China Safety Science Journal ›› 2023, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 103-110.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.0795
• Safety engineering technology • Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHOU Shijie(), LIU Donghai**(), JIN Rui
Received:
2022-10-25
Revised:
2023-01-11
Online:
2023-03-28
Published:
2023-11-28
ZHOU Shijie, LIU Donghai, JIN Rui. Multi-evidence fusion comprehensive evaluation of importance of safety accident causation in hydropower project construction[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(3): 103-110.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.cssjj.com.cn/EN/10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.0795
Tab.2
Judgment matrix M of criterion layer
专家 | A | B1 | B2 | B3 | B4 | α, β | Mij(k) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | B1 | [1,1] | [3,4] | [3,5] | [3,4] | α=0.914 β=1.041 | [0.282 8, 0.336 9] |
B2 | [1/4,1/3] | [1,1] | [1,3] | [4,5] | [0.253 5, 0.297 2] | ||
B3 | [1/5,1/3] | [1/3,1] | [1,1] | [4,5] | [0.250 2, 0.278 6] | ||
B4 | [1/4,1/3] | [1/5,1/4] | [1/5,1/4] | [1,1] | [0.127 1, 0.128 7] | ||
2 | B1 | [1,1] | [3,5] | [3,5] | [4,6] | α=0.912 β=1.045 | [0.302 3, 0.366 7] |
B2 | [1/5,1/3] | [1,1] | [3,4] | [3,5] | [0.259 6, 0.305 8] | ||
B3 | [1/5,1/3] | [1/4,1/3] | [1,1] | [3,4] | [0.221 6, 0.244 6] | ||
B4 | [1/6,1/4] | [1/5,1/3] | [1/4,1/3] | [1,1] | [0.127 8, 0.128 1] | ||
3 | B1 | [1,1] | [2,3] | [5,6] | [7,8] | α=0.949 β=1.035 | [0.333 3, 0.362 1] |
B2 | [1/3,1/2] | [1,1] | [4,5] | [6,7] | [0.301 8, 0.329 3] | ||
B3 | [1/6,1/5] | [1/5,1/4] | [1,1] | [3,4] | [0.199 2, 0.227 4] | ||
B4 | [1/8,1/7] | [1/7,1/6] | [1/4,1/3] | [1,1] | [0.114 5, 0.116 0] | ||
4 | B1 | [1,1] | [1,2] | [5,6] | [7,8] | α=0.922 β=1.069 | [0.332 2, 0.380 7] |
B2 | [1/2,1] | [1,1] | [3,4] | [5,6] | [0.274 2, 0.322 4] | ||
B3 | [1/6,1/5] | [1/4,1/3] | [1,1] | [3,4] | [0.200 5, 0.242 0] | ||
B4 | [1/8,1/7] | [1/6,1/5] | [1/4,1/3] | [1,1] | [0.115 4, 0.123 7] | ||
5 | B1 | [1,1] | [5,7] | [4,5] | [4,6] | α=0.932 β=1.019 | [0.341 0, 0.356 5] |
B2 | [1/7,1/5] | [1,1] | [1/7,1/5] | [1,3] | [0.147 7, 0.195 7] | ||
B3 | [1/5,1/4] | [5,7] | [1,1] | [4,6] | [0.314 7, 0.334 5] | ||
B4 | [1/6,1/4] | [1/3,1] | [1/6,1/4] | [1,1] | [0.128 4, 0.132 6] |
Tab.3
Distance of evaluation interval weight vector
A | d12 | d13 | d14 | d15 | d23 | d24 | d25 | d34 | d35 | d45 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B1 | 0.049 0 | 0.037 8 | 0.046 6 | 0.038 9 | 0.011 1 | 0.002 4 | 0.014 2 | 0.009 8 | 0.006 7 | 0.016 5 |
B2 | 0.049 2 | 0.040 2 | 0.023 0 | 0.103 6 | 0.009 0 | 0.026 3 | 0.152 8 | 0.017 3 | 0.143 9 | 0.126 6 |
B3 | 0.093 2 | 0.051 1 | 0.043 1 | 0.060 2 | 0.042 1 | 0.050 1 | 0.153 4 | 0.008 0 | 0.111 3 | 0.103 3 |
B4 | 0.015 0 | 0.012 7 | 0.008 4 | 0.002 6 | 0.027 7 | 0.023 4 | 0.012 4 | 0.004 3 | 0.015 3 | 0.011 0 |
Tab.4
Similarity Sij(k) and weight ρij(k) of evaluation index
A | Si(1) | Si(2) | Si(3) | Si(4) | Si(5) | ρi(1) | ρi(2) | ρi(3) | ρi(4) | ρi(5) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B1 | 0.958 7 | 0.981 2 | 0.983 9 | 0.981 5 | 0.981 3 | 0.196 2 | 0.200 8 | 0.201 3 | 0.200 9 | 0.200 8 |
B2 | 0.948 8 | 0.944 0 | 0.950 0 | 0.954 0 | 0.883 6 | 0.202 7 | 0.201 7 | 0.203 0 | 0.203 8 | 0.188 8 |
B3 | 0.941 7 | 0.921 9 | 0.949 5 | 0.951 3 | 0.903 3 | 0.201 7 | 0.197 5 | 0.203 4 | 0.203 8 | 0.193 5 |
B4 | 0.990 4 | 0.980 8 | 0.985 2 | 0.988 4 | 0.989 8 | 0.200 7 | 0.198 8 | 0.199 7 | 0.200 3 | 0.200 6 |
Tab.5
Evaluation set of safety experts
评价 指标 | 评价等级/不确定度 | 评价 指标 | 评价等级/不确定度 | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
专家1 | 专家2 | 专家3 | 专家4 | 专家5 | 专家1 | 专家2 | 专家3 | 专家4 | 专家5 | ||||||||||||
C11 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.15 | VL | 0.2 | M | 0.1 | C31 | M | 0.15 | M | 0.1 | L | 0.2 | VL | 0.2 | H | 0.1 |
C12 | VH | 0.05 | VH | 0.05 | H | 0.05 | H | 0.05 | H | 0.15 | C32 | VH | 0.1 | M | 0.1 | H | 0.1 | VH | 0.05 | H | 0.1 |
C13 | VH | 0.15 | M | 0.2 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.1 | VH | 0.1 | C33 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.1 | H | 0.1 | VH | 0.05 | H | 0.2 |
C14 | M | 0.15 | H | 0.15 | H | 0.05 | M | 0.1 | M | 0.1 | C34 | M | 0.2 | H | 0.2 | M | 0.2 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.2 |
C15 | VH | 0.05 | H | 0.15 | H | 0.05 | M | 0.1 | VH | 0.1 | C35 | H | 0.15 | H | 0.2 | L | 0.2 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.1 |
C16 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.05 | H | 0.05 | M | 0.15 | C41 | M | 0.2 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.15 | VL | 0.2 | M | 0.15 |
C21 | VH | 0.1 | M | 0.15 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.05 | H | 0.1 | C42 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.2 | M | 0.15 | H | 0.15 | M | 0.2 |
C22 | H | 0.15 | H | 0.1 | VH | 0.05 | L | 0.2 | H | 0.1 | C43 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.15 | M | 0.1 | H | 0.05 | M | 0.1 |
C23 | VH | 0.15 | VH | 0.15 | VH | 0.05 | VH | 0.05 | H | 0.15 | C44 | M | 0.15 | M | 0.15 | L | 0.1 | L | 0.1 | M | 0.15 |
C24 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.15 | M | 0.1 | VH | 0.15 | M | 0.2 | C45 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.15 | VL | 0.05 | M | 0.2 |
C25 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.2 | H | 0.1 | H | 0.15 | M | 0.1 | C46 | M | 0.15 | H | 0.1 | M | 0.2 | M | 0.05 | H | 0.1 |
C26 | H | 0.2 | H | 0.15 | H | 0.2 | M | 0.2 | M | 0.1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Tab.6
Weights of safety accident cause factor index
准则层 | 区间权重 | 指标层 | 相对重要度W | 区间权重 | 平均权重 | 排序 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B1 | [0.335 3, 0.372 0] | 生理机能不良C11 | 0.138 1 | [0.046 3, 0.051 4] | 0.048 8 | 10 |
违章作业C12 | 0.193 7 | [0.064 9, 0.072 1] | 0.068 5 | 1 | ||
冒险心理C13 | 0.176 6 | [0.059 2, 0.065 7] | 0.062 4 | 3 | ||
违章指挥C14 | 0.144 7 | [0.048 5, 0.053 8] | 0.051 2 | 7 | ||
处于不安全位置C15 | 0.180 9 | [0.060 6, 0.067 3] | 0.064 0 | 2 | ||
使用不安全措施C16 | 0.166 0 | [0.055 7, 0.061 8] | 0.058 7 | 5 | ||
B2 | [0.267 8, 0.310 4] | 防护不当C21 | 0.172 4 | [0.046 2, 0.053 5] | 0.049 8 | 9 |
设计不当C22 | 0.165 0 | [0.044 2,0.051 2] | 0.047 7 | 11 | ||
无防护措施C23 | 0.206 4 | [0.055 3, 0.064 1] | 0.059 7 | 4 | ||
设施失修C24 | 0.151 8 | [0.040 7, 0.047 1] | 0.043 9 | 13 | ||
强度不够C25 | 0.153 4 | [0.041 1, 0.047 6] | 0.044 3 | 12 | ||
设备失效C26 | 0.150 9 | [0.040 4,0.046 9] | 0.043 6 | 14 | ||
B3 | [0.206 0, 0.241 1] | 劳动组织不合理C31 | 0.150 6 | [0.031 0, 0.036 3] | 0.033 7 | 17 |
安全教育不到位C32 | 0.239 9 | [0.049 4, 0.057 8] | 0.053 6 | 6 | ||
安全检查不仔细C33 | 0.228 2 | [0.047 0, 0.055 0] | 0.051 0 | 8 | ||
操作规程不健全C34 | 0.190 5 | [0.039 2, 0.045 9] | 0.042 6 | 16 | ||
技术交底不全面C35 | 0.190 8 | [0.039 3, 0.046 0] | 0.042 7 | 15 | ||
B4 | [0.121 5, 0.130 4] | 连续降水C41 | 0.173 5 | [0.021 1, 0.022 6] | 0.029 0 | 21 |
光线不足C42 | 0.243 4 | [0.029 6, 0.031 7] | 0.030 7 | 18 | ||
作业面条件差C43 | 0.221 8 | [0.027 0, 0.028 9] | 0.027 9 | 20 | ||
通风不畅C44 | 0.181 8 | [0.022 1, 0.023 7] | 0.022 9 | 22 | ||
大风天气C45 | 0.227 3 | [0.027 6, 0.029 6] | 0.028 6 | 19 | ||
现场混乱C46 | 0.208 6 | [0.025 3, 0.027 2] | 0.026 3 | 23 |
[1] |
陈述, 申浩播, 郑霞忠, 等. 大坝浇筑立体交叉作业空间竞争程度研究[J]. 水力发电学报, 2018, 37(7): 106-112.
|
|
|
[2] |
朱庆, 王所智, 丁雨淋, 等. 铁路隧道钻爆法施工智能管理的安全质量进度知识图谱构建方法[J]. 武汉大学学报:信息科学版, 2022, 47(8): 1155-1164.
|
|
|
[3] |
王晶, 樊运晓, 高远. 基于HFACS模型的化工事故致因分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(9): 81-86.
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.09.014 |
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.09.014 |
|
[4] |
周毅, 赵晓刚. 基于区间层次分析法的石油库防火防爆安全评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2011, 21(12): 58-63.
|
|
|
[5] |
刘芮葭. 煤矿瓦斯爆炸危险性的灰类-IAHP评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2016, 26(5): 99-104.
|
|
|
[6] |
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000605 |
[7] |
仝瑞刚, 曹庆贵, 宋洁, 等. 基于组合赋权-集对分析的煤矿煤尘爆炸危险性评价研究[J]. 中国矿业, 2020, 29(5):97-102.
|
|
|
[8] |
肖遥, 张东胜, 董博恺. 基于IAHP和模糊综合评判的企业安全风险预警系统研究[J]. 北京化工大学学报:自然科学版, 2020, 47(5): 109-117.
|
|
|
[9] |
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001860 |
[10] |
孙志禹, 周剑岚, 宋四新. 基于贝叶斯理论的工程施工事故发生的人为因素分析[J]. 水力发电学报, 2014, 33(1): 241-245.
|
|
|
[11] |
张清华, 王进, 王国胤. 粗糙模糊集的近似表示[J]. 计算机学报, 2015, 38(7): 1484-1496.
|
|
|
[12] |
曲珩斌. 基于IAHP和专家群决策的桥式起重机安全评价[J]. 重庆理工大学学报:自然科学, 2019, 33(5): 78-83.
|
|
|
[13] |
贾进章, 陈怡诺, 柯丁琳. 基于模糊集和改进D-S证据理论的危化品道路运输体系贝叶斯网络风险分析[J]. 北京化工大学学报:自然科学版, 2020, 47(1): 38-45.
|
|
|
[14] |
夏柠萍, 杨高升. 建筑施工特种作业安全影响因素辨识[J]. 土木工程与管理学报, 2016, 33(6): 125-129.
|
|
|
[15] |
晋良海, 张荣坤, 郑霞忠, 等. 隧洞钻孔作业工效及低位作业姿势研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2016, 26(4): 66-71.
|
|
|
[16] |
陶秋香, 涂继亮, 陶永辉. 基于PFMEA技术及专家群决策的工艺失效风险评估[J]. 计算机应用与软件, 2018, 35(2): 60-64,140.
|
|
[1] | YUE Wenjing, DU Lijing, CHEN Xianfeng, YUAN Bihe, YANG Jiaqi, WANG Pengcheng. Scenario deduction and node analysis of gas leakage accidents based on DBN [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(S1): 165-170. |
[2] | WU Aizhi. Large-space virtual reality-based emergency drill training system for road transportation accidents of hazardous chemicals [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(S1): 189-196. |
[3] | YANG Jingfeng, ZHU Dapeng, ZHAO Ruilin. Evaluation of station importance and cascading failure resistance analysis of urban rail transit network [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(8): 161-167. |
[4] | AN Yonglin, LI Jiahao, LIU Wenjuan, ZHOU Jin, TAN Geyu. Unified boundary determination method of pressure arch in tunnels and its spatial evolution characteristics [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(8): 84-90. |
[5] | LIU Jiahua. Development and practice of training pattern for construction safety professionals [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(7): 14-19. |
[6] | XIE Quanmin, MA Wei, YANG Wendong. Design and implementation of SHM system for highway tunnels [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(7): 56-62. |
[7] | LI Jingqiang, FAN Tianchen. Safety inspection ability model of statutory self-inspection personnel in civil aviation [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(7): 7-13. |
[8] | FANG Jun, GUO Peiwen, ZHU Ke, CHEN Zhengfu. Coupling evolution analysis of subway tunnel construction safety risk based on N-K model [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(6): 1-9. |
[9] | CAO Yuan, YU Xiao, SUN Yongkui. Research on safety headway control of GTS based on intersection condition evaluation [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(6): 144-150. |
[10] | HUANG Yajiang, LI Shuquan, LI Yixin, ZHENG Han. Comprehensive evaluation on subway operation safety resilience based on DEMATEL-ISM-ANP [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(6): 171-177. |
[11] | XIONG Yu, KONG Dezhong, YANG Shengli, WU Guiyi, ZUO Yujun, CHENG Zhanbo. Cloud model identification of coal face stability in steeply inclined working faces [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(3): 144-151. |
[12] | GUO Jinping, ZHOU Guoyue, NIE Xingxin, YAN Chengyuan. Importance evaluation of organizational safety behavior in high-risk enterprises [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(11): 23-30. |
[13] | WANG Junsong, DUAN Bin, WU Wanbo, CHEN Linfeng, HE Ruoyang, DAI Ziyong. Study on construction scheme of intelligent safety management and control system for hydropower projects [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(S1): 96-102. |
[14] | HU Yunpin, LI Chao, LI Zongliang, YANG Daohe. IHFACS-BN safety assessment model for large-span steel structure construction and its application [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(8): 147-154. |
[15] | YU Guangyu, LI Huimin. Research on safety impact mechanism of reconstruction of old industrial building [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(7): 120-129. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||