Professional Documents
Culture Documents
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Major accidents from gas explosions have a high rate of occurrence in Chinese coal mines. The frequency
Received 20 March 2012 of major gas explosion accidents between the years 1980e2000, and the years 2001e2010 was reviewed.
Received in revised form Case studies were also compared. The study of direct causes indicates that during the period 2001e2010
1 September 2012
the proportion of accidents caused by deliberate violation was reduced by 31.13% compared with data
Accepted 2 September 2012
from 1980 to 2000. However the proportion of accidents caused by mismanagement rose by 32.38%
during this period. Direct causes of high occurrence rate accidents include deliberate violations such as
Keywords:
illegal blasting, conducting maintenance with the power on, and mismanagement behaviors such as
Major gas explosion accidents
Direct causes
chaotic electromechanical management and chaotic ventilation management. The study of environ-
Environment characteristics mental characteristics shows that the proportion of accidents occurring in the heading faces increased by
Surface chart of accident regularities 27.18%. The study of human factors indicates that deliberate violation behaviors showed a high utility
Quadrifid graph of behavior characteristics ehigh cost factor. Mismanagement behaviors showed strong correlation with responsibility awareness
and weak correlation with technological ability.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0950-4230/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2012.09.001
H. Chen et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 26 (2013) 38e44 39
97.67% of total accidents and 96.59% of major gas explosion acci- mines. To facilitate the process of finding a solution, it is meaningful
dents, which are much higher than generally thought. Deliberate to characterize further the gas explosion accidents from the view
violations are behaviors which violate the safety systems (regula- points of the environment and direct causes. It can help to find in
tions, procedures, etc.). These may cause accidents directly, such as which environment and by what kind of actions the gas explosions
smoking, blasting without checking gas and so on. Mismanagement is were triggered.
a special human factor causing fatal accidents, including false The characteristics of the environment are defined here as the
management decisions, improper production process disposal or spatial distribution of accidents determined by the location,
dereliction of duty. Examples of this are conducting live working working conditions, geological features and other factors. The
during maintenance processes, use of damaged cables, unreasonable direct cause of the accident is the material cause that directly led to
local ventilation etc. Defective design is a type of human error behavior the fatal coal mine accidents.
that can cause defects in the construction process of the shafts, mining Table 2 presents the statistical data of the environment char-
systems, ventilation systems, and electromechanical systems, etc. It is acteristics of major gas explosion accidents in the periods 1980e
a particular human factor with hysteretic and systematic characteris- 2000 and 2001e2010 periods; Table 3 shows the statistical data
tics that occurs at the beginning of the coal production time chain. For of causes of major gas explosion accidents in the corresponding two
major coal mine accidents that occurred during 2001e2010, the periods.
statistical data showed that, of the direct causes, human factors As Table 2 shows, the environment characteristics of major gas
accounted for 95.10% of all the accidents and 100% of all the major gas explosion accidents in the two periods are not radically different.
explosion accidents. For example, on 20th October 2004, a gas Most major gas explosion accidents in the two periods occurred in
explosion accident occurred in the Daping coal mine in Zhengzhou the working face, including the coal face and heading face.
city, Henan province, in which 148 miners died. The reasons However, the rate of major gas explosion accidents that occurred in
announced by the China State Administration of Coal Mine Safety the heading faces rose significantly, from 25.85% in 1980e2000 to
(SACMS) were chaotic ventilation management and improper system 53.03% in 2001e2010, increasing by 27.18%. This indicates that
design which strengthened the gas countercurrent after extruding. At greater attention should be paid to the working place of the
3 pm on 14th February 2005, a gas explosion accident occurred in the heading faces in order to prevent major gas explosion accidents in
Sunjiawan coal mine attached to Fuxin LLC in Liaoning province which underground coal mines.
