CN109389263B - Risk-based refinery device operation period evaluation method - Google Patents
Risk-based refinery device operation period evaluation method Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN109389263B CN109389263B CN201710674397.6A CN201710674397A CN109389263B CN 109389263 B CN109389263 B CN 109389263B CN 201710674397 A CN201710674397 A CN 201710674397A CN 109389263 B CN109389263 B CN 109389263B
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- risk
- equipment
- determining
- integrity
- management
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0635—Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
- G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
- Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
- Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
- Y02P90/30—Computing systems specially adapted for manufacturing
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Testing And Monitoring For Control Systems (AREA)
- General Factory Administration (AREA)
Abstract
The invention relates to a risk-based refinery device operation cycle evaluation method, which solves the problem that high-risk devices and equipment cannot be evaluated systematically in the prior art. The invention adopts a risk-based refinery device operation cycle evaluation method, firstly, the device integrity is graded, secondly, the device is subjected to risk quantitative evaluation, and finally, the initial device risk management level of a refinery enterprise is determined according to the refinery device risk management quantitative rating standard, an expert team is organized to determine the operation and maintenance strategy of high-risk devices, after the enterprise is rectified and implemented, the device risk management level is organized to be reevaluated, and the reasonable operation cycle of the enterprise is determined according to the initial device risk management level grading and reevaluation results, thereby better solving the problems and being used for the refinery device operation cycle evaluation.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of long-period operation evaluation of refining devices, in particular to a technical method for quantitatively evaluating the risk management level of refining enterprise equipment and providing a reasonable overhaul period and an operation and maintenance strategy according to an evaluation result. The method comprises the steps of grading the integrity of equipment of the device, carrying out risk quantitative evaluation on the equipment, determining the risk management level of the equipment of the refining enterprise and the operation and maintenance strategy of high-risk equipment according to the risk management quantitative rating standard of the refining equipment, and further determining the reasonable operation period of the enterprise. Is an effective evaluation technology for ensuring the safety of the refining device for a long period.
Background
Along with the development of the economic society and the improvement of the civilization degree, the refining enterprises in China face more and more severe situations and pressures of safety and environmental protection. In 2014, 12 and 1, the modified safety production method of the people's republic of China is implemented; 1/2015, modified "environmental protection law of the people's republic of China". Both of the above two laws are referred to as "the most severe in history" related legislation. The method fully reflects the strong appeal of people to safety and environmental protection, and meets the requirement of sustainable development of the economic society. The practice of part of enterprises shows that the safety and environmental protection work of the refining and chemical enterprises becomes the basis and the premise of the survival and the development of the enterprises, and is the first major affairs of the enterprises. The reliable operation of the equipment is the basis for enterprises to make safety, environmental protection and various work.
In recent years, the long-period operation level of refining and chemical plants is continuously improved, part of oil refining plants are repaired once in four years, all ethylene plants are repaired once in four years, and all aromatic hydrocarbon integrated plants are repaired once in three years. The refining device runs favorably for a long period, so that the utilization rate of equipment is improved, the large overhaul cost is reduced, and the economic benefit of an enterprise is obviously improved; on the other hand, the reliability of the equipment is reduced, and the operation risk of the refining device is improved. Currently, the determination of the operation cycle of the refining and chemical device in China is basically based on the judgment of experience. Therefore, the equipment risk management level of the refining and chemical device is quantitatively evaluated, a reasonable overhaul period and a maintenance strategy are provided, the organic combination of equipment management safety and economy is realized, and the requirement of the development of the era is met.
The prior art at least has the defects that the device integrity score is not carried out on the device, so that the device management condition of the device cannot be evaluated; the risk of the single equipment of the device is quantitatively evaluated, and the risk of the equipment combined according to the logical relationship is lack of effective quantitative evaluation; the key device influencing the long-period operation of the whole plant is not determined according to the degree of safety risk, environmental protection risk, economic loss, reputation influence and quality risk and the influence on material balance generated by the device after the device is shut down; the average score of the equipment integrity evaluation, the lowest score of each element of the equipment integrity and the factory-wide risk sum obtained by a key equipment risk evaluation system are not determined to define the final grade principle of the equipment risk management level of the enterprise; no enterprise equipment risk management determines the device operating period; there is no technical method for re-evaluating the operation period after correcting the high-risk equipment problem according to the risk management evaluation result of the enterprise equipment.
