CN110163454A - A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and device - Google Patents
A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and device Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN110163454A CN110163454A CN201810120160.8A CN201810120160A CN110163454A CN 110163454 A CN110163454 A CN 110163454A CN 201810120160 A CN201810120160 A CN 201810120160A CN 110163454 A CN110163454 A CN 110163454A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- grade
- damage
- target pipe
- failure probability
- maloperation
- 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.)
- Pending
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 70
- 230000006378 damage Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 105
- 206010035148 Plague Diseases 0.000 claims abstract description 34
- 241000607479 Yersinia pestis Species 0.000 claims abstract description 34
- 230000007797 corrosion Effects 0.000 claims description 63
- 238000005260 corrosion Methods 0.000 claims description 63
- 230000004224 protection Effects 0.000 claims description 23
- 238000012502 risk assessment Methods 0.000 claims description 13
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 claims description 11
- 230000007257 malfunction Effects 0.000 claims description 2
- 230000004888 barrier function Effects 0.000 claims 1
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 abstract description 6
- 239000002689 soil Substances 0.000 description 13
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 description 6
- 238000009434 installation Methods 0.000 description 4
- 238000007726 management method Methods 0.000 description 4
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 4
- 239000011435 rock Substances 0.000 description 4
- 229910000831 Steel Inorganic materials 0.000 description 3
- 238000013523 data management Methods 0.000 description 3
- 239000010959 steel Substances 0.000 description 3
- 208000037408 Device failure Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 206010047924 Wheezing Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 208000027418 Wounds and injury Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000015572 biosynthetic process Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000004568 cement Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000006243 chemical reaction Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000003628 erosive effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000006870 function Effects 0.000 description 2
- 208000014674 injury Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 230000002452 interceptive effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000011241 protective layer Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000001105 regulatory effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 241000894006 Bacteria Species 0.000 description 1
- UCKMPCXJQFINFW-UHFFFAOYSA-N Sulphide Chemical compound [S-2] UCKMPCXJQFINFW-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 230000002159 abnormal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000002378 acidificating effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000009412 basement excavation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000005540 biological transmission Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004210 cathodic protection Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000008859 change Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000002131 composite material Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000008021 deposition Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000001035 drying Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005868 electrolysis reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000009472 formulation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000002309 gasification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000006872 improvement Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000007246 mechanism Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005065 mining Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 231100001143 noxa Toxicity 0.000 description 1
- 230000002265 prevention Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000001681 protective effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000008439 repair process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000000638 solvent extraction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012549 training Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000009736 wetting Methods 0.000 description 1
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
- G06Q50/00—Information and communication technology [ICT] specially adapted for implementation of business processes of specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
- G06Q50/06—Energy or water supply
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Public Health (AREA)
- Primary Health Care (AREA)
- Water Supply & Treatment (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention discloses a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and devices, it is related to city gas pipe network system technical field；First determining module is used to determine the corresponding damage plague grade of the types of damage of third party damage on Target pipe and multiple damage safeguard procedures grades, and the third party damage failure probability of Target pipe is determined based on the types of damage, damage plague grade and multiple damage safeguard procedures grades；The present invention is for every class hazard factor in four class hazard factor of damage, burn into maloperation and equipment fault, a possibility that being occurred based on the hazard factor, and the grade for the safeguard procedures taken for the hazard factor, comprehensive analysis determines a possibility that hazard factor causes Target pipe to fail, and then a possibility that causing Target pipe to fail based on every class hazard factor, by the way that the density of population, stopping transportation influence, pressure rating determines pipeline failure probability, and then obtain the risk integrative index of Target pipe.
Description
Technical field:
The present invention relates to a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and devices, belong to city gas pipe network system
Technical field.
Background technique:
City gas pipeline network leak risk assessment is to determine pipeline risk by calculating pipeline failure probability and leakage consequence
Grade, and further instruct the important means of pipeline risk management and control.
Pipeline degree of risk mainly has relationship with two aspect factors, is failure probability and leakage consequence respectively.Target tube
The size for a possibility that failure probability of net refers under the influence of a variety of hazard factors, Target pipe is caused to leak, wherein this is more
Kind hazard factor may be damage, burn into maloperation and equipment fault.Therefore, a kind of pipeline failure probability is needed really
Determine method, the failure probability of Target pipe can be determined in the operational process of Target pipe；And then determine Target pipe
Risk class；The influence factor of city gas pipeline network leak consequence mainly has the sides such as the density of population, pressure rating, stopping transportation influence
Face factor；Composite failure probability and leakage consequence influence factor determine the risk of leakage grade of city gas pipe network.
Summary of the invention:
In view of the above-mentioned problems, the technical problem to be solved in the present invention is to provide a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk assessment
Method and device.
