Engineering project site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management method

Abstract

The invention discloses an engineering project site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management method. The method comprises the following steps: constructing an engineering project site safety risk assessment index system; based on the security risk assessment index system, establishing an index weight set of each security risk factor by using a structure entropy weight method; dividing and quantifying the comment levels of the safety risk assessment indexes in combination with a site; and according to the index weight of each safety risk factor and the comment level quantification result of the safety risk assessment index, determining the main safety risk factor and the engineering project site safety risk level. According to the method, the fuzziness problem and the uncertainty problem existing in the evaluation process are fully considered in the evaluation process, the subjectivity and objectivity of empowerment are considered, the obtained evaluation result fits the actual situation, and technical support can be provided for graded management and control and hidden danger investigation and treatment of field safety risks.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of safety risk assessment, and relates to a method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project. Background Art

[0002] On-site operations of engineering projects are characterized by high labor intensity, relatively weak quality of operators, complex working environment, and numerous safety risk factors. The combined effect of multiple factors has led to frequent production safety accidents, posing a serious threat to people's lives and property. In recent years, the trend of engineering project sites from single construction to cross-construction has brought new safety risks. The safety management of engineering project sites has gradually transformed from safety inspections to prevent accidents as the main means to prevent various safety risks in the production process in advance. Carrying out on-site safety risk assessment of engineering projects is to deeply grasp the root causes of accidents and to effectively implement accident prevention, which is of great significance to effectively prevent safety accidents on engineering project sites.

[0003] As a prerequisite and core content of the dual prevention mechanism, safety risk assessment can provide direction for risk classification control and hidden danger investigation and treatment. At present, the main risk assessment methods used on the construction site are work hazard analysis, safety checklist method, LEC method, etc. Although they can reflect the safety status of the site to a certain extent, a complete and comprehensive construction site safety risk indicator system has not yet been established. In addition, the risk factor indicator assessment is extremely subjective, which sometimes leads to a large deviation between the on-site assessment results and the actual situation on site, and even wrong assessment results. Although there are many on-site evaluation methods for engineering projects, there is currently no on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management method for engineering projects based on comprehensive consideration of multiple indicator factors such as safety training, personnel and equipment configuration, risk management, and work implementation. Summary of the invention

[0004] The purpose of the present invention is to solve the problems in the prior art and provide a method for safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of engineering project sites. The assessment results are in line with the actual situation on site, so that on-site management personnel have a clearer understanding of the safety risk factors and risk levels of the engineering project sites, and provide technical support for the implementation of the double prevention mechanism.

[0005] In order to achieve the above object, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions:

[0006] A method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project comprises the following steps:

[0007] Construct a site safety risk assessment indicator system for engineering projects;

[0008] Based on the safety risk assessment index system, the structural entropy weight method is used to establish the index weight set of each safety risk factor;

[0009] Classify and quantify the levels of safety risk assessment indicators based on the site;

[0010] Based on the indicator weights of various safety risk factors and the quantitative results of the levels of safety risk assessment indicators, the main safety risk factors and the safety risk levels of the project site are determined.

[0011] Furthermore, the safety risk assessment indicator system includes primary indicators, secondary indicators and tertiary indicators. The secondary indicator set is established based on the primary indicators as follows:

[0012] U={u1,u2,u3,u4,u5}

[0013] The three-level indicator sets established based on the secondary indicators are:

[0014] U i = {u i1 ,u i2 ,u i3 ,...,u in}

[0015] Among them, i represents the number of the second-level indicators u1, u2, u3, u4, u5, i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, n represents the sub-number of each third-level indicator belonging to each second-level indicator, then the indicator number of the third-level indicator is j = i1, i2, i3, ..., in.

[0016] Furthermore, the secondary indicators include regulatory factors, work implementation factors, risk management factors, personnel and equipment configuration factors, and safety training factors.

