...
首页> 外文期刊>Resources policy >Systemic approaches to incident analysis in coal mines: Comparison of the STAMP, FRAM and '2-4' models
【24h】

Systemic approaches to incident analysis in coal mines: Comparison of the STAMP, FRAM and '2-4' models

机译:煤矿事件分析的系统性方法:邮票,FRAM和“2-4”模型的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Coal mine accidents are often caused by the coupling of multiple factors rather than by a single factor. Therefore, explaining the nonlinear and coupling characteristics in accidents by using traditional accident theory is hard. To cope with the safety challenges caused by the extensive use of digital components and the construction of complex systems, incorporating the idea of system engineering into accident analysis is deemed effective. First, this paper introduces the basic principles and analysis steps of the Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP), Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) and "2-4" models and then applies the three models to the eight coal mine accidents. Finally, the three models are compared based on their characteristics, analysis processes and analysis results. The results show that the accident causes identified by the three methods cover the main causes in the accident investigation report, and new causes were identified. However, the results of the STAMP and FRAM models are more comprehensive and systematic, but the model characteristics and analysis processes are more complex, whereas the results of the "2-4" model analysis are relatively broad, but the analysis process is simple and easy to understand. Therefore, the study suggests that although the choice of accident causing model depends on the user's knowledge level or accident type, the STAMP and FRAM models are more suitable for analyzing a small number of complex coal mine accidents, while the "2-4" model is more advantageous in the analysis of large number of accidents.
机译:煤矿事故通常由多因素而不是单一因素引起的。因此,通过使用传统的事故理论来解释事故中的非线性和耦合特性是艰难的。为了应对数字组件广泛使用和复杂系统建设所造成的安全挑战,将系统工程思想纳入事故分析的思想被视为有效。首先,本文介绍了系统 - 理论事故模型和过程(印章),功能共振分析方法(FRAM)和“2-4”型号的基本原理和分析步骤,然后将三种模型应用于八种煤矿事故。最后,基于其特征,分析过程和分析结果进行比较三种模型。结果表明,三种方法鉴定的事故原因涵盖了事故调查报告中的主要原因,并确定了新的原因。但是,邮票和架构模型的结果更全面和系统,但模型特征和分析过程更复杂,而“2-4”模型分析的结果相对广泛,但分析过程很简单容易理解。因此,该研究表明,虽然事故的选择导致模型取决于用户的知识水平或事故类型,但印章和FRAM模型更适合分析少数复杂的煤矿事故,而“2-4”模型在分析大量事故时更有利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号