A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method of the invention, its evaluation method include the following:
Step 1: determine that the corresponding damage plague grade of the types of damage of damage on Target pipe and multiple damages are anti-
Shield measure grade, and determined based on the types of damage, the damage plague grade and the multiple damage safeguard procedures grade
The damage failure probability of the Target pipe；
Step 2: it determines and corrodes corresponding corrosion plague grade and multiple corrosion protection steps etc. on the Target pipe
Grade and the corrosion plague grade and the multiple corrosion protection steps grade determine that the corrosion failure of the Target pipe is general
Rate；
Step 3: determine that the corresponding maloperation plague grade of maloperation and multiple maloperations protection are arranged on the Target pipe
It applies grade and the maloperation plague grade and the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade determines the mistake of the Target pipe
Operation failure probability；
Step 4: determining the corresponding equipment fault grade of device type on Target pipe, and is based on the device type, sets
Standby failure plague grade determines the maloperation bad failure probability of the Target pipe；
Step 5: based on the damage failure probability, the corrosion failure probability, the misuse failure probability and
The equipment fault failure probability, the failure probability of the Target pipe is determined by operation；
Step 6: it determines that density of population grade on Target pipe, stopping transportation influence grade, pressure rating, is based on above-mentioned grade
As a result, determining the leakage consequence of Target pipe；
Step 7: failure probability and leakage consequence based on Target pipe determine the risk integrative index of Target pipe, real
Existing risk assessment.
A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk assessment device, it includes the first determining module, the second determining module, third
Determining module, the 4th determining module, the 5th determining module, the 6th determining module；First determining module is for determining Target pipe
The corresponding damage plague grade of the types of damage of upper third party damage and multiple damage safeguard procedures grades, and it is based on the damage
Type, the damage plague grade and the multiple damage safeguard procedures grade determine that the third party damage of the Target pipe loses
Imitate probability；Second determining module corrodes corresponding corrosion plague grade and multiple corrosion protections for determining on the Target pipe
Measure grade and the corrosion plague grade and the multiple corrosion protection steps grade determine the corrosion of the Target pipe
Failure probability；Third determining module is for determining maloperation plague grade and multiple maloperation safeguard procedures on the Target pipe
Grade and the maloperation plague grade and the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade determine the mistake behaviour of the Target pipe
Make failure probability；4th determining module includes: for being obtained from the equipment fault type of storage based on the device type
Take corresponding equipment fault that score value occurs, for determining that the equipment fault of the Target pipe is lost based on the equipment fault score value
Imitate probability；5th determining module include: for based on the density of population grade, stopping transportation influence grade, pressure rating from
Corresponding density of population score value, stopping transportation impact fraction, pressure score value are obtained in the score value of storage, for being based on the density of population
Score value, stopping transportation impact fraction, pressure score value determine the leakage consequence of the Target pipe；6th determining module is mainly used
In: it is based on the damage failure probability, corrosion failure probability, misuse failure probability, equipment fault failure probability and institute
It tells leakage consequence, determines the risk integrative index of the Target pipe.
Preferably, first determining module include: for based on the types of damage from the types of damage of storage
Obtain corresponding damage score value, for based on the multiple damage safeguard procedures grade from the damage safeguard procedures grade of storage
Corresponding damage safeguard procedures score value is obtained respectively, for determining the target based on the damage score value and safeguard procedures score value
The damage failure probability of pipeline.
Preferably, second determining module include: for based on the Corrosion Types from the types of damage of storage
It obtains corresponding corrosion and score value occurs, for the corrosion protection steps etc. based on the multiple corrosion protection steps grade from storage
Corresponding corrosion protection steps score value is obtained respectively in grade, for determining based on corrosion generation score value and safeguard procedures score value
The corrosion failure probability of the Target pipe.
Preferably, the third determining module includes: for the maloperation class based on the maloperation grade from storage
Corresponding maloperation is obtained in type, score value occurs, for the maloperation based on the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade from storage
Corresponding maloperation safeguard procedures score value is obtained in safeguard procedures grade respectively, for score value to occur based on the maloperation and prevents
Shield measure score value determines the misuse failure probability of the Target pipe.
Compared with prior art, the invention has the benefit that for damage, burn into maloperation and equipment fault
Every class hazard factor in four class hazard factors a possibility that generation based on the hazard factor, and is adopted for the hazard factor
The grade of the safeguard procedures taken, comprehensive analysis determine a possibility that hazard factor causes Target pipe to fail, and then based on every
A possibility that class hazard factor causes Target pipe to fail, by the way that the density of population, stopping transportation influence, pressure rating determines pipeline failure
Probability, and then the risk integrative index of Target pipe is obtained, the risk class situation of pipeline is determined by risk integrative index.
Detailed description of the invention:
Detailed description will be given by the following detailed implementation and drawings by the present invention for ease of explanation,.
Fig. 1 is flow chart of the invention；
Fig. 2 is structural schematic block diagram of the invention.
Specific embodiment:
In order to make the objectives, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention clearer, below by shown in the accompanying drawings specific
Embodiment describes the present invention.However, it should be understood that these descriptions are merely illustrative, and it is not intended to limit model of the invention
It encloses.In addition, in the following description, descriptions of well-known structures and technologies are omitted, it is of the invention to avoid unnecessarily obscuring
Concept.