[0017] Furthermore, the second-level indicators are subordinate to several third-level indicators; the third-level indicators subordinate to the rules and regulations factors include no safety production fund guarantee, no targeted safety technology briefing, lack of comprehensive safety measures, lack of special safety measures, no construction design safety measures, no safety operating procedures and no safety production responsibility system;

[0018] The three-level indicators under the work implementation factors include failure to implement safety production responsibility targets, failure to rectify hidden dangers in a timely manner, failure to implement routine safety inspections, failure to implement written safety technical briefings, failure to implement safety measures, and failure to implement construction design safety measures;

[0019] The third-level indicators under the risk management factors include materials not stacked according to regulations, working under the influence of alcohol, arbitrarily dismantling safety facilities, not going to work after confirming safety as required, not wearing safety protection equipment as required, not managing accident-prone areas in a timely manner, and not wearing safety helmets;

[0020] The third-level indicators under the personnel and equipment configuration factors include lack of safety facilities and signs, lack of lighting facilities, non-compliant work sites, lack of qualifications to engage in corresponding activities, lack of emergency rescue personnel and lack of safety officers;

[0021] The three-level indicators under the safety training factor include no on-the-job training for special personnel, no safety training for changing jobs, no regular safety training, no safety training for new employees, and no emergency rescue training.

[0022] Furthermore, the process of establishing the indicator weight set of each safety risk factor by using the structural entropy weight method includes:

[0023] Collect the statistical results of failure causes of hazardous events at different engineering project sites to form a typical ranking of the importance of indicators;

[0024] Transform the qualitative value of the typical sorting into a quantitative value, and the information entropy calculation formula of sequence number x is:

[0025] H(x)=-kP(x)ln P(x)...(1≤x≤n)

[0026] in, λ represents the information entropy conversion parameter. The membership function of event sorting obtained according to the entropy weight method is:

[0027]

[0028] Where x represents all different locations given event u j The qualitative ranking number of , ψ(x) represents the membership function value corresponding to x;

[0029] Set the sorted number x = a ij Substitute into the membership function, qualitative value a ij Realize quantization and obtain the quantitative transformation value b ij , that is (b ij =ψ(a ij )), b ij represents the degree of membership of the sorted number x, then B=(b ij ) m×n The membership matrix representing the event ranking;

[0030] Hazard event u at location m j The consistent factor is the average recognition bj, and the calculation process is as follows:

[0031] b j =(b 1j +b 2j +...+b mj ) / m

[0032] The uncertainty of the hazard events at different locations is the blindness Q j , the calculation method is as follows:

[0033] Q j =|{[max(b 1j ,b 2j ,...b mj )-b j ]+[min(b 1j ,b 2j ,...b mj )-b j ]} / 2|

[0034] Weight normalization processing, all the engineering project sites under statistical analysis have a weight normalization process for each event u j Have an overall understanding j ,Right now:

[0035] c j =b j (1-Q j ),c j >0

[0036] Then the overall evaluation vector for all events at position m is:

[0037] C=(c1,c2,...,c n )

[0038] c j =b j (1-Q j ) is normalized, then the event u j The weight wj is:

[0039]

[0040] Where j = i1, i2, ..., in, W i ={w i1 ,w i2 ,...,w in} is the event set U i = {u i1 ,u i2 ,...,u in}, that is, the overall judgment of the importance of the event at the m locations, which satisfies the actual situation of all the m locations.

[0041] Furthermore, the comment levels of the safety risk assessment indicators include negligible risk, allowable risk, medium risk, major risk and extremely high risk.

[0042] Furthermore, the quantification process of the comment level of the safety risk assessment indicator is as follows:

[0043] Convert the review set into a rating matrix Z = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5} T ;

[0044] According to the different levels of comments on the safety risk assessment indicators, they are divided into: (0,1] indicates negligible risk, (1,2] indicates allowable risk, (2,3] indicates medium risk, (3,4] indicates major risk and (4,5] indicates extremely high risk;

[0045] According to the evaluation results of the third-level indicators, the membership matrix R of the second-level indicator risk is calculated. i and weight set W i .

[0046] Furthermore, the main safety risk factor is an evaluation indicator corresponding to the maximum value of the risk level of the secondary indicator:

[0047] B i =W i R i ;

[0048] E i =B i Z

[0049] Among them, B i Represents the evaluation matrix of the secondary indicators, W i Represents the weight set of secondary indicators, R i represents the membership matrix of the secondary indicator risk, Z represents the evaluation level matrix, E i Indicates the risk level of the secondary indicator.

