A multi-sensory warning device and warning method for a gas system hidden danger grading early warning system

Abstract

This invention provides a multi-sensory warning device and method for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system, belonging to the field of gas system early warning. To address the problem of existing gas system early warning devices having a single mode and unclear classification, resulting in poor early warning effectiveness, this invention's multi-sensory warning device includes a main housing, a display, an odor diffuser, a speaker, and a main controller. The main controller is wired or wirelessly connected to the display, odor diffuser, and speaker, respectively, and the display, odor diffuser, and speaker are arranged in parallel. Based on the early warning signals given by the gas pipeline hazard classification and early warning and decision-making system, the main controller controls the display, odor diffuser, and speaker to provide classified early warnings. This invention, through the parallel design and precise classified control of visual, auditory, and olfactory channels, solves the problems of traditional alarm methods being single, susceptible to interference, and unreliable, significantly improving the reliability, intuitiveness, and emergency response speed of alarm transmission.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of gas system early warning technology, and more specifically, to a multi-sensory warning device and warning method for a gas system hazard classification early warning system. Background Technology

[0002] As a core component of urban lifeline engineering, the safe and stable operation of gas pipeline networks is of paramount importance. With the acceleration of urbanization and the expansion of pipeline networks, the risks of leaks, explosions, and other accidents caused by corrosion, third-party damage, and aging are becoming increasingly prominent, seriously threatening public safety and social order. Therefore, achieving real-time monitoring, accurate early warning, and rapid response to potential hazards in gas systems is a pressing technical challenge that the industry needs to address.

[0003] In the early warning and alert phase, the commonly used gas safety monitoring systems typically employ relatively simple or overlapping alarm output methods, primarily relying on visual prompts and audible alarms from the control center. This approach has several limitations: First, the sensory channels are singular and susceptible to interference, resulting in insufficient intuitiveness and impact in alerts. Second, the system suffers from a "single point of failure" risk; if a module or specific environmental conditions cause the sensory channel to malfunction, it can lead to serious missed alarms. Third, the matching between warning information and risk levels is crude. Most systems only provide two alarm levels: "normal" and "abnormal," making it difficult for operators to quickly and intuitively assess the urgency of the risk, affecting the prioritization and response speed of emergency decisions. Furthermore, there are blind spots in the spatial coverage of warning information. Other key positions such as on-site inspection, maintenance, and management cannot simultaneously and intuitively obtain the same warning information, making it difficult to support efficient distributed collaborative emergency response.

[0004] In summary, existing gas safety early warning technologies have significant shortcomings in terms of multi-sensory coordination of warnings, system redundancy and reliability, accuracy of hierarchical expression, and spatial coverage of information dissemination. Therefore, there is an urgent need for an innovative warning device that can be deeply integrated with intelligent early warning systems. This device should utilize multi-channel, high-sensitivity, and highly reliable warning methods to overcome current bottlenecks and fundamentally improve the timeliness, reliability, and emergency response efficiency of early warnings of potential gas system hazards. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The technical problem to be solved by this invention is:

[0006] To address the problem that existing gas system warning devices have a single mode and unclear levels, resulting in poor warning effectiveness.

[0007] The technical solution adopted by the present invention to solve the above-mentioned technical problems is as follows:

[0008] This invention provides a multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system, comprising a main housing, a display, an odor diffuser, a speaker, and a main controller.

[0009] The odor diffuser, speaker, and main controller are all housed inside the main housing, while the display is located on the outer surface of the main housing.

[0010] The main controller is connected to the display, the odor diffuser and the speaker respectively. Based on the warning signal, the main controller controls the display, the odor diffuser and the speaker to provide graded warnings.

[0011] The display is used to show warning level graphics, with different levels of flashing intervals;

[0012] The odor diffuser releases different concentrations of odor depending on the level of the alarm.

[0013] The speaker is used to play different sound alarm prompts with different frequencies and volumes according to the alarm level.

[0014] Furthermore, the display, odor diffuser, and speaker are connected in parallel.

[0015] Furthermore, the display outputs five warning levels: black, red, orange, yellow, and blue, corresponding to Level 1 warning, Level 2 warning, Level 3 warning, Level 4 warning, and no warning, respectively.

[0016] Furthermore, the odor diffuser provides odor alarm concentrations and time intervals corresponding to Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, and no alarm releases, respectively: 25 mg / m³, 5 min; 20 mg / m³, 4 min; 15 mg / m³, 2 min; 8 mg / m³, 1 min; and 0 mg / m³, 0 min.

[0017] Furthermore, the odorant built into the odor diffuser is tetrahydrothiophene.

[0018] Furthermore, the frequency and decibel of the loudspeaker's sound alarm corresponding to Level 1 warning, Level 2 warning, Level 3 warning, Level 4 warning, and no warning are 0.3s / time, 120dB, 0.8s / time, 100dB, 1.2s / time, 80dB, 1.6s / time, 60dB, and 0s / time, 0dB, respectively.

[0019] Furthermore, the number of the multi-sensory alarms is multiple, and they are portable multi-sensory alarms, with each multi-sensory alarm being placed in the hands of multiple supervisors.

[0020] A warning method for a multi-sensory warning device in a gas system hazard classification and early warning system is characterized by the following steps: After receiving the warning level result output by the gas pipeline hazard classification and early warning and decision-making system, the main controller generates and synchronously sends control commands to a display, an odor diffuser, and a speaker connected in parallel according to the warning level result; the display displays the corresponding level graphic and performs dynamic flashing visual warning according to the control command; the odor diffuser releases the corresponding level warning odor according to the control command; and the speaker plays the corresponding level warning sound according to the control command.

[0021] Furthermore, the methods for obtaining the early warning level results output by the gas pipeline hidden danger classification early warning and decision-making system include,

[0022] S100. Provide users with registration and login functions by entering their username and password in the user management module;

[0023] S200: Import the raw pipeline monitoring data from multiple sources into the data management module for data preprocessing to eliminate noise and outliers, and perform normalization.

