CN116341890A - Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform - Google Patents

Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform Download PDF

Info

Publication number
CN116341890A
CN116341890A CN202111430293.3A CN202111430293A CN116341890A CN 116341890 A CN116341890 A CN 116341890A CN 202111430293 A CN202111430293 A CN 202111430293A CN 116341890 A CN116341890 A CN 116341890A
Authority
CN
China
Prior art keywords
accident
severity
platform
leakage
level
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Pending
Application number
CN202111430293.3A
Other languages
Chinese (zh)
Inventor
杨冬平
齐静静
石双
范路
朱丽国
郭爱洪
王安鹏
彭星来
杜帆
郑义和
王伟斌
闫肃肃
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
China Petroleum and Chemical Corp
Technology Inspection Center of Sinopec Shengli Oilfield Co
Shengli Oilfield Testing and Evaluation Research Co Ltd
Original Assignee
China Petroleum and Chemical Corp
Technology Inspection Center of Sinopec Shengli Oilfield Co
Shengli Oilfield Testing and Evaluation Research Co Ltd
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by China Petroleum and Chemical Corp, Technology Inspection Center of Sinopec Shengli Oilfield Co, Shengli Oilfield Testing and Evaluation Research Co Ltd filed Critical China Petroleum and Chemical Corp
Priority to CN202111430293.3A priority Critical patent/CN116341890A/en
Publication of CN116341890A publication Critical patent/CN116341890A/en
Pending legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0635—Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
    • G06F30/20—Design optimisation, verification or simulation
    • G06F30/28—Design optimisation, verification or simulation using fluid dynamics, e.g. using Navier-Stokes equations or computational fluid dynamics [CFD]
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06T—IMAGE DATA PROCESSING OR GENERATION, IN GENERAL
    • G06T17/00—Three dimensional [3D] modelling, e.g. data description of 3D objects
    • Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
    • Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
    • Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
    • Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
    • Y02P90/30—Computing systems specially adapted for manufacturing

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Development Economics (AREA)
  • Educational Administration (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Geometry (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Operations Research (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
  • Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
  • Algebra (AREA)
  • Software Systems (AREA)
  • Computer Graphics (AREA)
  • Computing Systems (AREA)
  • Fluid Mechanics (AREA)
  • Mathematical Analysis (AREA)
  • Mathematical Optimization (AREA)
  • Mathematical Physics (AREA)
  • Pure & Applied Mathematics (AREA)
  • Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
  • Evolutionary Computation (AREA)
  • General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)

Abstract

The invention provides a technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of an offshore oil and gas platform, and belongs to the technical field of quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of offshore oil and gas platforms. The technical proposal is as follows: a technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of an ocean oil and gas platform comprises the following steps: dividing evaluation units of offshore oil and gas platform groups; analyzing the major safety risk of the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining a potential accident scene; calculating the occurrence frequency of potential accidents according to the leakage frequency and the ignition probability, and determining the occurrence probability of the accidents; establishing a fire explosion numerical model of a potential accident scene, calculating accident results, and determining accident result severity; calculating the risk grade and the risk index value of the offshore oil and gas platform according to the accident occurrence probability and the accident consequence severity; the beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: the problem of lack of offshore oil and gas platform security risk quantization evaluation classification at present is solved, and the method is simple, quick, reliable and effective, and can meet the requirements of offshore oil and gas platform risk classification.