As shown in Figure 1, present embodiment use following technical scheme: it evaluation method is as follows:
Step 101: collecting damage risk correlation hazard factor data, calculate pipeline damage failure probability；
Step 102: collecting corrosion risk correlation hazard factor data, calculate pipeline corrosion failure probability；
Step 103: collecting maloperation risk correlation hazard factor data, calculate pipeline maloperation and damage failure probability；
Step 104: collecting device failure risk correlation hazard factor data calculate pipeline equipment fault failure probability；
Step 105: collecting the density of population, pressure, stopping transportation influences hazard factor data, calculates pipe leakage consequence；
Step 106: in conjunction with failure probability and the comprehensive determining pipeline integrated risk index of leakage consequence；
In a step 101, damage risk correlation hazard factor data are collected, it is general to calculate the failure of pipeline damage
Rate.
Further, the damage probability determination method is as follows:
Damage scoring=A.1+A.2+A.3+A.4+A.5+A.6+A.7+A.8+A.9+A.10；
In damage CALCULATION OF FAILURE PROBABILITY formula, the value range of each index be see the table below.
1 damage Score index of table
| Serial number | Index | Score range |
| A.1 | Urban operating mechanism crossing parallel | 0~10 point |
| A.2 | Land operations are horizontal | 0~10 point |
| A.3 | Risk point is identified | 0~10 point |
| A.4 | Piping facility | 0~5 point |
| A.5 | Geological disaster | 0~10 point |
| A.6 | Pipeline land marking | 0~15 point |
| A.7 | Buried depth | 0~15 point |
| A.8 | Line walking | 0~10 point |
| A.9 | Statutory regulation | 0~10 point |
| A.10 | Pipeline location and excavation respond | 0~5 point |
In damage failure probability index A.1~be A.5 common damage type and scene, be to be easy to happen damage
Bad position, A.6~it is A.10 the safeguard procedures for being directed to external damage, the value range of comprehensive two aspect factors determines that external force is damaged
Bad failure probability value.With A.5 geological disaster and A.7, buried depth two indices illustrate determining for each index score value in the present embodiment
Journey.
Geological disaster scoring example:
A possibility that gas pipeline pressure piping is normally at urban periphal defence area, and there are geological disasters, the geology of generation
Disasters Type mainly has: landslide, avalanche, mud-rock flow, the damaged or destroyed by flood of stream road, slope surface damaged or destroyed by flood etc..Geological disaster harm point once exists,
The injury caused by pipeline is larger.Scoring is scored according to different geologic hazard types and its extent of injury size, generally
It is closer apart from pipeline, the geological disaster point in coverage.
Score criterion: first determining the type of geological disaster, according to different type Characteristics of Geological Hazards, acquires geological disaster
Point data, selection describe corresponding grade with index.
It is the disaster point on landslide for Disasters Type, according to following index evaluation:
(1) come down unstable, be losing shape --- 0 point；
(2) come down latent instability, or there is slight deformation in part --- and 6 points；
(3) slip mass is basicly stable --- and 8 points.
It is the disaster point of mud-rock flow for Disasters Type, according to following index evaluation:
(1) debris flow formation sufficient condition had mud-rock flow that event occurs in recent years --- and 0 point；
(2) debris flow formation condition is more abundant, Debris Flow Deposition --- and 3 points；
(3) mud-rock flow does not occur for ordinary circumstance, and continuing extra torrential rain may occur --- and 8 points.
It is avalanche evil point for Disasters Type, according to following index evaluation:
(1) crag (avalanche) master control crack is pulled open obviously, is had small-scale avalanche event or it is expected that calamity to be occurred in the recent period
Evil --- 0 point；
(2) crag master control crack is pulled open more apparent, the trend with avalanche --- and 3 points；
(3) basicly stable --- 8 points.
It is the disaster point of the damaged or destroyed by flood of stream road and slope surface damaged or destroyed by flood for Disasters Type, according to following index evaluation:
(1) channel or the erosion caused by sloping surfaces are serious, riverbed empty or dinting depth up to 1m with --- 0 point；
(2) landforms have change in recent years, and channel or slope surface have gentle erosion --- and 4 points；
(3) basicly stable --- 9 points.
For the score by rules example of buried depth:
This part scoring is mainly used for finding out buried depth not foot point, can will wherein increase the safeguard measures such as hard covering and casing
Safeguard measure conversion is buried depth.Specific conversion is as follows:
6cm cement protective layer is equivalent to the thickness of earth covering for increasing 0.2m；
12cm cement protective layer is equivalent to the thickness of earth covering for increasing 0.3m；
Pipe sleeve is equivalent to the thickness of earth covering for increasing 0.6m；
Score criterion:
For car lane:
(1) buried depth is greater than 0.9m --- and 15 points；
(2) buried depth is located at 0.45~0.9m --- and 10 points；
(3) buried depth is less than 0.45m --- and 5 points；
(4) buried depth is less than 0.3m --- and 0 point.
Motor vehicle cannot reach location:
(1) buried depth is greater than 0.6m --- and 15 points；
(2) buried depth is located at 0.3~0.6m --- and 10 points；
(3) buried depth is less than 0.3m --- and 5 points；
(4) buried depth is less than 0.1m --- and 0 point.
Further, described to collect corrosion risk correlation hazard factor data in a step 102, calculate pipeline corrosion failure
Probability.
The scoring of corrosive pipeline failure probability uses following formulation formula:
Corrosion scoring=B.1+B.2+B.3+B.4+B.5+B.6+B.7+B.8+B.9+B.10+B.11；
In corrosion failure probability calculation formula, the value range of each index be see the table below.
Table 2 corrodes Score index
Corrode the corrosion harmfulness in Score index comprising external environment and the safeguard procedures two types for corrosion, for
Each Score index present invention is provided with detailed grading system partitioning standards.In the present embodiment, with soil corrosivity and direct current
For interference, illustrate that corrosion index grade classification and scoring require.
Soil corrosivity scoring example:
Gas pipeline is embedded in underground mostly, and soil corrosivity is very serious for the influence of corrosive pipeline situation, so this refers to
Mark is set as 15 points.Soil around gas enterprise reply buried steel pipeline is sampled analysis, uses based on the analysis results
The evaluation index that the 1.1st article of CJJ95-2003 of " Buried City Gas Steel Pipeline corrosion control technology regulation " determines soil corrosion
Property.According to measurement result, score according to following scoring criterion.
Score criterion:
1) soil resistivity is less than 20 Ω .m --- and 15 points；
2) soil resistivity is 20~50 Ω .m --- 10 points；
3) soil resistivity is greater than 50 Ω .m；--- 6 points；
If have in soil environment sulfide, bacterium, acidic environment, high temperature, swampy area, alternation of wetting and drying area etc. endanger because
Element, subtract 3 on the basis of above-mentioned appraisal result~5 points.
DC influence scoring example:
Two methods are mainly used for the evaluation of DC influence, are based on qualitative judgement and based on testing result respectively.
To in direct current power distributing system, direct current gasification railway, cathodic protection system or other DC influence source coverages
Buried steel pipeline near soil, should be by " buried steel pipeline direct current drainage protection technical standard " SY/T0017-2006
The requirement of 4th chapter is measured and is evaluated to DC influence extent of corrosion.
Score criterion:
Based on the method for qualitative judgement:
1) Near Pipelines have direct current supply institute, electric car, railcar, high pressure or extra high voltage direct current transmission line converter station, make
With DC influences sources such as the mining system of direct current, DC electrolysis factories --- 12 points；
2) to take safeguard procedures for DC influence source --- 8 points；
3) Near Pipelines are without obvious DC influence source --- and 0 point.
Based on testing result method:
1) there are DC influence, soil shows that electric potential gradient is greater than 5mV/m --- 12 points；
2) there are DC influence, soil shows that electric potential gradient is greater than 0.5~5mV/m --- 10 points；
3) there are DC influence, soil shows that electric potential gradient is less than 0.5mV/m --- 6 points；
4) without obvious electric potential gradient --- 0 point.
In step 103, maloperation risk correlation hazard factor data are collected, pipeline misuse failure probability is calculated.
Misuse failure probability determination method is as follows:
Maloperation scoring=C.1+C.2+C.3+C.4+C.5+C.6.
In misuse failure probability calculation formula, the value range of each index be see the table below.
3 maloperation Score index of table
Maloperation setting Score index in terms of harm identification, operating regulation, staffs training etc. 6, in the present embodiment with
Operation is to endanger identification, data and information management system two indices.
Endanger distinguishing indexes scoring example:
Harm identification is primarily referred to as whether operations staff considers the various danger being likely to occur in yard operational process comprehensively
Evil, and take Prevention and control measures；Whether safety guard is in place；Whether various special circumstances can be coped with, such as suddenly
Power down, key equipment catastrophic failure etc..Operations staff should complete comprehensive risk using the methods of safety checklist, Hazop
Identification, and risk account is established, treatment measures are formulated for common operation risk.
Score criterion:
Multi-option, three scores are added below, and total score is no more than 20 points；
1) unidentified yard operational risk --- 8 points；
2) risk account is not set up --- 8 points；
3) risk treatment measures are not formulated --- 8 points.
Data and information management system scoring example:
Data and information management system can be used to save and search and have access to the basic data of pipeline and installations and facilities, go through
Secondary maintenance and repair situation, malfunction and failure situation and other useful informations, can be the file system of papery, is also possible to calculate
Machine information system.It can be used to the maintenance measure of adjusting and optimizing pipeline and installations and facilities after the analysis of these data.
Score criterion:
1) there is data management system, and in the application --- 5 points；
2) there is data management system, but that all data are not included --- 10 points；
3) without this data management system；Or mass data has been lost --- 15 points.
Step 104: collecting device failure risk correlation hazard factor data calculate pipeline equipment fault failure probability；
Equipment fault failure probability determines that method is as follows:
Equipment fault scoring=D.1+D.2+D.3+D.4；
In equipment fault CALCULATION OF FAILURE PROBABILITY formula, the value range of each index be see the table below.
4 equipment fault Score index of table
| Serial number | Index | Score range |
| D.1 | Valve | 0~25 point |
| D.2 | Regulator | 0~25 point |
| D.3 | Underground well chamber | 0~25 point |
| D.4 | Bellows | 0~25 point |
In equipment fault CALCULATION OF FAILURE PROBABILITY, by taking valve and regulator as an example, illustrate the grade classification and scoring of index
It is required that.
Valve scoring example:
Valve is the important equipment of gas pipeline system, and valve should be inspected periodically, and must not have gas leakage, damage phenomenon,
In valve well must not ponding, collapse, must not have the deposit for interfering valve operation, valve opening and closing should be flexible.Valve preferably every year into
The primary online macroscopic examination of row, prevents from being not closed completely and causing to leak.
Multi-option, three scores are added below, and total score is no more than 20 points.
1) there are gas leakage, damage phenomenon --- 8 points；
2) have ponding in valve well, collapse --- 8 points；
3) there is the deposit for interfering valve operation, valve opening and closing should be flexible --- 8 points.
Regulator scoring example:
Gas pipeline system regulator refers mainly to pressure regulating box, cabinet and pressure regulator.Pressure regulation should be checked in evaluation procedure
The operating condition and reliability of device.It should mainly stablize comprising pressure regulating box, cabinet and pressure regulator installation；For prevent vehicle or its
He collides at mode, and regulator should have protective fence or cover；It can be operated normally in operational process, guarantee normal pressure regulation, must not had
Wheeze, pressure kick phenomena such as.
Score criterion:
Multi-option, three scores are added below, and total score is no more than 20 points.
1) regulator installation is unstable --- and 8 points；
2) unshielded device --- 8 points；
3) run it is abnormal, have wheeze, pressure kick phenomenon --- 8 points.
Step 105: collecting the density of population, pressure, stopping transportation influences hazard factor data, calculates pipe leakage consequence.
Leakage consequence determines that method is as follows:
The scoring of leakage consequence=E.1+E.2+E.3.
It leaks in Consequence calculation formula, the value range of each index see the table below.
4 consequence Score index of table
| Serial number | Index | Score range |
| E.1 | The density of population | 0~5 point |
| E.2 | Pressure rating | 0~3 point |
| E.3 | Stopping transportation influences | 0~2 point |
Step 106: in conjunction with failure probability and the comprehensive determining pipeline integrated risk index of leakage consequence:
Risk integrative index=(damage scoring+corrosion scoring+maloperation scoring+equipment fault) × leakage consequence is commented
Point:
As shown in Fig. 2, providing a kind of city gas pipe network risk assessment device, described device includes:
First determining module, the corresponding damage plague grade of types of damage for determining third party damage on Target pipe
With multiple damage safeguard procedures grades, and protected based on the types of damage, the damage plague grade and the multiple damage
Measure grade determines the third party damage failure probability of the Target pipe.
Optionally, first determining module includes: for being obtained from the types of damage of storage based on the types of damage
Corresponding damage score value is taken, for dividing from the damage safeguard procedures grade of storage based on the multiple damage safeguard procedures grade
Corresponding damage safeguard procedures score value is not obtained, for determining the target tube based on the damage score value and safeguard procedures score value
The damage failure probability in road.
Second determining module, for determining that corroding corresponding corrosion plague grade and multiple corrosion on the Target pipe prevents
Shield measure grade and the corrosion plague grade and the multiple corrosion protection steps grade determine the corruption of the Target pipe
Lose failure probability；
Optionally, second determining module includes: for being obtained from the types of damage of storage based on the Corrosion Types
Take corresponding corrosion that score value occurs, for the corrosion protection steps grade based on the multiple corrosion protection steps grade from storage
It is middle to obtain corresponding corrosion protection steps score value respectively, for determining institute based on corrosion generation score value and safeguard procedures score value
State the corrosion failure probability of Target pipe；
Third determining module, for determining maloperation plague grade and multiple maloperation safeguard procedures on the Target pipe
Grade and the maloperation plague grade and the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade determine the mistake behaviour of the Target pipe
Make failure probability；
Optionally, the third determining module includes: for the maloperation type based on the maloperation grade from storage
It is middle to obtain corresponding maloperation generation score value, for anti-from the maloperation of storage based on the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade
Corresponding maloperation safeguard procedures score value is obtained in shield measure grade respectively, for score value and protection to occur based on the maloperation
Measure score value determines the misuse failure probability of the Target pipe.
Optionally, the 4th determining module includes: for the equipment fault type based on the device type from storage
It is middle to obtain corresponding equipment fault generation score value, for determining the equipment event of the Target pipe based on the equipment fault score value
Hinder failure probability.
Optionally, the 5th determining module includes: for influencing grade, pressure based on the density of population grade, stopping transportation
Power grade obtains corresponding density of population score value, stopping transportation impact fraction, pressure score value from the score value of storage, for based on described
Density of population score value, stopping transportation impact fraction, pressure score value determine the leakage consequence of the Target pipe.
Optionally, the 6th determining module is mainly used for:
It is general based on the damage failure probability, corrosion failure probability, misuse failure probability, equipment fault failure
Rate and the leakage consequence, determine the risk integrative index of the Target pipe.
The beneficial of present embodiment is analyzed: being endangered for damage, burn into maloperation and four class of equipment fault
Every class hazard factor in noxa element is based on a possibility that hazard factor occurs, and prevents for what the hazard factor was taken
The grade of shield measure, comprehensive analysis determines a possibility that hazard factor causes Target pipe to fail, and then is endangered based on every class
A possibility that factor causes Target pipe to fail, by the way that the density of population, stopping transportation influence, pressure rating determines pipeline failure probability,
And then the risk integrative index of Target pipe is obtained, the risk class situation of pipeline is determined by risk integrative index.
It should be understood that pipe leakage risk assessment device provided by the above embodiment is in risk assessment, only more than
The division progress of each functional module is stated for example, can according to need and in practical application by above-mentioned function distribution by difference
Functional module complete, i.e., the internal structure of equipment is divided into different functional modules, with complete it is described above whole or
Person's partial function.In addition, above-described embodiment provides Pas-petrol Pipeline Risk Assessment device and Pas-petrol Pipeline Risk Assessment embodiment of the method belongs to together
One design, specific implementation process are detailed in embodiment of the method, and which is not described herein again.
Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that realizing that all or part of the steps of above-described embodiment can pass through hardware
It completes, relevant hardware can also be instructed to complete by program, the program can store in a kind of computer-readable
In storage medium, storage medium mentioned above can be read-only memory, disk or CD etc..
The foregoing is merely presently preferred embodiments of the present invention, is not intended to limit the invention, it is all in spirit of the invention and
Within principle, any modification, equivalent replacement, improvement and so on be should all be included in the protection scope of the present invention.
Claims (5)
1. a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method, it is characterised in that: its evaluation method includes the following:
Step 1: determine that the corresponding damage plague grade of the types of damage of damage on Target pipe and multiple damages protection are arranged
Grade is applied, and based on described in the determination of the types of damage, the damage plague grade and the multiple damage safeguard procedures grade
The damage failure probability of Target pipe；
Step 2: determining and corrode corresponding corrosion plague grade and multiple corrosion protection steps grades on the Target pipe, with
And the corrosion plague grade and the multiple corrosion protection steps grade determine the corrosion failure probability of the Target pipe；
Step 3: the corresponding maloperation plague grade of maloperation and multiple maloperation safeguard procedures etc. on the Target pipe are determined
Grade and the maloperation plague grade and the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade determine the maloperation of the Target pipe
Failure probability；
Step 4: the corresponding equipment fault grade of device type on Target pipe is determined, and based on the device type, equipment event
Barrier plague grade determines the maloperation bad failure probability of the Target pipe；
Step 5: based on the damage failure probability, the corrosion failure probability, the misuse failure probability and described
Equipment fault failure probability determines the failure probability of the Target pipe by operation；
Step 6: determining that density of population grade on Target pipe, stopping transportation influence grade, pressure rating, be based on above-mentioned level results,
Determine the leakage consequence of Target pipe；
Step 7: failure probability and leakage consequence based on Target pipe determine the risk integrative index of Target pipe, realize wind
Danger evaluation.
2. a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk assessment device, it is characterised in that: it is determined including the first determining module, second
Module, third determining module, the 4th determining module, the 5th determining module, the 6th determining module；First determining module is for determining
The corresponding damage plague grade of the types of damage of third party damage and multiple damage safeguard procedures grades on Target pipe, and be based on
The types of damage, the damage plague grade and the multiple damage safeguard procedures grade determine the third of the Target pipe
Side's damage failure probability；Second determining module corrodes corresponding corrosion plague grade and multiple for determining on the Target pipe
Corrosion protection steps grade and the corrosion plague grade and the multiple corrosion protection steps grade determine the target tube
The corrosion failure probability in road；Third determining module is for determining maloperation plague grade and multiple maloperations on the Target pipe
Safeguard procedures grade and the maloperation plague grade and the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade determine the target tube
The misuse failure probability in road；4th determining module includes: for the equipment fault based on the device type from storage
Corresponding equipment fault is obtained in type, score value occurs, for determining setting for the Target pipe based on the equipment fault score value
Standby malfunction and failure probability；5th determining module includes: for influencing grade, pressure based on the density of population grade, stopping transportation
Power grade obtains corresponding density of population score value, stopping transportation impact fraction, pressure score value from the score value of storage, for based on described
Density of population score value, stopping transportation impact fraction, pressure score value determine the leakage consequence of the Target pipe；6th determining module
It is mainly used for: general based on the damage failure probability, corrosion failure probability, misuse failure probability, equipment fault failure
Rate, and told leakage consequence, determine the risk integrative index of the Target pipe.
3. a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk assessment device according to claim 2, it is characterised in that: described first
Determining module includes: to be used for base for obtaining corresponding damage score value from the types of damage of storage based on the types of damage
Corresponding damage protection is obtained respectively from the damage safeguard procedures grade of storage in the multiple damage safeguard procedures grade to arrange
Score value is applied, for determining the damage failure probability of the Target pipe based on the damage score value and safeguard procedures score value.
4. a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk assessment device according to claim 2, it is characterised in that: described second
Determining module includes: that score value occurs for obtaining corresponding corrosion from the types of damage of storage based on the Corrosion Types, is used
In being obtained respectively from the corrosion protection steps grade of storage based on the multiple corrosion protection steps grade, corresponding corrosion is anti-
Shield measure score value, for determining that the corrosion failure of the Target pipe is general based on corrosion generation score value and safeguard procedures score value
Rate.
5. a kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk assessment device according to claim 2, it is characterised in that: the third
Determining module includes: to occur to divide for obtaining corresponding maloperation from the maloperation type of storage based on the maloperation grade
Value is corresponded to for being obtained respectively from the maloperation safeguard procedures grade of storage based on the multiple maloperation safeguard procedures grade
Maloperation safeguard procedures score value, determine the Target pipe for score value and safeguard procedures score value to occur based on the maloperation
Misuse failure probability.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201810120160.8A CN110163454A (en) | 2018-02-07 | 2018-02-07 | A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and device |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201810120160.8A CN110163454A (en) | 2018-02-07 | 2018-02-07 | A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and device |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN110163454A true CN110163454A (en) | 2019-08-23 |
Family
ID=67641486
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201810120160.8A Pending CN110163454A (en) | 2018-02-07 | 2018-02-07 | A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and device |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN110163454A (en) |
Cited By (10)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN110942234A (en) * | 2019-11-14 | 2020-03-31 | 北京市燃气集团有限责任公司 | Medium-low pressure gas pipeline risk evaluation method and device |
| CN110942259A (en) * | 2019-12-10 | 2020-03-31 | 北方工业大学 | Community gas equipment risk assessment method and device |
| CN111191959A (en) * | 2020-01-08 | 2020-05-22 | 中国石油大学(华东) | Long-distance natural gas pipeline derivative disaster evaluation system and method |
| CN111861151A (en) * | 2020-06-30 | 2020-10-30 | 深圳市燃气集团股份有限公司 | Gas pipeline risk management and control method |
| CN113536230A (en) * | 2020-04-15 | 2021-10-22 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Gas well safety grade output method, device, equipment and storage medium |
| CN113627697A (en) * | 2020-05-06 | 2021-11-09 | 中国石油化工股份有限公司 | Failure grade obtaining method and device for oil and gas pipeline crossing section |
| CN114201840A (en) * | 2020-09-02 | 2022-03-18 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Pipe section stress corrosion cracking risk identification method, device, equipment and medium |
| CN115100822A (en) * | 2022-04-06 | 2022-09-23 | 合肥泽众城市智能科技有限公司 | Gas leakage risk early warning classification method |
| CN115404516A (en) * | 2022-10-19 | 2022-11-29 | 氢联(江苏)高科技有限公司 | Water electrolysis hydrogen production leakage monitoring system |
| CN118149289A (en) * | 2024-05-13 | 2024-06-07 | 中国石油大学(华东) | Pipeline safety supervision system based on Internet of things |
Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN101071483A (en) * | 2007-06-19 | 2007-11-14 | 广州市煤气公司 | Underground gas pipe network fuzzy risk evaluating system |
| CN101221633A (en) * | 2007-06-19 | 2008-07-16 | 广州市煤气公司 | Gas pipe risk estimation method based on Mueller model |
| CN101488213A (en) * | 2008-01-17 | 2009-07-22 | 新奥(廊坊)燃气技术研究发展有限公司 | Risk evaluation and security management decision support system for town gas pipe |
| US20140163936A1 (en) * | 2012-12-11 | 2014-06-12 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for maintenance planning and failure prediction for equipment subject to periodic failure risk |
| CN104537574A (en) * | 2014-12-16 | 2015-04-22 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Method for evaluating damage risk of petroleum and natural gas pipeline |
-
2018
- 2018-02-07 CN CN201810120160.8A patent/CN110163454A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN101071483A (en) * | 2007-06-19 | 2007-11-14 | 广州市煤气公司 | Underground gas pipe network fuzzy risk evaluating system |
| CN101221633A (en) * | 2007-06-19 | 2008-07-16 | 广州市煤气公司 | Gas pipe risk estimation method based on Mueller model |
| CN101488213A (en) * | 2008-01-17 | 2009-07-22 | 新奥(廊坊)燃气技术研究发展有限公司 | Risk evaluation and security management decision support system for town gas pipe |
| US20140163936A1 (en) * | 2012-12-11 | 2014-06-12 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for maintenance planning and failure prediction for equipment subject to periodic failure risk |
| CN104537574A (en) * | 2014-12-16 | 2015-04-22 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Method for evaluating damage risk of petroleum and natural gas pipeline |
Cited By (15)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN110942234A (en) * | 2019-11-14 | 2020-03-31 | 北京市燃气集团有限责任公司 | Medium-low pressure gas pipeline risk evaluation method and device |
| CN110942259A (en) * | 2019-12-10 | 2020-03-31 | 北方工业大学 | Community gas equipment risk assessment method and device |
| CN111191959A (en) * | 2020-01-08 | 2020-05-22 | 中国石油大学(华东) | Long-distance natural gas pipeline derivative disaster evaluation system and method |
| CN113536230A (en) * | 2020-04-15 | 2021-10-22 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Gas well safety grade output method, device, equipment and storage medium |
| CN113627697B (en) * | 2020-05-06 | 2024-05-10 | 中国石油化工股份有限公司 | Failure grade acquisition method and device for oil and gas pipeline crossing section |
| CN113627697A (en) * | 2020-05-06 | 2021-11-09 | 中国石油化工股份有限公司 | Failure grade obtaining method and device for oil and gas pipeline crossing section |
| CN111861151A (en) * | 2020-06-30 | 2020-10-30 | 深圳市燃气集团股份有限公司 | Gas pipeline risk management and control method |
| CN114201840A (en) * | 2020-09-02 | 2022-03-18 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Pipe section stress corrosion cracking risk identification method, device, equipment and medium |
| CN114201840B (en) * | 2020-09-02 | 2022-11-04 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Pipe section stress corrosion cracking risk identification method, device, equipment and medium |
| CN115100822B (en) * | 2022-04-06 | 2024-03-12 | 合肥泽众城市智能科技有限公司 | Early warning and grading method for gas leakage risk |
| CN115100822A (en) * | 2022-04-06 | 2022-09-23 | 合肥泽众城市智能科技有限公司 | Gas leakage risk early warning classification method |
| CN115404516A (en) * | 2022-10-19 | 2022-11-29 | 氢联(江苏)高科技有限公司 | Water electrolysis hydrogen production leakage monitoring system |
| CN115404516B (en) * | 2022-10-19 | 2023-02-24 | 氢联(江苏)高科技有限公司 | Water electrolysis hydrogen production leakage monitoring system |
| CN118149289A (en) * | 2024-05-13 | 2024-06-07 | 中国石油大学(华东) | Pipeline safety supervision system based on Internet of things |
| CN118149289B (en) * | 2024-05-13 | 2024-07-19 | 中国石油大学(华东) | Pipeline safety supervision system based on Internet of things |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN110163454A (en) | A kind of city gas pipeline network leak risk evaluating method and device | |
| Cimellaro et al. | Resilience-based design of natural gas distribution networks | |
| Sutton | Plant design and operations | |
| CN108345976A (en) | A kind of long-distance oil ＆ gas pipeline dynamic risk appraisal procedure and device | |
| Zhang et al. | Risk evaluation and analysis of a gas tank explosion based on a vapor cloud explosion model: A case study | |
| CN110675038B (en) | Urban underground comprehensive pipe gallery risk assessment method based on control force | |
| Azevedo et al. | Seismic vulnerability of lifelines in the greater Lisbon area | |
| Mousavi et al. | Seismic risk assessment of the 3rd Azerbaijan gas pipeline in Iran | |
| Moran et al. | Documentation of flood damage on railway infrastructure | |
| CN114565257A (en) | Oil-gas parallel pipeline risk evaluation method and management and control method | |
| Flannery et al. | Risk and resilience analysis for emergency projects | |
| Murthy et al. | Selection of failure frequency and its impact on risk assessment–A case study from plot plan optimisation | |
| Rais et al. | Pipelines at Bridge Crossings: Empirical-Based Seismic Vulnerability Index | |
| Syuryana et al. | Risk Assessment and Integrity Analysis of Flexible Subsea Pipeline in Indonesia | |
| García et al. | Integrity management program for geo-hazards in the OCENSA pipeline system | |
| Copello et al. | A system approach for evaluating residual life of existing fixed offshore platform | |
| Singh Gurjar | Risk Based Inspection (RBI) Implementation in Cross Country Petroleum Pipelines | |
| Lai et al. | Modeling railway damage due to shake, liquefaction, and tsunami for the 2011 Tohoku earthquake | |
| Sloterdijk et al. | Development and implementation of a risk based prioritization methodology for maop reconfirmation of gas transmission facilities | |
| Rodgers et al. | 40 Years of floodplain management in Perth: a report card | |
| Rankin | Pipeline integrity information integration | |
| Rosli et al. | ASSESSMENT OF LANDSLIDE VULNERABILITY REGARDING TNB ASSETS IN BUKIT ANTARABANGSA | |
| Davis | Assessing geotechnical hazards for water pipes with uniform confidence level | |
| Eguchi | Seismic risk to natural gas and oil systems | |
| Selickis et al. | Basis of Operational Planning Methodology in Diversified Gas Distribution Systems |
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 | ||
| TA01 | Transfer of patent application right |
Effective date of registration: 20200927 Address after: No. 16, ande Road, Dongcheng District, Beijing 100010 Applicant after: PetroChina Company Limited Applicant after: PETROCHINA KUNLUN GAS Co.,Ltd. Address before: 101300 68 Du Jun Road, Renhe District, Beijing, Shunyi District Applicant before: PETROCHINA KUNLUN GAS Co.,Ltd. |
|
| RJ01 | Rejection of invention patent application after publication | ||
| RJ01 | Rejection of invention patent application after publication |
Application publication date: 20190823 |