Research on safety risk transmission paths of hydropower engineering construction in high-altitude area based on SFEP-SD

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2026.05.1176

Abstract

Abstract:

To manage risk transmission and reduce the probability of construction safety accidents, the evolution process and characteristics of construction safety risk transmission in high-altitude areas were explored. Firstly, based on construction accident reports of hydropower projects in high-altitude areas and the 4M1E theory, a construction safety risk factor system was constructed from five aspects: personnel, machinery and equipment, materials, management, technology, and environment. The Decision-Making Experiment and Assessment Technique (DEMATEL) was used to analyze risk events triggered by risk factors. Then, based on the SFEP theory, a construction safety risk transmission network was established, and the risk transmission probability of each path was calculated through association rules. The SD method was utilized to construct an SD model of the construction safety risk transmission network. Finally, a large hydropower project in Xizang was taken as an example for simulation verification. The results show that the SD model of the construction safety risk transmission network reveals 29 risk transmission paths from 17 edge events, 15 process events, to 5 final events, as well as their evolution trends and sensitivities. Environmental and management risk events are identified as key nodes, and three key transmission paths are identified. Based on this, targeted risk transmission prevention and control measures are proposed, providing a theoretical basis for the management of construction safety risks in hydropower projects in high-altitude areas.

Key words: hydropower projects in high-altitude areas, construction safety risk, risk transmission paths, system fault evolution process (SFEP), system dynamics (SD)

CLC Number:

X948

Jiang Xin, Cao Lu, Yang Jing, Li Bingzi, Jin Lianghai. Research on safety risk transmission paths of hydropower engineering construction in high-altitude area based on SFEP-SD[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(5): 27-37.

Figures/Tables 13

Fig.1

Table 1

Impact relation of risk events

风险因素	风险事件	影响度	被影响度	中心度	原因度
A₁	高海拔地区施工经验不足	0.677	0.208	0.885	0.469
A₂	与当地政府、居民对环境气候经验交流不足	0.460	0.000	0.460	0.460
A₃	人员基础身体素质较差	1.230	0.440	1.670	0.789
A₄	人员安全态度不端	0.826	0.314	1.140	0.512
A₅	人员对施工安全风险误判与处置不当	0.241	0.374	0.615	-0.133
A₆	高原反应引发高原病	0.895	0.695	1.590	0.201
A₇	劳动防护用品使用不规范	0.593	0.331	0.925	0.262
A₈	心理状态不佳	1.021	0.780	1.801	0.241
B₁	施工设备未定期检查维修	0.697	0.222	0.919	0.475
B₂	机械设备选型、采购与使用不当	0.705	0.231	0.926	0.486
B₃	施工材料选型、采购与使用不当	0.585	0.182	0.767	0.403
B₄	高海拔条件下安全物资性能不达标	0.699	0.295	0.994	0.404
B₅	高海拔条件下设备性能不佳	0.788	0.776	1.563	0.012
B₆	高海拔条件下材料性能不达标	0.359	0.321	0.680	0.038
C₁	高寒气候	1.404	0.699	2.102	0.705
C₂	低氧	0.688	0.192	0.880	0.496
C₃	强紫外线辐射	0.769	0.000	0.769	0.769
C₄	复杂地形、地质条件	1.201	0.534	1.734	0.667
C₅	冻土与冻融循环	0.769	0.863	1.632	-0.094
C₆	暴风雪、冰雹等自然灾害发生	0.746	0.974	1.720	-0.228
D1	安全管理制度不健全与落实不到位	1.560	0.493	2.053	1.067
D₂	安全隐患排查不彻底和整改不及时	0.613	0.161	0.774	0.452
D₃	现场管理不规范	0.570	0.373	0.943	0.197
D₄	安全教育培训不到位	0.860	0.595	1.455	0.266
D₅	应急救援准备不充分	0.452	0.290	0.742	0.161
D₆	安全责任未落实	0.802	0.772	1.574	0.030
E₁	未按规定进行超前地质预报	1.283	0.521	1.804	0.763
E₂	施工方案考虑现场实际不足	0.613	0.161	0.774	0.452
E₃	高海拔设计技术标准实施存在偏差	1.285	0.277	1.562	1.008
E₄	安全技术交底不充分	0.452	0.290	0.742	0.161
E₅	混凝土施工配合比等不能满足设计要求	1.055	0.973	2.027	0.082
E₆	安全技术措施落实不到位	1.078	1.192	2.269	-0.114