[0024] S300. Input the pipeline monitoring data preprocessed in step S200 into the risk assessment calculation module, calculate the risk score, and conduct an early warning level assessment.

[0025] S400. The risk score and warning level obtained in step S300 are visualized through the visualization module. That is, the warning level is displayed graphically, and alarm prompts are given in combination with dynamic flashing lights and graded sounds.

[0026] After receiving the risk score and warning level from the risk assessment module in step S300, S500 generates corresponding emergency response suggestions for different warning levels through the decision knowledge base in the decision support module; for single hazards and coupled hazards, it provides single solutions and comprehensive solutions respectively, and recommends suitable emergency plans for commanders to refer to.

[0027] The S600 incorporates a design feedback optimization mechanism that transmits real-time status information from the visualization module back to the data management model. The decision support module records the actual application effects of the processing solutions, which are then fed back to the risk assessment module as feedback data to drive the continuous iteration and optimization of the risk assessment calculation model.

[0028] Furthermore, in step S300, the risk score is calculated as follows:

[0029] Suppose that each type of hidden danger contains m feature indicators, which correspond to m risk weights respectively. The risk score is calculated based on the normalized feature indicators and the risk weights. When n types of hidden dangers occur at the same time, the coupled risk score of the hidden danger is calculated based on the individual hidden danger risk score, the coupling enhancement factor, and the coupling matching factor.

[0030] Based on the risk scores of coupled hazards, graded early warnings are issued, and the risk score of an individual hazard is calculated using the following formula:

[0031] (1)

[0032] In the formula, This represents the risk score for the i-th individual hidden danger. The number of characteristic indicators for a single hidden danger; This is the normalized value of the k-th feature index; The risk weight of the k-th feature indicator;

[0033] The normalization method for feature indicators is as follows:

[0034] (2)

[0035] In the formula, The value of the k-th feature index; The maximum value of the kth feature index is used as the normalization benchmark.

[0036] The risk score for multiple coupled hidden dangers is calculated using the following formula:

[0037] (3)

[0038] In the formula, A risk score is given for the coupling of multiple hidden dangers; The number of types of hazards occurring simultaneously; This represents the risk score for the i-th type of hazard. Let be the coupling matching factor for the i-th type of hidden danger;

[0039] The coupling matching factor of the potential hazard is calculated using the following formula:

[0040] (4)

[0041] In the formula, Let be the coupling matching factor for the i-th type of hidden danger; This represents the maximum risk score among all types of potential hazards. This is the coupling enhancement factor for the i-th type of hidden danger;

[0042] The coupling enhancement factor of the hidden danger is calculated by the following formula:

[0043] (5)

[0044] The calculation method for the risk score of multiple coupled hidden dangers is as follows:

[0045]

[0046] (6).

[0047] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are:

[0048] 1. This alarm device adopts a parallel multi-channel alarm design (display, odor diffuser, speaker), achieving physical redundancy in alarm methods. When a single sensory alarm channel (such as screen damage, noisy environment, or olfactory failure) fails, the remaining channels can still independently and effectively transmit warning information, fundamentally avoiding missed alarms due to single-point failure, and greatly enhancing the robustness and fault tolerance of the entire warning system.

[0049] 2. This invention achieves multi-dimensional and refined matching of early warning information with human senses. Based on the accurately determined five-level early warning results, the system differentiates and quantifies the output parameters of each alarm channel: visually, it conveys a sense of urgency through dynamic flashing at different intervals; olfactorily, it provides intuitive and contextualized warnings by simulating different concentrations of natural gas leak odors. This multi-layered, high-intensity combination of sensory stimulation can quickly overcome the cognitive load of operators and effectively shorten the decision-making time from receiving an alarm to initiating a response.

[0050] 3. The alarm system supports distributed deployment across different work areas and positions, forming a spatial early warning network. This enables multiple key nodes, such as the dispatch center, inspection posts, and emergency command points, to perceive the same alarm almost simultaneously, effectively eliminating the risk of information transmission delays and oversights at different levels, and providing a unified perception foundation for achieving cross-departmental and cross-position collaborative emergency response.

[0051] In summary, this invention creatively integrates an intelligent early warning system with a multi-sensory physical alarm device, which not only solves the problems of easy failure and weak perception of traditional single alarm methods, but also significantly improves the timeliness and reliability of gas hazard early warning and the emergency response efficiency of operators through precise and three-dimensional sensory feedback. It provides key hardware support and interactive innovation for building a safer and more intelligent gas system safety assurance system. Attached Figure Description

[0052] Figure 1 This is a structural diagram of a multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system, as described in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0053] Figure 2This is a schematic diagram showing the distribution of the multi-sensory alarm in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0054] Explanation of reference numerals in the attached figures:

[0055] 1. Main housing; 2. Display; 3. Odor diffuser; 4. Speaker; 5. Main controller. Detailed Implementation

[0056] To make the above-mentioned objects, features and advantages of the present invention more apparent and understandable, specific embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0057] Specific Implementation Plan 1: Combining Figure 1 As shown, this invention provides a multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system, including a main housing 1, a display 2, an odor diffuser 3, a speaker 4, and a main controller 5.

[0058] The odor diffuser 3, speaker 4 and main controller 5 are all housed inside the main housing 1, and the display 2 is housed on the outer surface of the main housing 1.

[0059] The main controller 5 is connected to the display 2, the odor diffuser 3, and the speaker 4 via wired or wireless means. Based on the warning signals given by the gas pipeline hidden danger classification warning and decision-making system, the main controller 5 controls the display 2, the odor diffuser 3, and the speaker 4 to perform classified warnings. The three sensory alarms are connected in parallel so that if one of the warning methods fails, the warning information can still be received through other senses.

