输气管道泄漏模型不确定性因素敏感性分析

doi:10.11885/j.issn.1674-5086.2020.06.29.03

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 输气管道泄漏模型中不确定性因素的分析是影响管道泄漏风险评价不确定的主要原因。为此，在确定起点压力、泄漏孔面积、气体温度和泄漏点距起点距离4项为影响输气管道泄漏速率计算的主要不确定性因素基础上，考虑多因素相互关联、共同影响模型计算精度的问题，采用多因素敏感度整体分析方法分别抽取数量为500，1 000，2 000和3 000的样本各3组，研究各不确定性因素对泄漏速率的影响程度，分析表明，不同样本量下计算得到的各因素Spearman秩相关系数排序基本一致，说明泄漏孔面积对泄漏速率的影响最大，其次是气体温度，起点压力和泄漏点距起点距离对泄漏速率的影响较小；样本数量为500时得到的不确定性因素Spearman秩相关系数排序与样本数量为1 000，2 000和3 000时得到的不确定性因素Spearman秩相关系数排序趋势相同，说明在现有因素取值区间内，抽样数量大于500时的模型计算结果已具备可靠性，能够满足后续风险分析的精度要求。

关键词: 输气管道, 泄漏模型, 不确定性因素, 敏感性整体分析, 风险评价

Abstract: The main cause for affects the uncertainty of pipeline leakage risk assessment is the analysis for uncertain factors of gas pipeline leakage model. For this purpose, on the one hand, four factors which were inlet pressure, leakage hole area, gas temperature and distance from the leakage hole to the pipe inlet were determined as the main uncertain factors affecting the calculation of gas pipeline leakage rate; on other hand, the multi-factor sensitivity analysis method was used to study the effects of uncertainty factors on the leakage rate by extracting twelve groups of samples with 500, 1 000, 2 000 and 3 000 samples. The results showed that:the rank of Spearman rank correlation coefficient of uncertain factors calculated under different sample sizes is basically consistent, that is, the leakage hole area has the greatest influence on the leakage rate; the gas temperature the second, the inlet pressure and the distance from the leakage hole to the pipe inlet has the third influence; within the existing value range of uncertain factors, the calculated results of the gas pipeline leakage model could meet the accuracy requirements of subsequent pipeline leakage risk analysis when the number of samples is greater than 500, because of the same rank trend of Spearman rank correlation coefficient among different samples.

Key words: gas pipeline, leakage model, uncertainty factors, multi-factor sensitivity analysis, risk assessment

中图分类号:

TE832

安建川. 输气管道泄漏模型不确定性因素敏感性分析[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 43(1): 149-156.

AN Jianchuan. Sensitivity Analysis for Uncertain Factors of Gas Pipeline Leakage Model[J]. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University(Science & Technology Edition), 2021, 43(1): 149-156.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: http://journal15.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_xnzk/CN/10.11885/j.issn.1674-5086.2020.06.29.03

http://journal15.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_xnzk/CN/Y2021/V43/I1/149