[0050] Furthermore, the on-site safety risk level of the engineering project is the risk level of the first-level indicator:

[0051] A=W[B1 B2 B3 B4 B5] T

[0052] E=AZ

[0053] Among them, A represents the evaluation matrix of the first-level indicators, W represents the weight of the first-level indicators, [B1 B2 B3 B4 B5] T It represents the evaluation matrix of the secondary indicators, Z represents the evaluation grade matrix, and E represents the risk grade of the primary indicators.

[0054] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0055] The present invention provides a method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of engineering projects. By constructing an on-site safety risk assessment index system for engineering projects and using the structural entropy weight method, an in-depth analysis is conducted from five aspects: safety training, personnel and equipment configuration, risk management, work implementation, and rules and regulations. A more detailed classification of safety risk management factors is provided for on-site safety of engineering projects, which supports the application of on-site risk assessment and risk factor optimization management methods. The present invention can avoid the defects of the commonly used risk analysis methods on engineering project sites, such as complex working procedures, high subjectivity in risk assessment, and inaccurate risk assessment results. The fuzziness and uncertainty problems in the evaluation are fully considered during the evaluation process, and the subjectivity and objectivity of the empowerment are taken into account. The obtained evaluation results are in line with the actual situation, and can provide technical support for the hierarchical control of on-site safety risks and the investigation and treatment of hidden dangers. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0056] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings required for use in the embodiments are briefly introduced below. It should be understood that the following drawings only show certain embodiments of the present invention and therefore should not be regarded as limiting the scope. For ordinary technicians in this field, other related drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work.

[0057] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of the engineering project site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management method of the present invention.

[0058] Figure 2 Schematic diagram of the on-site safety risk assessment index system for an engineering project in Example 1 of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0059] The following is a description of exemplary embodiments of the present application in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, including various details of the embodiments of the present application to facilitate understanding, which should be considered as merely exemplary. Therefore, it should be recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that various changes and modifications can be made to the embodiments described herein without departing from the scope and spirit of the present application. Similarly, for the sake of clarity and conciseness, the description of well-known functions and structures is omitted in the following description.

[0060] Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present application, but not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present application, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in the field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present application.

[0061] In addition, the term "and / or" in this article is only a description of the association relationship between the associated objects, indicating that there can be three relationships. For example, A and / or B can represent: A exists alone, A and B exist at the same time, and B exists alone. In addition, the character " / " in this article generally indicates that the associated objects before and after are in an "or" relationship.

[0062] The present invention is further described in detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings:

[0063] See also Figure 1 The present invention provides a method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project, comprising the following steps:

[0064] S1. Taking the unsafe behaviors of people and the unsafe conditions of objects at the project site as the problem orientation, establish the project site safety risk assessment indicator system.

[0065] S2, based on the safety risk assessment indicator system, U is the first-level indicator, and the second-level indicator set is U = (u1, u2, u3, u4, u5), where u1, u2, u3, u4 and u5 represent rules and regulations, work implementation, risk management, personnel and equipment configuration and safety training respectively. A third-level indicator layer is established based on the second-level indicator set, and the third-level indicator layer object set is U i =(u 11 、u 12 、u 13 、u 14 、u 15 、u 16 、u 17 、u 21 、u 22 、u 23 、u 24 、u 25 、u 26 、u 31 、u 32 、u 33 、u 34 、u 35 、u 36 、u 37 、u 41 、u 42 、u 43 、u 44 、u 45 、u 46 、u 51 、u 52 、u 53 、u 54 、u 55 ), where u1 in the third-level indicator layer includes no safety production fund guarantee u 11 , No targeted safety technology disclosure document12 , lack of comprehensive safety measures 13 , lack of special safety measures 14 , No construction design safety measures 15 , No safety operating procedures 16 , No safety production responsibility system 17 , u2 includes failure to implement safety production responsibility targets u 21 , hidden dangers are found but not rectified in time 22 , Failure to implement routine safety inspections 23 2. Failure to implement written safety technical instructions 24 , Failure to implement safety measures 25 2. Failure to implement construction design safety measures 26 , U3 includes materials not stacked according to regulations 31 , Construction work after drinking 32 , arbitrarily dismantle safety facilities 33 , Failure to confirm safety before taking up the post as required 34 , Failure to wear safety protective equipment as required 35 , Failure to timely manage accident-prone areas 36 , Not wearing a helmet 37 , u4 including lack of safety facilities and signs u 41 , No lighting facilities 42 , The working site does not meet the regulations 43 , not qualified to engage in corresponding activities 44 , No emergency rescue personnel 45 , No safety officer 46 , including special personnel who have not received on-the-job training 51 2. Failure to provide safety training when changing jobs 52 , Failure to carry out routine safety training 53 2. New employees did not receive safety training 54 , No emergency rescue training was carried out 55 .