[0060] The display 2 is used to display warning level graphics, with different flashing intervals for different levels; the display 2 outputs five warning levels: black, red, orange, yellow, and blue, which correspond to Level 1 (high risk), Level 2 (relatively high risk), Level 3 (moderate risk), Level 4 (low risk), and no warning, respectively;

[0061] The odor diffuser (e.g., A815 type electric button controlled CE Rohs essential oil wall plug aroma diffuser) 3 has a built-in natural gas odorant (e.g., tetrahydrothiophene), which releases different concentrations of odor according to different levels when an alarm is triggered; when outputting odor alarm prompts with different release concentrations and release times at different levels, the five alarm levels of Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4 and no alarm correspond to 25 mg / m³, 5min, 20 mg / m³, 4min, 15 mg / m³, 2min, 8 mg / m³, 1min, 0 mg / m³, 0min, respectively;

[0062] The speaker 4 is used to play alarm sounds. When an alarm is triggered, the sound frequency and volume vary depending on the level. The speaker 4 outputs alarm sounds at different time intervals and volumes for different levels. There are five alarm levels: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, and No Alarm, which correspond to 0.3s / time, 120dB, 0.8s / time, 100dB, 1.2s / time, 80dB, 1.6s / time, 60dB, and 0s / time, 0dB, respectively.

[0063] Specific Implementation Scheme Two: The present invention provides a warning method for a multi-sensory warning device used in a gas system hazard classification and early warning system, comprising the following steps:

[0064] After receiving the warning level results output by the gas pipeline hidden danger classification early warning and decision-making system, the main controller 5 generates and synchronously sends control commands to the parallel-connected display 2, odor diffuser 3 and speaker 4 according to the warning level results; the display 2 displays the corresponding level graphic and performs dynamic flashing visual warning according to the control commands; the odor diffuser 3 releases the corresponding level warning odor according to the control commands; the speaker 4 plays the corresponding level warning sound according to the control commands.

[0065] The method for risk classification, early warning, and decision-making in gas system systems includes the following steps:

[0066] S100: By entering a username and password in the user management module, users are provided with registration and login functions, and access security is ensured with strict identity verification. After the user enters the system, this module implements role-based access control to distinguish the operation scope and data access permissions of different identities such as administrators, operators, and viewers.

[0067] S200 imports raw pipeline monitoring data in various formats into the data management module and preprocesses the raw pipeline monitoring data through the data cleaning function to effectively eliminate noise and outliers, providing a high-quality data foundation for subsequent analysis. At the same time, it provides standardized data entry templates to standardize data formats and stores and manages all processed monitoring data in a long-term and orderly manner to ensure that historical data can be efficiently retrieved and traced back.

[0068] The data management module supports manual parameter input for structured tables and documents, and enables quick hazard identification through preset drop-down menus, as well as file import functionality compatible with multiple data formats, thus effectively solving the problem of diverse data sources.

[0069] The data management module first performs intelligent cleaning on imported data in various formats, uses a threshold detection mechanism to monitor the data stream in real time to capture abnormal fluctuations, and can use the Naive Bayes algorithm to identify and correct abnormal data. At the same time, it converts multi-source heterogeneous data into a standardized format that can be processed internally by the system, providing high-quality input data for downstream analysis models.

[0070] S300. Through the risk assessment calculation module, the pipeline monitoring data preprocessed in step S200 is used to calculate the risk score using quantitative and qualitative methods. The warning level is divided according to which preset risk score threshold range the risk score falls into. The warning level includes five levels: black, red, orange, yellow and blue.

[0071] It should be noted that the risk assessment calculation model can not only independently and deeply assess and analyze a single hidden danger factor, but also handle complex coupled hidden dangers, analyze the interaction and superposition effect between multiple risk factors, and provide a basis for risk assessment of the entire platform.

[0072] In the risk assessment calculation module, a progressive calculation strategy is adopted. First, a weighted scoring model is used to independently quantify individual risk factors such as corrosion and abnormal pressure. Then, the interaction and superposition effects between multiple risk factors are coupled and analyzed. Finally, all parameters are integrated and machine learning algorithms such as random forest are used to calculate risk scores and generate five levels of early warning results. The preset scores are: 0 ≤ risk score < 20, no warning; 20 ≤ score < 40, level four warning; 40 ≤ score < 60, level three warning; 60 ≤ score < 80, level two warning; 80 ≤ score < 100, level one warning. Five warning levels are determined and output as black, red, orange, yellow, and blue, corresponding to level one (high risk), level two (relatively high risk), level three (moderate risk), level four (low risk), and no warning, respectively.

[0073] S400: The data and analysis results obtained in step S300 are transformed into easily understandable graphical information through the visualization module. The risk level is displayed intuitively using icons of different colors. High-risk levels are dynamically flashed to enhance visual warning. At the same time, tiered sound alarm prompts are provided to ensure that the alarm is perceived through multiple channels and in all aspects.

[0074] The visualization module can also display multi-dimensional evaluation results in rich charts, which greatly improves the efficiency and depth of situational understanding.

[0075] After the warning level is output in step S300, the visualization module is activated, transforming the abstract warning and decision-making information into an intuitive interactive interface. The visualization module displays the warnings visually using color icons corresponding to the warning levels, and simultaneously implements dynamic flashing of the warning icons at different time intervals for each level to enhance visual alertness. The five warning levels—black, red, orange, yellow, and blue—correspond to flashing times of 0.15s / time, 0.4s / time, 0.6s / time, 0.8s / time, and 0s / time, respectively. Simultaneously, the control center provides audible alarm prompts at different time intervals and volumes for each level. The five warning levels—black, red, orange, yellow, and blue—correspond to flashing times of 0.3s / time, 120dB, 0.8s / time, 100dB, 1.2s / time, 80dB, 1.6s / time, 60dB, and 0s / time, 0dB, respectively, ensuring that the alarm is perceived through multiple channels. Furthermore, it can display risk assessment results, historical trends, and other multi-dimensional information in rich chart formats, greatly improving the depth of understanding of the security situation and decision-making efficiency.