参考文献

[1] 熊鸿斌,武珊珊. 基于蒙特卡洛模拟的天然气管道环境风险评价研究[J]. 合肥工业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 41(7):978-983. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-5060.2018.07.021 XIONG Hongbin, WU Shanshan. Study on environmental risk assessment of natural gas pipeline leakage based on Monte Carlo simulation[J]. Journal of Hefei University of Technology (Natural Science edition), 2018, 41(7):978-983. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-5060.2018.07.021
[2] 武珊珊. 基于修正突变级数法的天然气管道环境风险评价研究[D]. 合肥:合肥工业大学, 2017. WU Shanshan. Environmental risk assessment of natural gas pipelines by using modified catastrophe progression method[D]. Hefei:Hefei University of Technology, 2017.
[3] HSE(Health and Satfety Executive). Development of an intermediate societal risk methodology:An investigation of FN curve repersentation[R]. UK:Health and Safety Executive, 2011.
[4] BEERENS H I, POST J G, PA U D H. The use of generic failure frequencies in QRA:The quality and use of failure frequencies and how to bring them up-to-date[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2006, 130(3):265-270. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.07.013
[5] 刘中良,罗志云,王皆腾,等. 天然气管道泄漏速率的确定[J]. 化工学报, 2008, 59(8):2121-2126. doi:10.3321/j.issn:0438-1157.2008.08.036 LIU Zhongliang, LUO Zhiyun, WANG Jieteng, et al. Analytical calculation of leakage rate for natural gas pipelines[J]. Journal of Chemical Industry and Engineering (China), 2008, 59(8):2121-2126. doi:10.3321/j.issn:0438-1157.2008.08.036
[6] 韩光洁. 埋地燃气管道泄漏量计算及扩散规律研究[D]. 重庆:重庆大学, 2014:53-64. HAN Guangjie. Research on the leakage of buried gas pipeline and diffusion regularity[D]. Chongqing:Chongqing University, 2014:53-64.
[7] 杨凯. 城市燃气管道泄漏多因素耦合致灾机理与灾害控制研究[D]. 北京:首都经济贸易大学, 2016. YANG Kai. Study on multi-factor coupled disaster mechanism and disaster control of urban gas pipeline leakage[D]. Beijing:Capital University of Economics and Business, 2016.
[8] HENRY E J. 可靠性工程与风险分析[M]. 吕应中,黄祥瑞,高金中,等,译. 北京:原子能出版社, 1988. HENRY E J. Reliability engineering and risk analysis[M]. LÜ Yingzhong, HUANG Xiangrui, GAO Jinzhong, et al. trans. Beijing:Atomic Energy Press, 1988.
[9] 沈斐敏,伍良. 燃气泄漏风险评价中不确定性问题的探讨[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2002, 12(1):30-33. doi:10.16265/j.cnki.Issn1003-3033.2002.01.008 SHEN Feimin, WU Liang. Probe into the uncer tainties in risk assessment of urban gas leakage[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2002, 12(1):30-33. doi:10.16265/j.cnki.Issn1003-3033.2002.01.008
[10] 盛鹰,曾祥国,陈华燕,等. 基于位错机制钛合金本构关系的目标参数识别及实验验证[J]. 四川大学学报(工程科学版), 2015, 47(6):69-76. doi:10.15961/j.jsuese.2015.06.010 SHENG Ying, ZENG Xiangguo, CHEN Huayan, et al. Identification of target parameters and experimental verification fordislocation-mechanics-based constitutive relations of titanium alloy[J]. Journal of Sichuan University (Engineering Science Edition), 2015, 47(6):69-76. doi:10.15961/j.jsuese.2015.06.010
[11] 李云飞,曾祥国. 基于位错理论的TC4钛合金的动态本构模型与数值模拟[J]. 中国有色金属学报, 2019, 29(5):972-982. doi:10.19476/j.ysxb.1004.0609.2019.05.10 LI Yunfei, ZENG Xiangguo. Dislocation-mechanicsbased constitutive model of TC4 alloy and its numerical simulation[J]. The Chinese Journal of Nonferrous Metals, 2019, 29(5):972-982. doi:10.19476/j.ysxb.1004.0609.2019.05.10
[12] 高军,黄再兴. PBX炸药粘弹性损伤本构模型参数敏感度分析[J]. 工程力学, 2015, 32(2):201-206. doi:10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2013.12.1209 GAO Jun, HUANG Zaixing. Parameter sensitivity analysis for viscoelastic damage constitutive model of PBX materials[J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2015, 32(2):201-206. doi:10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2013.12.1209
[13] BOSCH C J H V D, WETERINGS R A P M. Methods for the calculation of physical effects-Part 2[M]. 3rd ed. Netherlands:Committee for the Prevention of Disasters, 1997.
