Risk assessment method and system for urban gas pipeline operation with illness and storage medium

Abstract

The invention discloses a risk assessment method and system for failure operation of an urban gas pipeline and a storage medium, and belongs to the technical field of gas pipeline operation detection, and the method comprises the steps: carrying out the index scoring of a pipeline operation safety index, determining the index weight, and carrying out the calculation to obtain a risk possibility score before correction; performing index scoring and index weight determination on the pipeline safety emergency index, calculating to obtain a safety management risk score, and determining a safety management risk correction coefficient; carrying out coefficient correction on the obtained risk possibility score before correction, obtaining a corrected risk possibility score, and determining a risk possibility evaluation grade; performing index scoring on the pipeline leakage hazard index and determining a corresponding index weight, performing calculation to obtain a risk consequence score, and determining a risk consequence grade of the urban gas pipeline; and performing comprehensive judgment according to a preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of the urban gas pipeline and a corresponding management and control strategy scheme.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of gas pipeline operation detection, and specifically relates to a risk assessment method, system and storage medium for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline. Background Art

[0002] Currently, there is no mature system or fixed indicators for risk assessment of residential risers, pre-meter pipes and their ancillary facilities, making it impossible to conduct a quantitative assessment of the operating risks of existing risers and pre-meter pipes.

[0003] Gas companies can only judge whether pipelines need to be replaced or repaired based on the age, material, and leakage of the pipelines. The evaluation criteria and dimensions are relatively simple and cannot reflect the actual operation of the on-site gas pipelines or the urgency of pipeline renovation, resulting in hidden dangers not being discovered in a timely manner and waste of investment. Summary of the invention

[0004] The purpose of the present invention is to overcome the deficiencies in the prior art and to provide a risk assessment method, system and storage medium for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline.

[0005] To achieve the above object, the present invention is implemented by adopting the following technical solutions: In a first aspect, the present invention provides a risk assessment method for the operation of a city gas pipeline with a defect, comprising the following steps: The pipeline operation safety index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined, and the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline is calculated using a semi-quantitative evaluation method; The pipeline safety emergency index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined. The safety management risk score of the city gas pipeline is calculated using a semi-quantitative evaluation method, and the safety management risk correction coefficient is determined according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship; Using the determined safety management risk correction coefficient, the obtained risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline before correction is corrected to obtain the corrected risk possibility score and determine the risk possibility assessment level of the city gas pipeline according to the preset risk possibility relationship; The pipeline leakage hazard index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined. The risk consequence score of the city gas pipeline is calculated by using a semi-quantitative evaluation method, and the risk consequence level of the city gas pipeline is determined according to the preset consequence evaluation level relationship; The risk possibility assessment level and risk consequence level of urban gas pipelines are comprehensively judged according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy plans.

[0006] Furthermore, the pipeline operation safety indicators include pipeline completion acceptance materials, pipeline service life, on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions, and indoor and outdoor gas leakage conditions of the pipeline in the past three years; The pipeline safety emergency indicators include the enterprise's internal safety training records, the enterprise's safety organization and personnel configuration, the enterprise's emergency plan formulation, the enterprise's emergency personnel material equipment configuration and the frequency of gas safety publicity for users; The pipeline leakage hazard indicators include the diffusion type of the gas leakage pipeline, the type of building to which the gas pipeline belongs, and the area where the gas pipeline is installed.

[0007] Furthermore, the pipeline completion acceptance materials are scored according to the completeness of the data: 0 points for complete data, 4 points for relatively complete data, and 10 points for no data; the higher the score, the higher the risk of the current operation of the pipeline; according to the impact of the actual operation status of the pipeline, the index weight of the pipeline completion acceptance materials is 5%; The pipeline service life is scored according to the operating life of the gas pipeline: 0 to 5 years for 0 points, 6 to 9 years for 2 points, 10 to 19 years for 6 points, 20 to 29 years for 8 points, and more than 30 years for 10 points; the higher the score, the higher the operating risk of the pipeline; according to the impact of the actual operating conditions of the pipeline, the indicator weight of the pipeline service life is 10%; The indoor and outdoor air leakage of pipelines in the past three years include outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years and indoor pipeline leakage in the past three years; the outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years is divided into the pipeline leakage point locations of short risers, outdoor overhead pipes, and outdoor risers, and scored according to the leakage frequency: 2 points if the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes is less than 10%, 6 points if the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes is 10%-30%, and 10 points if the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes is greater than 30%; the weight of the indicator of outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years is 5%; The indoor pipe gas leakage situation in the past three years was counted as follows: if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is less than 3%, 4 points will be awarded; if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is 3%-5%, 6 points will be awarded; if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is greater than 5%, 10 points will be awarded; the weight of the indicator of indoor pipe gas leakage in the past three years is 30%.

