Evaluation of Open-Pit Mine Security Risk Based on FAHP-Extenics Matter-Element Model

  • Tao ZhiGangEmail author
  • Zhao DongDongEmail author
  • Yang XiaoJie
  • Wang JiaMin
  • Shu Yu
Original Paper


In order to timely find out the safety problems in the production process, in this study, we focused on the present safety situation of ChangShaoHao open-pit gold mine in Inner Mongolia and established the overall safety environment risk evaluation matter-element model based on the Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) and extenics theory. In addition, for the analysis, four criteria layer indexes, thirteen sub-criteria layer indexes, and thirty-one measure layer indexes were selected as the overall risk (target layer) evaluation object. The basic data were mainly acquired by the means of on-site investigation, data analysis of the engineering, expert questionnaire, etc., followed by calculating the correlation degree of the bottom indexes with respect to the four safety grades through the extenics theory, and combining with the index weight of other layers obtained by the FAHP method. Finally, the comprehensive evaluation result was worked out. The overall security level of the open-pit mine is II, indicating that the overall safety level of the open-pit mine is acceptable. Simultaneously, some serious risks on mine’s safety need to be observed. The evaluation result fitted under the practical situation of the engineering, providing a good decision-making basis for the safe production and management work of gold mine.


Open-pit mine Overall safety risk evaluation FAHP Extenics theory 



This work was supported by the Key Research and Development Project of Zhejiang Province (Grant No: 2019C03104).


  1. Abdulai M, Sharifzadeh M (2019) Uncertainty and reliability analysis of open pit rock slopes: a critical review of methods of analysis. Geotech Geol Eng 37(3):1223–1247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvarado M, Gonzalez F, Fletcher A et al (2015) Towards the development of a low cost airborne sensing system to monitor dust particles after blasting at open-pit mine sites. Sensors 15(8):19667–19687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Badri A, Nadeau S, Gbodossou A (2011) Integration of OHS into risk management in an open-pit mining project in Quebec (Canada). Minerals 1(1):3–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duarte J, Baptista JS, Marques AT (2019) Occupational accidents in the mining industry—a short review. In: Occupational and Environmental Safety and Health. Springer, Cham, pp 61–69Google Scholar
  5. Feng G, Kang Y, Sun ZD, Wang XC, Hu YQ (2019) Effects of supercritical CO2 adsorption on the mechanical characteristics and failure mechanisms of shale. Energy 173:870–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gu Q, Jiang S, Lian M (2019) Health and safety situation awareness model and emergency management based on multi-sensor signal fusion. IEEE Access 7:958–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hagigi M, Sivakumar K (2009) Managing diverse risks: an integrative framework. J Int Manag 15(3):286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horberry T, Xiao T, Fuller R (2013) The role of human factors and ergonomics in mining emergency management: three case studies. Int J Hum Factors Ergon 2(2/3):116–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kasap Y, Subaşı E (2016) Risk assessment of occupational groups working in open pit mining: analytic Hierarchy process. Science 85(2):88–98Google Scholar
  10. Kumar P, Gupta S, Agarwal M (2016) Categorization and standardization of accidental risk-criticality levels of human error to develop risk and safety management policy. Saf Sci 85:88–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li Y, Zhang S, Zhang X (2018) Classification and fractal characteristics of coal rock fragments under uniaxial cyclic loading conditions. Arab J Geosci 11(9):201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu Q, Meng X, Hassall M (2016) Accident-causing mechanism in coal mines based on hazards and polarized management. Saf Sci 85:276–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liu R, Cheng W, Yu Y (2018) Human factors analysis of major coal mine accidents in China based on the HFACS-CM model and AHP method. Int J Ind Ergon 68:270–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lu MJ, Zhu M, Liu WS (2012) Study on safety assessment modeling in Sijiaying open-pit iron mine. In: Advanced materials research, vol 429. Trans Tech Publications, pp 200–205Google Scholar
  15. Mohamad F, Abdullah NH, Mohammad M et al. (2014) Management systems integration for organizational sustainability: Quality, environmental, occupational health and safety, and energy. In: Applied mechanics and materials, vol 465. Trans Tech Publications, pp 1155–1159Google Scholar
  16. Moreau DTR, Neis B (2009) Occupational health and safety hazards in Atlantic Canadian aquaculture: laying the ground work for prevention. Mar Policy 33:401–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nezarat H, Sereshki F, Ataei M (2015) Ranking of geological risks in mechanized tunneling by using Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP). Tunn Undergr Space Technol 50:358–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nieto A, Gao Y, Grayson L (2014) A comparative study of coal mine safety performance indicators in China and the USA. Int J Min Miner Eng 5(4):299–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Qin Z, Fu H, Chen X (2019) A study on altered granite meso-damage mechanisms due to water invasion-water loss cycles. Environ Earth Sci 78:428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rahmanpour M, Osanloo M (2016) Determination of value at risk for long-term production planning in open pit mines in the presence of price uncertainty. J South African Inst Min Metall 116(3):229–236Google Scholar
  21. Şandru OI, Vlǎdǎreanu L, Şchiopu P (2013) Multidimensional extenics theory. UPB Sci. Bull. Ser A 75(1):3–12Google Scholar
  22. Sun W, Du H, Zhou F, Shao J (2019) Experimental study of crack propagation of rock-like specimens containing conjugate fractures. Geomech Eng 17(4):323–331Google Scholar
  23. Van Laarhoven PJM, Pedrycz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11(1–3):229–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wang X (2007) Management regulations on reporting and investigation of production safety accidents shall enter into force on June 1. Modern Occupational Safety (06): 17 + 11Google Scholar
  25. Wang X, Meng FB (2018) Statistical analysis of large accidents in China’s coal mines in 2016. Nat Hazard 92(1):311–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wang J, Li SC, Li LP et al (2019) Attribute recognition model for risk assessment of water inrush. Bull Eng Geol Environ 78:1057–1071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wu L, Jiang Z, Cheng W (2011) Major accident analysis and prevention of coal mines in China from the year of 1949 to 2009. Min Sci Technol (China) 21(5):693–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhang Y, Li S, Meng F (2014) Application of extenics theory for evaluating effect degree of damaged mountains based on analytic hierarchy process. Environ Earth Sci 71(10):4463–4471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhang H, Nie W, Liu Y et al (2018) Synthesis and performance measurement of environment-friendly solidified dust suppressant for open pit coalmine. J Applied Polym Sci 135(29):46505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhang S, Li Y, Shen B et al (2019) Effective evaluation of pressure relief drilling for reducing rock bursts and its application in underground coal mines. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 114:7–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhou J, Shi X, Li X (2016) Utilizing gradient boosted machine for the prediction of damage to residential structures owing to blasting vibrations of open pit mining. J Vib Control 22(19):3986–3997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhu C, Tao ZG, Shuai Zhao et al (2019) V shaped gully method for controlling rockfall of high-steep slope in China. Bull Eng Geol Environ 78(4):2731–2747CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Deep Geomechanics and Underground EngineeringBeijingChina
  2. 2.School of Mechanics and Civil EngineeringChina University of Mining and TechnologyBeijngChina

Personalised recommendations