摘要
纵观长输管道多年的发展,管道事故的频频发生引起社会对管道安全的关注。而液氨长输管道作为液氨输送的一种新型运输方式,让大家了解到它所具有的优越性之外,也让人们对其安全性提出了质疑。因为目前我国的化学品长输管道建设仍处于起步阶段,各项法规要求还处于空白状态,对它的相关研究也比较少。所以开展液氨长输管道泄漏风险研究,对提高我国液氨长输管道安全监管水平以及对我国化学品长输管道的发展都具有重要意义。
本文对液氨长输管道泄漏风险进行了调查和分析。首先对我国长输管道安全现状进行了概括总结。然后在现场调研和事故分析的基础上,用事故树分析法对导致泄漏事故发生的原因事件进行了定性分析,求出最小割集,识别引起管道泄漏的主要影响因素,从而可以为管道风险管理提供经验和可参考的依据。接着以事故树分析中的风险因素结合管道的实际情况作为评分内容,用肯特管道评价法对某一条液氨长输管道进行风险评价,分析出在风险因素的作用下,不同管段因防护措施的不同和所处环境的不同而造成管段之间泄漏风险的不同。通过以上分析,可以得出整条管道中泄漏风险最大、中等和最小的管段,由此可以对泄漏风险大的管段进行特别保护,将泄漏风险降到最低。最后根据以上分析提出相关的建议措施。
Throughout long-distance pipeline years of development, pipe accidents occurre d frequently cause social of pipeline security concerns. And liquid ammonia pipelines as liquid ammonia transport of a new mode of transportation, let everybody knows to that it has superiority over, it is also let people to its security questioned. Because at p resent China's chemical long-distance pipeline construction is still in the initial stage, various regulations still is in blank phase, and its relevant studies less. So carrying out of liquid ammonia long-distance pipeline leakage risk studies has important signifyca-nce to enhance our country's liquid ammonia long-distance pipeline security supervisi on level and China chemicals long-distance pipeline development.
This paper liquid ammonia long-distance pipeline leakage risk investigated and analy zed. Of our country at first long distance pipeline security situation are summarized. T hen in the field investigation and based on the analysis of the accident, use to cause le akage accident tree analysis of the cause of the accident incident has qualitative analy sis, ask out of minimum cut set, identify causes pipe leakage main influence fact ors, which can provide for pipeline risk management experience and reference basis. Then in the accident tree analysis risk factors combined with the actual situation of pipe as score content, in Kent pipeline evaluation method to a liquid ammonia pipe lines, anal ysis of the risk assessment in risk factors, under the action of different modeled for protective measures of different and environment caused by the different between diff erent pipeline leakage risk. Through the above analysis, we can draw the whole pipeli ne leak greatest risk, the medium and small, which can be modeled on leakage risk is big modeled on special protection, will leak risk to the minimum. Finally, according to the above analysis puts forward related suggestions and measures.
引文
[1]Papadakis GA. Major hazard pipelines:a comparative study of onshore transmission accidents[J].Journal of Loss Prevention in the Proces Industries,1999,12(1):91-107
[2]IMO. Formal safety assessment, decision parameters including risk acceptance criteria. MSC.2000,72(16)
[3]Torgeir M.Accidental actions background to NORSOK N-003[D].Trondkeim:Dept of Marine Technology, Nrwegian University of Science and Technology,2000:44-50