Disclosure of Invention
The invention aims to solve the technical problem that high-risk devices and equipment cannot be systematically evaluated in the prior art, and provides a novel evaluation method for the operation cycle of a refining device based on risks. The method can systematically and quantitatively evaluate the high-risk devices and equipment, and rectify the high-risk equipment problems to reduce the system risk, thereby scientifically and reasonably determining the operation period of the refining device and safely and reliably improving the operation period of the refining device.
In order to solve the problems, the technical scheme adopted by the invention is as follows: a refinery device operation cycle assessment method based on risks comprises the steps of firstly, carrying out equipment integrity scoring on a device, formulating a check table and a scoring standard for the refinery device according to ten elements of equipment integrity management to form a whole plant equipment integrity management level assessment system, and carrying out check scoring on the integrity level of equipment management of a refinery enterprise according to the check table to obtain an equipment integrity average score rate and an equipment integrity single-element lowest score rate; secondly, risk quantitative evaluation is carried out on the equipment, a plant device fault logic diagram is established according to the total flow of the refining enterprise, key devices influencing the long-period operation of the whole plant are determined according to the safety risk, the environmental protection risk, the economic loss, the reputation influence, the degree of quality risk and the influence on the material balance which are generated on the whole plant after the device is shut down, qualitative risk analysis is carried out on the equipment in the key devices, high-risk equipment is determined, and the risk value and the risk sum of the high-risk equipment are calculated; and finally, determining the risk management level of the initial equipment of the refining enterprise according to the risk management quantitative rating standard of the refining equipment, organizing an operation and maintenance strategy of high-risk equipment by an expert team, organizing the reevaluation of the risk management level of the equipment after the enterprise is rectified and implemented, and determining the reasonable operation period of the enterprise according to the rating and reevaluation result of the risk management level of the initial equipment.
In the above technical solution, preferably, ten factors are guidelines and policies, goals and plans, organizations and responsibilities, personnel training and document control, risk management, quality assurance, inspection, testing and preventive maintenance, defect management, change management, performance evaluation and corrective preventive measures, management review and continuous improvement.
In the above technical scheme, preferably, qualitative risk analysis is performed on equipment in the key device, and equipment with a risk level of higher than level iii is positioned at a high risk.
In the above technical solution, preferably, the risk level of the equipment of the key device is determined according to two dimensions of the fault consequence and the failure probability, the equipment with the risk levels of iii and iv is higher than the high risk, and the equipment is determined as the key equipment of the device, and further quantitative risk analysis is performed.
In the above technical solution, preferably, the final level of the equipment risk management level of the enterprise is defined by the average score of the equipment integrity evaluation, the lowest score of each element of the equipment integrity, and the factory-wide risk sum obtained by the key equipment risk evaluation system.
In the above technical solution, preferably, the risk management quantitative rating of the enterprise device is lower than 3 levels (without 3 levels), and an operation cycle of more than 3 years is not adopted; the risk management quantitative rating of the enterprise equipment reaches more than 3 levels (including 3 levels), the problems existing in the equipment integrity evaluation are rectified, corresponding operation and maintenance strategies are adopted for the high-risk equipment, then the high-risk equipment is re-rated to reach more than 5 levels (including 5 levels), and the 4-year operation cycle is adopted; and (3) the risk management quantitative rating of the enterprise equipment reaches more than 4 levels (including 4 levels), the problems existing in the equipment integrity evaluation are rectified, the high-risk equipment is re-rated to reach 6 levels after a corresponding operation and maintenance strategy is adopted, and 5-year-long periodic test is carried out.