[0066] S3, based on the structural entropy weight method, establish a set of indicator weights for each security risk factor.

[0067] According to the statistical number of injury events caused by different reasons at the project site, the importance of each indicator event is ranked. A typical ranking of indicator importance is formed, as shown in Table 1.

[0068] Table 1 Ranking of events by importance

[0069] event Category I Category II Event A1 √ √ √ Event A2 √ √ √

[0070] Uncertainty analysis of typical ranking of indicator weights transforms the qualitative value of typical ranking into quantitative value. The information entropy calculation formula of sequence number x is:

[0071] H(x)=-kP(x)lnP(x)...(1≤x≤n)

[0072] in, λ is the information entropy conversion parameter. The membership function of event ranking obtained by entropy weight method is:

[0073]

[0074] Where x is the event u j As shown in Table 1, if event A1 is a class, then x is equal to 1, and so on. ψ(x) is the membership function value corresponding to x.

[0075] Set the sorted number x = a ij Substitute the membership function into the equation, and the qualitative value a ij Realize quantization and obtain the quantitative transformation value b ij , that is (b ij =ψ(a ij )). b ij represents the degree of membership of the sorted number x, then B=(b ij ) m×n Membership matrix representing the ordering of events.

[0076] Hazard event u at location m j The consistent factor is the average recognition degree bj. The calculation process is as follows:

[0077] b j =(b 1j +b 2j +...+b mj ) / m

[0078] The uncertainty of the hazard events at different locations is the blindness Q j , the calculation method is as follows:

[0079] Q j =|{[max(b 1j ,b 2j ,...b mj )-b j ]+[min(b 1j ,b 2j ,...b mj )-b j ]} / 2|

[0080] Weight normalization processing, all the engineering project sites under statistical analysis have a weight normalization process for each event u jHave an overall understanding j ,Right now

[0081] c j =b j (1-Q j ),c j >0

[0082] Then the overall evaluation vector for all events at position m is:

[0083] C=(c1,c2,...,c n )

[0084] To get the event u j The weight of c j =b j (1-Q j ) is normalized, then

[0085]

[0086] Where j = i1, i2, ..., in, W i ={w i1 ,w i2 ,...,w in} is the event set U i = {u i1 ,u i2 ,...,u in}, that is, the overall judgment of the importance of the event at the m position is formed, which satisfies the actual situation of all the m positions.

[0087] S4. Establish a risk level set. According to the actual situation of on-site safety management of the project, the evaluation results of the first-level and second-level safety management indicators are divided into five levels: negligible risk, allowable risk, medium risk, major risk and extremely high risk.

[0088] S5, convert the risk level set into a risk level matrix as follows:

[0089] Z={1,2,3,4,5} T .

[0090] S6, divide the risk level standard intervals, as shown in Table 2.

[0091] Table 2 Risk level classification standards

[0092] grade Negligible risk Allowable risk Medium risk Significant risks Very high risk Points (0，1] (1,2] (2,3] (3,4] (4，5]

[0093] S7, according to the actual situation of each safety risk factor, the 31 third-level indicators are scored respectively. Based on the membership matrix and weight set of the second-level indicators, the evaluation matrix B of each second-level indicator is calculated. i =W i R i .

[0094] S8, based on the evaluation matrix and the comment set, obtain the risk status of each secondary indicator and the risk level of the primary indicator.

[0095] The present invention is further described in detail below in conjunction with specific embodiments:

[0096] Embodiment 1:

[0097] This embodiment takes a certain engineering project site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management as an example, and includes the following steps:

[0098] S1. Determine the on-site safety risk assessment index system for engineering projects, and determine the on-site safety risk assessment index system for engineering projects with safety training factors, personnel and equipment configuration factors, risk management factors, work implementation factors, and rules and regulations factors as secondary indicators, such as Figure 2 shown.

