Methodology for explosion-proof resilience assessment of continuous stirred tank reactors driven by process parameters

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2026.09.0029

Abstract

Abstract:

To effectively prevent explosion accidents in continuous reactors due to thermal runaway during operation, this study proposed a reactor explosion accident prevention method that integrates dynamic simulation and resilience assessment. Firstly, based on the operating characteristics of the reactor and the mechanism of thermal runaway, key process parameters such as temperature and pressure were identified, and potential interference events are systematically recognized. Secondly, dynamic simulation was carried out using ASPEN HYSYS to analyze the time-varying characteristics of key process parameters under different interference events. On this basis, considering the multi-dimensional nature and time-varying characteristics of process parameters, a process parameter-driven resilience assessment model for the reactor system was constructed using the optimal-worst algorithm (BWM), and the overall resilience of the reactor system was evaluated. Finally, targeted resilience improvement strategies were proposed based on the assessment results, thereby preventing explosion accidents in continuous reactors. Taking the continuous reactor as an example, typical interference scenarios were simulated and resilience assessment was conducted to verify the accuracy and applicability of the method. The research results show that by coupling dynamic simulation with resilience assessment, the impact mechanism of interference events on the safety status of the reactor can be systematically revealed. By improving the system resilience, the key process parameters of the reactor can be controlled within the safety threshold, providing a theoretical basis and practical path for the transformation from passive response to active prevention in accident prevention.

Key words: process parameter, continuous stirred tank reactors, explosion-proof resilience assessment, dynamic simulation, system performance

CLC Number:

X932爆炸安全与防火、防爆

Sun Hao, Huang Jin, Shi Jihao, Wang Fuyu, Qi Meng. Methodology for explosion-proof resilience assessment of continuous stirred tank reactors driven by process parameters[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(9): 103-110.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Table 2

References 16

[1]	罗梦杰, 赵云鹏, 张梦轩, 等. 大模型时代的石油化工行业高质量数据集:挑战与机遇[J]. 化工学报, 2026, 77(1):435-447,538.
	Luo Mengjie, Zhao Yunpeng, Zhang Mengxuan, et al. High-quality datasets for petrochemical industry in era of large language models: challenges and opportunities[J]. CIESC Journal, 2026, 77(1):435-447,538.
[2]	都亮, 别凯, 赵亚洁, 等. 含平面埋藏缺陷的精制加氢反应器安全评定分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(11):86-91. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.11.014
	Du Liang, Bie Kai, Zhao Yajie, et al. Safety assessment of refined hydrogenation reactor with plane embedded defects[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(11):86-91. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.11.014
[3]	陈文涛, 杨茗铠, 王文和, 等. 基于SDG和CBR的化工过程风险评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(3):77-84. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.03.1368
	Chen Wentao, Yang Mingkai, Wang Wenhe, et al. Chemical process risk assessment utilizing SDG and CBR methodologies[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(3):77-84. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.03.1368
[4]	张术琳, 王澜凝, 鲁义. 基于动态贝叶斯网络的蒽醌法制备双氧水工艺风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2):110-116. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.02.1066
	Zhang Shulin, Wang Lanning, Lu Yi. Risk assessment of hydrogen peroxide production technology by using anthraquinone process based on dynamic Bayesian network[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(2):110-116. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.02.1066
[5]	鲁秋实, 叶光华, 周兴贵. 半间歇釜式反应器安全高效操作的数值优化策略[J]. 化工学报, 2021, 72(2):975-983. doi: 10.11949/0438-1157.20201381
	Lu Qiushi, Ye Guanghua, Zhou Xinggui. Strategy for numerical optimization of safe and efficient operation of semi-batch reactors[J]. CIESC Journal, 2021, 72(2):975-983.
[6]	张春义, 朱戈, 田志勇, 等. 加氢反应器接管法兰密封槽失效原因分析及改进措施[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(12): 100-107. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.12.0102
	Zhang Chunyi, Zhu Ge, Tian Zhiyong, et al. Failure analysis and improvement measures of hydrogenation reactor flange sealing groove[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(12): 100-107. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.12.0102
[7]	Sun Hao, Yang Ming, Zio E, et al. A simulation-based approach for resilience assessment of process system: a case of LNG terminal system[J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2024, 249: DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2024.110207.
[8]	王海顺, 魏利军, 多英全, 等. 化工过程系统韧性研究进展与展望[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2024, 20(6): 40-49.
	Wang Haishun, Wei Lijun, Duo Yingquan, et al. Research progress and prospects on the resilience of chemical process systems[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2024, 20(6): 40-49.
[9]	Pawar B, Huffman M, Khan F, et al. Resilience assessment for fast response process systems[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2022, 163: 82-93. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2022.05.016
[10]	Zhang Yanping, Cai Baoping, Ahmed S, et al. A resilience-driven emergency maintenance operation scheme optimization method based on risk[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2025, 254: DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2024.110630.
[11]	孔祥北, 陈思凝, 苏明清, 等. 化工园区安全组织韧性指标体系构建及评估模型研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2023, 19(增刊2):27-32.
	Kong Xiangbei, Chen Sining, Su Mingqing, et al. Study on index system construction and evaluation model of safety organization resilience in chemical industry parks[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2023, 19(S2):27-32.
[12]	Sun Hao, Yang Ming, Wang Haiqing. An integrated approach to quantitative resilience assessment in process systems[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2024, 243: DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2023.109878.
[13]	Zio E. Prognostics and health management (PHM): where are we and where do we (need to) go in theory and practice[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2022, 218: DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2021.108119.
[14]	Rezaei J. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method[J]. Omega, 2015, 53: 49-57. doi: 10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009
[15]	Wu Qun, Liu Xinwang, Zhou Ligang, et al. An analytical framework for the best-worst method[J]. Omega, 2024, 123: DOI:10.1016/j.omega.2023.102974.
[16]	Al-Malah K. Aspen plus: chemical engineering applications.[M]. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2016:155-196.

参数	设定值	参数	设定值
乙烯流量/(kmol/h)	360	反应器压力/MPa	1.50
苯流量/(kmol/h)	720	反应器液位/m	8.64
乙烯和苯进料温度/℃	21.85	反应器容积/m³	60
乙烯和苯进料压力/MPa	2	热传递选项	Dynamic
反应器温度/℃	21.85	介质温度/℃	24.85

严重程度	韧性范围	严重程度	韧性范围
正常,可接受	[0.9,1]	中风险,需控制	[0.6,0.8)
低风险,需关注	[0.8,0.9)	高风险,立即停止	[0,0.6)