Description

Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of quantitative evaluation and grading of safety risks of offshore oil and gas platforms, in particular to a technical method for quantitative evaluation and grading of safety risks of offshore oil and gas platforms.
Background
In recent years, with further development and exploration of offshore oil and gas resources, it is important to define the fire explosion risk level of an offshore oil and gas platform which is one of important facilities for oil and gas development. The offshore oil and gas platform has concentrated equipment, complex space environment, coexistence of oil and gas in daily production, flammability and explosiveness, and huge potential oil and gas explosion risk accidents. Once a fire explosion happens, the local part of the platform is seriously damaged, even domino effect is generated, and the whole platform is invalid and collapses.
The existing security risk quantitative evaluation grading technology mainly aims at land chemical industry parks, most of the chemical industry parks are in plane layout, the offshore oil and gas platform is of a three-dimensional structure, and the space layout is complex, so that the existing method is not suitable for risk grading of accidents of the offshore oil and gas platform. The invention provides a technical method for quantitatively evaluating and grading the safety risk of an ocean oil and gas platform, which aims to solve the problem that the technology for quantitatively evaluating and grading the safety risk of the ocean oil and gas platform in China lacks technical basis and standard.
Disclosure of Invention
Aiming at the problems in the prior art, the invention aims to provide a technical method for quantitatively evaluating and grading the safety risk of an offshore oil and gas platform, which solves the problem of lack of quantitative evaluation and grading of the safety risk of the offshore oil and gas platform at present, is simple, quick, reliable and effective, and can meet the requirement of grading the safety risk of the offshore oil and gas platform in China.
The invention is realized by the following technical scheme: a technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of an ocean oil and gas platform comprises the following steps:
s1, dividing an offshore oil and gas platform group into a total evaluation unit, a platform evaluation unit, a deck evaluation unit and a device evaluation unit layer by layer according to spatial structure attribution; the method comprises the following steps: regarding the offshore oil and gas platform group which can generate mutual influence as an overall evaluation unit; in the overall evaluation unit, dividing an independent platform into platform evaluation units by considering the position distribution and main functions of the platform group; in the platform evaluation unit, taking the space relation of the platform structure into consideration, dividing each layer of devices in the platform by using a deck as a boundary, and respectively dividing independent decks as a deck evaluation unit; in the deck evaluation unit, taking the space constitution and the device function of the deck into consideration, dividing the same device on the deck into device evaluation units; aiming at the division of the offshore platform evaluation units, the offshore production reality is matched more, and the risk calculation and the evaluation result application are facilitated;
s2, carrying out hazard source identification on all device evaluation units of the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining potential accident scenes, wherein the potential accident scenes comprise leakage scenes, fire scenes and explosion scenes; the method comprises the following steps: identifying dangerous substances possibly existing in the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining dangerous characteristics of the dangerous substances; carrying out dangerous source identification on all device evaluation units of the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining main dangerous sources and distribution conditions of the platform; and determining a potential accident scene according to the dangerous and harmful substance identification condition of the device evaluation unit. The potential accident scene is divided into a leakage scene (hydrogen sulfide leakage), a fire scene and an explosion scene;
s3, calculating the corresponding device leakage frequency P in each potential accident scene leak And device ignition probability P ignition Determining accident occurrence frequency P accident The method comprises the steps of carrying out a first treatment on the surface of the Wherein P is accident ＝P leak ×P ignition ..................(7)；
S4, respectively calculating accident occurrence frequency P aiming at different leakage grades accident And according to the accident occurrence frequency P accident Dividing the accident occurrence probability level; the specific classification is shown in the following table:
TABLE 1-2 Accident probability level Classification Table
Figure BDA0003379886410000071
S5, progressively grading the severity of the accident result step by step to establish an accident result severity grade table, analyzing and calculating the accident result caused by each potential accident scene according to the potential accident scene accident result numerical model, and determining the severity grade of the accident result by combining the accident result severity grade table;
s6, calculating the cumulative accident occurrence frequency of each device unit corresponding to each accident consequence severity level;
s7, calculating accumulated accident occurrence frequency of each deck evaluation unit, each platform evaluation unit and each overall evaluation unit corresponding to each accident consequence severity level step by step from bottom to top;
s8, combining the security risk matrix to determine the maximum value of the accumulated risk level in the overall evaluation unit and the risk index value.
Further, the step S3 specifically includes:
s31, determining a group of leakage pore diameters to divide leakage grades, wherein the leakage grades comprise small pores, medium pores, large pores and cracks; as shown in the table below,
table 1-1 recommended leakage aperture
Pore diameter Representative value (mm)
Small hole 5
Middle hole 25
Macropores are formed 100
Rupture of —
S32, aiming at different leakage grades and combining with a Hairy rule, namely, 300 pieces of personnel are not damaged when 330 accidents occur in the production process, 29 pieces of personnel are light injured, 1 piece of personnel are heavy injured or dead, the accident distribution of more small accidents and fewer large accidents is obtained, and a basic function of accident leakage and ignition probability is obtained through data fitting; :
Figure BDA0003379886410000081
Figure BDA0003379886410000082
P g ＝0.0085ln(V g )+0.0116..............................(3)
s32, correcting the basic function according to service life a, RBI adjustment coefficient r and safety integrity grade coefficient S to obtain a final leakage frequency and delayed ignition probability calculation formula as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000083
Figure BDA0003379886410000084
P g ＝ars(0.0085ln(V g )+0.0116)..............................(6)
wherein: f (d): indicating the leakage frequency of the equipment with the aperture of d, wherein the unit is times/year; m is M d : the number of leakage accidents with the aperture of d is represented, and the unit is times/year; p (P) l : indicating the probability of liquid retarding ignition; v (V) l : indicating the liquid leakage rate; p (P) g : indicating a gas delay ignition probability; v (V) l : indicating the gas leakage rate; the service life coefficient a is the ratio of the service time to the maximum allowable service time, the early failure rate is from high to low, the abrasion failure rate is from low to high, the random failure rate is smaller, and the service life coefficient is related to the shape parameter k of Weibull distribution. So when a is greater than or equal to 0.9, a=k; when a is<0.1, a=1/k; RBI toneThe integer coefficient r refers to the recommendation of API RP 581; the safety integrity grade coefficient s is the ratio of the safety integrity grade to be achieved and the safety integrity grade to be achieved by actual evaluation;
