中美瓦斯爆炸事故不安全动作原因对比分析
Comparative Analysis of Unsafe Acts of Gas Explosion Accidents in China and American
-
摘要: 为了找出中国和美国瓦斯爆炸事故不安全动作原因的异同,为我国预防瓦斯爆炸事故从不安全动作方面提供参考。采取案例分析法和比较分析法,选取我国2005—2016年来10起爆炸事故和美国1980年至今的10起瓦斯爆炸事故作为样本,以事故致因24 Model为理论依据,基于该模型中对于动作的划分,确定了瓦斯爆炸事故不安全动作分类原则,归类并统计了中美瓦斯爆炸事故中不安全动作,并进行对比分析。结果表明,在我国引起瓦斯爆炸事故的不安全动作有72个,美国有48个;不安全操作相对于不安全行动、不安全指挥在中美瓦斯爆炸事故中都是发生频率最高的动作;在美国不安全操作子类频率最高的是“未检查瓦斯”,在我国是“违规爆破”;不论是在美国还是中国“未检查瓦斯”和“未佩戴自救器”都是出现频率较高的不安全操作,应该重点防范。Abstract: The similarities and differences between China and the United States can provide references for the prevention of unsafe actions in China. 10 explosion accidents in China from 2005 to 2016 and 10 gas explosion accidents in the United States from 1980 to the present were analyzed based on the accidental cause 24 Model, taking the case analysis method and comparative analysis method. The principles of classification of unsafe actions in gas explosion accidents are determined, and the unsafe actions were classified and analyzed. The results show that there are 72 unsafe actions in China and 48 unsafe actions in the United States. Unsafe operations are the most frequent operations in China and the United States compared to unsafe actions and unsafe command. The most frequent category of unsafe operation in the United States is “no gas concentration detected” and “illegal blasting” in China. Both in the United States and China, “no gas concentration detected” and “no self-rescue device” are unsafe operations with high frequency, which should be mainly prevented.
-
Keywords:
- gas explosion accidents /
- accident causation /
- unsafe act /
- 24 Model /
- comparative analysis
-
-
[1] 邓奇根,王燕,刘明举,等.2001-2013年全国煤矿事故统计分析及启示[J].煤炭技术,2014,33(9):73. [2] Shappell S A, Wiegmann D A. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System-HFACS[J]. American Libraries, 2000(1): 20-46. [3] Reason J.Human errors[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990. [4] 傅贵,李宣东,李军.事故的共性原因及其行为科学预防策略[J].安全与环境学报,2005(1):80-83. [5] 傅贵,张苏,董继业,等.行为安全的理论实质与效果讨论[J].中国安全科学学报,2013,23(3):150-154. [6] 李辉.比较安全学的功能、划界、方法论及应用研究[D].焦作:河南理工大学,2017. [7] 傅贵,樊运晓,佟瑞鹏,等.通用事故原因分析方法(第4版)[J].事故预防学报,2016,2(1):7-12. [8] 傅贵.安全科学学及其应用探讨[J].安全,2019,40(2):1-10. [9] 傅贵.安全学科结构的研究[M].北京: 安全科学出版社,2015. [10] 国家煤矿安全监察局.事故查处[EB/OL].[2018-05-20](2018-09-20).http://www.chinacoal-safety.gov.cn/. [11] Richmond J K, Price G C, Sapko M J, et al.Historical Summary of Coal Mine Explosions in the United States[M]. United States Department of the Interior, 1983.
计量
- 文章访问数: 146
- HTML全文浏览量: 0
- PDF下载量: 0
下载:
