	0.073	0.070	0.064
x₈	0.145	0.125	0.154	0.129
x₉	0.057	0.035	0.073	0.039
x₁₀	0.078	0.086	0.095	0.094
x₁₁	0.059	0.066	0.009	0.064
x₁₂	0.116	0.108	0.119	0.110

安全性级别	矿山1	矿山2	矿山3	矿山4	矿山5
级别评价结果	Ⅱ级	Ⅲ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级
Ⅰ级	-0.339	-0.361	-0.309	-0.259	-0.203
Ⅱ级	-0.251	-0.319	-0.256	-0.323	-0.121
Ⅲ级	-0.261	-0.265	-0.352	-0.447	-0.294
Ⅳ级	-0.444	-0.453	-0.557	-0.640	-0.508

方法	安全等级
方法	矿山1	矿山2	矿山3	矿山4	矿山5
本文方法评价结果	Ⅱ级	Ⅲ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级
模糊综合评价法评价结果	Ⅱ级	Ⅲ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级

[1]	Guoyan ZHAO,Pan WU,Xingfu ZHU,Yuan ZHAO,Yang LI,Ju QIU. Priority Evaluation of Green Mining Technology in Sanshandao Gold Mine Based on Grey Correlation Analysis [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2019, 27(6): 835-843.
[2]	Jiayuan CAO,Fengshan MA,Jie GUO,Guodong ZHANG,Zhaoping LI. Study on Subsidence Prediction of Inclined Orebody Cut and Fill Mining in Seabed [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2019, 27(4): 522-529.
[3]	YANG Chao, SHI Xiuzhi. Mine Safety Standardization Grade Evaluation Based on Fisher Discriminant Model [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2018, 26(2): 187-194.
[4]	KE Yuxian，WANG Xinmin，LIU Qi，LIU Enyan. Reliability Evaluation of Mine’s Six-System Based on Entropy Weight and Matter Element Analysis [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2018, 26(1): 31-39.
[5]	BI Lin，XIE Wei，CUI Jun. Identification Research on the Miner’s Safety Helmet Wear Based on Convolutional Neural Network [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2017, 25(4): 73-80.
[6]	WANG Xinmin，FAN Biao，ZHANG Deming，LI Shuai. Synthetic Judgement for Filling Scheme Optimization Based on AHP and TPOSIS Methods [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2016, 24(5): 1-6.
[7]	FENG Xuefei，LUO Zhouquan，WANG Wei，LU Fan. Study and Application of RS-CPM Model for Analysis of Mined Goaf Insta-bility [J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2015, 23(3): 67-72.