Skip to main content
Log in

Mines Systems Safety Improvement Using an Integrated Event Tree and Fault Tree Analysis

  • Original Contribution
  • Published:
Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series D Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mines systems such as ventilation system, strata support system, flame proof safety equipment, are exposed to dynamic operational conditions such as stress, humidity, dust, temperature, etc., and safety improvement of such systems can be done preferably during planning and design stage. However, the existing safety analysis methods do not handle the accident initiation and progression of mine systems explicitly. To bridge this gap, this paper presents an integrated Event Tree (ET) and Fault Tree (FT) approach for safety analysis and improvement of mine systems design. This approach includes ET and FT modeling coupled with redundancy allocation technique. In this method, a concept of top hazard probability is introduced for identifying system failure probability and redundancy is allocated to the system either at component or system level. A case study on mine methane explosion safety with two initiating events is performed. The results demonstrate that the presented method can reveal the accident scenarios and improve the safety of complex mine systems simultaneously.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ET:

Event tree

FT:

Fault tree

HAZOP:

Hazard and operability study

STEP:

Safety training and evaluation process

PSA:

Probabilistic safety assessment

MSS:

Mines safety system

SB:

Safety barrier

THP:

Top hazard probability

ALARA:

As low as reasonably achievable

IE:

Initiating event

Ci :

ith consequence

PCk :

Probability of Ckth consequences

Si :

ith safety barrier

λi :

ith failure rate

Pi :

ith probabilities

References

  1. P.K. Marhavilas, D. Koulouriotis, V. Gemini, Risk analysis and assessment methodologies in the work sites: on a review, classification and comparative study of the scientific literature of the period 2000–2009. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 24, 477–523 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1975) Reactor Safety Study, an Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Nuclear Power Plants. WASH-1400. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC

  3. H.W. Lewis, R.J. Budnitz, H.J.C. Kouts, W.B. Loewenstein, W.D. Rowe, F. von Hippel, F. Zachariasen, Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 1978)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, An Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 1998)

    Google Scholar 

  5. G.E. Apostolakis, H. Dezfuli, S.D. Gahring, M.B. Sattison, W.E. Vesely, Report of the Independent Peer Review Panel on the Probabilistic Risk Assessment of the International Space Station (NASA Headquarters, Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, Washington, 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  6. R.J. Budnitz, G. Apostolakis, D.M. Boore, L.S. Cluff, K.J. Coppersmith, C.A. Cornell, P.A. Morris, Use of technical expert panels: applications to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Risk Anal. 18, 463–469 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. J. Joy, D. Griffiths, National minerals industry safety and health risk assessment guideline (Minerals Council of Australia: Version 6, Sydney, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. Badri, S. Nadeau, A. Gbodossou, Integration of OHS into risk management in an open-pit mining project in Quebec (Canada). Minerals 1, 3–29 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ministry of Coal (MoC), Guidelines for preparation of mining plans for coal/lignite blocks, Ministry of Coal, Government of India, New Delhi, No. 34011/(48)/2009-CPAM (2009)

  10. Ministry of Labour, Recommendations of 11th Conference on Safety in Mines. Ministry of Labour, New Delhi; http://www.dgms.net/Recommendation%20of%2011th%20safety%20conference,9.7.13.pdf (2013)

  11. Bureau of Indian Standards (2012) Indian Standard on Electrical Apparatus for Explosive Gas Atmospheres. Part 0: General Requirements. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi; IS/IEC 60079-0

  12. CDC Statistics (2014) http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/statistics/content/coaldisasters.html

  13. F.N. Kissell, Handbook for Methane Control in Mining (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. F.N. Kissell, G.V.R. Goodman (1991) Preventing tunnel methane explosions: What’s most important? In: Proceedings of the Fifth U.S. Mine Ventilation Symposium, Morgantown, USA, p 605–610

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ranjan Kumar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, R., Ghosh, A.K. Mines Systems Safety Improvement Using an Integrated Event Tree and Fault Tree Analysis. J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. D 98, 101–108 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40033-016-0121-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40033-016-0121-0

Keywords

Navigation