[14] 姜璐,梁伟,张来斌. 蒙特卡洛模拟在天然气管道泄漏事故后果分析中的应用[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2015, 22(6):109-115. doi:10.13578/j.cnki.issn.1671-1556.2015.06.21 JIANG Lu, LIANG Wei, ZHANG Laibin. Application of Monte Carlo simulation in consequence analysis of natural gas pipeline leakage accidents[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2015, 22(6):109-115. doi:10.13578/j.cnki.issn.1671-1556.2015.06.21
[15] MONTIEL H, VILCHEZ J A, CASAL J, et al. Mathematical modelling of accidental gas releases[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1998, 59(2):211-233. doi:10.1016/S0304-3894(97)00149-0
[16] 中国石油化工股份有限公司青岛安全工程研究院. 石化装置定量风险评估指南[M]. 北京:中国石化出版社, 2007. Qingdao Safety Engineering Research Institute of China Petrochemical Co. Ltd. A guidance for quantitative risk assessment in the petrochemical plant[M]. Beijing:China Petrochemical Press, 2007.
[17] ALZBUTAS R, TOMAS IEŠMANTAS, POVILAITIS M, et al. Risk and uncertainty analysis of gas pipeline failure and gas combustion consequence[J]. Stochastic Environmental Research & Risk Assessment, 2014, 28:1431-1446. doi:10.1007/s00477-013-0845-4
[18] MARCUS A. Uncertainty in quantitative risk analysischaracterisation and methods of treatment[D]. Lund:Lunds Universitet, 2002.
[19] MORGAN M G, HENRION M. Uncertainty:A guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis[M]. New York:Cambridge University Press, 1992.
[20] CARTER D A. Aspects of risk assessment for hazardous pipelines containing flammable substances[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1991, 4(2):68-72. doi:10.1016/0950-4230(91)80010-R
[21] SIMPSON T W, LIN D K J, CHEN W. Sampling strategies for computer experiments:Design and analysis[J]. International Journal of Reliability and Applications, 2001, 2(3):209-240.
[22] CONOVER W J, 崔恒健. 实用非参数统计[M]. 北京:人民邮电出版社, 2006. CONOVER W J, CUI Hengjian. Practical nonparametric statistics[M]. Beijing:Posts & Telecom Press, 2006.
[23] 曹渊,韩峰,王铁良,等. 爆炸容器力学安全的敏感度分析方法[J]. 科技导报, 2013, 31(3):28-32. doi:10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2013.03.002 CAO Yuan, HAN Feng, WANG Tieliang, et al. Sensitivity analysis of mechanical safety of explosion vessel[J]. Science & Technology Review, 2013, 31(3):28-32. doi:10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2013.03.002
[24] 李云飞,曾祥国,盛鹰,等. 基于实验的钛合金优化动态本构模型与有限元模拟[J]. 材料导报,2016,30(24):137-142. doi:10.11896/j.issn.1005-023X.2016.24.026 LI Yunfei, ZENG Xiangguo, SHENG Ying, et al. An optimal dynamic constitutive modling of titanium alloy and FE simulation[J]. Materials Review, 2016, 30(24):137-142. doi:10.11896/j.issn.1005-023X.2016.24.026
[25] 李森,陈家军,叶慧海,等. 地下水流数值模拟中随机因素的灵敏度分析[J]. 水利学报, 2006, 37(8):977-984. doi:10.3321/j.issn:0559-9350.2006.08.013 LI Sen, CHEN Jiajun, YE Huihai, et al. Analysis on sensitivity of stochastic factors in numerical simulation of groundwater flow[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2006, 37(8):977-984. doi:10.3321/j.issn:0559-9350.2006.08.013
[26] 陈志波,简文彬. 边坡稳定性影响因素敏感性灰色关联分析[J]. 防灾减灾工程学报, 2006, 26(4):473-477. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-2132.2006.04.020 CHEN Zhibo, JIAN Wenbin. Sensibility analysis of slopes stability based on grey correlation analysis[J]. Journal of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Engineering, 2006, 26(4):473-477. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-2132.2006.04.020
[27] ALZBUTAS R, TOMAS IEŠMANTAS, POVILAITIS M, et al. Risk and uncertainty analysis of gas pipeline failure and gas combustion consequence[J]. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 2014, 28(6):1431-1446.
[28] 常亮,帅健,周晓亮,等. 天然气长输管道泄漏爆炸后果评价[J]. 油气储运, 2011, 30(3):161-165. CHANG Liang, SHUAI Jian, ZHOU Xiaoliang, et al. Evaluation on explosion consequence caused by leakage of long-distance gas pipeline[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2011, 30(3):161-165.