s33, immediate ignition probability P m The probability of the UKOA ignition model is multiplied by the service life coefficient, the RBI adjustment coefficient and the safety integrity coefficient to determine;
s34, selecting P by combining the device type and the corresponding potential accident scene l Or P g Or P m As the accident ignition probability in the corresponding potential accident scene, is denoted as P ignition The method comprises the steps of carrying out a first treatment on the surface of the F (d) in equation 5 is taken as the accident leakage frequency P leak ；
S35, the accident occurrence frequency P corresponding to each device accident ，
Wherein P is accident ＝P leak ×P ignition .................................(7)；
According to the novel calculation formula of the equipment leakage frequency and the ignition probability, the required parameters are fewer, and the accident occurrence frequency can be obtained more rapidly and accurately;
further, the step S5 specifically includes:
s51, establishing a three-dimensional numerical model according to actual data of an offshore oil and gas platform;
s52, simulating potential accident scenes corresponding to different environmental conditions and leakage levels, and calculating fire heat radiation distribution and explosion overpressure distribution under different combinations; calculating meteorological data of an area where the ocean platform is located, and selecting low wind speed (1 m/s-2 m/s), common wind speed and high wind speed (not more than 9 m/s), so as to determine the environmental condition of the platform according to the low wind speed, the common wind speed and the high wind speed; determining leakage conditions according to recommended leakage aperture and combining process parameters; constructing an accident simulation scene by combining different environmental conditions and leakage conditions;
s53, according to the simulation result of CFD software, determining the accident result of the offshore oil and gas platform by combining the injury standard and the distribution of platform personnel and assets;
s54, determining severity levels of accident consequences according to an accident consequence severity grading table, wherein the accident consequence severity grading table is expressed by an alphabet positive sequence and the lowest level of the severity levels is expressed by letters A; in particular, as shown in tables 1 to 5,
tables 1-5 Accident outcome severity ranking Table
Results grade Degree of influence
A The accident causes light injury to personnel.
B The accident causes 1-2 people to be lightly injured.
C The accident causes light injury of more than 3 people or serious injury of 1-2 people; 1-2 sets of devices are damaged.
D The accident causes death of 1-2 people or serious injury of 3-9 people; 3 sets and above devices are damaged.
E The accident causes death of 3 to 9 people or serious injury of 10 to 50 people; the single deck of the platform is damaged.
F The accident causes death of less than 10 to 30 people or serious injury of less than 50 to 100 people; the individual platforms are damaged.
G Accident causes death of 30 or more or 100 or moreSevere injury; the large central platform is damaged.
Wherein, injury criteria refer to tables 1-6 and 1-7:
tables 1 to 6 injury and damage caused by different heat radiation intensities
Intensity of thermal radiation (kW/m) 2 ) Damage to the device Injury to human
37.5 Device damage, structural collapse Death of people
25.0 - Serious injury of personnel
12.5 - Light injury of personnel
4.7 - Has no influence on
Tables 1-7 injury and damage caused by different overpressure
Figure BDA0003379886410000091
Figure BDA0003379886410000101
And carrying out simulation work aiming at the accident scene of the device by combining the data in the table, calculating the fire heat radiation distribution and explosion overpressure distribution under different conditions, and judging by combining the injury standard. Devices with a calculated heat radiation value in the range of 37.5kW/m2 will be damaged and persons in this range will die, thereby counting the accident consequences and determining the severity level of the accident consequences according to the severity level table of the accident consequences.
Further, the step S6 specifically includes:
s61, combining accident occurrence frequencies of the same device unit corresponding to different leakage levels and having the same accident consequence severity level;
s62, calculating cumulative occurrence frequency P of each device evaluation unit under different accident severity grades R (λ)
Figure BDA0003379886410000102
Wherein: λ represents the accident severity ranking A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; p (P) R (A) Indicating the cumulative occurrence frequency of the device evaluation unit when the accident severity level is level A, and so on, P R (G) Indicating the cumulative occurrence frequency of the device evaluation unit when the accident severity level is level G; when lambda is A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …, n is x, x-1, x-2, …,2, 1, and Pr in each sub-term is A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …, and P is calculated according to formula 7 accident And the combination of the step S61 is carried out; m is M r The number of devices in the unit is evaluated for the corresponding device.
Further, the cumulative occurrence frequency with the same severity level in each device evaluation unit belonging to the same deck is summed to obtain the accident occurrence probability of each deck evaluation unit under different accident severity levels, and then the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the deck evaluation units are determined; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000103
wherein: p (P) c (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each deck evaluation unit at different incident severity levels; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of device evaluation units for the severity of an accident, each of which represents the cumulative frequency of occurrence of the device evaluation units at the same accident severity level λ.
Further, the cumulative occurrence frequency with the same severity level in each deck evaluation unit belonging to the same platform is summed to obtain the accident occurrence probability of each platform evaluation unit under different accident severity levels, and then the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the platform evaluation units are determined; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000112
wherein: p (P) b (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit at different incident severity levels; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of deck evaluation units of the severity of an accident on a single platform, and each subitem represents the cumulative frequency of occurrence of the deck evaluation units at the same accident severity level λ.
Further, the cumulative occurrence frequency with the same severity level in each platform evaluation unit in the platform group is summed to obtain the accident occurrence probability of each platform evaluation unit under different accident severity levels, and then the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the deck evaluation units are determined; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000111
wherein: p (P) a (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit at the accident severity level lambda; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of severity platform evaluation units for which an accident result occurs in the whole platform group, and each subitem represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit under the same accident severity level lambda.
