A risk model-based risk assessment method for urban gas above-ground public pipelines

Abstract

This invention discloses a risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model. The method includes: acquiring enterprise data from the gas company; dividing the risers within a residential area into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data; acquiring failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; scoring the failure probability data and failure consequence data separately based on a scoring table to obtain failure probability scores and failure consequence scores; for each building assessment unit, if there is no corresponding veto data, determining the risk level according to the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, within a preset value range. This invention uses buildings as independent assessment units and establishes a dual scoring system of failure probability and failure consequence, improving the scientific nature of the assessment. It also constructs a standardized risk level assessment mechanism, which can provide long-term guidance for pipeline safety management.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of pipeline safety management technology, and in particular to a risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model. Background Technology

[0002] With the widespread use of urban gas, risers, as key public facilities connecting underground gas pipelines to users' inlet pipes, are directly related to the safety of residents' lives and public safety. The aging, renovation, and risk assessment of risers have become one of the key aspects of pipeline safety management.

[0003] To standardize the risk assessment and renovation of urban gas risers, it is now clearly required that risers that have been in operation for 20 years and have been assessed as having safety hazards, as well as risers that have been in operation for less than 20 years but have safety hazards and cannot be guaranteed to be safe through control measures, must be included in the renovation plan.

[0004] However, existing urban gas aging assessment technologies use overly simplistic and general settings for riser assessment units, elements, and results. They fail to adequately consider individual differences in the installation environment, service life, and material conditions of risers in different buildings. This often leads to assessments with overly broad coverage that doesn't match the actual operating conditions of the risers, making it difficult to accurately pinpoint safety hazards in specific buildings. Furthermore, the lack of specificity and systematic design in the assessment elements makes it difficult for the results to provide long-term guidance for subsequent riser management and renovation, thus hindering the efficient implementation of riser renovation requirements and failing to provide reliable support for the precise management of riser safety risks.

[0005] Therefore, existing technologies still need improvement and development. Summary of the Invention

[0006] The technical problem to be solved by this invention is to provide a risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model, in order to address the above-mentioned deficiencies of the existing technology. This method aims to solve the problem that the existing urban gas aging assessment technology does not fully consider the individual differences of risers in different buildings, resulting in an assessment result with an excessively large coverage area, making it difficult to accurately locate the safety hazards of specific buildings.

[0007] The technical solution adopted by this invention to solve the problem is as follows: In a first aspect, embodiments of the present invention provide a risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model, the method comprising: Obtain corporate data from the gas company, and divide the risers in the community into several independent building assessment units based on the corporate data; Acquire failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; based on a preset scoring table, score the failure probability data and failure consequence data respectively to obtain failure probability score and failure consequence score. For each building assessment unit, if there is no corresponding veto data for the building assessment unit, the risk level is determined according to the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, based on a preset value range.

[0008] In one implementation, the step of dividing the risers within the community into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data includes: Based on the enterprise data, determine the assessment scope and assessment elements for the risers of each building in the community; The building assessment unit is generated based on the assessment scope and the assessment elements.

[0009] In one embodiment, the scope of the assessment includes the pipeline section from the flange gasket on the ground outlet valve of the underground gas pipeline to the point before it enters the household; the assessment elements include the pipeline material, years of commissioning, operating status, and consequences of failure of the public ring pipe, riser pipe, downcomer pipe, and household branch pipe.

[0010] In one implementation, the preset rating table includes rating tables corresponding to failure probability and failure consequences, respectively; the method for obtaining the preset rating table includes: Obtain risk data for each of the building assessment units; the risk data includes: daily inspection records, maintenance files, and safety inspection logs. Based on the risk data, determine the risk category and the corresponding hazard factor; A failure probability rating table and a failure consequence rating table are established based on the risk category and the hazard factor. The rating table includes: several primary elements, several secondary elements for each primary element, and evaluation criteria for each secondary element.

[0011] In one implementation, the risk categories include: pipeline-related risks and equipment / facilities risks; The risks associated with the pipeline itself include: pipeline aging, damage from third-party construction, vehicle collisions, geological disasters, and encroachment. The risks associated with the equipment and facilities include: the valve body and the pressure regulating device body.

