[1]张玉涛,林国铖,李亚清.基于事故树-风险矩阵法的脱硫工艺中毒窒息事故风险评估[J].西安科技大学学报,2020,(01):40-48.
 ZHANG Yu-tao,LIN Guo-cheng,LI Ya-qing.Risk assessment of suffocation and poisoning accidents in desulfurization process based on FTA-risk matrix method[J].Journal of Xi'an University of Science and Technology,2020,(01):40-48.
点击复制

基于事故树-风险矩阵法的脱硫工艺中毒窒息事故风险评估(/HTML)
分享到:

西安科技大学学报[ISSN:1672-9315/CN:61-1434/N]

卷:
期数:
2020年01期
页码:
40-48
栏目:
出版日期:
2020-02-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Risk assessment of suffocation and poisoning accidents in desulfurization process based on FTA-risk matrix method
文章编号:
1672-9315(2020)01-0040-09
作者:
张玉涛林国铖李亚清
(西安科技大学 安全科学与工程学院,陕西 西安 710054)
Author(s):
ZHANG Yu-taoLIN Guo-chengLI Ya-qing
(College of Safety Science and Engineering,Xi'an University of Science and Technology,Xi'an 710054,China)
关键词:
脱硫工艺 风险评估 事故树分析 风险矩阵 TOPSIS法
Keywords:
desulfurization process risk assessment Fault Tree Analysis risk matrix Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
分类号:
X 913
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
脱硫工艺由于系统组成复杂,近年来中毒窒息事故频发,有效辨识脱硫任务中存在的有害因素,并对其危险等级进行准确评估,对预防此类事故的发生具有重要意义。文中基于事故树分析法(FTA)与风险矩阵法(Risk Matrix),结合熵权法和TOPSIS法,建立了事故树-风险矩阵综合评价模型,以结构风险贴近度S为新的评判指标,对热电厂脱硫工艺进行了中毒窒息事故风险评估,并将评价结果与事故树分析法和风险矩阵法评估结果进行了对比分析。分析结果显示结构重要度和风险概率2个指标的权重分别为0.6和0.4; 13个基本事件中“通风机故障或通风能力不足”,“气体检测装置失效”等基本事件的贴近度最高,后期需要加强控制和预防。研究表明,事故树-风险矩阵法的评价结果较单一的事故树法或风险矩阵法具有更高的区分度和准确度。
Abstract:
Recently,there occur accidents of poisoning suffocation frequentlydue to a complex desulfurization process.Therefore,it is of importance to identify dangerous factorsof the desulfurization process and to further assess their risk levels.Combined Fault Tree Analysis(FTA)and risk evaluation method with entropy and TOPSIS methods,an FTA-risk matrix model was proposed.Taking closeness degree of structural risk as a new criteria,risks of poisoning and suffocation accidents for desulfurization process of the thermal power plant was assessed.Acomparatire analysis showsthat the structure importance and the risk probability were 0.6 and 0.4,respectively.Also,among the 13 basic incidents,“fan failure or insufficient ventilation capacity” and “gas detection device failure” have the highest closeness,and need to strengthen control and prevention in the later stage.The comparison results show that the fault tree-risk matrix method has higher discrimination and accuracy than the single fault tree method or risk matrix method.

参考文献/References:

[1] 赵学山.火力发电厂机组能耗分析系统研发[D].成都:电子科技大学,2010. ZHAO Xue-shan.Research and development of energy consumption analysis system for thermal power plant units[D].Chengdu:University of Electronic Science and Technology of China,2010. [2]李艳昌,刘哲含,贾进章.2006—2015年我国化工企业生产事故统计分析[J].应用化工,2017,46(8):1620-1623. LI Yan-chang,LIU Zhe-han,JIA Jin-zhang.Statistic analysis of chemical enterprises accidents occurring in China during 2006—2015[J].Applied Chemical Industry,2017,46(8):1620-1623. [3]闫 放,张 舒,许开立.化工危险源定量保护层分析[J].中国安全科学学报,2019,29(1):100-105. YAN Fang,ZHANG Shu,XU Kai-li.Research on quantitative layer of protection analysis for chemical industry hazards[J].China Safety Science Journal,2019,29(1):100-105. [4]匡 轮,陈 丽,郭倩倩.LEC危险性评价法及其应用的再探讨[J].安全与环境学报,2018,18(5):1902-1905. KUANG Lun,CHEN Li,GUO Qian-qian.Further discussion on the LEC evaluation method and its applications in the quantitative analysis of the risks[J].Journal of Safety and Environment,2018,18(5):1902-1905. [5]吴学彬.HAZOP/事故树综合安全评价模型研究与实现[D].大连:大连理工大学,2010. WU Xue-bin.A prototype for integrating HAZOP/Fault tree analysis[D].Dalian:Dalian University of Technology,2010. [6]程 刚,陆卫东.FTA-LEM危险源评价方法的研究[J].矿业安全与环保,2018,45(5):105-108,114. CHENG Gang,LU Wei-dong.Research on FTA-LEM hazards evaluation method[J].Mining Safety & Environmental Protection,2018,45(5):105-108,114. [7]黄胜松,张义平,赵明生,等.FTA-AHP法在爆破飞石事故原因分析中的综合应用[J].中国矿业,2019,28(3):134-138. HUANG Sheng-song,ZHANG Yi-ping,ZHAO Ming-sheng,et al.Comprehensive application of FTA-AHP method in the cause analysis of blasting flying stone accident[J].China Mining Magazine,2019,28(3):134-138. [8]王君莉.煤矿电气火灾的FTA-AHP评价模型建构及应用[J].煤矿机械,2019,40(1):162-165. WANG Jun-li.Risk evaluation model for coal mine electrical fire based on FTA-AHP and application[J].Coal Mine Machinery,2019,40(1):162-165. [9]张青松,郑 薇.基于熵权TOPSIS的风险矩阵改进方法研究[J].安全与环境学报,2013,13(6):225-228. ZHANG Qing-song.ZHENG Wei.An improved method for the risk matrix research based on the entropy weight TOPSIS[J].Journal of Safety and Environment,2013,13(6):225-228. [10]李树清,颜 智,段 瑜.风险矩阵法在危险有害因素分级中的应用[J].中国安全科学学报,2010,20(4):83-87. LI Shu-qing,YAN Zhi,DUAN Yu.Application of risk matrix in classification of dangerous and hazardous factors[J].China Safety Science Journal,2010,20(4):83-87. [11]罗 恒,卢梓悦,樊瑞稠,等.基于风险矩阵和LOPA的风险分析法在煤气柜中的应用[J].工业安全与环保,2017,43(4):29-31,35. LUO Heng,LU Zi-yue,FAN Rui-chou,et al.Application of risk analysis method based on risk matrix and LOPA in gas tank[J].Industrial Safety and Environmental Protection,2017,43(4):29-31,35. [12]罗新星,彭素华.绿色供应链中基于AHP和TOPSIS的供应商评价与选择研究[J].软科学,2011,25(2):53-56. LUO Xin-xing,PENG Su-hua.Research on the vendor evaluation and selection based on AHP and TOPSIS in green supply chain[J].Soft Science,2011,25(2):53-56. [13]金平,王昊辰,李 磊,等.烟气脱硫技术现状及展望[J].当代化工,2019,48(1):119-121,126. JIN Ping,WANG Hao-chen,LI Lei,et al.Status and prospect of flue gas desulfurization[J].Contemporary Chemical Industry,2019,48(1):119-121,126. [14]钟 毅,高 翔,王惠挺,等.基于CFD技术的湿法烟气脱硫系统性能优化[J].中国电机工程学报,2008,28(32):18-23. ZHONG Yi,GAO Xiang,WANG Hui-ting,et al.Performance optimization of wet flue gas desulphurization system based on CFD technology[J].Proceedings of the CSEE,2008,28(32):18-23. [15]聂向欣,郑宗明,崔孝洋,等.燃煤电厂湿法烟气脱硫废水处理技术研究进展[J].中国电力,2018,51(12):175-179. NIE Xiang-xin,ZHENG Zong-ming,CUI Xiao-yang,et al.Research progress on the treatment technologies of wet flue gas desulfurization waste water in coal-fired power plants[J].Electric Power,2018,51(12):175-179. [16]彭 启.石灰石—石膏法脱硫系统工艺参数计算及优化运行[D].哈尔滨:哈尔滨理工大学,2019. PENG Qi.Calculation and optimization of technological parameters of limestone-gypsum desulfurization system[D].Harbin:Harbin Institute of Technology,2019. [17]杨战社,马宪民.基于静态故障树的矿井提升机系统故障诊断研究[J].西安科技大学学报,2014,34(6):696-700. YANG Zhan-she,MA Xian-min.Mine hoist system fault diagnosis based on static fault tree[J].Journal of Xi'an University of Science and Technology,2014,34(6):696-700. [18]孙兰会,成 锋,陆愈实.