[0099] S2, based on the security risk assessment indicator system, establish the secondary indicator set U = {u1,u2,u3,u4,u5}, then the tertiary indicator sets are U i = {u i1 ,u i2 ,u i3 ,...,u in}, where i is the number of the second-level indicators u1, u2, u3, u4, u5, i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and n represents the sub-number of each third-level indicator belonging to each second-level indicator. The indicator number of the third-level indicator is j = i1, i2, i3, ..., in.

[0100] S3, select 3 locations as group 1, group 2, and group 3. Sort the importance of the secondary indicators, and use the structural entropy weight method to determine their weights based on the ranking results of importance. The relevant parameters are shown in Table 3.

[0101] Table 3 Calculation table of secondary index ranking

[0102] Calculated Value <![CDATA[U1]]> <![CDATA[U2]]> <![CDATA[U3]]> <![CDATA[U4]]> <![CDATA[U5]]> Group 1 3 5 1 4 2 Group 2 2 5 4 1 3 Group 3 2 3 5 1 4 <![CDATA[b j ]]> 0.857 0.516 0.667 0.871 0.762 <![CDATA[1-Q j ]]> 0.979 0.724 0.974 0.936 0.994 <![CDATA[c j ]]> 0.839 0.374 0.650 0.815 0.757 <![CDATA[w j ]]> 0.244 0.109 0.189 0.237 0.220

[0103] Similarly, the third-level indicators under each second-level indicator are calculated separately according to the process of structural entropy weight method, and the calculation results are shown in Tables 4 to 8.

[0104] Table 4 Weight table of subordinate indicators of U1

[0105] index <![CDATA[U 11 ]]> <![CDATA[U 12 ]]> <![CDATA[U 13 ]]> <![CDATA[U 14 ]]> Weight 0.067 0.190 0.195 0.146 index <![CDATA[U 15 ]]> <![CDATA[U 16 ]]> <![CDATA[U 17 ]]> Weight 0.139 0.120 0.143

[0106] Table 5 Weight table of subordinate indicators of U2

[0107] index <![CDATA[U 21 ]]> <![CDATA[U 22 ]]> <![CDATA[U 23 ]]> Weight 0.207 0.134 0.165 index <![CDATA[U 24 ]]> <![CDATA[U 25 ]]> <![CDATA[U 26 ]]> Weight 0.121 0.150 0.223

[0108] Table 6U3's subordinate indicator weights

[0109]

[0110]

[0111] Table 7U4's subordinate indicator weights

[0112] index <![CDATA[U 41 ]]> <![CDATA[U 42 ]]> <![CDATA[U 43 ]]> Weight 0.241 0.242 0.124 index <![CDATA[U 44 ]]> <![CDATA[U 45 ]]> <![CDATA[U 46 ]]> Weight 0.123 0.146 0.125

[0113] Table 8 Weights of Subordinate Indicators of U5

[0114] index <![CDATA[U 51 ]]> <![CDATA[U 52 ]]> <![CDATA[U 53 ]]> Weight 0.124 0.264 0.143 index <![CDATA[U 54 ]]> <![CDATA[U 55 ]]> Weight 0.254 0.215

[0115] S4, based on the on-site situation, divide the comments on safety management indicators into five levels: negligible risk, allowable risk, medium risk, major risk and extremely high risk.

[0116] S5, convert the review set into an evaluation level matrix Z = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5} T .

[0117] S6, divide different risk level standards into five intervals: (0,1], (1,2], (2,3], (3,4], (4,5].

[0118] S7, based on the statistical number of causes of different hazardous events at each project site, was finally converted into the statistical results of 31 third-level indicators, as shown in Table 9.

[0119] Table 9 Summary of the results of the three-level indicators

[0120]

[0121]

[0122] According to the statistical results, the membership matrix of each secondary indicator is obtained as follows:

[0123]

[0124]

[0125]

[0126]

[0127]

[0128] S8, calculate the evaluation matrix B of each secondary indicator based on the membership matrix and weight set of the secondary indicators i =W i R i .