[0076] S500 receives the risk score obtained from the risk assessment module in step S300, and generates corresponding emergency response suggestions for different warning levels through the decision knowledge base in the decision support module; especially in the face of complex coupled hidden dangers, it provides comprehensive solutions and recommends suitable emergency plans for commanders to refer to.

[0077] The decision support module receives analysis results and generates preliminary decision recommendations with priorities based on different warning levels. Simultaneously, the decision knowledge base matches historical cases and standard emergency plans to provide commanders with validated and optimal response strategies. For complex coupled risks, this module can also generate comprehensive solutions. All operations and decision-making processes based on system recommendations are fully recorded, forming a traceable handling archive. To ensure the stable operation and continuous optimization of the entire platform, the system management module is integrated throughout, allowing administrators to globally configure and personalize system parameters, export key assessment results and reports in standard formats, and meticulously record all operation logs and security audit logs for traceability.

[0078] It should be noted that this invention fully records all operations and decision-making processes performed based on system recommendations, forming a traceable and complete handling archive; it allows administrators to perform global configuration and personalized settings of system parameters to meet the needs of different application scenarios; the module supports exporting evaluation results, analysis reports, and other data in a standard format for easy reporting and archiving; it records system operation logs and security audit logs to provide a basis for troubleshooting and security tracing, and integrates system help and user manuals to provide users with timely technical support and usage guidance;

[0079] The S600 incorporates a feedback optimization mechanism that transmits real-time status information from the visualization module back to the data management model. The actual application effects of the processing solutions recorded by the decision support module are fed back to the risk assessment module as feedback data. This drives the continuous iteration and optimization of the risk assessment calculation model, enabling the system to learn from practice and continuously improve the accuracy of early warnings and the effectiveness of decision-making.

[0080] The specific steps of execution step S100 include:

[0081] (1) On the registration page, enter your username, a password of no less than six digits, and confirm the password to complete the registration;

[0082] (2) Login interface: Enter username and password to complete login.

[0083] Specifically, set the registered username to "user" and the password to "123456", confirm the password to "user", and enter the username "user" and password "123456" on the login screen to display a successful login message.

[0084] The specific steps of step S200 include:

[0085] (1) Select a single hazard assessment and choose the type of hazard;

[0086] (2) Input the hazard parameters in the hazard table;

[0087] (3) In step (1), select to switch to coupled hazard assessment, and select the first hazard type and the second hazard type;

[0088] (4) Enter the hazard parameters in the hazard table (as shown in Table 1 below) for the first and second hazard types respectively;

[0089] (5) After step (1) or step (3), select to import the values ​​from the Excel document;

[0090] (6) After step (1) or step (3), selecting the template will generate an Excel document containing the values ​​of potential hazards;

[0091] (7) After step (1) or step (3), select data preview to preview the data imported in step (5);

[0092] (8) Click to start the evaluation.

[0093] Table 1

[0094]

[0095] The specific steps of step S300 include:

[0096] (1) After jumping to the evaluation results, you can view the flashing icon and the interval sound alarm;

[0097] Specifically, a single hazard assessment is selected, with preset scores: 0 ≤ risk score < 20, no warning; 20 ≤ score < 40, Level 4 warning; 40 ≤ score < 60, Level 3 warning; 60 ≤ score < 80, Level 2 warning; 80 ≤ score < 100, Level 1 warning. The system accurately determines and outputs five warning levels: black, red, orange, yellow, and blue, corresponding to Level 1 (high risk), Level 2 (relatively high risk), Level 3 (moderate risk), Level 4 (low risk), and no warning, respectively.

[0098] The system selects a coupled hazard assessment, choosing the first and second hazard types to obtain assessment results: scores for Hazard 1 and Hazard 2. By introducing machine learning algorithms such as Random Forest and a coupled analysis model, a comprehensive score is obtained after coupling. Preset scores are: 0 ≤ risk score < 20, no warning; 20 ≤ score < 40, Level 4 warning; 40 ≤ score < 60, Level 3 warning; 60 ≤ score < 80, Level 2 warning; 80 ≤ score < 100, Level 1 warning. The system accurately determines and outputs five warning levels: black, red, orange, yellow, and blue, corresponding to Level 1 (high risk), Level 2 (relatively high risk), Level 3 (moderate risk), Level 4 (low risk), and no warning, respectively.

[0099] Specifically, to ensure the comparability of feature data with different dimensions and ranges, feature normalization is required. Each category implicitly contains m feature indicators, corresponding to m risk weights. A percentage-based risk score can be calculated based on the normalized feature indicators and risk weights. When n types of hazards occur simultaneously, a percentage-based hazard coupling risk score can be calculated based on the individual hazard risk score, coupling enhancement factor, and coupling matching factor. Graded early warnings are then implemented based on the hazard coupling risk score. The risk score for an individual hazard is calculated using the following formula:

[0100] (1)

[0101] In the formula, The risk score for the i-th individual hidden danger is expressed on a percentage basis. The number of characteristic indicators for a single hidden danger; This is the normalized value of the k-th feature index; The risk weight of the k-th feature indicator.

[0102] The general normalization method for feature indicators is as follows:

[0103] (2)

[0104] In the formula, The value of the k-th feature index; The maximum value of the k-th feature index is used as the normalization benchmark.

[0105] The characteristic indicators of various hidden dangers, their normalization benchmarks, and risk weights are detailed in Table 1.

[0106] The risk score for multiple coupled hidden dangers is calculated using the following formula:

[0107] (3)

[0108] In the formula, The risk score is calculated based on the coupling of multiple potential hazards, on a 100-point scale. The number of types of hazards occurring simultaneously; The risk score for the i-th type of hazard is on a percentage basis. is the coupling matching factor for the i-th type of hidden danger.

[0109] The coupling matching factor of the potential hazard is calculated using the following formula:

[0110] (4)

[0111] In the formula, Let be the coupling matching factor for the i-th type of hidden danger; This represents the maximum risk score among all types of potential hazards, expressed as a percentage. , which is the coupling enhancement factor for the i-th type of hidden danger.

[0112] The coupling enhancement factor of the hidden danger is calculated by the following formula:

[0113] (5)

[0114] The calculation method for the risk score of multiple coupled hidden dangers is as follows:

[0115]

[0116] (6)

[0117] The above-mentioned multi-hazard coupling risk scoring algorithm ensures that:

[0118] (1) Risk scores for individual hidden dangers can be calculated;

[0119] (2) When a certain implicit risk score is 100 points, regardless of the risk scores of other hidden risks, the coupled risk score is 100 points;

[0120] (3) When the types of hazards and the risk scores of other hazards remain unchanged, if the risk score of a certain hazard increases, the score of the coupled risk also increases;

[0121] (4) The most significant risk is the dominant risk, which also has the greatest impact on the coupled risk score;

[0122] (5) When the number of hidden dangers increases (other hidden dangers and risk scores remain unchanged), adding a hidden danger will increase the coupled risk score.

[0123] The specific steps of execution step S400 include:

[0124] (1) After jumping to the evaluation results, you can view the flashing icon and the interval sound alarm;

[0125] Specifically, after navigating to the assessment results interface, the location of the warning point is clearly marked on the electronic map and displayed intuitively with color icons corresponding to the warning level. Simultaneously, the warning icons are dynamically flashed at different time intervals according to the warning level to enhance visual alertness. The five warning levels—black, red, orange, yellow, and blue—correspond to flashes of 0.15s / time, 0.4s / time, 0.6s / time, 0.8s / time, and 0s / time, respectively. In the control center, audible alarms at different time intervals and volumes according to the warning level are also provided. The five warning levels—black, red, orange, yellow, and blue—correspond to flashes of 0.3s / time, 120dB, 0.8s / time, 100dB, 1.2s / time, 80dB, 1.6s / time, 60dB, and 0s / time, 0dB, respectively, ensuring that the alarm is perceived through multiple channels.

[0126] The specific steps of execution step S500 include:

[0127] (1) After jumping to the evaluation results, you can view the processing decision;

[0128] Specifically, when selecting a single hazard assessment and choosing "occupancy" as the hazard type, if the assessment result is a Level 4 warning, the following decision recommendations can be viewed: Level 4 warning, increase monitoring frequency. Detailed recommendations: 1. Increase monitoring frequency to twice a week; 2. Prepare emergency plans; 3. Notify relevant management personnel. Hazard-specific recommendations: Recommendation: Remove the obstruction within a specified time and strengthen monitoring of this pipeline section. When the assessment result is no warning, conduct normal inspections. Detailed recommendations: 1. Maintain normal inspection frequency; 2. Record monitoring data; 3. No special treatment required. Hazard-specific recommendations: Recommendation: Develop a specific treatment plan based on the site conditions. When the assessment result is a Level 1 warning, immediately shut down operations and activate the emergency plan! Detailed recommendations: 1. Immediately stop operation; 2. Evacuate surrounding personnel; 3. Activate the highest level emergency plan; 4. Notify government emergency departments; 5. Prepare for media notification. Hazard-specific recommendations: Immediately remove the obstruction, and conduct pipeline inspection if necessary. For other hazard types and levels, see other embodiments of the method.

[0129] Alternatively, select Coupled Hazard Assessment, choose "Occupation" as the first hazard type and "Third-Party Construction Damage" as the second hazard type. If the assessment result is a Level 2 warning, click on the handling decision to view the decision recommendations: Level 2 Warning, arrange immediate repairs, and shut down operations if necessary. Coupled Warning Recommendations: 1. Prioritize handling according to urgency: address "Third-Party Construction Damage" first, then "Occupation"; 2. The two hazards may have a coupling effect, requiring comprehensive analysis; 3. It is recommended to develop a joint handling plan; 4. Monitor the mutual influence of the two hazards during the handling process. Occupation-Specific Recommendations: Mark the occupation location and conduct regular inspections. Third-Party Construction Damage-Specific Recommendations: Strengthen patrols to ensure compliance with construction plans. Comprehensive Recommendations: 1. Immediately activate the emergency plan and handle both hazards simultaneously; 2. Prioritize resolving the "Third-Party Construction Damage" issue, then address "Occupation"; 3. Establish a joint command team to coordinate the handling work.

[0130] Select the coupled hazard assessment, choose "Landslide" as the first hazard type and "Pipeline Aging Corrosion" as the second hazard type. If the assessment result is a Level 1 warning, click "Handling Decision" to view the decision recommendations: Level 1 Warning, Immediate shutdown, activate the emergency plan! Coupled Warning Recommendations: 1. Prioritize handling: address "Landslide" first, then "Pipeline Aging Corrosion"; 2. The two hazards may have a coupling effect, requiring comprehensive analysis; 3. A joint handling plan is recommended; 4. Monitor the mutual influence of the two hazards during the handling process. Landslide-Specific Recommendations: Regular inspections, paying attention to rainy season changes. Pipeline Aging Corrosion-Specific Recommendations: Continue existing anti-corrosion measures, conduct regular inspections. Comprehensive Recommendations: 1. Immediately activate the emergency plan, handling both hazards simultaneously; 2. Prioritize resolving "Landslide," then address "Pipeline Aging Corrosion"; 3. Establish a joint command team to coordinate the handling work. See other examples of the method for other hazard types and levels.

[0131] The specific steps of execution step S600 include:

[0132] (1) Click on the processing operation to enter the processing time, the person handling the processing, the specific operation, and the processing result;

[0133] (2) Click "Processing Complete" to jump to the evaluation results page. The page will display a green checkmark and stop flashing and alarm sounds.

[0134] (3) Click on the processing operation history to view the past records of hidden danger handling time, handler, specific operation, and handling result;

[0135] (4) Click Export Report to export hazard records and handling operation records in various formats.

[0136] Specifically, you can enter the processing time: 2026-01-19; the processor: user; the specific operation: handle it promptly and properly according to the processing decision suggestions; and the processing result: the hidden danger has been eliminated. After recording, click "Processing Complete" to jump to the evaluation result page, where a green checkmark will be displayed, and the flashing and alarm sounds will stop. Click on the processing operation history to view this processing record.

[0137] Example 1

[0138] This embodiment specifically demonstrates the application process of the multi-sensory warning device in a single hazard warning scenario of a gas system.

[0139] The operator first logs in via the display screen integrated into the main housing 1 of the warning device. After successful login, the operator selects the "Single Hazard Assessment" function through the interface of the gas system hazard classification, early warning, and decision-making system running on the main controller 5, and selects "Occupation" as the hazard type from the drop-down menu. Then, the operator inputs relevant parameters into the standardized template provided by the system: Occupation area: 80m², Occupation time: 30 days, Pipe material: PE pipe, Burial depth: 1.5m. After inputting the parameters, the operator clicks "Start Assessment." The risk assessment module within the main controller 5 immediately processes the input parameters. Using a weighted scoring model, the risk score for the "Occupation" hazard is calculated to be 29.3 points. Based on the preset scoring threshold (20 ≤ score < 40 corresponds to Level 4 warning), the system accurately determines the current warning level as Level 4 (yellow warning), corresponding to low risk.

[0140] After the warning judgment result is generated, the main controller 5 synchronously sends control commands to the three sensor alarms connected in parallel:

[0141] Visual warning: On monitor 2, the icon representing the potential hazard point immediately turns yellow and flashes continuously at a frequency of 0.8 seconds per flash, strongly alerting the operator.

[0142] Auditory warning: Speaker 4 is activated simultaneously, emitting a periodic alarm sound at an interval of 1.6 seconds and a volume of 60 decibels.

[0143] Olfactory warning: Odor diffuser 3 is activated, and its built-in natural gas odorant storage tank continuously releases a warning odor for 1 minute at a concentration of 8 mg / m³, simulating a low-concentration leak scenario and enhancing the operator's risk intuition.

[0144] At this point, the operator can immediately see the flashing yellow icon and is surrounded by audible and odor warnings, achieving multi-channel, high-sensitivity alarm reception. The operator then clicks the "Handling Decision" button on the interface. The decision support module automatically generates and displays handling suggestions based on the four-level warning level: "Increase monitoring frequency. Detailed suggestions: 1. Increase monitoring frequency to twice a week; 2. Prepare emergency plans; 3. Notify relevant management personnel. Specific suggestion for the hazard: Remove the obstruction within a specified time and strengthen monitoring of this pipeline section." The operator executes the handling according to the suggestions and enters the following information on the system's "Handling Operation" interface: handling time, handler, specific operation (e.g., "On-site verification and urging cleanup"), and handling result (e.g., "Obstruction removed"). After completing the entry, click "Handling Completed."

[0145] Upon receiving confirmation of completion, the main controller 5 immediately stops sending warning signals to all alarms: the icon on display 2 turns green and stops flashing; the speaker 4 and odor diffuser 3 cease operation. The entire process of this warning and response is automatically recorded by the system, creating a traceable file.

[0146] Example 2

[0147] This embodiment specifically demonstrates the application process of the multi-sensory warning device in dealing with scenarios involving coupled risks (multiple risk factors coexisting).

[0148] After logging into the system, the operator selects the "Coupled Hazard Assessment" function. First, the first hazard type is selected as "Third-Party Construction Damage," and the parameters are entered: construction distance: 8m, construction type: Level 4, protective measures: Level 4, duration: 20 days. Next, the second hazard type is selected as "Occupation," and the parameters are entered: occupied area: 100m², occupied time: 120 days, pipe material: PE pipe, burial depth: 1.5m. "Start Assessment" is then clicked. The risk assessment module of the main controller 5 initiates the coupled analysis process. First, the independent risk scores for the two hazards are calculated: "Third-Party Construction Damage" scores 88.8 points, and "Occupation" scores 60 points. Then, the coupled analysis unit assesses the interaction between the two, identifying that construction vibration may exacerbate the stress risk of the occupied pipeline. After comprehensive evaluation using the random forest algorithm, the overall risk score is output as 74.4 points. Based on the threshold (60 ≤ score < 80 corresponds to a Level 2 warning), the system determines it as a Level 2 (red) warning, corresponding to a higher risk.

[0149] The main controller 5 immediately activates the multi-sensory alarm:

[0150] Visual warning: The icon in the corresponding area on display 2 turns red and flashes continuously at a rapid frequency of 0.4 seconds per flash.

[0151] Auditory warning: Speaker 4 emits an alarm sound at an interval of 0.8 seconds and a volume of 100 decibels, which significantly enhances the sense of urgency compared to Example 1.

[0152] Olfactory warning: Odor diffuser 3 releases odorant at a concentration of 20 mg / m³ for 4 minutes, simulating the odor intensity of a high risk of leakage.

[0153] Meanwhile, the decision support module generates comprehensive handling suggestions for coupled risks: "Level 2 warning, arrange immediate repairs, and shut down operations if necessary. Coupling warning suggestions: 1. Prioritize handling 'third-party construction damage' according to urgency, then handle 'occupancy'; 2. Develop a joint handling plan and monitor the mutual impact between the two;...". Based on this intelligent suggestion, the operator coordinates with the construction party to immediately suspend operations and organize joint emergency repairs, recording the complete handling process in the system. After the handling is completed, the system deactivates the alarm.

[0154] Example 3

[0155] This example demonstrates the emergency response and handling linkage of the multi-sensory warning device under the highest risk level (Level 1 warning).

[0156] Assuming the system automatically identifies and determines that a certain area has a coupled risk of "pipeline aging and corrosion" (score 85) and "landslide" (score 90) through real-time sensor data analysis, the comprehensive risk score is as high as 92 points, triggering a level one (black) warning.

[0157] The main controller 5 immediately activates the highest level of alert mode:

[0158] Visual warning: On monitor 2, the relevant icons turn black and flash violently at a frequency of up to 0.15 seconds per flash, creating a strong visual impact.

[0159] Auditory warning: Speaker 4 emits an extremely rapid alarm sound (0.3 seconds / time, 120 decibels), which is enough to penetrate most ambient noise.

[0160] Olfactory alert: Odor diffuser 3 releases odorant at a maximum concentration of 25 mg / m³ for 5 minutes, creating a highly realistic emergency leak scenario.

[0161] This comprehensive and high-intensity sensory bombardment ensures that operators at all positions are aware of the impending major risk immediately. The system's synchronized decision-making recommendations directly direct to "Immediate shutdown, activate the highest-level emergency plan!" and push specific instructions such as valve closure, evacuation, and reporting. Multiple alarms deployed at different positions simultaneously support cross-departmental emergency coordination. The entire response process is significantly accelerated due to the high efficiency of the alerts.

[0162] Example 4

[0163] This embodiment illustrates the normal state of the system after determining that there is no risk or the hidden danger has been eliminated, demonstrating its closed-loop management capability.

[0164] When the operator completes the handling of a potential hazard (such as removing obstructions in Example 1) and confirms it, or when the risk score in the system's periodic assessment remains below 20 points, the warning level is determined to be no warning (blue).

[0165] At this time, the main controller 5 sends a stop or standby command to each alarm:

[0166] Visual display: On monitor 2, the corresponding point icon is displayed as a stable green checkmark or normal mark, without any flickering.

[0167] Hearing and smell: Both the speaker 4 and the odor diffuser 3 remain silent and do not release any sound or odor.

[0168] Meanwhile, the system interface clearly displays the "normal" status, and all historical warning records and handling files are available for review. This demonstrates that the alarm not only excels at high-intensity alerts in emergency situations but also provides clear and uninterrupted safety status feedback under normal conditions. It achieves visualized and perceptive management of the entire process, from risk warning and emergency response to status recovery, effectively avoiding interference from false alarms and ensuring the seriousness and reliability of the system.

[0169] Example 5

[0170] This embodiment demonstrates the high reliability of this alarm device thanks to its parallel redundancy design in the event of a failure in one of the sensory alarm channels. Assume that in the compressor room of a gas station, the ambient background noise level remains consistently high (approximately 90 decibels). At this time, the multi-sensory alarm device deployed there receives a Level 2 (red) warning signal from the central system.

[0171] The main controller 5 simultaneously sends commands to three parallel alarms according to a preset program. However, due to long-term corrosion from a high-humidity environment, the internal circuit of the speaker 4 malfunctions, preventing it from playing the preset loud alarm sound (0.8 seconds / time, 100 dB). In this "single-point failure" scenario, traditional single or simple superimposed alarm devices will completely lose their warning function, resulting in serious missed alarms.

[0172] However, the parallel redundancy design of this invention ensures the continuous operation of the system:

[0173] Visual warning normal: Monitor 2 is intact, and its red icon immediately flashes violently at the highest frequency (0.4 seconds / time), which is still conspicuous in the brightly lit computer room.

[0174] Olfactory warning normal: Odor diffuser 3 started normally, releasing odorant at a high concentration (20 mg / m³) for 4 minutes. The operator who was inspecting the compressor room did not hear the expected alarm, but was first attracted by the rapidly flashing red dot on the screen and the sudden appearance of a strong "gas leak" odor in the air, and immediately realized that a major alarm had occurred.

[0175] Based on the dual visual and olfactory alerts, the operator quickly reviewed the detailed warning information and response decisions displayed on the screen and initiated the emergency procedure. Subsequent investigation revealed a malfunction in speaker 4, which was subsequently repaired. This embodiment demonstrates that even if one sensory channel (hearing) completely fails, the remaining parallel sensory channels (vision and olfaction) can still independently and effectively transmit alarms, fundamentally eliminating the risk of missed alarms caused by the failure of a single channel due to hardware or environmental factors, and significantly improving the overall robustness of the system.

[0176] Example 6

[0177] Combination Figure 2 As shown in the figure, this embodiment illustrates a collaborative working mode in which the alarm device is deployed in a distributed manner in multiple key positions to cope with the temporary absence of personnel in individual positions and to ensure that no alarm is missed.

[0178] The multi-sensory warning devices of this invention have been deployed in the regional dispatch center, the station manager's office, and the emergency repair team's duty room of a gas company, and are connected to a unified hazard classification, early warning, and decision-making system via network. One night, the system determined that a section of high-pressure pipeline was damaged by third-party construction and coupled with geological subsidence, triggering a level-two (red) warning.

[0179] The main controller 5 simultaneously sends the warning command to the alarms at the three locations mentioned above. At this time, the only duty officer in the emergency repair team's duty room was away from his post because he had gone to the equipment room for a temporary inspection.

[0180] Dispatch Center and Station Master's Office: Both alarms activated normally, with red icons flashing (0.4 seconds / time), alarm sounds (0.8 seconds / time, 100 decibels), and odorant released (20 mg / m³, 4 minutes). The dispatcher and station master were immediately alerted and began coordinating resources.

[0181] Emergency repair team duty room: The alarm system there was also activated, with the screen flashing, the alarm sounding, and an odor spreading. Although no one was inside, the loud alarm sounded through the crack in the door, and the pervasive alarm odor spread into the corridor.

[0182] Upon returning from the patrol, the emergency repair crew member approached the duty room and first heard a rapid alarm coming from inside. Entering the room, he was immediately alerted by the flashing screen and lingering odor. He quickly reviewed the response plan pushed by the system (prioritizing the handling of construction damage and monitoring the impact of settlement) and immediately contacted the dispatch center, which was already coordinating online, and led his team to the scene.

[0183] This embodiment demonstrates that by spatially distributing the alarm across different job positions, a three-dimensional early warning and sensing network is constructed. When the receiving personnel at a certain node are temporarily absent for any reason, the alarm at that node continues to operate, and the multi-sensory signals it generates (especially sound and smell) constitute an effective "environmental warning field," ensuring that the alarm is detected immediately upon the personnel's return. Simultaneously, synchronized alarms from other positions enable parallel information reception and response initiation, effectively avoiding delays or interruptions in the entire response chain caused by the absence of personnel at individual positions, achieving cross-position, near-zero-latency collaborative emergency response.