In the above technical solution, preferably, the failure possibility is determined according to qualitative evaluation including experience of an assessment expert, a periodic maintenance result, an accident record of the present enterprise, and accident records of other enterprises.
In the above technical solution, preferably, after obtaining the total risk value of the plant-wide key equipment, the total risk value and the score of the plant-wide equipment integrity evaluation system are used as constraint items of the equipment risk management quantitative rating system, so as to obtain an equipment risk management quantitative rating level, and preliminarily determine the overhaul period of the device; according to the risk sequence, for key equipment with higher risk, relevant experts in the organization industry formulate a scheme of a checking, maintenance, operation and maintenance strategy and a redundancy optimization strategy, submit to enterprise implementation, manage the integrity of the equipment, submit to enterprise rectification, after the rectification is finished, carry out quantitative evaluation and grading on the equipment risk again, and determine a final overhaul period according to a grading result.
The evaluation technical method systematically evaluates the equipment risk level of the whole system and can improve the problem of high-risk equipment and reduce the system risk according to the evaluation result, thereby scientifically and reasonably determining the operation period of the refining device, safely and reliably improving the operation period of the refining device and obtaining better technical effect.
Drawings
FIG. 1 is a technical roadmap for risk-based device run cycle assessment.
Fig. 2 identifies a key device logic diagram.
FIG. 3 is a logic diagram for determining the maintenance cycle of the refining apparatus.
The present invention will be further illustrated by the following examples, but is not limited to these examples.
Detailed Description
[ example 1 ] A method for producing a polycarbonate
A method for evaluating the operation period of a risk-based refining device is disclosed, as shown in FIGS. 1-3, firstly, the device is scored for the integrity of the equipment. And establishing a check table and a grading standard for the refining device according to the ten elements of the equipment integrity management to form a whole plant equipment integrity management level evaluation system, and checking and grading the integrity level of the refining enterprise equipment management according to the check table to obtain the average score rate of the equipment integrity and the lowest score rate of the single element of the equipment integrity. Secondly, risk quantitative evaluation is carried out on the equipment. According to the total flow of the refinery enterprise, a fault logic diagram of devices (units) of the whole plant is established, and key devices (units) influencing the long-period operation of the whole plant are determined according to the degree of safety risks, environmental risks, economic losses, reputation influences and quality risks and the influence on material balance, which are generated on the whole plant after the devices are shut down. And (4) carrying out qualitative risk analysis on the equipment in the key device (unit), determining high-risk equipment, and calculating to obtain a risk value and a risk sum of the high-risk equipment. And finally, determining the initial equipment risk management level of the refining enterprise according to the refining equipment risk management quantitative rating standard, organizing an expert team to determine the operation and maintenance strategy of high-risk equipment, and organizing the reevaluation of the equipment risk management level after the enterprise is rectified, reformed and implemented. And determining a reasonable operation period of the enterprise according to the initial equipment risk management level rating and reevaluation results.
The method comprises the following steps: performing a plant wide equipment integrity assessment scoring
And formulating a check list and a grading standard according to the ten elements of the equipment integrity management to form a plant equipment integrity management level evaluation system. The equipment integrity system elements are shown in table 1.
TABLE 1 plant-wide equipment integrity level assessment System elements
| Serial number | Item content |
| 1 | Guidelines and strategies |
| 2 | Goals and plans |
| 3 | Organization and responsibility, personnel training and document control |
| 4 | Risk management |
| 5 | Quality assurance |
| 6 | Inspection, testing and preventive maintenance |
| 7 | Defect management |
| 8 | Change management |
| 9 | Performance assessment and corrective precautions |
| 10 | Management review and continuous improvement |
Step two: critical equipment risk assessment scoring
The technology only concerns the influence of the key equipment on the system risk, and removes non-key equipment. The key devices (units) in the project are devices which can generate great influence on the whole plant when the devices are stopped, and the great influence means that the severity level of the consequences in the table 2 reaches D and above; the critical equipment refers to equipment with a high risk, and quantitatively refers to equipment with a risk grade of III or above. The relationship of the key equipment to the key devices (units) is: the critical equipment must be contained in the critical device (unit), and the equipment in the non-critical device (unit) must be non-critical equipment.
