Systemic approaches to incident analysis in coal mines: Comparison of the STAMP, FRAM and “2–4” models

Abstract

Coal mine accidents are often caused by the coupling of multiple factors rather than by a single factor. Therefore, explaining the nonlinear and coupling characteristics in accidents by using traditional accident theory is hard. To cope with the safety challenges caused by the extensive use of digital components and the construction of complex systems, incorporating the idea of system engineering into accident analysis is deemed effective. First, this paper introduces the basic principles and analysis steps of the Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP), Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) and “2–4” models and then applies the three models to the eight coal mine accidents. Finally, the three models are compared based on their characteristics, analysis processes and analysis results. The results show that the accident causes identified by the three methods cover the main causes in the accident investigation report, and new causes were identified. However, the results of the STAMP and FRAM models are more comprehensive and systematic, but the model characteristics and analysis processes are more complex, whereas the results of the “2–4” model analysis are relatively broad, but the analysis process is simple and easy to understand. Therefore, the study suggests that although the choice of accident causing model depends on the user's knowledge level or accident type, the STAMP and FRAM models are more suitable for analyzing a small number of complex coal mine accidents, while the “2–4” model is more advantageous in the analysis of large number of accidents.