Assessment and Management of Safety Risks Through Hierarchical Analysis in Fuzzy Sets Type 1 and Type 2: A Case Study (Faryab Chromite Underground Mines)

Abstract

There is a high rate of casualty among miners in the world every year. One way to reduce accidents and increase safety in mines is to use the risk management process to identify and respond to major hazards in mines. The present study is an attempt to investigate the assessment and management of safety risks in Faryab chromite underground mines. In this paper, the method of AHP in type-1 and type-2 fuzzy sets is used for risk assessment. Upon studying two underground mines of Faryab chromite (Makran and Nemat), 45 hazards were divided into 9 groups, among which 7 main risks were eventually identified. The risk assessment showed that the most important hazards in the Nemat underground mine are the required airflow, the lack of proper scaling and post-blast scaling. Similarly, the assessment of hazards in the Makran underground mine showed that post-blast scaling, absence of proper scaling, and proper ventilation of dust, are the most important hazards. Finally, after detecting the causes of the accidents, based on the records of accidents at the mine safety, health, and environmental unit, technical personnel’s descriptions, and similar risk projects, proper responses are prepared for each group of hazards.

Challenges Related to the Transformation of Post-Mining Underground Workings into Underground Laboratories

“…While the safety aspects may be limited at the user level, the problems of national legal regulations in most cases are beyond the influence of the users of underground laboratories. Still, as Paat and Joutsenvaara [54] pointed out in the report "Underground laboratories working environment, a common standard", underground laboratories work under the same laws and regulations as mining companies in most EU countries. In such a case, the revitalisation of underground workings or transition from the mining company to the UL site may be smooth.…”

“…It must be highlighted here that the risk matrix method is a very general approach and should be used to determine risk categories that have to be evaluated in a more detailed (quantitative) way. For example, in the case of roof falls, risk may be analysed with the use of numerical methods or with a systematic approach, as presented, respectively, by Ghasemi et al in [53] or by Sakhno et al in [54]. In the case of more general analyses that are not focused on only one group of hazards, a hierarchical analysis may be performed, as presented by Siahuei et al [55].…”

Simulator for Training Mining Locomotive Drivers

“…Effective training of mining locomotive operators is an important task for many mines around the world (URL1, URL2, URL3; Ding 2010). The training of qualified drivers is extremely important for the successful operation and development of the mining industry (Siahuei et al, 2021;Zhu et al, 2021). World experience shows a constant growth in the use of simulators in the process of training, retraining and certification of drivers (Alfieri et al, 2020;Naweed, 2014).…”