[0008] Furthermore, the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions include the operation conditions of the gas short riser, outdoor overhead pipeline, outdoor riser, indoor riser, pre-meter pipe, casing and the corrosion conditions of each pipeline; For the gas short riser, if the metal hose is deformed or corroded, 3 points will be awarded; if the short riser tee, anti-theft valve, and thread plug are corroded, 5 points will be awarded; if the double-sleeve is corroded, 9 points will be awarded; if the anti-corrosion failure at the root of the short riser occurs, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; For outdoor overhead pipes, if the net distance between the pipes installed along the outer wall and the doors and window openings of the room where the gas pipes should not be laid is less than 0.3m, 3 points will be awarded; if the pipes are deformed, 7 points will be awarded; if the safety measures for the pipes passing through the confined space are not in place, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above situations exists, 0 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipes; For the riser, if it is located in the kitchen and is enclosed but has a maintenance vent, 2 points will be awarded; if the distance between the riser and the stove is less than 30 cm, 6 points will be awarded; if it is located in the kitchen and is enclosed but has no maintenance vent, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; For the pipe before the meter, 3 points will be awarded if the connection position of the hard pipe is unreasonable, 6 points will be awarded if the hard pipe connection is enclosed, 10 points will be awarded if a soft pipe is used, and 0 points will be awarded if none of the above situations exists. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline. For the casing part, 2 points will be awarded if there is a casing but the casing diameter is unreasonable, 4 points will be awarded if there is a casing but the gap between the casing and the gas pipe is not effectively sealed, 5 points will be awarded if there is a casing and the casing through the floor is severely corroded, 9 points will be awarded if the casing is secretly sealed and the pipe is corroded, 10 points will be awarded if there is no casing, and 0 points will be awarded if none of the above situations exist; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; Regarding pipeline corrosion, if more than 30% of the pipelines are slightly corroded and the corrosion depth is less than 25% of the pipeline wall thickness, the pipelines are yellow rusted, and the galvanized surface is slightly peeled off, 5 points will be awarded; if more than 30% of the pipelines are severely corroded, the pipelines are corroded to a dark brown color, and some of the surface layers are cracked and peeled off, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; The scores of each part of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions are calculated and the average score is used as the final index score of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions, and the index weight of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions is 50%.

[0009] Furthermore, the internal safety training records of the enterprise: if the enterprise conducts internal training more than 4 times a year, 2 points will be awarded; if the enterprise conducts internal training less than 4 times a year, 6 points will be awarded; if there is no training, 10 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The indicator weight of the internal safety training records of the enterprise accounts for 20%; The enterprise's safety organization and personnel configuration: 2 points for setting up a safety organization and having sufficient full-time and part-time safety personnel; 7 points for setting up a safety organization but insufficient full-time and part-time safety personnel; 10 points for having no safety organization and no full-time and part-time safety personnel. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The indicator weight of the enterprise's safety organization and personnel configuration accounts for 20%; The formulation of the enterprise's emergency plan: 0 points for formulating a comprehensive plan and various special plans and on-site disposal plans that have been reviewed and filed; 2 points for formulating a comprehensive plan and various special plans and on-site disposal plans but not filed; 6 points for formulating a comprehensive plan and various special plans and on-site disposal plans but not reviewed and filed; 10 points for not formulating any emergency plan. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The indicator weight of the formulation of the enterprise's emergency plan accounts for 20%; The material and equipment configuration of the enterprise's emergency personnel: if both material and equipment and personnel configuration meet the requirements, 0 points will be awarded; if the two items meet 90% in total, 1 point will be awarded; if the two items meet 70-90% in total, 2 points will be awarded; if the two items meet 50-70% in total, 6 points will be awarded; if the two items are less than 50% in total, 10 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The index weight of the material and equipment configuration of the enterprise's emergency personnel accounts for 20%; The frequency of gas safety publicity for users: 0 points for regular safety publicity, 10 points for no regular publicity. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The frequency of gas safety publicity for users accounts for 20% of the indicator weight.

[0010] Furthermore, the type of gas leakage pipeline diffusion, check the gas diffusion environment, outdoor overhead pipes get 2 points, indoor exposed pipelines get 4 points, indoor buried pipelines get 10 points. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences of the leakage. The weight of the gas leakage pipeline diffusion type accounts for 35%; The type of building to which the gas pipeline belongs. Verify the nature of the building where the gas pipeline is located. A normal community with a well-ventilated kitchen will get 1 point, a commercial and residential community will get 2 points, an apartment will get 5 points, and a closed kitchen will get 10 points. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences of a leak. The weight of the building type to which the gas pipeline belongs is 40%; The gas pipeline installation area, check the pipeline installation area, 2 points for installation in general residential areas, 4 points for installation in commercial and office areas, and 10 points for installation through underground garages and closed areas. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences of leakage. The weight of the gas pipeline installation area is 25%.

[0011] Furthermore, a semi-quantitative evaluation method is used to calculate the risk probability score of the city gas pipeline before correction, which is expressed as follows: , Where: P of —Possibility score before correction; P i —The score of the i-th evaluation indicator; P ij —Single evaluation index score, using a ten-point system; i=1, 2,; j=1, 2, ..., J, j is the number of indicators included in the corresponding i-th category of evaluation indicators; I ij —The weight of a single evaluation indicator; The semi-quantitative risk assessment method is used to calculate the safety management risk score, which is expressed as follows: , Where: H—safety management risk score; h i —The score of a single evaluation indicator is based on a ten-point system; i=1, 2, ......., n; n is the number of evaluation indicators; γ i —The weight of a single evaluation indicator; The safety management risk correction coefficient is determined according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship: if the safety management risk score is 0≤H<1, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 0.95; if the safety management risk score is 1≤H<2, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1; if the safety management risk score is 2≤H<3, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.05; if the safety management risk score is 3≤H<4, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.1; if the safety management risk score is 4≤H<5, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.15; if the safety management risk score is H≥5, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.2; The coefficient correction is performed on the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline, and the formula is expressed as follows: , Where: P—corrected risk probability score; α—safety management correction coefficient; The risk possibility assessment level of the urban gas pipeline is determined according to the preset risk possibility relationship. If the corrected risk possibility score is 0≤P<2, the risk possibility assessment level is level 1, which means extremely low possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 2≤P<4, the risk possibility assessment level is level 2, which means low possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 4≤P<5, the risk possibility assessment level is level 3, which means medium possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 5≤P<8, the risk possibility assessment level is level 4, which means high possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 8≤P≤10, the risk possibility assessment level is level 5, which means high possibility.

