Quantitative evaluation of oil-type gas emission risk in mine with coal-oil-gas coexistence

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.04.0331

Abstract

Abstract:

To address the oil-type gas emission hazard in coal-oil-gas coexisting mines, a quantitative risk assessment technology has been proposed. Firstly, the stability of the coal seam roof and floor strata was identified as a key parameter for evaluating oil-type gas gushing. The horizontal resistivity distribution uniformity was used to characterize strata stability. A direct current resistivity method was employed to investigate the resistivity distribution characteristics of the roof and floor strata, and a dynamic quantitative detection method for strata stability based on the resistivity variation coefficient was proposed. Additionally, comprehensive consideration of geological structures was integrated, supplemented by static parameters such as mining-induced damage depth, mechanical properties, permeability of the strata, and fault structures. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) based on variable weight theory was employed to quantitatively calculate the weight of each factor relative to the evaluation indicators, thereby establishing a comprehensive quantitative evaluation method for oil-type gas gushing risks. Finally, the proposed method was applied to quantitatively assess the oil-type gas gushing risks in two typical areas of the Huangling mining area. The results align with field data from actual oil-type gas extraction boreholes, validating the method's reliability.

Key words: coal-oil-gas coexisting mines, oil-type gas, gas emission hazard, quantitative risk assessment, geologic structure, electrical resistivity, electrical detection

CLC Number:

X935

WEI Mingyao, HUANGFU Haoqi, GAO Kang, LU Chunqin, YU Liyuan, FU Shigen. Quantitative evaluation of oil-type gas emission risk in mine with coal-oil-gas coexistence[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(4): 67-75.