[0012] In one embodiment, the hazards of the pipeline body and aging include: years of operation, leakage incidents, gas usage and gas supplier management; The hazards to the construction damage caused by the three parties include: the basic conditions of the construction site and the on-site management and control measures. The hazardous factors of the geological disaster include: being laid along with retaining walls or enclosure walls; The hazardous factors mentioned for preventing vehicle collisions include: distance from the roadway and the location of the impact; The hazards of the encroachment include: the type of encroachment and the impact of emergency repairs; The hazards to the valve body include: defect events, service life, operating conditions, and maintenance; The hazards to the voltage regulating facility itself include: defect events, years of operation, operating conditions, and maintenance.

[0013] In one implementation, the veto data includes: unsealed end, unknown pipeline route, serious gas leakage, and emergency response team response exceeding a preset time.

[0014] In one embodiment, the method further includes: Based on the risk level of each building assessment unit, corresponding control measures and task lists are generated; The risk level of each of the aforementioned building assessment units shall be reassessed periodically.

[0015] Secondly, embodiments of the present invention also provide a risk assessment system for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model, the system comprising: The unit division module is used to obtain enterprise data from the gas company and divide the risers in the community into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data. The data scoring module is used to acquire failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; based on a preset scoring table, the failure probability data and failure consequence data are scored respectively to obtain failure probability score and failure consequence score. The rating module is used to determine the risk level for each building assessment unit if there is no corresponding veto data for the building assessment unit, based on the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, according to a preset value range.

[0016] Thirdly, embodiments of the present invention also provide a computer-readable storage medium storing a plurality of instructions adapted to be loaded and executed by a processor to implement the steps of the risk assessment method for urban gas aboveground public pipelines based on risk models as described above.

[0017] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: This invention obtains enterprise data from gas companies and divides the risers within a residential community into several independent building assessment units based on this data. It acquires failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit. Based on a preset scoring table, the failure probability data and failure consequence data are scored separately to obtain failure probability scores and failure consequence scores. For each building assessment unit, if there is no corresponding veto data, the risk level is determined according to the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, within a preset value range. This invention uses buildings as independent assessment units, refining the original broad assessment scope based on the entire community into riser segments corresponding to each building. This fully considers the individual differences between different buildings in terms of pipe material, years of operation, and operating environment, making the assessment more closely aligned with the actual operation scenario of the risers. Furthermore, this invention establishes a dual scoring system for failure probability and failure consequences, combined with a preset detailed scoring table for quantitative scoring, effectively improving the scientific rigor and relevance of the assessment. Finally, this invention also establishes a standardized risk level assessment mechanism, which can be used to provide long-term guidance, making the management and control of riser safety risks more practical and sustainable. Attached Figure Description

[0018] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments recorded in the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0019] Figure 1 This is a basic flowchart of the risk assessment method for urban gas above-ground public pipelines based on a risk model provided in this embodiment of the invention.

[0020] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the above-ground public pipeline looping downwards provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0021] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the above-ground public pipeline ring going upwards, provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0022] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the direct upward flow of the above-ground public pipeline provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0023] Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the basic modules of the risk assessment system for urban gas above-ground public pipelines based on a risk model provided in this embodiment of the invention.

[0024] Figure 6This is a schematic diagram of the terminal provided in the embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0025] This invention discloses a risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model. To make the objectives, technical solutions, and effects of this invention clearer and more explicit, the invention is further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are only for explaining the invention and are not intended to limit the invention.

[0026] Those skilled in the art will understand that, unless specifically stated otherwise, the singular forms “a,” “an,” “the,” and “the” used herein may also include the plural forms. It should be further understood that the term “comprising” as used in this specification means the presence of the stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and / or components, but does not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, and / or groups thereof. It should be understood that when we say an element is “connected” or “coupled” to another element, it can be directly connected or coupled to the other element, or there may be intermediate elements. Furthermore, “connected” or “coupled” as used herein can include wireless connections or wireless coupling. The term “and / or” as used herein includes all or any units and all combinations of one or more associated listed items.

[0027] It will be understood by those skilled in the art that, unless otherwise defined, all terms used herein (including technical and scientific terms) have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains. It should also be understood that terms such as those defined in general dictionaries should be understood to have the same meaning as in the context of the prior art, and should not be interpreted in an idealized or overly formal sense unless specifically defined as herein.