[0129] B1=[0.12 0.28 0.25 0.22 0.14]

[0130] B2=[0.22 0.23 0.29 0.18 0.08]

[0131] B3=[0.10 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.17]

[0132] B4=[0.36 0.20 0.15 0.21 0.07]

[0133] B5=[0.23 0.18 0.23 0.23 0.14]

[0134] From this, we can see that the evaluation matrix of the first-level indicator U is A=W[B1 B2 B3 B4 B5] T for:

[0135] A=[0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20]

[0136] S9, based on the evaluation matrix and risk level set, the risk level E of each secondary indicator i =B i Z is E1 = 3.01; E2 = 2.67; E3 = 3.13; E4 = 2.40; E5 = 2.90

[0137] The risk level of the first-level indicator E=AZ is

[0138] E=2.94

[0139] It can be seen from this that the safety of this project is at a medium risk level. The project leader and safety management personnel should remain highly vigilant and focus on strengthening safety management of the three-level indicator factors in terms of work implementation factors, rules and regulations factors, and safety training factors in order to reduce the safety risk to an allowable risk level.

[0140] Based on the fuzzy comprehensive rating method and the structural entropy weight method, the present invention proposes for the first time a safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management method for engineering project sites. The method includes constructing an engineering project site safety risk assessment index system, uncertainty analysis of typical rankings, normalization processing, comment set and risk level classification, establishment of a membership matrix, calculation of an evaluation matrix, and displaying the risk status of secondary indicators and the risk level of primary indicators based on the comment set and the evaluation matrix.

[0141] Compared with the existing risk assessment methods such as the safety checklist method, the LEC method, and the job hazard analysis method, the method of the present invention establishes a method for the on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of engineering projects, in which the structural entropy weight method can take into account both subjectivity and objectivity, and solve the uncertainty and cognitive error problems of various indicator factors. The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method can quantify the qualitative evaluation results, fully consider the fuzziness problems in the evaluation process, and realize a systematic and comprehensive evaluation of the engineering project site. The on-site example analysis shows that the safety risk assessment results of the engineering project site are in line with the actual situation, providing technical support for the hierarchical management and control of on-site safety risks and the investigation and treatment of hidden dangers.

[0142] The above are only preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. For those skilled in the art, the present invention may have various modifications and variations. Any modification, equivalent replacement, improvement, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present invention shall be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of engineering projects, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: Construct a site safety risk assessment indicator system for engineering projects; Based on the safety risk assessment index system, the structural entropy weight method is used to establish the index weight set of each safety risk factor; Classify and quantify the levels of safety risk assessment indicators based on the site; Based on the indicator weights of various safety risk factors and the quantitative results of the levels of safety risk assessment indicators, the main safety risk factors and the safety risk levels of the project site are determined.

2. A method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project according to claim 1, characterized in that: The safety risk assessment indicator system includes primary indicators, secondary indicators and tertiary indicators. The secondary indicator set is established based on the primary indicators: U={u1,u2,u3,u4,u5} The three-level indicator sets established based on the secondary indicators are: IN i ={in i1 ,in i2 ,in i3 ,...,in in } Among them, i represents the number of the second-level indicators u1, u2, u3, u4, u5, i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, n represents the sub-number of each third-level indicator belonging to each second-level indicator, then the indicator number of the third-level indicator is j = i1, i2, i3, ..., in.

3. A method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of engineering projects according to claim 2, characterized in that: The secondary indicators include regulatory factors, work implementation factors, risk management factors, personnel and equipment configuration factors, and safety training factors.

4. A method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project according to claim 3, characterized in that: The second-level indicators are subordinate to several third-level indicators; the third-level indicators subordinate to the rules and regulations factors include no safety production fund guarantee, no targeted safety technology briefing, lack of comprehensive safety measures, lack of special safety measures, no construction design safety measures, no safety operating procedures and no safety production responsibility system; The three-level indicators under the work implementation factors include failure to implement safety production responsibility targets, failure to rectify hidden dangers in a timely manner, failure to implement routine safety inspections, failure to implement written safety technical briefings, failure to implement safety measures, and failure to implement construction design safety measures; The third-level indicators under the risk management factors include materials not stacked according to regulations, working under the influence of alcohol, arbitrarily dismantling safety facilities, not going to work after confirming safety as required, not wearing safety protection equipment as required, not managing accident-prone areas in a timely manner, and not wearing safety helmets; The third-level indicators under the personnel and equipment configuration factors include lack of safety facilities and signs, lack of lighting facilities, non-compliant work sites, lack of qualifications to engage in corresponding activities, lack of emergency rescue personnel and lack of safety officers; The three-level indicators under the safety training factor include no on-the-job training for special personnel, no safety training for changing jobs, no regular safety training, no safety training for new employees, and no emergency rescue training.