[0012] Furthermore, a semi-quantitative assessment method is used to calculate the risk consequence score of urban gas pipelines, which is expressed as follows: , Where: C—risk consequence score; C i —The score of the i-th evaluation indicator; C ik —Single evaluation index score, i=1, 2, 3; k=1, 2, ..., K, K is the number of indicators included in the corresponding i-th evaluation index; I ik —The weight of a single evaluation indicator; The risk consequence level of the urban gas pipeline is determined according to the preset consequence assessment level relationship. If the risk consequence score is 0≤C<2, the risk consequence level is level 1, and the consequence impact is small; if the risk consequence score is 2≤C<5, the risk consequence level is level 2, and the consequence impact is general; if the risk consequence score is 5≤C<6.5, the risk consequence level is level 3, and the consequence impact is large; if the risk consequence score is 6.5≤C<8, the risk consequence level is level 4, and the consequence impact is significant; if the risk consequence score is 8≤C≤10, the risk consequence level is level 5, and the consequence impact is extremely large.

[0013] Furthermore, a comprehensive assessment is made according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy plan, and the risk level is divided into four levels: I-low, II-general, III-large, and IV-major; The corresponding control strategy plan for IV-major is: unacceptable risk, maintenance and renovation measures should be taken immediately until the risk level drops to an acceptable range; The corresponding control strategy for the above III-large is: maintenance, renovation or strengthening management should be taken to reduce the risk to general risk or below. If the risk level still cannot be reduced, the pipeline should be inspected and monitored; The II-general corresponding control strategy scheme is: increase the inspection frequency; The corresponding control strategy for the I-low is: regular inspection and maintenance.

[0014] In a second aspect, the present invention provides a risk assessment system for the operation of a city gas pipeline with a defect, comprising the following modules: The pre-correction scoring module is used to score the pipeline operation safety index of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding index weight, and use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline; The correction coefficient module is used to score the pipeline safety emergency index as the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding index weight, use the semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the safety management risk score of the city gas pipeline, and determine the safety management risk correction coefficient according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship; A correction level module is used to use the determined safety management risk correction coefficient to correct the risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline before correction, obtain the corrected risk possibility score and determine the risk possibility assessment level of the city gas pipeline according to a preset risk possibility relationship; The consequence level module is used to score the pipeline leakage hazard indicators of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding indicator weights, use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the risk consequence score of the city gas pipeline, and determine the risk consequence level of the city gas pipeline according to the preset consequence evaluation level relationship; The risk strategy module is used to make a comprehensive assessment of the risk possibility level and risk consequence level of urban gas pipelines according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy solutions.

[0015] In a third aspect, the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium, which, when the instructions in the storage medium are executed by a processor of an electronic device, enables the electronic device to execute the risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline as described in any one of the first aspects.

[0016] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects achieved by the present invention are as follows: the risk assessment method, system and storage medium for the defective operation of urban gas pipelines provided by the present invention calculate the possibility level and consequence level according to the current operation status of the community gas risers and the pipes before the household meters and the degree of perfection of the safety management of the gas management company, and then derive the risk level of the assessment unit according to the risk matrix, so as to determine the subsequent management requirements and measures of the assessment unit, reflect the actual situation of the on-site gas pipeline operation, and give strategic measures in combination with the risk level to guide the urgency of pipeline transformation, avoid hidden dangers, improve operation monitoring efficiency and reduce costs. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0017] Figure 1 A flow chart of a method for risk assessment of a city gas pipeline with defective operation provided in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 A schematic diagram of an indoor gas riser system provided according to an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 3 A schematic diagram of an outdoor gas riser system provided according to an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 4 A schematic diagram of a risk matrix provided according to an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0018] The present invention will be further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. The following embodiments are only used to more clearly illustrate the technical solution of the present invention, and cannot be used to limit the protection scope of the present invention.

[0019] like Figure 1 As shown, an embodiment of the present invention provides a risk assessment method for the operation of a city gas pipeline with a defect, comprising the following steps: The pipeline operation safety index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined, and the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline is calculated using a semi-quantitative evaluation method; The pipeline safety emergency index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined. The safety management risk score of the city gas pipeline is calculated using a semi-quantitative evaluation method, and the safety management risk correction coefficient is determined according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship; Using the determined safety management risk correction coefficient, the obtained risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline before correction is corrected to obtain the corrected risk possibility score and determine the risk possibility assessment level of the city gas pipeline according to the preset risk possibility relationship; The pipeline leakage hazard index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined. The risk consequence score of the city gas pipeline is calculated by using a semi-quantitative evaluation method, and the risk consequence level of the city gas pipeline is determined according to the preset consequence evaluation level relationship; The risk possibility assessment level and risk consequence level of urban gas pipelines are comprehensively judged according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy plans.

