滩海油气管道泄漏风险演化与评估

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.01.023

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (1): 159-164.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.01.023

滩海油气管道泄漏风险演化与评估

任乐峰^1,2 高级工程师, 孟祥坤², 陈国明^**2 教授

1 胜利油田分公司孤东采油厂,山东东营 257000;
2 中国石油大学海洋油气装备与安全技术研究中心,山东青岛 266580

收稿日期:2020-10-16 修回日期:2020-12-12 出版日期:2021-01-28 发布日期:2021-07-28
通讯作者: **陈国明(1962—),男,浙江绍兴人,博士,教授,博士生导师,主要从事海洋油气装备与安全技术方面的研究。E-mail:
offshore@126.com。
作者简介:任乐峰 (1970—),男,山东东营人,硕士,高级工程师,主要从事安全管理及技术方面的工作。E-mail:renyuefeng.slyt@sinopec.com。
孟祥坤 (1988—),男,山东泰安人,博士,主要从事海洋油气安全技术方面的研究。E-mail: wsdy1002@163.com。
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目 (2016YFC0802305)。

Risk evolution and evaluation for oil and gas leakage of pipeline in shallow sea

REN Yuefeng^1,2, MENG Xiangkun², CHEN Guoming²

1 Gudong Oil Production Plant of Shengli Oil Company, Dongying Shandong 257000, China;
2 Centre for Offshore Engineering and Safety Technology, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao Shandong 266580, China

Received:2020-10-16 Revised:2020-12-12 Online:2021-01-28 Published:2021-07-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为预防滩海油气管道泄漏事故的发生,提出基于复杂网络和故障模式影响及危害分析(FMECA)的连锁风险演化评估方法。依据滩海油气管道的结构组成,考虑自然环境、内外腐蚀、第三方破坏和人因组织风险,结合泄漏事故发展流程和风险因素逻辑关系,构建滩海管道泄漏复杂网络模型;引入风险熵和FMECA方法,衡量风险传递过程中节点事件的可能性及严重程度;给出风险传递路径最大可能性的表达式,通过Dijkstra算法计算泄漏演化的最短路径,辨识多节点所形成的最可能失效模式。结果表明:各类初始事件对管道泄漏的影响差异较大,以人因组织类的作业组织不合理作为初始事件引发管道泄漏的概率为5.20×10^-3,其对管道泄漏的影响最大。

关键词: 滩海, 油气管道泄漏, 复杂网络, 风险熵, 故障模式影响及危害分析(FMECA)

Abstract: In order to prevent oil and gas pipeline leakage in shallow sea, a novel evaluation method integrating complex network and FMECA was proposed. Considering pipeline structure, leakage development process and logic relation between risk factors, a complex network model, which consisted of risk factors such as natural environment, internal and external corrosion, third party damage, and organizational management, was constructed. Then, risk entropy and FMECA were introduced to characterize probability and criticality of risks. Finally, the shortest path was applied with Dijkstra algorithm to identify the most potential failure modes of pipeline leakage. The results show that effect of initial events on leakage varies a lot. Inappropriate operational organization, as initial event with a probability of 5.20×10^-3 to cause accidents, has the greatest influence on leakage.

Key words: shallow sea, oil and gas pipeline leakage, complex network, risk entropy, failure mode effects and criticality analysis (FMECA)

中图分类号:

X944.4

任乐峰, 孟祥坤, 陈国明. 滩海油气管道泄漏风险演化与评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(1): 159-164.

REN Yuefeng, MENG Xiangkun, CHEN Guoming. Risk evolution and evaluation for oil and gas leakage of pipeline in shallow sea[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(1): 159-164.

参考文献

[1] 李玉坤, 李亚旭, 陆忠, 等. 滩海埋地管道变形相似试验与抗漂浮数值计算[J]. 油气储运, 2014, 33(8): 900-904.
LI Yukun, LI Yaxu, LU Zhong, et al. Deformation similarity test and anti-floating numerical calculation of offshore buried pipeline[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2014, 33(8): 900-904.
[2] 骆吉庆, 姚安林, 何莎, 等. 浅海输气管道坠物碰撞动力响应分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(6): 103-109.
LUO Jiqing, YAO Anlin, HE Sha, et al. Dynamic response analysis of neritic gas pipeline impacted by dropped objects[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(6): 103-109.
[3] 雷云, 余建星, 吴朝晖, 等. 基于模糊ANP的海底管道失效风险综合评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(5): 178-184.
LEI Yun, YU Jianxing, WU Chaohui, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of failure risks of submarine pipelines based on fuzzy ANP[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(5): 178-184.
[4] LI Xinhong, CHEN Guoming, ZHU Hongwei. Modelling and assessment of accidental oil release from damaged subsea pipelines[J]. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2017, 123(1/2): 133-141.
[5] YANG Yongsheng, KHAN F, THODI P, et al. Corrosion induced failure analysis of subsea pipelines[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2017, 159: 214-222.
[6] ALJAROUDI A, KHAN F, AKINTURK A, et al. Risk assessment of offshore crude oil pipeline failure[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2015, 37: 101-109.
[7] 李新宏, 朱红卫, 陈国明, 等. 海底油气管道泄漏事故风险分析的贝叶斯动态模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2015, 25(4): 77-82.
LI Xinhong, ZHU Hongwei, CHEN Guoming, et al. Bayesian dynamic model for analyzing risk of meeting submarine oil & gas pipeline leakage accident[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2015, 25(4): 77-82.
[8] 黄浪, 吴超, 王秉. “流”视域下的系统安全协同理论模型构建[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(5): 50-55.
HUANG Lang, WU Chao, WANG Bing. Theoretical modeling of system safety synergy from perspective of "flow"[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(5): 50-55.
[9] 孟祥坤, 陈国明, 朱红卫. 海底管道泄漏风险演化复杂网络分析[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2017, 13(4): 26-31.
MENG Xiangkun, CHEN Guoming, ZHU Hongwei. Complex network analysis on risk evolution of submarine pipeline leakage[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2017, 13(4): 26-31.
[10] 蔡志强, 孙树栋, 司书宾, 等. 基于FMECA的复杂装备故障预测贝叶斯网络建模[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2013, 33(1): 187-193.
CAI Zhiqiang, SUN Shudong, SI Shubin, et al. Modeling of failure prediction Bayesian network based on FMECA[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2013, 33(1): 187-193.
[11] ARZAGHI E, ABAEI M M, ABBASSI R, et al. A hierarchical Bayesian approach to modelling fate and transport of oil released from subsea pipelines[J]. Process Safety & Environmental Protection, 2018, 118: 307-315.
[12] 刘文颖, 王佳明, 谢昶, 等. 基于脆性风险熵的复杂电网连锁故障脆性源辨识模型[J]. 中国电机工程学报, 2012, 32(31): 142-149.
LIU Wenying, WANG Jiaming, XIE Chang, et al. Brittleness source identification model for cascading failure of complex power grid based on brittle risk entropy[J]. Proceedings of the CSEE, 2012, 32(31): 142-149.
[13] DENG Yongliang, LI Qiming, LU Ying. A research on subway physical vulnerability based on network theory and FMECA[J]. Safety Science, 2015, 80: 127-134.
[14] 姜丹, 钱玉美. 效用风险熵[J]. 中国科学技术大学学报, 1994, 24(4): 461-469.
JIANG Dan, QIAN Yumei. Effect risk entropy[J]. Journal of China University of Science and Technology, 1994, 24(4): 461-469.
[15] 陈业华, 王浩, 宋之杰. 基于效用风险熵的突发事件应急方案动态调整[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2016, 38(9): 2 093-2 098.
CHEN Yehua, WANG Hao, SONG Zhijie. Dynamic adjustment for emergency decision- making based on utility risk entropy[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2016, 38(9): 2 093-2 098.

滩海油气管道泄漏风险演化与评估

Risk evolution and evaluation for oil and gas leakage of pipeline in shallow sea

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李浩然, 王子恒, 杨起帆, 张亚君, 欧阳作林. 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.
[2]	张帆, 步兵, 赵骏逸. 列车运行控制系统信息安全风险评估方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(S1): 172-178.
[3]	陈文瑛, 李泳暾, 宋志光. 基于复杂网络的生产安全事故致因研究:以北京市某城区为例[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(7): 7-12.
[4]	罗军华, 林孝松, 牟凤云, 李宏伟, 张莉. 山区暴雨-农业灾害链复杂网络静态风险分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(3): 163-170.
[5]	牟能冶, 康秋萍, 贾程方. 突发事件影响下的城市快递网络脆弱性评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(12): 125-132.
[6]	花玲玲, 郑伟. 基于复杂网络理论的铁路事故致因分析^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(S1): 114-119.
[7]	王亚风, 黄勇. 基于动态可靠性评价的区域铁路网规划优化:以成渝城市群为例[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(5): 97-104.
[8]	蒋代, 华敏, 潘旭海, 蒋军成. 化工园区储罐多米诺效应的脆弱性评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(4): 177-182.
[9]	薛锋, 何传磊, 黄倩. 成都地铁网络的关键节点识别方法及性能分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(1): 93-99.
[10]	陈刘瑜, 李希建, 尹鑫, 毕娟. 复杂网络理论下燃气管网节点重要性分析方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(9): 74-80.
[11]	李晓璐, 于昕明, 雷方舒, 郗艳红, 毛军, 朱广宇. 城市轨道交通系统灾害链网络模型构建与评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(6): 179-184.
[12]	王红勇, 温瑞英. 基于复杂网络的空中交通态势风险评估方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(5): 172-178.
[13]	王兴隆, 王宽, 赵末. 鱼骨式航路网络建模及抗毁性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(3): 167-172.
[14]	于宝, 冯春, 朱倩, 张怡. 中国高速铁路网络脆弱性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(9): 110-115.
[15]	岳希坚, 袁永博, 张明媛, 何祥. 基于复杂网络理论识别油库关键安全风险因素[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(5): 146-151.