5. The method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project according to claim 1, characterized in that: The process of establishing the index weight set of each safety risk factor by using the structural entropy weight method includes: Collect the statistical results of failure causes of hazardous events at different engineering project sites to form a typical ranking of indicator importance; Transform the qualitative value of the typical sorting into a quantitative value, and the information entropy calculation formula of sequence number x is: H(x)=-kP(x)ln P(x)...(1≤x≤n) in, (λ=n+2), λ represents the information entropy conversion parameter. The membership function of event sorting obtained by the entropy weight method is: Where x represents all different locations given event u j The qualitative ranking number of , ψ(x) represents the membership function value corresponding to x; Set the sorted number x = a ij Substitute into the membership function, qualitative value a ij Realize quantization and obtain the quantitative transformation value b ij , that is (b ij =ψ(a ij )), b ij represents the degree of membership of the sorted number x, then B=(b ij ) m×n The membership matrix representing the event ranking; Hazard event u at location m j The consistent factor is the average recognition degree bj, and the calculation process is as follows: b j =(b 1j +b 2j +...+b mj ) / m The uncertainty of the hazard events at different locations is the blindness Q j , the calculation method is as follows: Q j =|{[max(b 1j ,b 2j ,...b mj )-b j ]+[min(b 1j ,b 2j ,...b mj )-b j ]} / 2| Weight normalization processing, all the engineering project sites under statistical analysis have a weight normalization process for each event u j Have an overall understanding j ,Right now: c j =b j (1-Q j ),c j >0 Then the overall evaluation vector for all events at position m is: C=(c1,c2,...,c n ) c j =b j (1-Q j ) is normalized, then the event u j The weight wj is: Where j = i1, i2, ..., in, W i ={w i1 ,w i2 ,...,w in } is the event set U i = {u i1 ,u i2 ,...,u in }, that is, the overall judgment of the importance of the event at the m locations, which satisfies the actual situation of all the m locations.

6. A method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project according to claim 1, characterized in that: The comment levels of the safety risk assessment indicators include negligible risk, allowable risk, medium risk, major risk and extremely high risk.

7. The method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project according to claim 1, characterized in that: The quantification process of the comment level of the safety risk assessment indicator is as follows: Convert the review set into an evaluation matrix Z = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5} T ; According to the different levels of comments on the safety risk assessment indicators, they are divided into: (0,1] indicates negligible risk, (1,2] indicates allowable risk, (2,3] indicates medium risk, (3,4] indicates major risk and (4,5] indicates extremely high risk; According to the evaluation results of the third-level indicators, the membership matrix R of the second-level indicator risk is calculated. i and weight set W i .

8. The method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project according to claim 1, characterized in that: The main safety risk factor is the evaluation indicator corresponding to the maximum value of the risk level of the secondary indicator: B i =W i R i ; E i =B i Z Among them, B i Represents the evaluation matrix of the secondary indicators, W i Represents the weight set of secondary indicators, R i represents the membership matrix of the secondary indicator risk, Z represents the evaluation level matrix, E i Indicates the risk level of the secondary indicator.

9. The method for on-site safety risk assessment and risk factor optimization management of an engineering project according to claim 1, characterized in that: The on-site safety risk level of the project is the risk level of the first-level indicator: <h2 style=";text-align:left;direction:ltr">A=W[B1 B2 B3 B4 B5]<h2 style=";text-align:left;direction:ltr"> T E=AZ Among them, A represents the evaluation matrix of the first-level indicators, W represents the weight of the first-level indicators, [B1 B2 B3 B4 B5] T It represents the evaluation matrix of the secondary indicators, Z represents the evaluation grade matrix, and E represents the risk grade of the primary indicators.

Images