Table 1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Table 2

Table 3

Fig.5

Fig.6

Table 4

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

References 24

[1]	中共中央关于制定国民经济和社会发展第十四个五年规划和二〇三五年远景目标的建议[C]. 中国企业改革发展2020蓝皮书. 新华社,2020:371-386.
[2]	樊启祥, 林鹏, 魏鹏程, 等. 高海拔地区水电工程智能建造挑战与对策[J]. 水利学报, 2021, 52(12):1404-1417.
	Fan Qixiang, Lin Peng, Wei Pengcheng, et al. Intelligent construction of hydraulic engineering in high altitude areas: challenges and strategies[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2021, 52(12):1404-1417.
[3]	莫俊文, 王锐锐, 滕仓国. 高海拔铁路工程施工人员不安全行为评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8):30-38. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.08.1447
	Mo Junwen, Wang Ruirui, Teng Cangguo. Assessment of unsafe behavior of construction personnel in high-altitude railway projects[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(8):30-38. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.08.1447
[4]	成连华, 李梓凡, 郭慧敏, 等. 基于区间二元语义信息的高海拔地区建筑施工项目应急能力评价[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2024, 24(21):9252-9259.
	Cheng Lianhua, Li Zifan, Guo Huimin, et al. Construction projects in high altitude areas based on interval binary semantic information emergency response capacity evaluation[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2024, 24(21):9252-9259.
[5]	Zhao Jing, Wang Yuanming, Li Huimin, et al. Analysis of construction safety risk management for cold region concrete gravity dams based on fuzzy VIKOR-LEC[J]. Buildings, 2025, 15(12):DOI:10.3390/buildings15121981.
[6]	牛衍亮, 苏丽娟, 纪文雅, 等. 高海拔铁路隧道施工安全风险管理策略研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2024, 20(6):168-175.
	Niu Yanliang, Su Lijuan, Ji Wenya, et al. Study on safety risk management strategy of railway tunnel construction in high-altitude area[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2024, 20(6):168-175.
[7]	谢雪凌. 高海拔地区作业人员职业健康防护行为意识研究[D]. 宜昌: 三峡大学, 2019.
	Xie Xueling. Study on occupational health protection behavior awareness of workers in high altitude area[D]. Yichang: China Three Gorges University, 2019.
[8]	Wu Peng, Yang Feng, Zheng Jinlong, et al. Evaluating the highway tunnel construction in western Sichuan plateau considering vocational health and environment[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16(23):DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16234671.
[9]	Zhang Yuxiang, Pan Jianwen, Sun Xinjian, et al. Simulation of thermal stress and control measures for rock-filled concrete dam in high-altitude and cold regions[J]. Engineering Structures, 2021, 230:DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111721.
[10]	姚可夫, 田始光, 漆一宁, 等. 高海拔区特征环境驱动下混凝土坝服役性能研究进展[J]. 水利学报, 2023, 54(6):717-728.
	Yao Kefu, Tian Shiguang, Qi Yining, et al. Performance of concrete dams impacted by characteristic climate in high-altitude area: a review[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2023, 54(6):717-728.
[11]	赵树磊, 孙兵, 陈稳干, 等. 超高海拔隧道施工人员生理指标变化及劳动强度研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(4):239-246. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.04.1748
	Zhao Shulei, Sun Bing, Chen Wen'gan, et al. Physiological indicators and labor intensity of tunnel construction workers at ultra-high altitude[J]. China Safety Sciences Journal, 2024, 34(4):239-246.
[12]	刘毅, 杜雷功, 钱文勋, 等. 高寒区高混凝土坝关键技术难题与解决途径[J]. 水利水电技术, 2020, 51(3):45-52.
	Liu Yi, Du Leigong, Qian Wenxun, et al. Study on key technical problems of high concrete dam construction in alpine region[J]. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, 2020, 51(3):45-52.
[13]	潘丹, 罗帆. 基于结构方程模型的建筑施工项目安全绩效评价[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2018, 18(2):602-609.
	Pan Dan, Luo Fan. Safety performance evaluation of the construction projects based on the structural equation model[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2018, 18(2):602-609.
[14]	李藐, 陈建国, 陈涛, 等. 突发事件的事件链概率模型[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2010, 50(8):1173-1177.
	Li Miao, Chen Jianguo, Chen Tao, et al. Probability for disaster chains in emergencies[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University(Science and Technology), 2010, 50(8):1173-1177.
[15]	吴翊鸣, 申霞. 数智赋能应急管理体系和能力现代化建设影响因素分析:基于DEMATEL-ISM方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(11):236-244. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.11.0259
	Wu Yiming, Shen Xia. Analysis of influencing factors on digital intelligence empowering emergency management system and capacity modernization: based on DEMATEL-ISM method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(11):236-244. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.11.0259
[16]	Fang Chao, Marle F, Zio E, et al. Network theory-based analysis of risk interactions in large engineering projects[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2012, 106: 1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2012.04.005
[17]	崔铁军, 李莎莎. 系统故障演化过程最终事件状态及发生概率研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(8):1-7. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2021.08.001
	Cui Tiejun, Li Shasha. Study on target event state and occurrence probability of system fault evolution process[J]. China Safety Sciences Journal, 2021, 31(8):1-7.
[18]	李莎莎, 崔铁军. 基于过滤性传递概率的SFN最终事件发生概率计算方法研究[J]. 模糊系统与数学, 2024, 38(1):88-97.
	Li Shasha, Cui Tiejun. Research on calculating method of target event occurrence probability of SFN based on filterability transfer probability[J]. Fuzzy Systems and Mathematics, 2024, 38(1):88-97.
[19]	Xiang Pengcheng, Yang Yingliu, Yan Kesheng, et al. Identification of key safety risk factors and coupling paths in mega construction projects[J]. Journal of Management in Engineering, 2024, 40(4):DOI:10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-5926.
[20]	Cui Tiejun, Li Shasha. Research on basic theory of space fault network and system fault evolution process[J]. Neural Computing and Applications, 2020, 32(6): 1725-1744. doi: 10.1007/s00521-019-04247-0
[21]	郭明阳, 陈淼, 吕佳, 等. 基于关联规则算法-解释结构模型-贝叶斯网络的船舶碰撞破损进水风险及致因分析[J]. 哈尔滨工程大学学报, 2025, 46(9):1693-1700.
	Guo Mingyang, Chen Miao, Lyu Jia, et al. Risk and causation analysis of ship collision breakage into water based on Apriori-ISM-BN[J]. Journal of Harbin Engineering University, 2025, 46(9):1693-1700.
[22]	江新, 李雪莲, 吴静涵, 等. 敏感性水利工程社会稳定风险演化SD模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(4):18-26. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2021.04.003
	Jiang Xin, Li Xuelian, Wu Jinghan, et al. SD model of social stability risk evolution for sensitive water conservancy projects[J]. China Safety Sciences Journal, 2021, 31(4):18-26.
[23]	Ma Hui, Wu Zhiguo, Chang Peng. Social impacts on hazard perception of construction workers: a system dynamics model analysis[J]. Safety Science, 2021, 138:DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105240.
[24]	江新, 张腾飞, 陈婧, 等. 复杂系统视角下洞室施工人员安全认知仿真研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2):22-30. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.02.0995
	Jiang Xin, Zhang Tengfei, Chen Jing, et al. Numerical study on safety cognition of cavern constructors from perspective of complex system[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(2):22-30. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.02.0995

编号	概率值	编号	概率值	编号	概率值	编号	概率值	编号	概率值	编号	概率值
q₁	0.41	q₉	0.43	q₁₇	0.66	q₂₅	0.82	q₃₃	0.59	q₄₁	0.60
q₂	0.52	q₁₀	0.47	q₁₈	0.75	q₂₆	0.78	q₃₄	0.63	q₄₂	0.22
q₃	0.30	q₁₁	0.71	q₁₉	0.81	q₂₇	0.72	q₃₅	0.62	q₄₃	0.77
q₄	0.43	q₁₂	0.80	q₂₀	0.76	q₂₈	0.58	q₃₆	0.68	q₄₄	0.68
q₅	0.47	q₁₃	0.39	q₂₁	0.65	q₂₉	0.79	q₃₇	0.75	—	—
q₆	0.28	q₁₄	0.15	q₂₂	0.73	q₃₀	0.71	q₃₈	0.66	—	—
q₇	0.72	q₁₅	0.28	q₂₃	0.63	q₃₁	0.64	q₃₉	0.74	—	—
q₈	0.67	q₁₆	0.25	q₂₄	0.57	q₃₂	0.69	q₄₀	0.57	—	—

编号	路径	计算式	编号	路径	计算式	编号	路径	计算式
R₁	A₁→A	P_A₁q₁	R₁₁	B₃→B₆→B	P_B₃q₁₀q₃₃	R₂₁	D₁→D	P_D₁q₂₀
R₂	A₁→A₅→A	P_A₁q₂q₂₈	R₁₂	B₄→B	P_B₄q₁₁	R₂₂	D₂→D₅→D	P_D₂q₂₁q₃₈
R₃	A₂→A	P_A₂q₃	R₁₃	C₁→C₅→C	P_C₁q₁₂q₃₄	R₂₃	D₂→D	P_D₂q₂₂
R₄	A₃→A₆→A	P_A₃q₄q₂₉	R₁₄	C₁→C	P_C₁q₁₃	R₂₄	E₁→E₆→E	P_E₁q₂₃q₄₄
R₅	A₃→A₆→A₈→A	P_A₃q₄q₃₀q₄₂	R₁₅	C₁→C₆→C	P_C₁q₁₄q₃₅	R₂₅	E₂→E₆→E	P_E₂q₂₄q₄₄
R₆	A₄→A₇→A	P_A₄q₅q₃₁	R₁₆	C₂→C	P_C₂q₁₅	R₂₆	E₂→E₄→E₆→E	P_E₂q₂₅q₃₉q₄₄
R₇	A₄→A	P_A₄q₆	R₁₇	C₃→C	P_C₃q₁₆	R₂₇	E₂→E₄→E	P_E₂q₂₅q₄₀
R₈	B₁→B₅→B	P_B₁q₇q₃₂	R₁₈	C₄→C	P_C₄q₁₇	R₂₈	E₂→E₅→E	P_E₂q₂₆q₄₁
R₉	B₂→B₅→B	P_B₂q₈q₃₂	R₁₉	D₁→D₃→D	P_D₁q₁₈q₃₆	R₂₉	E₃→E₅→E	P_E₃q₂₇q₄₁
R₁₀	B₂→B	P_B₂q₉	R₂₀	D₁→D₄→D₆→D	P_D₁q₁₉q₃₇q₄₃	—	—	—

边缘事件	发生概率/%	边缘事件	发生概率/%	边缘事件	发生概率/%
A₁	5.3	B₃	4.5	D₁	8.0
A₂	3.5	B₄	3.6	D₂	6.0
A₃	4.7	C₁	8.8	E₁	6.5
A₄	4.8	C₂	9.0	E₂	5.5
B₁	4.5	C₃	5.4	E₃	6.3
B₂	3.5	C₄	10.1	—	—