G1-EW组合赋权云模型下地铁运营安全风险评价

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.06.0947

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为有效控制地铁运营的安全风险,考虑地铁运营安全的特点,引入云模型方法与组合赋权技术,构建地铁运营安全风险评价模型。以西安某地铁所辖线路为例,首先,构建地铁运营安全风险评价三级指标体系,基于欧氏距离组合运用序关系分析(G1)法与熵权法(EW)确定各指标的综合权重系数;然后,依据各指标量化分级标准,采用Matlab确定云的数字特征并生成云图;最后,运用正向云发生器确定各指标的确定度。结果表明:该模型可以减少主观随机性,消除单一的客观误差;所辖T₁—~ T₄运营线路安全风险等级分别为中等(V₃)、较低(V₂)、低(V₁)、中等(V₃),与实际评价结果吻合较好。

关键词: 序关系分析(G1)法, 熵权法(EW), 组合赋权云模型, 地铁运营, 安全风险评价

Abstract:

In order to effectively control risks of metro operation, a cloud modeling method and combination weighting technology were introduced, and a risk assessment model was established considering features of metro operation safety. With a subway line in Xi'an is as research background, a three-level index system of risk evaluation was constructed, and comprehensive weight coefficients of each index were determined based on Euclidean distance combination and by using G1 method and EW method. Secondly, based on quantitative grading criteria of each index, numerical characteristics of clouds were determined and cloud maps were generated by utilizing Matlab. Finally, certainty degree of indexes was determined through forward cloud generators. The results show that the proposed risk assessment model can not only reduce subjective randomness, but also eliminate single objective error. Safety risk levels of T₁- T₄ operating lines under its jurisdiction are medium (V₃), low (V₂), low (V₁) and medium (V₃), which are in good agreement with actual evaluation results.

Key words: sequential relationship analysis (G1) method, entropy weight (EW) method, combination weighting cloud model, metro operation, safety risk assessment

张渺. G1-EW组合赋权云模型下地铁运营安全风险评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(6): 163-170.

ZHANG Miao. Risk assessment of metro operation based on G1-EW combination weighting cloud model[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(6): 163-170.

图/表 7

表1

地铁运营安全风险评价指标评价准则

二级指标U_i	三级指标U_ij		评价准则		风险等级
二级指标U_i	三级指标U_ij		评价准则		低(V₁)		较低(V₂)		中等(V₃)		较高(V₄)	高(V₅)
城市人口因素 U₁	客流站台饱和度U₁₁	平均到达率/服务速率		≤0.1		(0.1,0.3]		(0.3,0.5]		(0.5,0.8]		>0.8
	客流超高峰系数U₁₂	超高峰时段进站或出站人次高峰小时进站或出站人次		≤1.1		(1.1,1.2]		(1.2,1.3]		(1.3,1.4]		>1.4
	客流最大波动系数U₁₃	波动系数		≤1.2		(1.2,1.3]		(1.3,1.4]		(1.4,1.5]		>1.5
	客流楼梯拥挤度U₁₄	楼梯拥堵程度/%		≤0.15		(0.15,0.3]		(0.3,0.45]		(0.45,0.6]		>0.6
	客流通道拥挤度U₁₅	通道拥堵程度/%		≤0.15		(0.15,0.3]		(0.3,0.45]		(0.45,0.6]		>0.6
地铁设备设施 U₂	车辆系统故障率U₂₁	设备故障时间/总运行时间/%		≤5		(5,10]		(10,15]		(15,20]		>20
	供电系统故障率U₂₂	设备故障时间/总运行时间/%		≤5		(5,10]		(10,15]		(15,20]		>20
	线路轨道故障率U₂₃	设备故障时间/总运行时间/%		≤5		(5,10]		(10,15]		(15,20]		>20
二级指标U_i	三级指标U_ij		评价准则		风险等级
二级指标U_i	三级指标U_ij		评价准则		低(V₁)		较低(V₂)		中等(V₃)		较高(V₄)	高(V₅)
	机电设备合格率U₂₄	维护保养合格率/%		>90		(80,90]		(70,80]		(60,70]		≤60
	通信设备合格率U₂₅	维护保养合格率/%		>90		(80,90]		(70,80]		(60,70]		≤60
	监测设备合格率U₂₆	维护保养合格率/%		>90		(80,90]		(70,80]		(60,70]		≤60
	消防设施更新率U₂₇	设备更换频率/%		>90		(80,90]		(70,80]		(60,70]		≤60
地铁安全管理 U₃	安全规章制度完善性U₃₁	实际规章制度条数/ 规定规章制度条数/%		>90		(80,90]		(70,80]		(60,70]		≤60
	安全管理规程落实性U₃₂	实际落实文件数/ 规定制度文件数/%		>90		(80,90]		(70,80]		(60,70]		≤60
	安全技术人员配备率U₃₃	实际配备数量/规定配备数量/%		>95		(90,95]		(85,90]		(80,85]		≤80
	安全教育培训情况U₃₄	教育培训学时/h		>96		(48,96]		(24,48]		(12,24]		≤12
	安全技术考核达标率U₃₅	考核达标率/%		>95		(90,95]		(85,90]		(80,85]		≤80
	应急预案完善性U₃₆	实际应急预案条数/ 规定应急预案条数/%		>90		(80,90]		(70,80]		(60,70]		≤60
	应急演练频率U₃₇	频率/(次·a^-1)		>36		(24,36]		(12,24]		(6,12]		≤6
	应急救援便捷性 $U 3 8$	便捷程度		优(5)		良(4)		中等(3)		合格(2)		差(1)
地铁环境因素 U₄	噪声控制合规率U₄₁	环境噪声级/dB		≤80		(80,85]		(85,90]		(90,95]		>95
	地铁通风合格率U₄₂	空气危害程度		无害(5)		较无害(4)		中等(3)		轻度(2)		重度(1)
	引导标志完善率U₄₃	有效标识数量/规定标识数量/%		>95		(90,95]		(85,90]		(80,85]		≤80
	自然灾害频率U₄₄	频率程度		几乎不(5)		极少(4)		偶尔(3)		较少(2)		经常(1)

表1

表2

表3

图1

表4

表5

图2

参考文献 23

[1]	黄宏伟, 叶永峰, 胡群芳. 地铁运营安全风险管理现状分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2008, 18(7): 55-62.
	HUANG Hongwei, YE Yongfeng, HU Qunfang. Analysis on the current situation of risk management on metro operation safety[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2008, 18(7): 55-62.
[2]	潘科, 石剑云. 变权和相对差异函数在地铁运营安全评价中的应用[J]. 铁道学报, 2009, 31(3): 20-25.
	PAN Ke, SHI Jianyun. Application of variable weight theory and relative difference function in safety assessment of urban subway operation[J]. Journal of the China Railway Society, 2009, 31(3): 20-25.
[3]	潘科, 王洪德, 石剑云. 多级可拓评价方法在地铁运营安全评价中的应用[J]. 铁道学报, 2011, 33(5): 14-19.
	PAN Ke, WANG Hongde, SHI Jianyun. Application of multi-level extensible method to urban subway operation safety evaluation[J]. Journal of the China Railway Society, 2011, 33(5): 14-19.
[4]	陆莹, 李启明, 周志鹏. 基于模糊贝叶斯网络的地铁运营安全风险预测[J]. 东南大学学报:自然科学版, 2010, 40(5): 1110-1114.
	LU Ying, LI Qiming, ZHOU Zhipeng. Safety risk prediction of subway operation based on fuzzy Bayesian network[J]. Journal of Southeast University:Natural Science Edition, 2010, 40(5): 1110-1114.
[5]	曾明华, 王旭, 王转敏, 等. 基于模糊多态贝叶斯网络的地铁运营风险评价方法[J]. 城市轨道交通研究, 2019, 22(5): 28-33.
	ZENG Minghua, WANG Xu, WANG Zhuanmin, et al. Risk assessment of subway operation safety based on fuzzy polymorphic bayesian network[J]. Urban Mass Transit, 2019, 22(5): 28-33.
[6]	贾水库, 温晓虎, 林大建, 等. 基于层次分析法地铁运营系统安全评价技术的研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2008, 18(5): 137-141.
	JIA Shuiku, WEN Xiaohu, LIN Dajian, et al. Study on safety assessment techniques for subway operation system based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2008, 18(5): 137-141.
[7]	侯靖宇. 基于熵权法的地铁运营安全模糊综合评价方法研究[J]. 隧道建设, 2016, 36(12): 1465-1470.
	HOU Jingyu. Study of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method for metro operation safety based on entropy weight method[J]. Tunnel Construction, 2016, 36(12): 1465-1470.
[8]	LIU Kai, ZHU Jiatong, WANG Ming. An event-based probabilistic model of disruption risk to urban metro networks[J]. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2021, 147: 93-105. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2021.03.010
[9]	LI Qiming, SONG Liangliang, LIST G F, et al. A new approach to understand metro operation safety by exploring metro operation hazard network (MOHN)[J]. Safety Science, 2017, 93: 50-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.10.010
[10]	周雪, 左忠义, 程伟. 基于组合赋权云模型的铁路旅客运输安全评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(增1):158-164.
	ZHOU Xue, ZUO Zhongyi, CHENG Wei. Safety evaluation of railway passenger transportation based on combined weighting cloud model[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(S1):158-164. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.S1.028
[11]	杨文东, 杨栋, 谢全敏. 基于云模型的边坡风险评价方法及其应用[J]. 华中科技大学学报:自然科学版, 2018, 46(4): 30-34.
	YANG Wendong, YANG Dong, XIE Quanmin. Study on slope risk assessment method based on cloud model and its application[J]. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology:Natural Science Edition, 2018, 46(4): 30-34.
[12]	WANG Mingwu, WANG Yan, SHEN Fengqiang, et al. A novel classification approach based on integrated connection cloud model and game theory[J]. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 2021, 93:Doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2020.105540. doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2020.105540
[13]	王佳奇, 卢明银, 王庆雄, 等. 基于熵权法-云模型保水开采生态环境评价研究[J/OL]. [2022-01-27]. 煤炭科学技术:1-8. Doi: 10.3390/app11083652. doi: 10.3390/app11083652
	WANG Jiaqi, LU Mingyin, WANG Qingxiong, et al. Study on ecological environment assessment of water conservation mining based on entropy weight method and cloud model[J/OL]. [2022-01-27]. Coal Science and Technology: 1-8. Doi: 10.3390/app11083652. doi: 10.3390/app11083652
[14]	王学军, 郭亚军. 基于G1法的判断矩阵的一致性分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2006, 14(3): 65-70.
	WANG Xuejun, GUO Yajun. Analyzing the consistency of comparison matrix based on G1 method[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2006, 14(3): 65-70.
[15]	刘建, 郑双忠, 邓云峰, 等. 基于G1法的应急能力评价指标权重的确定[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2006, 16(1): 30-33.
	LIU Jian, ZHENG Shuangzhong, DENG Yunfeng, et al. Weight determination of indexes in evaluation of emergency response ability based on G1[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2006, 16(1): 30-33.
[16]	王刚, 商荦真, 刘学麟, 等. 采用AHP-熵权法的巷道启封中毒窒息致因研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7):187-192. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.07.026
	WANG Gang, SHANG Luozhen, LIU Xuelin, et al. Study on causes of poisoning and asphyxiation in roadway opening by AHP-entropy weight method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(7):187-192. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.07.026
[17]	魏久传, 许玉阳, 谢道雷, 等. 基于距离函数组合赋权法的突水危险性评价[J]. 中国矿业, 2021, 30(4): 162-167.
	WEI Jiuchuan, XU Yuyang, XIE Daolei, et al. The risk assessment of water bursting based on combination rule of distance function[J]. China Mining Magazine, 2021, 30(4): 162-167.
[18]	李浩然, 王子恒, 杨起帆, 等. 复杂网络下地铁灾害链演化模型与风险分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(11):141-147. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.11.020
	LI Haoran, WANG Ziheng, YANG Qifan, et al. Evolutionary model and risk analysis of metro disaster chain under complex network[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(11):141-147. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.11.020
[19]	GB/T50438—2007,地铁运营安全评价标准[S].
	GB/T50438-2007,Standard for the operation safety assessment of existing metro[S].
[20]	李志刚, 徐平, 王国利. 地铁运营系统安全风险辨识流程及危险因素研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2019, 15(增1): 34-37.
	LI Zhigang, XU Ping, WANG Guoli. Safety risk identification process and risk factors of subway operation system[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2019, 15(S1): 34-37.
[21]	GB50157—2013,地铁设计规范[S].
	GB50157—2013,Code for Design Metro[S].
[22]	梅潇, 王鑫. 基于云模型和EAHP的起重机金属结构健康评价[J]. 机械设计与研究, 2020, 36(6):200-204.
	MEI Xiao, WANG Xin. The structural health evaluation of crane based on cloud model and EAHP[J]. Machine Design & Research, 2020, 36(6):200-204.
[23]	胥旋, 钟茂华, 史聪灵, 等. 基于动态分级法的地铁设备设施风险评价研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2013, 23(7): 61-66.
	XU Xuan, ZHONG Maohua, SHI Congling, et al. Risk assessment of equipment and facilities in metro based on dynamic classification method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2013, 23(7): 61-66.

评价指标	V₁(E_n,E_x,H_e)	V₂(E_n,E_x,H_e)	V₃(E_n,E_x,H_e)	V₄(E_n,E_x,H_e)	V₅(E_n,E_x,H_e)
客流站台饱和度U₁₁	(0.05,0.016 7, 0.000 835)	(0.2,0.033, 0.001 65)	(0.4,0.033, 0.001 65)	(0.65,0.05, 0.002 5)	(0.8,0.05, 0.002 5)
客流超高峰系数U₁₂	(0.55,0.183, 0.009 15)	(1.15,0.016 7, 0.000 84)	(1.25,0.016 7, 0.000 84)	(1.35,0.016 7, 0.000 84)	(1.4,0.0167, 0.000 84)
客流最大波动系数U₁₃	(0.6,0.2, 0.01)	(1.25,0.016 7, 0.000 84)	(1.35,0.016 7, 0.000 84)	(1.45,0.0167, 0.000 84)	(1.5,0.0167, 0.000 84)
客流楼道拥挤度U₁₄	(0.075,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.225,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.375,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.525,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.6,0.025, 0.001 25)
客流通道拥挤度U₁₅	(0.075,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.225,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.375,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.525,0.025, 0.001 25)	(0.6,0.025, 0.001 25)

指标	U₁₁	U₁₂	U₁₃	U₁₄	U₁₅	U₂₁	U₂₂	U₂₃	U₂₄	U₂₅	U₂₆	U₂₇
G1	0.035 3	0.038 8	0.050 3	0.073 2	0.066 6	0.030 8	0.088 8	0.103 1	0.048 7	0.088 2	0.036 7	0.073 1
EW	0.042 9	0.035 9	0.044 0	0.036 6	0.040 9	0.031 8	0.034 8	0.049 1	0.035 5	0.047 1	0.035 9	0.049 7
组合权重	0.039 0	0.037 4	0.047 2	0.055 2	0.053 9	0.031 3	0.062 2	0.076 4	0.042 2	0.067 9	0.036 3	0.061 6
指标	U₃₁	U₃₂	U₃₃	U₃₄	U₃₅	U₃₆	U₃₇	U₃₈	U₄₁	U₄₂	U₄₃	U₄₄
G1	0.012 6	0.012 1	0.014 5	0.026 3	0.027 9	0.018 1	0.023 1	0.041	0.009 4	0.014 5	0.036	0.030 8
EW	0.030 6	0.029 4	0.031 5	0.031 7	0.031 2	0.056 9	0.051 1	0.050 5	0.050 3	0.058 5	0.032 5	0.061 8
组合权重	0.021 5	0.020 6	0.022 9	0.029 0	0.029 5	0.037 2	0.036 9	0.045 7	0.029 6	0.036 2	0.034 3	0.046 1

二级指标	云模型综合确定度
二级指标	低 (V₁)	较低 (V₂)	中等 (V₃)	较高 (V₄)	高 (V₅)
城市人口因素(U₂)	0.000 1	0.007 9	0.064 2	0.000 8	0.000 0
地铁设备设施(U₃)	0.004 4	0.000 0	0.050 2	0.000 0	0.000 0
地铁安全管理(U₄)	0.038 3	0.031 1	0.006 6	0.000 0	0.000 2
地铁环境因素(U₅)	0.017 5	0.000 0	0.024 5	0.000 0	0.000 0
T₁线路地铁	0.013 6	0.009 4	0.039 1	0.000 2	0.000 1