Coupling certainty and uncertainty analysis fire risk evaluation method

Abstract

The invention discloses a coupling certainty and uncertainty analysis fire risk evaluation method. The method comprises steps that S1, risk factors are identified, and a fire risk evaluation system isestablished; S2, a fuzzy analytic hierarchy method is utilized to determine the index weight of each risk factor; S3, the fuzzy theory is utilized to combine with the confidence to calculate the firerisk of each single factor; S4, the evidence reasoning operator is utilized to synthesize the fire risk of each single factor; S5, an expected utility value is utilized to acquire the clear evaluation result; and S6, the sensitivity analysis method is utilized to verify feasibility of a model.

Description

technical field [0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of fire risk assessment, and in particular relates to a fire risk assessment method coupled with deterministic and uncertain analysis. Background technique [0002] There are three main types of fire risk assessment methods at this stage: qualitative assessment, semi-quantitative assessment and quantitative assessment. Because quantitative evaluation is more accurate than qualitative and semi-quantitative evaluation, quantitative evaluation has become a research hotspot at the present stage. However, quantitative evaluation generally starts from the probability of accidents. Due to the imperfect statistical data, it is difficult to obtain from statistical data at this stage Scientific, reasonable and credible accident probability. Therefore, for the situation where the probability is unknown, there are great difficulties in quantitative risk assessment. And fuzzy mathematics can just solve the situation wh...

AI Technical Summary

Problems solved by technology

[0004] (1) Judgment of subjectivity: In the literature on fuzzy evaluation, most of them use the AHP to determine the weight of the index system, while the 1-9 degree scale method in the traditional AHP (AHP) is difficult due to human factors. Subjectivity of judgment, the results of different evaluation subjects vary greatly; in the process of assigning the membership degree of each index by the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, there is also the subjectivity of individual judgment, and the results of different evaluation subjects vary greatly

[0005] (2) Uncertainty problem: In the process of fire risk assessment, due to the random uncertainty of fire behavior and the uncertainty of knowledge itself (incompleteness, inaccuracy), it brings a lot of uncertainty to the whole risk assessment. deterministic, but fuzzy theory cannot solve this problem very well

Images