Study on location selection of linkage fire stations based on demand level and distance loss

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.03.025

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to improve urban fire resistance, designing fire stations based on urban development status could be an effective means to improve firefighting efficiency and optimize allocation of resources. Firstly, regional fire potential was assessed based on population density and distribution of high-risk fire potential units, and ArcGIS was adopted to simulate distribution of fire potential and classify it. Then, with influence of fire station response distance on fire loss being taken into consideration, an optimized model of linkage fire station location selection based on demand grade and distance loss was established, and multi-objective optimization algorithm NSGA-Ⅱ was used to solve it iteratively. Finally, with Xiangzhou district, Xiangcheng district and Fancheng district of Xiangyang as examples, the model was compared with layout of fire stations in active service and that of site selection considering single factor. The results show that the optimization model comprehensively considers both factors of demand level and distance loss, and implements multi-level coverage for high-risk units according to the actual demand. As a results, it features a better location than that considering a single factor, and it proves to be more reasonable in fire resources' utilization.

Key words: demand level, distance loss, location of fire station, fire potential, multilevel coverage

HUO Feizhou, DONG Geli, LI Moxiao, MEI Yiyun. Study on location selection of linkage fire stations based on demand level and distance loss[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(3): 183-193.

Figures/Tables 15

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig. 6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Tab.1

Fig.9

Tab.2

Fig.10

Tab.3

Fig.11

Tab.4

References 16

[1]	ZHANG Hengjie, WANG Fang, TANG Huali, et al. An optimization-based approach to social network group decision making with an application to earthquake shelter-site selection[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16(15):DOI:10.3390/ijerph16152740.
[2]	SISMAN A, YILDIRIM R E. Determining new fire station location, response time coverage area approach[J]. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2019, 28(11A):8548-8554.
[3]	VAN DEN BERG P L, LEGEMAATE G A G, VAN DER MEI R D. Increasing the responsiveness of firefighter services by relocating base stations in Amsterdam[J]. Interfaces, 2017, 47(4):352-361.
[4]	YAO Jing, ZHANG Xiaoxiang, MURRAY A T. Location optimization of urban fire stations: access and service coverage[J]. Computers Environment and Urban Systems, 2019, 73: 184-190. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.10.006
[5]	UDDIN S, WARNITCHAI P. Decision support for infrastructure planning: a comprehensive location-allocation model for fire station in complex urban system[J]. Natural Hazards, 2020, 102(3): 1475-1496. doi: 10.1007/s11069-020-03981-2
[6]	BOLOURI S, VAFAEINEJAD A, ALESHEIKH A A, et al. The ordered capacitated multi-objective location-allocation problem for fire stations using spatial optimization[J]. Isprs International Journal of Geo-information, 2018, 7(2):DOI:10.3390/ijgi7020044.
[7]	KIRAN K C, CORCORAN J, CHHETRI P. Spatial optimisation of fire service coverage: a case study of Brisbane, Australia[J]. Geographical Research, 2018, 56 (3): 270-284. doi: 10.1111/1745-5871.12288
[8]	MA Yunjia, XU Wei, QIN Lianjie, et al. Hierarchical supplement location-allocation optimization for disaster supply warehouses in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region of China[J]. Geomatics Natural Hazards & Risk, 2019, 10(1):102-117.
[9]	张进峰, 何芸枫, 吴小红, 等. 库区水上应急救助设施选址多目标优化模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(4):175-181. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.04.030
	ZHANG Jinfeng, HE Yunfeng, WU Xiaohong, et al. Multi-objective optimization model for water emergency rescue facilities location in reservoir area[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(4):175-181. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.04.030
[10]	陈振南, 吴立志, 夏登友, 等. 基于城市火灾风险的消防站分级覆盖选址模型:以济南市区为例[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2020, 16(7):18-24.
	CHEN Zhennan, WU Lizhi, XIA Dengyou, et al. Hierarchical coverage location model for fire station based on urban fire risk: a case study on urban area in Ji'nan[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2020, 16(7):18-24.
[11]	郭静文, 赵朋朋, 倪佳成. 基于遗传算法的消防站选址规划模型[J]. 计算机应用, 2020, 40(增1):41-44.
	GUO Jingwen, ZHAO Pengpeng, NI Jiacheng. Fire station location planning model based on genetic algorithm[J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2020, 40(S1):41-44.
[12]	王宁, 许益, 张磊, 等. 考虑消防联动与效益的消防站多目标选址方法[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2020, 40(3):664-678. doi: 10.12011/1000-6788-2018-1345-15
	WANG Ning, XU Yi, ZHANG Lei, et al. Muiti-target location method for fire stations considering fire-fighting collaboration and efficiency[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2020, 40(3):664-678.
[13]	胡立伟, 何越人, 佘天毅, 等. 高速公路应急救援中心选址优化模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(5):145-150. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.05.024
	HU Liwei, HE Yueren, SHE Tianyi, et al. Research on optimization model of expressway emergency rescue center location[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(5):145-150. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.05.024
[14]	陈志芬, 李俊伟, 卢方欣, 等. 城市消防站选址布局优化及对雄安新区的启示[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2018, 14(9):12-17.
	CHEN Zhifen, LI Junwei, LU Fangxin, et al. Optimizing location of fire stations and it's enlightenments for Xiongan New Area[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2018, 14(9):12-17.
[15]	关文玲, 张孟军, 董呈杰, 等. 化工园区消防站多目标选址模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(3):62-67. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.03.011
	GUAN Wenling, ZHANG Mengjun, DONG Chengjie, et al. Study on multi-objective programming model for locating fire stations in chemical industry park[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(3):62-67. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.03.011
[16]	建标152—2017, 城市消防站建设标准[S].

序号	经纬度				X坐标		Y坐标		k值
1	东经112.045°		北纬31.787°		17		1		1
3	东经112.063°		北纬31.787°		18		1		1
4	东经112.081°		北纬31.787°		19		1		1
︙	︙		︙		︙		︙		︙
454	东经112.099°		北纬32.032°		20		17		3
455	东经112.117°		北纬32.032°		21		17		2
456		东经112.135°		北纬32.032°		22		17		2
︙		︙		︙		︙		︙		︙
1183		东经112.135°		北纬32.308°		22		39		2
1184		东经112.153°		北纬32.308°		23		39		1
1185		东经112.171°		北纬32.308°		24		39		1
︙		︙		︙		︙		︙		︙
1267		东经112.009°		北纬32.445°		15		48		1

选址方案	备选站点序列
1	28	120	127	167	172	291	312	359	416	434
476	514	515	548	570	578	639	709	795	851
860	883	987	996	1 048	1 186	1 113	1 167	1 172
2	28	120	156	200	287	294	312	322	416	434
467	513	550	556	578	684	717	811	860	870
983	1 003	1 064	1 142	1 152	1 208	1 220
3	20	120	156	200	245	294	312	323	341	467
471	473	485	550	557	578	590	684	717	811
820	870	983	1 003	1 064	1 142	1 152	1 208	1 220
4	8	59	96	148	244	262	313	433	436	441
466	511	527	570	695	745	755	809	909	941
964	1 045	1 099	1 106	1 124	1 181	1 260
5	20	84	95	148	206	261	421	433	466	473
482	527	550	570	631	663	675	695	885	899
912	959	1 022	1 044	1 101	1 124	1 140	1 246
6	8	59	126	148	206	236	292	351	433	441
466	473	510	527	570	695	745	755	805	909
930	941	1 083	1 099	1 124	1 143	1 232
7	13	59	126	148	206	236	350	402	433	441
466	512	527	570	591	695	723	745	755	886
909	941	973	1 104	1 040	1 124	1 150	1 261
8	20	83	96	148	200	246	302	310	412	426
433	438	550	657	669	678	743	771	845	897
908	956	1 044	1 090	1 172	1 246
9	28	96	134	141	215	262	310	365	393	413
478	538	626	676	686	696	864	928	937	1 028
1 081	1 129	1 154	1 172	1 255	—	—	—	—	—	—

选址方案	覆盖需求点数	总体覆盖率	各级单一覆盖数量			单一覆盖率
选址方案	覆盖需求点数	总体覆盖率	k=1	k=2	k=3	k=1	k=2	k=3
1	1089	0.859 5	988	80	21	0.8488	0.975 7	1
2	1 062	0.838 2	963	78	21	0.827 3	0.951 2	1
3	1 091	0.861 1	980	79	21	0.842 0	0.963 4	1
4	1 053	0.831 1	962	70	21	0.826 5	0.853 7	1
5	1 074	0.847 7	978	75	21	0.840 2	0.914 6	1
6	1 047	0.826 4	955	71	21	0.820 5	0.865 9	1
7	1 049	0.827 9	952	76	21	0.817 9	0.926 8	1
8	1 087	0.857 9	992	74	21	0.852 2	0.902 4	1
9	1 100	0.868 2	1 007	74	19	0.865 1	0.902 4	0.904 7
现役	250	0.197 3	175	54	21	0.150 3	0.658 5	1

选址方案	多级覆盖数量		多级覆盖率		所需备选点数量	备选站点总量
选址方案	k=2	k=3	k=2	k=3	所需备选点数量	备选站点总量
1	40	21	0.487 8	1	4	29
2	51	21	0.622 0	1	6	27
3	47	21	0.573 2	1	6	29
4	46	21	0.561 0	1	3	27
5	39	21	0.475 6	1	4	28
6	34	21	0.414 6	1	3	27
7	47	21	0.573 2	1	4	28
8	29	21	0.353 7	1	2	26
9	0	0	0	0	0	25
现役	52	21	0.634 5	1	14	17