[4]Houghj E. Leak Testing of Pipelines Uses Pressure and Acoustic Velocity. Oil&Gas,1998, (21):4-35
[5]Likun Wang, Jian Li et al. Petroleum Pipe Leakage Detection and Location Embeded in Scada, International Pipeline Conference,2004, IPC04-0717
[6]FUCHS H, RIEHLE V. Ten years of experience with leak detection by acoustic signal analysis[J]. Applied Acoustics,1991,33(1):1-19
[7]Georgios A. Papadakis. Assessment of requirements on safety management systems in EU regulations for the control of major hazard pipelines[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials,2000,78-63
[8]Zhang J, Enea D M. Implmenting a reliable leak detection system on a crude oil pipeline. Advances in Pipelines technology[J].1998, Dubai, UAE
[9]Walied A. Moussa.Risk-based reliability evaluation of multi-site damage in pipelines[J]. Computers and Industrial Engineering.1998,35-595
[10]SINGER D. A fuzzy set approach to fault tree and reliability analysis[J]. FUZZY Sets and Systems,1990,35 (2):145-155
[11]Correspondence with Mr. Mark Sheehan of ASME International[Z].2002
[12]WilliamF. Sharpe, GordonJ. Alexander, FeffreyV. Bailey. Investments. Fif th Edition, Prentice-Hall International, Inc.1995:1021
[13]Michael C. Jensen. Value Maximization Stakeholder Theory and the Corporate Objective Function[J].2001,7(3):297-317
[14]KantyH, SchreiberT. Nonlineartimeseriesanalysis[M]. Cambridge:Cambri dge university press.1997
[15]Kent Muhlbauer W. Pipeline Risk Management Manual 2nd Edition[M],2001
[16]郑津洋,马夏康,尹谢平.长输管道安全风险辨识评价控制[M].化学工业出版社,2004
[17]谭晓术,童刚,刘鑫.浅谈对重大危险介质液氨的安全管理.氮肥技术,2009年第30卷第1期[J]：43-44
[18]郑杨炜,谢殿荣,何衍兴,申志兵.基于MATLAB的液氨泄漏环境风险分析.安全与环境工程,2010,17(1)[J]：41-44
[19]柳红卫,黄沿波.液氨泄漏风险评估和风险分级方法.安全与环境工程,2010,17(1)[J]：70-74
[20]周德红,赵云胜,胡敏涛,邓航.合成氨厂液氨储罐泄漏环境风险分析.安全与环境工程,2009,16(2)[J]：101-104
[21]邓庆涛,张霆.长输管道泄漏的检测方法.中国西部科技,2009,8(12)[J]：23-25
[22]梁运枚,骆晖,杨伟,方箭.天然气长输管道风险接收准则的研究进展.油气储运,2009,23(10)[J]：6-9
[23]尹群,刘海燕,李良碧.海底输气管道泄漏风险定量分析.江苏科技大学学报(自然科学版),2009,23(3)[J]：189-192
[24]阎钟山,米莹,高建华.天然气长输管道泄漏的抢修与维护.天然气与石油,2002,20(2)[J]：13-15
[25]王淑霞.油气长输管道河流穿越风险分析.油气田地面工程,2008,27(7)[J]：54-56
[26]赵江,郝崇清,王艳英.温度对原油长输管道泄漏定位影响研究.石油化工自动化,2008[J]：75-76
[27]徐礼萍,徐文,樊鹏军.油气长输管道工程中的风险评价浅析.能源与环境,2010[J]：53-54
[28]唐恂,张鹏,李辉,张琳,苏欣.长输管道泄漏检测技术发展现状.油气储运,2007,26(7)[J]：11-14
[29]李玉星,彭红伟,唐建峰,邓雷颖,王风波.天然气长输管道泄漏检测方案对比.天然气工业,2008,28(9)[J]：101-104
[30]敬尚前.长输管道的腐蚀风险评价.石油和化工设备,2009[J]：56-58
[31]张诗海.浅议长输管道安装工程风险管理.中国高新技术企业,2010,4[J]：114-116
[32]马强.长输管道外防腐层的检测与评价.承德石油高等专科学校学报,2009,11(3)[J]：26-29
[33]俞树荣,杨慧来,李淑欣.基于模糊层次分析法的长输管道风险分析.兰州理工大学学报,2009,35(2)[J]：58-60
[34]薛振奎,白世武,冯斌,邵云巧.国内外长输管道标准法规比较手册[M].中国标准出版社,2008
[35]林伟明.美国长输管道管理情况简介.中国锅炉压力容器安全,2002,18(4)[J]：18
[36]曹晓燕.澳大利亚长输管道标准体系的建设与管理.环球博览,2007,5[J]：75-76
[37]张琴,陈柳钦.风险管理理论沿袭和研究趋势综述.中国证券期货,2008[J]：66-67
[38]张景林,崔国璋.安全系统工程[M].煤炭工业出版社,2005
[39]陆瑞忠,郑津洋.肯特管道风险评价法在天然气长输管道的应用.化工生产与技术,2008,15(3)[J]：55-59
[40]田洪波,姜波,武建宏SCADA系统在长输管道的应用和发展.石油化工自动化,2008,4[J]：10-12