The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: the invention provides a security risk quantitative evaluation grading technical method suitable for marine oil and gas platform leakage fire explosion accidents; the problems that different evaluation results caused by random division of the platform units cannot be directly compared and are not uniform are solved, and a probability calculation model for leakage occurrence and ignition is given, so that the method is simpler and more efficient than a traditional model; the judgment standard of accident results is defined, the accident result grades of different accident scenes can be effectively given by combining CFD simulation, and the standardized flow of risk calculation is provided according to the accident result grades of the accident scenes and the accident occurrence probability, so that the calculation process of accumulated risks is standardized; the method is simple, quick, reliable and effective, and can meet the requirements of risk classification of ocean oil and gas platforms in China.
Drawings
Fig. 1 is an evaluation unit division flow.
Fig. 2 is a flow chart of an accident scene determination method.
Fig. 3 is a flow of accident occurrence probability level calculation.
Fig. 4 is a flow chart for calculating severity level of an accident outcome.
Fig. 5 is a risk calculation flow.
Fig. 6 is a three-dimensional model of a platform in the second embodiment.
Fig. 7 is a natural gas fire accident simulation in the second embodiment.
Detailed Description
In order to clearly illustrate the technical characteristics of the scheme, the scheme is explained below through a specific embodiment.
Referring to fig. 1 to 5, the present invention is implemented by the following technical solutions: a technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of an ocean oil and gas platform comprises the following steps:
s1, dividing an offshore oil and gas platform group into a total evaluation unit, a platform evaluation unit, a deck evaluation unit and a device evaluation unit layer by layer according to spatial structure attribution; as shown in fig. 1, specifically: regarding the offshore oil and gas platform group which can generate mutual influence as an overall evaluation unit; in the overall evaluation unit, dividing an independent platform into platform evaluation units by considering the position distribution and main functions of the platform group; in the platform evaluation unit, taking the space relation of the platform structure into consideration, dividing each layer of devices in the platform by using a deck as a boundary, and respectively dividing independent decks as a deck evaluation unit; in the deck evaluation unit, taking the space constitution and the device function of the deck into consideration, dividing the same device on the deck into device evaluation units; aiming at the division of the offshore platform evaluation units, the offshore production reality is matched more, and the risk calculation and the evaluation result application are facilitated;
s2, carrying out hazard source identification on all device evaluation units of the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining potential accident scenes, wherein the potential accident scenes comprise leakage scenes, fire scenes and explosion scenes; as shown in fig. 2, specifically: identifying dangerous substances possibly existing in the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining dangerous characteristics of the dangerous substances; carrying out dangerous source identification on all device evaluation units of the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining main dangerous sources and distribution conditions of the platform; and determining a potential accident scene according to the dangerous and harmful substance identification condition of the device evaluation unit. The potential accident scene is divided into a leakage scene (hydrogen sulfide leakage), a fire scene and an explosion scene;
s3, calculating the corresponding device leakage frequency P in each potential accident scene leak And device ignition probability P ignition Determining accident occurrence frequency P accident The method comprises the steps of carrying out a first treatment on the surface of the Which is a kind ofMiddle P accident ＝P leak ×P ignition .................. (7); as shown in fig. 3, specifically:
s31, determining a group of leakage pore diameters to divide leakage grades, wherein the leakage grades comprise small pores, medium pores, large pores and cracks; the leakage aperture is recommended as in Table 1-1
Pore diameter Representative value (mm)
Small hole 5
Middle hole 25
Macropores are formed 100
Rupture of —
S32, aiming at different leakage grades and combining with a Hairy rule, namely, 300 pieces of personnel are not damaged when 330 accidents occur in the production process, 29 pieces of personnel are light injured, 1 piece of personnel are heavy injured or dead, the accident distribution of more small accidents and fewer large accidents is obtained, and a basic function of accident leakage and ignition probability is obtained through data fitting; :
Figure BDA0003379886410000131
Figure BDA0003379886410000132
P g ＝0.0085ln(V g )+0.0116..............................(3)
s32, correcting the basic function according to service life a, RBI adjustment coefficient r and safety integrity grade coefficient S to obtain a final leakage frequency and delayed ignition probability calculation formula as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000133
Figure BDA0003379886410000134
P g ＝ars(0.0085ln(V g )+0.0116)................................(6)
wherein: f (d): indicating the leakage frequency of the equipment with the aperture of d, wherein the unit is times/year; m is M d : the number of leakage accidents with the aperture of d is represented, and the unit is times/year; p (P) l : indicating the probability of liquid retarding ignition; v (V) l : indicating the liquid leakage rate; p (P) g : indicating a gas delay ignition probability; v (V) l : indicating the gas leakage rate; the service life coefficient a is the ratio of the service time to the maximum allowable service time, the early failure rate is from high to low, the abrasion failure rate is from low to high, the random failure rate is smaller, and the service life coefficient is related to the shape parameter k of Weibull distribution. So when a is greater than or equal to 0.9, a=k; when a is<0.1, a=1/k; the RBI adjustment coefficient r refers to the recommended result of the API RP 581; the safety integrity grade coefficient s is the ratio of the safety integrity grade to be achieved and the safety integrity grade to be achieved by actual evaluation;
s33, determining the immediate ignition probability Pm by multiplying the UKOA ignition model probability by the service life coefficient, the RBI adjustment coefficient and the safety integrity coefficient;
s34, combining device types and correspondingSelecting pl or pg or pm as the accident ignition probability in the corresponding potential accident scene, and marking as P ignition The method comprises the steps of carrying out a first treatment on the surface of the F (d) in equation 5 is taken as the accident leakage frequency P leak ；
S35, the accident occurrence frequency P corresponding to each device accident ，
Wherein P is accident ＝P leak ×P ignition ...................................(7)。
According to the novel calculation formula of the equipment leakage frequency and the ignition probability, the required parameters are fewer, and the accident occurrence frequency can be obtained more rapidly and accurately;
s4, respectively calculating accident occurrence frequencies Pacciant aiming at different leakage grades, and dividing accident occurrence probability grades according to the accident occurrence frequencies Pacciant; the specific classification is shown in the following table:
TABLE 1-2 Accident probability level Classification Table
Figure BDA0003379886410000135
Figure BDA0003379886410000141