left 214 miners dead. Investigation results published by SACMS According to Table 3, the causes of major gas explosion accidents in
showed that the reasons were “With the wind on the driving working the two periods were similar; however, the main causes of major gas
face stopping, workers were still repairing the protective device of explosion accidents in the past 10 years have noticeably shifted. The
temporary distributor with the power on.” At 2:30 on 11th July 2005, rate of major gas explosion accidents caused by smoking or disman-
a gas explosion accident occurred in the Shenlong coal mine in Fukang tling the cap-lamp decreased significantly, while unsafe behaviors of
city, Xinjiang province, in which 83 miners died. The reasons enterprises, such as illegal production and ordering cross-border
announced by SACMS were illegal mining, production exceeding its mining become the main contributors to the fatal accidents, reflect-
ability, commanding workers to work under abnormal gas density, ing the low efficiency of coal mine supervision in a macroscopic level.
chaotic electromechanical equipment management, insufficient safety To find the exact frequency of gas explosion accidents and take
management. All of the above gas explosion accidents were caused by proper and sufficient preventive measures, it is helpful to study the
human factors. The details are shown in Table 1. rate of the accidents which crossed two key dimensions, i.e. envi-
It can be seen from Table 1 that of the human factors that caused ronments and causes. Thus the likelihood of the accident being
major accidents (including major gas explosion accidents) in the caused by one fatal factor in a specific environment can be
past 10 years, the proportion of deliberate violation decreased by visualized.
31.13%, while the proportion of mismanagement rose by 32.38%. Let Cij denote the rate of major gas explosions occurring in
This provides an indication that coal mine enterprises’ control over environment Ai and caused by behavior or event Bj. For the gas
the workers’ unsafe behaviors did work to some extent. However, explosion accidents that occurred during the years 1980e2000,
the control over the unsafe behaviors at an administrative level there were 16 different types of environments, represented by
should be strengthened. A1eA16, and there were nine different types of causes, represented
by B1eB9. Cij which forms a matrix of 16*9. Similarly, for the gas
3. Characteristic frequency of major gas explosion accidents explosion accidents that occurred during the years 2001e2010,
based on environment characteristics and direct causes there were five different types of environments and ten different
types of causes. Cij forms a matrix of 5*10. The figures of accident
As shown in the above analysis, human factors are the key occurrence rate in the two periods are shown in Figs. 1 and 2,
factors leading to major gas explosion accidents in Chinese coal respectively.
Table 1
The human factor proportion in major gas explosion accident causes in Chinese coal mines.
Accidents
Reasons Gas explosion Total major accidents Gas explosion Total major accidents
accidents (1980e2000) (1980e2000) accidents (2001e2010) (2001e2010)
Intentional violation 227 552 32 100
Mismanagement 153 540 92 186
Defective design 16 83 8 9
Total human factors 396 1175 132 291
Total accidents 410 1203 132 306
Intentional violation rate 55.37% 45.89% 24.24% 32.68%
Mismanagement rate 37.32% 44.89% 69.70% 60.78%
Defective design rate 3.90% 6.90% 6.06% 2.94%
Human factors rate 96.59% 97.67% 100.00% 95.10%
40 H. Chen et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 26 (2013) 38e44
Table 2
Environment characteristics frequency of major gas explosion accidents in Chinese coal mines.