[0184] While the present invention has been disclosed above, its scope of protection is not limited thereto. Those skilled in the art can make various changes and modifications without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention, and all such changes and modifications will fall within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system, characterized in that: It includes a main housing (1), a display (2), an odor diffuser (3), a speaker (4), and a main controller (5). The odor diffuser (3), speaker (4) and main controller (5) are all located inside the main housing (1), and the display (2) is located on the outer surface of the main housing (1); The main controller (5) is connected to the display (2), the odor diffuser (3) and the speaker (4) respectively. The main controller (5) controls the display (2), the odor diffuser (3) and the speaker (4) to perform graded warnings based on the warning signal. The display (2) is used to display warning level graphics, with different levels of flashing intervals; The odor diffuser (3) releases different concentrations of odor according to different levels when an alarm is triggered; The speaker (4) is used to play different sound alarm prompts with different sound frequencies and volumes according to the level when an alarm is triggered.

2. A multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The display (2), odor diffuser (3) and speaker (4) are arranged in parallel.

3. A multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 2, characterized in that: The display (2) outputs five warning levels: black, red, orange, yellow, and blue, which correspond to Level 1 warning, Level 2 warning, Level 3 warning, Level 4 warning, and no warning, respectively.

4. A multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 3, characterized in that: The odor diffuser (3) provides odor alarm concentrations and time intervals corresponding to Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, and no alarm releases, respectively: 25 mg / m³, 5 min; 20 mg / m³, 4 min; 15 mg / m³, 2 min; 8 mg / m³, 1 min; and 0 mg / m³, 0 min.

5. A multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 4, characterized in that: The odor diffuser (3) contains tetrahydrothiophene as the odorant.

6. A multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 5, characterized in that: The loudspeaker (4) provides sound alarms at frequencies and decibels of 0.3s / time, 120dB, 0.8s / time, 100dB, 1.2s / time, 80dB, 1.6s / time, 60dB and 0s / time, 0dB for Level 1 warning, Level 2 warning, Level 3 warning, Level 4 warning and no warning, respectively.

7. A multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 6, characterized in that: The number of the multi-sensory alarms is multiple, and they are portable multi-sensory alarms, with each multi-sensory alarm being placed in the hands of multiple supervisors.

8. A warning method for a multi-sensory warning device for a gas system hazard classification and early warning system as described in any one of claims 1-7, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: After receiving the warning level results output by the gas pipeline hidden danger classification warning and decision-making system, the main controller (5) generates and synchronously sends control commands to the parallel-connected display (2), odor diffuser (3) and speaker (4) according to the warning level results; the display (2) displays the corresponding level graphic and performs dynamic flashing visual warning according to the control command; the odor diffuser (3) releases the corresponding level warning odor according to the control command; the speaker (4) plays the corresponding level warning sound according to the control command.

9. The warning method for a multi-sensory warning device in a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 8, characterized in that: Methods for obtaining the warning level results output by the gas pipeline hidden danger classification, early warning and decision-making system include, S100. Provide users with registration and login functions by entering their username and password in the user management module; S200: Import the raw pipeline monitoring data from multiple sources into the data management module for data preprocessing to eliminate noise and outliers, and perform normalization. S300. Input the pipeline monitoring data preprocessed in step S200 into the risk assessment calculation module, calculate the risk score, and conduct an early warning level assessment. S400. The risk score and warning level obtained in step S300 are visualized through the visualization module. That is, the warning level is displayed graphically, and alarm prompts are given in combination with dynamic flashing lights and graded sounds. S500: After receiving the risk score and warning level obtained from the risk assessment module in step S300, S500 generates corresponding emergency response suggestions for different warning levels through the decision knowledge base in the decision support module. For single and coupled hazards, we provide single and comprehensive solutions respectively, and recommend appropriate emergency plans for commanders to refer to. The S600 incorporates a design feedback optimization mechanism that transmits real-time status information from the visualization module back to the data management model. The decision support module records the actual application effects of the processing solutions, which are then fed back to the risk assessment module as feedback data to drive the continuous iteration and optimization of the risk assessment calculation model.

10. The warning method for a multi-sensory warning device in a gas system hazard classification and early warning system according to claim 9, characterized in that: In step S300, the risk score is calculated as follows: Suppose that each type of hidden danger contains m characteristic indicators, which correspond to m risk weights respectively. Calculate the risk score based on the normalized characteristic indicators and risk weights. When n types of hidden dangers occur simultaneously, the hidden danger coupling risk score is calculated based on the individual hidden danger risk score, coupling enhancement factor, and coupling matching factor. Based on the risk scores of coupled hazards, graded early warnings are issued, and the risk score of an individual hazard is calculated using the following formula: （1） In the formula, This represents the risk score for the i-th individual hidden danger. The number of characteristic indicators for a single hidden danger; This is the normalized value of the k-th feature index; The risk weight of the k-th feature indicator; The normalization method for feature indicators is as follows: （2） In the formula, The value of the k-th feature index; The maximum value of the kth feature index is used as the normalization benchmark. The risk score for multiple coupled hidden dangers is calculated using the following formula: （3） In the formula, A risk score is given for the coupling of multiple hidden dangers; The number of types of hazards occurring simultaneously; This represents the risk score for the i-th type of hazard. Let be the coupling matching factor for the i-th type of hidden danger; The coupling matching factor of the potential hazard is calculated using the following formula: （4） In the formula, Let be the coupling matching factor for the i-th type of hidden danger; This represents the maximum risk score among all types of potential hazards. This is the coupling enhancement factor for the i-th type of hidden danger; The coupling enhancement factor of the hidden danger is calculated by the following formula: （5） The calculation method for the risk score of multiple coupled hidden dangers is as follows: （6）。

Images