| Literature DB >> 31783616 |
Chunjing Gao1,2, Dongmei Huang1,2,3, Xikun Chang1,2,3, Han Xi1,2.
Abstract
In order to evaluate the surrounding rock stability of deep roadways, the diversity of accident hazard sources in deep coal mining is statistically analyzed. To conduct an effective evaluation, first, the risk analysis of the factors affecting the rock mass accidents is carried out, and the comprehensive safety index system of rock accidents in deep mine roadway is established. Further, combining the theory of hazard sources with the extension method, a matter-element model for the risk assessment of rock mass accidents in deep roadway is established. Finally, the hazard sources for the surrounding rock stability of deep roadway in the E-Zhuang coal mine of Xinwen Ming area are evaluated. The results show that the risk grade of the surrounding rock for deep roadways in E-Zhuang coal mine is "B", which is generally safe, the human factors and organizational management factors are relatively safe, and some suggestions for improvement are put forward.Entities:
Keywords: deep roadway; extension method; risk assessment; stability of surrounding rock
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31783616 PMCID: PMC6926719 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16234752
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1System of surrounding rock stability for deep roadway in coal mine [23].
Characteristic of coal mine floor and roof.
| Name | Rock | Thickness/m | Rock Characteristics |
|---|---|---|---|
| Main roof | Medium grained sandstone | 20 | Gray–white; its main ingredient is quartz, followed by feldspar; calcareous cementation, dense and hard, not easy to fall |
| Immediate roof | Fine sandstone and siltstone | 5 | Light gray; its main ingredient is quartz, followed by feldspar; calcareous cementation, relatively hard and easy to fall; the compressive strengths Rc = 62.0 MPa; joint crack spacing I = 0.5 m; layered thickness h = 0.2 m |
| False roof | Carbonaceous mudstone | 0–0.5 | Lamellar; firmness coefficient f = 3 |
| Coal seam | 4# coal | 1.6 | Relatively stable thickness |
| Immediate floor | Mudstone | 2.0 | Light gray; silty sand; no bedding; relatively hard; not easy to deform; allowable pressure ratio 26.5 MPa, the compressive strengths Rc = 39.27 MPa |
Roadway section characteristics.
| Name of Roadway | Roadway Shape | Height of Roadway/m | Roadway Section Area/m2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2409 working face transportation trough | trapezium | 2.25 | 7.5 |
Data on three major types of hazard sources.
| Source of Risk | Frequency | Risk | Prevention Difficulty | Sphere of Influence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compression strength of surrounding rock | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| Rock quality designation (RQD) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Support equipment | 3 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| Roof conditions | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 |
| Hydrogeological conditions | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| The roadway’s size and shape | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| The depth of excavation | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Exploitation influence of workings nearby | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Staff safety awareness | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| length of service | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Personal protection | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Emergency self-rescue ability | 4 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| Staff certification | 4 | 0 | 4 | 1 |
| Related rules and regulations | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Safety education and training | 3 | 2 | 4 | 0 |
| Security management organization | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Emergency rescue plan | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| Safety technical measures | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Correlation coefficient table.
| Source of Risk | Frequency of Occurrence | Risk | Prevention Difficulty | Sphere of Influence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compression strength of surrounding rock | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.500 | 0.667 |
| Rock quality designation (RQD) | 0.667 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.667 |
| Support equipment | 0.400 | 1.000 | 0.333 | 1.000 |
| Roof conditions | 0.400 | 0.667 | 0.333 | 0.500 |
| Hydrogeological conditions | 0.667 | 1.000 | 0.667 | 1.000 |
| The roadway’s size and shape | 0.500 | 0.667 | 0.500 | 1.000 |
| The depth of excavation | 0.400 | 0.667 | 0.500 | 0.667 |
| Exploitation influence of workings nearby | 0.500 | 1.000 | 0.667 | 1.000 |
| Staff safety awareness | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.667 | 1.000 |
| length of service | 0.667 | 1.000 | 0.500 | 1.000 |
| Personal protection | 0.400 | 1.000 | 0.500 | 1.000 |
| Emergency self-rescue ability | 0.333 | 1.000 | 0.333 | 1.000 |
| Staff certification | 0.333 | 1.000 | 0.333 | 0.667 |
| Related rules and regulations | 0.400 | 0.667 | 0.500 | 0.500 |
| Safety education and training | 0.400 | 0.500 | 0.333 | 1.000 |
| Security management organization | 0.667 | 1.000 | 0.667 | 1.000 |
| Emergency rescue plan | 0.500 | 0.667 | 0.400 | 0.667 |
| Safety technical measures | 0.500 | 0.667 | 0.500 | 0.667 |
Correlation sequence calculation results.