1. Key determination device (Unit)
Establishing a fault logic diagram of a whole plant device (unit) according to a total flow of a refinery enterprise, and determining a key device (unit) influencing the long-period operation of the whole plant according to the degree of safety risk, environmental protection risk, economic loss, reputation influence and quality risk and the influence on material balance which are generated on the whole plant after the device is shut down. Risk analysis is performed only on equipment in the critical equipment (unit). As shown in fig. 2.
It should be noted that the key device (unit) exists objectively, the matching and processing flow of an enterprise device is determined, and the key device is definite and is not transferred by the will of people.
2. Determining critical devices
Qualitative risk analysis is carried out on equipment in the key device (unit), and equipment with the risk level reaching above III level (including III level) is positioned to be high risk. The key equipment depends on objective factors such as design, purchase, installation, manufacture and the like, and also depends on subjective factors such as the process of the device, the equipment management level and the like. The method comprises the following specific steps:
(1) information collection
● boundary division of equipment (division according to ISO14224 standard)
● Equipment data Collection (Equipment self data, reliability data, maintenance data)
● creating the equipment failure mode library of the device
(2) Prediction of failure
Before risk analysis is carried out, fault prediction is carried out on main components of the system by referring to past experiences and related maintenance and accident records, and the method comprises the following steps:
● major function of analytical equipment
● analyzing the type (phenomenon), cause and influence of equipment failure
● determining and evaluating the important faults that may actually occur
(3) Qualitative risk analysis
● determining the failure possibility, namely 1-6 grades, according to the qualitative evaluation of the experience of the assessment expert, the periodic maintenance result, the accident records of the enterprise, other accident records of the enterprise and the like. As shown in table 2.
● the consequences of failure are mainly due to human injury, property loss (including unplanned shutdowns), environmental impact, reputation impact, and the like. As shown in table 3.
●, determining risk levels of equipment of the key device according to two dimensions of fault consequences and failure possibility, wherein the risk levels of III-level equipment and IV-level equipment are higher risk equipment, the risk levels of III-level equipment and IV-level equipment are determined as key equipment of the device and are also key equipment of enterprises, and further carrying out quantitative risk analysis.
TABLE 2 qualitative risk rating Table for device
In the table, I, II, III and IV represent class I risk, class II risk, class III risk and class IV risk, respectively.
TABLE 3 severity level description of equipment failure consequences
Note 1: "above" includes the present numbers, and "below" does not include the present numbers.
Note 2: the "environmental sensitive area" refers to the third item of the "construction project environmental impact evaluation classification management title book" of the ministry of environmental protection of the people's republic of China, the environmental sensitive area refers to various natural and cultural protected areas at all levels established by law, and areas which are particularly sensitive to certain pollution factors or ecological impact factors of construction projects, and mainly comprises: a natural protection area, a scenic spot area, a world culture and natural heritage area and a drinking water source protection area; (II) basic farmland protection areas, basic grasslands, forest parks, geological parks, important wetlands, natural forests, natural concentrated distribution areas of rare or endangered wildlife and plants, natural spawning fields and bait fields of important aquatic organisms, overwintering fields and migration channels, natural fisheries, resource water-deficient areas, key water and soil loss prevention areas, desertification land sealing protection areas, closed and semi-closed sea areas and eutrophic water areas;
note 3: the calculation of the relative environmental risk number of the dangerous substances is shown in the key points of water environmental risk prevention and control of the petrochemical industry group company of China.
Note 4: the dangerous chemicals are listed in the Ministry of dangerous chemicals.
And (III) areas with main functions of residence, medical health, cultural education, scientific research, administrative office work and the like, cultural relic protection units and protection places with special historical, cultural, scientific and national meanings.
3. Critical equipment quantitative risk analysis
(1) Calculating the failure probability (Y) of a single critical device
The collected data of the equipment, reliability data, maintenance data and the like are imported into ProAIM-RAM software according to required rules, the fault occurrence rule of the equipment is found through the analysis of fault data, and the probability that the equipment can continuously run for a certain time (such as 3 years or 4 years) without fault under the condition of reaching the given function is calculated, and the probability is the reliability Re of the equipment. The sum of the equipment failure probability Y and the reliability Re is equal to 1. For unifying standards and improving data comparability, the unified constraint of the project on the reliability precondition is as follows: the given function is that the equipment output is not lower than 90% of the rated capacity, and the continuous operation time without faults is 3 years.
In fact, the possibility of equipment failure is related to factors such as the design, manufacturing, installation and debugging, operation, inspection and maintenance, management, etc. of the equipment, in addition to the reliability of the equipment itself. Therefore, the final equipment failure probability needs to be corrected by the above factor. The failure probability of a single key device is calculated according to the following formula.
Y＝(1－Re)……①
The output of the Re-ProAIM-RAM software is not lower than 90% of rated capacity, and the equipment reliability of 3 years of continuous operation time without fault
(2) Calculating the consequences of failure of a single critical device (C)
The failure consequence of a single key device is calculated according to the following formula (II):
C＝CF1+CF2×CF3……②
CF 1-Equipment breakdown, direct economic loss
CF2 production downtime loss per unit time
CF 3-time required for device recovery
(3) Calculation of individual critical equipment risk value (R)
The risk value of the single key device is carried out according to the following formula:
R＝Y×C……③
R-Risk value
Y-probability of failure
Consequence of C-failure
(4) Total plant high risk equipment risk total calculation
And (3) adding the risks of the key equipment of the whole plant to obtain the total risk value of the equipment of the whole plant:
total plant equipment risk (Rtotal) ∑ failure probability (Y) x failure consequence (C) … …
Step three: equipment risk management quantitative rating and overhaul period determination
The rating scale is divided into 6 levels from low to high. And defining the final grade of the equipment risk management level of the enterprise by the average score of the equipment integrity evaluation, the lowest score of each element of the equipment integrity evaluation and the factory-wide risk sum obtained by the key equipment risk evaluation system. The risk management quantitative rating of the enterprise equipment is lower than 3 levels (without 3 levels), and the operation period of more than 3 years cannot be adopted; the risk management quantitative rating of the enterprise equipment reaches more than 3 levels (including 3 levels), the problem existing in the equipment integrity evaluation is rectified, the high-risk equipment is re-rated to reach more than 5 levels (including 5 levels) after a corresponding operation and maintenance strategy is adopted, and a 4-year operation cycle can be adopted; the risk management quantitative rating of the enterprise equipment reaches more than 4 levels (including 4 levels), the problem existing in the equipment integrity evaluation is rectified, corresponding operation and maintenance strategies are adopted for high-risk equipment, then the high-risk equipment is re-rated to reach 6 levels, and 5-year-long periodic test can be carried out. The risk management quantitative rating standard of equipment of the whole refinery enterprise is shown in a table 4. The logic diagram for determining the maintenance period of the refining device is shown in figure 3.
TABLE 4 quantitative rating criteria for risk management of devices
And after obtaining the total risk value of the key equipment of the whole plant, taking the total risk value and the score of the integrity evaluation system of the whole plant equipment as constraint items of the equipment risk management quantitative rating system, and obtaining the equipment risk management quantitative rating level according to the table 4. And according to the principle, preliminarily determining the overhaul period of the device.
And (4) according to the risk sequence, for the key equipment with higher risk, relevant experts in the organization industry formulate a scheme of a strategy for inspection, maintenance, operation and maintenance and a redundancy optimization strategy, and submit the scheme to the enterprise for implementation. And submitting enterprise rectification to the problems existing in the equipment integrity management. After the rectification and the modification are finished, the equipment risk quantitative evaluation grading is carried out again, and the final overhaul period is determined according to the grading result.
It should be understood that the above-described embodiments of the present invention are merely examples for clearly illustrating the present invention and are not intended to limit the embodiments of the present invention. Other variations and modifications will be apparent to persons skilled in the art in light of the above description. Not all embodiments are exhaustive. All obvious changes and modifications of the present invention are within the scope of the present invention.
Claims (7)
1. A risk-based refinery unit operation cycle assessment method, comprising:
acquiring an equipment integrity average score and an equipment integrity single-element lowest score of the refining device through a preset check list, wherein the check list comprises ten elements for carrying out equipment integrity scoring on the refining device and a scoring standard corresponding to each element;
acquiring influence data of the whole-plant long-period operation after the refinery device is shut down through a whole-plant refinery device fault logic diagram, determining a key device influencing the whole-plant long-period operation according to the acquired influence data, performing qualitative risk analysis on equipment in the key device, determining the key device, and calculating to obtain a risk value of the key device and a risk sum value of all key devices; the influence data comprises the degrees of safety risk, environmental protection risk, economic loss, reputation influence and quality risk generated by the whole plant and the influence on material balance, and the fault logic diagram of the refinery device of the whole plant is established according to a refinery total flow;
determining a risk management quantitative rating level of the refining device according to the equipment integrity average score, the equipment integrity single-element lowest score, the risk sum value and a refining equipment risk management quantitative rating standard table, preliminarily determining the operation period of the refining device, and determining high-risk equipment according to the risk value of key equipment; the refining equipment risk management quantitative rating standard table comprises corresponding relations of equipment integrity average scores, equipment integrity single-element minimum scores, risk sum values and refining equipment risk management quantitative rating levels;
obtaining operation and maintenance strategies of high-risk equipment determined by an expert team, performing rectification and modification, re-determining an equipment integrity average score, a re-determining equipment integrity single-element minimum score and a re-determining risk total value of the refining device after implementation, determining a final risk management quantitative rating level of the refining device according to the re-determining equipment integrity average score, the re-determining equipment integrity single-element minimum score, the re-determining risk total value and a refining equipment risk management quantitative rating standard table, and finally determining an operation period of the refining device according to the final risk management quantitative rating level of the refining device;
the risk value of the key device is determined according to the following formula: r ═ Y × C, R is the risk value, Y is the failure probability, and C is the failure consequence; wherein, the failure possibility Y is (1-Re), Re is the equipment output power output by the ProAIM-RAM software is not lower than 90% of the rated capacity, and the equipment reliability of the fault-free continuous operation time is 3 years; the failure consequence C is CF1+ CF2 x CF3, CF1 is the direct economic loss of equipment damage, CF2 is the unit time shutdown loss, and CF3 is the time required by equipment recovery;
the sum of the risks for all critical equipment is: total plant equipment risk (rdtotal) ═ Σ failure probability (Y) × failure consequence (C).
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the ten factors are guidelines and policies, goals and plans, organizations and responsibilities, personnel training and documentation control, risk management, quality assurance, inspection, testing and preventative maintenance, defect management, change management, performance assessment and corrective precautions, management review and continuous improvement.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the determining key equipment by performing qualitative risk analysis of equipment within the key plant comprises:
determining the risk grade of equipment in the key device according to an equipment qualitative risk rating table, wherein the risk grade is I grade, II grade, III grade and IV grade from low to high;
the equipment with the risk grade above III level is the key equipment.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein the risk classification of the equipment of the key plant is determined according to two dimensions of fault consequences and failure probability, and the equipment with risk classification of class iii and class iv is higher than high risk and determined as the key equipment, and further quantitative risk analysis is performed.
5. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the final level of the risk management level of the facilities is determined by the average score of the facilities integrity evaluation, the minimum score of each element of the facilities integrity evaluation, and the risk sum of the whole plant obtained from the critical facilities risk evaluation system.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the risk management quantification rating of the refinery unit includes 1-6 levels from low to high, the risk management quantification rating of the unit is lower than 3 levels, and no operating cycle longer than 3 years is used; the equipment risk management quantitative rating reaches more than 3 grades, the problems existing in equipment integrity evaluation are rectified, the high-risk equipment is re-rated to reach more than 5 grades after a corresponding operation and maintenance strategy is adopted, and a 4-year operation cycle is adopted; and the equipment risk management quantitative rating reaches more than 4 grades, the problems existing in the equipment integrity evaluation are rectified, the high-risk equipment is re-rated to reach 6 grades after adopting a corresponding operation and maintenance strategy, and 5-year-long periodic test is carried out.
7. The method of claim 4 wherein the probability of failure is determined based on qualitative assessments including the expertise of the assessment expert, periodic maintenance results, business incident records, and other business incident records.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201710674397.6A CN109389263B (en) | 2017-08-09 | 2017-08-09 | Risk-based refinery device operation period evaluation method |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201710674397.6A CN109389263B (en) | 2017-08-09 | 2017-08-09 | Risk-based refinery device operation period evaluation method |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN109389263A CN109389263A (en) | 2019-02-26 |
| CN109389263B true CN109389263B (en) | 2022-09-06 |
Family
ID=65414701
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201710674397.6A Active CN109389263B (en) | 2017-08-09 | 2017-08-09 | Risk-based refinery device operation period evaluation method |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN109389263B (en) |
Families Citing this family (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN110928858A (en) * | 2019-11-19 | 2020-03-27 | 杭州培慕科技有限公司 | Equipment knowledge base construction method based on digitization and intelligent application |
| CN110910044A (en) * | 2019-12-04 | 2020-03-24 | 江苏智谋科技有限公司 | CMMI (China Mobile multimedia interface) model-based software research and development process improvement system and method |
Citations (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AU2008100890A4 (en) * | 2008-09-12 | 2008-11-20 | Charlton, Gerard Anthony Mr | IPOS Sports Ground Quality and Risk Assessment System |
| US7809634B1 (en) * | 2004-07-09 | 2010-10-05 | Bierc Gary J | Enterprise-wide total cost of risk management using ARQ |
| CN105512831A (en) * | 2015-12-29 | 2016-04-20 | 中国石油化工股份有限公司 | Systematic method for equipment integrity management of oil-refining chemical engineering enterprise |
| CN106203836A (en) * | 2016-07-12 | 2016-12-07 | 中国石油化工股份有限公司 | A kind of appraisal procedure of oil refining enterprise equipment dependability performance management |
| CN106384210A (en) * | 2016-10-28 | 2017-02-08 | 贵州电网有限责任公司贵阳供电局 | Power transmission and transformation equipment maintenance priority ordering method based on maintenance risk premium |
| CN206161053U (en) * | 2016-11-04 | 2017-05-10 | 江苏省特种设备安全监督检验研究院南通分院 | Online test detection of storage tank and evaluation device |
-
2017
- 2017-08-09 CN CN201710674397.6A patent/CN109389263B/en active Active
Patent Citations (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US7809634B1 (en) * | 2004-07-09 | 2010-10-05 | Bierc Gary J | Enterprise-wide total cost of risk management using ARQ |
| AU2008100890A4 (en) * | 2008-09-12 | 2008-11-20 | Charlton, Gerard Anthony Mr | IPOS Sports Ground Quality and Risk Assessment System |
| CN105512831A (en) * | 2015-12-29 | 2016-04-20 | 中国石油化工股份有限公司 | Systematic method for equipment integrity management of oil-refining chemical engineering enterprise |