S5, progressively grading the severity of the accident result step by step to establish an accident result severity grade table, analyzing and calculating the accident result caused by each potential accident scene according to the potential accident scene accident result numerical model, and determining the severity grade of the accident result by combining the accident result severity grade table; as shown in fig. 4, specifically:
s51, establishing a three-dimensional numerical model according to actual data of an offshore oil and gas platform;
s52, simulating potential accident scenes corresponding to different environmental conditions and leakage levels, and calculating fire heat radiation distribution and explosion overpressure distribution under different combinations; calculating meteorological data of an area where the ocean platform is located, and selecting low wind speed (1 m/s-2 m/s), common wind speed and high wind speed (not more than 9 m/s), so as to determine the environmental condition of the platform according to the low wind speed, the common wind speed and the high wind speed; determining leakage conditions according to recommended leakage aperture and combining process parameters; constructing an accident simulation scene by combining different environmental conditions and leakage conditions;
s53, according to the simulation result of CFD software, determining the accident result of the offshore oil and gas platform by combining the injury standard and the distribution of platform personnel and assets;
s54, determining severity levels of accident consequences according to an accident consequence severity grading table, wherein the accident consequence severity grading table is expressed by an alphabet positive sequence and the lowest level of the severity levels is expressed by letters A; in particular, as shown in tables 1 to 5,
tables 1-5 Accident outcome severity ranking Table
Results grade Degree of influence
A The accident causes light injury to personnel.
B The accident causes 1-2 people to be lightly injured.
C The accident causes light injury of more than 3 people or serious injury of 1-2 people; 1-2 sets of devices are damaged.
D The accident causes death of 1-2 people or serious injury of 3-9 people; 3 sets and above devices are damaged.
E Accident (Accident)Causing death of 3 to 9 people or serious injury of 10 to 50 people; the single deck of the platform is damaged.
F The accident causes death of less than 10 to 30 people or serious injury of less than 50 to 100 people; the individual platforms are damaged.
G The accident causes death of 30 or more or serious injury of 100 or more; the large central platform is damaged.
Wherein, injury criteria refer to tables 1-6 and 1-7:
tables 1 to 6 injury and damage caused by different heat radiation intensities
Figure BDA0003379886410000142
Figure BDA0003379886410000151
Tables 1-7 injury and damage caused by different overpressure
Overpressure value (kPa) Damage to the device Injury to human
350 Device damage, structural collapse Death of people
100 - Death of people
75 - Serious injury of personnel
40 - Light injury of personnel
25 - Has no influence on
And carrying out simulation work aiming at the accident scene of the device by combining the data in the table, calculating the fire heat radiation distribution and explosion overpressure distribution under different conditions, and judging by combining the injury standard. Devices with a calculated heat radiation value in the range of 37.5kW/m2 will be damaged and persons in this range will die, thereby counting the accident consequences and determining the severity level of the accident consequences according to the severity level table of the accident consequences.
S6, calculating the cumulative accident occurrence frequency of each device unit corresponding to each accident consequence severity level; as shown in fig. 5, the specific steps are as follows:
s61, combining accident occurrence frequencies of the same device unit corresponding to different leakage levels and having the same accident consequence severity level;
s62, calculating cumulative occurrence frequency P of each device evaluation unit under different accident severity grades R (λ)
Figure BDA0003379886410000152
Wherein: λ represents the accident severity ranking A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; p (P) R (A) Indicating the cumulative occurrence frequency of the device evaluation unit when the accident severity level is level A, and so on, P R (G) Indicating the cumulative occurrence frequency of the device evaluation unit when the accident severity level is level G; when lambda is A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …, n is x, x-1, x-2, …,2, 1, and Pr in each sub-term is A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …, and P is calculated according to formula 7 accident And the combination of the step S61 is carried out; m is M r The number of devices in the unit is evaluated for the corresponding device.
S7, calculating accumulated accident occurrence frequency of each deck evaluation unit, each platform evaluation unit and each overall evaluation unit corresponding to each accident consequence severity level step by step from bottom to top;
summing the cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in all the device evaluation units belonging to the same deck to obtain the accident occurrence probability of all the deck evaluation units under different accident severity levels, thereby determining the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the deck evaluation units; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000161
wherein: p (P) c (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each deck evaluation unit at different incident severity levels; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of device evaluation units for the severity of an accident, each of which represents the cumulative frequency of occurrence of the device evaluation units at the same accident severity level λ.
Summing the cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in all deck evaluation units belonging to the same platform to obtain the accident occurrence probability of all the platform evaluation units under different accident severity levels, thereby determining the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the platform evaluation units; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000162
wherein: p (P) b (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit at different incident severity levels; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of deck evaluation units of the severity of an accident on a single platform, and each subitem represents the cumulative frequency of occurrence of the deck evaluation units at the same accident severity level λ.
Summing the cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in each platform evaluation unit in the platform group to obtain the accident occurrence probability of each platform evaluation unit under different accident severity levels, thereby determining the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the deck evaluation units; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003379886410000163
wherein: p (P) a (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit at the accident severity level lambda; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of severity platform evaluation units for which an accident result occurs in the whole platform group, and each subitem represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit under the same accident severity level lambda.
S8, combining the security risk matrix to determine the maximum value of the accumulated risk level in the overall evaluation unit and the risk index value.
In the second embodiment, according to the calculation method in the first embodiment, taking calculation of the fire explosion accident risk classification of the center third platform as an example, the calculation process of the invention is shown more truly and specifically:
s1, determining the center No. three platform evaluation unit division as follows according to an evaluation unit division method:
table 2-1 center No. three platform evaluation unit partitioning
Figure BDA0003379886410000171
S2, determining a potential accident scene; around fire explosion accident, confirm the dangerous harmful substance that center No. three platform involved and have: crude oil (inflammable and explosive), natural gas (inflammable and explosive), diesel oil (inflammable) and the like; in combination with the arrangement condition of the central third platform equipment, the main oil gas fire explosion hazard sources are distributed as follows: a three-phase separator area, a heating medium furnace area, a natural gas treatment area, a closed tank area, a wellhead area and a generator room Chai Youguan; further, the potential accident scene is determined as shown in the following table:
table 2-2 center platform number three potential accident scenario
Evaluation facility Scene of fire accident Scene of explosion accident
Heating medium oil stove Leakage fire disaster of heating medium oil furnace —
Natural gas treatment skid block Natural gas leakage fire disaster Natural gas leakage explosion
Three-phase separator, separation buffer tank, etc Separated gas leakage fire disaster Separated gas leakage explosion
Closing row pot Oil stain leakage fire disaster —
Wellhead, metering separator, etc Produced gas leakage fire disaster Produced gas leakage explosion
Emergency generator room — Diesel oil leakage explosion
S3, taking the natural gas treatment skid in the table 2-2 as an example, calculating the accident occurrence frequency according to the method of S31-S35 in the first embodiment: wherein the leakage frequency is calculated as shown in the following table:
tables 2-3 Natural gas handling skid leakage frequency
Leakage size Frequency of gas phase leakage
Small pore size 0.0210436
Middle aperture 0.00623228
Large aperture 0.000379526
Rupture of 0.0000411355
The calculation result of the ignition probability is shown in the following table:
tables 2-4 Natural gas handling skid firing probability
Leakage size Probability of gas phase ignition
Small pore size 0.0025
Middle aperture 0.0026
Large aperture 0.0023
Rupture of 0.0024
The final calculated accident occurrence frequency is shown in the following table:
tables 2-5 Natural gas handling pry Accident frequency
Figure BDA0003379886410000172
/>
Figure BDA0003379886410000181
Continuing to calculate accident occurrence frequency of other device evaluation units;
s4, grading the accident occurrence frequency of all the device evaluation units according to the table 1-2 in the first embodiment;
s5, calculating accident results, taking a natural gas treatment pry as an example, and specifically comprising the following steps:
s51, according to actual data of an offshore oil and gas platform, a three-dimensional numerical model is established as shown in FIG. 6;
s52, setting simulation parameters according to the actual environmental conditions and leakage conditions of the platform;
s53, as shown in FIG. 7, according to the simulation result of the CFD software, combining the injury standard and the distribution of platform personnel and assets, and simulating to obtain the natural gas fire accident result; distance of different radiation levels at the same wind speed:
tables 2-6 distance of different radiation levels (unit: m)
Leakage aperture 4.7kW/m 2 12.5kW/m 2 37.5kW/m 2
Small size - - -
In (a) 11.0 - -
Big size 46.8 43.1 40.9
Rupture of 70.7 63.9 59.9
S54, determining severity level of accident result of the natural gas treatment skid according to accident result and tables 1-5, wherein the severity level is shown in the following table:
tables 2-7 Natural gas handling pry incident outcome severity rating
Leakage aperture Severity rating of accident outcome
Small size A
In (a) C
Big size E
Rupture of E
By the same method, the accident consequence severity level of the potential accident scene corresponding to the evaluation unit of other devices can be obtained.
S6, determining cumulative occurrence frequency of each device evaluation unit under different accident severity grades (taking a production platform natural gas treatment skid as an example):
tables 2-8 cumulative incidence of natural gas handling skid accidents
Figure BDA0003379886410000182
Wherein, the accident consequence severity grades corresponding to the leakage grade of 'macropores' and 'cracks' are E, and the accumulated occurrence frequency corresponding to the accident consequence severity grade of E is the sum of the accident occurrence frequencies corresponding to the two, as shown in tables 2-8;
s7, summing the cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in each device evaluation unit, and determining the accident occurrence level and the cumulative risk level of the production platform and the CB26 platform under different accident severity levels by referring to the security risk matrix:
tables 2-9 center No. three platform evaluation unit accident occurrence probability level and cumulative risk level
Figure BDA0003379886410000191
Summing the cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in each platform evaluation unit, and determining the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the overall evaluation unit:
tables 2-10 center No. three platform cumulative risk rating
Accident severity rating Possibility of accident Probability of accident level Cumulative risk level
A 3.76810E-04 4 A4
B 4.93200E-05 3 B3
C 1.63000E-04 4 C4
D 6.91886E-05 3 D3
E 1.18146E-04 4 E4
F 6.09953E-06 2 F2
S8, referring to the security risk matrix, taking the maximum value of the accumulated risk levels in tables 2-10 as the risk level of the center No. three platform, wherein the risk level is E4, and the corresponding risk index value is 22.
In the description of the invention, the foregoing detailed description has set forth various embodiments of the devices and/or processes via the use of block diagrams, flowcharts, and/or examples. To the extent that such block diagrams, flowcharts, and/or examples contain one or more functions and/or operations, it will be understood by those within the art that each function and/or operation within such block diagrams, flowcharts, or examples can be implemented, individually and/or collectively, by a wide range of different hardware, software, firmware, or virtually any combination thereof.
There is little distinction between hardware and software implementations of aspects of the system; the use of hardware or software is often (but not always, as the choice between hardware and software may become important in some scenarios) a design choice representing a cost versus efficiency tradeoff. There are various means (e.g., hardware, software, and/or firmware) by which the processes and/or systems and/or other techniques described herein may be implemented, and the preferred means will vary with the context in which the processes and/or systems and/or other techniques are deployed. For example, if an implementer determines that speed and accuracy are paramount, the implementer may opt for a means, primarily hardware and/or firmware; if flexibility is paramount, the implementer may opt for an implementation that is primarily software; alternatively, but as well, the implementer may opt for some combination of hardware, software, and/or firmware.
The terms "first," "second," and the like are used for descriptive purposes only and are not to be construed as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly indicating the number of technical features indicated. Thus, a feature defining "a first", "a second", etc. may explicitly or implicitly include one or more such feature. In the description of the invention, unless otherwise indicated, the meaning of "a plurality" is two or more.
The technical features of the present invention that are not described in the present invention may be implemented by or using the prior art, and are not described in detail herein, but the above description is not intended to limit the present invention, and the present invention is not limited to the above examples, but is also intended to be within the scope of the present invention by those skilled in the art.