| Source of Risk | Correlation Sequence (a) |
|---|---|
| Compression strength of surrounding rock | 0.6334 |
| Rock quality designation (RQD) | 0.6668 |
| Support equipment | 0.5466 |
| Roof conditions | 0.3800 |
| Hydrogeological conditions | 0.6668 |
| The roadway’s size and shape | 0.5334 |
| The depth of excavation | 0.4468 |
| Exploitation influence of workings nearby | 0.6334 |
| Staff safety awareness | 0.8251 |
| length of service | 0.7126 |
| Personal protection | 0.6525 |
| Emergency self-rescue ability | 0.5999 |
| Staff certification | 0.5249 |
| Related rules and regulations | 0.3101 |
| Safety education and training | 0.3350 |
| Security management organization | 0.5001 |
| Emergency rescue plan | 0.3351 |
| Safety technical measures | 0.3501 |
Classical domain table of mine rock accidents.
| Evaluation Feature | Grading standards | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safe (A) | Generally Safe (B) | Riskier (C) | Dangerous (D) | |
| Compression strength of surrounding rock | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Rock quality designation (RQD) | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Support equipment | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Roof conditions | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Hydrogeological conditions | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| The roadway’s size and shape | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| The depth of excavation | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Exploitation influence of workings nearby | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Staff safety awareness | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| length of service | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Personal protection | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Emergency self-rescue ability | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Staff certification | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Related rules and regulations | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Safety education and training | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Security management organization | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Emergency rescue plan | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
| Safety technical measures | [90, 100) | [80, 90) | [70, 80) | [0, 70) |
Evaluation index score.
| Evaluation Feature | Score |
|---|---|
| Compression strength of surrounding rock | 95 |
| Rock quality designation (RQD) | 95 |
| Support equipment | 95 |
| Roof conditions | 85 |
| Hydrogeological conditions | 95 |
| The roadway’s size and shape | 85 |
| The depth of excavation | 85 |
| Exploitation influence of workings nearby | 95 |
| Staff safety awareness | 85 |
| length of service | 85 |
| Personal protection | 85 |
| Emergency self-rescue ability | 85 |
| Staff certification | 95 |
| Related rules and regulations | 85 |
| Safety education and training | 75 |
| Security management organization | 85 |
| Emergency rescue plan | 85 |
| Safety technical measures | 95 |
Correlation degree calculation results.
| Evaluation Project | K(A) | K(B) | K(C) | K(D) | Weight Coefficient |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| U11 | 0.0500 | −0.0500 | −0.1364 | −0.2083 | 0.6334 |
| U12 | 0.0500 | −0.0500 | −0.1364 | −0.2083 | 0.6668 |
| U13 | 0.0500 | -0.0500 | −0.1364 | −0.2083 | 0.5466 |
| U14 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.3800 |
| U15 | 0.0500 | −0.0500 | −0.1364 | −0.2083 | 0.6668 |
| U16 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.5334 |
| U17 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.4468 |
| U18 | 0.0500 | −0.0500 | −0.1364 | −0.2083 | 0.6334 |
| U21 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.8251 |
| U22 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.7126 |
| U23 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.6525 |
| U24 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.5999 |
| U25 | 0.0500 | −0.0500 | −0.1364 | −0.2083 | 0.5249 |
| U31 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.3101 |
| U32 | −0.1667 | −0.0625 | 0.0625 | −0.0625 | 0.3350 |
| U33 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.5001 |
| U34 | −0.0556 | 0.0556 | −0.0556 | −0.1500 | 0.3351 |
| U35 | 0.0500 | −0.0500 | −0.1364 | −0.2083 | 0.3501 |
Comprehensive correlative degree.
| KA(U) | KB(U) | KC(U) | KD(U) | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −0.0258 | 0.0112 | −0.3305 | −0.6327 | B |