基于同位素测氡的煤矿火区圈划方法对比研究

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.01.006

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (1): 38-44.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.01.006

基于同位素测氡的煤矿火区圈划方法对比研究

张俊英^1,2,3 研究员, 方熙杨^1,2,3, 王海宾⁴, 王海燕^**1,3 副研究员, 姚海飞^2,3,5 副研究员, 李琨⁶

1 煤炭科学研究总院, 北京 100013;
2 煤炭科学技术研究院有限公司安全分院, 北京 100013;
3 煤炭科学研究总院煤炭资源高效开采与洁净利用国家重点实验室,北京 100013;
4 淄博矿业集团有限责任公司, 山东淄博 255000;
5 中国矿业大学(北京) 应急管理与安全工程学院, 北京 100083;
6 山西晋神沙坪煤业有限公司, 山西忻州 034000

收稿日期:2020-10-09 修回日期:2020-12-18 出版日期:2021-01-28
作者简介:张俊英 (1965—),男,河北武安人,博士,研究员,主要从事开采沉陷控制与环境治理技术、采空区隐患防治、建筑物保护技术、矿井防治水等方面的研究。E-mail: 13811109986@139.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金青年基金资助(51804161);国家重点研发计划课题(2018YFC0807902)。

Comparative study of coal mine fire areas zoning methods based on isotopic radon measurement technique

ZHANG Junying^1,2,3, FANG Xiyang^1,2,3, WANG Haibin⁴, WANG Haiyan^1,3, YAO Haifei^2,3,5, LI Kun⁶

1 China Coal Research Institute, Beijing 100013, China;
2 Safety Branch of China Coal Research Institute, Beijing 100013, China;
3 State Key Laboratory of Coal Mining and Clean Utilization, China Coal Research Institute, Beijing 100013, China;
4 Zibo Mining Group Co. Ltd, Zibo Shandong 255000, China;
5 Faculty of Emergency Management and Safety Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China;
6 Shanxi Jinshen Shaping Coal Industry Co. Ltd, Xinzhou Shanxi 034000, China

Received:2020-10-09 Revised:2020-12-18 Published:2021-01-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为确定基于同位素测氡的地下火区异常区域圈划的最优计算方法,首先,在分析3种常用区域数据处理方法(传统统计法、趋势面分析法及分形法)的原理基础上,应用这3种方法处理实际矿井地面的测氡数据;然后,利用3种方法圈划火区的结果,从强化弱异常的能力和异常下限的确定 2方面对比分析3种方法的差异性;最后,通过选取代表性的钻孔,验证3种方法确定的异常区域。结果表明:传统统计法和分形法的氡异常下限分别为5 982和7 094 Bq/m³,趋势面分析法是通过正剩余分量确定异常区域的,没有具体的异常下限值;3种方法圈划的异常区域面积大小与强化弱异常能力的高低一致:趋势面分析法＞分形法＞传统统计法;通过对比钻孔验证的结果,确定以分形法所圈划的结果作为后期火区治理的依据。

关键词: 同位素测氡, 异常区域, 火区圈划, 地下火源探测, 分形法

Abstract: In order to determine optimal calculation method for identification of abnormal temperature areas, firstly, three commonly used regional data processing methods (traditional statistical method, trend surface analysis method and fractal method) were applied to process radon measurement data of actual mine surface. Then, differences of three methods were compared and analyzed from ability of strengthening weak anomalies and determination of outlier threshold. Finally, representative boreholes were selected to verify anomaly areas determined by the three methods. The results show that the lower limits of radon anomaly of traditional statistical method and fractal method are 5 982 Bq/m³ and 7 094 Bq/m³ respectively, and trend surface analysis method is used to determine anomaly area by positive residual component. In delineating abnormal areas according to its consistency with ability of strengthening weak anomalies, the three methods rank as trend surface analysis method > fractal method > traditional statistical method. By comparing results of drilling verification, it is determined that results delineated by fractal method can be used as basis for later fire-fighting activities.

Key words: isotopic radon measurement, abnormal areas, fire areas zoning, underground fire source detection, fractal method

中图分类号:

X936

张俊英, 方熙杨, 王海宾, 王海燕, 姚海飞, 李琨. 基于同位素测氡的煤矿火区圈划方法对比研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(1): 38-44.

ZHANG Junying, FANG Xiyang, WANG Haibin, WANG Haiyan, YAO Haifei, LI Kun. Comparative study of coal mine fire areas zoning methods based on isotopic radon measurement technique[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(1): 38-44.

参考文献

[1] 褚廷湘,韩学锋,余明高. 承压破碎煤体低温氧化特征与宏观致因分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019,29(9): 77-83.
CHU Tingxiang, HAN Xuefeng, YU Minggao. Low-temperature oxidation characteristics of compacted broken coal and macroscopic cause analysis [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019,29(9): 77-83.
[2] 齐庆杰,祁云,周新华. 供风量对采空区自燃动态影响及防灭火技术[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019,29(4): 120-126.
QI Qingjie, QI Yun, ZHOU Xinhua. Dynamic effects of air supply volume on spontaneous combustion in goafs and fire prevention and extinguishing technology[J]. China Safety Science Journal,2019,29(4): 120-126.
[3] 王海燕, 方熙杨. 煤自热低温阶段“自限制”特征的理论与试验研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2019,47(6): 231-237.
WANG Haiyan, FANG Xiyang. Theoretical and experimental study on low temperature stage of coal self-heating[J]. Coal Science and Technology,2019,47(6): 231-237.
[4] SONG Zeyang, KUENZER C. Coal fires in China over the last decade: a comprehensive review[J]. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2014, 133: 72-99.
[5] WANG Haiyan, TAN Bo, ZHANG Xuedong. Research on the technology of detection and risk assessment of fire areas in gangue hills[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research,2020,24(27):38 776-38 787.
[6] ZHOU Bin, WU Jianming, WANG Junfeng, et al. Surface-based radon detection to identify spontaneous combustion areas in small abandoned coal mine gobs: case study of a small coal mine in China[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2018, 119: 223-232.
[7] XUE Sheng, DICKSON B, WU Jianming. Application of 222Rn technique to locate subsurface coal heating in Australian coal mines[J]. International Journal of Coal Geology,2007,74(2): 139-144.
[8] 张玲玲,刘鸿福,张新军,等. 趋势面分析法圈定氡异常[J]. 煤田地质与勘探,2014,42(1): 79-82.
ZHANG Lingling, LIU Hongfu, ZHANG Xinjun, et al. Delineating radon anomalies by the trend surface analysis[J]. Coal Geology & Exploration, 2014,42(1): 79-82.
[9] 李峰,刘鸿福,张新军,等. 基于分形理论确定地下煤层自燃火区范围[J]. 煤田地质与勘探,2013,41(3):15-17,22.
LI Feng, LIU Hongfu, ZHANG Xinjun, et al. Determination of spontaneous combustion extent in coal seams on the basis of the fractal theory[J]. Coal Geology & Exploration, 2013,41(3):15-17,22.
[10] REIMANN C, FILZMOSER P, GARRETT R. Background and threshold: critical comparison of methods of determination[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2005, 346(1/2/3): 1-16.
[11] 戴慧敏,宫传东,鲍庆中,等. 区域化探数据处理中几种异常下限确定方法的对比:以内蒙古查巴奇地区水系沉积物为例[J]. 物探与化探,2010,34(6): 782-786.
DAI Huimin, GONG Chuandong, BAO Qingzhong. A comparison of several threshold determination methods in geochemical data processing: a case study of stream sediments in Chabaqi area of Inner Mongolia[J]. Geophysical & Geochemical Exploration,2010,34(6): 782-786.
[12] 李随民,姚书振,韩玉丑. Surfer 软件中利用趋势面方法圈定化探异常[J]. 地质与勘探,2007,43(2): 72-75.
LI Suimin, YAO Shuzhen, HAN Yuchou. Using tendency analysis method to deal with geochemical data based on the surfer software[J]. Geology and Prospecting,2007,43(2): 72-75.
[13] TURCOTTE D L. A fractal approach to the relationship between ore grade and tonnage [J]. Economic Geology, 1986, 81: 1 528-1 532.
[14] 韩东昱, 龚庆杰, 向运川. 区域化探数据处理的几种分形方法[J]. 地质通报,2004,23(7): 714-719.
HAN Dongyu, GONG Qingjie, XIANG Yunchuan. Some new fractal methods for regional geochemical survey data processing[J]. Geological Bulletin of China,2004,23(7): 714-719.

[1]	何文, 卢博凯, 石文芳, 祝思雨, 刘金朋. 超声空化效应对细粒尾矿的增渗作用[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 91-100.
[2]	许娜, 梁燕翔, 王亮, 赵丽丽, 周雪晴, 张博. 基于知识图谱的煤矿建设安全领域知识管理研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 28-35.
[3]	杨可明, 李婷婷, 马军, 李亚星, 江克贵, 赵项通. 基于最优PS点获取方法的矿山工业广场沉降监测[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 44-51.
[4]	裴晓东, 姚志远, 王亮, 邵昊, 王凯, 吴征艳. 基于Unity3D的矿井火灾监测与防治虚拟仿真试验系统[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 109-116.
[5]	徐永亮, 孙萌, 王兰云, 王云刚. 矿井带式输送机火灾烟流特性及其预警防控综述[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 117-128.
[6]	李敏, 罗欧文, 鲁义, 施式亮, 李贺, 林志军. 再生顶板条件下煤自燃危险区域空间分布特征[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 129-136.
[7]	吴芳华, 施式亮, 鲁义, 谷旺鑫, 谭嘉乐, 刘蔚廷. 磷石膏基自产气膨胀浆体防灭火性能研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 148-154.
[8]	杜栋栋, 雷文杰, 李东会, 李哲. 矿井瓦斯抽采钻孔偏移特性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 155-161.
[9]	李懿, 陆伟, 李金亮, 陈云龙, 赵舒洁. 煤层注射成胶型抑尘剂影响因素及抑尘效果研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 171-178.
[10]	于海淼, 徐泽鹏, 张硕, 祁慧. 煤矿工人职业健康研究进展的知识图谱分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 230-236.
[11]	左明成, 焦文华. 面向煤矿井下作业场景的安全帽佩戴识别算法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 237-246.
[12]	张遵国, 袁新立, 陈毅, 唐朝, 马凯欣, 陈永强. 不同应力循环路径下砂岩的能量演化特征[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2): 144-152.
[13]	游波, 崔大雄, 刘何清, 鲁义, 杨芯宇. 不同隔热材料下的深井巷道隔热降温模拟研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2): 153-160.
[14]	王永军, 郑倩, 张河猛, 董伟, 张晓明, 佐佐木久郞. 采空区地下遗煤燃烧-地表碳通量相关性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2): 161-167.
[15]	郭鑫, 鲁义, 施式亮, 李贺, 李大芳. 高流态封孔注浆材料力学性能及水化机制[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2): 168-175.

基于同位素测氡的煤矿火区圈划方法对比研究

Comparative study of coal mine fire areas zoning methods based on isotopic radon measurement technique

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价