Claims (7)

1. The technical method for quantitatively evaluating and grading the safety risk of the marine oil and gas platform is characterized by comprising the following steps of:
s1, dividing an offshore oil and gas platform group into a total evaluation unit, a plurality of platform evaluation units, a plurality of deck evaluation units and a plurality of device evaluation units layer by layer according to a spatial structure attribution relation; wherein the same type of device belonging to the same deck is a device evaluation unit;
s2, carrying out dangerous source identification on all device evaluation units of the offshore oil and gas platform, and determining a potential accident scene;
s3, determining a group of representative aperture division leakage grades, and respectively calculating the leakage frequency P of each device in the potential accident scene corresponding to each leakage grade leak And ignition probability P ignition Determining the accident occurrence frequency P corresponding to each device accident The method comprises the steps of carrying out a first treatment on the surface of the Wherein P is accident ＝P leak ×P ignition ..................(7)；
S4, according to the accident occurrence frequency P accident Dividing the accident occurrence probability level;
s5, analyzing and calculating accident results caused by each potential accident scene, and determining accident result severity grades according to an accident result severity grade table, wherein the accident result severity grade table is divided into x grades, and is represented by an alphabetical positive sequence, and the lowest grade is represented by letter A;
s6, calculating the cumulative accident occurrence frequency of each device unit corresponding to each accident consequence severity level;
s7, calculating accumulated accident occurrence frequencies of different accident consequence severity grades corresponding to each deck evaluation unit, each platform evaluation unit and each overall evaluation unit step by step from bottom to top;
s8, combining the security risk matrix to determine the maximum value of the accumulated risk level in the overall evaluation unit and the risk index value.
2. The method for quantitatively evaluating and grading the safety risk of the marine oil and gas platform according to claim 1, wherein the step S3 is specifically:
s31, determining a group of leakage pore diameters to divide leakage grades, wherein the leakage grades comprise small pores, medium pores, large pores and cracks;
s32, aiming at different leakage grades and combining with a Hairy rule, obtaining a basic function of accident leakage and ignition probability by data fitting;
s32, correcting the basic function according to service life a, RBI adjustment coefficient r and safety integrity grade coefficient S to obtain a final leakage frequency and delayed ignition probability calculation formula as follows:
Figure FDA0003379886400000011
Figure FDA0003379886400000012
P g ＝ars(0.0085ln(V g )+0.0116).......................................(6)
wherein: f (d): indicating the leakage frequency of the equipment with the aperture of d, wherein the unit is times/year; m is M d : the number of leakage accidents with the aperture of d is represented, and the unit is times/year; p (P) l : watch (watch)Showing the probability of liquid retarding ignition; v (V) l : indicating the liquid leakage rate; p (P) g : indicating a gas delay ignition probability; v (V) l : indicating the gas leakage rate; the service life coefficient a is the ratio of the service time to the maximum allowable service time; the RBI adjustment coefficient r refers to the recommended result of the API RP 581; the safety integrity grade coefficient s is the ratio of the safety integrity grade to be achieved and the safety integrity grade to be achieved by actual evaluation;
s33, determining the immediate ignition probability Pm by multiplying the UKOA ignition model probability by the service life coefficient, the RBI adjustment coefficient and the safety integrity coefficient;
s34, combining the device type and the corresponding potential accident scene, selecting pl or pg or pm as accident ignition probability in the corresponding potential accident scene, and marking as P ignition The method comprises the steps of carrying out a first treatment on the surface of the F (d) in equation 5 is taken as the accident leakage frequency P leak ；
S35, the accident occurrence frequency P corresponding to each device accident Wherein, the method comprises the steps of, wherein,
P accident ＝P leak ×P ignition ........................................(7)。
3. the method for quantitatively evaluating and grading the safety risk of the marine oil and gas platform according to claim 1, wherein the step S5 is specifically:
s51, establishing a three-dimensional numerical model according to actual data of an offshore oil and gas platform;
s52, simulating potential accident scenes corresponding to different environmental conditions and leakage levels, and calculating fire heat radiation distribution and explosion overpressure distribution under different combinations;
s53, determining corresponding accident consequences by combining the injury standards;
s54, determining severity grades of accident results by referring to an accident result severity grading table, wherein the accident result severity grading table is expressed by positive sequences of alphabets, and the lowest grade is expressed by letter A.
4. The method for quantitatively evaluating and grading the safety risk of the marine oil and gas platform according to claim 1, wherein the step S6 is specifically:
s61, combining accident occurrence frequencies of the same device unit corresponding to different leakage levels and having the same accident consequence severity level;
s62, calculating cumulative occurrence frequency P of each device evaluation unit under different accident severity grades R (λ)
Figure FDA0003379886400000021
Wherein: λ represents the accident severity ranking A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; p (P) R (A) Indicating the cumulative occurrence frequency of the device evaluation unit when the accident severity level is level A, and so on, P R (G) Indicating the cumulative occurrence frequency of the device evaluation unit when the accident severity level is level G; when lambda is A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …, n is x, x-1, x-2, …,2, 1, and Pr in each sub-term is A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …, and P is calculated according to formula 7 accident And the combination of the step S61 is carried out; m is M r The number of devices in the unit is evaluated for the corresponding device.
5. The quantitative evaluation and grading technical method for the safety risk of the marine oil and gas platform according to claim 4, wherein the cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in all device evaluation units belonging to the same deck are summed to obtain the accident occurrence probability of all the deck evaluation units under different accident severity levels, and then the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the deck evaluation units are determined; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure FDA0003379886400000031
wherein: p (P) c (lambda) represents eachCumulative frequency of occurrence of deck evaluation units at different incident severity levels; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of device evaluation units for the severity of an accident, each of which represents the cumulative frequency of occurrence of the device evaluation units at the same accident severity level λ.
6. The quantitative evaluation and grading technical method for the safety risk of the marine oil and gas platform according to claim 5 is characterized in that cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in all deck evaluation units belonging to the same platform are summed to obtain the accident occurrence probability of all the platform evaluation units under different accident severity levels, and then the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of the platform evaluation units are determined; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure FDA0003379886400000032
wherein: p (P) b (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit at different incident severity levels; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of deck evaluation units of the severity of an accident on a single platform, and each subitem represents the cumulative frequency of occurrence of the deck evaluation units at the same accident severity level λ.
7. The quantitative evaluation and grading technical method for the safety risk of the marine oil and gas platform according to claim 6 is characterized in that cumulative occurrence frequencies with the same severity level in all platform evaluation units in a platform group are summed to obtain the accident occurrence probability of all the platform evaluation units under different accident severity levels, and then the accident occurrence probability level and the cumulative risk level of deck evaluation units are determined; the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure FDA0003379886400000041
wherein: p (P) a (lambda) represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit at the accident severity level lambda; lambda is taken in turn to represent the severity of the incident A, B, C, D, E, F, G … …; i:1,2,3, …, m represents the number of severity platform evaluation units for which an accident result occurs in the whole platform group, and each subitem represents the cumulative occurrence frequency of each platform evaluation unit under the same accident severity level lambda.
CN202111430293.3A 2021-11-29 2021-11-29 Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform Pending CN116341890A (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202111430293.3A CN116341890A (en) 2021-11-29 2021-11-29 Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202111430293.3A CN116341890A (en) 2021-11-29 2021-11-29 Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
CN116341890A true CN116341890A (en) 2023-06-27