[0020] In this embodiment, the pipeline operation safety index includes pipeline completion acceptance materials, pipeline service life, on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions, and indoor and outdoor gas leakage conditions of the pipeline in the past three years; Pipeline safety emergency indicators include the enterprise's internal safety training records, the enterprise's safety organization and personnel configuration, the enterprise's emergency plan formulation, the enterprise's emergency personnel material equipment configuration, and the frequency of users' gas safety publicity; Pipeline leakage hazard indicators include the diffusion type of the gas leakage pipeline, the type of building to which the gas pipeline belongs, and the area where the gas pipeline is installed.

[0021] In this embodiment, the pipeline completion acceptance materials are scored according to the completeness of the data: 0 points for complete data, 4 points for relatively complete data, and 10 points for no data; the higher the score, the higher the risk of the current operation of the pipeline; according to the influence of the actual operation status of the pipeline, the weight of the pipeline completion acceptance materials is 5%; The service life of the pipeline is scored according to the operating life of the gas pipeline: 0 to 5 years for 0 points, 6 to 9 years for 2 points, 10 to 19 years for 6 points, 20 to 29 years for 8 points, and more than 30 years for 10 points; the higher the score, the higher the risk of the current operation of the pipeline; based on the impact of the actual operating conditions of the pipeline, the indicator weight of the service life of the pipeline is 10%; The indoor and outdoor air leakage of pipelines in the past three years includes the outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years and the indoor pipeline leakage in the past three years, such as Figure 2 and Figure 3 . In the past three years, the outdoor pipeline leakage situation was statistically divided into the pipeline leakage point locations of short risers, outdoor overhead pipes, and outdoor risers, and scored according to the leakage frequency: 2 points for the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes less than 10%, 6 points for the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes 10%-30%, and 10 points for the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes greater than 30%. The weight of the indicator of outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years is 5%; The statistics of indoor pipe leakage in the past three years were respectively as follows: if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is less than 3%, 4 points will be awarded; if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is 3%-5%, 6 points will be awarded; if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is greater than 5%, 10 points will be awarded; the weight of the indicator of indoor pipe leakage in the past three years is 30%.

[0022] In this embodiment, the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions include the operation conditions of the gas short riser, outdoor overhead pipeline, outdoor riser, indoor riser, front pipe, casing and the corrosion conditions of each pipeline; For the gas short riser, if the metal hose is deformed or corroded, 3 points will be awarded; if the short riser tee, anti-theft valve, and thread plug are corroded, 5 points will be awarded; if the double-sleeve is corroded, 9 points will be awarded; if the anti-corrosion failure at the root of the short riser occurs, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; For outdoor overhead pipes, if the net distance between the pipes installed along the outer wall and the doors and window openings of the room where the gas pipes should not be laid is less than 0.3m, 3 points will be awarded; if the pipes are deformed, 7 points will be awarded; if the safety measures for the pipes passing through the confined space are not in place, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above situations exists, 0 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipes; For the riser, if it is located in the kitchen and is enclosed but has a maintenance vent, 2 points will be awarded; if the distance between the riser and the stove is less than 30 cm, 6 points will be awarded; if it is located in the kitchen and is enclosed but has no maintenance vent, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; For the pipe before the meter, 3 points will be awarded if the connection position of the hard pipe is unreasonable, 6 points will be awarded if the hard pipe connection is enclosed, 10 points will be awarded if a soft pipe is used, and 0 points will be awarded if none of the above situations exists. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline. For the casing part, 2 points will be awarded if there is a casing but the casing diameter is unreasonable, 4 points will be awarded if there is a casing but the gap between the casing and the gas pipe is not effectively sealed, 5 points will be awarded if there is a casing and the casing through the floor is severely corroded, 9 points will be awarded if the casing is secretly sealed and the pipe is corroded, 10 points will be awarded if there is no casing, and 0 points will be awarded if none of the above situations exist; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; Regarding pipeline corrosion, if more than 30% of the pipelines are slightly corroded and the corrosion depth is less than 25% of the pipeline wall thickness, the pipelines are yellow rusted, and the galvanized surface is slightly peeled off, 5 points will be awarded; if more than 30% of the pipelines are severely corroded, the pipelines are corroded to a dark brown color, and some of the surface layers are cracked and peeled off, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; The scores of each part of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions are calculated and the average score is used as the final index score of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions, and the index weight of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions is 50%.

[0023] In this embodiment, the internal safety training records of the enterprise: if the enterprise conducts internal training more than 4 times a year, 2 points will be awarded; if the enterprise conducts internal training less than 4 times a year, 6 points will be awarded; if there is no training, 10 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The indicator weight of the internal safety training records of the enterprise accounts for 20%; Enterprise safety organization and staffing: 2 points for setting up a safety organization and having sufficient full-time and part-time safety personnel; 7 points for setting up a safety organization but insufficient full-time and part-time safety personnel; 10 points for having no safety organization and no full-time and part-time safety personnel. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise safety management. The weight of the indicator of enterprise safety organization and staffing is 20%; The formulation of the enterprise's emergency plan: 0 points for formulating a comprehensive plan, various special plans and on-site disposal plans and having them reviewed and filed; 2 points for formulating a comprehensive plan, various special plans and on-site disposal plans but not filing them; 6 points for formulating a comprehensive plan, various special plans and on-site disposal plans but not reviewing and filing them; 10 points for not formulating any emergency plan. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The weight of the indicator for the formulation of the enterprise's emergency plan accounts for 20%; The configuration of materials and equipment for enterprise emergency personnel: if both materials and equipment and personnel configuration meet the requirements, 0 points will be awarded; if the total of the two can meet 90%, 1 point will be awarded; if the total of the two can meet 70-90%, 2 points will be awarded; if the total of the two can meet 50-70%, 6 points will be awarded; if the total of the two is less than 50%, 10 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The weight of the indicator of the configuration of materials and equipment for enterprise emergency personnel accounts for 20%; Frequency of gas safety publicity for users: 0 points for regular safety publicity, 10 points for no regular publicity. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The frequency of gas safety publicity for users accounts for 20% of the indicator weight.

[0024] In this embodiment, the diffusion type of gas leakage pipeline is to check the gas diffusion environment. Outdoor overhead pipes are scored 2 points, indoor exposed pipes are scored 4 points, and indoor buried pipes are scored 10 points. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences may be after the leakage. The weight of the diffusion type of gas leakage pipeline is 35%; The type of building to which the gas pipeline belongs. Verify the nature of the building where the gas pipeline is located. A normal community with a well-ventilated kitchen will get 1 point, a commercial and residential community will get 2 points, an apartment will get 5 points, and a closed kitchen will get 10 points. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences of a leak. The weight of the building type to which the gas pipeline belongs is 40%; Gas pipeline installation area: Check the pipeline installation area. 2 points will be awarded for installation in general residential areas, 4 points will be awarded for installation in commercial and office areas, and 10 points will be awarded for installation through underground garages and closed areas. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences may be after a leak. The weight of the gas pipeline installation area accounts for 25%.

[0025] In this embodiment, a semi-quantitative evaluation method is used to calculate and obtain the risk probability score of the city gas pipeline before correction, which is expressed by the formula: , Where: P of —Possibility score before correction; P i —The score of the i-th evaluation indicator; P ij —Single evaluation index score, using a ten-point system; i=1, 2,; j=1, 2, ..., J, j is the number of indicators included in the corresponding i-th category of evaluation indicators; I ij —The weight of a single evaluation indicator.

[0026] The semi-quantitative risk assessment method is used to calculate the safety management risk score, which is expressed as follows: , Where: H—safety management risk score; h i —The score of a single evaluation indicator is based on a ten-point system; i=1, 2, ......., n; n is the number of evaluation indicators; γ i —The weight of a single evaluation indicator.

[0027] The safety management risk correction factor is determined based on the preset safety management risk factor relationship, as shown in Table 1 below.

[0028] Table 1 Corresponding score Safety management correction factor α 0≤H＜1 0.95 1≤H＜2 1 2≤H＜3 1.05 3≤H＜4 1.1 4≤H＜5 1.15 H≥5 1.2 The safety management risk correction coefficient is determined according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship: if the safety management risk score is 0≤H<1, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 0.95; if the safety management risk score is 1≤H<2, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1; if the safety management risk score is 2≤H<3, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.05; if the safety management risk score is 3≤H<4, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.1; if the safety management risk score is 4≤H<5, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.15; if the safety management risk score is H≥5, the safety management risk correction coefficient is 1.2.

[0029] The coefficient correction is performed on the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline, and the formula is expressed as follows: , Where: P is the corrected risk probability score; α is the safety management correction factor.

[0030] The risk possibility assessment level of the urban gas pipeline is determined based on the preset risk possibility relationship, as shown in Table 2 below.

[0031] Table 2

[0032] The risk possibility assessment level of the urban gas pipeline is determined according to the preset risk possibility relationship. If the corrected risk possibility score is 0≤P<2, the risk possibility assessment level is level 1, which means extremely low possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 2≤P<4, the risk possibility assessment level is level 2, which means low possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 4≤P<5, the risk possibility assessment level is level 3, which means medium possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 5≤P<8, the risk possibility assessment level is level 4, which means high possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 8≤P≤10, the risk possibility assessment level is level 5, which means high possibility.

[0033] In this embodiment, a semi-quantitative evaluation method is used to calculate the risk consequence score of the city gas pipeline, which is expressed as follows: , Where: C—risk consequence score; C i —The score of the i-th evaluation indicator; C ik —Single evaluation index score, i=1, 2, 3; k=1, 2, ..., K, K is the number of indicators included in the corresponding i-th evaluation index; I ik —The weight of a single evaluation indicator.

[0034] The risk consequence level of the urban gas pipeline is determined according to the preset consequence assessment level relationship, as shown in Table 3 below.

[0035] Table 3 Consequence score level illustrate 0≤C＜2 1 Small consequences 2≤C＜5 2 General consequences 5≤C＜6.5 3 The consequences are serious 6.5≤C＜8 4 The consequences are significant 8≤C≤10 5 The consequences are huge The risk consequence level of the urban gas pipeline is determined according to the preset consequence assessment level relationship. If the risk consequence score is 0≤C<2, the risk consequence level is level 1, and the consequence impact is small; if the risk consequence score is 2≤C<5, the risk consequence level is level 2, and the consequence impact is general; if the risk consequence score is 5≤C<6.5, the risk consequence level is level 3, and the consequence impact is large; if the risk consequence score is 6.5≤C<8, the risk consequence level is level 4, and the consequence impact is significant; if the risk consequence score is 8≤C≤10, the risk consequence level is level 5, and the consequence impact is extremely large.