[0028] To address the aforementioned deficiencies in existing technologies, this invention provides a risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model. The method includes: acquiring enterprise data from the gas company; dividing the risers within a residential area into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data; acquiring failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; scoring the failure probability data and failure consequence data respectively based on a preset scoring table to obtain failure probability scores and failure consequence scores; for each building assessment unit, if there is no corresponding veto data, determining the risk level according to the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, within a preset value range. This invention uses buildings as independent assessment units, refining the original broad assessment scope based on the entire residential area into riser segments corresponding to each building, fully considering individual differences in pipeline materials, years of operation, and operating environment among different buildings, making the assessment more closely aligned with the actual operation scenarios of the risers. Furthermore, this invention establishes a dual scoring system for failure probability and failure consequences, combined with a preset detailed scoring table for quantitative scoring, effectively improving the scientific rigor and relevance of the assessment. Finally, this invention also establishes a standardized risk level assessment mechanism, which can be used to provide long-term guidance, making the management and control of riser safety risks more practical and sustainable.

[0029] like Figure 1 As shown, the method specifically includes the following steps: Step S100: Obtain the gas company's enterprise data, and divide the risers in the community into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data.

[0030] The gas company's enterprise data includes key information such as the building distribution plan of the community, gas pipeline laying drawings, the correspondence between risers and buildings, the installation location ledgers of facilities such as outlet valves and building pressure regulating boxes, and the definition of the gas supply range for each building. This data provides a foundation for subsequent division work. In practical applications, above-ground public pipelines (risers) are mostly laid along the building structure of the gas-supplying buildings: after underground gas pipelines emerge from the ground, they are mostly laid vertically upwards along the building's exterior walls, with structural forms including above-ground public pipelines running in a loop and then downwards (e.g.,...). Figure 2 As shown), the above-ground public pipe ring goes up (such as...). Figure 3 As shown), the public utility pipe on the ground goes directly upwards (such as...). Figure 4(As shown in the image) Pipelines and facilities include outgoing valves, building pressure regulating boxes, unit control valves, venting terminals, ring pipes, and unit branch risers. Based on the aforementioned enterprise data and the characteristics of riser installation, the risers within the community are divided into several independent building assessment units. Each building assessment unit corresponds to the riser system of a building, including: the building's ring pipes, riser pipes, downpipes, unit branch risers, and supporting facilities such as outgoing valves and building pressure regulating boxes. This division method not only conforms to the structural characteristics of risers but also defines the boundary range of each building assessment unit, avoiding the mixing of risers from different buildings, so that subsequent risk assessments can be accurately conducted on the specific conditions of each building's risers.

[0031] In one implementation, the step of dividing the risers within the community into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data includes: Based on the enterprise data, determine the assessment scope and assessment elements for the risers of each building in the community; The building assessment unit is generated based on the assessment scope and the assessment elements.

[0032] Furthermore, the scope of the assessment includes: the pipeline section from the flange gasket on the ground outlet valve of the underground gas pipeline to the point before it enters the household; the assessment elements include: the pipeline material, years of commissioning, operating status, and consequences of failure of the public ring pipe, riser pipe, downcomer pipe, and household branch pipe.

[0033] Specifically, the division principle in this embodiment is as follows: the riser pipe body and aging safety risk assessment unit are divided according to buildings, combined with the current status of public pipelines and the actual situation of daily inspection and patrol work. Through enterprise data, the assessment scope of the riser pipes in each building can be clearly determined, thus dividing the corresponding building assessment unit into: the pipeline section from the flange gasket above the outlet valve to the section before the household entrance (including the household branch pipe). This division method avoids confusion between riser pipe sections in different buildings, ensuring that the assessment scope aligns with the actual boundaries of daily inspections. Simultaneously, through the specific information of the riser pipes in each building from the enterprise data, assessment elements can be further determined. That is, according to the subdivided types of pipelines—public ring pipes, riser pipes, downpipes, and household branch pipes—key information such as the material, years of operation, operating status, and consequences of failure for each section of pipeline can be extracted. This key information constitutes several assessment elements. These are key data for riser risk assessment and are consistent with the content that needs to be recorded and verified during daily inspections, accurately corresponding to the actual situation of the riser pipes in each building.

[0034] Step S200: Obtain failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; based on a preset scoring table, score the failure probability data and failure consequence data respectively to obtain failure probability score and failure consequence score.