Environment characteristics types Number of accidents Proportion Environment characteristics types Number of accidents Proportion
Gob area 15 3.66% Coal face 36 27.27%
Coal face 108 26.34% Heading face 70 53.03%
Panel 20 4.88% Construction roadway 7 5.30%
Heading face 106 25.85% Airway 2 1.52%
Level 33 8.05% Level 2 1.52%
Crossheading 27 6.59% Uphill and downhill 3 2.27%
Haulage roadway 14 3.41% Crossheading 2 1.52%
Shaft bottom 31 7.56% Other roadway 3 2.27%
Return airway 10 2.44% Shaft 3 2.27%
Heading roadway 4 0.98% Cross hole 1 0.76%
Hoist house 4 0.98% Open-off cut 1 0.76%
Water sump 7 1.71% Coal bunker 1 0.76%
Coal warehouse 3 0.73% Station 1 0.76%
Station 6 1.46% Total 132 100%
Blind roadway 7 1.71%
Others 15 3.66%
Total 410 100.00%
In Fig. 1, 1e16 on the axis of environment characteristics corre- management (electromechanical equipment with no blast resis-
spond to the gob area, coal face, panel, heading face, level, cross- tance, cable breakage), and chaotic ventilation management
heading, haulage roadway, shaft bottom, return airway, heading (chaotic ventilation design, series ventilation, turning on and off
roadway, hoist house, water sump, coal warehouse, station, blind the local fan without permission), respectively, as shown in the
roadway, and others, respectively, as shown in the first column of forth column of Table 3. The three protuberant points are located in
Table 2. Numbers 1e9 on the axis of causes correspond to illegal chaotic ventilation management (B10)/coal face (A1), illegal
blasting, smoking, dismantling the cap-lamp, conducting mainte- production (B7)/heading face (A2), and chaotic electromechanical
nance with the power on, chaotic electromechanical equipment equipment management (B9)/heading face (A2).
management (electromechanical equipment with no blast resis- Overall, through the analysis of gas explosion accidents in the
tance, cable breakage), tool strike friction sparks, spontaneous two periods, the gas explosion accidents which occurred in the
combustion, chaotic safety management (poor ventilation heading faces increased significantly, and the rate of accidents that
management, illegal construction), reckless behavior, respectively, occurred in the coal faces was still very high. The rate of accidents
as shown in the first column of Table 3. The figure includes four caused by illegal blasting, smoking, dismantling the cap-lamp in
protuberant points, i.e., illegal blasting (B1)/heading face (A4), illegal the working face decreased. Illegal production, chaotic electrome-
blasting (B1)/coal face (A2); chaotic electromechanical equipment chanical equipment management were important causes of major
management (B5)/heading face (A4), and chaotic electromechanical gas explosion accidents in the heading faces. Chaotic ventilation
equipment management (B5)/coal face (A2). management was the most important factor regarding major gas
In Fig. 2, 1e5 on the axis of environment characteristics corre- explosion accidents in the coal face.
spond to the coal face, heading face, construction roadway, shaft,
and others, respectively, which are obtained after merging similar 4. Deliberate violation and mismanagement behaviors
types of environment characteristics in the forth column of Table 2. related to gas explosion accidents
Numbers 1e10 on the axis of causes correspond to illegal blasting,
smoking, dismantling the cap-lamp, conducting maintenance with As shown in Table 1, human factors accounted for 96.59% and
the power on, not performing ‘power outages and power trans- 100% of the gas explosion accidents in the 1980e2000 and 2001e
mission’ regulations, absence on duty, illegal production, ordering 2010 periods. Therefore, it is reasonable to treat them separately
mining in cross-border area, chaotic electromechanical equipment and in more detail. Human factors related to the gas explosion
Table 3
Direct cause frequency of major gas explosion accidents in Chinese coal mines.
Cause frequency of major gas explosion accidents from 1980 to 2000 Cause frequency of major gas explosion accidents from 2001 to 2010
Fig. 1. Surface chart of characteristic frequency of major gas explosion accidents from
the year 1980 to 2000.
Fig. 3. Frequency of accidents caused by deliberate violation from the year 1980 to
2000.
accidents can be classified into two categories: deliberate violations
and mismanagement behaviors.
working face. In Fig. 4, 1e6 on the causes axis represent illegal
Figs. 3 and 4 show the characteristic frequency of major gas
blasting, smoking, dismantling the cap-lamp, conducting mainte-
explosion accidents from the dimensions of environment and
nance with power the on, not performing “power outages and
deliberate violation in the two periods, respectively. Fig. 5 shows
power transmission” regulations, and absence on duty, respec-
the distribution frequency of behavior utility and behavior cost
tively. Numbers 1e5 on the axis of environment characteristics
corresponding to various causes of deliberate violation.
