CN111882210A - Gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation - Google Patents
Gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN111882210A CN111882210A CN202010729920.2A CN202010729920A CN111882210A CN 111882210 A CN111882210 A CN 111882210A CN 202010729920 A CN202010729920 A CN 202010729920A CN 111882210 A CN111882210 A CN 111882210A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- index
- indexes
- matrix
- evaluation
- importance
- 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
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 54
- 239000011159 matrix material Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 76
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 22
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 15
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 15
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 9
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 3
- 239000013598 vector Substances 0.000 claims description 23
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 claims description 7
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 claims description 7
- 239000007788 liquid Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 238000011426 transformation method Methods 0.000 claims description 3
- 238000012937 correction Methods 0.000 claims 1
- 238000007670 refining Methods 0.000 abstract 1
- 239000007789 gas Substances 0.000 description 48
- VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N methane Chemical compound C VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 10
- 238000000746 purification Methods 0.000 description 10
- 238000010276 construction Methods 0.000 description 5
- 239000003345 natural gas Substances 0.000 description 5
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 4
- LFQSCWFLJHTTHZ-UHFFFAOYSA-N Ethanol Chemical compound CCO LFQSCWFLJHTTHZ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 3
- 239000002737 fuel gas Substances 0.000 description 3
- 238000002347 injection Methods 0.000 description 3
- 239000007924 injection Substances 0.000 description 3
- 230000007547 defect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000005065 mining Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000005457 optimization Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000002093 peripheral effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Substances O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 229910000831 Steel Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 230000005540 biological transmission Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000006866 deterioration Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000009792 diffusion process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000006185 dispersion Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000007613 environmental effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000002360 explosive Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000010438 heat treatment Methods 0.000 description 1
- 229910052500 inorganic mineral Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000007726 management method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000011707 mineral Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000010959 steel Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 1
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
- G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
- G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
-
- 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
- G06Q50/02—Agriculture; Fishing; Forestry; Mining
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Agronomy & Crop Science (AREA)
- Primary Health Care (AREA)
- Mining & Mineral Resources (AREA)
- Animal Husbandry (AREA)
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Marine Sciences & Fisheries (AREA)
- 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 gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, which comprises the following steps of: firstly, taking technical economy, supportable conditions and safe production as a primary index, refining each primary level index into a secondary index, and establishing a multi-level analysis evaluation index system; secondly, determining the weight of each secondary index by using an AHP analytic hierarchy process; thirdly, constructing an evaluation index matrix; carrying out standardization processing on the evaluation index matrix to obtain a fuzzy relative membership matrix R; and (V) introducing the weight of the secondary indexes into fuzzy comprehensive evaluation calculation, calculating the relative membership degree of each scheme, and finally determining the optimal scheme of the gas field overall layout according to the maximum membership degree principle. The evaluation method has objectivity and provides a certain theoretical basis for the comparison and selection of the gas field overall layout scheme.
Description
Technical Field
The invention belongs to the field of gas field overall layout, and particularly relates to a gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation.
Background
The overall layout of the gas field mainly refers to the routing of natural gas purification plant sites, gas gathering station sites and corresponding pipelines in the development process of the gas field.
The plant site of the natural gas purification plant and the station site of the gas gathering station follow the following selection principle: (1) the method is in accordance with the overall construction plan of the gas field ground and is suitable for being close to a gas source; (2) the method is reasonably determined according to the trends of a feed gas collection trunk line and a purified natural gas conveying pipeline; (3) selecting a section with good atmospheric diffusion conditions to avoid a wind-nest section; (4) towns, industrial and mining enterprises and densely populated areas should be avoided as much as possible, and the requirements of town planning, environmental protection and fire safety should be met; (5) the method is applied to a convenient traffic section, and the conditions of nearby dependence are considered, including traffic, water sources, electric power, telecommunication, heating, living conditions, fire fighting and the like.
The pipeline routing should follow the following selection principle: (1) the line trend is straight and smooth, so that steel is saved and investment is reduced; (2) the existing railway and highway are approached or utilized as much as possible, so that the pipeline construction and maintenance management are facilitated; (3) avoiding the geological section with larger construction difficulty and bad engineering as much as possible to ensure the reliable and safe operation of the pipeline, and when the difficulty is certain, selecting a proper position and a proper mode to pass and adopting corresponding engineering measures; (4) the large and medium-sized crossing positions are selected to meet the overall trend of the line, and the local trend of the large and medium-sized crossing positions is adjusted according to the actual situation, so that the engineering quantity and the construction difficulty of the crossing section are reduced as much as possible; (5) the route is coordinated with local urban planning, mineral resources, railway and highway planning construction, and dense population areas are avoided as much as possible; when the escape cannot be avoided due to special reasons, the design is strictly carried out according to the requirements of gas transmission pipeline engineering design specifications on regional grade division, and the requirements of development and planning of cities, towns and industrial and mining enterprise areas are fully considered; (6) avoiding the economic crop areas and important farmland infrastructure as much as possible; (7) important military facilities, flammable and explosive warehouses and safety protection areas of national key cultural relic protection units are avoided; (8) avoiding the water source protection area and the national level scenic spot area of the city.
The natural gas purification plant site, the gas gathering station site and the corresponding pipeline routes thereof have the optimization problem of the gas field overall layout scheme because various gas field overall layout schemes can exist in the selection process. The overall gas field layout scheme is preferably a multi-constraint and multi-objective comprehensive optimization problem, which involves many factors, and each objective is mutually restricted, one objective is often optimized at the cost of deterioration of other objectives, and meanwhile, the realization of the multi-objective optimal value is unrealistic, and often, compromise treatment is needed to be coordinated, so that each sub-objective is as optimal as possible. At present, the selection of the gas field overall layout scheme is mainly based on single factor index analysis, and one or more factor indexes in the overall layout scheme are usually concerned. The method has the defects of incomplete consideration, lack of objective and unified evaluation standard and strong subjectivity. The traditional comparison scheme has various limitations and cannot comprehensively evaluate the quality of the layout scheme, so that the optimal method which can comprehensively consider all factors in the layout scheme has very important engineering practice value.
Disclosure of Invention
Aiming at the defects of the prior art, the invention provides a gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, which considers factors in each scheme and finally determines the gas field overall layout according to the maximum membership principle, and has strong practicability.
A gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation comprises the following steps:
determining a multi-level analysis evaluation index system:
taking technical and economic indexes, supportable conditions and safe production indexes as 3 first-level indexes; then subdividing the 3 primary indexes into a plurality of secondary indexes respectively; the technical and economic indexes comprise 5 secondary indexes of operation pressure, gas collection radius, pressure loss, gas flow direction and investment; the supportable conditions comprise electric power/communication availability degree, traffic convenience and terrain support of 3 secondary indexes; the safety production indexes comprise 3 secondary indexes of the distance of the liquid-carrying pipeline, the population density of the periphery and natural conditions;
secondly, determining the weight of each secondary index by using an AHP analytic hierarchy process;
determining the evaluation basis of each secondary index, and constructing an evaluation index matrix, wherein the evaluation index matrix is formed by specific values of the secondary indexes contained in each overall layout scheme forming the alternative, and the evaluation basis of the secondary indexes is as follows:
and (IV) carrying out standardization processing on the evaluation index matrix constructed in the step (III) by adopting a translation-range transformation method, wherein the larger the benefit index value is, the more the scheme is, the more the benefit formula is adopted for calculation, the smaller the cost index value is, the more the scheme is, the more the cost formula is adopted for calculation, the calculation formula is shown as a formula (1), and a fuzzy relative membership matrix R is obtained,
in formula (1), P ═ 1;
xijthe index of the ith term of the scheme j, i is 1,2, …, m;
rijthe relative dominance of the scheme j to the target i;
ximin,ximaxthe minimum value and the maximum value of each column of data in the matrix are obtained;
introducing the weight obtained by the calculation in the step (II) into fuzzy comprehensive evaluation calculation, calculating the relative membership degree of each scheme by adopting an equation (2),
wherein, ω isiTarget weight vector as index i;
ujis the relative membership value of the scheme j;
m and P are the same as formula (1);
and finally determining the optimal scheme of the gas field overall layout according to the maximum membership principle.
Preferably, the second step of determining the weight of each index by using an AHP analytic hierarchy process is as follows;
(21) constructing a judgment matrix X: the first-level index and the second-level index are sorted according to importance, the first-level index and the second-level index are compared pairwise according to different importance of different indexes, a judgment matrix is respectively established, numbers 1-9 and reciprocal thereof are taken as scales, the larger the number is, the stronger the comparison importance of the two factors is, a matrix X is established as a formula (3),
X＝(xij)n×nsatisfy xij>0,xji＝1/xij，,xii1(i, j ═ 1,2, …, n) (formula 3)
In the formula (3), xijFor the importance of contrast among different indexes, X represents any judgment matrix;
(22) calculating eigenvalues and eigenvectors: solving the maximum characteristic root of the judgment matrix and the maximum characteristic vector corresponding to the maximum characteristic root by adopting a sum-product method, wherein the maximum characteristic root of the first-level index judgment matrix and the maximum characteristic vector corresponding to the maximum characteristic root are respectively
And ω1(ii) a The maximum characteristic root of the secondary index judgment matrix is respectively
The maximum eigenvectors corresponding thereto are respectively
(23) And (3) checking consistency:
calculating a consistency index CI by adopting a formula (4), judging whether the consistency index of the matrix is acceptable or not, judging that the consistency of the matrix is acceptable when CR is less than 0.1, judging that the matrix does not meet the requirement when CR is more than or equal to 1, and revising the judgment matrix;
in the formula, n is the order of the judgment matrix;
λmaxis the maximum eigenvalue;
RI is an average random consistency index;
CR is a consistency ratio;
(24) and (3) overall hierarchical ordering:
multiplying a diagonal matrix formed by the maximum characteristic vectors of the secondary index judgment matrix with the maximum characteristic vector of the primary index judgment matrix to obtain a weight vector of the secondary index, and calculating the weight vector in the formula (6);
the importance of the secondary indexes is sorted according to the value of the weight vector of the secondary indexes; the weight vector of the secondary index reflects the importance of the secondary index, and the larger the value is, the more important the represented secondary index is.
Preferably, the primary index and the secondary index in step (21) are sorted according to importance as follows:
the primary index importance ranking is: technical and economic indexes > safe production indexes > supportable conditions;
the importance of the secondary indexes in the technical and economic indexes is ranked as follows: investment > operating pressure > pressure loss > gas flow direction > gas collection radius;
the importance of the secondary indexes in the safety production indexes is ranked as follows: terrain support > traffic convenience > electric power/communication availability degree; the supportable condition indexes have the following secondary index importance sequence: distance with liquid pipeline > perimeter population density > natural conditions.
Preferably, the re-correcting mode is as follows: and judging whether the importance ordering of the indexes in each judgment matrix is reasonable or not and whether the scales of the importance of every two indexes are reasonable or not.
The invention has the advantages that:
the method provided by the invention comprises the steps of establishing a multi-level analysis system, calculating the weight coefficient of each secondary index by an AHP analytic hierarchy process, finally adopting a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to establish an evaluation matrix, calculating the membership degree of each scheme to be adopted by combining the weight coefficients of the secondary indexes, and determining the optimal overall layout scheme according to the maximum membership degree principle, wherein the evaluation method has objectivity and provides a certain theoretical basis for comparing and selecting the overall layout schemes of gas fields at home and abroad.
Drawings
FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the evaluation method of the present invention;
FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of a multi-level analysis evaluation index system;
FIG. 3 is a schematic view of scheme 1;
FIG. 4 is a schematic view of scheme 2;
FIG. 5 is a schematic view of scheme 3.
Detailed Description
Example 1
The technical method of the invention will be described in detail in the following with reference to the accompanying drawings.
The invention takes the general layout of a certain block of the Yanan gas field as an example, and explains how to select the general layout of the gas field by using the method provided by the invention.
Firstly, a gas field overall layout scheme is designed by combining basic guiding principles of natural gas purification plant sites, gas gathering station sites and pipeline route selection and actual engineering conditions, the blocks of the embodiment totally comprise three sets of layout schemes, and fig. 3, 4 and 5 are schematic diagrams of different layout schemes respectively, and the specific scheme is as follows:
scheme 1, newly building 1 purification plant in the southern part of the Yangtze mountain, 6 gas collecting stations, 447.43km of gas production pipeline, 102.22km of gas collecting pipeline, 28.54km of alcohol injection pipeline and 347.05km of fuel gas pipeline. Wherein the purification plant is positioned at about 19km west side of the well area, the terrain is flat, the traffic is convenient, the land property meets the requirements, and the overall line layout is inclined to users at the end station;
scheme 2, newly building 1 purification plant in the southern Yangshan, 6 gas collecting stations, 408.68km gas production pipeline, 112.22km gas collecting pipeline, 28.54km alcohol injection pipeline and 381.86km fuel gas pipeline. Wherein the purification plant is located east of the whole well zone, substantially centrally. The distance from the gas collecting station to the pipeline of the purification plant is short, the operating pressure of the gas collecting station is low, and the outward pipeline is longest;
scheme 3, a gas collecting station 6 seat is newly built by relying on a Qingyang turnout purification plant built outside a well, and the gas collecting pipeline is 447.43km, the gas collecting pipeline is 170.1km, the alcohol injection pipeline is 28.54km, and the fuel gas pipeline is 347.05 km.
Secondly, the method provided by the invention is used for evaluating three schemes, and the flow schematic diagram is shown in figure 1.
Determining a multi-level analysis evaluation index system:
evaluating the three schemes, selecting common indexes required by multi-level analysis, layering the indexes, and establishing a multi-level analysis system, as shown in fig. 2, the division into two layers is mainly used for avoiding weight dispersion caused by excessive indexes in one layer;
taking technical and economic indexes, supportable conditions and safe production indexes as 3 first-level indexes; then subdividing the 3 primary indexes into a plurality of secondary indexes respectively;
the technical and economic indexes comprise 5 secondary indexes of operation pressure, gas collection radius, pressure loss, gas flow direction and investment; the supportable conditions comprise electric power/communication availability degree, traffic convenience and terrain support of 3 secondary indexes;
the safety production indexes comprise 3 secondary indexes of liquid-carrying pipeline distance, peripheral population density and natural conditions.
(II) determining the weight of each secondary index by using an AHP analytic hierarchy process:
(21) constructing a judgment matrix X: the first-level index and the second-level index are sorted according to importance, the first-level index and the second-level index are compared pairwise according to different importance of different indexes, a judgment matrix is respectively established, numbers 1-9 and reciprocal thereof are taken as scales, the larger the number is, the stronger the comparison importance of the two factors is, a matrix X is established as a formula (3),
X＝(xij)n×nsatisfy xij>0,xji＝1/xij，,xii1(i, j ═ 1,2, …, n) (formula 3)
In the formula (3), xijFor the importance of contrast among different indexes, X represents any judgment matrix;
TABLE 1 evaluation criteria of importance Scale
The primary index importance ranking is: the technical and economic index B1, the safety production index B3 and the supportable condition B2 are as follows, and the first-level index judgment matrix is as follows:
the importance ranking of the secondary indexes is as follows:
in the technical and economic indexes, the investment is considered as an important parameter of the overall layout of the gas field, the lower the investment is, the more convenient the overall layout is to implement, the most important weight index is taken, and the importance of secondary indexes in the technical and economic indexes is ranked: investment C5, operating pressure C1, pressure loss C3, gas flow C4, gas collection radius C2 and secondary index judgment matrix
The importance of condition indexes can be ranked: landform support C8, traffic convenience C7, availability degree C6 of power/communication and the like, and secondary index judgment matrix
Sorting the importance of safety production indexes: distance with liquid pipeline C9, peripheral population density C10, natural condition C11 and secondary index judgment matrix
(22) Calculating eigenvalues and eigenvectors: solving the maximum characteristic root of the judgment matrix and the maximum characteristic vector corresponding to the maximum characteristic root by adopting a sum-product method, wherein the maximum characteristic root of the first-level index judgment matrix and the maximum characteristic vector corresponding to the maximum characteristic root are respectively
And ω1(ii) a The maximum characteristic root of the secondary index judgment matrix is respectively
The maximum eigenvectors corresponding thereto are respectively
Calculating the maximum eigenvalue of the primary index matrix A
Maximum eigenvector is ω1＝(05396,0.1634, 0.2970); maximum eigenvalue of the secondary index matrix B1
Maximum eigenvector
Maximum eigenvalue of B2 secondary matrix index
Maximum eigenvector
Maximum eigenvalue of B3 secondary matrix index
Maximum eigenvector
(23) And (3) checking consistency:
calculating a consistency index CI by adopting a formula (4), judging whether the consistency index of the matrix is acceptable or not, judging that the consistency of the matrix is acceptable when CR is less than 0.1, judging that the matrix does not meet the requirement when CR is more than or equal to 1, and revising the judgment matrix;
in the formula, n is the order of the judgment matrix;
λmaxis the maximum eigenvalue;
RI is an average random consistency index;
CR is a consistency ratio;
the consistency ratio CR of the matrix A is checked by consistency10.0089, uniformity ratio of matrix B1
Consistency ratio of matrix B2
Consistency ratio of matrix B3
Are all less than 0.1, and the consistency test is acceptable.
(24) And (3) overall hierarchical ordering:
weight vector of secondary index
The importance of the secondary indexes is sorted according to the value of the weight vector of the secondary indexes, and the importance of the secondary indexes is sequentially from high to low: investment, distance of pipelines with liquid, running pressure, pressure loss, population density around, terrain support, natural conditions, gas collection radius, gas flow direction, traffic convenience and electric power/communication availability; the weight vector of the secondary index reflects the importance of the secondary index, and the larger the value is, the more important the represented secondary index is;
the weights of the secondary indices are shown in table 2.
TABLE 2 weights of the second level indicators
Determining the evaluation basis of each secondary index, and constructing an evaluation index matrix, wherein the evaluation index matrix is formed by specific values of the secondary indexes contained in each overall layout scheme forming the alternative, and the evaluation basis of the secondary indexes is as follows:
specific values of each secondary index in the schemes 1,2 and 3 are shown in a table 3;
TABLE 3 concrete values of the second-level indices
The gas field overall layout evaluation index matrix formed by the specific values of the secondary indexes in the schemes 1,2 and 3 is as follows:
fourthly, in order to eliminate the influence of different physical dimensions and increase the contrast of results, the evaluation index matrix constructed in the third step is standardized by a translation-range transformation method, the higher the benefit index value is, the better the scheme is, the benefit formula is adopted for calculation, the lower the cost index value is, the better the scheme is, the cost formula is adopted for calculation, the formula is shown in the formula (1), the fuzzy relative membership matrix R is obtained,
in formula (1), P ═ 1;
xijthe index of the ith term of the scheme j, i is 1,2, …, m;
rijthe relative dominance of the scheme j to the target i;
ximin,ximaxthe minimum value and the maximum value of each column of data in the matrix are obtained;
is calculated to obtain
And (V) considering the different influences of different indexes on the final optimal scheme, introducing the weight obtained by calculation in the step (II) into fuzzy comprehensive evaluation calculation, calculating the relative membership degree of each scheme by adopting an equation (2),
in the formula, ωiTarget weight vector as index i;
ujis the relative membership value of the scheme j;
m and P are the same as formula (1);
the relative membership degree of each scheme is shown in a table 4;
TABLE 4 relative membership values for each case
| Name of scheme | Scheme 1 | Scheme 2 | Scheme 3 |
| Degree of membership | 0.7495 | 0.334 | 0.560995 |
According to the principle of maximum membership degree, the scheme 1 is the optimal scheme.
Claims (4)
1. A gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation is characterized by comprising the following steps: the method comprises the following steps:
determining a multi-level analysis evaluation index system:
taking technical and economic indexes, supportable conditions and safe production indexes as 3 first-level indexes; then subdividing the 3 primary indexes into a plurality of secondary indexes respectively; the technical and economic indexes comprise 5 secondary indexes of operation pressure, gas collection radius, pressure loss, gas flow direction and investment; the supportable conditions comprise electric power/communication availability degree, traffic convenience and terrain support of 3 secondary indexes; the safety production indexes comprise 3 secondary indexes of the distance of the liquid-carrying pipeline, the population density of the periphery and natural conditions;
secondly, determining the weight of each secondary index by using an AHP analytic hierarchy process;
determining the evaluation basis of each secondary index, and constructing an evaluation index matrix, wherein the evaluation index matrix is formed by specific values of the secondary indexes contained in each overall layout scheme forming the alternative, and the evaluation basis of the secondary indexes is as follows:
and (IV) carrying out standardization processing on the evaluation index matrix constructed in the step (III) by adopting a translation-range transformation method, wherein the larger the benefit index value is, the more the scheme is, the more the benefit formula is adopted for calculation, the smaller the cost index value is, the more the scheme is, the more the cost formula is adopted for calculation, the calculation formula is shown as a formula (1), and a fuzzy relative membership matrix R is obtained,
in formula (1), P ═ 1;
xijthe index of the ith term of the scheme j, i is 1,2, …, m;
rijthe relative dominance of the scheme j to the target i;
ximin,ximaxthe minimum value and the maximum value of each column of data in the matrix are obtained;
introducing the weight obtained by the calculation in the step (II) into fuzzy comprehensive evaluation calculation, calculating the relative membership degree of each scheme by adopting an equation (2),
wherein, ω isiTarget weight vector as index i;
ujis the relative membership value of the scheme j;
m and P are the same as formula (1);
and finally determining the optimal scheme of the gas field overall layout according to the maximum membership principle.
2. The gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multilevel fuzzy comprehensive evaluation according to claim 1, characterized in that:
determining the weight of each index by using an AHP analytic hierarchy process in the step (II) specifically as follows;
(21) constructing a judgment matrix X: the first-level index and the second-level index are sorted according to importance, the first-level index and the second-level index are compared pairwise according to different importance of different indexes, a judgment matrix is respectively established, numbers 1-9 and reciprocal thereof are taken as scales, the larger the number is, the stronger the comparison importance of the two factors is, a matrix X is established as a formula (3),
X＝(xij)n×nsatisfy xij>0,xji＝1/xij，,xii1(i, j ═ 1,2, …, n) (formula 3)
In the formula (3), xijFor the importance of contrast among different indexes, X represents any judgment matrix;
(22) calculating eigenvalues and eigenvectors: solving the maximum characteristic root of the judgment matrix and the maximum characteristic vector corresponding to the maximum characteristic root by adopting a sum-product method, wherein the maximum characteristic root of the first-level index judgment matrix and the maximum characteristic vector corresponding to the maximum characteristic root are respectively
And ω1(ii) a The maximum characteristic root of the secondary index judgment matrix is respectively
The maximum eigenvectors corresponding thereto are respectively
(23) And (3) checking consistency:
calculating a consistency index CI by adopting a formula (4), judging whether the consistency index of the matrix is acceptable or not, judging that the consistency of the matrix is acceptable when CR is less than 0.1, judging that the matrix does not meet the requirement when CR is more than or equal to 1, and revising the judgment matrix;
in the formula, n is the order of the judgment matrix;
λmaxis the maximum eigenvalue;
RI is an average random consistency index;
CR is a consistency ratio;
(24) and (3) overall hierarchical ordering:
multiplying a diagonal matrix formed by the maximum characteristic vectors of the secondary index judgment matrix with the maximum characteristic vector of the primary index judgment matrix to obtain a weight vector of the secondary index, and calculating the weight vector in the formula (6);
and the importance of the secondary indexes is sorted according to the value of the weight vector of the secondary indexes.
3. The gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multilevel fuzzy comprehensive evaluation according to claim 2, characterized in that: the primary index and the secondary index in the step (21) are sorted according to importance as follows:
the primary index importance ranking is: technical and economic indexes > safe production indexes > supportable conditions;
the importance of the secondary indexes in the technical and economic indexes is ranked as follows: investment > operating pressure > pressure loss > gas flow direction > gas collection radius;
the importance of the secondary indexes in the safety production indexes is ranked as follows: terrain support > traffic convenience > electric power/communication availability degree;
the supportable condition indexes have the following secondary index importance sequence: distance with liquid pipeline > perimeter population density > natural conditions.
4. The gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multilevel fuzzy comprehensive evaluation according to claim 2, characterized in that: the re-correction mode is as follows: and judging whether the importance ordering of the indexes in each judgment matrix is reasonable or not and whether the scales of the importance of every two indexes are reasonable or not.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010729920.2A CN111882210A (en) | 2020-07-27 | 2020-07-27 | Gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010729920.2A CN111882210A (en) | 2020-07-27 | 2020-07-27 | Gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN111882210A true CN111882210A (en) | 2020-11-03 |
Family
ID=73201497
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010729920.2A Pending CN111882210A (en) | 2020-07-27 | 2020-07-27 | Gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN111882210A (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WO2023097932A1 (en) * | 2021-11-30 | 2023-06-08 | 江苏徐工工程机械研究院有限公司 | Method and system for screening a plurality of simulation results of engineering machinery |
Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN102222279A (en) * | 2011-06-14 | 2011-10-19 | 华南理工大学 | Evaluation method of leather-making industry technology based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method |
| CN104376400A (en) * | 2014-10-27 | 2015-02-25 | 广州市中南民航空管通信网络科技有限公司 | Risk assessment method based on fuzzy matrix and analytic hierarchy process |
| CN105023067A (en) * | 2015-08-04 | 2015-11-04 | 环境保护部南京环境科学研究所 | Analytic hierarchy process-fuzzy comprehensive evaluation-based chemical project environmental risk evaluation system |
| CN105469196A (en) * | 2015-11-18 | 2016-04-06 | 山东科技大学 | Comprehensive evaluation method and comprehensive evaluation system for evaluating mine construction project process |
| US20190041374A1 (en) * | 2017-08-03 | 2019-02-07 | Central South University Of Forestry And Technology | Rapid screening method of processing raw rice for rice products |
-
2020
- 2020-07-27 CN CN202010729920.2A patent/CN111882210A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN102222279A (en) * | 2011-06-14 | 2011-10-19 | 华南理工大学 | Evaluation method of leather-making industry technology based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method |
| CN104376400A (en) * | 2014-10-27 | 2015-02-25 | 广州市中南民航空管通信网络科技有限公司 | Risk assessment method based on fuzzy matrix and analytic hierarchy process |
| CN105023067A (en) * | 2015-08-04 | 2015-11-04 | 环境保护部南京环境科学研究所 | Analytic hierarchy process-fuzzy comprehensive evaluation-based chemical project environmental risk evaluation system |
| CN105469196A (en) * | 2015-11-18 | 2016-04-06 | 山东科技大学 | Comprehensive evaluation method and comprehensive evaluation system for evaluating mine construction project process |
| US20190041374A1 (en) * | 2017-08-03 | 2019-02-07 | Central South University Of Forestry And Technology | Rapid screening method of processing raw rice for rice products |
Non-Patent Citations (2)
| Title |
|---|
| 熊星: ""榆林气田增压方案设计及效果评价研究"", 《中国优秀硕士学位论文全文数据库工程科技I辑》, pages 3 - 5 * |
| 王亚禧 等: ""油田开发方案的多级模糊综合评判模型"", 《石油大学学报(自然科学版)》, pages 1 - 3 * |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WO2023097932A1 (en) * | 2021-11-30 | 2023-06-08 | 江苏徐工工程机械研究院有限公司 | Method and system for screening a plurality of simulation results of engineering machinery |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN103049799B (en) | A kind of Study on Power Grid Planning method based on multiple-objection optimization | |
| Dong et al. | Study on urban fire station planning based on fire risk assessment and GIS technology | |
| Zhang et al. | A risk assessment based optimization method for route selection of hazardous liquid railway network | |
| CN112085280A (en) | Power transmission channel path optimization method considering geographic factors | |
| CN113554323A (en) | Emergency guarantee optimization design method for key nodes of road network | |
| CN106941256A (en) | The power distribution network main transformer contact structure optimization planing method of meter and net capability and minimum contact construction cost | |
| CN107274047A (en) | A kind of power network method of post project evaluation based on multilevel extension assessment method | |
| CN113988484B (en) | Traffic accessibility index optimization method applied to territorial space total planning | |
| CN112766800A (en) | Urban green traffic system evaluation method based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process | |
| CN111882210A (en) | Gas field overall layout evaluation method based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation | |
| CN114925985A (en) | Municipal facility site selection planning method based on GIS decision | |
| CN110717644A (en) | Power distribution network cell division and rationality evaluation method | |
| Li et al. | Comprehensive Evaluation Model of Coal Mine Safety under the Combination of Game Theory and TOPSIS | |
| CN112785141A (en) | Comprehensive pipe gallery whole life cycle planning design intrinsic safety risk assessment method | |
| CN115310878B (en) | Power space planning design method based on homeland space element data | |
| CN112712271A (en) | Power grid meshing evaluation method, system, medium and electronic equipment | |
| CN114723218B (en) | Oil and gas pipeline geological disaster evaluation method based on information quantity-neural network | |
| CN117273427A (en) | Assembled project overall process risk management assessment method | |
| Um et al. | Comprehensive evaluation indexes framework and evaluation method for substation site selection | |
| CN105825308A (en) | Reservoir connectivity analysis method based on multi-target analysis | |
| CN102892133B (en) | Method for optimizing master frequencies and scrambling codes of time division-code division multiple access (TD-CDMA) network base station based on genetic algorithm | |
| CN115640882A (en) | Power grid infrastructure project decision optimization method based on fuzzy evaluation analytic hierarchy process | |
| CN114897213A (en) | Historical block public transportation reachability measuring and calculating method and optimization method | |
| CN114204554A (en) | Method for evaluating regulation and control operation safety for intelligent power grid system | |
| CN111062577A (en) | GIS-based substation site selection method |
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 |