Risk assessment of occupational groups working in open pit mining: Analytic Hierarchy Process

• Autorzy: Kasap Y. , Subasi E.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1016/j.jsm.2017.07.001

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In open pit mining it is possible to prevent industrial accidents and the results of industrial accidents such as deaths, physical disabilities and financial loss by implementing risk analyses in advance. If the probabilities of different occupational groups encountering various hazards are determined, workers’ risk of having industrial accidents and catching occupational illnesses can be controlled. In this sense, the aim of this study was to assess the industrial accidents which occurred during open pit coal production in the Turkish Coal Enterprises (TCE) Garp Lignite unit between 2005 and 2010 and to analyze the risks using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The analyses conducted with AHP revealed that the greatest risk in open pit mining is landslides, the most risky occupational group is unskilled labourers and the most common hazards are caused by landslides and transportation/hand tools/falling.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

open-pit mining; industrial accidents; Analytic Hierarchy Process

PL

górnictwo odkrywkowe; awaria przemysłowa; Analytic Hierarchy Process

• Wydawca: Elsevier ; Główny Instytut Górnictwa
• Czasopismo: Journal of Sustainable Mining
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: Vol. 16, iss. 2
• Strony: 38--46
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 11 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Kasap Y.

• Dumlupınar University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Mining Engineering, 43100, Kütahya, Turkey

autor

Subasi E.

• Ali Pasa Mah., Atatürk Bulvarı, Akalın Apt. 3-12, 43000, Kütahya, Turkey

Bibliografia

• 1. Dağdeviren, M., & Yüksel, İ. (2008). Developing a Fuzzy analytic Hierarchy process (AHP) model for behavior-based safety management. Information Sciences, 178(6), 1717-1733.
• 2. Expert choice software and manual. Pittsburgh, PA: Expert Choice, Inc.
• 3. Fang, D., Shen, Q.,Wu, S., & Liu, G. (2003). A comprehensive framework for assessing and selecting appropriate scaffolding based on analytic Hierarchy process. Journal of Safety Research, 34(5), 589-596.
• 4. Komljenovic, D., Groves, W. A., & Kecojevic, V. J. (2008). Injuries in U.S. mining operations - a preliminary risk analysis. Safety Science, 46(5), 792-801.
• 5. Marhavilas, P. K., & Koulouriotis, D. E. (2008). A risk estimation methodological framework using quantitative assessment techniques and real accidents' Data: Application in an aluminum extrusion industry. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 21(6), 596-603.
• 6. Ouédraogo, A., Groso, A., & Meyer, T. (2001). Risk analysis in research environment - Part II: Weighting lab criticity index using the analytic hierarchy process. Safety Science, 49(6), 785-793.
• 7. Őztaş, S. (2007). Analysis and evaluation of risks different perspective. In Mines Occupational Health and Safety Symposium. March 08-09 2007, UCTEA chamber of mining engineers. Adana. Turkey.
• 8. Project Assessment Report of Surface and Underground Mines. (2005). By republic of Turkey Ministry of labor and social security. Ankara, Turkey.
• 9. Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234-281.
• 10. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• 11. Subaşı, E. (2011). Occupational health and safety-workplace accidents-risk analysis. Final Project. Kütahya, Turkey: Dumlupınar University, Department of Mining Engineering.