represent the coal face, heading face, construction roadway, shaft,
In Fig. 3, 1e5 on the causes axis represent illegal blasting,
and other environments, respectively. The protuberant points in
smoking, dismantling the cap-lamp, conducting maintenance with
the curved surface are illegal blasting behavior in the heading face,
the power on, and others, respectively; 1e11 on the axis of envi-
illegal blasting behavior in the coal face and conducting mainte-
ronment characteristics represent the heading face, coal face, level,
nance with the power on in the heading face. Illegal blasting
crossheading, shaft bottom, gob area, panel, heading roadway,
behavior is an important cause in the two periods. Further analysis
haulage roadway, return airway, and others, respectively. The
showed that illegal blasting causes can be divided into: not per-
prominent protuberant point is the illegal blasting behavior in the
forming “to check the gas three times before a burst”, blasting with
Fig. 2. Surface chart of characteristic frequency of major gas explosion accidents from Fig. 4. Frequency of accidents caused by deliberate violation from the year 2001 to
the year 2001 to 2010. 2010.
42 H. Chen et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 26 (2013) 38e44
Fig. 5. Quadrifid graph of behavior utility and behavior cost of deliberate violation.
the wires exposed to the air or visible flame, blasting with multiple
buses, not to fill stemming as required, reverse blasting, multiple
blasting with one time filling, and so on. Fig. 6. Frequency of accidents caused by mismanagement from 1980 to 2000.
Fig. 5 shows a quadrifid graph of behavior utility and behavior
cost of deliberate violation. Behavior utility refers to the profits Numbers 1e14 on the environment axis characteristics represent
which can be perceived by the workers through implementing the coal face; heading face; shaft bottom; panel; level; crossheading;
violation behavior. These include psychological and physiological gob area; haulage roadway; station; airway; blind roadway; hoist
utility, economic utility and time utility. Behavior cost refers to the house; water sump; and others, respectively. The prominent
cost that can be perceived by the workers through implementing protuberant point is the chaotic electromechanical equipment
the violation behavior, including stress cost through dangerous management behavior in the working face. In Fig. 7, 1e4 on the
conditions and regulation execution cost. Based on the calculation causes axis represent illegal production; ordering mining in cross-
method (Chen, 2006), the behavior utility and cost were obtained border area; chaotic electromechanical equipment management;
through expert survey and statistical methods. In Fig. 5, the utilitye and chaotic ventilation management behaviors, respectively.
cost values for behaviors AeK are: A (3.47, 3.79, not performing “to Numbers 1e5 on the environment axis characteristics represent
check the gas three times in a burst”); B (3.12, 4.17, blasting with the coal face; heading face; construction roadway; shaft; and others,
wires exposed to the air or visible flame); C (2.79, 3.32, blasting respectively. There is no apparent fluctuation of causes in the curve,
with multiple bus); D (2.61, 3.54, not to fill stemming as regula- and illegal production, ordering mining in cross-border areas,
tions); E (1.44, 3.31, reverse blasting); F (3.03, 3.77, blasting with chaotic electromechanical equipment management, and chaotic
rock explosive); G (2.99, 2.78, a few times blasting with one time ventilation management are among the most dangerous misman-
filling); H (3.34, 4.17, smoking); I (1.21, 3.75, dismantling the cap- agement behaviors leading to fatal gas explosion accidents.
lamp); J (3.21, 3.34, conducting maintenance with the power on);
and K (3.47, 3.00, absence on duty), respectively.
Table 3 shows that during the 2001e2010 period, 17 major gas
explosion accidents were caused by illegal blasting, in which not
performing “to check the gas three times before a burst” is the main
behavior. In addition, nine major gas explosion accidents were
caused by conducting maintenance with the power on. Both
behaviors are typical high-utility, low-cost behaviors. This means
that the utility workers perceived from the deliberate violation
behaviors is obtained instantly and is cumulative, but the behavior
cost has a certain probability nature. This indicates that the
supervision and economic punishment system currently adopted
by coal mine enterprises for controlling unsafe behaviors is not
adequate for workers to perceive the cost of violation behaviors.