[0036] In this embodiment, a comprehensive judgment is made according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy scheme, and the risk level is divided into four levels: I-low, II-general, III-large, and IV-major, as shown in Table 4 and Figure 4 .

[0037] Table 4 Serial number Risk Level Control principles 1 IV (major) For unacceptable risks, maintenance, renovation and improvement measures should be taken immediately until the risk level drops to an acceptable range. 2 Ⅲ (larger) Maintenance, renovation and reconstruction measures or strengthened management should be taken to reduce the risk to general risk or below. If the risk level still cannot be reduced, the pipeline should be inspected and monitored. 3 Ⅱ (General) Increase inspection frequency. 4 Ⅰ (low) Regular inspection and maintenance. IV-Major corresponding control strategy plan is: unacceptable risk, maintenance, renovation and transformation measures should be taken immediately until the risk level drops to an acceptable range; III-The corresponding control strategy plan for the larger one is: maintenance, renovation and transformation measures or strengthened management should be taken to reduce the risk to general risk or below. If the risk level still cannot be reduced, the pipeline should be inspected and monitored; Ⅱ-General corresponding control strategy solutions are: increase the inspection frequency; The corresponding control strategy for Ⅰ-Low is: regular inspection and maintenance.

[0038] In addition, an embodiment of the present invention provides a risk assessment system for the operation of a city gas pipeline with a defect, including the following modules: The pre-correction scoring module is used to score the pipeline operation safety index of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding index weight, and use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline; The correction coefficient module is used to score the pipeline safety emergency indicators of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding indicator weights, use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the safety management risk score of the city gas pipeline, and determine the safety management risk correction coefficient according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship; A correction level module is used to use the determined safety management risk correction coefficient to correct the risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline before correction, obtain the corrected risk possibility score and determine the risk possibility assessment level of the city gas pipeline according to a preset risk possibility relationship; The consequence level module is used to score the pipeline leakage hazard indicators of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding indicator weights, use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the risk consequence score of the city gas pipeline, and determine the risk consequence level of the city gas pipeline according to the preset consequence evaluation level relationship; The risk strategy module is used to make a comprehensive assessment of the risk possibility level and risk consequence level of urban gas pipelines according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy solutions.

[0039] Furthermore, an embodiment of the present invention further provides a computer-readable storage medium. When the instructions in the storage medium are executed by a processor of an electronic device, the electronic device can execute the above-mentioned risk assessment method for the operation of a city gas pipeline with defects.

[0040] The above is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the technical principles of the present invention. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A risk assessment method for the operation of urban gas pipelines with defects, characterized in that: The steps include: The pipeline operation safety index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined, and the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline is calculated using a semi-quantitative evaluation method; The pipeline safety emergency index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined. The safety management risk score of the city gas pipeline is calculated using a semi-quantitative evaluation method, and the safety management risk correction coefficient is determined according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship; Using the determined safety management risk correction coefficient, the obtained risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline before correction is corrected to obtain the corrected risk possibility score and determine the risk possibility assessment level of the city gas pipeline according to the preset risk possibility relationship; The pipeline leakage hazard index as the city gas pipeline is scored and the corresponding index weight is determined. The risk consequence score of the city gas pipeline is calculated by using a semi-quantitative evaluation method, and the risk consequence level of the city gas pipeline is determined according to the preset consequence evaluation level relationship; The risk possibility assessment level and risk consequence level of urban gas pipelines are comprehensively judged according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy plans.

2. The risk assessment method for the operation of a city gas pipeline with defects according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The pipeline operation safety indicators include pipeline completion acceptance materials, pipeline service life, on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions, and indoor and outdoor gas leakage conditions of pipelines in the past three years; The pipeline safety emergency indicators include the enterprise's internal safety training records, the enterprise's safety organization and personnel configuration, the enterprise's emergency plan formulation, the enterprise's emergency personnel material equipment configuration and the frequency of gas safety publicity for users; The pipeline leakage hazard indicators include the diffusion type of the gas leakage pipeline, the type of building to which the gas pipeline belongs, and the area where the gas pipeline is installed.

3. The risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline according to claim 2 is characterized in that: The pipeline completion acceptance materials are scored according to the completeness of the data: 0 points for complete data, 4 points for relatively complete data, and 10 points for no data; the higher the score, the higher the risk of the current operation of the pipeline; according to the impact of the actual operation of the pipeline, the index weight of the pipeline completion acceptance materials is 5%; The pipeline service life is scored according to the operating life of the gas pipeline: 0 to 5 years is scored as 0 points, 6 to 9 years is scored as 2 points, 10 to 19 years is scored as 6 points, 20 to 29 years is scored as 8 points, and more than 30 years is scored as 10 points; The higher the score, the higher the risk of the pipeline's current operation. Based on the impact of the actual operation of the pipeline, the indicator weight of the pipeline service life is 10%; The indoor and outdoor air leakage of pipelines in the past three years include outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years and indoor pipeline leakage in the past three years; the outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years is divided into the pipeline leakage point locations of short risers, outdoor overhead pipes, and outdoor risers, and scored according to the leakage frequency: 2 points if the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes is less than 10%, 6 points if the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes is 10%-30%, and 10 points if the proportion of leaking pipes to the total number of pipes is greater than 30%; the weight of the indicator of outdoor pipeline leakage in the past three years is 5%; The statistics of indoor pipe gas leakage in the past three years are as follows: if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is less than 3%, 4 points will be awarded; if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is 3%-5% of the total number of households, 6 points will be awarded; if the proportion of households with gas leakage in the community is greater than 5%, 10 points will be awarded; The indicator weight of indoor pipe leakage in the past three years is 30%.

