Research on risk classification of confined space operation in industrial and trade enterprises

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.06.0541

Abstract

Abstract:

To enhance the identification and control of accident risks in confined space operations in industrial and commercial enterprises, a socially acceptable risk standard for such operation accidents was established, and a risk grading study based on F-N curve was conducted. First, historical data on significant and higher-level accidents in confined space operations from 2014 to 2021 were analyzed statistically in terms of fatalities, accident frequency, and the number of enterprises involved, in order to identify accident patterns. Then, considering accident frequency and fatality consequences, a socially acceptable risk standard was developed based on ALARP criteria, and F-N curve was plotted. Finally, a risk grading management model was established based on three risk zones-intolerable, acceptable, and negligible. The control measures were proposed from both enterprise and individual perspectives. The results show that for accidents with 3 to 10 fatalities, the frequency falls within the magnitude of 10^-6-10^-4. The F-N curve with a slope of -4.033 is used to divide three distinct risk levels, helping to clarify the boundaries of risk levels and highlight management priorities.

Key words: confined space operation, F-N curve, as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP) criteria, industrial and trade enterprises, risk classification and control

CLC Number:

X928.02事故处理

LI Jishuo, XU Kaili, YAO Xiwen, LI Mengjia. Research on risk classification of confined space operation in industrial and trade enterprises[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(6): 98-104.

Figures/Tables 5

Fig.1

Table 1

Table 2

Fig.2

Table 3

References 20

[1]	中华人民共和国应急管理部. 应急管理部启动工贸重点企业有限空间作业专家指导服务[EB/OL].(2023-05-24). https://www.mem.gov.cn/xw/ztzl/2023zt/zzpc2023/dybs_5536/202305/t20230524_451678.shtml.
[2]	MANWARING J C, CONROY C. Occupational confined space-related fatalities: Surveillance and prevention[J]. Journal of Safety Research, 1990, 21(4): 157-164.
[3]	王梦蓉. 美国1992—2002年间氮气窒息事故分析及预防措施[J]. 安全、健康和环境, 2004(9):4-5.
	WANG Mengrong. Analysis and preventive measures of nitrogen suffocation accidents in the United States from 1992 to 2002[J]. Safety, Health and Environment, 2004(9):4-5.
[4]	黄郑华, 李建华, 边成, 等. 有限空间作业危险因素分析与安全措施[J]. 中国公共安全:学术版, 2009(4):61-65.
	HUANG Zhenghua, LI Jianhua, BIAN Cheng, et al. Analysis of risk factors and safe measures in limited space operations[J]. China Public Security:Academy Edition, 2009(4):61-65.
[5]	杨宏刚, 赵江平, 张璇. 有限空间作业危害辨识及事故控制[J]. 建筑安全, 2013, 28(2):63-67.
[6]	李红果. 工贸企业有限空间作业常见隐患[J]. 劳动保护, 2017(12):74-75.
[7]	徐向川. 有限空间设备维修作业危险源辨识与风险管控[J]. 设备管理与维修, 2018(22):33-35.
[8]	胡敏, 王红汉, 李辉, 等. 工贸企业有限空间作业安全风险分析及管控[J]. 工业安全与环保, 2021, 47(8):66-68.
	HU Min, WANG Honghan, LI Hui, et al. Safety risk analysis and control of confined space operation in industrial and trade enterprises[J]. Industrial Safety and Environmental Protection, 2021, 47(8):66-68.
[9]	WANG Bingyu, ZHAO Jinsong. Automatic frequency estimation of contributory factors for confined space accidents[J]. Process Safety and Environment Protection, 2022, 157:193-207.
[10]	康宇, 孙栋伟. 基于F-N曲线的非机动车事故风险分级方法优化[J]. 黑龙江科技大学学报, 2022, 32(4):448-452.
	KANG Yu, SUN Dongwei. Method optimization of non-motor vehicle accident risk classification based on F-N curve[J]. Journal of Heilongjiang University of Science and Technology, 2022, 32(4):448-452.
[11]	EDWARD M M. Tolerable risk guidelines[J]. ISA Transaction, 2001, 40(4):391-399.
[12]	KANEKO F, ARIMA T, YOSHIDA K, et al. On a novel method for approximation of FN diagram and setting ALARP borders[J]. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2015, 20(1):14-36.
[13]	PEI Jingjing, WANG Guantao, LUO Sida, et al. Societal risk acceptance criteria for pressure pipelines in China[J]. Safety Science, 2018, 109:20-26.
[14]	段欣, 罗云, 曾珠, 等. 特种设备社会风险及可接受准则分析[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2014, 14(2):102-106.
	DUAN Xin, LUO Yun, ZENG Zhu, et al. Analysis of social risk and acceptable criteria of special equipment[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2014, 14(2):102-106.
[15]	汪金辉, 王雨, 庄磊, 等. 全球气体运输船社会风险可接受衡准及应用研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2022, 22(6):3014-3020.
	WANG Jinhui, WANG Yu, ZHUANG Lei, et al. Study on social risk acceptance criteria of global gas tankers and its application[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2022, 22(6):3014-3020.
[16]	汪金辉, 周雨, 庄磊, 等. 全球客船的社会风险可接受标准及应用研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(9):195-201.
	WANG Jinhui, ZHOU Yu, ZHUANG Lei, et al. Social risk acceptance criteria of global passenger ships and its application[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(9):195-201.
[17]	王秀明, 傅贵. 基于F-N曲线的煤矿重特大瓦斯爆炸事故伤亡规律研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2016, 12(7):140-144.
	WANG Xiuming, FU Gui. Study on regularities of casualties in major and extraordinarily serious gas explosion accidents of coal mine based on F-N curve[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2016, 12(7):140-144.
[18]	杨燕鹏, 罗云, 曾珠, 等. 压力管道社会风险可接受准则研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2014, 24(9):128-133.
	YANG Yanpeng, LUO Yun, ZENG Zhu, et al. Research on acceptable criteria of pressure pipeline social risk[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2014, 24(9):128-133.
[19]	高建明, 王喜奎, 曾明荣. 个人风险和社会风险可接受标准研究进展及启示[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2007, 3(3):29-34.
	GAO Jianming, WANG Xikui, ZENG Mingrong. The research development and indication of the acceptable standard of individual risk and social risk[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2007, 3(3):29-34.
[20]	张舒, 李夏林, 吴超, 等. 我国煤矿可接受风险标准研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2015, 25(1):158-164.
	ZHANG Shu, LI Xialin, WU Chao, et al. Study on acceptable risk criteria of coal industry in China[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2015, 25(1):158-164.

累积频率 F(N)	年份
累积频率 F(N)	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021
F(3)	2.630×10^-4	2.449×10^-4	1.670×10^-4	2.044×10^-4	1.279×10^-4	1.555×10^-4	1.915×10^-4	1.386×10^-4
F(4)	8.766×10^-5	1.225×10^-4	3.711×10^-5	6.290×10^-5	1.421×10^-5	1.196×10^-5	2.016×10^-5	5.039×10^-5
F(5)	2.191×10^-5	6.123×10^-5	3.711×10^-5	3.145×10^-5	1.421×10^-5	1.196×10^-5	2.016×10^-5	2.519×10^-5
F(6)	0	2.041×10^-5	0	3.145×10^-5	1.421×10^-5	1.196×10^-5	1.008×10^-5	6.300×10^-6
F(7)	0	0	0	1.572×10^-5	1.421×10^-5	1.196×10^-5	0	6.300×10^-6
F(8)	0	0	0	1.572×10^-5	0	1.196×10^-5	0	6.300×10^-6
F(9)	0	0	0	0	0	1.196×10^-5	0	0
F(10)	0	0	0	0	0	1.196×10^-5	0	0

未标准化系数B		t	t-Sig.	B的95.0%置信区间		模型汇总
未标准化系数B		t	t-Sig.	下限	上限	R²	调整后 R²	标准估算的误差S_e	F	F-Sig.
常量	-1.797	-14.943	0.000	-2.091	-1.503	0.992	0.990	0.110	720.327	0.000
lgN	-4.033	-26.839	0.000	-4.400	-3.665	0.992	0.990	0.110	720.327	0.000

风险区	管控措施
不可容忍风险区一级风险管控	风险辨识与评估:作业前进行全面的风险识别与评估,包括环境、设备、操作流程等潜在危害
	安全防护装备检查:确保作业人员配备符合标准的个人防护装备,并对防护装备进行全面检查
	作业人员培训与考核:进行严格的安全培训和考核,确保作业人员掌握必要的安全知识和操作技能
	全过程监管:实行全程监管,实时监控作业过程,发现异常情况立即停止作业并进行处理
	紧急应对机制:制定详细的应急预案,配备应急救援设施和人员,确保突发事故能够迅速响应并减少损失
可接受风险区二级风险管控	风险辨识与安全教育:作业前进行风险因素辨识,并对作业人员进行必要的安全教育和培训
	常规监管与检查:作业中进行常规监管与检查,确保设备、环境、操作人员处于安全状态
	成本效益分析与风险控制:根据成本效益分析,判断是否需要采取额外的风险控制措施(如增加通风设备或安全人员等)
	灵活调整管控策略:根据作业过程中发现的风险隐患,及时调整管控措施,进一步降低风险
可忽略风险区三级风险管控	一般监管手段:采用一般的安全监管措施,定期巡视作业现场,确保作业按规定流程进行
	随机检查与作业状态监控:进行随机检查,关注作业人员的安全操作,并确保其处于良好的身体与心理状态
	保持风险稳定性:确保作业过程中的风险始终处于可接受范围,及时发现并处理任何异常情况,防止风险升高
	持续改进与反馈机制:收集作业中的问题与隐患,定期总结经验,不断优化安全管理措施,提高安全水平