The workers’ violation behaviors cannot be controlled only by the
increase of economic punishment alone.
Figs. 6 and 7 show the characteristic frequency of major gas
explosion accidents from the dimensions of mismanagement and
environment characteristics in the two periods. Fig. 8 shows
distribution frequency of responsibility awareness and technolog-
ical ability corresponding to various causes of mismanagement.
In Fig. 6, 1e6 on the causes axis represent chaotic electrome-
chanical equipment management; ordering illegal blasting; tool
strike friction sparks; ordering illegal production; spontaneous
combustion; and chaotic safety management, respectively. Fig. 7. Frequency of accidents caused by mismanagement from 2001 to 2010.
H. Chen et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 26 (2013) 38e44 43
miners’ unsafe behaviors and managers’ low responsibility Education Humanities and Social Science Project (10YJA630010,
awareness. The working environment, labor intensity, safety 11YJ630162), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central
rights, organizational care, organizational respect could not Universities (2012LWA04).
reach their expectation, and they foresaw that the factors could
not be improved in the future, which led to an incompatible
status between individual benefit and organizational benefit. References
The phenomenon indicates deficiency of organizational
Amyotte, P. R. (2006). Solid inertants and their use in dust explosion preven-
responsibility to workers, bringing severe psychological tion and mitigation. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,
contract violation, also having a huge negative influence on 19(2), 161e173.
workers’ attitude and behavior. Thus, they usually choose to Amyotte, P. R., & Eckhoff, R. K. (2009). Dust explosion causation, prevention and
mitigation: an overview. Journal of Chemical Health and Safety, 17(1), 15e28.
strengthen the benefit cognition from unsafe behavior, and are Chen, H. (2006). Unsafe behavior study of major accidents in China coal mines. Bei-
not willing to sacrifice their own benefit for production safety. jing: Science Press.
Further, it must damage the entire results, and strengthen the Chen, H. (2008). “Behavioral fence” for major coal mine accidents prevention and
control. Beijing: Economic Science Press.
externalization of unsafe behavior cost, forming negative Chen, H., Qi, H., Long, R. Y., & Zhang, M. L. (2012). Research on 10-year tendency of
external effects. Thus, the organization will pay the accident China coal mine accidents and the characteristics of human factors. Safety
cost in the end. Therefore, for Chinese coal mines, the key to Science, 50, 745e750.
Oh, K. H., Kim, H., Kim, J. B., & Lee, S. E. (2001). A study on the obstacle-induced
reducing coal mine accidents caused by human factors lies in variation of the gas explosion characteristics. Journal of Loss Prevention in the
good cooperation between the coal mine enterprises and the Process Industries, 14(6), 597e602.
miners. They should undertake organizational responsibilities State Administration of Coal Mine Safety. (2009a). Main points of coal mine safety
in 2009. Available on-line at. <http://www.gov.cn>.
to construct positive organizationeworker relations, to reach State Administration of Coal Mine Safety. (2009b). Notice of revision opinions about
the status of “high organizational responsibilityehigh workers’ “coal mine enterprise safety production license implementation methods”.
responsibility”, and improve the behavioral safety of the Available on-line at. <http://www.gov.cn>.
State Administration of Coal Mine Safety. (2010). Main points of coal mine safety in
workers themselves.
2010. Available on-line at. <http://www.gov.cn>.
Wang, S. H. (2005). Strengthen safety management of small coal mines, try to
Acknowledgments realize stable improvement of coal mines’ safety production situation. Available
on-line at. <http://www.chinasafety.gov.cn/zhengwugongkai/2006-05/16/
content_167000.htm>.
This work was financially supported by Natural Science Foun- Wang, J. F., & Li, W. J. (2001). China’s coal mine accidents and comments of safety
dation of China Project (70671101, 71173217), China Ministry of specialists. Beijing: Coal Industry Press.