4. The risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline according to claim 3 is characterized in that: The on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions include the operation conditions of the gas short riser, outdoor overhead pipeline, outdoor riser, indoor riser, pre-meter pipe, casing and the corrosion conditions of each pipeline; For the gas short riser, if the metal hose is deformed or corroded, 3 points will be awarded; if the short riser tee, anti-theft valve, and thread plug are corroded, 5 points will be awarded; if the double-sleeve is corroded, 9 points will be awarded; if the anti-corrosion failure at the root of the short riser occurs, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; For outdoor overhead pipes, if the net distance between the pipes installed along the outer wall and the doors and window openings of the room where the gas pipes should not be laid is less than 0.3m, 3 points will be awarded; if the pipes are deformed, 7 points will be awarded; if the safety measures for the pipes passing through the confined space are not in place, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above situations exists, 0 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipes; For the riser, if it is located in the kitchen and is enclosed but has a maintenance vent, 2 points will be awarded; if the distance between the riser and the stove is less than 30 cm, 6 points will be awarded; if it is located in the kitchen and is enclosed but has no maintenance vent, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; For the pipe before the meter, 3 points will be awarded if the connection position of the hard pipe is unreasonable, 6 points will be awarded if the hard pipe connection is enclosed, 10 points will be awarded if a soft pipe is used, and 0 points will be awarded if none of the above situations exists. The higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline. For the casing part, 2 points will be awarded if there is a casing but the casing diameter is unreasonable, 4 points will be awarded if there is a casing but the gap between the casing and the gas pipe is not effectively sealed, 5 points will be awarded if there is a casing and the casing through the floor is severely corroded, 9 points will be awarded if the casing is secretly sealed and the pipe is corroded, 10 points will be awarded if there is no casing, and 0 points will be awarded if none of the above situations exist; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; Regarding pipeline corrosion, if more than 30% of the pipelines are slightly corroded and the corrosion depth is less than 25% of the pipeline wall thickness, the pipelines are yellow rusted, and the galvanized surface is slightly peeled off, 5 points will be awarded; if more than 30% of the pipelines are severely corroded, the pipelines are corroded to a dark brown color, and some of the surface layers are cracked and peeled off, 10 points will be awarded; if none of the above conditions exists, 0 points will be awarded; the higher the score, the worse the current operation of the pipeline; The scores of each part of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions are calculated and the average score is used as the final index score of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions, and the index weight of the on-site pipeline operation and pipeline corrosion conditions is 50%.

5. The risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline according to claim 4 is characterized in that: Internal safety training records of the enterprise: 2 points are awarded if the enterprise conducts internal training more than 4 times a year, 6 points are awarded if the enterprise conducts internal training less than 4 times a year, and 10 points are awarded if there is no training. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The indicator weight of the internal safety training records of the enterprise accounts for 20%; The enterprise's safety organization and personnel configuration: 2 points for setting up a safety organization and having sufficient full-time and part-time safety personnel; 7 points for setting up a safety organization but insufficient full-time and part-time safety personnel; 10 points for having no safety organization and no full-time and part-time safety personnel. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The indicator weight of the enterprise's safety organization and personnel configuration accounts for 20%; The formulation of the enterprise's emergency plan: 0 points for formulating a comprehensive plan and various special plans and on-site disposal plans that have been reviewed and filed; 2 points for formulating a comprehensive plan and various special plans and on-site disposal plans but not filed; 6 points for formulating a comprehensive plan and various special plans and on-site disposal plans but not reviewed and filed; 10 points for not formulating any emergency plan. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The indicator weight of the formulation of the enterprise's emergency plan accounts for 20%; The material and equipment configuration of the enterprise's emergency personnel: if both material and equipment and personnel configuration meet the requirements, 0 points will be awarded; if the two items meet 90% in total, 1 point will be awarded; if the two items meet 70-90% in total, 2 points will be awarded; if the two items meet 50-70% in total, 6 points will be awarded; if the two items are less than 50% in total, 10 points will be awarded. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The index weight of the material and equipment configuration of the enterprise's emergency personnel accounts for 20%; The frequency of gas safety publicity for users: 0 points for regular safety publicity, 10 points for no regular publicity. The higher the score, the worse the enterprise's safety management. The frequency of gas safety publicity for users accounts for 20% of the indicator weight.

6. The risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline according to claim 5 is characterized in that: The diffusion type of the gas leak pipeline, check the gas diffusion environment, outdoor overhead pipes get 2 points, indoor exposed pipes get 4 points, and indoor buried pipes get 10 points. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences of the leak. The weight of the diffusion type of the gas leak pipeline is 35%; The type of building to which the gas pipeline belongs. Verify the nature of the building where the gas pipeline is located. A normal community with a well-ventilated kitchen will get 1 point, a commercial and residential community will get 2 points, an apartment will get 5 points, and a closed kitchen will get 10 points. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences of a leak. The weight of the building type to which the gas pipeline belongs is 40%; The gas pipeline installation area, check the pipeline installation area, 2 points for installation in general residential areas, 4 points for installation in commercial and office areas, and 10 points for installation through underground garages and closed areas. The higher the score, the more serious the consequences of leakage. The weight of the gas pipeline installation area is 25%.