Figures/Tables 13

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Table 1

Fig.4

Fig.5

Table 2

Table 3

Fig.6

Fig.7

Table 4

Table 5

Fig.8

References 19

[1]	赵继展, 张群, 郑凯歌, 等. 黄陵矿区煤矿井下围岩喷涌气体致灾机理及防治措施[J]. 天然气工业, 2018, 38(11): 114-121.
	ZHAO Jizhan, ZHANG Qun, ZHENG Kaige, et al. Disaster-causing mechanism of surrounding rock gas flowing underground in the Huangling mining area and prevention measures[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2018, 38(11): 114-121.
[2]	方祖康, 庞雄奇, 高春文. 煤型气和油型气的概念及其类型划分[J]. 天然气工业, 1988, 8(1): 13-17.
	FANG Zukang, PANG Xiongqi, GAO Chunwen. Idea of coll-formed gas and oil-related gas and their classification[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 1988, 8(1): 13-17.
[3]	韩中喜, 李剑, 严启团, 等. 天然气汞含量作为煤型气与油型气判识指标的探讨[J]. 石油学报, 2013, 34(2): 323-327. doi: 10.7623/syxb201302014
	HAN Zhongxi, LI Jian, YAN Qituan, et al. Discussion on the applicability of mercury content in natural gases as an identification index of coal-type gas and oil-type gas[J]. Acta Petroleum Sinica, 2013, 34(2): 323-327.
[4]	唐恩贤. 黄陵矿区煤层底板异常涌出气体成因类型[J]. 煤田地质与勘探, 2015, 43(6): 8-11.
	TANG Enxian. Genetic type of abnormal gas emission from coal seam floor in Huangling mining area[J]. Coal Geology & Exploration, 2015, 43(6):8-11.
[5]	孙四清. 煤油气共存矿井掘进工作面底板油型气涌出机理探讨[J]. 矿业安全与环保, 2017, 44(4): 90-94.
	SUN Siqing. Discussion on oil-type gas emission mechanism from heading face floor in coal-oil-gas coexisting mine[J]. Mining Safety & Environmental Protection, 2017, 44(4): 90-94.
[6]	孙四清, 陈冬冬, 龙威成, 等. 煤油气共存矿井油型气精准治理技术及工程实践[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2021, 49(5): 60-66.
	SUN Siqing, CHEN Dongdong, LONG Weicheng, et al. Technology of precise control of oil-type gas and engineering practice in coal mine with coal-oil-gas coexistence[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 2021, 49(5): 60-66.
[7]	张俭让, 张荃, 董丁稳, 等. 油型气涌出矿井CH₄扩散规律数值模拟[J]. 煤炭技术, 2015, 34(10): 136-138.
	ZHANG Jianrang, ZHANG Quan, DONG Dingwen, et al. Law of gas distribution of numerical simulation with oil-type gas emission[J]. Coal Technology, 2015, 34(10): 136-138.
[8]	张俭让, 张玲洁, 李倩玉. 油型气涌出矿井局部通风排瓦斯优化[J]. 西安科技大学学报, 2017, 37(6): 823-828.
	ZHANG Jianrang, ZHANG Lingjie, LI Qianyu. Gas-exhausting optimization of drivage roadway under the condition of oil-type gas emission[J]. Journal of Xi'an University of Science and Technology, 2017, 37(6): 823-828.
[9]	司俊鸿, 许敏, 郑凯凯, 等. 黄陇矿区瓦斯-油型气混合气体爆炸特性及预警技术研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2019, 47(8): 251-256.
	SI Junhong, XU Min, ZHENG Kaikai, et al. Characteristics and early warning technology of gas-oil explosion in Huanglong mining area[J]. Coal Science & Technology, 2019, 47(8): 251-256.
[10]	殷民胜, 刘耀宗. 黄陵二号煤矿底板油型气释放规律及影响因素[J]. 陕西煤炭, 2023, 42(6):24-28.
	YIN Minsheng, LIU Yaozong. Oil-type gas releasing regularity and influential factors of Huangling No.2 coal mine floor[J]. Shaanxi Coal, 2023, 42(6):24-28.
[11]	郑凯歌, 孙四清, 赵继展, 等. 黄陵矿区围岩气体成因及致灾机理研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2021, 49(8):139-146.
	ZHENG Kaige, SUN Siqing, ZHAO Jizhan, et al. Study on genetic and destructive mechanism of gas from surrounding rock in Huangling mining area[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 2021, 49 (8): 139-146.
[12]	牟全斌. 煤油气共生矿井底板油型气赋存特征及防治[J]. 能源与环保, 2020, 42(12): 76-80,88.
	MOU Quanbin. Occurrence characteristics and prevention of oil-type gas in coal-gas symbiosis mine floor[J]. China Energy and Environmental Protection, 2020, 42(12): 76-80,88.
[13]	方林, 龚晟, 王桂林, 等. 基于突变理论的隔水岩体失稳分析及安全厚度计算[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3):76-83. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.03.0344
	FANG Lin, GONG Sheng, WANG Guilin, et al. Instability analysis and safe thickness calculation of waterproof rock mass based on mutation theory[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(3):76-83. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.03.0344
[14]	李毛飞, 刘树才, 姜志海, 等. 矿井直流电透视底板探测及三维反演解释[J]. 煤炭学报, 2022, 47(7): 2708-2721.
	LI Maofei, LIU Shucai, JIANG Zhihai, et al. Detecting floor geological information by mine DC perspective and 3D inversion[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2022, 47(7): 2708-2721.
[15]	马进功. 基于变权模糊理论的残煤连采可行性评价研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2021, 49(8): 30-37.
	MA Jingong. Study on feasibility evaluation of continuous mining of residual coal based on variable weight fuzzy theory[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 2021, 49(8): 30-37.
[16]	江新, 王婧雯, 王耀威, 等. 突变视角下地下深埋隧洞塌方风险耦合演化研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(5):103-111. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.05.1494
	JIANG Xin, WANG Jingwen, WANG Yaowei, et al. Study on coupling evolution of collapse risk of deep underground tunnel from perspective of catastrophe[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(5):103-111. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.05.1494
[17]	武强, 李博, 刘守强, 等. 基于分区变权模型的煤层底板突水脆弱性评价:以开滦蔚州典型矿区为例[J]. 煤炭学报, 2013, 38(9): 1516-1521.
	WU Qiang, LI Bo, LIU Shouqiang, et al. Vulnerability assessment of coal floor groundwater burstiong based on zoning variable weight model: a case study int the typical mining region of Kailuan[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2013, 38(9): 1516-1521.
[18]	马进功, 宋德军. 基于变权模糊理论的掘锚一体机组掘进适用性数学评价[J]. 煤炭学报, 2023, 48(6): 2579-2589.
	MA Jingong, SONG Dejun. Mathematical evaluation on the applicability of bolter miners based on variable weight fuzzy theory[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2023, 48(6): 2579-2589.
[19]	张金才, 张玉卓, 刘天泉. 岩体渗流与煤层底板突水[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1997: 20-35.

区域	平均值	标准差	变异系数
413工作面200 m	0.050 2	0.054 8	1.092 1
413工作面250 m	0.087 7	0.084 6	0.965 0
北二运输巷	0.065 1	0.077 5	1.190 3
北二辅运巷	0.063 4	0.075 1	1.184 8

影响因素	电性	采动影响	渗透性	断层构造
电性	1	P12	P13	P14
采动影响	P21	1	P23	P24
渗透性	P31	P32	1	P34
断层构造	P41	P42	P43	1

测量区域	测量次序	油型气涌出危险性评价指标
413巷道	第1次	0.19
	第2次	0.34
	第3次	0.15
	第4次	0.13
	第5次	0.18
北二巷道	第1次	0.20
	第2次	0.31
	第3次	0.49
	第4次	0.48
	第5次	0.59
	第6次	0.31
	第7次	0.54

涌出危险性评价指标Q	涌出危险性类型
(0.0, 0.2]	顶底板稳定,油型气涌出危险性低
(0.2, 0.4]	顶底板较稳定,油型气涌出危险性较低
(0.4, 0.7]	顶底板不稳定,存在断层等地质构造,油型气涌出危险性高
(0.7, 1.0]	顶底板极度不稳定,存在大尺度断层构造,油型气涌出危险性高