模糊区间TOPSIS动车组塞拉门故障风险评估

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2021.04.024

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (4): 177-183.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2021.04.024

模糊区间TOPSIS动车组塞拉门故障风险评估

马润¹, 仇维斌² 研究员, 秦云³ 副教授, 欧红香^**1 教授

1 常州大学环境与安全工程学院,江苏常州213164;
2 南京信息工程大学滨江学院,江苏无锡214015;
3 江苏大学电气信息与工程学院,江苏镇江212013

收稿日期:2021-01-10 修回日期:2021-03-08 出版日期:2021-04-28 发布日期:2021-12-20
通讯作者: **欧红香(1976—),女,湖南宜章人,博士,教授,主要从事阻燃材料、环境安全功能材料等方面的研究。E-mail:760263761@qq.com。
作者简介:马润 (1996—),男,江苏扬州人,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为安全科学与工程。E-mail: 279994701@qq.com。
基金资助:
江苏省高等教育教改研究项目重点课题(2019JSJG022); 江苏省研究生科研创新计划项目(KYCX19_1794);常州市科技支撑计划项目(CE20189003)。

Fault risk assessment of sliding plug door of EMU based on fuzzy interval TOPSIS

MA Run¹, QIU Weibin², QIN Yun³, OU Hongxiang¹

1 School of Environmental & Safety Engineering, Changzhou University, Changzhou Jiangsu 213164, China;
2 Binjiang College, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Wuxi Jiangsu 214015, China;
3 School of Electrical Information & Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang Jiangsu 212013, China

Received:2021-01-10 Revised:2021-03-08 Online:2021-04-28 Published:2021-12-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为提高动车组(EMU)塞拉门运行可靠度,采用模糊层次分析法(AHP),计算塞拉门7种主要故障模式和故障原因的权重大小;引入模糊理论,从故障发生率、维修费用和故障运营影响(晚点)3个风险指标,评价各故障原因的多属性风险指标并得到加权风险评价矩阵;使用模糊区间逼近理想排序法(TOPSIS)相对贴近度计算故障模式,最终得到风险评估结果。研究结果表明:计算结果与近2年的塞拉门现场维护保养记录相吻合,锁闭装置故障、限位开关故障、敏感边缘故障对动车组塞拉门运行可靠度具有较大的危害,需重点检修保养。

关键词: 模糊区间, 逼近理想排序法(TOPSIS), 动车组(EMU), 塞拉门故障, 风险评估, 可靠性

Abstract: In order to improve operation reliability of sliding plug door of EMU, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was used to calculate seven main fault modes and weight of fault causes.Fuzzy theory was introduced to evaluate cause of failure from three risk indexes, failure incidence, maintenance cost and failure operation delay. Multi-attribute risk indexes of each fault cause were evaluated and weighted risk evaluation matrix was obtained. TOPSIS was used to calculate relative nearness of fault mode, and result of risk assessment was obtained. The results show that calculated results are consistent with field maintenance records of plug door in recent 2 years. Failure of lock device, limit switch and sensitive edge fault have great harm to operation reliability of plug door of EMUS, need key overhaul and maintenance.

Key words: fuzzy interval, technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution(TOPSIS), electric multiple unit(EMU), sliding plug door fault, risk assessment, reliability

中图分类号:

X913.4

马润, 仇维斌 , 秦云, 欧红香. 模糊区间TOPSIS动车组塞拉门故障风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(4): 177-183.

MA Run, QIU Weibin, QIN Yun, OU Hongxiang. Fault risk assessment of sliding plug door of EMU based on fuzzy interval TOPSIS[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(4): 177-183.

参考文献

[1] 段毅刚, 齐金平. 基于模糊故障树的动车组塞拉门系统可靠性分析[J]. 模糊系统与数学, 2019, 33(5): 166-174.
DUAN Yigang, QI Jinping. Reliability analysis of the sliding plug door system of EMU based on fuzzy fault tree [J]. Fuzzy System and Mathematics, 2019, 33(5): 166-174.
[2] 余飞. 高速动车组边门运行状态仿真及故障分析[D]. 成都: 西南交通大学, 2013.
YU Fei. Operating condition simulation and fault analysis of side door for high-speed EMU[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University, 2013.
[3] 刘光武, 蔡昌俊, 陈刚,等. 基于故障树和模糊推理petri网的塞拉门系统可靠性分析[J]. 机械制造与自动化, 2015,44(3): 146-149.
LIU Guangwu, CAI Changjun, CHEN Gang, et al. Reliability analysis of metro door system using FTA and fuzzy reasoning petri net [J]. Machine Building & Automation, 2015,44(3): 146-149.
[4] GJB/Z 1391—2006, 故障模式、影响及危害性分析指南[S].
GJB/Z 1391-2006, Guide to failure mode, effects and criticality analysis[S].
[5] 戴云徽, 韩之俊, 朱海荣. 故障模式及影响分析(FMEA)研究进展[J]. 中国质量, 2007(10): 23-26.
DAI Yunhui, HAN Zhijun, ZHU Hairong. FMEA theories and methods-review on research progress [J]. China Quality, 2007(10): 23-26.
[6] 胡海涛, 高朝晖, 何正友,等. 基于FTA和FMEA法的地铁牵引供电系统可靠性评估[J]. 铁道学报, 2012, 34(10): 48-54.
HU Haitao, GAO Zhaohui, HE Zhengyou, et al. Reliability evaluation of metro traction power supply system based on FTA and FMEA methods [J]. Journal of the China Railway Society, 2012, 34(10): 48-54.
[7] 贺德强, 肖红升, 姚晓阳,等. 地铁列车预防性维修多目标优化模型及应用[J]. 广西大学学报:自然科学版, 2019, 44(2): 299-305.
HE Deqiang, XIAO Hongsheng, YAO Xiaoyang, et al. Multi objective optimization model for metro prevention maintenance and its application [J]. Journal of Guangxi University:Natural Science Edition, 2019, 44(2): 299-305.
[8] 宋筱茜, 廖谨宇, 王雨,等. 基于改进FMEA的地铁车辆转向架风险评估[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2019, 15(增1): 48-54.
SONG Xiaoqian, LIAO Jinyu, WANG Yu, et al. Risk evaluation of metro vehicle bogie based on improved FMEA [J]. Journal of Safety Science And Technology, 2019, 15(S1): 48-54.
[9] 樊治平, 姜艳萍. 模糊判断矩阵排序方法研究的综述[J]. 系统工程, 2001, 19(5): 12-18.
FAN Zhiping, JIANG Yanping. An overview on ranking methods of fuzzy judgement matrix [J]. Systems Engineering, 2001, 19(5): 12-18.
[10] MACUZIC I, TADIC D, ALEKSI A, et al. A two step fuzzy model for the assessment and ranking of organizational resilience factors in the process industry[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2016, 40: 122-130.
[11] 邬书良, 霍亮, 严荣福. 直觉模糊集TOPSIS在边坡地震稳定性评价中的应用[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(6): 145-150.
WU Shuliang, HUO Liang, YAN Rongfu. Application of intuition fuzzy set TOPSIS to evalution of seismic stability of slopes[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27(6): 145-150.
[12] JUAN C F, YURLIEV C, HERIBERTO R, et al. Yager index and ranking for interval type-2 fuzzy numbers[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2018, 26(5): 2 709-2 718.
[13] 马齐飞扬, 赵庶旭. 改进TOPSIS在铁路应急救援决策中的应用研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2016, 26(1): 155-161.
MA Qifeiyang, ZHAO Shuxu. Application of improved TOPSIS method in decision-making of railway emergency rescue[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2016, 26(1): 155-161.

[1]	刘嘉豪, 余杨, 张振兴, 余建星, 王巍巍, 傅一钦. 二维云模型和贝叶斯网络的立管风险评估方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(5): 147-154.
[2]	辛保泉, 喻健良, 党文义, 白永忠, 于安峰. 定量风险评估视域下的多组分混合物危险特性[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(4): 80-85.
[3]	卢颖, 赵志攀, 姜学鹏, 吴锦东, 范小鹏. 大数据视域下体育场馆动态火灾风险指标研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(4): 155-162.
[4]	黄杰, 张显峰. 以南疆为例的区域暴恐袭击风险评估^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(2): 192-199.
[5]	张鸽. 基于累积接尘量的尘肺病风险评估方法^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(2): 200-206.
[6]	韩鹏, 王军, 王启, 赵嶷飞. 基于飞行剖面的航空器试飞活动空管风险研究^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(1): 149-156.
[7]	刘继川, 桂蕾. 城市公共安全风险评估与控制对策研究:以武汉市为例^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(1): 164-171.
[8]	辛保泉, 党文义, 喻健良, 王溪舸, 闫兴清, 卢卫. 石化过程蒸气云爆炸抗爆设防荷载定量评估方法^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(9): 113-118.
[9]	刘玉珍, 杨瑞刚, 赵广立, 景玮宸, 马晓星. 基于PHI2的桥式起重机结构时变可靠性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 130-136.
[10]	安宇, 李子琪, 王袆, 郭子萌, 张姜博南. 基于FBN的高校实验室不安全行为风险评估^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(5): 160-167.
[11]	赵冬月, 陈长坤, 易亮. 灾害演化网络时序性风险评估模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(3): 171-177.
[12]	鲁锦涛, 任利成, 戎丹, 郭昕曜. 基于灰色-物元模型的煤矿瓦斯爆炸风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(2): 99-105.
[13]	韩鹏, 张冰玉. 航迹误差对无人机坠地伤人风险评估的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(2): 106-111.
[14]	刘大山, 陈晓春, 多英全, 师立晨. 化工园区地震Na-Tech事件快速风险评估方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(2): 127-134.
[15]	汪铁楠, 翟越, 王康, 赵瑞峰, 韩树鹏. 新冠肺炎疫情下的高校复课综合风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(2): 143-148.

模糊区间TOPSIS动车组塞拉门故障风险评估

Fault risk assessment of sliding plug door of EMU based on fuzzy interval TOPSIS

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