7. The risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline according to claim 2 or 6 is characterized in that: A semi-quantitative assessment method is used to calculate the risk probability score of the city gas pipeline before correction, which is expressed as follows: ， Where: P of —Possibility score before correction; P i —The score of the i-th evaluation indicator; P ij —The score of a single evaluation indicator is based on a ten-point system; i=1，2，； j=1, 2, ..., J, j is the number of indicators included in the corresponding i-th category of evaluation indicators; I ij —The weight of a single evaluation indicator; The semi-quantitative risk assessment method is used to calculate the safety management risk score, which is expressed as follows: ， Where: H—safety management risk score; h i —The score of a single evaluation indicator is based on a ten-point system; i=1, 2, ......., n; n is the number of evaluation indicators; γ i —The weight of a single evaluation indicator; Determine the safety management risk correction factor based on the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship: if the safety management risk score is 0≤H<1, the safety management risk correction factor is 0.95; If the safety management risk score is 1≤H<2, the safety management risk correction factor is 1; If the safety management risk score is 2≤H<3, the safety management risk correction factor is 1.05; if the safety management risk score is 3≤H<4, the safety management risk correction factor is 1.1; if the safety management risk score is 4≤H<5, the safety management risk correction factor is 1.15; if the safety management risk score is H≥5, the safety management risk correction factor is 1.2; The coefficient correction is performed on the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline, and the formula is expressed as follows: ， Where: P—corrected risk probability score; α—safety management correction coefficient; The risk possibility assessment level of the urban gas pipeline is determined according to the preset risk possibility relationship. If the corrected risk possibility score is 0≤P<2, the risk possibility assessment level is level 1, which means extremely low possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 2≤P<4, the risk possibility assessment level is level 2, which means low possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 4≤P<5, the risk possibility assessment level is level 3, which means medium possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 5≤P<8, the risk possibility assessment level is level 4, which means high possibility; if the corrected risk possibility score is 8≤P≤10, the risk possibility assessment level is level 5, which means high possibility.

8. The risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline according to claim 7 is characterized in that: A semi-quantitative assessment method is used to calculate the risk consequence score of urban gas pipelines, which is expressed as follows: ， Where: C—risk consequence score; C i —The score of the i-th evaluation indicator; C ik —Single evaluation index score, i=1, 2, 3; k=1, 2, ..., K, K is the number of indicators included in the corresponding i-th category evaluation indicator; I ik —The weight of a single evaluation indicator; The risk consequence level of the urban gas pipeline is determined according to the preset consequence assessment level relationship. If the risk consequence score is 0≤C<2, the risk consequence level is level 1, and the consequence impact is small; if the risk consequence score is 2≤C<5, the risk consequence level is level 2, and the consequence impact is general; if the risk consequence score is 5≤C<6.5, the risk consequence level is level 3, and the consequence impact is large; if the risk consequence score is 6.5≤C<8, the risk consequence level is level 4, and the consequence impact is significant; if the risk consequence score is 8≤C≤10, the risk consequence level is level 5, and the consequence impact is extremely large.

9. The risk assessment method for the defective operation of a city gas pipeline according to claim 8 is characterized in that: Comprehensively determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategies according to the preset risk matrix, and divide the risk level into four levels: I-low, II-general, III-large, and IV-major; The corresponding control strategy plan for IV-major is: unacceptable risk, maintenance and renovation measures should be taken immediately until the risk level drops to an acceptable range; The corresponding control strategy for the above III-large is: maintenance, renovation and transformation measures or strengthened management should be taken to reduce the risk to general risk or below. If the risk level still cannot be reduced, the pipeline should be inspected and monitored; The II-general corresponding control strategy scheme is: increase the inspection frequency; The corresponding control strategy for the I-low is: regular inspection and maintenance.

10. A risk assessment system for the operation of a city gas pipeline with defects, characterized in that: Includes the following modules: The pre-correction scoring module is used to score the pipeline operation safety index of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding index weight, and use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the pre-correction risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline; The correction coefficient module is used to score the pipeline safety emergency indicators of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding indicator weights, use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the safety management risk score of the city gas pipeline, and determine the safety management risk correction coefficient according to the preset safety management risk coefficient relationship; A correction level module is used to use the determined safety management risk correction coefficient to correct the risk possibility score of the city gas pipeline before correction, obtain the corrected risk possibility score and determine the risk possibility assessment level of the city gas pipeline according to a preset risk possibility relationship; The consequence level module is used to score the pipeline leakage hazard indicators of the city gas pipeline and determine the corresponding indicator weights, use a semi-quantitative evaluation method to calculate the risk consequence score of the city gas pipeline, and determine the risk consequence level of the city gas pipeline according to the preset consequence evaluation level relationship; The risk strategy module is used to make a comprehensive assessment of the risk possibility level and risk consequence level of urban gas pipelines according to the preset risk matrix to determine the safety risk level of urban gas pipelines and the corresponding management and control strategy solutions.

11. A computer-readable storage medium, when the instructions in the storage medium are executed by a processor of an electronic device, enables the electronic device to execute the risk assessment method for the operation of a city gas pipeline with defects as described in any one of claims 1 to 9.

Images