Mining of Mineral Deposits

ISSN 2415-3443 (Online)

ISSN 2415-3435 (Print)

Flag Counter

Determination of the injury probability among coal mine workers

Dmytro Nosal1, Serhii Konovalov1, Volodymyr Shevchenko2

1PJSC “DTEK Pavlohradvuhillia”, Pavlohrad, 51400, Ukraine

2Institute of Geotechnical Mechanics named by N. Poljakov of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Dnipro, 49005, Ukraine


Min. miner. depos. 2021, 15(2):47-53


https://doi.org/10.33271/mining15.02.053

Full text (PDF)


      ABSTRACT

      Purpose. Establishing regularities of change in the injury probability and development of a methodology for determining the injury probability of coal mine workers to improve the occupational health and safety (OSH) management system efficiency.

      Methods. Methods of mathematical statistics and mathematical analysis were used in the data processing of coal mine workers’ injuries; probability theory and risk theory were applied for setting equations to determine the injury probability; correlation and regression analysis were used to determine the density and nature of the dependences reflecting changes in the injury probability.

      Findings. A calculator has been developed to compute the injury probability of an employee. This instrument distributes the probability into three “zones”: high probability – “red zone”, medium probability – “yellow zone”, and low probability – “green zone”. The injury probability for all employees of the mine administration was calculated. It was found that the clo-sest relationship between the number of injuries and the calculated probability is observed for mining sites (medium probability) and for tunneling sites (high probability). For employees with a calculated high injury probability, in most cases, the causes of injury were objective and less dependent on employees themselves. For employees with a medium probability, the causes independent of and dependent on employees were approximately equally correlated. In the case of employees with a low probability, the main reasons were subjective – dependent on the employees themselves. For employees in the main operational sites (mining and tunneling), the cause of injury is directly related to the specifics of the production operations performed: the presence of loose space.

      Originality. For the first time, relationships were determined between the injury probability and the profession. We also established relationships between experience at the enterprise, age, marital status of an employee and the injury causes, as well as between the actual number of injuries and the calculated injury probability.

      Practical implications. A method for determining the injury probability of coal mine workers has been developed and implemented. The ways of improving the methods for calculating the injury probability are determined.

      Keywords: injury probability, coal mine, position, age, experience, marital status, injury causes, relationships


      REFERENCES

  1. DSTU ISO 9001:2015. (2015). Systemy upravlinnia yakistiu. Kyiv, Ukraina.
  2. DSTU OHSAS 18001:2010. (2010). Systemy upravlinnia hihiienoiu ta bezpekoiu pratsi. Vymohy. Kyiv, Ukraina.
  3. ISO 45001:2018. (2018). Occupational health and safety management systems – requirements with guidance for use. Geneva, Switzerland.
  4. Shevchenko, V.G., & Nosal, D.A. (2018). Procedure for danger identification and risk assessment in the field of labor protection. Geo-Technical Mechanics, (141), 190-203. https://doi.org/10.15407/geotm2018.141.190
  5. Nosal, D.A., & Shevchenko, V.H. (2018). Procedure for classifying, analyzing and reacting to dangerous actions. Geo-Technical Mechanics, (143), 143-152. https://doi.org/10.15407/geotm2018.143.143
  6. Nosal, D.A., & Shevchenko, V.H. (2019). Method of assessment of coal mines managers in the labor safety. Geo-Technical Mechanics, (149), 77-88. https://doi.org/10.15407/geotm2019.149.077
  7. Parkhan’ski, Yu. (2016). Risk travmatizma rabochikh ugol’nykh shakht i ego gisterezis. Zapiski Gornogo Instituta, (222), 869-876. https://doi.org/10.18454/PMI.2016.6.869
  8. Lisovskiy, V.V., Ivanov, Y.M., Voroshilov, A.S., Sedelnikov, G.E., & Un, L.K. (2018). Practical use of methodology of quantitative risk assessment “Probability Harm Risk (PHR)” as exemplified by “Suek-Kuzbass” JSC. Ugol’, (12), 41-46. https://doi.org/10.18796/0041-5790-2018-12-41-46
  9. Ghosh, A.K., & Bhattacherjee, A. (2007). Predictors of occupational injuries among coal miners: causal analysis. Mining Technology, 116(1), 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1179/174328607x161879
  10. Mahdevari, S., Shahriar, K., & Esfahanipour, A. (2014). Human health and safety risks management in underground coal mines using fuzzy TOPSIS. Science of The Total Environment, (488-489), 85-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.04.076
  11. Cheberiachko, S., Cheberiachko, Yu., Sotskov, V., & Tytov, O. (2018). Analysis of the factors influencing the level of professional health and the biological age of miners during underground mining of coal seams. Mining of Mineral Deposits, 12(3), 87-96. https://doi.org/10.15407/mining12.03.087
  12. Tong, R., Zhang, Y., Yang, Y., Jia, Q., Ma, X., & Shao, G. (2019). Evaluating targeted intervention on coal miners’ unsafe behavior. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(3), 422. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030422
  13. Domínguez, C.R., Martínez, I.V., Piñón Peña, P.M., & Rodríguez Ochoa, A. (2019). Analysis and evaluation of risks in underground mining using the decision matrix risk-assessment (DMRA) technique, in Guanajuato, Mexico. Journal of Sustainable Mining, 18(1), 52-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsm.2019.01.001
  14. Mishra, R.K., Janiszewski, M., Uotinen, L.K.T., Szydlowska, M., Siren, T., & Rinne, M. (2017). Geotechnical risk management concept for intelligent deep mines. Procedia Engineering, (191), 361-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.192
  15. Mancini, L., & Sala, S. (2018). Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resources Policy, (57), 98-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.02.002
  16. Krzemień, A., Suárez Sánchez, A., Riesgo Fernández, P., Zimmermann, K., & González Coto, F. (2016). Towards sustainability in underground coal mine closure contexts: A methodology proposal for environmental risk management. Journal of Cleaner Production, (139), 1044-1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.149
  17. Duzgun, H.S.B., & Einstein, H.H. (2004). Assessment and management of roof fall risks in underground coal mines. Safety Science, 42(1), 23-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0925-7535(02)00067-x
  18. Amponsah-Tawiah, K., Jain, A., Leka, S., Hollis, D., & Cox, T. (2013). Examining psychosocial and physical hazards in the Ghanaian mining industry and their implications for employees’ safety experience. Journal of Safety Research, (45), 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2013.01.003
  19. Amirshenava, S., & Osanloo, M. (2018). Mine closure risk management: An integration of 3D risk model and MCDM techniques. Journal of Cleaner Production, (184), 389-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.186
  20. Sari, M., Selcuk, A.S., Karpuz, C., & Duzgun, H.S.B. (2009). Stochastic modeling of accident risks associated with an underground coal mine in Turkey. Safety Science, 47(1), 78-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2007.12.004

    21. Лицензия Creative Commons

Copyright © 2024 Dnipro University of Technology

Underground Mining Department

All Rights Reserved.

Journal homepage Authors