关于事故树的结构重要度分析[J].科技通报,2015,31(4):248-250. SUN Lan-hui,CHENG Feng,LU Yu-shi.Analysis of structual importance of fault tree[J].Bulletin of Science and Technology,2015,31(4):248-250. [19]葛 及,郭 迪.基于风险矩阵法的化工企业综合安全评价模型及其应用[J].安全与环境学报,2016,16(5):21-24. GE Ji,GUO Di.Comprehensive safety evaluation model of the chemical enterprises based on the risk matrix method and its application[J].Journal of Safety and Environment,2016,16(5):21-24. [20]党兴华,黄正超,赵巧艳.基于风险矩阵的风险投资项目风险评估[J].科技进步与对策,2006,23(1):140-143. DANG Xing-hua,HUANG Zheng-chao,ZHAO Qiao-yan.Risk assessment of venture capital program based on risk matrix[J].Science & Technology Progress and Policy,2006,23(1):140-143. [21]董丁稳,陈 赞.基于贝叶斯分类的煤矿系统安全动态定量评价[J].西安科技大学学报,2015,35(3):320-324,330. DONG Ding-wen,CHEN Zan.Dynamic and quantitative safety evaluation of mine system based on Bayesian classification[J].Journal of Xi'an University of Science and Technology,2015,35(3):320-324,330. [22]夏勇其,吴祈宗.一种混合型多属性决策问题的TOPSIS方法[J].系统工程学报,2004,19(6):630-634. XIA Yong-qi,WU Qi-zong.A technique of order preference by similarity to ideal solution for hybrid multiple attribute decision making problems[J].Journal of Systems Engineering,2004,19(6):630-634. [23]秦忠诚,陈光波,李 谭,等.“AHP+熵权法”的CW-TOPSIS煤矿内因火灾评价模型[J].西安科技大学学报,2018,38(2):193-201. QIN Zhong-cheng,CHEN Guang-bo,LI Tan,el at.CW-TOPSIS mine internal caused fire evaluation model of “AHP+entropy weight method”[J].Journal of Xi'an University of Science and Technology,2018,38(2):193-201. [24]谢 赤,钟 赞.熵权法在银行经营绩效综合评价中的应用[J].中国软科学,2002(9):109-111,108. XIE Chi,ZHONG Zan.Entropy method and its application in comprehensive evaluation of bank's performance[J].China Soft Science,2002(9):109-111,108. [25]郭 强,殷冉冉,刘建国.基于TOPSIS的时序网络节点重要性研究[J].电子科技大学学报,2019,48(2):296-300. GUO Qiang,YIN Ran-ran,LIU Jian-guo.Node importance identi-fication for temporal networks via the TOPSIS method[J].Journal of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China,2019,48(2):296-300. [26]郭英明,李虹利.基于斯皮尔曼系数的加权朴素贝叶斯分类算法研究[J].信息与电脑(理论版),2018(13):57-59. GUO Ying-ming,LI Hong-li.Research on weighted naive bayesian classification algorithm based on spelman coefficients[J].China Computer & Communication,2018(13):57-59. ----------------------------------------------- 《西安科技大学学报》再次被收录为“中国科技核心期刊”近日,《2019年版中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)自然科学卷》正式公布,《西安科技大学学报》再次被收录为“中国科技核心期刊”(中国科技论文统计源期刊)(证书编号2018-A150-1543 ),扩展总被引频次1 304. 《中国科技期刊引证报告》以《中国科技论文与引文数据库(CSTPCD)》为基础,采用科学客观的研究方法与评价形式,遴选中国自然科学领域各个学科分类的重要期刊作为统计来源期刊。《中国科技期刊引证报告》(核心版)每年11月出版。《2019年版中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)自然科学卷》收录了在中国(不含港澳台地区)正式出版的1 933种中文期刊和116种英文期刊,共2 049种“中国科技核心期刊(中国科技论文统计源期刊)”。 期刊中心将以此为契机,在学校的正确领导、编委会的精心指导、广大师生的大力支持下,全体人员不忘初心、牢记使命,凝心聚力,积极拓展优质稿源,不断提高办刊质量,扩大期刊学术影响力,向《学报》创刊40周年献礼,为学校“双一流”建设和教育事业改革发展做出新的更大的贡献。

相似文献/References:

[1]杨更社,吴成发,李瑞强.西安地铁1号线区间特殊地段施工风险评估[J].西安科技大学学报,2010,(02):159.
 YANG Geng-she,WU Cheng-fa,LI Rui-qiang.Risk assessment of Xi'an metro line 1 special sections construction[J].Journal of Xi'an University of Science and Technology,2010,(01):159.
[2]樊胜军,李慧民,路鹏飞.旧工业厂房改造工程施工阶段的风险评估[J].西安科技大学学报,2008,(01):158.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-9315.2008.01.035]
 FAN Sheng-jun LI Hui-min LU Peng-fei.Risk assessment on rebuilding project of the old industrial factory building[J].Journal of Xi'an University of Science and Technology,2008,(01):158.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-9315.2008.01.035]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2019-08-26 责任编辑:刘 洁
基金项目:国家自然科学基金(51974231,51904235); 国家重点基础研究计划(973计划)(2015CB251600); 中国博士后科学基金(2018M643692); 陕西省自然科学基础研究计划(2019JQ-487)
通信作者:王红胜(1976-),男,安徽池州人,博士,副教授,E-mail:cumtwhs@xust.edu.cn
更新日期/Last Update: 2020-02-15