[0035] Specifically, this embodiment transforms the abstract risk of a building assessment unit into a calculable and comparable specific score, thereby providing objective data reference for subsequent risk level determination and solving the problems of simple assessment elements and lack of quantitative support in existing technologies. First, based on the divided building assessment units, data is collected on the risers of each building to obtain failure probability data and failure consequence data. A pre-set scoring table with standardized scoring rules is used to score the failure probability data and failure consequence data separately, obtaining failure probability scores and failure consequence scores. These two scores ensure that the risk of each building's risers has an objective numerical score, guaranteeing the fairness and comparability of risk assessments between different buildings.

[0036] In one implementation, the preset scoring table includes scoring tables corresponding to failure probability and failure consequences, respectively; the method for obtaining the preset scoring table includes: Obtain risk data for each of the building assessment units; the risk data includes: daily inspection records, maintenance files, and safety inspection logs. Based on the risk data, determine the risk category and the corresponding hazard factor; A failure probability rating table and a failure consequence rating table are established based on the risk category and the hazard factor. The rating table includes: several primary elements, several secondary elements for each primary element, and evaluation criteria for each secondary element.

[0037] Furthermore, the risk categories include: pipeline-related risks and equipment / facilities risks; The risks associated with the pipeline itself include: pipeline aging, damage from third-party construction, vehicle collisions, geological disasters, and encroachment. The risks associated with the equipment and facilities include: the valve body and the pressure regulating device body.

[0038] Furthermore, the hazards of the pipeline itself and aging include: years of operation, leakage incidents, and management by the gas user and supplier; The hazards to the construction damage caused by the three parties include: the basic conditions of the construction site and the on-site management and control measures. The hazardous factors of the geological disaster include: being laid along with retaining walls or enclosure walls; The hazardous factors mentioned for preventing vehicle collisions include: distance from the roadway and the location of the impact; The hazards of the encroachment include: the type of encroachment and the impact of emergency repairs; The hazards to the valve body include: defect events, service life, operating conditions, and maintenance; The hazards to the voltage regulating facility itself include: defect events, years of operation, operating conditions, and maintenance.

[0039] Specifically, the scoring table in this embodiment includes a failure probability scoring table and a failure consequence scoring table, which are standardized assessment tools based on actual riser operation data and risk characteristics. The scoring table uses buildings as assessment units and establishes multiple scoring items based on the distribution and operational status of risers (including inlet pipes and horizontal trunk pipes) to conduct semi-quantitative assessments of failure probability and failure consequence scores. Failure probability is scored according to the following principles in order: material of public ring pipes, riser pipes, downcomer pipes, and branch pipes entering households; years of operation, operational status, and failure consequences. Failure consequences (also known as consequence probability) are scored according to user type, pipe environment, and population density.

[0040] To establish a scientific scoring system, it is first necessary to collect real risk data for each building assessment unit. This data can come from accumulated information in the gas company's daily management, specifically including daily inspection records, maintenance files, and safety inspection logs. This data reflects key information such as potential hazards, maintenance status, and safety inspection results for each building's riser during operation. This provides a reliable basis for risk category definition and scoring item design, ensuring that the scoring system accurately reflects the actual operating scenarios of the risers.

[0041] Secondly, risk identification is needed through risk data to determine risk categories and corresponding hazard factors. Based on the actual needs of riser risk assessment, two key risk categories were identified from the collected risk data: pipeline body risk and equipment / facilities risk. These can be further subdivided into seven subcategories: pipeline body and aging, third-party construction damage, vehicle collisions, geological disasters, landslides / enclosures, valve bodies, and pressure regulating facilities (as shown in Table 1). Each risk category has its own corresponding hazard factors. For example, the hazard factors for pipeline body and aging include the number of years since commissioning, leakage events, and management by gas users and suppliers. The hazard factors for third-party construction damage involve the basic conditions of the construction site and on-site control measures. The hazard factors for valve bodies and pressure regulating facilities include defect events, years of operation, operating conditions, and maintenance. These hazard factors are all influencing variables obtained from daily risk data.