| CN106203836A (en) * | 2016-07-12 | 2016-12-07 | 中国石油化工股份有限公司 | A kind of appraisal procedure of oil refining enterprise equipment dependability performance management |
| CN106384210A (en) * | 2016-10-28 | 2017-02-08 | 贵州电网有限责任公司贵阳供电局 | Power transmission and transformation equipment maintenance priority ordering method based on maintenance risk premium |
| CN206161053U (en) * | 2016-11-04 | 2017-05-10 | 江苏省特种设备安全监督检验研究院南通分院 | Online test detection of storage tank and evaluation device |
Non-Patent Citations (2)
| Title |
|---|
| "基 于 R B I 的 环 氧 丙 烷 / 苯 乙 烯 装 置";石凯，等;《风险检验》;20031231;第30卷(第1期);全文 * |
| "基于定量 ＲBI 技术的输气站场设备风险评价";崔凯燕，等;《中 国 安 全 科 学 学 报》;20160228;第26卷(第2期);全文 * |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN109389263A (en) | 2019-02-26 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Yazdi et al. | Fuzzy dynamic risk-based maintenance investment optimization for offshore process facilities | |
| Tan et al. | An evaluation of maintenance strategy using risk based inspection | |
| Lin et al. | The role of the internal audit function in the disclosure of material weaknesses | |
| Franciosi et al. | A taxonomy of performance shaping factors for human reliability analysis in industrial maintenance | |
| Pawar et al. | Applications of resilience engineering principles in different fields with a focus on industrial systems: A literature review | |
| CN109389263B (en) | Risk-based refinery device operation period evaluation method | |
| Figueira et al. | Integration of human factors principles in LARG organizations–a conceptual model | |
| Buber et al. | The bibliometric analysis and visualization mapping of net environmental benefit analysis (NEBA) | |
| Demirci et al. | An evaluation of the effects of human factors on potential ship accidents under pilotage | |
| Tong et al. | An assessment model of owner safety management and its application to real estate projects | |
| Chen et al. | Risk analysis of oilfield gathering station | |
| Lazar Farokhi | Application of fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods for risk evaluation of gas transmission facility | |
| Coglianese et al. | Management-based regulation | |
| Zhang et al. | Human factors analysis of coal mine gas accidents based on improved HFACS model | |
| Khosrowabadi et al. | Decision support approach to occupational safety using data mining | |
| Munirah et al. | Prioritization of the human health and safety loss factor subject to offshore pipeline accidents | |
| Dehghani et al. | Evaluating Human Errors using HEART and TRACEr Methods: Case Study at a Petrochemical Plant | |
| Verma et al. | Green audit-A Boom to human civilization | |
| Ridha et al. | Analysis and measurement of risks in business: a case study on the Jordan Valley Authority | |
| Chen et al. | A study of property insurance based on ARFLGB-XGBoost modeling | |
| Pishehvar et al. | Reviewing and improving health safety environment management program using SWOT analytical planning | |
| Yalcin et al. | Human Factors Analysis by Classifying Chemical Accidents into Operations. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8129 | |
| Mousavi et al. | Identifying and Prioritizing of Indicators Affecting Resilience in the Event of Fire-Induced Emergencies in a Combined Cycle Power Plant Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) | |
| Mahmoudi et al. | Designing a Model for Predicting and Analyzing Factors Affecting the Occurrence of Environmental Incidents: A Case Study in MAPNA Group | |
| Hoseinpour | Prioritization of effective parameters related to Health, Safety& Environment (HSE) Promotion utilizing fuzzy logic approach and House of Quality (HOQ) method: case study Iran Barite Group |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| TA01 | Transfer of patent application right |
Effective date of registration: 20220810 Address after: Yanan City, Shandong province Qingdao City three road 266071 No. 218 Applicant after: CHINA PETROLEUM & CHEMICAL Corp. Applicant after: Sinopec Safety Engineering Research Institute Co.,Ltd. Address before: Yanan City, Shandong province Qingdao City three road 266071 No. 218 Applicant before: CHINA PETROLEUM & CHEMICAL Corp. Applicant before: SINOPEC Research Institute OF SAFETY ENGINEERING |
|
| TA01 | Transfer of patent application right | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |