China Safety Science Journal ›› 2026, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (6): 213-221.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2026.06.1282
• Public Safety and Emergency Management • Previous Articles Next Articles
Sun Fenglin1(
), Wang Wenyu2, Li Peng3, Liu Chang3,**(
)
Received:2026-01-28
Revised:2026-03-20
Online:2026-06-28
Published:2026-12-28
Contact:
Liu Chang
CLC Number:
Sun Fenglin, Wang Wenyu, Li Peng, Liu Chang. Electrical fire model for four-network integrated stations integrated with FTA-BN[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(6): 213-221.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.cssjj.com.cn/EN/10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2026.06.1282
Table 1
Comparison between four-network converged stations and ordinary stations
| 风险维度 | 普通地铁站 (单一枢纽) | 四网融合车站 (跨系统枢纽) |
|---|---|---|
| 系统耦合性 与火源特性 | 仅城市轨道交通系统,以低压设备过载、接触不良风险为主 | 干线铁路、地铁等四网交织,高压系统电弧风险高,低压系统交互频繁,短路、接触不良风险高 |
| 可燃物类型 与管控难度 | 以乘客随身行李为主,管控主体单一 | 含施工材料、铁路货运临时物资、跨网乘客行李,来源多样;管控主体涉及铁路、施工单位等,协同难度大 |
| 管理主体 与协作需求 | 管理主体单一,班组协作流程成熟 | 涉及铁路、地铁、消防、施工4类主体,班组配合失误、信息传递不准确风险显著 |
| 消防设施 与维护权责 | 消防设施标准统一,维护权责清晰 | 设施标准不统一,维护权责模糊,设施维护不足风险升高 |
| 保护措施 健全性 | 继电保护配置标准统一,定期检测流程成熟,合规性高 | 多系统保护装置配置标准与校验周期不一,存在保护失灵或协同失效风险 |
Table 2
FTA event symbols and names
| 事件符号 | 事件名称 |
|---|---|
| T | 四网融合车站电气火灾 |
| M1 | 开始燃烧 |
| M2 | 无法扑灭 |
| M3 | 电气火灾火源 |
| M4 | 电气火灾可燃物 |
| M5 | 未发现燃烧 |
| M6 | 灭火措施失效 |
| M7 | 设备不安全状态 |
| M8 | 人员不安全行为 |
| X1 | 电气设施短路 |
| X2 | 电气线路接触不良 |
| X3 | 电气设施超负荷运行 |
| X4 | 电气设备散热不良 |
| X5 | 操作人员无证上岗 |
| X6 | 人员习惯性违反规定误操作 |
| X7 | 人员偶然性违反规定误操作 |
| X8 | 人员技能性误操作 |
| X9 | 人员安全意识不足误操作 |
| X10 | 人员违规指挥 |
| X11 | 施工可燃物 |
| X12 | 乘客携带行李可燃物 |
| X13 | 管理缺陷导致可燃物违规堆放 |
| X14 | 火灾报警装置故障 |
| X15 | 车站内信息传递不准确 |
| X16 | 管理人员技术经验不足 |
| X17 | 工作班组间配合失误 |
| X18 | 监控人员生理状态不良 |
| X19 | 电气消防部门配置缺陷 |
| X20 | 监控人员火情监控失误 |
| X21 | 自动灭火系统联动故障 |
| X22 | 灭火装置选型或设置不当 |
| X23 | 电气消防灭火培训不足 |
| X24 | 车站环境温度、湿度条件复杂 |
| X25 | 车站消防设施维护保养不到位 |
| X26 | 车站消防管理人员组织能力不足 |
| X27 | 车站电气火灾消防应急处置不合理 |
Table 6
Probabilities of each basic event in electrical fire fault tree of four-network converged station
| 基本 事件 | 专家打分等级 | 基本事件 发生概率 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 专家1 | 专家2 | 专家3 | 专家4 | ||
| X1 | L | FL | FH | FH | 0.060 |
| X2 | L | FL | M | FH | 0.031 |
| X3 | M | M | M | M | 0.109 |
| X4 | FL | FH | FL | M | 0.040 |
| X5 | FL | L | M | L | 0.018 |
| X6 | M | FH | M | M | 0.163 |
| X7 | FL | FL | M | FH | 0.032 |
| X8 | M | FH | FL | M | 0.041 |
| X9 | M | FH | FL | FL | 0.059 |
| X10 | L | FL | FL | FL | 0.025 |
| X11 | FL | FL | M | FL | 0.071 |
| X12 | FL | M | FH | FH | 0.171 |
| X13 | L | FL | M | L | 0.159 |
| X14 | L | FL | L | FL | 0.015 |
| X15 | M | FL | M | FH | 0.137 |
| X16 | FL | FL | FL | M | 0.044 |
| X17 | M | M | FL | M | 0.159 |
| X18 | L | FL | FL | FL | 0.023 |
| X19 | L | L | M | M | 0.017 |
| X20 | FL | M | M | M | 0.064 |
| X21 | FL | M | FL | M | 0.110 |
| X22 | L | L | FL | FL | 0.024 |
| X23 | L | M | FH | FL | 0.066 |
| X24 | L | M | FL | L | 0.018 |
| X25 | FL | M | FH | M | 0.113 |
| X26 | FL | FL | M | FH | 0.071 |
| X27 | M | FL | L | L | 0.080 |
Table 8
Differences between posterior probabilities and prior probabilities of each basic event %
| 基本事件 | 先验概率 | 后验概率 | 概率差值 |
|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | 6.02 | 13.21 | 7.19 |
| X2 | 3.12 | 6.85 | 3.73 |
| X3 | 10.92 | 23.96 | 13.04 |
| X4 | 4.03 | 8.84 | 4.81 |
| X5 | 1.83 | 4.02 | 2.19 |
| X6 | 16.32 | 35.81 | 19.49 |
| X7 | 3.22 | 7.07 | 3.85 |
| X8 | 4.12 | 9.04 | 4.92 |
| X9 | 5.93 | 13.01 | 7.08 |
| X10 | 2.48 | 5.44 | 2.96 |
| X11 | 7.13 | 20.21 | 13.08 |
| X12 | 17.11 | 48.50 | 31.39 |
| X13 | 15.92 | 45.13 | 29.21 |
| X14 | 1.49 | 3.87 | 2.38 |
| X15 | 13.71 | 35.59 | 21.88 |
| X16 | 4.38 | 11.37 | 6.99 |
| X17 | 15.92 | 41.33 | 25.41 |
| X18 | 2.26 | 5.87 | 3.61 |
| X19 | 1.68 | 4.36 | 2.68 |
| X20 | 6.39 | 16.59 | 10.20 |
| X21 | 11.03 | 15.19 | 4.16 |
| X22 | 2.42 | 26.17 | 23.75 |
| X23 | 6.64 | 15.74 | 9.10 |
| X24 | 1.84 | 4.37 | 2.53 |
| X25 | 11.32 | 26.83 | 15.51 |
| X26 | 7.12 | 16.88 | 9.76 |
| X27 | 8.03 | 19.03 | 11.00 |
Table 9
Differences between prior and posterior probabilities of basic events
| 排序 序号 | 事件 符号 | 平均节点 敏感度 | 排序 序号 | 事件 符号 | 平均节点 敏感度 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | X13 | 0.058 | 15 | X21 | 0.005 |
| 2 | X12 | 0.058 | 16 | X18 | 0.005 |
| 3 | X11 | 0.052 | 17 | X1 | 0.005 |
| 4 | X17 | 0.040 | 18 | X9 | 0.004 |
| 5 | X15 | 0.038 | 19 | X19 | 0.004 |
| 6 | X22 | 0.032 | 20 | X14 | 0.003 |
| 7 | X25 | 0.031 | 21 | X8 | 0.003 |
| 8 | X20 | 0.021 | 22 | X4 | 0.003 |
| 9 | X27 | 0.019 | 23 | X24 | 0.003 |
| 10 | X26 | 0.019 | 24 | X7 | 0.002 |
| 11 | X6 | 0.017 | 25 | X2 | 0.002 |
| 12 | X3 | 0.016 | 26 | X10 | 0.002 |
| 13 | X23 | 0.016 | 27 | X5 | 0.002 |
| 14 | X16 | 0.016 | — | — | — |
| [1] |
中华人民共和国国家发展和改革委员会. 关于培育发展现代化都市圈的指导意见(发改规划〔2019〕328号)[EB/OL]. (2019-02-19)[2026-01-11]. https://www.ndrc.gov.cn/xxgk/zcfb/tz/201902/t20190221_962397.html.
|
| [2] |
褚鹏宇, 刘澜, 尹俊淞. 基于动态变权模糊Petri网的地铁火灾风险评估[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2016, 16(6): 39-44.
|
|
|
|
| [3] |
吴倩, 谈伟, 盖文妹. 基于动态贝叶斯网络的民航突发事件情景分析研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2016, 12(3):169-174.
|
|
|
|
| [4] |
汤青慧, 刘硕, 刘文杰. 基于改进变权物元可拓模型的地铁车站火灾安全韧性评价[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2024, 24(4): 1346-1355.
|
|
|
|
| [5] |
卢飞, 张健, 赵二丽. 基于模糊贝叶斯和事件树的配对进近碰撞风险研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(12): 64-73.
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.12.0662 |
|
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.12.0662 |
|
| [6] |
秦荣水, 石晨晨, 陈超, 等. 基于模糊贝叶斯网络的城市商业综合体火灾风险分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(12): 176-182.
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.12.0879 |
|
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.12.0879 |
|
| [7] |
姚诗忆, 汪益敏, 仇培云, 等. 基于FTA-BN的综合交通枢纽中地铁车站安全风险评价[J]. 都市快轨交通, 2023, 36(2): 174-182.
|
|
|
|
| [8] |
doi: 10.1007/s44150-024-00117-z |
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2017.09.012 |
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
王睿, 刘启钢, 杨晓, 等. 我国轨道交通四网融合发展战略研究[J]. 中国工程科学, 2025, 27(4): 187-198.
doi: 10.15302/J-SSCAE-2025.06.039 |
|
doi: 10.15302/J-SSCAE-2025.06.039 |
|
| [14] |
doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.019 |
| [15] |
李建华. 浅谈城市轨道交通电气专业消防设计:结合重庆轨道交通特点谈电气消防设计的重难点[J]. 建筑电气, 2016, 35(6): 40-46.
|
|
|
|
| [16] |
doi: 10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X |
| [17] |
张元元, 张春昌, 孙虎, 等. 基于动态贝叶斯网络的甲醇船对船加注风险评估[J]. 上海海事大学学报, 2024, 45(4): 54-61.
|
|
|
|
| [18] |
尹琪. 基于动态贝叶斯网络的地铁盾构施工安全风险评估研究[D]. 青岛: 青岛理工大学, 2023.
|
|
|
|
| [19] |
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 |
|
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.02.1066 |
| [1] | Zhu Wei, Sheng Yanzhen, Song Jiayun, Zhao Yifan. Hidden hazard identification and causation analysis of urban gas accidents based on Bayesian network [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(6): 178-185. |
| [2] | CHEN Dongjian. Road safety risk assessment under synergistic effects of rainfall and traffic [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(6): 203-212. |
| [3] | Li Zeyu, Li Suzhen. Integration of data and knowledge for risk assessment of urban water supply networks [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(6): 222-228. |
| [4] | Liang Wenjuan, Yu Leiyang, Huang Hongming. Low-altitude integrated collision risk assessment and multi-factor simulation analysis based on SORA framework [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(6): 51-61. |
| [5] | Guan Wenling, Wang Yutong, Wang Li, Ren Changxing, Dong Chengjie. Risk assessment for physical hazard-bearing bodies based on consequences of hazardous chemical accidents and vulnerability [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(5): 105-112. |
| [6] | Ren Jie, Qu Shiru, Wang Lili, Han Yuansong, Sun Zhiyuan. Risk assessment model for true north transition in aviation based on STPA-BN [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(5): 165-173. |
| [7] | Tang Huabin, Xu Lei, Chen Siyu, Ma Songhua. Risk assessment for overdue in-service pressure pipelines based on BOA-SAM-FTA [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(4): 57-64. |
| [8] | ZHAO Bo. Risk assessment model for embankment slope failure in mining goafs [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(2): 121-126. |
| [9] | LI Zhijian, SHE Jianjun, LU Cong, GUO Zihao, ZHOU Yilun. Evaluation of emergency management capability for construction safety accidents based on FRAM-BN [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(2): 199-208. |
| [10] | LIU Kunqi, YANG Juan, LI Ziyi, LI Peng, WU Jiansong, LIU Chang. Risk assessment of new urban power systems under extreme weather conditions based on BN-MC [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(1): 157-166. |
| [11] | YANG Dashen, XIA Ji, WEI Rongfang, LIANG Dong, HU Yiming, WANG Renchao. Technical system for geological hazard prevention in mountainous areas pipelines and case studies [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(S2): 14-20. |
| [12] | DU Yan, LYU Mengjia, WANG Qikai, XIE Mowen, JIANG Yujing, LIU Jingnan. Research on risk assessment model of creep landslide instability based on RLE and SF [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(S2): 43-49. |
| [13] | LIAO Guangdong, YU Shilei. Comprehensive prevention and control system for work safety in metallurgical enterprises based on risk quantitative evaluation [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(S1): 21-28. |
| [14] | LI Jiayin, TAN Deqiang, QIAN Yiyi. Operational risks of large manned eVTOL for tourism in mountainous scenic areas [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(S1): 210-216. |
| [15] | WANG Yizhao, BAI Wenfeng, HE Qinglun, WANG Fei, CHEN Long, HE Sen. A methodology for road collapse risk assessment based on data augmentation [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(S1): 234-238. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||