[0042] Finally, based on the defined risk categories and hazard factors, a basic framework and evaluation criteria for the scoring tables were established. The scoring tables include two types: a failure probability scoring table and a failure consequence scoring table. The failure probability scoring table uses risk categories such as pipeline structure and aging, and third-party construction damage as primary elements. Each primary element is further subdivided into secondary elements such as years in operation, leakage events, and on-site control measures. Specific evaluation criteria are established for each secondary element; for example, years in operation are categorized by different usage durations, and leakage events are distinguished by minor or severe severity. The failure consequence scoring table uses the scope of impact as a primary element, with secondary elements such as user type, pipeline environment, and number of affected households (population density). Its evaluation criteria must refer to the main factors leading to increased consequence risks: for example, user type specifically includes evaluation criteria for densely populated areas such as key residential communities and commercial complexes; pipeline environment covers outdoor, well-ventilated balconies, and scenarios involving enclosed balconies and kitchens; and the number of affected households corresponds to different building heights (low-rise, multi-story, high-rise, etc.) and the number of non-residential users. As shown in Table 2, the two types of scoring tables can be used as scoring tools for subsequent quantitative evaluation.

[0043] Table 1. Risk Categories

[0044] Table 2. Riser Risk Assessment Table

[0045] Step S300: For each building assessment unit, if there is no corresponding veto data for the building assessment unit, the risk level is determined according to the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, based on a preset value range.

[0046] Furthermore, the veto data includes: unsealed end, unclear pipeline route, serious gas leakage, and emergency response team response exceeding the preset time.

[0047] Specifically, this embodiment first screens for veto items to determine if there are extreme high risks, then assesses regular risks by matching the total score to the range, and finally visualizes the risk level using a four-color chart, making the risk assessment both accurate and in line with the practical needs of frontline operations. First, the first step in risk level determination is veto item screening: for each building assessment unit, it checks for veto data such as unsealed end pipes, unclear pipe routing, serious gas leaks, and emergency response teams exceeding preset response times. These veto data represent fatal safety hazards; once discovered, they are directly classified as the highest risk level (red risk), eliminating the need for subsequent score calculations. This allows frontline staff to quickly identify the most dangerous situations during assessments, thereby improving the operability of the assessment and the efficiency of emergency response. Second, if the building assessment unit does not have the aforementioned veto data, it enters the regular risk level confirmation stage: calculating the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, and then comparing it with the safety risk assessment four-color chart (as shown in Table 3). Using a custom range of red, orange, yellow, and blue values, the risk level of the building assessment unit is determined, thus achieving a semi-quantitative risk assessment. The entire risk level confirmation process, whether it's a red risk determined directly through veto items or other levels matched by the total score, will ultimately correspond to a specific category in the four-color chart. The assessed risk level can then be linked to subsequent risk management strategies (as shown in Table 4), allowing for differentiated control measures to be developed for different risk levels. For example, red risks require rectification within a specified timeframe, while blue risks require routine inspections.

[0048] Table 3. Four-color diagram for safety risk assessment

[0049] Table 4. Risk Management Strategy Table

[0050] In one implementation, the method further includes: Based on the risk level of each building assessment unit, corresponding control measures and task lists are generated; The risk level of each of the aforementioned building assessment units shall be reassessed periodically.

[0051] Specifically, this embodiment establishes a closed-loop management system of assessment, control, and reassessment. This system ensures that riser risk assessments not only accurately identify potential hazards but also achieve long-term safety management through control measures and dynamic updates, guaranteeing the effective implementation of the dual prevention mechanism. First, differentiated control measures are developed for different risk levels (red, orange, yellow, and blue), including immediate renovation, increased patrol frequency, strengthened property management collaboration, and safety awareness campaigns. To ensure these measures are not merely formalities, specific tasks are assigned to local work teams through task orders, achieving closed-loop management and ensuring the effective implementation of control measures. Second, riser risks are not static. With increasing years of operation, risers naturally age, and the surrounding environment may experience new construction sites or changes in population density, rendering the original risk levels meaningless. Therefore, regular riser assessments are necessary, such as annually. Through periodic reassessments, data on the probability and consequences of riser failure in each building are collected again, and the risk levels are updated by comparing them with the scoring table and four-color chart.

[0052] The advantages of this invention include, but are not limited to: 1. More practical assessment units and elements. The assessment unit of this invention is the building rather than the community, which provides finer granularity and better reflects the actual operation of risers. For example, in a community with 10 buildings, the riser operation varies in each building due to different environments, although the pipe operating environment is basically the same in each building. Therefore, the building is designated as the assessment unit. The assessment elements are based on the current status of the riser pipes and facilities, clarifying factors such as the pipe body itself, management by relevant parties, and years of operation, as well as the consequences of failure such as user type, environment, and population density. All assessment elements can be obtained through daily inspections of the risers, which is beneficial for companies to conduct assessments themselves.

[0053] 2. Customizable risk four-color chart values ​​and veto items. This invention assigns values ​​to assessment elements based on daily inspections and patrols, and defines the value ranges for red, orange, yellow, and blue. It also clarifies the direct judgment items for red risks (such as unsealed end pipes, serious gas leaks, and unclear pipeline routes), which can help frontline staff conduct riser assessments and makes the process more operational.

[0054] 3. The risk strategy aligns with actual production needs and meets dynamic management requirements. Control measures have been developed for the red, orange, yellow, and blue risk systems, including immediate upgrades, increased patrol frequency, strengthened property management collaboration, and safety awareness campaigns. Tasks are distributed to local work teams through task sheets for closed-loop management. Riser assessments are conducted annually, enabling dynamic riser management and ensuring the effective implementation of the dual prevention mechanism.

[0055] Based on the above embodiments, the present invention also provides a risk assessment system for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model, such as... Figure 5 As shown, the system includes: Unit division module 01 is used to obtain enterprise data from the gas company and divide the risers in the community into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data. The data scoring module 02 is used to acquire the failure probability data and failure consequence data of each building assessment unit; based on a preset scoring table, the failure probability data and failure consequence data are scored respectively to obtain the failure probability score and failure consequence score. The rating module 03 is used to determine the risk level for each building assessment unit if there is no corresponding veto data for the building assessment unit, based on the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, according to a preset value range.

[0056] Based on the above embodiments, the present invention also provides a terminal, the principle block diagram of which can be as follows: Figure 6 As shown, the terminal includes a processor, memory, network interface, and display screen connected via a system bus. The processor provides computing and control capabilities. The memory includes non-volatile storage media and internal memory. The non-volatile storage media stores the operating system and computer programs. The internal memory provides the environment for the operation of the operating system and computer programs in the non-volatile storage media. The network interface is used to communicate with external terminals via a network connection. When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements a risk assessment method for urban gas above-ground public pipelines based on a risk model. The display screen can be an LCD screen or an e-ink screen.

[0057] Those skilled in the art will understand that Figure 6 The schematic diagram shown is merely a partial structural diagram related to the present invention and does not constitute a limitation on the terminal to which the present invention is applied. A specific terminal may include more or fewer components than those shown in the figure, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.

[0058] In one implementation, the terminal's memory stores one or more programs, and these programs are configured to be executed by one or more processors, and the programs contain instructions for performing a risk assessment method for urban gas aboveground public pipelines based on a risk model.

[0059] Those skilled in the art will understand that all or part of the processes in the methods of the above embodiments can be implemented by a computer program instructing related hardware. The computer program can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium. When executed, the computer program can include the processes of the embodiments of the above methods. Any references to memory, storage, databases, or other media used in the embodiments provided by this invention can include non-volatile and / or volatile memory. Non-volatile memory can include read-only memory (ROM), programmable ROM (PROM), electrically programmable ROM (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable ROM (EEPROM), or flash memory. Volatile memory can include random access memory (RAM) or external cache memory. By way of illustration and not limitation, RAM is available in various forms, such as static RAM (SRAM), dynamic RAM (DRAM), synchronous DRAM (SDRAM), dual data rate SDRAM (DDRSDRAM), enhanced SDRAM (ESDRAM), synchronous link DRAM (SLDRAM), Rambus direct RAM (RDRAM), direct memory bus dynamic RAM (DRDRAM), and memory bus dynamic RAM (RDRAM), etc.

[0060] In summary, this invention discloses a risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model. The method includes: acquiring enterprise data from the gas company; dividing the risers within a residential area into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data; acquiring failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; scoring the failure probability data and failure consequence data respectively based on a preset scoring table to obtain failure probability scores and failure consequence scores; for each building assessment unit, if there is no corresponding veto data, determining the risk level according to the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, within a preset value range. This invention uses buildings as independent assessment units, refining the original broad assessment scope based on the entire residential area into riser segments corresponding to each building, fully considering the individual differences of different buildings in terms of pipeline material, years of commissioning, and operating environment, making the assessment more closely aligned with the actual operation scenario of the risers. Furthermore, this invention establishes a dual scoring system of failure probability and failure consequence, combined with a preset detailed scoring table for quantitative scoring, effectively improving the scientific rigor and relevance of the assessment. Finally, this invention also establishes a standardized risk level assessment mechanism, which can be used to provide long-term guidance, making the management and control of riser safety risks more practical and sustainable.

[0061] It should be understood that the application of the present invention is not limited to the examples above. Those skilled in the art can make improvements or modifications based on the above description, and all such improvements and modifications should fall within the protection scope of the appended claims.

Claims

1. A risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model, characterized in that, The method includes: Obtain corporate data from the gas company, and divide the risers in the community into several independent building assessment units based on the corporate data; Acquire failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; based on a preset scoring table, score the failure probability data and failure consequence data respectively to obtain failure probability score and failure consequence score. For each building assessment unit, if there is no corresponding veto data for the building assessment unit, the risk level is determined according to the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, based on a preset value range.

2. The risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the aforementioned enterprise data, the steps for dividing the risers within the community into several independent building assessment units include: Based on the enterprise data, determine the assessment scope and assessment elements for the risers of each building in the community; The building assessment unit is generated based on the assessment scope and the assessment elements.

3. The risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model according to claim 2, characterized in that, The assessment scope includes the pipeline section from the flange gasket on the ground outlet valve of the underground gas pipeline to the point before it enters the household; the assessment elements include the pipeline material, years of operation, operating status, and consequences of failure of the public ring pipe, riser pipe, downcomer pipe, and household branch pipe.

4. The risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model according to claim 1, characterized in that, The preset scoring table includes scoring tables corresponding to the probability of failure and the consequences of failure, respectively. The methods for obtaining the preset rating sheet include: Obtain risk data for each of the building assessment units; the risk data includes: daily inspection records, maintenance files, and safety inspection logs. Based on the risk data, determine the risk category and the corresponding hazard factor; A failure probability rating table and a failure consequence rating table are established based on the risk category and the hazard factor. The rating table includes: several primary elements, several secondary elements for each primary element, and evaluation criteria for each secondary element.

5. The risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model according to claim 1, characterized in that, The risk categories include: pipeline inherent risks and equipment and facility risks; The risks associated with the pipeline itself include: pipeline aging, damage from third-party construction, vehicle collisions, geological disasters, and encroachment. The risks associated with the equipment and facilities include: the valve body and the pressure regulating device body.

6. The risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model according to claim 5, characterized in that, The hazards of the pipeline itself and its aging include: years of operation, leakage incidents, and management by the gas user and supplier. The hazards to the construction damage caused by the three parties include: the basic conditions of the construction site and the on-site management and control measures. The hazardous factors of the geological disaster include: being laid along with retaining walls or enclosure walls; The hazardous factors mentioned for preventing vehicle collisions include: distance from the roadway and the location of the impact; The hazards of the encroachment include: the type of encroachment and the impact of emergency repairs; The hazards to the valve body include: defect events, service life, operating conditions, and maintenance; The hazards to the voltage regulating facility itself include: defect events, years of operation, operating conditions, and maintenance.

7. The risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model according to claim 1, characterized in that, The veto criteria include: unsealed end, unclear pipeline route, serious gas leakage, and emergency response team response exceeding the preset time.

8. The risk assessment method for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: Based on the risk level of each building assessment unit, corresponding control measures and task lists are generated; The risk level of each of the aforementioned building assessment units shall be reassessed periodically.

9. A risk assessment system for above-ground public gas pipelines in urban areas based on a risk model, characterized in that, The system includes: The unit division module is used to obtain enterprise data from the gas company and divide the risers in the community into several independent building assessment units based on the enterprise data. The data scoring module is used to acquire failure probability data and failure consequence data for each building assessment unit; based on a preset scoring table, the failure probability data and failure consequence data are scored respectively to obtain failure probability score and failure consequence score. The rating module is used to determine the risk level for each building assessment unit if there is no corresponding veto data for the building assessment unit, based on the sum of the failure probability score and the failure consequence score, according to a preset value range.

10. A computer-readable storage medium storing a plurality of instructions thereon, characterized in that, The instructions are applicable to be loaded and executed by a processor to implement the steps of the risk assessment method for urban gas aboveground public pipelines based on a risk model as described in any one of claims 1 to 8.

Images