Family

ID=86882716

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
CN202111430293.3A Pending CN116341890A (en) 2021-11-29 2021-11-29 Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform

Country Status (1)

Country Link
CN (1) CN116341890A (en)

Cited By (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN116911035A (en) * 2023-07-21 2023-10-20 中国石油大学(华东) Shale oil gas gathering and transportation process key device risk identification method

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN116911035A (en) * 2023-07-21 2023-10-20 中国石油大学(华东) Shale oil gas gathering and transportation process key device risk identification method
CN116911035B (en) * 2023-07-21 2024-02-06 中国石油大学(华东) Shale oil gas gathering and transportation process key device risk identification method

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
KR101805713B1 (en) Risk Analysis System using Risk Map
Tauseef et al. Case studies of 28 major accidents of fires/explosions in storage tank farms in the backdrop of available codes/standards/models for safely configuring such tank farms
CN104657810A (en) Risk evaluation method for fires and explosions at tank storage areas at petrochemical decks
CN102722634A (en) Regional lightning disaster risk evaluation method
CN112633553B (en) Gas pipeline-hazardous chemical enterprise coupling hidden danger identification and risk assessment method and system
CN108090707A (en) A kind of mountain flood risk assessment method and early warning system based on catastrophe theory
CN105825320A (en) Petrochemical enterprise hazard-bearing body vulnerability assessment method
CN112686581A (en) Natural disaster secondary dangerous chemical accident risk assessment method and system
CN103605822A (en) Dynamic classification method of risk of liquid chemical pipeline leakage of petrochemical wharf
CN116341890A (en) Technical method for quantitative evaluation and classification of safety risk of marine oil and gas platform
CN106023035A (en) Person evacuation safety evaluation method, device and apparatus in toxic gas leakage accident
CN109978415A (en) Based on level gray theory to the appraisal procedure of elevator safety guard system
CN106055803B (en) Consider the oil refining apparatus gas detecting and alarming instrument Optimization Method for Location-Selection of conditional risk value
CN109409683A (en) Quickly dynamic urban safety risk class appraisal procedure
CN106096104A (en) The multifactorial oil refining apparatus gas detecting and alarming instrument addressing method for arranging of a kind of consideration
CN113723817A (en) Enterprise dust explosion risk assessment method, device and equipment
Yu et al. Safety distance assessment of industrial toxic releases based on frequency and consequence: A case study in Shanghai, China
Das et al. Improving flammable mass estimation for vapor cloud explosion modeling in an offshore QRA
CN111564023A (en) Method and system for setting leakage alarm threshold of buried gas pipeline
VR et al. Individual and societal risk analysis and mapping of human vulnerability to chemical accidents in the vicinity of an industrial area
Su et al. Study on quantification scheme of weight coefficient for electrical fire risk assessment of high-rise building
CN114881498A (en) Enterprise production safety comprehensive evaluation method of coupled space-time elements
CN111598406A (en) Quantitative evaluation method for block instability risk of high and steep slope
CN113807638A (en) Major safety risk quantification method for tailing pond
Lu et al. Quantitative risk analysis of domino effect in petrochemical enterprise based on vulnerability-resilience

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PB01 Publication
PB01 Publication
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination