基于EWM-VIKOR模型的人体热应激评价指标研究

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.06.1171

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (6): 232-239.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.06.1171

基于EWM-VIKOR模型的人体热应激评价指标研究

游波¹^,²^,³(), 王思奇¹, 刘何清¹, 罗骁¹, 杨明²^,^**(), 高科³

¹ 湖南科技大学资源环境与安全工程学院,湖南湘潭 411201
² 河南理工大学瓦斯地质与瓦斯治理省部共建国家重点实验室培育基地,河南焦作 454003
³ 矿山热动力灾害与防治教育部重点实验室,辽宁葫芦岛 125105

收稿日期:2025-02-14 修回日期:2025-04-18 出版日期:2025-06-28
通信作者:
** 杨明(1982—),男,安徽怀宁人,博士,教授,主要从事瓦斯灾害预测与防治、通风理论与技术、职业安全与健康等方面的研究。E-mail:yming@hpu.edu.cn。
作者简介:
游波 (1986—),男,湖南娄底人,博士,教授,主要从事矿井热害防治与职业安全健康方面的研究。E-mail: 494907336@qq.com。
刘何清, 教授。
高科, 教授。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(52174179); 河南省瓦斯地质与瓦斯治理重点实验室-省部共建国家重点实验室培育基地开放基金(WS2023B09); 辽宁工程技术大学矿山热动力灾害与防治教育部重点实验室基金(JSK202204); 湖南省自然科学基金(2022JJ30255)

Research on human heat stress evaluation indexes based on EWM-VIKOR model

YOU Bo¹^,²^,³(), WANG Siqi¹, LIU Heqing¹, LUO Xiao¹, YANG Ming²^,^**(), GAO Ke³

¹ School of Resource & Environment and Safety Engineering, Hunan University of Science and Technology, Xiangtan Hunan 411201, China
² State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base for Gas Geology and Gas Control, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo Henan 454003, China
³ Key Laboratory of Mine Thermodynamic Disasters and Control of Ministry of Education, Huludao Liaoning 125105, China

Received:2025-02-14 Revised:2025-04-18 Published:2025-06-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

人体长时间处于高温高湿环境中易引发热疾病,为评估室内高温高湿环境人体热应激水平,利用熵权法(EWM)确定平均皮肤温度(MST)、心率(HR)、口腔温度(OT)、耳膜温度(TT)测量参数的权重,基于多准则妥协解排序法(VIKOR)模型建立新的综合评价指标QI,与主观参数、环境参数进行拟合以验证QI的合理性,通过改进生理应激指标(PHSI)的热应力强度分级确定QI的分级。结果表明:TT、MST、OT、HR的权重范围分别为0.151 9~0.421 1、0.193 5~0.345 2、0.160 4~0.426 9、0.134 8~0.339 1,MST的权重均值较高,受环境因素及劳动因素影响较大;QI的安全范围[0,0.36),热耐受范围[0.36,0.57],危险范围(0.57,1]。

关键词: 熵权法(EWM), 多准则妥协解排序法(VIKOR), 热应激, 评价指标, 高温高湿

Abstract:

The human body is susceptible to heat diseases when exposed to high temperature and high humidity for a long period of time. In order to assess the level of human heat stress in indoor high temperature and high humidity environments, the paper utilized the EWM to determine the weights of measurement parameters such as Mean Skin Temperature (MST), Heart Rate (HR), Oral Temperature (OT) and Tympanic Temperature (TT). A new comprehensive evaluation index QI was established based on VIKOR model. The reasonableness of QI was validated by fitting with the subjective parameters and the environmental parameters. The grading of QI was determined by improving the thermal stress intensity grading of the physiological stress indicator PHSI. The results show that the weight ranges of TT, MST, OT and HR are 0.151 9-0.421 1, 0.193 5-0.345 2, 0.160 4-0.426 9 and 0.134 8-0.339 1, respectively. MST has a high mean value of weight, which is greatly affected by environmental factors and labor factors. QI's safety range [0,0.36), thermal tolerance range [0.36,0.57] and hazardous range (0.57,1].

Key words: entropy weight method (EWM), vlsekriterijumska optimizacija i kompromis-no resenine (VIKOR), heat stress, evaluation indicators, high temperature and high humidity

中图分类号:

X968高低温防护

游波, 王思奇, 刘何清, 罗骁, 杨明, 高科. 基于EWM-VIKOR模型的人体热应激评价指标研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(6): 232-239.

YOU Bo, WANG Siqi, LIU Heqing, LUO Xiao, YANG Ming, GAO Ke. Research on human heat stress evaluation indexes based on EWM-VIKOR model[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(6): 232-239.

图/表 7

表1

图1

表2

图2

表3

图3

图4

参考文献 19

[1]	张志宇, 朱能. 16个高温高湿环境工况等级划分[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(5): 184-190. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.05.028
	ZHANG Zhiyu, ZHU Neng. Classification of 16 high temperature and high humidity environmental conditions[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(5): 184-190. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.05.028
[2]	YOU Bo, WANG Siqi, YANG Ming, et al. Simulation study of heat transfer in the space under the clothing of mining ventilation suits in typical human labour positions[J]. International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 2025, 208: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2024.109423.
[3]	王梦飞, 金龙哲, 于露, 等. PPG信号用于高温高湿伤害预警的可行性研究[J]. 中南大学学报:自然科学版, 2020, 51(5): 1424-1430.
	WANG Mengfei, JIN Longzhe, YU Lu, et al. Feasibility study of PPG signal for early warning of high temperature and high humidity injury[J]. Journal of Central South University: Science and Technology, 2020, 51(5): 1424-1430.
[4]	ISO 7933-2004, Ergonomics of the thermal environment-analytical determination and interpretation of heat stress using calculation of the predicted heat strain[S].
[5]	FIALA D, HAVENITH G. Modelling human heattransfer and temperature regulation[M]. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015:265-302.
[6]	JOSHI A, WANG Faming, KANG Zhanxiao, et al. A three-dimensional thermoregulatory model for predicting human thermophysiological responses in various thermal environments[J]. Building and Environment, 2022, 207: DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108506.
[7]	OPRICOVIC S, TZENG G H. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2004, 156(2): 445-455.
[8]	YADAV R, SINGH M, MEENA A, et al. Selection and ranking of dental restorative composite materials using hybrid Entropy-VIKOR method: an application of MCDM technique[J]. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 2023, 147: DOI: 10.1016/J.JMBBM.2023.106103.
[9]	KUMAR A, KUMAR M, VERMA P C. Ranking analysis of AA7075-Cr alloy composites based on physical, mechanical, and sliding wear assessment using hybrid ENTROPY-VIKOR approach[J]. International Journal of Metalcasting, 2024, 18(1): 352-372.
[10]	THOM C E. The discomfort index[J]. Weatherwise, 2010, 12(2): 57-61.
[11]	MORAN D S, PANDOLF K B, SHAPIRO Y, et al. An environmental stress index (ESI) as a substitute for the wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT)[J]. Journal of Thermal Biology, 2001, 26(4/5): 427-431.
[12]	胡琴. 基于热平衡理论的人体热应激水平评估[D]. 武汉: 武汉理工大学, 2017.
	HU Qin. Evaluation of human heat stress level based on heat balance theory[D]. Wuhan: Wuhan University of Technology, 2017.
[13]	KURAZUMI Y, TSUCHIKAWA T, MATSUBARA N, et al. Evaluation of enhanced conduction-corrected modified effective temperature ETFe as the outdoor thermal environment evaluation index[J]. Energy and Buildings, 2011, 43: 2926-2938.
[14]	SAKOI T, MOCHIDA T. Concept of the equivalent wet bulb globe temperature index for indicating safe thermal occupational environments[J]. Building Science, 2013, 67: 167-178.
[15]	CHEN Y C, MATZARAKIS A. Modified physiologically equivalent temperature:basics and applications for western European climate[J]. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 2018, 132: 1275-1289.
[16]	ZHENG Guozhong, LI Cong, FENG Yinshuai. Developing a new index for evaluating physiological safety in high temperature weather based on entropy-TOPSIS model: a case of sanitation worker[J]. Environmental Research, 2020, 191(8): DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.110091.
[17]	吕石磊. 极端热环境下人体热耐受力研究[D]. 天津: 天津大学, 2007.
	LYU Shilei. Study on human thermal tolerance under extreme thermal environment[D]. Tianjin: Tianjin University, 2007.
[18]	YOU Bo, WU Chao, LI Ji, et al. Physiological responses of people in working faces of deep underground mines[J]. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 2014, 24(5): 683-688.
[19]	YANG Bin, YAO Huangcheng, YANG Pengfei, et al. Effects of thermal and acoustic environments on workers' psychological and physiological stress in deep underground spaces[J]. Building and Environment, 2022, 212: DOI:10.1016/J.BUILDENV.2022.108830.

测量指标	仪器	精度
口腔温度/℃	电子体温计	±0.1
皮肤温度/℃	温度传感器	±0.01
耳膜温度/℃	电子体温计	±0.2
心率/%	电子血压计	±5

劳动强度	环境温度/℃	QI值分布
轻度劳动强度	32	[0.08,0.27]
	34	[0.07,0.32]
	36	[0.22,0.62]
	38	[0.22,0.90]
中度劳动强度	32	[0.18,0.40]
	34	[0.22,0.62]
	36	[0.28,0.93]
	38	[0.30,0.98]
重度劳动强度	32	[0.20,0.49]
	34	[0.22,0.71]
	36	[0.23,0.98]
	38	[0.41,1]

热应力强度	PSI数值
无或轻度	-1、0、1、2
稍轻	3、4
中度	5、6
重度	7、8
非常重	9、10、11、12

基于EWM-VIKOR模型的人体热应激评价指标研究

Research on human heat stress evaluation indexes based on EWM-VIKOR model

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 19

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	朱安峰, 范秀芳, 杜温瑞, 孙婉馨, 徐刚. 韧性视角下应急避难场所防灾减灾能力综合评价:以温州市瓯海区为例[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 223-230.
[2]	王丹, 高雯雯. 基于组合赋权-偏序集的应急供应链可靠性评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 231-237.
[3]	王东营, 陈小平, 刘权, 赵天浩, 闫序. 基于改进的云模型-FMEA的油气管道风险排序[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 61-68.
[4]	陈亮, 郑伟. 基于AWAHP的调度员疲劳致因研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(4): 42-49.
[5]	李鹏程, 许倩, 王烨. 核电厂运行阶段安全文化评价指标体系研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2): 60-66.
[6]	胡啸峰, 黄玲. 基于机器学习的户外作业警务人员热应激预测模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(11): 220-228.
[7]	周海怡, 鲍全贵, 叶茂, 朱圣文, 林颖典. 基于组合赋权法的城市桥梁可靠性模糊综合评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(S1): 156-161.
[8]	张琦, 吉日格勒. 基于卷积神经网络的煤泥水外溢检测算法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(S1): 192-195.
[9]	王振宇, 向泽锐, 邹瑞, 丁铁成, 支锦亦. 融合点阵拓扑优化法和熵权法的铲运机外观设计[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(S1): 215-221.
[10]	李凤, 张来斌, 董绍华, 陈林, 张行. 基于EWM-AHP-云模型的站场法兰系统密封失效风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(9): 150-156.
[11]	古莹奎, 汪源金, 石昌武. 基于EWM和SVR的滚动轴承剩余使用寿命预测方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(9): 49-55.
[12]	张任栋, 张礼敬, 陶刚. 模糊推理-组合赋权的化工工艺本质安全度研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8): 149-155.
[13]	王启飞, 赵逸涵, 张慧, 王健, 王亚飞. 基于PSR和信息敏感性的城市韧性度评价:以北京市为例[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8): 198-204.
[14]	莫俊文, 王锐锐, 滕仓国. 高海拔铁路工程施工人员不安全行为评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8): 30-38.
[15]	牛莉霞, 杨满意. 疫苗供应链风险评价指标体系构建[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(7): 32-38.